Citation
Becoming part of the academy

Material Information

Title:
Becoming part of the academy factors affecting the academic career success of foreign-born faculty
Creator:
Switzer, Teri R
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Universities and colleges -- Faculty -- United States ( lcsh )
College teachers -- United States ( lcsh )
College teachers ( fast )
Universities and colleges -- Faculty ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
The entire diversity landscape of our university campuses is changing. As American colleges and universities address their need for more globally aware campuses, academic institutions are hiring well-qualified foreign-born scholars to teach in their programs. Both non-resident alien faculty as well as those who are foreign-born but are classified permanent residents or American citizens, whether U.S. educated or educated in foreign countries, bring an immense amount of talent to the American academy. These faculty not only provide diversity but hey also satisfy vital needs in several disciplines, predominantly those in the sciences and engineering, but also those in the social sciences and humanities. Foreign-born faculty enhance the lives of the students they teach and the curriculum of the universities in which they teach. They bring with them international connections, which are important to global collaborations involving both teaching and research. Yet, little is known about their experiences as faculty, in particular the unique obstacles they face, what motivates them to overcome these distinctive challenges, and the effect mentoring and social networks have had on their career successes. In order to gain a better understanding of foreign-born faculty, this study uncovered some of the factors affecting their academic career successes. The faculty in this study experienced the same obstacles as native-born faculty. However, they also were confronted with additional obstacles which included problems with visas and immigration, communication challenges, in particular those related to oral and interpersonal communication, and feelings of being different which frequently resulted in isolation and alienation. While mentoring is known to be a support system that can affect individuals' successes, the faculty in this study found success without the aid of mentoring. Instead, more informal collaborations and support from colleagues, friends, and family took the place of formal mentoring. Finally, motivation that was both internal and externally driven was an important factor in the faculties' successes.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Teri R. Switzer.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
|Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
859411704 ( OCLC )
ocn859411704

Auraria Membership

Aggregations:
Auraria Library
University of Colorado Denver

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
BECOMING PART OF THE ACADEMY:
FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACADEMIC CAREER SUCCESS
OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY
by
Teri R. Switzer
AB, University of Illinois, 1971
MS, University of Illinois, 1973
MBA, Colorado State University, 1977
A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Colorado Denver in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Educational Leadership and Innovation
2012




2012 by Teri Reynolds Switzer
All rights reserved.


This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy degree by
Teri R. Switzer
has been approved for the
Educational Leadership and Innovation
by
Ellen A. Stevens, Chair and Advisor
Candan Duran-Aydintug
Farah Ibrahim
Rodney Muth
Date December 12, 2011


Teri R. Switzer (Ph.D., Educational Leadership and Innovation)
Becoming Part of the Academy: Factors Affecting the Academic Career Success of Foreign-
Bom Faculty
Thesis directed by Associate Professor Ellen A. Stevens
The entire diversity landscape of our university campuses is changing. As American colleges
and universities address their need for more globally aware campuses, academic institutions are
hiring well-qualified foreign-born scholars to teach in their programs. Both non-resident alien
faculty as well as those who are foreign-born but are classified permanent residents or American
citizens, whether U.S. educated or educated in foreign countries, bring an immense amount of
talent to the American academy. These faculty not only provide diversity but they also satisfy
vital needs in several disciplines, predominantly those in the sciences and engineering.
Foreign-bom faculty enhance the lives of the students they teach and the curriculum of the
universities in which they teach. They bring with them international connections, which are
important to global collaborations involving both teaching and research. Yet, little is known
about their experiences as faculty, in particular the unique obstacles they face, what motivates
them to overcome these distinctive challenges, and the effect mentoring and social networks
have had on their career successes.
In order to gain a better understanding of foreign-bom faculty, this study uncovered some of the
factors affecting their academic career successes. The faculty in this study experienced the same
obstacles as native-born faculty. However, they also were confronted with additional obstacles
such as, problems with visas and immigration; communication challenges, in particular: Those


related to oral and interpersonal communication; feelings of being different; and isolation and
alienation. While mentoring is known to be a support system that can affect individuals
successes, the faculty in this study found success without the aid of mentoring. Instead, more
informal collaborations and support from colleagues, friends, and family took the place of formal
mentoring. Finally, motivation that was both internal and externally driven was an important
factor in the faculties successes.
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Ellen A. Stevens


DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my family: husband, Gene Luthman; daughter, Lois
Switzer Reaume and her husband, Moosah Reaume; son, R. Vincent Switzer III, and his wife,
Marielle Mori; our family pet, Wilma; and Mom and Dad Chief. Your love and support during
this journey has been my inspiration. I learned from you to never give up. I now have time for
grandchildren!


