Common Misconceptions about Students from South ...

Download PDF
39 downloads 0 Views 983KB Size Report
Comment
Nov 1, 2006 - in Australia (e.g., Ballard, 1987; Ballard & Clanchy, 1991; Gassin, 1982; Waller,. 1991). These misconceptions are examined in the light of ...
Higher Education Research & Development

ISSN: 0729-4360 (Print) 1469-8366 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cher20

Common Misconceptions about Students from South‐East Asia Studying in Australia Denise Chalmers & Simone Volet To cite this article: Denise Chalmers & Simone Volet (1997) Common Misconceptions about Students from South‐East Asia Studying in Australia, Higher Education Research & Development, 16:1, 87-99, DOI: 10.1080/0729436970160107 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160107

Published online: 01 Nov 2006.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1592

View related articles

Citing articles: 100 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cher20 Download by: [University of Western Australia]

Date: 24 January 2017, At: 21:19

Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1997

87

Common Misconceptions about Students from South-East Asia Studying in Australia DENISE CHALMERS Edith Cowan University

SIMONE VOLET Murdoch University

ABSTRACT International students from South-East Asia who study in Australia are often portrayed negatively compared to local students in terms of learning and study practices. This article discusses some of the misconceptions held by university teachers and administrators about South-East Asian students studying in Australia and examines them in the light of recent research. In particular, it challenges the views that students from South-East Asia are surface learners, passive non-participants in class who prefer the company of other Asian students. These findings challenge university teachers to reconsider accepted beliefs and practices when teaching all students, but particularly students from South-East Asia.

Introduction Students come from all over the world to study in Australian universities. We have seen an increase in students from the United States and Europe, particularly the former Eastern Block communist countries. However, the majority of international students at Australian universities are, and will continue to be, from the Asian region. Therefore, the discussion of international students in this article, which is written from an Australian perspective, will focus specifically on students from the South-East Asian region. Concern has been expressed about the tendency in Australian universities to refer to students from the Asian region as if they are a homogeneous group of people with similar cultural background and educational experiences (Burns, 1990; Volet & Kee, 1993). It is important to recognise that there are real differences, but that there are also a number of similarities between international students from South-East Asia. For example, all the students share the common experience of moving to a different country in order to study. Many are learning in a language other than their first language. In addition, they commonly find themselves studying in a situation where the learning context is different from their previous experiences in terms of expectations, learning support and academic and social requirements. For example, some 0729-4360/97/010087-12 © 1997 HERDSA

88 D. Chalmers & S. Volet students may have come from an educational context that is highly directed, structured and regulated by the teacher to find themselves in an educational context where self-direction, active participation and critical thinking are emphasised. Finally, many of the students from South-East Asia share a common Chinese and Confucian heritage background which has traditionally emphasised the value of knowledge and respect for those who teach it. Method This article examines some of the common misconceptions held by university teachers and administrators about South-East Asian students studying in Australia. Many of these misconceptions have been derived from reports and articles which have focused on the perceived problems and deficiencies of Asian students studying in Australia (e.g., Ballard, 1987; Ballard & Clanchy, 1991; Gassin, 1982; Waller, 1991). These misconceptions are examined in the light of recent research conducted in Australia and overseas. The findings challenge many of the accepted beliefs that are currently held in Australian universities. Throughout this article, students comments have been included to give a student voice to the research findings. The comments were made by 10 international students from four South-East Asian countries who participated in a larger study on students' goals, perceptions and management of study (Chalmers & Volet, 1992; Volet & Chalmers, 1992). The students were interviewed three times during their first semester of study at an Australian university, in weeks 3, 7 and 13. Comments from students who participated in Volet and Kee's (1993) study have also been cited. Misconception 1 South-East Asian Students are Rote Learners who Adopt a Surface Approach to Learning Early literature and anecdotal evidence has suggested that "Asian students rely more heavily on memorisation and less on understanding than Australian students" (Samuelowicz, 1987, p. 123). Asian students have been described as rote learners who adopt a surface approach to learning (e.g., Ballard, 1987, 1989; Bourke, 1986; Gassin, 1982; Kim & Crowley, 1990; Samuelowicz, 1987). According to Biggs (1987, 1993a) surface approach to learning is characterised by an intention to learn information to meet external demands, or simply to be able to reproduce the information. In contrast, a deep approach to learning is characterised by the intention to learn information so that it is meaningful and can be understood. In Western schools, the surface approach to learning has been associated with the use of rote learning strategies to such an extent that it is often assumed that students who use memorisation learning strategies necessarily rote learn—i.e. learn "unprocessed" information—and hold a surface approach to learning (Marton, Watkins & Tang, 1995; Biggs, 1993a). However, the belief that the use of memorisation strategies implies a surface approach indicates some confusion about the relative importance of motives and strategies in determining an approach to learning

