This article was downloaded by: [New York University]On: 10 October 2014, At: 09:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Social Work Education: TheInternational JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cswe20

Supporting International StudentsUndertaking Australian UniversityStudiesKerry Brydon a & Max Liddell aa Monash University , AustraliaPublished online: 15 Sep 2011.

To cite this article: Kerry Brydon & Max Liddell (2012) Supporting International StudentsUndertaking Australian University Studies, Social Work Education: The International Journal, 31:8,995-1011, DOI: 10.1080/02615479.2011.610786

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2011.610786

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Supporting International StudentsUndertaking Australian UniversityStudiesKerry Brydon & Max Liddell

While in Australia there has been emphasis on internationalisation of education as an

export commodity, there has been less emphasis placed on the question of providingthe international student with the support necessary to ensure that their educational

experience is positive and that they are supported to achieve throughout their studies. Thisdiscussion will draw on a case study of a degree programme offered in an offshore setting.

Key themes and issues that can undermine both the quality of the student experience andtheir capacity to complete their study programme are identified. Some possible strategies

for responding to these themes and issues are also discussed.

Keywords: Offshore Students; Challenges Confronting International Students; Student

Support in Offshore Programmes; Cross-Cultural Perspectives; Educational Policies

Introduction

Australia has positioned itself as a major provider of education to internationalstudents. The export of education is the third largest source of foreign trade income

(Marginson, 2002; OECD, 2006; Bradley et al., 2008). There has been aconceptualisation of universities in Australia in terms of wealth generation (Bradleyet al., 2008) and Australia follows only the United Kingdom and the United States in

terms of the volume of education as an export good (Harman, 2004). In view of thiscontext, it would appear reasonable to expect that efforts to protect and strengthen the

market would be accompanied by efforts to support students to maximise theirlearning experience through the provision of student support.

ISSN 0261-5479 print/1470-1227 online q 2012 Taylor & FrancisDOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2011.610786

Correspondence to: Dr Kerry Brydon, Department of Social Work, Monash University, PO Box 197, Caulfield East, 3145

Australia. Email: kerry.brydon@monash.edu

Kerry Brydon & Max Liddell, Monash University, Australia

Social Work EducationVol. 31, No. 8, December 2012, pp. 995–1011

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

What would appear evident is that the conceptualisation of education as an export

industry is accompanied by the conceptualisation of students as consumers andsources of revenue with scant attention being afforded to the ways in which they may

be supported through their study programmes to the point that they successfullycomplete courses. Arguably, retention of international students in their study

programmes is equally as important as recruitment of international students into theirstudy programmes.

A reality in Australian higher education is that through the 1980s a consensusemerged that higher education should continue to be expanded but government could

no longer afford to offer free higher education (Marginson, 2004). This positionreflects an apparently conflicting policy position whereby OECD governments

promote access to higher education across widening segments of the population, while

also appearing unwilling to fund higher education (Christou and Haliassos, 2005).The position also reflects the rise of the neo-liberal agenda that seeks to reduce

subsidisation of higher education, demands accountability and places emphasis on therole of higher education in the national marketplace (Marginson and Rhoades, 2002).

One consequence is that international students are sought to compensate for revenuedeficits given that international students pay higher fees than domestic students

(Crisp, 2009), but this view gives little thought to meeting the support needs thatinternational students might introduce.

This discussion is set against a case study whereby the Bachelor of Social Work isdelivered by an Australian university to students completing their studies in their

home country of Singapore. Specifically, this case study is an example of offshoreeducation. Offshore education describes the situation where international students are

located in a different country to that of the institution providing their education(Chapman and Pyvis, 2006). This is a relatively recent development in international

education. ‘Offshore education’ is different to ‘distance education’ and exists wherethere is a formal agreement between an Australian university and an overseas

organisation or institution to participate in the delivery of the educational programme(Universities Australia, 2007). Students undertaking study in this mode usually

study through a combined approach of study materials, distance education modelsand locally based classroom instruction. The students in the case study are also

international students, as well as offshore students, as they are not Australiannationals. They, like other international students, join the programme with an array of

educational experiences and cultural insights that are different to those typically heldby Australian domestic students.

The purpose of the discussion is to draw, from a case study of offshore education forsocial work students, some insights into the ways in which broad policy directions

open new challenges for educators facing an increasingly diverse array of students,educational approaches and challenges. Our approach reflects on the experiences of

involvement in the programme. The focus of this paper is to consider the supportneeds of the students involved in the programme. The discussion will offer a brief

overview of the literature relevant to student support activities. Through thepresentation of some de-identified scenarios, some particular issues in student

996 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

support will be highlighted. The conclusions reached suggest that a critical aspect of

attracting international students is the level of support offered to them once they arerecruited.

