中國(guó)學(xué)生跨國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷研究-(以中英合作辦學(xué)項(xiàng)目為例)
定 價(jià):72 元
- 作者:侯俊霞
- 出版時(shí)間:2016/12/30
- ISBN:9787516182819
- 出 版 社:中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)出版社
- 中圖法分類:G649.2
- 頁(yè)碼:306
- 紙張:膠版紙
- 版次:1
- 開(kāi)本:16K
中外合作辦學(xué)自上個(gè)世紀(jì)90年代以來(lái)逐漸成為中國(guó)高等教育的重要組成部分,是中國(guó)高校國(guó)際化的指標(biāo)之一,也是引進(jìn)國(guó)際優(yōu)質(zhì)教育資源的重要途徑之一。
《中國(guó)學(xué)生跨國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷研究:以中英合作辦學(xué)項(xiàng)目為例》的作者侯俊霞采用民族志研究方法,對(duì)50名中英合作辦學(xué)項(xiàng)目學(xué)生中英兩校學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷進(jìn)行歷時(shí)跟蹤研究。通過(guò)參與式觀察、深度訪談和政策分析等方法搜集數(shù)據(jù)。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)受留學(xué)動(dòng)機(jī)、行前準(zhǔn)備、語(yǔ)言能力和自主學(xué)習(xí)能力等因素的影響,這些學(xué)生中英兩校學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷和結(jié)果千差萬(wàn)別。本文在此基礎(chǔ)上概括了三種典型的應(yīng)對(duì)策略類型,并進(jìn)一步深入分析了同一類型內(nèi)部的細(xì)微差別。同時(shí),由于項(xiàng)目的特殊性,他們的到來(lái)在英國(guó)大學(xué)形成了許多中國(guó)人占主導(dǎo)的課堂,改變了原有課堂文化,出現(xiàn)了“我們”和“他們”分割現(xiàn)象,在一定程度上影響了兩國(guó)學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷,這也是合作院校在培養(yǎng)學(xué)生跨文化能力方面必須面對(duì)的挑戰(zhàn)。
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Research Background
1.2 Research Overview
1.3 The Organisation of the Book
Chapter 2 Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools
Setting the Scene
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Globalisation, Internationalisation & Transnational Higher Education
2.3 Chinese-British Cooperation in Transnational Higher Education
2.3.l The UK Story
2.3.2 The Chinese Story
2.4 Features of Transnational Higher Education in China
2.4.1 The First Feature
2.4.2 The Second Feature
2.4.3 The Third Feature
2.5 Discussions
2.6 Conclusions
Chapter 3 Intercultural Transition
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Existing Models: Towards Happy-ending?