South-East Asia Students 89 (for further discussion see Marton, Watkins & Tang, 1995) and a lack of distinction between rote learning and memorisation (Biggs, 1992; Volet & Renshaw, in press). The learner's intentions in carrying out the learning task are more important in determining the particular approach to learning than the actual strategies used (Biggs, 1993a). For example, there will be occasions when students who adopt a deep approach to learning will find it necessary to memorise some information. Doing this does not mean that they have changed their approach to learning: rather it is simply one strategy that complements other strategies they use in order to understand. Recent findings of research carried out in Hong Kong, Singapore, China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan and Australia show that although students from secondary schools and universities in these countries spent a great deal of their time memorising, they did this with the intention of understanding the information (Hess & Azuma, 1991; Hollaway, 1988; Kember & Gow, 1989; Marton, Dall'Alba & Tse, 1993; Tang, 1993; Watkins, Regmi & Astilla, 1991). These studies found that both the students and their teachers held an underlying belief in understanding through memorisation (Marton, et al.) or deep memorisation (Tang, 1993). They saw a close relationship between memorisation and understanding, with memorisation preceding understanding (Marton, Watkins & Tang, 1995). So, although the use of repetition and memorisation strategies by Western students has been found to indicate a surface approach to learning, the use of these same strategies by Asian students does not necessarily indicate that they are adopting a surface approach. The perceived overuse of memorisation strategies by Asian students should also be viewed in the context of the cultural and educational situation. Using the Study Processes Questionnaire, Biggs (1989a,b; 1990; 1991; 1992; 1993b) found that Asian students consistently scored higher on deep approaches and lower on surface approaches to learning than their Australian counterparts. They consistently reported a preference for high level, meaning-based learning strategies both in their own country and when studying in other countries (Biggs, 1993b). Many of these students believed that information should be learned thoroughly in order to allow them to concentrate on understanding that information. This belief was reinforced by the teaching strategies and methods used in the schools throughout Asia. These methods seem to be quite effective, given that students from these countries consistently achieve significantly higher than their Western counterparts in exams, particularly in the areas of mathematics and science (Biggs, 1993b; Sue & Okazaki, 1990). Rather than view use of memorisation strategies by Asian students as a "problem" (Samuelowicz, 1987) or a deficit in learning, it may be more productive to investigate the relationship between memorisation strategies and understanding, an issue recently addressed by Marton et al. (1995). In this way, the effectiveness of the strategies may be identified for the benefit of all students. It has been argued that use of memorisation strategies such as rote learning can be an effective strategy because it reduces the memory load when students are learning in a language different from their first language (Kember & Gow, 1989). As many Asian students will be studying in a second, third or even fourth language, memorisation strategies that lead to accurate recall can be effective because they

90 D. Chalmers & S. Volet enable students to deal directly with content and ideas rather than with the mechanics of decoding the language. Therefore, while Australian researchers and teachers are correct in asserting that students from Asia do make significant use of memorisation strategies, they have incorrectly attributed the use of memorisation and rote learning to a surface approach to learning (Biggs, 1992). The Asian students' emphasis on accuracy of recall should not be regarded as mindless repetition, for it is used as a means of achieving deep understanding. The anecdotal claim that Chinese learners are inherently more inclined to be rote learners at the expense of deep learning—in comparison to comparable groups of local Australian students—was not supported in any of our empirical studies. The overwhelming evidence is that the students from Asian countries appear to rely less on rote learning, to simply reproduce information, than Western students when they use the same strategies. The following comments made by three international students from South-East Asian countries illustrate the point that they should not be stereotyped as students who simply aim to rote learn and reproduce information. The unit on information technology, I feel it is very boring... computers. It is more memorising which I don't really like ... (9). I want to learn, really learn something from the courses (16). My aim of coming here to study is not just to get a degree, and go back and get a good job. Not only that, but to learn, to be educated, to widen my horizons and to know more about other people in their country besides all the courses I'm taking. I think that education here is more than just getting a degree, it's more than that (14). Misconception 2 Students from South-East Asia are Passive Learners and do not Participate in Class