The Programme Arrangements

The Bachelor of Social Work is a professional degree that qualifies graduates to practiseas professional social workers. The degree, in accordance with professional

accreditation requirements, has been accredited by two professional social workassociations, the Australian Association of Social Workers and the Singapore

Association of Social Workers. Accreditation from the Australian perspective wasgranted on the basis that the content of the degree offered in the offshore context was

consistent in content with the degree offered to students studying in Australia.The authors, who are faculty members of their Australian university, have been

directly involved in the teaching, programme delivery and coordination of the BSW

study programme over the past eight years. These roles have encompassed the day-to-day management of the programme as well as liaison with an array of stakeholders in

both Australia and Singapore.The BSW is a two-year full-time programme, able to be taken on a part-time basis

over four years, taught at third and fourth year levels of undergraduate studies.Students entering the programme are required to have completed a degree in the social

sciences of two years. In the Singapore context, many of the students do not have thesepre-requisites but rather they have completed a three-year Polytechnic Diploma.Through negotiation with the partner agency, the university and the two professional

associations, arrangements were made to offer students in possession of a PolytechnicDiploma to articulate into the degree by successfully completing additional units of

study at second year university level.The programme is taught by a mixture of distance education and face-to-face

delivery modes. University staff travel to Singapore at the commencement of eachsemester and offer intensive workshops over two and half days. Students then have

regular classes with local tutors employed by the Singapore partner. Students andtutors are provided with course materials and the tutor receives a tutor’s manual to

support their teaching. All assessment tasks remain the responsibility of the universityand subject coordinators and tutors have regular email contact.

The students follow the same timetable and assignment submission dates as the

Australian students. They submit the same assessments on the same dates. Where thereis difference in the programme is that case studies and some readings are provided that

are specific to the Singapore context, recognising that there are both similarities anddifferences in welfare arrangement and service delivery models between Australian and

Singapore. The other area of difference is that the students undertake two fieldworkplacements, each of 70 days duration, in Singaporean agencies. This arrangement for

fieldwork placement has been approved by the Australian Association of SocialWorkers which otherwise requires that students undertake one placement in Australia.

Social Work Education 997

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

They complete the same assessment as Australian students in terms of their fieldwork

placements.

What We Know: A Brief Survey of the Literature Pertinent to the Provision ofStudent Support

Arguably, universities have always had an international focus and scholars from onecountry have always travelled to universities in another country. Further, international

exposure is beneficial for students and academics and particularly for social workstudents, regardless of whether they ultimately work locally or globally (Crisp, 2009).

Internationalisation of curriculum is not centrally concerned with internationalstudents. It is concerned with how cultural, social and economic diversity anddifference impacts on teaching and learning, and has resulted in new ways of thinking

about curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment (Clifford and Joseph, 2005).A truly internationalised curriculum seeks to develop the intercultural competence

of students to perform socially and professionally in a multicultural environmentand seeks to develop the students’ understanding of their own and other cultural

perspectives (Clifford and Joseph, 2005).There has been the suggestion that universities are ambivalent about international

students, whether they are located in offshore programmes or elect to study inAustralia, in the face of the twin demands to commercialise and to also maintain thequality of curriculum, teaching and assessment (Devos, 2003). International students

are simultaneously conceptualised in negative terms on the basis of the adequacy oftheir English skills and the way they are ‘forced on’ academics that have no options but

to teach them; but also they are conceptualised in terms of the extent to which they willlike and accept their teachers (Devos, 2003). Paradoxically, the university, by relying

on revenue generation paradigms, fails to capitalise on opportunities to fully engagewith international students and their capacity to contribute to cross-cultural dialogue,

understanding and research (Asmar, 2005).The challenges confronting international students are broader than their need to

develop study skills and linguistic capacity (Egege and Kutieleh, 2004; Arkoudis andTran, 2007). Although referring specifically to the realm of postgraduate studies,some research has noted that students have some difficulties in adapting to the self-

directed learning processes common to Western universities (Bruce and Bramfield,1999). The students may have come from contexts where morality and practically

may have been the major theme of their educational experiences (Chan and Chan,2005), where there is also a teaching approach of seeking wisdom from ‘experts’

rather than self-directed learning (Denicolo and Pope, 1999). As well, the emphasison Western-based materials and case studies tends to overlook the rich contexts

from the student’s origins (Chapman and Pyvis, 2005). The students also facechallenges in preparing assessments as they tend to focus on the content of essaysrather on the ways in which these are structured and formed (Arkoudis and Tran,

2007), thus facing problems in being able to express their deep meanings (Koehne,2006).

998 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Learning difficulties have been identified to include conflicts in learning styles,

requirements around active participation, issues involved in plagiarism and challengesin moving towards a non-structured and self-directed learning context (Egege and

Kutieleh, 2004). In a similar vein, students have reported finding it difficult toapproach academic staff due to feelings of shyness (Maxwell et al., 2000) and students

often feel more concerned with teacher input than with their own learning outcomes(Maxwell et al., 2000).

