Higher Education Research & Development ...

This article was downloaded by: [University of Western Sydney Ward] On: 02 December 2014, At: 18:00 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Higher Education Research & Development Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cher20

Challenges to Stereotypes of International Students’ Prior Educational Experience: undergraduate education in India a

b

Peter Ninnes , Claire Aitchison & Shoba Kalos a

b

University of New England

b

University of Western Sydney Published online: 01 Nov 2006.

To cite this article: Peter Ninnes , Claire Aitchison & Shoba Kalos (1999) Challenges to Stereotypes of International Students’ Prior Educational Experience: undergraduate education in India, Higher Education Research & Development, 18:3, 323-342, DOI: 10.1080/0729436990180304 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180304

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 to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and 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 Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

Downloaded by [University of Western Sydney Ward] at 18:00 02 December 2014

Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/ page/terms-and-conditions

Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1999

323


Challenges to Stereotypes of International Students' Prior Educational Experience: undergraduate education in India PETER NINNES University of New England CLAIRE AITCHISON & SHOBA KALOS University of Western Sydney

ABSTRACT The discourse concerning teaching and learning for international students in Australia has been dominated by a cultural-deficit approach. Proponents of this perspective argue that many international students bring with them learning experiences which are inadequate in the Australian context. These experiences have favoured rote, reproductive, surface, teacher-centred and dependent approaches to learning; which lack analytical and critical perspectives; and which have occurred in contexts dominated by examinations and substantially lacking in educational resources. More recently, other research has challenged these stereotypes of international students, particularly regarding students from Confucianheritage cultures. This paper examines these stereotypes in relation to international students from India, through the use of a review of the available literature on Indian higher education and the analysis of the undergraduate learning experiences of a group of postgraduate students studying at a large Australian metropolitan university. It concludes that while some aspects of the stereotype may apply to Indian undergraduate education, most aspects of the cultural-deficit perspective are problematic in that context, and a more contextualised approach is of greater use in understanding and describing the diversity of undergraduate learning in India.

Introduction The rapid increase in the last decade and a half in the numbers of international students on Australian university campuses has given rise to a growing and important body of literature related to university learning. Within the discourse associated with international students' learning in Australian universities there is a central notion that this academic study presents a qualitatively different set of requirements from those experienced by students in their educational experiences in their home country. However, within this major discourse there are two partially contradictory or competing strands. The first strand, although couched in terms of cultural difference, represents a cultural-deficit perspective, because it argues that the learn0729-4360/99/030323-20 © 1999 HERDSA


324 P. Ninnes et al. ing strategies which international students bring to the Australian university context are more or less inadequate in this new setting. The second discourse argues that while international students experience substantial differences in learning contexts, the cultural-deficit approach enforces negative stereotypes and that in fact, the learning processes which international students employ have significant practical application in the Australian context. This paper aims to provide a small but important extension to the evaluation of the cultural-deficit perspective by examining various aspects of undergraduate learning in Indian universities, through a review of pertinent literature, and interviews with a small sample of Indian postgraduate students studying in Australia. Because of the small size of the sample, it is not the intent of this paper to unequivocally dismiss or support the arguments presented in the two major discourses described above. Rather, the intent is to contribute to the growing literature on the nature of undergraduate student experiences and hence to the analysis and evaluation of these perspectives. The prevailing discourse in the cultural-deficit strand identifies typical learning processes among international students and the contexts in which these arise. In terms of the processes of learning, this discourse argues that many international students are committed rote, reproductive and surface learners who prefer learning environments referred to by Ashman and. Conway (1997) as "teaching-centred", and which focus on the transmission of content and successful completion of exams (see, e.g. Ballard & Clanchy, 1984, 1991, 1997; Kelly & Bennoun, 1984; Samuelowicz, 1987; Ballard, 1989; Burns, 1991; Kenyon & Amrapala, 1991; Phillips, 1994; Boonyanate & Simkin, 1996). The general argument is that while these approaches to learning arise out of the cultural, social, economic, political and educational contexts of the students' home country and are therefore not necessarily invalid in that context, Australian universities require an approach which focuses on critical and analytical evaluations, in which students are expected to work independently and to develop and exhibit skills in debating, discussing, and arguing and, at least in formal assessments, in applying and manipulating knowledge (Ballard, 1989). As noted below, there is also a need to problematise these representations of Australian university teaching and learning practices, although such a task is beyond the scope of the current paper. The cultural-deficit discourse also enunciates ideas about the learning context which international students have experienced in their previous studies. Some of these contextual features have been propounded by Ballard (1989) and Ballard and Clanchy (1984, 1991, 1997). Many "Asian" students, they suggest, are products of competitive education systems dominated by examinations. Secondly, many students come from societies in which academic achievement is highly valued. Thirdly, the nature of the relationship between teachers and students is an important contextual feature. Ballard and Clanchy argue that in many societies students are required to show great respect to teachers, and this influences their approach to learning. Fourthly, particular approaches to learning can be limited by economic factors such as scarcity of resources. Yet to say that these contextual features apply to most international students may be an unhelpful generalisation. Burns (1991) and Boonyanate and Simkin (1996), have argued that it is unwise to treat all inter-


Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 325 national students ?s a homogenous group, since there are substantial variations in teaching and learning from one country to another. For example, Burns (1991) identified some differences between students from Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong, particularly in relation to willingness to approach academic staff for help with study problems. On the other hand, Burns himself did not distinguish between the three major ethnic groups from Malaysia. There are still other contextual features which may influence students' approaches to learning which are not canvassed in detail in the literature. These include: the type of institution in which students have studied (e.g. private versus state universities; single-sex versus coeducational institutions); the course undertaken (e.g. arts or humanities versus science versus commerce or business); and the language of instruction. Chalmers and Volet (1997) have identified several major problems associated with the perception of international students' learning described in this discourse. Of particular relevance here is their idea that this cultural-deficit discourse misrepresents the nature of learning in students' home countries. A recognition of the problematics of these perceptions has given rise to the second strand within the discourse on the differences between university learning in Australia and elsewhere. This discourse can be conceptualised as representing a cultural-proficiency approach, because it presents the argument that while there are variations in learning across cultures, the "home-grown" strategies used by international students are to some extent useful in the Australian university context and that students are able to adapt their learning to the new context. In their most recent publication, Ballard and Clanchy (1997) have acknowledged briefly the usefulness of some aspects of international students' learning repertoires, but the cultural proficiency discourse is developed more comprehensively in the work of Biggs (1991, 1996, 1997), Chalmers and Volet (1997), Mugler and Landbeck (1997), Volet and Renshaw (1996) and Volet, Renshaw and Tietzel (1994). Proponents within this school of thought argue that learners from countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and China are not passive with a focus on rote learning, but are active, struggling to attain deep understanding of course content. This approach is often an asset to studying in Australia. As Biggs (1996) points out, a learning strategy such as repetition can be incorrectly interpreted as rote learning, that is, as an approach which disregards meaning or understanding. However, many students from Chinese-heritage cultures (CHC) use repetitive learning strategies as a way of internalising or ensuring accurate recall of well-understood material. In this case, repetition becomes a deep learning strategy (Biggs, 1996). Furthermore, some learning theorists, such as Ausubel, Novak and Hanesian (1978), argue that teacher exposition can be a very effective strategy in certain circumstances (see, e.g., Lefrancois, 1994). Recent research by Volet et al. (1994), which is relevant here, challenges the assumption that Australian undergraduate education emphasises critique and evaluation. While this may be true in some courses, Volet et al. note that in their study CHC students actually became more surface oriented in their learning over the duration of the first semester of their courses in economics. The research within the cultural-proficiency strand presents a clear counter to


326 P. Ninnes et al. the stereotypes of international students' culture and previous learning experiences presented in the cultural-deficit strand. Much of the commentary, however, pertains to CHC students, and to students from countries which have relatively high levels of cultural homogeneity, such as China, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan and Korea (Biggs, 1996). This paper seeks to extend the analysis of the home-country learning experiences of international students to students from India, a country which is becoming increasingly important as a source of international students in Australia (DEET, 1996) and which, unlike the CHC countries, is characterised by substantial cultural, linguistic, religious and educational diversity (Basu, 1989). It aims to explore and provide additional information and insight into the ideas about processes and contexts of learning espoused by Ballard, Clanchy and others, and in particular, the extent to which Indian students' undergraduate experience, as described in the relevant literature, and by the students in the sample, is characterised by: 1. Learning processes which emphasise rote, reproductive, surface, teacher-centred approaches, which emphasise the successful completion of exams, and which are applied uniformly regardless of the type of institution or the course of study; 2. Learning processes which lack a critical and analytical approach and which do not involve debating, discussing, and arguing; and 3. Learning contexts in which teachers are highly respected, in which academic achievement highly valued, which are dominated by examinations and in which resources for learning are scarce. The research reported here contributes to the advancement of the study of international students' prior learning experiences in an important way. Much, but not all, previous research has employed surveys of approaches to study such as Biggs' Student Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987) or the Approaches to Studying Inventory (Entwistle & Ramsden, 1983). Such approaches have the advantage of providing broad overviews of the nature of study among large samples of students. In settings such as India in which students come from diverse cultural, linguistic, religious and educational backgrounds, however, the use of survey instruments can tend to obscure important variations within samples and lead to over-generalisations. Hence, the current study employed case studies as one of its methodologies to examine the learning experiences of a small but diverse group of Indian students, in order to obtain some sense not only of the nature of these experiences but also of their diversity, and of their subtle differences and nuances. The focus then is an exploratory one and emphasises the kinds of learning experiences rather than their generalisability. Much of the Australian literature on international students focuses on teaching undergraduate students. However, the generalisations in the literature may not apply to postgraduate students who have previously undertaken university studies in their home country. The current study examines postgraduate students in order to identify the extent to which the ideas concerning international students' approaches to learning apply to this important group.

Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 327


Methodology Two methods were used to explore the three sets of assumptions about Indian undergraduate students' learning listed above. The first method involved a review of the available literature in the field of comparative and international education pertaining to university education in India. The second method involved interviewing a small sample of postgraduate students concerning their experiences of undergraduate education in India, using an interview protocol specifically developed for this purpose. The interview protocol included questions related to the kinds of assessment tasks which students had undertaken in their undergraduate degree, the processes which they employed in assignment preparation, their perceptions of the role(s) of students and lecturers in Indian universities, the nature of the interactions between students and lecturers, and students' perceptions of the reasons for their success in their previous study. As well as articulating their ideas in these areas, students were asked to try to describe how they arrived at their understanding of that aspect of Indian higher education. The interview protocol also sought demographic information about the students including age, religion, parents' occupations, languages spoken at home and the students' date of arrival in Australia. The interview protocol was trialled with a group of four postgraduate students from India who were part of the 1995 intake of international postgraduate students. Debriefing of these students after the trial interview and discussions among the research team led to minor amendments to the wording of the questions, the addition of a series of questions relating to the undergraduate course or courses which students had undertaken in India, and the characteristics of the university in India at which the course was completed. The participants in this study comprised ten students (nine male, one female, in line with the gender composition of the cohort) in the 1996 intake of an intensive one-year, four-term Master of Business Administration (International Business) at an Australian metropolitan university. The students volunteered to be involved in response to a request made during orientation sessions conducted during the first week of the course by the university's Student Services Division and the Faculty of Business and Technology. All the students had arrived in Australia immediately prior to the commencement of the orientation sessions. Students were told that the purpose of the study was to find out how students fare academically in Australia so that the division would be better able to provide support services for future intakes of students. In order to gauge the nature of the students' previous university education in India the students were interviewed by one of the team members for between one and one-and-three-quarter hours within three weeks of the commencement of their Australian course. The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed by members of the research team and by another university staff member employed for that purpose. Nine useable transcripts were produced. Copies of the unmarked transcripts were sent to the participants with a covering letter thanking them for their participation. The letter asked the students to carefully read the transcripts and