3.2.1 Cultural Shock
3.2.2 Stress-Adaptation-Growth Model
3.2.3 Developmental Models
3.3 National Cultures Perspective: a Suitable Way in Understanding Individuals?
3.3.1 National Cultural Theory and the Danger of Stereotyping Individuals
3.3.2 Culture of Learning Theory and the Tendency to Stereotype Chinese Learners
3.4 A Microscopic Perspective: Focusing on Individual Factors
3.4.1 Motivation for Studying Abroad
3.4.2 Pre-departure Preparation
3.4.3 Language Competency
3.4.4 Personal Factors Related to Autonomy
3.5 A Contextual Perspective: Focusing on Situational Factors
3.5.1 Support from Conational, Host National and Other National Groups
3.5.2 Formative Assessment and Transition in Higher Education
3.6 Intercultural Transition Group Oriented
3.6.1 Intergroup Contact
3.6.2 Ways to Reduce Intergroup Bias
3.6.3 The Intercultural Contact Experiences of International Students and Home Students
3.7 Conclusions
Chapter 4 Methodology
4.1 Introduction
4.2 My Philosophical Position
4.3 My Choice of Research Strategy
4.4 My Choice of Methodology
4.5 My Way of Collecting Data ...
4.5.1 Locating the Natural Setting
4.5.2 Negotiating to Get the Permission into the Field
4.5.3 Getting into the Field
4.5.4 Participant Observation
4.5.5 In-depth Interviews
4.5.6 Document Analysis
4.5.7 Leaving the Field
4.6 My Way of Analysing the Data
4.7 Rigour and Trustworthiness of the Research
4.8 My Concerns of Ethical Issues
4.9 Reflexivity
4.9.1 My Personal Experience on the Interpretation of the Data
4.9.2 My Participation in the Field on My Participants' Transition Experience
4.9.3 Rethinking the Research Methodology
4.10 Conclusions
Chapter 5 Individual Transition
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Motivation for Studying Abroad
5.2.1 It is My Decision Supported by My Parents
5.2.2 Decision Largely out of Respect for Parents' Opinion
5.2.3 Parents' Decision Neglecting Students' Interest
5.3 Pre-departure Preparation
5.3.1 Preparation from the Programme and Schools
5.3.2 Attitudes Towards Pre-departure Preparation
5.4 Interaction with the New Learning Environment
5.4.1 New Features in the New Learning Environment
5.4.2 Three Patterns of Students' Interaction with the New Learning Environment
5.5 Transition Outcome
5.6 Conclusions
Chapter 6 Studying Abroad as a Group
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Formation of Two Groups: Us and Them
6.2.1 Students in Sino-British Class: a Close Group on Chinese Campus
6.2.2 Chinese Students' : a Closed Group in the Class on British Campus
6.2.3 Intergroup Bias
6.3 Current Practices of Intergroup Contact
6.4 Conclusions
Chapter 7 Discussion and Conclusions
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Individual Transition Experience: Different Journeys and Different Outcomes
7.3 Studying Abroad as a Group: Us & Them Unavoidable?
7.4 Transition and the Impact on the Teaching and Learning Context at Two Campuses
7.5 Conclusions
References
《中國(guó)學(xué)生跨國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷研究:以中英合作辦學(xué)項(xiàng)目為例》:
Understanding the process of transition to higher education requires an examination from a multidisciplinary perspective ( Goldrick-Rab, Carter and Wagner,2007 :2470) . Transition in higher education which involves academic and social integration into the university culture is a significant period for students' success all through their university life. Transition and retention are closely related ( Yorke and Longden,2007 ) . Academic and social integration are vital to survival for new students( Billing,1997:132). Support has been highlighted relating to positive transitions in the first year university context ( Ramsay, Jones and Barker, 2007: 248 ). Rather than identifying the difficulties and challenges students will come across,recent research in this area has focused on social and academic support to facilitate students' transition.As argued in the previous sections,transition is a complex issue. Experiences vary across different individuals and successful transition needs a supportive environment. From contextual perspective,situational factors such as social support and formative assessment have been linked closely to the development of supportive environments for students under transition. 3.5.1 Support from ConationaI,Host Natlonal and Other Natlonal Groups
Social support has been related to a lower level of acculturative stress ( Duru and Poyrazli, 2007; Lee, Koeske and Sales, 2004; Yeh and Inose, 2003 ). Adelman( 1988) argues that social support can help sojourners to cope with uncertainty and enhance perceived mastery and control. Berry et al. ( 1987) ,Searle and Ward ( 1990 :451) and Tsang( 2001 :365 ) consider social support as a buffer against acculturative stress. This has been verified by Lee, Koeske and Sales ( 2004:399) who report that students with high levels of social support were significantly less likely to report symptoms with increasing levels of acculturative stress. Ye ( 2006:12) also found that international students who are more satisfied with their interpersonal support network are more likely to suffer less from acculturative stress.
Bochner(1982:30) has found that the peer group is import,ant in the academic sojourn,and exerts a major influence on the cultural orientation of the students. He and his colleges have conducted a series of studies to explore the social networks of international students' friendship patterns. They have identified three kinds of social networks that international students belong to. The primary conational network is mon,oculture and provides a place for international students to rehearse and express their ethnic and cultural values. The compatriot group was found to be the most important social network of sojourning overseas students. The secondary network of these students is bicultural,and consists of bonds with host nationals and will ~ instrumentally facilitate the academic and professional aspirations of the sojourner' ( Bochner, 1982:31). Academics,landlords,student advisers and government officials are also put into this category ( Furnham and Bochner,1982:173). The third network is the multicultural circle of friends and acquaintances of international students;which provides6 companionship for recreational,non-culture and nontask oriented activities' (ibid.). It is predicted that appropriate host culture friends will help sojourners learn the skills of host culture more easily than those whose friends are all compatriots ( Furnham and Bochner,1982 :174 ) . Ward and Kennedy( 1994 :333 ) examined Berry's four modes of acculturation in relation to the two adjustive outcomes of sojourners: psychological and sociocultural adaptations. The results revealed that sojourners with strong host national identification experienced less sociocultural adjustment difficulties, while those with strong co-national identification experienced less psychological adjustment problems. Separation was associated with the greatest level of social difficulty and integrated subjects experienced less depression than assimilated ones(ibid.) . Kashima and Loh( 2006 :471) have verified that students with more international ties were better adjusted in general.
……