In Chinese teaching models, for example, the teaching tradition has emphasisedmorality and practically rather than critical and reflective thought (Chan and Chan,

2005) and in the Chinese culture every individual is constructed as needing to improvethemselves (Lee, 2004). A high value is placed on practical knowledge and students

tend to be taught more about moral standards than critical analysis. Students may also

avoid taking risks and emphasise memorisation of the material taught to them (Chanand Chan, 2005). In traditional Chinese learning the process involves four stages that

commence with memorising followed by understanding, application and finallyquestioning (Lee, 2004). Accordingly the emphasis on critical reflection at the

commencement of the learning process may be misplaced as questioning comes onlyafter there has been understanding and application.

The student view of staff teaching an international curriculum is that the staff needto be open-minded, flexible, inclusive, understanding of other cultures and cultural

perspectives, have an ability to inspire students and have a good command of English(Clifford and Joseph, 2005). Importantly, students want staff to take the time to get to

know them (Clifford and Joseph, 2005); but, according to Chapman and Pyvis (2006),there are dilemmas in this area as students studying in offshore programmes do not

develop an identity as part of the university community. In addition, the studentsstruggle with a predominantly Australian curriculum which undermines the

purported international nature of their studies (Koehne, 2006).Finally, there is the way in which international students are conceptualised.

Although referring to the ways in which Australian students conceptualiseinternational students as ‘other’ (Koehne, 2006), this arguably applies to the ways in

which academic staff and universities conceptualise international students. Academicstend to conceptualise international students as students in need of correction as they

overcome language barriers and the tradition of rote learning; the university hastended to conceptualise them as customers; and government and universities tend to

conceptualise them as sources of revenue (Koehne, 2006).A particular aspect of the academic literature concerning international students

focuses primarily on issues concerned with academic performance. This, notunreasonably, is a concern for the university and the student; however, our experience

suggests that academic performance must be contextualised through greaterappreciation of the factors that influence academic outcomes. To fully appreciate

the context from which international students come, we need to develop in-depthunderstanding of the cultural, economic and family realities that shape our

international students, as well as their prior educational experiences and the ways inwhich these may influence their progression through an Australian university.

Social Work Education 999

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

What We Have Learned

With the wisdom of hindsight, it is apparent that we were somewhat naive and

uninformed at the point of embarking on this programme. The focus of the two years of

preparatory work to establish the programme was primarily concerned with

considerations of contractual arrangements, financial arrangements and potential

financial yield, matters of workload and how an additional programme could be managed

by staff and other issues which could be broadly termed as business concerns. We had

limited knowledge of the nature of potential students and a belief, unjustified as our

experience would demonstrate, that the students would be rote learners. We had concerns

as to whether Australian social work methods would work in Singapore and limited

understanding of the welfare arrangements in place in Singapore as well as concerns

broadly about colonising activities undertaken under the guise of social work education.

What would have been more helpful in those early stages would have been to separate the

processes concerned with business aspects away from the professional and teaching

concerns and to conduct more substantial research into these two areas. As a consequence

we may have been better situated to adapt out material and teaching approaches.

Nevertheless, we took a different approach and in the process developed many insights.

One dominant theme that pervades all aspects of our experience concerned with

supporting students, is the need to engage with our offshore, and other international,

students. That is, to form relationships with them. Relationships of course take time

and do not emerge overnight. It is through the formation of relationships that we

begin to understand the students’ context and the ways in which it impacts on their

studies. It is also through understanding the context that it becomes possible to

identify obstacles to their studies as well as culturally appropriate solutions that are

consistent with university standards and policies.The other dominant theme concerns the way in which the notion of support is

constructed. We would contend that an understanding of support as being concerned

with only those instances where a student faces overt problems, is unduly narrow and

lacks the potential to be truly supportive. A more comprehensive construction, that

entails consideration of a wide range of factors and the development of strategies to

respond to these factors, is more appropriate and has greater potential to support

students and help them achieve a positive learning experience.There has been limited attention paid to the question of student support where

students are located outside of Australia in an offshore setting. Email communication

and occasional phone calls are helpful but tend to be limited in their capacity to

facilitate communication in the face of more complex problems. This is particularly

the case where matters of academic progress and personal/family problems come

together. Our experience has been that where the nature of the presenting problem

contains elements of both aspects of the student situation there is a need to

compliment indirect communication with face-to-face communication.A pertinent issue here is that many international students do not readily discuss the

nature of their circumstances although they do allude to the existence of a problem.

This would appear consistent with studies that suggest that in the Asian context

1000 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

problems are constructed as private, meaning that they should be dealt with within the

family (Lee, 2004; Chan, 2006; Crabtree, 2008).It is within this context that the concepts of risk and opportunity come together.