328 P. Ninnes et al. report any inaccuracies to the research team. One student identified a small number of minor errors in his transcript. A two-stage content analysis technique was then used to identify (a) the major themes within the data (role of lecturer, role of student, interactions between students and lecturers, and so on), and then (b) to break down these major themes into specific practices, processes and perceptions. The categories used in the content analysis were derived initially from a list of codes developed through brainstorming among the three team members. Since each team member had been involved in interviewing and/or transcription, this process generated a substantial list of categories and themes and their definitions. Working in one room over the course of two days, each team member then coded two or three transcripts. Major themes were coded first, after which one transcript from each team member was cross-checked by another team member. Agreement between the team members was very high, and in cases where disagreement occurred, definitions were reassessed, changed if necessary, and then all instances of that code rechecked across all transcripts for consistency. An identical process of cross-checking and negotiation was followed in the second stage of coding.

Results Higher Education in India In recent years the Indian higher education system has grown to be one of the largest in the world (Watkins, 1994). In the mid-1990s there were over 175 universities, many of which had numerous affiliated colleges (Majumdar, 1994), compared to 27 universities in 1950-1951 (Behar, 1992). Although student numbers in higher education have grown considerably since independence, the proportion of students in the 19-23 age group in higher education in 1990 was only 5.9%, compared to 7% in Indonesia, 2 1 % in Egypt, and 59% in the USA (Behar, 1992). The various types of higher education institutions in India currently consist of: affiliating universities which primarily teach graduates and conduct research, and their affiliated colleges which teach undergraduates; unitary universities which teach both undergraduates and postgraduates and conduct research; specialised universities in the fields of agriculture, technical areas and engineering, medicine, law, education, music and fine arts; institutes officially designated as being of national importance, including the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), institutes of medical science and technology, an Institute of Hindi Language; and one national and four State open universities (Behar, 1992). Shukla (1991) also records the presence of colleges of dentistry, pharmacy, homeopathy, nursing and indigenous medicine which have been ascribed university status. Eight of the nine students who participated in this study completed their undergraduate degrees in colleges affiliated with eight different private or government universities in seven different states in both North and South India. The ninth

Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students

329

student attended a unitary university in North India. The universities ranged in size from 16,000 to 197,000 students (Taylor, 1993).


Rote, Reproductive, and Surface Approaches to Learning

Zachariah (1993), while acknowledging the dangers of over-generalising, believes that memorisation strategies are very common among Indian undergraduate students. He argues that, some weeks prior to the examination, a typical student "begins to read the textbooks and memorize from guidebooks ready-made answers to essay or other type questions asked in several previous public examinations". Zachariah (1993) argues that because exam papers contain substantial amounts of choice, students can gauge the probability of a particular question or a similar one reappearing and focus their revision accordingly. The students in this study did report that at times they used memorisation learning strategies, yet there were always provisos or caveats attached to their comments. One student, Lavanya (a pseudonym is used for each student), who undertook a Bachelor of Science degree at an all-female Catholic college affiliated with a large urban university in South India, observed that, "Being a science subject, you had to learn things by heart. But then you had to understand what was going on in class, basically". In this case, Lavanya recognised the usefulness of rote memorisation in certain subjects, but the necessity also of obtaining an understanding of the material. Another student, Rakesh, when asked about the role of the teacher in his previous degree, said that the approach of the teacher influenced the balance between memorisation and understanding: The only thing is every teacher would have a different approach. [A] few would explain the same thing, [a] few would like certain tutors I'm talking about, [a] few would give the written notes and you just literally mouthed them out, just memorised them. So that would make a difference, how the teacher explains. Because certain teachers were really amazing, you know, you could, you could just understand the whole subject by just listening to them and that made it just so easy to do it, or to solve the problem. That would make a lot of difference. Another student, Aditya, when discussing the role of the teacher, argued that students preferred teachers who facilitated an understanding of concepts, rather than those whose principal focus was on ensuring that students obtained high marks. It appears from these responses that, while the teaching style is primarily expository, there is an emphasis in some cases on student understanding, which Ashman and Conway (1997) argue is a characteristic of a "learning-centred" approach. Teacher-centred Learning

The cultural-deficit approach to international students' learning argues that many international students prefer a teacher-centred approach. Ashman and Conway (1997) use the slightly different term "teaching-centred" to refer to an approach