Many students from South-East Asian countries are quieter in class than local students, particularly during their first year in Australia. A survey conducted by Mullins, Quintrell and Hancock (1995) indicated that participation in tutorials was a problem for almost half of the international students who responded. It is often suggested that this happens because "Asian students, adopt passive learning styles and avoid debate or criticism of the material raised in class "(Barker, Child, Gallois, Jones & Callan, 1991, p. 80). Even though the diversity of schools and educational experiences in the different countries makes it difficult to support this contention, it is repeated many times in one form or another (Bradley & Bradley, 1984; Ballard, 1987; Samuelowicz, 1987). However, attributing student quietness in tutorials to passivity is misleading. Being quiet does not necessarily means being mentally passive. In addition, it does not take into account students' beliefs of what is culturally appropriate when interacting with people of different status and other students, and their concerns about use of language. South-East Asian students hold different beliefs from many Western students

South-East Asia Students 91 about the appropriateness of speaking out in class. Many are not willing to draw attention to themselves by asking what they perceive to be an unnecessary question in front of the whole group. This is because they do not wish to waste the teacher's or the other students' time with one query. Volet and Kee (1993) found that students from Singapore believed that local students wasted important tutorial time with very basic questions; "...The Aussie students, they ask even the simplest questions that you would just keep quiet and try to find out from your friends later" (p. 15; see also p. 41). In contrast, the students from Singapore saw tutorial time as a scarce commodity that should not be wasted. Many students considered it inappropriate to raise questions or dominate class time when things could be discussed or reviewed at a later time in informal study groups. As two students explained: In tutorials they (teachers) give us questions and also solve some of it, but I don't expect all the questions to be solved. After classes I ask my friends ... and so we get together and have a more rounded view and more complete answer to our questions (14). We discuss what we are taught in lectures and if we don't understand we discuss it. In the tutorial times normally we don't discuss, we discuss in our own tutorial (15). Another factor that limits the extent to which students participate in class arises from differences in language. Although most South-East Asian students are able to speak and read English competently, they take time to adjust to the Australian accent and style of speech used in academic and social settings. They often comment that lecturers speak too fast in lectures and use local examples and expressions not familiar to them (Mullins et al, 1995; Volet & Kee, 1993). Getting used to the Australian dialect. It is just a matter of being more careful during lectures, to listen, because the lecturer tends to speak very fast (26). Students also indicated that they felt intimidated speaking in class because they were a minority group in the class (Volet & Kee, 1993) or because their responses were ignored by the local students (Mullins et al, 1995). The students in the Volet and Kee (1993) study suggested that a tutorial group with equal numbers of local and international students would help them feel more comfortable about contributing to discussions. They indicated that lecturers and tutors should not take it for granted that Asian students were quiet, but should try to involve them in the tutorials. Some of their suggestions for encouraging greater involvement included allocating a question to different students and giving them time to prepare their answers, specifically directing questions to the international students, and setting up small group tutorial activities. Above all they did not want the lecturers to assume that all South-East Asian students were alike, and disliked questioning or participating in class (Renshaw & Volet, 1995): Maybe, because I'm a person that if something doesn't suit me or doesn't

92 D. Chalmers & S. Volet feel right, I'll voice out my own opinion, so maybe I'm not your typical Asian stereotype (34). Misconception 3 South-East Asian Students Stick Together and do not Want to Mix with Local Students All of the South-East Asian students in our study (Chalmers & Volet, 1992) had formed informal study groups. These groups provided an opportunity for the students to clarify their understanding of tutorial and course work. Some students participated in more than one study group, or belonged to a group that worked on subject matter from a number of courses. In contrast, few of the Australian students had established similar out of class study groups or networks. They were more likely to belong to groups that focused on social or sporting, rather than educational, interests. The informal study groups could involve groups of students from a particular tutorial class, students from other tutorial classes in the same course, or senior students who had already completed the course. Senior students were frequently used as a source of information and help, not only about specific content of a course, but also on general advice about course selection and studying at the university. In addition to study support, students saw the role of the groups and networks as providing direction, focus and explanation as well as social and emotional support. In many ways these groups provided the range of support previously provided in their home countries by their communities and families. I do my own studying but I go to people when I need help. So in order to get a better explanation I go finding people, seniors or my own classmates (8). I have got quite a number of friends doing the same course. So we always, when there is a problem or assignment or anything like that, a tutorial, we just come together and discuss and after that we do our own things (9). We just go through all the exercises and all the questions and just discuss the tutorial questions and help one another out, especially the weaker ones (14). The formation of informal study groups by South-East Asian students is not specific to international students studying in Australia. Tang (1993) found that students in Hong Kong also formed informal study groups while studying at the local university. The students in these groups focused on preliminary reading and interpretation of information and issues from their individual assignment work, with little evidence of collusion in assignments. These students were found to hold a deep approach to learning and demonstrated use of high level cognitive strategies. They also produced assignments with higher structural complexity than students who worked individually. The formation of informal study groups is sometimes seen by local teachers and students as indicating that Asian students are reluctant to mix with the Australian