The risk relates to the apparent paradox as the students are aspiring social workers whocarry expectations that (future) clients will openly share problems; but our students

also argue that it is culturally inappropriate for them, as students, to openly shareproblems. The opportunity, therefore, is that by drawing out the detail of challenges

confronting our students, there is the capacity to model professional behaviourconcerned with open discussion of problems and the identification of solutions.

Our experience demonstrates that while support of the students is a specific concern

in its own right, the issue is constituted of many component parts. Each of thesecomponent parts is pertinent to the overall notion of support of students and

maximising their potential to participate in a positive learning experience throughoutthe course of their studies.

On the basis that little is known about the support needs of offshore students, theapproach adopted is one of presenting case scenarios drawn from our experiences.

These are not fully fictional but based on our observations and experiences withthe students. In order to protect student privacy we have not used the specific

circumstances of any one student. The intention is to move beyond corporate callsfor internationalisation towards some of the specific micro-level challenges ofimplementing the agenda of the institution.

Theme 1: Meeting the Costs

It has been established earlier in this discussion that Australian universities have an

agenda of internationalisation as a form of revenue generation. It would logicallyfollow that international students are well positioned to therefore meet the costs of

an Australian education. That is, the students possess the financial means to pay for aninternational education.

Scenario 1S advised of plans to discontinue the course. On the basis that S had been achieving

good academic progress and had apparently been enjoying the study programme,this decision came as a surprise. Despite some initial resistance from S, a meeting

between S and the course coordinator was arranged. With probing, it becameapparent that S could not meet the requirements to pay the course fees in a lump

sum and ‘up front’ at the commencement of each semester. A payment plan thatwas realistic and achievable was developed and agreed, allowing S to meet thecourse costs through instalments. S expressed both appreciation and relief,

commenting that she had not thought such an approach would be allowed. It wasevident, through the process of discussion, that S did not have family support in the

form of financial backing and that she was employed in a job that paid a verymodest salary.

Social Work Education 1001

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

The issue here is that there are real challenges confronting students seeking to enhance

their educational standing through an Australian study programme. While the costsincurred through the offshore study mode are lower than if the student elected to study

in Australia, they nevertheless reflect a serious and substantial financial commitment.1

A common trend in government policy, including in Australia, is to move towards

charging users of educational products on the basis that the yields from highereducation accrue primarily to the individual student. This means that student

loans combined with part-time work opportunities are of increasing importance(Christou and Haliassos, 2005). Christou and Haliassos (2005) also suggest that thereare complexities in the way students organise to finance their studies, and that

students from low-income families are more likely to place high reliance on loans dueto limited family capacity to fund their education. This has certainly been the

experience of a significant number of our students in the offshore programme.This situation goes to the heart of tensions in social work education between the

commitment of social work to the promotion of social justice, diversity and equity,and the challenges facing Australian universities to generate revenue in a climate where

the demand for higher education exceeds the supply (Bradley et al., 2008) and thereis diminishing government funding for higher education. This observation and

experience confirms the position taken by Christou and Haliassos (2005) where theyobserve that the policy direction to increase participation in higher education has notbeen accompanied by increased government funding.

Theme 2: The Structure of Families

In the Asian context, families appear characterised by higher levels of interdependencethan is the case in the Australian context. This position risks creating a dichotomy

between Australian and Asian students and indeed failing to consider some of theneeds of international students who elect to study in Australia. This is not the intent

nor is it the intent to suggest that all students do not face such a tension. However,our experience in the programme suggests that the tensions around this issue are

heightened.

Scenario 2N struggled to keep up with the study requirements. His grandmother was terminally

ill and all family members were required to maintain a round-the-clock bedside vigilthroughout the period of illness and until death. Despite suggestions that a period of

intermission would be appropriate, N insisted on maintaining his place in the course,maintaining that the demands of study helped him to focus and experience some

diversion. At the same time, the requirement to spend extended periods at thehospital compromised the capacity of N to keep up with key tasks. Ultimately N failedto achieve good results for the semester. In later discussion, N impressed as tired and

distressed; N explained that he had no choice but to ensure that his duty as a familymember assumed precedence over his studies. N was supported to take a period of

intermission and was then supported through the process of resuming study.

1002 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

This scenario raises a common theme of tension between duty to self and duty to

family. They highlight the realities of the non-Western family as being hierarchical andcharacterised by filial piety (Maxwell et al., 2000). The students, from a cultural

perspective, appear to have failed to prioritise their own needs over the needs of theirfamily. The central issue here is that, compared to their Australian counterparts, the

family relationships, and responsibilities, of Asian students are much moreinterdependent. They have greater obligations to families and they also have

commitments to a wide range of family rituals that are both secular and sacred innature.