330 P. Ninnes et al. which emphasises the acquisition of knowledge, in which the curriculum is rigid and prescribed, in which the teacher is an instructor and imparter of knowledge rather than a co-learner, and in which the emphasis is on hearing the teacher rather than engaging in discussion. The evidence presented below suggests that such a teachingcentred environment was central to most students' undergraduate experience in India. However, this does not mean to say that substantial learning does not occur. As noted above, an expository style of teaching can enhance students' understanding (Lefrancois, 1994), and it would seem that some students in this study had such experiences. The idea that understanding rather than rote memorisation is the key to learning was expressed by Bhanu, who argued that the teacher played a crucial role in helping students whose first language was not English to understand material: Students actually always think that if something's there in the book to learn and that thing is not understood, so normally try to understand, because sometimes in India we are kind of low in English level so they always ask the professor to make it somewhat easy. And make them understood the concept. So once the concept is understood they can easily learn it. Normally the professor in India use this method of teaching. First they just spell out the concept in something normal English, and then he clarify further in the depth. Two other students in the study supported this notion that the teacher had an important role in explaining, clarifying and developing understanding of concepts. One observed that, "They make us understand very well" (Divakar) while another said, "If there are some doubts there, [the teacher will] explain it" (Kapil). Basu (1989) has argued that on independence, India "inherited a system of education where ... the method of teaching was authoritarian and did not encourage students to think for themselves", but argues that the extent to which such approaches to teaching have persisted varies substantially within the higher education system. It appears from the students' comments examined so far that the teacher played a central role in the students' undergraduate experience. This was explicitly stated on a number of occasions, such as the following: Actually [the teacher] always decide the points what the students says. If you say about something, suggests, then he will maybe, if the lecture is continuing, then he will discuss this is the correct point that the students makes, this is not so, this is not so (Bhanu). Such comments depict the teacher as an all-knowing guide to the literature and arbiter of student opinion. Yet, there were seemingly contradictory statements made by other students about the role of the teacher, and these apparent contradictions arose out of the realisation that the extent to which subjects were teacher- or teaching-centred depended on contextual features such as the subject itself and the style of the teacher. In some cases, a highly autonomous approach was required. One student, Rakesh, described a situation in which the teacher's explanations were so incomprehensible to the students that they needed to learn material by themselves and hope for the best. Other students also noted the need for students to be



331

self-sufficient. One student, Kapil, argued that this was because little feedback was given in class, and hence students were required to decide for themselves whether they had covered the material adequately. Another feature of the learning environment which impacted on the extent to which the teacher was involved was the nature of the subject matter. Several students distinguished between theoretical and practical subjects, but there was some disagreement among the students about the best approach to use in each case. One student argued that while the teacher was not particularly important in theoretical subjects, in practical subjects "like costing and budgeting, a lot depended on the teacher" (Rakesh). Another student agreed, saying, "Actually we were not totally dependent on teachers I can say that. Except some subjects we had to be very careful like accounting all that, you can't just study them [by yourself]. Theory subjects, OK" (Kapil). On the other hand, another student argued that, "it was important to attend the lectures because in economics, or such subject like as economics, the subjects which are theoretical, that lectures should be attended. For that, teachers are important" (Bhanu).

Passing Examinations

Some authors, such as Zachariah (1993) believe that passing examinations is the principal focus of many Indian undergraduate students. Class tests, when they do not count towards the formal assessment, are undertaken more for their value as a rehearsal for the examination rather than as a means for students to evaluate their own learning. As noted above, most students in the current study strive to understand their course material, regardless of the mode of delivery, but, in concurrence with Zachariah (1993), for many students the purpose of understanding material and for some the central role of the student was to pass examinations: "For us basically study means you have to get through your exams" (Lavanya) and, "The main thing was that we had to pass all our exams" (Kapil). These views are not surprising given the dominance of exams in the Indian higher education system, as discussed below. One strategy which students often mentioned in regard to passing examinations was attendance at lectures, which was necessary not only for the concepts which might be learned but because students in many cases could be excluded from examinations if their attendance record was weak. One student said "you should carry a 90 per cent attendance for appearing in the exam" (Ishan). Other students reported that attendance at lectures was generally poor, except when there were crack-downs on attendance.

Critical and Analytical Approaches, Debating, Discussing and Arguing

As noted above, Basu (1989) believes that in general Indian undergraduates are not encouraged to think independently. This appears to be reflected in our study. Only one student mentioned a formal teaching or learning approach which could be considered designed to develop critical or analytical learning. He said that his

332 P. Ninnes et al.


teachers had often asked students "How to solve this? What is the point? What do you think about it?" (Sunil). Reports of formal critical and analytical teaching and learning were rare but occurrences of debating, discussing and arguing were considered slightly more common. All of the students related that in most classes student participation consisted of asking questions in order to clarify concepts. On occasions this occurred in a somewhat formal manner: When teacher's describing, he asks the questions, and if any student wants to give his idea he can just ask the permission from the lecturer. He can come on the stage. ... So you can just raise your hand and just ask the professor I want to give some idea. So the professor will call you on the stage. There the student can just give something (Bhanu). Although asking questions was allowed in class, one student (Sunil) believed that "students in India [are] very hesitant to ask. They don't open up very easily ... we will find very few students like me. ... I would state anything which I don't follow; I would always ask for clarification [Interviewer: And you're saying that's the small minority?] That's the minority" (Sunil). Kapil also pointed out that while his lecturers had encouraged questions, the extent to which questions were tolerated was lower than he had experienced in Australia: Here [in Australia] you can ask out plenty of times, but [in India] if you are asking more than twice and if he explains to you and if you are not understanding you have to keep quiet. If you are asking and asking, he gets irritated. One student, who had completed an Honours Bachelor of Commerce, actually used the terms "debate" and "discuss" in his description of classes in India. Another student, Lavanya, reported that as part of their examination preparation students sometimes formed themselves into groups and discussed the work with each other. But these occurrences of discussion and debate appear to be exceptions which occurred almost incidentally to the major learning processes. Robust debate and argument appear to be largely outside the experiences of these students. One student, a science graduate, observed that being argumentative was undesirable and could have a negative impact on students' results: Maybe [a student] asks some questions. That's good if he asks some questions with the professor, but not arguing always with the professor. If he argues always he is going to come into his eyes and he is definitely not going to pass his exams. ... Maybe some students have got [a] habit of doing this, always arguing with the professor, always, you know ... [The student should exhibit] good behaviour and should be good in studies (Divakar).


