Summary
The research paper “Peer mentoring for international students in a UK law school: Lessons from a pilot study” by Shamini Ragavan explores the role of mentoring in the integration of international students. The qualitative study expresses multiple concerns, including the need to approach the international students as an issue of diversity within the educational institutions. Ragavan (2014) argues that the experiences of international students while far from home are a critical determinant of their academic success. Therefore, it follows that seamless integration can become a major facilitator for their academic achievements. The case of students dropping out before completing their courses is a major problem, which can also be resolved through mentoring as a means of integration. The researcher also acknowledges that that transition is not merely about acclimatizing their educational pursuits in the new country. However, there can be immense pressure to perform, which causes anxiety.
The setting of the study is the Newcastle Law School, where a mentoring scheme was implemented and used as a case study. The two types of mentoring highlighted in the research are natural and facilitated, where the former simply described a scenario where the process where mentoring is simply allowed to happen. On the contrary, facilitated mentoring is planned, structured, and has clear objectives. The case study at Newcastle Law School deployed a combination of both of these types. The primary goals of the mentoring scheme included recognizing the diverse social and academic needs of students, recognizing and addressing the vulnerabilities of international students, and providing continued support for the international students.
In terms of methodology, the researcher used a focus group discussion, which promoted active discussions between participants. The respondents were allowed to express their views and describe how they perceived the scheme, including its efficacy. Eight mentors and 17 mentees participated in the scheme, and two meetings were conducted in December 2008 and another in April 2009, each lasting 2 hours. While the focus groups seemed the perfect approach, the scholars and participants expressed a few concerns, including the possibility of a few respondents to over-influence the views of the rest.
The findings of the study displayed positive outcomes for the mentoring scheme where most of the participants indicated that they benefited from it and that mentoring facilitated their integration. Most importantly, some of the challenges of the international students were revealed, including getting homesick, confused and wanting to change schools, and experiencing cultural differences. The mentoring helped resolve these issues, especially where the mentors became friends and the continuous support helped the students integrate easier. Some of the problems faced in the scheme included the cultural and language differences between the mentors and mentees while some mentors were also unable to instill a sense of confidence in their mentees. Overall, the conclusion from the study is that when well-implemented, the mentoring programs can be critical in helping the international students integrates easily into the new country and culture.
Critique of Methodology, Methods, and Findings
The methodology section of the study is brief and offers a precise explanation of what the researchers sought to do and how they approached the problem. However, several aspects of the research can only be inferred. For example, it can be inferred that the researcher used a positivist approach, a paradigm that holds that human behavior can best be understood through observation and reason. In other words, positivism focuses on the functional relationships derived between explanatory and causal factors and outcomes (Park, Konge, and Artino, 2019, p. 690). Ragavan (2014, p. 295) deploys positivism to explore the causal relationship between mentoring and the social and academic life of international students. An experimental research design is also apparent considering that mentoring has the core characteristics of an experiment. According to Leppink (2019, p. 5), an experiment can be described as a study aimed at establishing causal relations between phenomena. In this case, integration and mentoring are the two experimental variables whose causal relationship was studied. The methodology section may lack the basic descriptions of the methodological choices but the qualitative experimental study has all the features of a scientific study.
The method used has been expressly stated â that is, a focus group discussion. By definition, a focus group discussion is a qualitative approach used to gain an in-depth understanding of social phenomena. In this case, the focus group used by Ragavan (2014, p. 295) can be considered an effective method for collecting primary data directly from the respondents. Focus group discussions have made it possible to collect data regarding the scheme and the respondents’ attitudes towards it and its efficacy. As an experimental case study, it can be argued that the method used is well-suited. However, the only problem is that it is hardly possible to generalize the findings across larger populations considering the small size of the sample and the fact that only one case was explored.
The findings may not be generalizable due to the small sample used and the small size of the experiment. However, the findings tend to replicate those of more recent studies, some of which have found advantages of placing domestic students as mentors (Marangell, Arkoudis, and Baik, 2018, p. 1445). Ragavan (2014, p. 295) establishes that first-year students are the most vulnerable. This is a position also supported by other studies focusing on the integration schemes for international students (Jean-Francois, 2017, p. 1069). Overall, most of the current research supports the idea of mentoring as the best way to address the detrimental experiences of first-year international students. Even though the findings seem to be replicated, it is important to acknowledge that different methodological approaches have been adopted. However, the replication of the findings is an indication that the generalizability is possible despite the small samples used.
Links to Proposed Research
The proposed research topic focuses on the inclusion of international students in a law school in the United States. The study by Ragavan (2014, p. 295) offers a starting point where the research can explore issues relating to the integration of international students and which methods work best. In this case, peer mentoring is the sole focus of Ragavan (2014, p. 295). In the proposed research, peer mentoring can be explored as one of the alternatives to the integration of international students. The expectation is that the findings from this study and the theoretical frameworks used, as well as the methodologies, can help inform the approaches used in the proposed study. Most importantly, the results can be used in exploring current literature and findings the potential gaps that the proposed study should seek to address.
A New Minority?
Summary
The research paper âA new minority? International JD students in US law schoolsâ seeks to explore how international law students in the United States navigate the school environment. The research by Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) is founded on the observation that international students often take a minority identity status, which means that they experience similar challenges as other minority groups in the country. However, these scholars also acknowledge that this situation affects people’s differences where some prefer to take advantage of it to create positive cultural experiences while failing to escape the negative implications. In other words, carrying the label ‘international’ has multiple implications, most of which depend on the self-perceived identity at the individual level. Other determining factors include peer interactions and educational institutions at the interactional and institutional levels respectively.