That is not to say that they necessarily should have prioritised self (in the guise of

commitment to their studies) as paramount; rather that the critical points arose whentheir decisions to favour their family placed them in conflict with the policies and

procedures of the university. Clearly, the policies and procedures of the university arenot premised on notions of interdependency of the family.

Theme 3: Applying Critical and Reflective Learning Paradigms

Most of our students have come through the polytechnic system where, despite

emerging evidence that the polytechnic route to university study is being givenincreasing preference in Singapore, there remain differences between academicdemands in polytechnics and universities. As well, the model of teaching in the

programme under review is premised on adult learning principles combined with acritical and reflective approach to teaching and learning.

There is evidence, however, that the critical and reflective approach is a particularchallenge for students who live in a context of a dominant discourse that discourages

dissent and where citizens are encouraged to acquiesce with government directions(George, 2005). The anecdotal evidence is that the students struggle to appreciate

professional social work approaches of critical and reflective practice, claiming thatthey reside in a context where criticism of government is not encouraged.

This anecdotal experience translates into a number of challenges. These challenges

are particularly significant in the earlier semesters of study as our experience suggests;

overall, our Singapore students are at least equally as capable as their Australian

counterparts (Brydon and Liddell, 2009). Nevertheless, our students have commented

Scenario 3D expressed surprise and some discomfort at the teaching approach thatencouraged student participation in critical reflection. He was also ‘surprised’ to

find that the study programme did not involve examinations but rather a widerange of assignments through the semester. D explained that in his previous studies

there had been a very different approach and doing well at examination time wasvery important.

Social Work Education 1003

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

on the challenges of articulating their views and expressing their meaning in a fashion

acceptable to the university (Koehne, 2006).As discussed earlier, it would appear that the issue of critical and reflective

approaches to learning come at a later point in the study process and that the studentsfeel most comfortable if they firstly memorise, then understand and finally apply the

concepts taught prior to feeling able to constructively critique the material beingtaught to them.

Theme 4: Teaching Models

The early advice received from a wide range of Singapore sources, was that the studentswould require face-to-face teaching. Accordingly, a model of tuition was developed

whereby students were required to attend workshops offered by university staff at thecommencement of each semester and then to have weekly three hour classes in each

subject offered by locally based tutors. The advice from the same sources also indicatedthat students would not be able to attend classes during working hours and evening

classes would be required.

The discussion regarding Asian students and their preferred learning styles goes to

the heart of the teaching model adopted. In essence, the students are more teacher

dependent than their Australian counterparts and, arguably, much slower to embrace

a position of critical analysis. The teaching model originally was based on weekly face-

to-face classes, and that arrangement was developed on the basis of our offshore

partners and their assessment of both student need and student preference. Certainly,

at least in the early stages of study, the students do express a desire for greater face-to-

face contact.

However, our experience demonstrated that the students are mainly employed in

a full-time capacity, and given in a context where there was no alternative to

offering night classes, the students were too tired to fully benefit from the face-to-

face teaching. For a full-time student in full-time employment the requirement was

Scenario 4R advised that he had difficulty meeting these requirements due to his full-time

employment. R did not perceive a supportive attitude from his employer withregard to his studies. He was commonly required to work overtime and also towork on Saturdays at special events. R commonly arrived late for class and was very

tired at the end of a busy working day. He tended to ‘skip classes’ around timeswhen assignments were due, thus compromising his level of attendance whereby

the university required he attend 80% of classes.When the teaching model was adjusted to reduce the number of classes offered,

R found that he struggled without the direct input of the tutor. R did not increasethe amount of reading he undertook as part of the course, despite the increased

time available to him.

1004 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

that they attend classes four evenings per week. This led to limited capacity to

prepare assignments and to keep up with the reading. There was also a view fromacademic staff that the students were being ‘over taught’ insofar as they were

receiving much greater input than distance education students while also havingthe same teaching and learning materials as provided for distance education

students.While not a perfect solution there were decisions made by academic staff, in

consultation with the students and key stakeholders, to reduce the face-to-faceteaching hours by about 75%. This has by no means been a perfect solution and thereare still concerns that the students do not complete their readings. Notwithstanding

this issue, there has been no appreciable reduction in the grade point averages achievedby each student cohort and they have demonstrated capacity to manage without a high

level of face-to-face input.

Theme 5: Supporting Students

Such a student predicament is, of course, not unique to the experience of students

studying in an offshore programme, but unlike students in the on-campus context,there is no ease of access to academic staff, particularly with regard to face-to-face

contact, nor is there access to a range of student support services. Arguably, Australianstudents studying through a distance education mode face similar challenges but,again arguably, they have a greater familiarity with the Australian educational context

and are more cognisant of their rights as students.

Theme 6: Working Life and University Rules

Our experience suggests that there is less flexibility allowed by the workplace in

Singapore than is the case in Australia. As well, it would appear that there is less scopefor the individual to reach agreement with employers about study/work combinations.