333


Relationships with Lecturers

Six of the students in this study described the relationship between teachers and students, particularly in class, as "formal". Some students, however, reported that there was substantial variation in the degree of formality. This variation could be based on whether students were relating to lecturers inside or outside class. As Divakar observed, "It depends on the lecturer to lecturers. Some lecturers are quite formal in the class. While others are quite informal and they're quite formal outside the class, outside the lecture rooms I must say". Ishan believed that the degree of formality was related to the age of the lecturer: "Informal were mostly—the older staff were very formal, very strict—the youngers they're very good. After some time they do become formal". Formality was expressed by the terms of address which were used by students to lecturers. Five of the students reported that they called lecturers "Sir" or "Ma'am". Formality was also shown by students behaving properly in class. "Properly" means behaviours such as "you have to show some respect, you can't go on doing anything in the classroom whatever you feel like, you can't do that" (Sunil), and being quiet in class (Kapil). The level of informality in class could include joking and laughter, as Rakesh reported. "We had some really funny teachers. ... A few teachers would just crack a joke and the whole class would start laughing". Joking sometimes occurred outside the classroom, although other indicators of formality were maintained. For example, Lavanya said that outside of class, students in her college, "don't call [lecturers] by their first names but then they joke with you. I mean in the class they don't generally joke with you. But there are some who ... I mean we have some who don't really care about the, about the formal stuff, but you have to call them Sir or Ma'am or Mr so and so or Mrs so and so". Sunil reported that in his college too much fooling around in class, however, was frowned upon: There are [a] few students who are ill-mannered and then they land up with some stupid jokes or something. That's why this thing lacks you know, which you are not supposed to do with any professor and we have sometimes ... at least not in my college—this was one of the top colleges— but you know other colleges. There is a rowdy crowd you know and that's how, why the problem is there because in our case, in our college, it is not so. We are pretty cool with all our professors, we can have a cup of tea also together. Valuing Academic

Achievement

The extent to which academic achievement is valued in the Indian higher education context is somewhat ambivalent. This ambivalence is particularly reflected in the affiliated colleges, where academic staff lack the status and prestige of their colleagues in the universities, but tend to have higher social standing than school teachers (Altbach, 1977). The generally poor employment conditions and the low


334 P. Ninnes et al. level of professionalisation of the teaching force (Altbach, 1977) could be taken as an indication that academia and, by implication, academic achievement is not highly valued. Yet according to Singh (1984), large segments of the Indian population value academic achievement because they see higher education as a means of upward social mobility. Some students in this study came from learning contexts in which academic achievement was valued. Lavanya, for example, explained that a reason for her success in her undergraduate degree was that "in the environment actually the people expect you to study and do well. On the average most of the people have a degree ... I would say most ... more than half. Another student, Aditya, argued that there were many distractions during his undergraduate course which suggested that at least some students had a wider focus than academic achievement: The main reason is the political scenario. I'm talking about not [only] the government politics, I'm talking about the university politics as well as the government politics, because there are a lot of student unions who run, political student unions are there, so there are a lot of hindrances, a lot of strikes, a lot of every bullshit you have on the college premises, and that's why the university is not working well. That's why the common people who are not interested in politics, just interested in studies, just can't go through the regular system. The Role of Examinations Several authors have argued that formal written examinations are a very common method of assessment in Indian universities, as they are in many parts of the world. In all the discussion of reform of the Indian university system, it is the examination system which has come in for the most criticism. It is usual for these examinations to be marked by external bodies, and Indiresan (1983) argues that as a result, students and teachers receive no useful feedback. Grades are usually given on a scale of 0-100, with first class passes being awarded for scores of 60% or more, second class for 50-60% and pass marks for 40-50%, though there are some variations between universities in this regard (Indiresan, 1983). Despite the apparently low pass marks, Saxena (1990) indicates that in the late 1980s non-completion rates were around 50%, while Zachariah (1993) reports that about half of arts, science and commerce undergraduate students fail. Behar (1992) observes that "the examination system is generally held to be defective". According to Zachariah (1993), the problems arising from the examination system include an emphasis on rote learning and a preoccupation with rules, regulations and power struggles rather than scholarship. In most institutions, examinations are held every semester, which, Zachariah (1993) notes, is a substantial reform of the colonial system in which examinations were held in many cases only at the end of a two-year course of study. There have been some major changes in assessment methods, but, like innovative teaching methods, these tend to be confined to the elite institutions such as the IIMs and IITs (Zachariah, 1993).


Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 335 The variability with which exams are used in assessment in India is reflected in their use in the various institutions attended by the students in this study. Some students had annual, externally set and marked examinations. Others had one or more internal mid-year examinations followed by external final examinations. The science graduates had both theory and practical examinations, and according to Behar (1992) practical examinations are also found in home science, fine arts, teacher education and other professional courses. The students also reported that there were other types of assessment, such as weekly revision tests (which usually carried no weight in the final mark) and assignments or projects, which no student reported as being worth more than 10% of the overall grade. There is little doubt, nevertheless, that in all of the cases in this study the students' undergraduate experience was dominated by examinations. Several students reported that all of their grades were derived from internal and/or external examinations. Those students who had some form of assignment or project included in their assessment reported that for any one subject these assessment items were worth less than 10% of the total subject mark. Ballard and Clanchy (1997) point out that in Indonesia most exams are in multiple choice or short answer format. However, several authors reveal that essay-type questions are common in Indian undergraduate examinations (Indiresan, 1983; Behar, 1992; Zachariah, 1993). Our Indian students, especially those who had undertaken commerce degrees, agreed that examinations sometimes involved extended written answers: Well we have to write down the points actually what are the main points that an examiner needs are asking to jot down. Actually in India you have to write down pages and pages. It's a very theoretical, lectures and writing. Not like fine points, but it's better if you just write down the points of your answers and just make it underlined, and just give a conclusion after that, introduction a bit at the front, but that's it (Aditya). This comment indicates that there may well be some difference between the Indian experience and the Australian requirements of analysis and argument in extended writing. Aditya also pointed out that while some subjects required theoretical treatment of topics, examinations in other subjects required students to apply their knowledge and solve problems: When we're doing our accountancy we must first make our working notes regarding each calculations we have to make. So for example we are working out some working capital requirements, so we have to work out regarding the profits, regarding the calculations of the datas. ... Then after that we just make a statement and just write total cash and all these things. Thus, simple rote learning was not always adequate to ensure a pass mark, although