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I will always be greatly indebted to my committee chair and advisor, Ellen Stevens, for
not giving up on me, and for being there whenever I would get so very frustrated. You have
inspired me and given me hope. Thanks also go to my two original committee members, Candan
Duran-Aydintug and Rod Muth. Like Ellen, you never gave up and your encouragement will
always be remembered. Finally I give a note of gratitude to my new committee member, Farah
Ibrahim, for joining me as I completed my dream.
I am grateful for the ongoing support of my lab cohort partners, Dr. Barbara Bates, Dr.
Patrick Lowenthal, and Dr.Michael Wray. I treasure the hours we spent working on projects,
discussing the merits of quantitative research, and what makes faculty attend faculty
development programs. Oh and who can forget the fun we had giving presentations that took us
to beautiful parts of North America, such as Montreal, Canada; Las Angeles, California; and
Jackson Hole, Wyoming. All graduate students should have research partners like you.
I am especially thankful to the support and encouragement I received from my Provost,
Dr. Peg Bacon. Your interest in my progress has been appreciated. I still laugh when you
admitted that your house was never so clean as when you were writing your dissertation. Glad I
had that period of procrastination because my house was really clean a few months ago. It is
now very dirty, and I have not cared because I did not want to let you, and me, down.
I also want to acknowledge the thousands of foreign-bom faculty who have made and
will continue to make the United States their home. Special gratitude goes to the eleven faculty
who I interviewed for this study. I have learned so much from you. I admire your pioneer spirit


and your dedication to the processes of teaching and learning. Our academic institutions are
enriched by your presence.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................1
Context..................................................................2
Conceptual Framework.....................................................4
Mentoring Support...................................................6
Social Networks.....................................................6
Obstacles as a Factor of Success....................................7
Motivations to Succeed..................................................7
Overview of Methodology.................................................8
Researchers Perspective................................................9
Organization of Dissertation............................................9
II. Review of the Literature..................................................11
Internationalization of Higher Education...............................11
Internationalization of Academic Professions...........................14
Supply and Demand..................................................14
Immigration in the United States...................................15
Value of Foreign-Bom Workers...........................................18
Fiscal Implications................................................18
Academic and Scholarly Implications................................19
Adaptation and Acculturation of Foreign-Born Academics.................19
Processes of Adaption and Acculturation............................21
Culture Shock as an Acculturation Variables........................22
Resilience.........................................................25
Motivation Theories....................................................26
Achievement Theories...............................................26
Ability..........................................................26
Goal Setting.....................................................27
Self-Determination...............................................27
Career Motivation................................................28
Motivation and Culture.................................................29
Individualism and Collectivism.........................................29
Roles of Mentoring and Social Networks.................................30
Mentoring as a Tool of Success.....................................32
Cross-Cultural Mentoring...........................................33
Cross-Cultural Mentoring Challenges................................35
Benefits of Mentoring..................................................37
Social Networks as a Form of Mentoring.................................38
Conclusion.............................................................39
IX


III. METHODS
42
Research Design........................................................42
Methodology............................................................43
Study Setting.......................................................44
Participant Selection...............................................44
Review of Research Methods.............................................47
Interview Protocol..................................................48
Data Collection.....................................................49
Data Analysis.......................................................50
Verification and Credibility...................................53
Inter-Reader Reliability.......................................54
Threats to Validity............................................55
IV. RESULTS....................................................................56
Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging...........................58
Communication Obstacles.............................................58
Oral Communication Challenges..................................59
Interpersonal Communication Challenges.........................63
Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation...............................65
Feelings of Differentness...........................................68
Teaching and Research...............................................69
Visa Obstacles......................................................73
Finding Support Through Relationships..................................76
Formal Mentoring Experiences........................................77
Informal Mentoring Experiences......................................79
Mutual Mentoring....................................................82
Finding Support From Others.........................................84
Support from Family............................................85
Support from Friends...........................................86
Serving as a Mentor....................................................87
Motivation to Succeed..................................................88
Self-Regulation Theory..............................................89
Goal Setting Theory.................................................90
Self-Determination Theory...........................................93
Ability Theory......................................................94
Self-Efficacy Theory................................................95
Summary................................................................97
V. SI MMARY AM) IMPLICATIONS.................................................101
Culture as an Overarching Complication................................101
Stereotypes........................................................102
Individualism and Collectivism.....................................102
Revisiting the Conceptual Framework.................................103
x


Review of Findings............................................105
Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging..................106
Communication Challenges...................................106
Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation......................109
Feelings of Differentness..................................110
Teaching and Research Challenges...........................111
Visa Difficulties..........................................112
Mentoring: Finding Support through Relationships..............113
Motivation to Succeed.........................................115
Recommendations from the Study................................118
Implications for Future Research..............................120
Conclusion....................................................122
APPENDIX
A. DEMOGRAPHICS SURVEY OF STUDY PARTICIPANT......................125
B. SURVEY INSTRUMENT..................................127
C. SURVEY INSTRUMENT, GROUPED QUESTIONS..........................132
D. RECRUITMENT SCRIPT FOR SURVEY.................................135
REFERENCES............................................................137
xi


LIST OF TABLES
Table
Table III.l DEMOGRAPHICS OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY........56
Table III.2 DEMOGRAPHICS OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY........57
Table III.3 CODES AND RESULTANT THEMES..................64
xii


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.1 Factors Affecting the Career Success of Foreign-Bom Faculty................7, 57, 104
V.l Factors Found to Affect the Career Success of Foreign-Bom Faculty, Revised.105
xiii


