educational goals as predictors of adjustment for east and south asian international students david...

Educational Goals as Predictors of Adjustment for East and South Asian

International Students

David RollockDepartment of Psychological Sciences

Purdue University

Presentation as part of the Purdue Assessment Coordinators Team’s 2nd Annual Pact Facts for Student Success Conference, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN December 2, 2013.

PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES

COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SCIENCES

Overview



Introduction: Cultural contact goals as organizers of behavior and adjustment

Latent structure of reasons/goals for international study among East and South Asian students

Differential predictors of depressive symptoms by distinct ethnocultural grouping

Implications: conceptualizing differences among diverse “Asian” groups, and organizing targeted interventions

Acknowledgements



P. Priscilla Lui, M.A.

Omar Rahman, Ph.D.

Within-Group IntersectionsWithin-Group Intersections



Cultural-ecological approaches (e.g., Ogbu, 1981, 1995)

• Develop preferences, skills, for expected (future) roles (goals)• Reflect expectations, beliefs, “native theories of success”• Rationale for studies of ethnicity & culture

Problems in ethnic minority psychology research• Systematic consideration for “intersecting” characteristics

• Heritage with demographics (e.g., SES, gender, religion) • “Within-group differences” (e.g., “subgroups”)

• Relate specific psychologically-relevant characteristics to specific psychologically-relevant outcomes

• e.g., “acculturation” as exposure, language preference, etc. may not relate functionally to distress (Rahman & Rollock, 2004)

Goals of contact/transition selection of skill set

Asian Diversity in the U.S.



“Asian” Diversity…for Adjustment“Asian” Diversity…for Adjustment“Asian” Diversity…for Adjustment



“Asian” Diversity…for Adjustment

Alternative approaches reflected in the literature

Emphasis on commonalities

Common Asian/”Contrast American” values, attitudes, behaviors

Acculturation measured by demographics & exposure

Focus on East Asians

Focus on single, well-defined groups

Out of context with other groups

Differential risks by groups within Asian sphere?



• Appropriateness of college/university samples– Common point of intercultural contact (esp. South

Asians)– Absence of larger (socializing) community– Common parameters for service access– Familiarity with data collection methods

• Appropriateness of ethnic studies at this campus

“Asian” Diversity on Campus



Goals and Intercultural Contact



(Modest) Research Questions

• What are different types of goals, relevant to cultural transition & performance?– Goals Intentions shaping approach to new context

• Do “Asian” acculturating groups differ in goals?– Groups should differ in goals, insofar as goals distinct

orchestration of behavior– Special clinical interest: Will “Asian” groups “look” the same

when screened for dysphoria/psychological distress? • Which predictors for which groups?

• How do goals predict outcomes, vs. “usual” predictors?– Commonly-used predictors are demographic

• Language use, and time in U.S. (“acculturation”)• Only indirect behavioral relevance need modifiable

psychological characteristics– Prior work: limited measured goals still predicted outcomes



Method• Goals items

– Focus: reasons for studying abroad/what is to be gained from international study

– Rational construction literature, related scales

– Item set • n = 28 reasons/goals, with Likert-type response

options– 1 = “Not at All Important” to 9 = “Extremely Important”

• Examples:– “…studying in another country is an exciting challenge”– “…to follow the wishes of my parents or relatives”– “…studying in another country will help me earn more

money…”

• (Open-ended option to specify additional goals)



Method (cont’d)

• Other Predictors– University Environment Scale (UES; Gloria & Kurpius,

1996). • 14 7-point items on positive campus climate for

(minority) students, from 1 (“not at all”) to 7 (“very true”)

– Acculturation Demographics. Self-reported age, gender, years in U.S., English language fluency



Method (cont’d)

• Outcomes– Center for Epidemiological Studies—

Depression scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977).• 20 items on frequency of signs of

depression/dysphoria, rated from 0 (“Not at all”) to 3 (“All the time”)

• Participants– N = 551 online (of ~6000), with 483 complete

on outcome, 337 complete on all measures• Recruited via direct email solicitation, fliers,

courses• Special effort to recruit South Asians PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES


Results: Basic sample statistics

Culture of OriginSouth Asian East Asian

Characteristic Menn=135

Womenn=51

Menn=187

Womenn=164

TOTALN=537

Age 23.3 (4.2) 22.9 (4.9)