336 P. Ninnes et al. in some cases it was considered an important strategy for gaining understanding of concepts, as shown by Bhanu's description of his revision technique:


Making notes. First, at the lecture, first you just point out the brief thing of the lecture. Go home, make it yourself all the details to study. Refer the text, too. Make the good thing ... study that thing again and again. So I just get all the concepts in my mind, all the major concepts, then I just go over it with myself and answer it. The dominance of Indian higher education by examinations has led to two particularly important contextual features. First, there has occurred the development of an extensive parallel private tutoring system which it appears most students make use of at some time (Saxena, 1990; Zachariah, 1993). One of the students in this study described the private tuition phenomenon as follows: The latest trend in India is that apart from your college and your university studies a lot of students have started taking tuitions. That's private classes from the teachers. So teachers of these subjects, accounts and certain other practical subject would take classes at home and at other places too they would charge some nominal fee. In fact this is a very big issue coming up in India because it's not legal in a way because they get a tax-free income. The teachers are doing this. So in those subjects we really have to depend on the teacher. We have to go take extra classes and then the teacher, depending on how good the teacher is, would tell us how to do the subject ... it's getting so competitive over there that teachers don't have time. They start at six o'clock in the morning and they have a batch of five, six, seven students, and some teachers their demand is such that they actually have you kind of have to give them an entrance test to get into their tuitions, there's so much rush they just won't cope, all the students want to go to them, so its like tuition's becoming a part of our education system which is a very debatable issue (Rakesh). One student, Bhanu, observed that an effect of this tutoring is that it provides an alternative avenue, besides lecturers, other students and texts, by which students can engage with the material they are required to learn. The second important contextual feature in Indian undergraduate education which this study has revealed is the existence of practices which may be viewed as corrupt. Zachariah (1993) notes the occurrence of cheating during examinations which sometimes occurs with the tacit approval of invigilators. In some cases it has been known for answers to questions to be broadcast into examination halls from loudspeakers set up outside by candidates' allies (Zachariah, 1993). In order to prevent improper marking procedures, exam markers are closely supervised in centralised facilities (Zachariah, 1993). While Zachariah (1993) notes the occurrence of cheating, Altbach (1987), however, is more direct, arguing that corruption, political interference and patronage are endemic in Indian universities. He describes the examination systems as a "deadweight" and points out that the involvement of central authorities in the exam process makes them targets for manipulation.

Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 337


Political interference does not generally involve ideology or influences on teaching programmes, but the seeking of jobs and places for relatives and friends, and obtaining higher grades through bribery or influence (Altbach, 1987). The students in this study also identified a number of illicit activities related to assessment. Prabhakar described one illegal practice used for passing examinations which involved taking into examinations a large number of small sheets of paper on which notes were written. There was also one suggestion that personal connections and close relationships with lecturers were useful resources for passing exams. Resources for Learning

The review of literature revealed that there are major disparities in funding between the various higher education institutions in India. Universities operated by the central government receive twice as much funding per student as state universities, while affiliated colleges receive only one-fifth of the amount per student funding given to state universities (Behar, 1992). Furthermore, in the last two decades a number of institutions of higher education has developed outside the control of the University Grants Commission, which was created in the 1950s to control university education in India. These new institutions include the IIMs and IITs mentioned previously (Singh, 1984; Faraj, 1988; Majumdar, 1994). These institutes are officially designated as "institutes of national importance" (Behar, 1992), and have been assigned high levels of funding and lower teacher-student ratios to match their importance. More than two decades ago, Altbach (1977) reported that the affiliated colleges in Bombay were generally poorly equipped. Lecturers rarely had their own offices and they prepared classes and marked papers in staff common rooms. College libraries were generally "small, fairly poorly maintained and inadequate for faculty research" (Altbach, 1977). The situation in Bombay appeared to reflect that in the rest of the country. More recently, Behar (1992) observed that in India "the few very high quality institutions of international standard coexist with a large number of substandard and nonviable colleges and many ill-equipped universities". Altbach (1993) points out that although government expenditure on higher education has increased steadily over half a century, after taking inflation into account, per student expenditures have actually declined in that period. Eight of the nine students in this study came from affiliated colleges which reflected the low level of facilities reported in the literature. Although each student reported that their campus had a library, none of the students reported that they used the library to obtain material related to their courses. Instead, they used the library as a place of quiet study or to photocopy other students', especially senior students', notes. Libraries were not used to obtain material for several reasons. Firstly, their resources were often limited or out of date. Only two students believed that their library was adequately equipped with books and journals. Secondly, one student, Rakesh, said that because books were relatively cheap in India, he considered that it was better to buy books rather than borrow them. Another student, Bhanu, reported that a book loan system operated as part of his course, which made

338 P. Ninnes et al. it unnecessary to either purchase or borrow books. Other students said that it was not necessary to use material in the library, because all the information required to pass a subject was available in the lecture notes or texts. Overall, students reported that their classrooms contained very few pieces of equipment such as overhead projectors or computers. Blackboards, benches and desks were reported as the most common pieces of equipment.