CHAPTERI
INTRODUCTION
As American colleges and universities address their need for more globally aware
campuses, academic institutions are hiring well-qualified foreign-bom scholars to teach
in their programs. In fact, the entire diversity landscape of our university campuses is
changing such that over the past several years, new faculty are not predominantly White
males as they were 20 and 30 plus years ago. Postdoctoral fellows with a temporary visa
comprise 25.2% of all post-doctorates as determined by a National Science Foundation
(NSF) 2010 survey. A survey of graduate students and post-doctorates in science and
engineering place that number at 62.4%. Non-resident alien faculty, those who are not
permanent residents or U.S. citizens, comprise 4.2% of the faculty in American colleges
and universities (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2010). Both non-
resident alien faculty as well as those who are foreign-bom but are classified permanent
residents or American citizens, whether U.S. educated or educated in foreign countries,
bring an immense amount of talent to the American academy. These faculty not only
provides diversity, but they also satisfy vital needs in several disciplines, predominantly
in the sciences and engineering (NCES, 2010; NSF, 2011). Foreign-bom faculty enhance
the lives of the students they teach, and the curriculum of the universities in which they
teach. They bring with them international connections, which are important to global
collaborations involving both teaching and research. Yet, little is known about their
experiences as faculty, in particular the unique obstacles they face, such as immigration
and visa problems, what motivates them to overcome these distinctive challenges, and the
effect informal or formal mentoring has had on their career successes.
1


Foreign-bom faculty are sometimes included in studies on non-dominant US
populations. However, a great number of the foreign-bom faculty are White, thus would
not be included in this research. Only during the past decade has research been
conducted on foreign-born professionals, their experiences in the American workforce,
the obstacles they face, their motivations, and their job satisfaction. Nonetheless, very
little research is available on the role that these experiences, obstacles, and motivational
factors have played in their career success as a tenure-track faculty member. Further, no
studies focus on the role that support measures, such as mentoring relationships and
programs, have played in foreign-born faculties academic career success. In order to
gain a better understanding of foreign-born faculty, this study uncovered some of the
factors affecting their academic career successes. Primarily, this study focuses on the
obstacles foreign-born confront, what motivates them to work through the obstacles; the
effect of mentoring, whether formal or informal has had on their careers; and the role
social networks, such as family and friends have played as they progress through tenure
and promotion. It provides information on the career lives of foreign-born faculty,
which, in some cases, began when they were a graduate student in the United States.
Context of the Problem
College and university teaching faculty in the United States number 703,000
(Lowell, 2007). Of these, 120,000 are considered to be of a minority class and 31,000 are
designated as foreign-born and are not U.S. citizens (Lowell, 2007). Additionally,
research has shown that between 2002 and 2012, 603,000 new postsecondary teaching
positions will require a doctoral degree. Foreign-born teachers are likely to fill 17% of
these new teaching positions (Lowell, 2007).
2


Importing the talents of foreign-bom scholars fills several gaps, particularly those
in the sciences and engineering (Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009; NSF, 2006). During
2006, American academic institutions employed nearly 31,400 noncitizens and temporary
visa holders and 31,300 naturalized United States citizens with an American science and
engineering doctorate (National Science Board [NSB], 2010). In fact, foreign-born
doctoral scholars have accounted for more than 50% of all academic researchers and full-
time faculty in the computer sciences and for 39% to 48% of all academic researchers
and full-time faculty researchers in mathematics and engineering (NSB). Moreover,
foreign-born scholars in many other disciplines such as the social sciences and the life
and physical sciences represent approximately 21% of full-time faculty researchers
Why should this trend be of interest? The teaching, research, and creative activity
of foreign-born faculty bring different viewpoints to the universitys faculty, staff, and
students, and they help create a more diverse and globally aware campus. In addition to
fostering an atmosphere of acceptance of differences on campus they also contribute to
diverse teaching, research, and creative activities (Welch, 1997). Furthermore, foreign-
born faculty add greatly to the research missions of American colleges and universities
due to their stronger preference for the research component of academia than their
American born colleagues (Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Mamiseishvili, 2010;
Mamiseishvili & Rossner, 2010; Marvasti, 2005). Perhaps, though, among the most
compelling reasons why this trend should be of interest is that as fewer Americans enter
the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields, foreign-born
physical scientists are needed to fill the gap. For example, in 1999, 90,000 Americans
were awarded patents, compared to 70,000 from other countries (West, 2010). Within 10
3


years, 96,000 patents were awarded to foreign-born inventors, compared to 93,000
awarded to Americans (West, 2010).
As mentioned previously, prior studies have indicated that foreign-born faculty
have different needs and confront additional obstacles that make the tenure and
promotion journey more stressful. Among these are cultural and language differences
(Collins, 2008; Theobald, 2007). In addition, some research suggests that foreign-bom
faculty are less satisfied with their jobs than their American counterparts (Corley &
Sabharwal, 2007; Wells, Seifert, Park, Reed, & Umbach, 2007). Although research
exists about the job satisfaction of foreign-bom faculty, very little research exists on the
support given to foreign-bom faculty as they establish themselves in their academic
careers, build their dossiers, and apply for tenure and promotion exists. On the other
hand, the support offered to minority faculty and international graduate students is well-
documented (Alberts, 2008; Grant-Thomas, 1997; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002;
Johnsrud, 1993; Knight & Trowler, 1999; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005; Tillman, 2001). It is
from the studies discussing the success and support systems experienced by minority
faculty (primarily those of color), international graduate students, as well as the few
studies that have studied the job satisfaction and experiences of foreign-born faculty that
I extrapolated the elements to determine the factors that affect the career success of
foreign-born faculty.
Conceptual Framework
The question guiding this study is: What factors affect the success of foreign-born
faculty? A small body of research exists that examines the obstacles experienced by
foreign-born faculty and the level of job satisfaction they have. In addition, other
4