20.2 (1.4) 20.3 (1.5)

21.3 (3.2)

English Fluency (1-5) 4.54 (0.6) 4.54 (0.6)

3.51 (0.7) 3.54 (0.7)

3.88 (0.8)

Classification: Freshman

16.1% 23.5% 46.2% 37.8% 33.8%

Sophomore 7.3% 15.7% 23.1% 27.4% 19.7%Junior 11.7% 5.9% 14.0% 18.3% 13.9%

Senior 13.9% 9.8% 15.6% 16.5% 14.9%Grad/Professional 51.0% 45.1% 1.1% 0.0% 17.7%

First to study abroad? 63.0% 49.0% 78.6% 76.8% 71.3%

Years in U.S. < 1

33.0% 28.0% 57.1% 53.4% 47.1%

1-2 22.8% 24.0% 23.6% 18.0% 21.7%2-3 18.4% 16.0% 7.7% 16.8% 14.0%3-5 18.4% 20.0% 8.2% 10.6% 12.7%> 5 7.3% 12.0% 3.2% 1.2% 4.5%



Results: Exploratory Factor Analysis of Goals (N=483)

Factors (Geomin rotated)

Professional

& Career Goals

Peer Experien

ces

External

Pressure

Romantic

Relationships

Challenge & Perso

nal Developmentdepen-dence

Item Content Mean (SD) a = .80 a = .77 a = .72 a = .83 a = .71

15. help in profession .75516. best choice at time 6.69 (1.95) .7389. attend best university possible 6.98 (1.92) .667 -.1238. better career start 6.26 (2.27) .619 .1972. best program admitted to 6.44 (2.07) .53428. earn more money 6.22 (2.04) .51314. skills to help home country 6.16 (2.08) .326 .173 -.129 .157

23. clear about reasons 6.54 (2.22) .273 .25012. peers study abroad 4.36 (2.35) .75013. friends’ experiences 4.28 (2.45) .717

11. have friends here 4.06 (2.46) .639

10. live abroad for rest of life 4.52 (2.33) .165 .386 .3577. have relatives here 2.76 (2.29) .385 .1375. politics in home country 3.36 (2.38) -.135 .348 .24727. study abroad only way to goals 5.13 (2.39) .215 .236 .144





Factors (Geomin rotated)

Professional

& Career Goals

Peer Experien

ces

External

Pressure

Romantic

Relationships

Challenge & Perso

nal Developmentdepen-dence

Item Content Mean (SD) a = .80 a = .77 a = .72 a = .83 a = .71

17. not own choice 3.25 (2.38) .86718. reasons have changed 4.62 (2.53) .5183. following parents’ wishes 4.62 (2.29) .481 -.13924.(R) would NOT choose, again 3.00 (2.26) .46420. study where language not problem 4.58 (2.47) .312 .22519. improve language skills 5.17 (2.62) .290 .202 .20722. meet people to marry 3.28 (2.41) .880

21. meet people to date 3.87 (2.51) .700

26. exciting challenge 7.04 (1.83) .87625. make me a better person 6.58 (2.02) .6454. experience life in another country 6.77 (1.94) .5356. free to live on own 5.30 (2.48) .189 .266 .268

Results: Exploratory Factor Analysis of Goals (N=483)(cont’d)

Results: Group differences in Goals

Culture of OriginSouth Asian East Asian

Variable Menn=135

Womenn=51

Menn=187

Womenn=164

p (eta2)N=537

Professional & Career Goals 6.80 (1.10) 6.87 (1.52) 6.40 (1.44) 6.41 (1.28) .013(.023)Peer Experiences 3.60 (1.50) 4.04 (1.63) 4.36 (1.66) 4.10 (1.39) .001(.035)External Pressure 4.21 (1.20) 4.38 (1.81) 5.24 (1.11) 5.19 (1.02) <.001(.130

)Romantic Relationships 3.07 (2.14) 2.88 (2.46) 4.13 (2.30) 3.66 (2.18) <.001(.042

)Challenge/Personal Develop’t 6.33 (1.82) 6.82 (1.72) 6.41 (1.34) 6.30 (1.33) ns

Age 23.34 (4.23)

22.86 (4.93)

20.15 (1.39)

20.25 (1.47)

<.001(.202)