This brings students into conflict with university rules, particularly those concerningthe submission of assignments.

Scenario 5

M expressed feelings of ambivalence about becoming a social worker. She had failedan assignment, despite having made significant efforts to prepare the paper. M was

hesitant in approaching the coordinator as her experience had been that failure wasdealt with negatively. It emerged, through discussion, that her family was not

supportive of her undertaking degree level studies.

Social Work Education 1005

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Although there is a tendency to focus on individual factors around staff/student

ratios, student numbers and overall cash returns, there are additional structural factorsthat have proven more difficult to address (Brydon and Liddell, 2009). These

structural factors have arisen in both the offshore and the home institution contexts.In the offshore Singapore context there are a number of issues arising for educational

policies, nation building policies, class and ethnicity policies as well as the ideologicalwelfare framework of self-dependence. These have presented significant barriers to our

students gaining access to financial support in the ways their peers attendingSingaporean institutions can. In our own institution there are difficulties around

contradictory messages about the intent of international education as well as internalprocedures that inhibit the capacity to obtain quick responses to problems. Needless tosay, internationalisation is not for the faint hearted as there are numerous complex

problems that must be addressed throughout the process.

Discussion

A central tension involved in the programme concerned the extent to which socialwork education could be taught by academics without intimate local knowledge andexperience of the local context (Crisp, 2009) and the extent to which Singaporean

students could benefit from an Australian social work education programme. Therewere challenges covering the role of the social worker in the Singapore context and also

the extent to which social workers might become involved in policy and advocacy andthe extent to which social workers would ultimately only work within prescribed

guidelines, challenges that have been identified elsewhere (Crisp, 2009). An associatedtension concerned the challenges of offering support to students from a different

background, with different prior educational experiences and who were located at adistance from academic staff.

There are two broad common themes in each of the preceding case scenarios: firstly,

offshore students face a range of challenges that they do not easily, or quickly, disclose;and secondly, the development of a relationship, through demonstrated interest in

Scenario 6

K was employed in a junior administrative position in her firm. She found heremployer increasingly required her to work substantial overtime (includingweekend work) at short notice. The employer did not consider these requirements

to be unreasonable nor did the employer consider K’s studies to be important, atleast in part because the employer was not a social service provider. K was unable to

consider seeking alternative employment as she had been unemployed for sometime prior to securing this job. K’s work circumstances meant that she was unable

to adhere to university requirements about submission of work and demands ofemployment were not considered compelling reasons in the granting of extension

or special consideration. K was left in a position where she felt there was noalternative but to seek a period of intermission.

1006 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

their circumstances, combined with intent to ‘problem solve’ in the students’ interests,

yields results. This perspective is consistent with the findings of other studies thatidentify the ways in which Asian students in particular appreciate the interest of

the ‘teacher’ in their circumstances and in them, this commonly taking the formof authoritarian relationships within the classroom but interaction and collective

activities outside of the classroom (Ho, 2001). The challenges confrontinginternational students are broader than study skills and linguistic forms (Arkoudis

and Tran, 2007). Instead, the early indicators of a student facing struggles tend to come

through some form of behaviour suggestive of the existence of a problem.Intertwined with these patterns is a theme that the students appear to have a

mindset that they will be punished for having problems. That is, the university will

adopt a punitive approach that will see them discontinued from the study programme.

Needless to say, their relief is both evident and significant when the position adopted isonce more concerned with finding solutions, and a way forward, rather than

punishment. The endeavour is to offer the students a message that university staff willwork with them to find solutions and to enable them to complete their studies.

These encounters with students, based on the need to address their problems, offeran opportunity to not only resolve problems but to also model professional behaviour

in a way that students can also be encouraged to reflect on the implications for theirown professional practice. There is, to date, no clear evidence that the students do take

these messages into their professional lives.While wishing to avoid simplistic stereotyping from cultural perspectives, there are

messages to be gleaned from the cultural context of the students. Broadly, Chinesesociety is constructed along hierarchical lines where filial piety remains an important

value (Lee, 2004; Chan and Chan, 2005). As well, the students are reluctant to criticisetheir teachers (Chan and Chan, 2005), suggesting that they would also have difficulties

in openly expressing their thoughts to teachers especially where personal matters areinvolved. Even so, there remains a danger in assuming that Western culture is

constructed only in terms of individualism while Asian society is invariablycommunitarian as all cultures invariably contain internal diversity (Parrot, 2009,

p. 621).Many students in the programme have succinctly and colloquially summarised their

position as ‘we do not air our dirty linen in public’. This saying does express theirposition, however, it is a position that must be challenged given that the students are

aspiring social workers and the willingness of clients to share their ‘dirty linen’ goes tothe heart of engagement and the social work mission of helping people to find

solutions to their problems. The students frequently and commonly express a viewthat their clients should be open with them. It therefore becomes central to the

acculturation of students to the social work profession to model desired professionalbehaviour as part of the student support function.