research focuses on the contribution of motivation to ones success and the effect socio-
cultural influences have on motivation. Finally, several others have documented the
benefits of mentoring minorities and the benefits of mentoring international students
(Chattergy, 1994; Dedrick & Watson, 2002; Ryan, 2005). These areas provide much of
the foundation on which to extrapolate the factors affecting the career success of foreign-
born faculty.
The conceptual framework for this study shown in Figure T1 is loosely patterned
after models developed by Grayson (2008) in his study of the academic achievement of
domestic and international students. Graysons models illustrate general education
outcomes and link these to university experiences such as peer involvement, hours of
study, English language, faculty support, and support from other students.
CareerSuccess
Tc d lire
Prunotkia
( nmprrhfnsnr Knita
Faculty
Colleagues (current
or past)
Friends Family
Years in Unified States
T eaching Experience
Gender
Language
Cultural Background
Discipline
Years in Unified f
Teaching Experit
ResearchFocus
Colleague
(current orpast)
Dept. Chair
(currait orpast)
Social
Networks
Mutilation fur
Academic
Success
Obstacles
Figure 1.1 Factors affecting the career success of foreign-born faculty- Conceptual framework.
5


The conceptual framework for this study has as its focal point foreign-bom
faculty, who are shown at the top in the center of the framework. Connected to the
faculty are concepts of gender, language, cultural background, discipline, number of
years in the United States, teaching experience, and research focus that pertain to the
faculty as well as to colleagues, friends, and family involved in either formal or informal
relationships. Arrows have been used to illustrate the synergism that exists among all the
concepts of the conceptual framework. Chapter II contains a review of the literature on
the concepts presented in the conceptual framework. In the following paragraphs, I
accentuate on the conceptual framework components as they relate to the success of
foreign-born faculty and the larger body of the literature.
Mentoring Support
A solid line represents the connections between informal and formal mentoring
relationships and the mentee, who is the foreign-bom faculty member. For many years,
mentoring has been seen to be one of the strategies to improve workplace achievements.
Several mentoring theories and philosophies exist. Among the more recent scholars
investigating the need for and the benefits of mentoring is Trower (2010) who argues that
mentoring has finally come to the point when it is needed now more than ever. Realizing
that formal and informal mentoring opportunities are afforded to many faculty, both are
considered in this study.
Social Networks as Support
The concept of social networks is included because social engagement frequently
has been used as a tool to alleviate feelings of isolation and loneliness (Collins, 2008;
Cooper & Stevens, 2002; Fontaine & Millen, 2004; Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Williams
6


& Kirk, 2008). Furthermore, social engagement and group interaction augment career
success (Fontaine & Millen, 2004; Ewing, Freeman, Barrie, Bell, OConnor, Waugh, &
Sykes, 2008; Muth & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne, & Kraimer,
2010; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Several individual benefits of being socially engaged are
an increase in knowledge and skills, personal productivity, job satisfaction, and a greater
feeling of a sense of belonging (Fontaine & Millen). Social networks, consisting of
colleagues, friends, and family, are slightly connected to informal mentoring
relationships as shown by the solid line connecting social networks with informal
mentoring in Figure F1.
Obstacles as a Factor of Success
The concept of obstacles is included because, like their native-born counterparts,
foreign-born faculty confront various challenges and roadblocks as they progress through
the tenure track. Among the more common challenges are work-life balance, stress, time
constraints, alienation and isolation, and uncertainty of expectations (Collins, 2008).
Unlike their native-born counterparts, foreign-born faculty also frequently encounters
what can be considered obstacles such as communication, language, and cultural
differences and visa complications (Collins, 2008; Liu, 2004; Nimoh, 2010; Theobald,
2007).
Motivation to Succeed
Motivation theories point to a relationship between ones accomplishments and
such concepts as goal setting, self-determination, and ability beliefs. The ability to set
goals, have determination, and to believe in oneself would be important deterrents to the
obstacles mentioned above. Working with the other factors, motivation plays a role in


the overall career success of foreign-bom faculty, shown by the arrows showing the
interaction among the concepts.
Overview of Methodology
This study is a phenomenological inquiry designed to provide a better
understanding of the factors that affect the career success of foreign-born faculty.
Phenomenology was first discussed in the late 1960s and early 1970s by Husserl. As
many researchers state, the operative phrase in phenomenological research is to
describe (Creswell, 2007; Groenewald, 2004). For this study, that is exactly what the
participants were invited to doto describe their experiences as a foreign-bom faculty
member in the American academy.
Based upon prior research recounting experiences of foreign-bom faculty in the
American academy (Liu, 2004; Mamiseishvili, 2011; Marvisti, 2005; Theobald, 2007), I
developed interview questions that provided insight into the roles that mentoring and
social engagement, motivation, and obstacles play in the foreign-bom faculty members
success (see Appendix B).
Interviews consisting of open-ended, semi-structured questions were used to
collect the stories from each of the participants. In addition to the interviews,
demographic questions were asked of each participant (see Appendix A). These
questions were constructed to provide information about
their country of origin;
United States residency status;
rank;
dates of tenure, promotion, or comprehensive review;
8