Discussion and Conclusion The research reported here employed a review of the relevant literature and interviews with a small sample of postgraduate students to explore the undergraduate learning experiences of students from India. In the process it attempted to provide further information and insight into the conceptual frameworks which have been used to describe and explain international students' learning experiences in Australia. In particular, the paper explored the idea that for students from India, undergraduate learning processes emphasise rote, reproductive, surface, teachercentredness, and the successful completion of exams, and are applied uniformly regardless of the type of institution or the course of study; that learning processes lack a critical and analytical approach and do not involve debating, discussing, and arguing; and that in these learning contexts teachers are highly respected, academic achievement is highly valued, examinations dominate, and resources for learning are scarce. Learning and teaching processes involving only rote, reproductive, and surface approaches, depicted by Ballard and Ballard and Clanchy (Ballard, 1989; Ballard & Clanchy, 1984, 1991, 1997) as typical of many international students appear to be predominantly minor aspects of the undergraduate experience in Indian universities, at least according to the literature and the student experiences examined here. Although memorisation appears to be used quite often, it is usually employed as an aid to understanding subject matter and concepts, which several authors have argued is more akin to a deep approach to learning rather than a surface approach (Biggs, 1996; Mugler & Landbeck, 1997). Furthermore, some learning theorists such as Ausubel (cited in Lefrancois, 1994) argue that an expository approach to teaching can in certain circumstances assist understanding. The question of dependence, lack of autonomy and teacher-centredness is more complex and contextualised. The suggestion that these processes of learning are widespread (Ballard & Clanchy, 1997) is true up to a point, but equally, the students in this study stressed that they often did not, or could not, rely on the teacher, and their success was due to their own autonomous efforts to read and comprehend subject matter. The pertinent literature and the students' responses suggest-that contextual features which seem to influence the degree of autonomy included the nature of assessment practices in the institution, teaching style, and students' perceptions of the nature of the subject matter. The analysis here indicates, as the cultural-deficit stereotype suggests, that there continues to be a heavy emphasis on examinations in Indian undergraduate education, but teachers who emphasised the mere transmission of content without an accompanying degree of understanding


Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 339 appear, at least, to have not been in the overwhelming ascendancy in the students' experience. Indeed, as noted above, and as the results concerning the ability to ask questions in class show, most students and their teachers appeared to focus on understanding material rather than simply transmitting it, and in many cases and in certain subjects there was also a major emphasis on applying the knowledge to practical situations. The idea that critical and analytical thinking is predominantly lacking in many international students' previous educational experience (Ballard, 1989) is supported by the evidence presented here. Although some uses of questioning and discussing were reported, these tended to be subordinate and peripheral to the major concern of obtaining understanding of key concepts and developing the ability to demonstrate this understanding in examinations. The mixture of striving for understanding but still lacking a substantially critical and analytical approach mimics the results found by Volet et al. (1994) among students from Singapore. The notion of debate, discussion and argument as appropriate classroom behaviours was relatively rare among these students. This absence can in part be explained by the social and cultural context of learning in many Indian universities, particularly the formal relationships between lecturers and students, although there are some notable variations and exceptions to the cultural stereotypes outlined in Ballard and Clanchy (1991, 1997). It appears from the analysis that it is an over-simplification to suggest that students' relationships with their lecturers are uniformly and substantially based on respect, as the cultural-deficit perspective suggests, or that the level of formality is universally high. Whilst the students in this study reported cases where lecturers demanded a high level of formality, this depended upon the personality of the lecturer, the situation (in class versus out of class) and in some cases the age of the lecturers. Similarly, there appears to be some substantial variation in the extent to which academic achievement is valued, and the situation in this regard appears to be somewhat different to the common perception of the value placed on academic achievement in, say, Confucian-heritage cultures. The cultural-deficit idea that international students come from education systems which are dominated by examinations seems, if anything, to understate the case in India. Although several authors note the attempts to reform the examination system, most authors agree that reform has been very slow and uneven (Zachariah, 1993). Furthermore, the literature and the comments of the students in this study reveal that the examination system in India exists in a context which also features a heavy reliance on private tuition and apparently widespread illegal activities. These two contextual elements have to date been rarely mentioned in the discussion of international students' previous learning experiences. The literature reviewed in this study indicates that there are some well-equipped tertiary education facilities in India, such as the IIMs and IITs (Basu, 1989). However, the students in this study more closely fitted the stereotype enunciated by Ballard and Clanchy (1991, 1997) of international students predominantly coming from poorly equipped educational institutions, and the literature suggests that these kinds of institutions are still widespread in India.