The most pertinent finding from our experience is that, while reluctant to divulgetheir experiences, the students respond positively to face-to-face discussions and

become very open about their circumstances. They reveal the existence of tensions anddilemmas that directly impact on their study progress and their capacity to focus on

Social Work Education 1007

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

their studies. They also demonstrate an attitude of relief when they find that the intent

of the face-to-face contact is to solve problems rather than to castigate them for theirlack of progress.

The implications are clear. The conceptualisation of students in revenue terms aloneis insufficient to ensure that they achieve educational goals related to achieving a

professional qualification. Their problems are complex and solving them is not easy.We have found that making the effort to, firstly, insist that the students do meet with

academic staff, and secondly, being prepared to meet in a range of locations suchas coffee shops and shopping centres identified by the students, does aid theidentification of problems and their solutions. The students also respond to these face-

to-face conversations of an illustration of professional behaviour insofar as theyappreciate the efforts made to both engage them and to hear their version of events.

This is not to say that the process is either easy or perfect. There remain tyrannies ofdistance and complexities with their origins in different cultural perspectives. What

these experiences do suggest is that while student experiences are shaped by a range ofpre-existing cultural, educational and personal experiences, so too are the perspectives

of university academic staff. Just as the students have to adapt to new teaching,learning and support approaches when they enrol in a programme of international

education, so too do university staff have to make adaptations when working with andteaching international students. The revenue generation goals of the university do noteasily co-exist with such experiences and approaches, nor do they blend with the social

work vision concerned with the promotion of social justice. Nevertheless, the studentsdo need to be supported through their study programme if for no other reason than to

keep them in the programme and meeting their fees.

Conclusion

This discussion has focused specifically on international students studying in an

offshore programme. In that context, the capacity to have face-to-face interactionbetween the student and academic staff is significantly compromised. There are,

however, lessons to be learned that are applicable to all international students. Thesupport needs of international students are spread across a number of domains. It isevident that while international students are not homogenous, similarly their needs

are not homogenous. Before they can be supported it is necessary to understand thenature of the challenges they are confronting; moreover it is necessary to engage with

the individual student and to work with them to, firstly identify the presenting needand secondly, to respond to that need.

Students will not necessarily be happy with studying an Australian-basedcurriculum that does not translate itself into being an international curriculum

(Koehne, 2006). As well, this discussion has focussed on the ways in which universitiesmay adapt in a bid to better meet the needs of international students but has neglectedthe capacity of the students to drive, inform and shape the internationalisation

process. There is the scope to conceptualise international students as thelearning/teaching tools for internationalisation (Fugate and Jefferson, 2001).

1008 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

The efforts of universities to attract international students may be viewed by those

both inside and outside the university solely as money-making ventures. Such views go

to the heart of how universities are conceptualised and certainly affect reputation and

ultimately the demand for the ‘product’ that universities produce. Again the question

is the particular model of internationalisation adopted by the educational institution.

The failure to grasp the interconnectedness of the economic, educational and support

paradigms is perhaps the biggest threat to the internationalisation of education in the

Australian higher education sector, and its accompanying revenue generation

objectives. It is interesting to note that, in our experience, the review criteria applied to

the programme, within the university, have heavily emphasised the business aspects

with lesser attention being paid to the quality of the international education

experience we are providing for our students.

It is contended in this discussion that there is a paradox. Unless proper support is

offered to international students both within Australia and in offshore locations, the

internationalisation project will be jeopardised. It is the quality of the student

experience that will encourage other students to embark on an international study

programme. Of necessity, the quality of the educational experience must be

constructed as being concerned not only with curricula but also with the support

offered to international students.

Note

[1] As at 1 February 2010, the fees incurred for international students coming to Australia toundertake a full year study load of 48 credit points is AU$21,300 or AU$42,600 for the full 96credit points needed to complete the Bachelor of Social Work (www.monash.edu.study/coursefinder/004/). By contrast the costs for the students in the offshore programme areAU$15,600 per annum or AU$31,200 for the required 96 credit points. This represents a costsaving in the vicinity of 25% by staying in the home country, compared to studying inAustralia, not to mention that travel costs and other re-location costs are not incurred.

References

Arkouidis, S. & Tran, L. T. (2007) ‘International students in Australia: read ten thousand volumesof books and walk ten thousand miles’, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, vol. 27, no. 2,pp. 157–169.

Asmar, C. (2005) ‘Internationalising students: reassessing diasporic and local student differences’,Studies in Higher Education, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 291–309.

Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H. & Scales, B. (2008) Review of Australian Higher Education: FinalReport, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra [online]. Available at: www.deewr.gov.au,accessed 18 December 2008.