native language;
language in which they teach; and
faculty responsibilities.
The interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed by hand as recommended
by Creswell (2007) and Moustakas (1994). In Chapter 3,1 detail the coding methods and
how I formed the resultant themes. Additionally, two independent researchers who were
not familiar with the study coded two of the interviews so that inter-rater reliability was
achieved.
Researchers Perspective
Researchers are encouraged to disclose personal characteristics and possible
biases, which may affect how they approach their analysis as well as their research topic
(Subedi, 2006). My interest in the success of foreign-bom scholars first started when I
was an undergraduate student studying English as a second language. Having worked
with international students as a graduate student at the University of Illinois, been a
professional colleague of various foreign-born faculty for the past 38 years, and having
immediate family members who immigrated to the United States, I have been immersed
in and aware of some of the struggles that they have faced.
Organization of Dissertation
In addition to this first chapter, which introduces the problem, discusses the
conceptual framework on which the research question is developed and the interviews are
constructed, and gives a very brief overview of the methodology, four other chapters
follow. Chapter II presents a review of the literature and takes a broad look at the global
9


landscape of higher education and the roles motivation and social engagement play in
faculty members success.
Chapter III includes the study design, methods of data collection, information
about the studys subjects, and methods of data analysis. Chapter IV presents the results,
and Chapter V presents a discussion of the results and covers implications and limitations
of the study.
10


CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
During the past four decades, the American academy has been host to thousands
of international students and foreign-born faculty. Some foreign-bom faculty have been
students in the United States. Some have not (NCES, 2010). Regardless of whether they
receive one or more degrees in the U.S. or they arrive here specifically to teach in the
American higher education system, their experiences tend to be challenging. This study
explores the factors that affect the academic career success of foreign-born faculty.
In this chapter, I present the historical landscape of the globalization of academia
and the internationalization of higher education as furthered by foreign-born scholars. I
then examine the role that acculturation plays in the learning and scholarship of foreign-
bom faculty. I end with background studies and information about the role motivation
plays in success and the importance of mentoring and social networks in supporting
foreign-born faculty.
The Internationalization of Higher Education
Historically, the international elements of higher education have been time-
honored notions made possible by the mobility of scholars and knowledge (Welch, 1997).
In the fifth century BC, the Sophists were committed to learning and sharing knowledge.
Following them, medieval scholars assumed that role. Now, in the twenty-first century, a
proliferation exists of exchanges and cross-continent collaborations, which illustrate the
importance of trading knowledge by traveling between countries (Welch, 1997). Boyer,
Altbach, and Whitelaw (1994) resolved that higher education has an international aspect
that is accepted and the faculty is becoming a global community. Several governments
11


world-wide view the immigration of skilled workers as vital contributors to the expertise
of their workforce (NSF, 2010). At the same time, global competition for highly skilled
workers, in particular those in the sciences and engineering, is growing.
While the internationalism of higher education is not a new phenomenon, it has
only now started to receive focused attention. The democratic political system of the US,
its national support for learning, and its ethnic diversity all have contributed to this
increased awareness (Liu, 2001). Other nations have begun to realize the economic and
cultural benefits of foreign students and employees and are investing more heavily in
their graduate programs (NSF, 2010). However, the United States continues to be
considered the center of scholarship and research (NSF, 2010). Until this standard
changes, American higher education will draw talent from foreign countries.
Students from foreign countries continue come to the United States in large
numbers to learn, to grow, and to become productive and successful professionals
(Bollag, 2006; Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Solem & Foote, 2004). Even though the
September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks created significant roadblocks for foreign scholars
due to visa delays and entry denials even with a valid visa, the American share of
international students dropped only four points, from 25.3% to 21.6 % (Institute of
International Education [IIE], 2008. This drop, however, was short lived. By the start of
the 2007-2008 academic year, the number of new international graduate students
increased 10.1% from the prior year and comprised 27.9% of the total graduate student
population in American universities (IIE, 2008).
The most recent statistics show that during 2009-2010, American universities and
colleges enrolled 690,923 foreign students, which is a 3% increase from 2008-2009 (IIE,
12


2010). Foreign doctoral students numbered 116,254, a 7.4% increase from the prior year.
This represents a record number of international students in the U.S, with the growth
driven by a 30% increase in students from China. Chinese students now make up 18% of
the total international student population and students from South Asia make up 15% of
the international students (IIE, 2010). The top fields of study for international students in
2009-2010 were business and management (21% of total), engineering (18%), physical
and life sciences (9%), and mathematics and computer sciences (9%) (IIE, 2010).
While some international students return to their home countries, others stay in
the United States, and a large number enter the American academic labor market. In fact,
according to the NSF (2010), the number of students who remained in the U.S. following
graduation decreased slightly after the events of September 11, 2001. During the past 10
years, this figure increased, which is a result of an employment or postdoctoral
commitment from 67.2% of the temporary visa holders in 2009, an increase of 1% from
2004 (NSF, 2010). Of these temporary visa holders, 40.8% are working in U.S. academic
institutions and 53% are in American businesses and industries.
These United States educated scholars play an important role in the American
higher education academy because they not only add to the diversity of its academic
institutions, but they also contribute to the scholarly and research components of
academia as well as to the economic well-being of the schools and communities in which
they study and live. Foreign-born faculty add intellectual and scientific talent to
American universities and colleges (Foote, Li, Monk, & Theobald, 2008, p. 168).
13


