In order to research more in
depths the intercultural experience of international students during their
study abroad, an ethnographic interview has been conducted. The aim of this
activity was to investigate how Erasmus students experience the transition from
their cultural and academic background. This study will help me gain a better
understanding of the challenges and opportunities I will be encountering while
studying and living abroad. As I will be in Gran Canaria, the interviewee for
this research was a Spanish student from the Canary Islands, who is now
studying at Edinburgh Napier University.
Although there are many people
moving abroad for studies, job opportunities, or leisure, the concept of “culture
shock” is often underestimated. According to authors such as Oberg (1960), the
term “culture shock” refers to the anxiety that occurs from losing some of our
cultural and familiar points of view, attitudes and symbols of social
interaction. As a person who left her home country, family, and friends to go
study abroad, both during high school and university, I have experienced this
situation myself. Nevertheless, it was interesting to see how a student from
the Canary Islands has been dealing with cultural differences. The interviewee,
in fact, reported to have settled well in the new environment, stating he “feels
part of it”, although the differences between countries and lifestyles are
quite significant.
Molinsky (2009) identified four
main ways people may feel in different environments and cultures, which are natural,
uncomfortable, incompetent, and noxious. The interviewee seemed to be very
natural, as he was very competent in the language, and he engaged authentically
in the conversation. Moreover, he said he “adapts very easily and gets used to
new things easily”, which proves to fall into Quadrant I of Molinsky’s Situational
Framework: natural.
According to Hofstede (2001),
there are different dimensions to illustrate cultural differences. One of these
is called Power Distance, and it differentiates hierarchical cultures from more
egalitarian ones. Hofstede’s scale sees Spain at the 57th position
out of 120 (Hofstede, 2001). Indeed, the interviewee stated that in the Canary
Islands “teachers are more distant, not so friendly, and they do not speak that
much to you”. The interviewee was surprised by the way professors are at
Napier, as he said he expected to “see professors once a month, not even
remembering your name”. The interviewee
noted another difference in the university environment concerning exams. While
at Edinburgh Napier small assignments take place every two of three weeks, in
Spain students are required to take harder and bigger exams at the end of the
year.
Another of Hofstede’s dimension
demonstrates the differences between individual and collective societies. From
what the interviewee said about people, it seems that the United Kingdom tends
to be a more individualistic society, whereas Spain leans towards the
collective side of the scale. In fact, while talking about going out with
friends, the students said that in Spain people go out together in one big
group, while here they form many smaller groups of friends. Moreover, if higher
education in Scotland is based more on independent study, and students have
only a few days of classes, Spanish universities schedule lectures for the
whole week. Therefore, students are given the opportunity to spend more time
together in an environment where they can both learn and relate to their peers.
In addition, the interviewee
affirmed that students in Edinburgh are friendly, but less open than they are
in Gran Canaria: “It is harder to get to know people here”; “people here are not
Canary-friendly, because Canary people would be like ‘come here, sit down, let’s
have a chat’”. Although Scottish people may seem a bit shy when it comes to
making friends, the student said he found many opportunities to get to know
people, especially through sports. Moreover, he was surprised to meet students
from all over the world, as “back home we do not have so many nationalities”.
He is happy to be here and feels part of this multinational environment. Therefore,
I believe the interviewee tends towards a more non-essentialist view of
culture, as he seems to be very open-minded and can adapt very easily to new
environments and cultures. In fact, according to Holliday (2000), this view
sees culture as a movable concept, and not as a concrete phenomenon, that
represents the essential feature of a nation.
For what concerns practicalities,
the interviewee said the difference in how people dress is mainly due to the
climate, as people in Gran Canaria would wear shorts and flip-flops. In terms
of transportation, instead, the student stated that buses are very timely and
the service is good, but very expensive compared to his home country.
Despite the many differences
between Scotland and the Canary Islands, the interviewee is enjoying his
staying in Edinburgh and believes that it is a very good experience, and “people
back home are missing out”.
This study surely contributed to
my understanding of the way things at Napier and in Scotland can be perceived
from the outside. For example, it made me appreciate how open and helpful
lecturers are here, compared to other countries. I can expect professors in
Gran Canaria to be more distant, but more hours in university in direct contact
with other students will make up for this lack of support.
In the light of what the
interviewee has said during our conversation, I believe there are different
strategies I could use to enhance my study abroad. For example, a good start
would be for me not to be shy to talk to people, as the student said Canary
people are very friendly, and always up for a chat. Another strategies is to arrive to Gran
Canaria willing to adapt from the beginning, as it will be a great experience
that I will not regret, and I should really make the best out of it.
The advice the interviewee gave
me was to “enjoy, have fun, learn about the culture and the local people”.
A recording of the interview can
be found here.
References:
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences. Thousand Oaks,
Calif.: Sage Publications.
Holliday, (2000). Culture as
constraint or resource: essentialist versus non- essentialist views. Iatefl Language and Cultural Studies,
(18), pp.38-40.
Molinsky, A. (2009). A
Situational Approach for Assessing and Teaching Acculturation. Journal of Management Education, 34(5),
pp.723-745.
Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock: adjustment to new cultural
environments. Practical Anthropology.
No comments:
Post a Comment