Bruce, C. & Bramfeld, G. (1999) ‘Encouraging student-directed research and critical thinkingin NESB students’, in Supervising Postgraduates from Non-English Speaking Backgrounds, edsY. Ryan & O. Zuber-Skerritt, Open University Press, Buckingham, pp. 157–166.

Brydon, K. & Liddell, M. (2009) ‘The rhetoric is easier than the reality: a case study in internationalsocial work education’, Journal of the World Universities Forum, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 87–102.

Chan, K. L. (2006) ‘The Chinese concept of face and violence against women’, International SocialWork, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 65–73.

Social Work Education 1009

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Chan, K. L. & Chan, C. L. W. (2005) ‘Chinese culture, social work education and research’,

International Social Work, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 381–389.

Chapman, A. & Pyvis, D. (2005) ‘Identity and social practice in higher education: student

experiences of postgraduate courses delivered “offshore” in Singapore and Hong Kong by

an Australian university’, International Journal of Educational Development, vol. 25, no. 1,

pp. 39–52.

Chapman, A. & Pyvis, D. (2006) ‘Dilemmas in the formation of student identity in offshore

higher education: a case study in Hong Kong’, Educational Review, vol. 58, no. 3,

pp. 291–302.

Christou, C. & Haliassos, M. (2005) ‘How do students finance human capital accumulation? The

choice between borrowing and work’, Journal of Policy Modelling, vol. 28, pp. 39–51.

Clifford, V. & Joseph, C. (2005) Report of the Internationalisation of Curriculum Project, Monash

University, Melbourne.

Crabtree, S. A. (2008) ‘Dilemmas in international social work education in the United Arab

Emirates: Islam, localization and social need’, Social Work Education, vol. 27, no. 5,

pp. 536–548.

Crisp, B. (2009) ‘Is there a role for “foreigners” as social work educators’, Social Work Education, vol.

28, no. 6, pp. 668–677.

Denicolo, P. & Pope, M. (1999) ‘Supervision and the overseas student’, in Supervising Postgraduates

from Non-English Speaking Backgrounds, eds Y. Ryan & O. Zuber-Skerritt, Open University

Press, Buckingham, pp. 63–74.

Devos, A. (2003) ‘Academic standards, internationalisation, and the discursive construction of

“the international student”’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 22, no. 2,

pp. 155–166.

Egege, S. & Kutieleh, S. (2004) ‘Critical thinking: foreign notions to foreign students’, International

Education Journal, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 75–85.

Fugate, D. L. & Jefferson, R. W. (2001) ‘Preparing for globalization—do we need structural change

for our academic programs’, Journal of Education for Business, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 160–166.

George, C. (2005) Calibrated Coercion and the Maintenance of Hegemony in Singapore Asia Research

Institute Working Paper Series No. 48, Singapore [online]. Available at: www.ari.nus.edu.sg,

accessed 18 October 2005.

Harman, G. (2004) ‘New directions in internationalizing higher education: Australia’s development

as an exporter of higher education services’, Higher Education Policy, vol. 17, pp. 101–120.

Ho, I. T. (2001) ‘Are Chinese teachers too authoritarian?’, in Teaching the Chinese Learner:

Psychological and Pedagogical Perspectives, eds D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs, CERC & ACER,

Hong Kong & Melbourne, pp. 99–114.

Koehne, N. (2006) ‘(Be)coming, (be)longing: ways in which international students talk about

themselves’, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 241–257.

Lee, E. (2004) ‘The ways of being a social worker: implications for Confucianism to social

work education and clinical practice’, Smith College Studies in Social Work, vol. 74, no. 2,

pp. 393–408.

Marginson, S. (2002) ‘Rethinking academic work in the global era’, Journal of Higher Education Policy

and Management, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 23–35.

Marginson, S. (2004) ‘Don’t leave me hanging on the Anglophone: the potential for online distance

higher education in the Asia–Pacific region’, Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 58, no. 2–3,

pp. 74–113.

Marginson, S. & Rhoades, G. (2002) ‘Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher

education: a glonacal agency heuristic’, Higher Education, vol. 43, pp. 281–309.

Maxwell, G., Adam, M., Pooran, J. & Scott, B. (2000) ‘Cultural diversity in learning: developing

effective learning for South East Asian hospitality management students’, Cross Cultural

Management—An International Journal, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 3–12.

1010 K. Brydon & M. Liddell

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2006) Education PolicyAnalysis: Focus on Higher Education, OECD, Paris.

Parrott, L. (2009) ‘Constructive marginality: conflicts and dilemmas in cultural competence andanti-oppressive practice’, Social Work Education, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 617–630.

Universities Australia (2007) Offshore Programs of Australian Universities, Universities Australia,Canberra, [online]. Available at: www.universitiesaustralia.com.au, accessed 24 June 2008.

Social Work Education 1011

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

50 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014