First to study abroad? 1.37 (.48) 1.51 (.50) 1.21(.41) 1.23 (.42) <.001(.045)

English Fluency 4.54 (0.63) 4.54 (0.65) 3.51 (0.73) 3.54 (0.68) <.001(.336)

University Environment Scale

4.91 (1.01) 5.21 (1.19) 4.56 (0.80) 4.73 (0.82) <.001 (.045)

CES-Depression 17.15(11.18)

19.31(14.29)

22.53(9.67)

19.04(10.77)

.01 (.037)



Group Differences in Goals

Some Interim Conclusions Goals/reasons more than “internal” vs. “external”

No major omissions noted by respondents Quite a few cross-loadings complex,

relationships among the meanings of ostensibly distinct constructs

No differences in Personal Challenge: who does seek to study abroad? Very few SA women!

Differences between cultural groups SA responding less to peer, external influence Result of being older, more English fluent?



Item Statistics Original Step Statistics

Step Predictor Mean r b R2

Adj. R2

R2

ChangeF

Change

1 Age 21.34 .21 .12* .06 .05 .06 7.17*

First to study abroad? 1.31 .06 .05

English Fluency 3.93 .13 -.05

2 Gender (1=male; 2=female) 1.40 .07 .09 .08 .07 .02 4.72*

Culture of Origin (0=SA; 1=EA) 0.64 -.23 -.08

3 Professional & Career Goals 6.63 .37 .29** .24 .22 .16 14.80**

Peer Experiences 4.08 -.15 -.09

External Pressure 4.88 --.16 -.07

Romantic Relationship 3.60 -.25 -.14*

Challenge/Personal Develop’t 6.48 -.20 -.14*

N = 360 ; UES M = 3.60 (SD = 0.93)Equation significant at Step 1 [F(3,356) = 7.17, p < .001]; Step 2 [F(5,354) = 6.28, p

< .001] , and Step 3 [F(10,349) = 11.15, p < .001];



Results: Goals Predicting Perceptions of University Environment

Goals Predicting Perceptions of University Environment

Some Interim Conclusions Goals contribute to prediction, above & beyond

more common demographic predictors Culture of origin does seem to matter, though not

a significant contributor on its own Note contribution of age

Strong professional & career goals perception of environment as positive, welcoming

Stronger romantic goals disappointment Challenge/Personal Development goals as a

suppressor



Item Statistics Original Step Statistics

Step Predictor Mean r b R2

Adj. R2

R2

ChangeF

Change

1 Age 21.43 -.08 -.00 .02 .01 .02 1.85

First to study abroad? 1.29 -.04 -.05

English Fluency 3.91 -.14 -.03

2 Gender (1=male; 2=female) 1.41 -.03 -.06 .03 .01 .01 0.72

Culture of Origin (0=SA; 1=EA) 0.65 .15 -.03

3 Professional & Career Goals 6.67 -.20 -.16* .16 .13 .13 7.40**

Peer Experiences 4.07 .25 .20**

External Pressure 4.87 .24 .17*

Romantic Relationship 3.55 .22 .07

Challenge/Personal Develop’t 6.44 -.13 -.15*

N = 360 ; CES-D Total mean = 19.81 (SD = 11.17)Equation not significant at Step 1 [F(3,237) = 1.85] or Step 2 [F(5,235) = 1.39], but

only after Step 3 [F(10,230) = 4.49, p < .001]



Results: Goals Predicting Psychological Distress/Depression

Goals Predicting Psychological Distress/Depression

Some Interim Conclusions Common demographics may not show up as

significant, due to generally high levels of distress?

Goals contribute to prediction, above & beyond more common demographic predictors Professional & career goals, and seeking personal

challenges appear to buffer against distress Following peers’ experiences, and responding to

external pressure greater distress



General Conclusions & Next Steps

“Asian” masks some important patterns of difference

“Goals” capture distinct variance in important adjustment outcomes Not just “general motivation”

Implications for intervention Attend to cultural group differences

Implications for future investigations Screening for maladjustment risk at critical levels Observing changes in goals over time



COLLEGE OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN

SCIENCES

educational goals as predictors of adjustment for east and south asian international students david...

Documents

lower acculturative

predictors of adjustment

function distinguished

cesd median

discriminant function

south asian sa

east asian ea

international students