South-East Asia Students 93 students. However, the following studies of students have found that the international students acutally wanted greater interaction with local Australian students:Barker et al. (1991)—study of international and rural students; Quintrell (1992)— three year study of international students; and Mullins et al. (1995)—study of students at three universities. In our study (Chalmers & Volet, 1992), overseas students wanted to form friendships with local students, but found they had limited opportunities. Indeed, only one student had established friendships with local students by the sixth week of semester, and this was centred on a sporting activity: I've met a lot of Australian friends as well because I've been playing tennis with a whole group of Australian guys from third year (34). One reason why overseas students have difficulty making friends with local students is because of their accommodation. Most live in student housing or shared housing with other international students, which restricts their contact with local students. The main occasion when they can establish contact with other students is during tutorial times. However, if no small group tutorial activities were organised, then there would be few opportunities available for local and international students to interact. A formal way of providing opportunities for international students to meet local students was introduced at Flinders University (Quintrell & Westwood, 1994; Westwood & Barker, 1990), in a peer-pairing program where first year international students were paired with local students for one year. Both the international and local students reported positive benefits of social integration and greater language fluency gains. The international students who were paired with a local peer were also more aware, and more likely to take advantage of, services offered by the university in terms of counselling and study assistance than students who were not paired. These studies indicate that both overseas and local students can benefit from opportunities to meet and work together.

Misconception 4 Students from South-East Asia Lack the Skills for Analysis and Critical Thinking "In many Asian countries ... the intellectual skills of comparing, evaluating different points of view, arguing and presenting one's point of view are not developed" (Samuelowicz, 1987, p. 124). The view that Asian students lack the skills to critically reflect, voice their own opinion, and analyse and question is often reported in the literature (Ballard, 1989; Ballard & Clancy, 1991; Samuelowicz, 1987, Waller, 1991). However, this view has recently been challenged by researchers and teachers working with Asian students. For example, Volet and Kee (1993) found that while students from Singapore reported that they were not encouraged to think critically, they were encouraged to express their own opinions on issues and problems, particularly in Social Science and Humanities courses. Interestingly, all students surveyed believed they would be expected to critically analyse and question in Australian universities.

94 D. Chalmers & S. Volet In commenting on their teachers' expectations for their learning, the students in our study (Chalmers & Volet, 1992) said: What I need to know is the principles, be able to apply it and be able to put views of your own opinion on the particular model and argue upon it (9). What we are expected to know is just simply to understand and be able to evaluate the situation using the theory in certain situations, for some theories are more applicable in a real world while others are not. We are supposed to know quite a few fundamental theories and we are supposed to analyse it critically using what we know (14). These students recognised that the courses required analysis, application and justification, and were not concerned about their ability to meet the expectations. In fact, many of them were looking forward to the opportunity to analyse and question: I like to argue ... I wouldn't just take it that it is right. I think that there is no definite answer to one question. It may be an insult to a certain sort of person who think why do you like to argue, but for myself it should be the case, and because if you just accept what people say I think that is not learning. I say the process of learning is questioning and asking (15). I chose the unit Introduction of Contemporary China because I did study some Chinese history in Taiwan, and I feel I couldn't get true information .... So I want to know what's going on in China from a third party (16). Other students were aware that critical thinking and analysis were skills that they needed to develop and were taking active steps to remedy any perceived difficulties: I am very bad in essay writing but I think this semester is better ... I got a B (for my essay) and the tutor says I presented a very good criticism. I am quite happy about that (16). I'm not very good at analysis. So I need some improvement there and I'm trying to look for someone who can help ...but anything to do with analysis, I think I need help in that area (11). Overall, there was clear evidence that students were aware of the study requirements in Australian universities and they were prepared to adjust their learning styles. Misconception 5 South-East Asian Students do not Easily Adjust their Learning to the Australian Context The extent to which students from South-East Asia strategically adjust their learning and study strategies to the Australian context is frequently not recognised. Many students come from countries where they studied under conditions which are considered by western academics to be not conducive to good learning (Biggs, 1987, 1993b). Many students come equipped with learning strategies and skills that were

