Page 26 - Movers, Shapers, and Everything in Between: Influencers of the International Student Experience

24
Chapter 1
of the experience and is different for everyone. The studies in this dissertation take into account the student’s stage of study and recognize that this can affect the student’s experience.
Since its inception, Student Involvement Theory has been used to create an effective academic environment where students are the focus. Research suggests that university administrators and staff should align the academic experience with the needs of students to allow them to engage with new ideas, people, and routines (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, Grier-Reid et al., 2008; Flowers, 2002). Although it is one of the central theories of the student experience, some research has pointed out weaknesses in this theory. For example, Streeter (2011) states that the theory “does not consider that students may have been negatively impacted by the dominant culture prior to their campus enrollment” (p. 26). Lundberg (2007) theorized that students of color in the US may feel intimidated and overwhelmed by their involvement in the college experience at predominantly white institutions. Other critics argue that the theory focuses on ‘traditional’ students and is not representative of students who may differ in age, mode of study, and background (Morgan, 2001).
A second framework fundamental to this research is the Student Integration Model by Vincent Tinto, who proposed in 1975 that students who exhibit higher levels of integration into the university environment are more likely to have higher levels of commitment to the institution, which in turn increases the likelihood of graduation. The model considers academic and social integration as two separate dimensions, but they interact and reinforce each other. Moreover, a student’s level of integration in each dimension is not necessarily the same.
Tinto’s framework has been applied in many studies of university students, often using persistence or degree as the dependent variable. Critics of the model point out that additional factors such as self- efficacy, goal setting, and self-concept play a role in study outcomes (Demetriou & Schmitz-Sciborski, 2011), and suggest that a student’s