The Internationalization of the Academic Profession
American academic institutions hold among their faculty both U.S. educated and
internationally educated foreign-bom faculty. Over the past several years, hundreds of
foreign-born scholars have become teaching faculty at American colleges and
universities, thereby making the academic workforce more diverse than ever.
Supply and Demand
In 2003, 630,092 total faculty resided in the U.S. By 2009, this number had
grown to 728,977 total faculty (NCES, 2010). Between 2003 and 2009, non-resident
alien faculty in the United States had increased from 21,153 to 30,745, which represents a
1% increase in non-resident alien faculty as a percentage of the total faculty. In 2003,
2.8% of these faculty were tenured or tenure track faculty. By 2009, 3.1% were tenured
or tenure track (NCES, 2010).
Fifty percent of foreign-born sciences and engineering graduates who were in the
United States in 1991 and remained through 2003 had obtained U.S. citizenship (NSF,
2010). More recently, three out of four foreign-bom sciences and engineering graduates
between the years 2004 and 2007 anticipated working in the U.S. (NSF, 2010). Over half
had employment contracts in United States. Additional information released by the NSF
(2010) states that 23% of all academic positions are held by either naturalized or non U.S.
citizens, and another 11.5% are held by naturalized citizens. Eight percent of all full-time
teaching faculty are non-U.S. citizens with another 12% classified as naturalized citizens.
Furthermore, 42% of postdoctoral research positions in higher education are held by non-
U.S. citizens and another 5.6% are held by naturalized citizens.
14


A National Science Foundation (2006) survey reported that the number of
foreign-born U.S. educated science and engineering doctorates increased 150 % since
1973. During this same period, U.S. educated native-born sciences and engineering
doctorates increased by only 90 %. It is interesting to note that, according to the
Association of American Universities, 11 of its 61 member institutions had foreign-born
presidents or chancellors in 2006 which is double from what it was 5 years ago
(Foderaro, 2011). Taking the above numbers into account and the reality that a great
number of international students remain in the American academy as faculty, the
academic profession is more internationally diverse and is a fast-growing global
community.
In addition, a shift toward increasing international perspectives is also occurring
across the American workforce in general (Goodwin & Nacht, 1991; Mamiseishvili &
Hermsen, 2009). With respect to the persistent high unemployment rates, discussion has
taken place whether the United States really needs highly skilled foreign workers.
However, the demand for skilled foreign workers is considerably greater than the supply.
Under the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act, an H-1B visa cap
of 65,000 indicates an unmet need (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). Although
individuals going into U.S. institutions of higher education are exempt from this, the
private sector, where much of the science and technology research is conducted, is held
under the cap.
Immigration and Visas in the United States
Immigration processes within the United States have long been complicated and
confusing. This has only become more difficult since the September 11, 2001 terrorist
15


events. The adoption of the Patriot Act (2001) imposed limitations on a variety of
relationships, in particular that which is related to the scholarly exchange of students and
faculty. The Patriot Act and ensuing legislation such as the Enhanced Border Security
and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, the REAL ID Act of 2005, which stipulates that a
drivers license cannot be obtained without proof of citizenship or legal immigration to
the U.S., and the Student Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) enacted in 2007,
have increased the complexity of the visa process due to national security.
Currently, one can apply for several different visas. International students and
scholars who come to the United States under an exchange program need one of the J-l
visas, depending on the purpose of the visit and the length of stay. One of the J-l visas is
issued for a short, temporary stay of no longer than 6 months. Another allows a
researcher or scholar to remain in the U.S. for a period not to exceed 5 years. One of the
stipulations of obtaining a J-l visa for those in the professorial ranks is that the U.S.
teaching position cannot be on the tenure-track. Those international students who are not
on an exchange program, but are instead attending school in the U.S. as a regularly
admitted student, must be issued a F-l visa. The F-l visa allows the student to remain in
the U.S. for as long as he or she is a full-time student. H-1B visas are for temporary
workers and can be issued for a 3-year period and have the possibility of being renewed
for another 3 years. The FY 2012 H-1B visa cap is 85,000, which includes 20,000 visas
given for advanced (masters or higher) completion (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Service, 2011).
A great number of these visa holders are foreign-educated professionals. In
2006, the National Science Foundation (2010) determined that 41% of doctorate holders
16


and 79% of professional degree holders on H-1B visas did not obtain their graduate
degrees from the United States.
To complicate matters, Canadian and Mexican residents can obtain a TN NAFTA
visa. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was recreated to promote
certain trade and economic partnerships between the U.S. and Canada and Mexico.
Under NAFTA, individuals who qualify can work in the U.S. for a period of 3 years.
Among the 60 professions that are on the qualifying list are a wide range of scientists,
post-secondary researchers and post-secondary teachers.
In addition to the standard visa requirements, over the past 12 years a few
legislative rulings have affected the issuance of H-1B visas. Among these is the
American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, which increased
the annual quota of H-1B temporary visas for foreign professional workers at the same
time provided protection of American workers whose employers may have wanted to hire
international workers at a lower pay rate. Another is the American Competitiveness in
the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000, which amended the Immigration and Nationality
Act with respect to H-1B nonimmigrant visas for the years 2001-2003.
Aside from the immigration challenges foreign-born workers experience,
restrictions also pertain to the ability of researchers to participate in federal grants.
Mainly, there has arisen with respect to foreign-bom researchers being involved in
sensitive technology and data, which heightens issues surrounding awarding grants on
sensitive research to foreign-born students and professors (Brainard, 2006). According to
the National Science Foundation website (2011), researchers who are not U.S. citizens or
17