South-East Asia Students 95 effective in their own countries, but are considered to be inappropriate in the Australian context (Ballard, 1987; Ballard & Clanchy, 1991; Mullins et al, 1995). These students are expected to adjust quickly to the Australian academic and social context. Even though a number of studies have shown that international students in Australia experience a range of academic and social problems (e.g., Barker et al.,, 1991; Burns, 1990; Mullins etal., 1995; Volet & Kee, 1993), these students achieve grades at least as high as, and often significantly higher, than the local students (Biggs, 1993b). How can these apparent discrepancies be explained? We contend that the explanation lies in the students' ability to adapt strategically to the conditions in which they study. For example, Singaporean students who arrived to study in an Australian university were initially found to hold different perceptions, goals and expectations from the local students (Volet & Kee, 1993; Volet & Renshaw, 1995; Volet, Renshaw & Tietzel, 1994). However, the patterns of change in these students' learning after one semester of study, were similar in nature and direction to those of local students. These findings were replicated in a subsequent study at a different university (Chalmers, 1994). The students had identified and strategically adjusted to the demands of their study programs. However, not all aspect of this adjustment should necessarily be viewed as positive. For example, Volet and Renshaw (1995) found that while the Asian students held higher learning goals than the local students at the beginning of the first semester, by the end of the semester their learning goals matched the lower learning goals of the local students. The South-East Asian students in our study (Chalmers & Volet, 1992) reported a series of adjustments to their methods of study and the Australian context throughout their first semester. Before we came we were subject to a different sort of education system and we are asked to change our way of learning into what the Aussies', or rather the higher education's way of learning is. (It is) totally different, so we have to have a very dramatic change in our way of learning. Week 3 (11). I'm learning, trying to accommodate and adapt... because I find that back home we just learnt from the book but now you have to read more and then get more information ... I think that I prefer what I'm doing now than what I was doing before because what I'm doing now opens your eyes to a lot of things. Week 13 (11). Basically my goals for the semester, at least for the first half of it was to get acclimatised as soon as possible, get comfortable, get a group of friends, so that I would feel at home over the next three years ... then I said okay, do enough work so at least you get your tutorial assignments done well and not skip too many lectures ... So far that's going okay so now its just a question of going to plan B, which is really to put in the hours (34). It should not be concluded that overseas students adapt to all aspects of the Australian learning context. For example, many students interviewed were aware of study skills and learning strategies that were important to develop, such as taking

96 D. Chalmers & S. Volet lecture notes, writing essays, identifying the main points or using the library effectively. Many were also aware that they had difficulties with grammar and English expression. However, despite this awareness, Asian students have generally been reluctant to take advantage of learning skills and language courses or counselling services that are available (Anderson & Meyer, 1985; Ballard, 1987). In this respect the international students are not different from local students where there are similar patterns of utilisation of these services (Mullins et al., 1995). Overall, students from South-East Asia strategically adjust to the different learning context in Australia. They adapt in order to meet the particular university requirements and to achieve their learning goals. But many of these adjustments are not unique to South-East Asian students. All first year students are influenced by course structures, the assessment requirements and the study demands of their faculties. All students have their own motivations and goals for learning, and adjust and adapt to the different learning situations and tasks throughout their course of study at university (Chalmers, Fuller & Kirkpatrick, 1993; Volet & Chalmers, 1992; Volet & Renshaw, 1995). Focussing on differences between students, or groups of students, increases the possibility of perceiving students inaccurately or seeing only part of the full picture.