One of the main issues addressed in the paper is what it is being like an international in the JD program. This question has been approached by exploring what past studies have established, including defining the term âinternational.â In this case, this status is derived from the immigration status as a non-resident alien, the basis on which reporting about student enrollment is done to the American Bar Association. The internal JD students may be a small portion of the entire JD population. However, the fact that the numbers are steadily rising indicates the need for exploring and dissecting the core issues affecting their time and experiences.
The methodology used in this study majorly comprises interviews conducted with JD students across a diversified sample that covers gender, home country, law school attended and experience. The priority was on determining the selection methods to allow a diverse sample, which was collected using the snowball method. In the end, the sample comprised students enrolled across seventeen US las schools. 38% (n=22) came from a single law school, 28 graduated from eight other schools, and the rest 8 interviewees graduated from eight other law schools. Since the law schools do not report the country, this data had to be gathered from other sources, including repositories and records from the relevant government institutions.
Lastly, the findings from the study reveal that there is a need to improve one’s self-perception. The students who agreed to participate highlighted that the students’ identities were negotiated through three major lenses. These lenses are the technical immigration and citizenship status, perceived identities primed through peer interactions, and the students’ view of their identifies as a function of their experiences. Differences in status also mean that not all international students are equal. Similarly, peer interactions and other experiences also differed across the sample since some preferred to assimilate and others failed to achieve this goal. Overall, being an international student in an American law school makes one part of the minority population experience all the challenges associated with this status.
Critique of Methodology, Methods, and Findings
The methodology adopted by the researchers has been dictated by several factors, including the primary research objective. However, one of the main issues made apparent is the fact that the scholars needed to offer in-depth insights into the subject and offer an understanding of lived experienced. In this case, it can be argued that the research paradigm adopted is interpretivism, which focuses on loosely interpreting or understanding the meanings that people attach to their actions. According to Alharahsheh and Pius (2020, p. 41), the main difference between positivism and interpretivism is that the latter seeks to offer rich insights as opposed to providing a universal and definite law generalizable across populations. Since Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) focus on lived experiences and do not seek to develop a universal theory regarding the life of international students, it can be argued that the researchers have used an interpretivist approach.
The methods used for data collection and analysis are also commendable since their selection suits the nature of the study. For example, the focus is on gathering in-depth insights, which means that interviews are the best techniques in this regard. The rationale is that interviews allow researchers to ask as many questions as possible, identify interesting pathways and pursue them, and ask follow-up questions for the most important parts of the interviews. In many cases, in-depth interviews and data collection hinders the use of large samples, which negatively affects the generalizability of the findings. However, this problem is not particularly interesting since the researchers have managed to gather a sample large enough to be both representative and fit for generalization. However, the snowball sampling strategy may negate the representativeness and generalizability since there is a possibility of bias from people with similar experiences.
The findings are in line with most scholarly work on the subject, which is evidence of the generalizability and accuracy of the entire undertaking. The most important observation is the heterogeneity of the international student experiences. A study of Chinese international students revealed that even within a single nationality the experiences are diverse and intersectional (Heng, 2019, p. 607). Such a finding confirms what Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) establish â that is, all international students are unequal. Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) have managed to outline some of the core issues affecting the experiences, some of which are personal while others are determined by peer relations. It can be argued that these elements dictate the outcome of the experiences whereby those that cope with differences better assimilate and create improved experiences. On the contrary, those unable to adapt or to whom the school environment is not conducting will face a challenging time. However, Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) make a case for the self-perceived identity, which affects how the international students interact with their school environment.
Links to Proposed Research
The links to the proposed research topic can be found in the similarity of the research objectives. The proposed research topic focuses on the inclusion of international students in a law school, which is similar to Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647). However, the proposed research will focus majorly on improving the integration of international students, which means addressing all the challenges they face. Therefore, the findings from Ballakrishnen and Silver (2019, p. 647) offer critical insight into the root causes of the challenges and negative experiences, which should help in proposing interventions or policy recommendations for improving the experiences of the international law students. This research shows where the problem lies and does little to explore the potential solutions. This can be considered a major research gap that can be explored in the proposed research. Overall, tackling the issue of identity could prove vital in helping students settle in their new school environment.
Reference List
Alharahsheh, H. and Pius, A. (2020) âA Review of key paradigms: positivism vs interpretivismâ, Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(3), pp. 39-43.
Ballakrishnen, S. and Silver, C. (2019) âA new minority? international students in US law schoolsâ, Law & Social Inquiry, 44(3), pp. 647-678.
Heng, T. (2019) âUnderstanding the heterogeneity of international studentsâ experiences: a case study of Chinese international students in U.S. universitiesâ, Journal of Studies in International Education, 23(5), pp. 607-623.
Jean-Francois, E. (2017) âExploring the perceptions of campus climate and integration strategies used by international students in a US university campusâ, Studies in Higher Education, 44(6), pp. 1069-1085.
Leppink, J. (2019) Statistical methods for experimental research in educational psychology. New York: Springer.
Marangell, S., Arkoudis, S. and Baik, C. (2018) âDeveloping a host culture for international students: what does it take?â, Journal of International Students, 8(3), pp. 1440-1485.
Park, Y., Konge, L. and Artino, A. (2019) âThe positivism paradigm of researchâ, Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 95(5), pp. 690-694.
Ragavan, S. (2014) âPeer mentoring for international students in a UK law school: lessons from a pilot case studyâ, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(3), pp. 292-302.