340 P. Ninnes et al. In conclusion, there are some aspects of the nature of international students' previous learning experiences articulated in the cultural-deficit discourse which appear to match the situation in many parts of the Indian higher education system. These include the domination of examinations, students' emphasis on passing these examinations, and the general lack of an analytical and critical approach. Other aspects of the cultural-deficit discourse are much more problematic because they apply to aspects of learning which are subject to wide variations, and these ideas about international students' previous learning experience need to be substantially qualified and contextualised in the Indian undergraduate situation. The study reported here has dealt with postgraduate students who have successfully undertaken first degrees in India. The undergraduate experiences of students who have not been so successful in the Indian university system can not necessarily be inferred from the discussion here, and along with the previous educational experiences of students in the Indian secondary school system, provide an important opportunity for further research. Research of this kind, along with similar studies of other countries from which Australia draws large numbers of international students, will contribute to an understanding of the educational background of international students which relies less on stereotypical generalisations and reveals more of the similarities and differences in experiences of teaching and learning which international students bring to Australian higher education institutions. It must also be said that assumptions and generalisations about the critical and analytical emphasis in teaching and learning practices in Australian institutions need to be problematised, as the work by Volet et al. (1994) has shown. Address for correspondence: Peter Ninnes, School of Education Studies, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] References P. (1977). In search of Saraswati: The ambivalence of the Indian academic. Higher Education, 6, 255-275. ALTBACH, P. (1987). Politics and the university: Rethinking higher education in India. Change, 19(4), 56-59. ALTBACH, P. (1993). The dilemma of change in Indian higher education. Higher Education, 26, 3-20. ASHMAN, A. & CONWAY, R. (1997). An introduction to cognitive education: Theory and applications. London and New York: Routledge. AUSUBEL, D.P., NOVAK, J . S . & HANESIAN, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. BALLARD, B. (1989). Sink or swim: In class or at home. In R.K. BROWNE & E.C. DALE (Eds.), Overseas students: Educational opportunity and challenge. Curtin, ACT: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). BALLARD, B. & CLANCHY, J. (1984). Study abroad: A manual for Asian students. Kuala Lumpur: Longman. BALLARD, B. & CLANCHY, J. (1991). Teaching students from overseas. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire. BALLARD, B. & CLANCHY, J. (1997). Teaching international students. Canberra: IDP Education. BASU, A. (1989). Indian higher education: Colonialism and beyond. In P. ALTBACH & V.

ALTBACH,


Educational Stereotyping of Indian Students 341 SELVARATNAM (Eds.), From dependence to autonomy: The development of Asian universities. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. BEHAR, S.C. (1992). India. In B.R. CLARK & G.R. NEAVE (Eds.), The encyclopedia of higher education, Vol. 1: National systems of education. Oxford: Pergamon. BIGGS, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). BIGGS, J. (1991). Approaches to learning in secondary and tertiary students in Hong Kong: Some comparative studies. Education Research Journal, 6, 27-39. BIGGS, J. (1996). Western misperceptions of the Confucian-heritage learning culture. In D . WATKINS & J. BIGGS (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Education, Comparative Education Research Centre (CERC) and Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). BIGGS, J. (1997, July 8-11). Teaching across and within cultures: The issue of international students. In R. MURRAY-HARVEY & H. SILINS (Eds.), Learning and teaching in higher education: Advancing international perspectives (Special Edition). Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) Conference, Adelaide, South Australia. Boonyanate, N . & SIMKIN, K. (1996, July 1-6). Adapting Australian universities to international students: A case study of Thais. Paper presented at the Ninth World Congress of Comparative Education Societies, Sydney, Australia. BURNS, R.B. (1991). Study and stress among first year overseas students in an Australian university. Higher Education Research & Development, 10, 61-77. CHALMERS, D . & VOLET, S. (1997). Common misperceptions about students from South-East Asia studying in Australia. Higher Education Research & Development, 16, 87-98. DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING (DEET). (1996). Overseas student

statistics 1995. Canberra: Author. ENTWISTLE, N . & RAMSDEN, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm. FARAJ, A.H. (1988). Higher education and economic development in South Asian countries. European Journal of Education, 23, 9-26. INDIRESAN,J. (1983). Changing patterns in the evaluation of student performance in India. Higher Education in Europe, 8, 58-64. KELLY, P. & BENNOUN, R. (1984). Students from Indochina: Educational issues—a resource book. Canberra: Australian Centre for Indo-Chinese Research. KENYON, C. & AMRAPALA, A. (1991). More than g'day: A guide for people working with overseas students. Williamstown, NSW: Good and Better Publishing. LEFRANCOIS, G. (1994). Psychology for teaching (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. MAJUMDAR,T. (1994). India: Government and higher education. In G. NEAVE & F.A. VAN VUGHT (Eds.), Government and higher education relationships across three continents: The winds of change. Oxford: IAU Press/Pergamon. MUGLER, F . & LANDBECK, R. (1997). Learning in the South Pacific and phenomenography across cultures. Higher Education Research & Development, 16, 227-239. PHILLIPS, D . (1994). Changes in university teaching as faculty staff interact with cross-cultural and international students. In E. MARTENS (Ed.), Tertiary teaching and cultural diversity. Bedford Park, South Australia: Flinders University, Centre for Multicultural Studies. SAMUELOWICZ, K. (1987). Learning problems of overseas students: Two sides of a story. Higher Education Research & Development, 6, 121-133. SAXENA, R.P. (1990). Governance of Indian universities: From decay to dynamism? Higher Education, 20, 91-111. SHUKLA, S. (1991). India. In P. ALTBACH (Ed.), International higher education: An encyclopedia. New York: Garland. SINGH, A. (1984). The Indian University Grants Commission. Higher Education, 13, 517-533. TAYLOR, A. (1993). International handbook of universities. New York: Stockton Press.

342 P. Ninnes et al. S. & RENSHAW, P. (1996). Chinese students at an Australian university: Adaptability and continuity. In D. WATKINS & J. BIGGS (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Education, Comparative Education Research Centre (CERC) and Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). VOLET, S., RENSHAW, P. & TIETZEL, K. (1994). A short-term longitudinal investigation of crosscultural differences in study approaches using Biggs' SPQ questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 301-318. WATKINS, D. (1994). Student evaluations of university teaching: A cross-cultural perspective. Research in Higher Education, 35, 251-266. ZACHARIAH, M. (1993). Examination reform in traditional universities: A few steps forward, many steps back. Higher Education, 26, 115-146.


VOLET,