Conclusion Much of the earlier literature portrayed South-East Asian students as a unique group of students unprepared for studying at university in Australia. For example, SouthEast Asian students have been characterised as learners who: wish largely to rote learn information; lack the skills for analysis and critical thinking; and do not adjust their learning to reflect the new context (Ballard, 1987; Samuelowicz, 1987). In addition, they are characterised as passive in class and unwilling to mix with local students. While recent research and reports have found that these stereotypical views of South-East Asian students are not correct or as simple as first portrayed, they continue to persist. The misconceptions discussed in this article have sometimes been used as an excuse for not addressing the fundamental issue of student learning at university. When the "problem" is attributed to the students, teachers can avoid examining their own attitudes and practices. With the recent focus in higher education on the quality of learning it has become apparent that the quality of teaching at university is not as good as has often been claimed. The principles of good teaching apply just as much to students from South-East Asia as they do for local students. South-East Asian students have been shown to be motivated, effective and strategic learners. They present us with the opportunity to learn from them. It is an opportunity that we should take advantage of for the benefit of all students and teachers. Address for correspondence: Denise Chalmers, The Teaching and Educational Development Institute (TEDI), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia. E-mail: [email protected].

South-East Asia Students 97 References ANDERSON, T.R. & MEYER, T.E. (1985). Presenting problems, counsellor contacts and "no shows": International and American college students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 500-503. BAKER, M., CHILD, C , GALLOIS, G., JONES, E. & CALLAN, V.J. (1991). Difficulties of overseas

students in social and academic situations. Australian Journal of Psychology, 43(2), 79-84. BALLARD, B. (1987). Academic adjustment: The other side of the export dollar. Higher Education Research and Development, 6(2), 109-119. BALLARD, B. (1989). Overseas students and Australian academics: Learning and teaching styles. In B. WILLIAMS (Ed.), Overseas students in Australia: Policy and practice. Canberra: IDP. BALLARD, B. & CLANCY, J. (1991). Teaching students from overseas: A brief guide for lecturers and supervisors. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire. BiGGS, J.B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). BiGGS, J.B. (1989a). Students' approaches to learning in Anglo-Chinese schools. Educational Research Journal, 4, 8-17. BIGGS, J.B. (1989b). Approaches to learning in two cultures. In V. BICKLEY (Ed.), Teaching and learning styles within and across cultures: Implications for language pedagogy. Hong Kong: Education Department, Institute of Language in Education. BiGGS, J.B. (1990, July). Asian students' approaches to learning: Implications for teaching overseas students. Keynote discussion paper, 8th Australasian Tertiary Learning Skills and Language Conference, Queensland University of Technology, Australia. BIGGS, J.B. (1991). Approaches to learning in secondary and tertiary students in Hong Kong: Some comparative studies. Educational Research Journal, 6, 27-39. BiGGS, J.B. (1992). Why and how do Hong Kong students learn? Using the Learning and Study Process Questionnaires. University of Hong Kong: Faculty of Education. BIGGS, J.B. (1993). What do inventories of students' learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19. BiGGS, J.B. (1993). Why do Asian students perform so well? Lessons for the West. Keynote address, Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Fremantle, Australia. BOURKE, B.D. (1986). Experiences of overseas undergraduate students. Sydney: The University of New South Wales. BRADLEY, D. & BRADLEY, M . (1984). Problems of Asian students in Australia: Language, culture and education. Canberra: Australian Government Printing Service. BURNS, R.B. (1990, November). The adjustment of overseas students: A study of the academic, cultural, social and personal problems of overseas first year students at an Australian university. Paper presented at the Internationalisation of Industry, Government and Education at Curtin University, Western Australia. CHALMERS, D. (1994). Local and overseas students' goals and management of study. Issues in Educational Research, 4(2), 25-56. CHALMERS, D . & FULLER, R. (1996). Teaching for learning at university: Theory and practice. London: Kogan Page. CHALMERS, D., FULLER, R. & KIRKPATRICK, D. (1993, November). Everyone wants an A—but will they even get a C? Paper presented at the Australian Association of Research in Education, Fremantle, Western Australia. CHALMERS, D . & VOLET, S.E. (1992, July). How stable are university students' learning characteristics? Identifying dynamic adjustments in goals and study strategies. Paper presented at the 7th Australasian Developmental Conference, Brisbane. GASSIN,J. (1982). Learning difficulties of a foreign student. HERDSA News, 4(3), 13-16. HESS, R.D. & AZUMA, M. (1991). Cultural support for schooling: Contrasts between Japan and the United States. Educational Researcher, 20(9), 2-8. HOLLAWAY, S.D. (1988). Concepts of ability and effort in Japan and the US. Review of Educational Research, 58, 327-345.