do not have national or permanent resident status are ineligible to receive a greater
majority of, if not any, grants issued by the NSF.
The Value of Foreign-Born Workers
If the United States is going to maintain its dominance in such areas as science
and technology, it is vital that we recruit highly skilled foreign-born workers to fill the
demand, because there are not enough U.S. born workers to meet the demand
(Immigration Policy Center, 2011). A study by the Harvard Business School and
reported by the Immigration Policy Center (2011) states that for the past 15 years, the H-
1B visa program for highly skilled foreign workers has played an important role in U.S.
innovation patterns. The abilities and talents of foreign-bom skilled workers complement
those of native-born workers.
Fiscal Implications
A confirming statistic of the fiscal advantages of hiring foreign-bom workers is
between 2003 and 2007, U.S. educated foreign-bom professionals in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics increased the gross domestic product by $13.5 billion and
added between $2.7 billion and $3.6 billion in taxes (Holen, 2009). During the 2009-
2010 academic year, $18.7 billion was contributed to the U.S. economy by international
students and their families (National Association of International Educators, 2011).
Furthermore, companies that employ H-1B workers in order to fulfill their
demand, make significant donations to educational institutions in order to increase
support to U.S. students studying in the sciences and engineering fields (National
Foundation for American Policy [NFAP], 2007). The American Competitiveness and
Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 instituted a $500 (raised to $1,500 in 2004) training
18


fee that must accompany H-1B applications. Since 2000, more than $2.3 billion has been
collected and is earmarked for training and scholarships for U.S. workers (NFAP, 2011).
A portion of these fees go to the National Science Foundation for scholarships to
encourage U.S. students to study in the STEM disciplines, and additional funding is
available for K-12 public schools to enrich their STEM programs.
Academic and Scholarly Implications
Foreign-bom professionals contribute considerably more than contributing to the
economic growth of the country. Foreign faculty not only contribute to academia through
their content knowledge, they also bring a positive change in an institutions culture and
they add an international experience to the classroom by their teaching and their research.
Foreign-bom faculty can be seen as models of international collaboration. With the
broadening focus of offering students international experiences within a global
curriculum, foreign-bom faculty undoubtedly add to the experience.
Foreign-bom faculty have a profound effect on stabilizing the higher education
marketplace and encouraging a global curriculum (Green, 2007; Lin, Pearce, & Wang,
2008; Raby, 2007). As colleges and universities expand their curriculum to include a
global component, they are implementing strategies such as promoting study abroad
opportunities for students and encouraging international exchange programs.
Adaptation and Acculturation of Foreign-Born Academics
As the academy becomes internationally diverse, administrators are beginning to
pay more attention to the experiences of foreign-bom faculty. The challenges of foreign-
born faculty as they establish themselves in the American academy, and the need for
support programs, such as mentoring and social networks, has been established (Lin et
19


al., 2008; Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009; Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Trower, 2010).
Faculty members from other countries have expressed the need for an international
community of scholarship in which faculty from all countries can connect with one
another and share philosophy and research (Altbach, 1996; Boyer et al., 1994; Sadao,
2003). Likewise, faculty from different countries share many of the same thoughts and
concerns about higher education, the nucleus of which is collaboration, acculturation, and
adaptation.
As I studied the internationalization of American higher education and the issues
foreign-born faculty confront in their quest for success in the United States, I found it
beneficial to review the initial philosophical theories of cross-cultural associations from
the early twentieth century. This history provides a better understanding of the conflicts
raised and broadens the foundation of the contextual factors that are related to this
success. Kalian (1915), a controversial philosophy professor who, with his colleagues,
advocated cultural diversity and believed that American democracy was strengthened by
racial differences, championed a pluralistic society, one in which many languages and
religions would thrive. While Kalians pluralism did not immediately take hold, Kalians
and Berksons (1920) philosophical views of pluralism, ethnic communications, political
life, and cultures have become more accepted than Kalians pluralistic view of society.
Since the first decades of the last century, researchers have continued to study and
promote multi culturalism. The majority of the research on acculturation has focused on
three dominant areas: intercultural stress, ability to communicate, and ability to establish
interpersonal relationships (Ward, 1996). The research on adaptation, which is closely
related to acculturation, has focused on two areasdomestic adjustment and international
20