98 D. Chalmers & S. Volet D. & Gow, L. (1989). Cultural specificity of approaches to study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 356-363. KIM, H.S. & CROWLEY, M. (1990, November). A study of ELICOS students' perceptions on aspects of studying in Australia. Paper presented at the Internationalisation of Industry, Government and Education at Curtin University, Western Australia. MARTON, F., DALUALBA, G. & TSE, L.K. (1993). The paradox of the Chinese learner. Occasional Paper No. 1 (93), Melbourne: RMIT Education Research and Development Unit. MARTON, F., WATKINS, D. & TANG, C. (1995). Discontinuities and continuities in the experience of learning. Paper presented at the 6th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction. Nijmegen, The Netherlands. MULLINS, G., QUINTRELL, N. & HANCOCK, L. (1995). The experiences of international and local students at three Australian universities. Higher Education Research and Development, 14(2), 201-231. QUINTRELL, N. (1992). The experiences of first year international students at Flinders University, 1989-1991: Responses to surveys. Adelaide: Flinders University of South Australia. QUINTRELL, N. & WESTWOOD, M. (1994). The influence of a peer pairing program on international students' first year experience and use of student services. Higher Education Research and Development, 13(1), 49-57. RENSHAW, P. & VOLET, S.E. (1995). South-East Asian students at Australian universities: A reappraisal of their tutorial participation and approaches to study. Australian Educational Researcher, 22(2), 85-105. SAMUELOWICZ, K. (1987). Learning problems of overseas students: Two sides of a story. Higher Education Research and Development, 6(2), 121-133. SUE, S. & OKAZAKI, S. (1990). Asian-American educational achievements: A phenomenon in search of an explanation. American Psychologist, 44, 349-359. TANG, K.C.C. (1993). Spontaneous collaborative learning: A new dimension in student learning experience? Higher Education Research and Development, 12(2), 115-130. VOLET, S.E. & CHALMERS, D. (1992). Investigation of qualitative differences in university students' learning goals, based on an unfolding model of stage development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 17-34. VOLET, S.E . & KEE, J.P.P. (1993). Studying in Singapore—Studying in Australia: A student perspective. Occasional Paper No. 1. Murdoch University Teaching Excellence Committee. VOLET, S.E. & RENSHAW, P.D. (in press). Chinese students at an Australian university: Adaptability and continuity. In D.WATKINS & J.BIGGS (Eds.), Cultural perspectives on effective teaming: The Chinese learner. ACER/The University of Hong Kong. VOLET, S.E. & RENSHAW, P.D. (1995). Cross-cultural differences in university students' goals and perceptions of study settings for achieving their own goals. Higher Education, 30, 407-433 VOLET, S.E. & RENSHAW, P.D. & TIETZEL, K. (1994). A short-term longitudinal investigation of cross-cultural differences in study approaches using Biggs SPQ Questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 301-318. VOLET, S.E. (1995). Process-oriented instruction: A discussion. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10(4), 449-459. WATKINS, D.A., REGMI, M. &ASTILLA, E. (1991). The-Asian-learner-as-rote-learner stereotype: Myth or reality? Educational Psychology, 11, 21-34. WESTWOOD, M.J. & BARKER, M. (1990). Academic achievement and social adaptation among international students: A comparison groups study of peer-pairing program. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 251-263. WALLER, D. (1991, February). New technologies—old cultures: Asian student attitudes to the teaching of marketing. Paper presented to the Marketing Educators of Australia and New Zealand, Annual Conference, Adelaide, Australia. KEMBER,

Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1997

99

Invited Contribution: Personal Perspective This is the first of a series of invited contributions which review or make personal comment on an aspect of higher education. The first contribution comes from Michael Jackson who talks about student learning from the perspective of an informed university teacher. Michael Jackson holds a personal chair in government and teaches political theory at the University of Sydney. He served as the Merrill Endowment Professor for Teaching Excellence at Utah State University in 1990 and was an inaugural member of the Committee for the Advance of University Teaching. He is also a member of the newly devised Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development. The article is a revised version of an invited keynote address to the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee, Symposium on the Course Experience Questionnaire, held at Griffith University, Queensland, October, 1996.

0729-4360/97/010099-01 © 1997 HERDSA