adjustment (Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991). Language and cultural differences
exacerbate the stress that occurs in adjusting to a foreign country or culture (Black et al.;
Nimoh, 2010; Theobald, 2007). In order to address the academic successes of foreign-
born faculty, a better understanding of the processes associated with acculturation and
adaptation is necessary.
The Processes of Adaptation and Acculturation
Acculturation is the change that occurs because of contact between individuals of
different cultural backgrounds (Iceland, 2009; Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits, 1936).
Berry and Kim (1988) and Sam and Berry (2006) compared acculturation to pluralistic
communities in which native people interact with ethnic groups. However, a lack of
boundaries within the course of acculturation initiates considerable speculation about the
process of acculturating into another way of life.
Acculturation consists of multiple phases (Berry, 1980). The first phase occurs
when two different groups have contact with one another. Their differences surface and
can instill conflict. The second stage consists of these conflicts and the need to adapt to
one another in order to lessen or eliminate the conflicts. Adaptation is the third phase of
acculturation. Within the context of adaptation rests the necessity for the disparate
groups to adjust their language, their personality, their attitudes, and their acculturative
stress (Berry, Poortinga, Segall & Dasen, 1992).
Adjustment into the new culture occurs when an individual becomes a member of
a new, unfamiliar setting, a setting that causes a level of disruption in ones life (Black et
al., 1991). The adjustment processes disparate groups go through are similar to the
phases of socialization in which the groups become familiar with and conform to the new
21


setting. Berry (1980) questions this and posited that two questions should be asked as an
individual begins the adjustment process. First, one should question whether retaining
ones own cultural identity is necessary. Second, one should determine if assimilating
and conforming to the more dominant society is beneficial. Liu (2001) suggested that
disparate groups consider both their cultural identity as well as their involvement with the
host culture as they acculturate into the majority culture.
Culture Shock as an Acculturative Variable
Appearing in 1951, the term culture shock (DuBois, 1951) paved the way for
anthropologist Kalvero Oberg to conduct in-depth studies about the adjustment of
Americans working in Brazil. Subsequent studies have referred to the stress and anxiety
experienced by people traveling and living abroad and, consequently referred to the role
culture shock plays in the successful adaptation to ones new surroundings (Oberg, 1960;
Ward, 1996). In general, culture shock occurs as a result of recurrent adaptation to an
environment of new food and new friends, and a loss of nearby family. It also occurs as a
result of the host community being less welcoming and possibly alienating, a feeling of
incompetence, discomfort with new values, and an uncertainty of identity (Argyle, 1982).
Among the many symptoms of culture shock is stress from the adjustment to the
new surroundings (Weaver, 1993). Elmers (2002) research on cross-cultural
connections distinguishes between two paths one can take when experiencing culture
shock. Cultural differences cause frustration, confusion, tension, lack of self-esteem, a
sense of inadequacy, and embarrassment. Individuals can either cope or react to these
feelings. If coping is chosen, the individual engages in observation, listening, and
inquiring about the new environment (Elmer, 2002). These actions encourage rapport
22


building and understanding with the host community. Others, however, choose to react
to these feelings. Reactive responses result in criticism, rationalizing, and eventual
withdrawal, which result in alienation and isolation (Elmer, 2002).
In addition to culture shock other variables affect adaptation to a new culture.
Some of these include duration of stay, self-efficacy, personality, attachment to ones
home culture, and language (Black et al., 1991; Tomich, McWhirter, & King, 2000).
Another acculturation variable that affects successful adaptation of a new culture and
achievements in ones job is language (Tomich et. al.). Legislation addressing the need
for academic institutions to provide programs of language proficiency for higher
education faculty has become more prevalent since the early 1990s (Monoson & Thomas,
1993; Williams, 1998). Although this legislation seems to have been a trend, it is not
without controversy. Researchers assert that such legislation is a narrow approach
(Thomas & Monoson; Williams). Contrary to assumptions about the effectiveness of
foreign accented teachers, some researchers have determined that foreign teaching
assistants were as effective in the classroom as native teaching assistants (Jacob &
Freidman, 1988; Kavas & Kavas, 2008). Similarly, Marvasti (2001) found that the
adverse effect foreign teaching assistants had on students was not the result of their lack
of English language skills. Instead, it was due to other factors such as differences
between cultural expectations, social skills, and prior teaching experiences.
Some researchers have linked language with culture (Boas, 1982; Kramsch &
Widdowson, 1998). Not unexpected, a connection exists with the ease of acculturation of
foreign-born individuals from English-speaking countries such as Canada and the United
Kingdom. Those from non-English speaking countries had more difficulties
23


acculturating into American society (Boijas, 1985). Nonetheless, it should not be
surprising that the amount of time spent in the United States positively affects ones
language ability (Chiswick & Miller, 1995; Mora, 2003).
Training, previous experience, social support, and relations with host nationals are
among the variables influencing successful acculturation and, ultimately, effective job
performance (Liebkind, 2006; Ward, 1996). A study by Cui and Awa (1992) identified
five factors that contribute to effective cross-cultural adjustment and job performance.
These are personal traits, language and interpersonal skills, managerial ability, cultural
empathy, and social interactions. In addition to these factors, Cui and Awa also
determined that effective cross-cultural adjustment involves personality traits,
interpersonal skills, social interaction and cultural empathy in that order. For effective
job performance, interpersonal skills and cultural empathy come before personality traits.
They also found that married people adjusted better to the new cultural environment than
those who were single.
Several other studies have examined the role of social interaction in job
performance (Boice, 1992a; Dinges & Baldwin, 1996; Menges, 1999; Obiakor & Grant,
2002; Tierney, 1997; Tierney & Bensimon, 1996; Ward, 1996). Although other
challenges such as confusion and uncertainty about tenure and promotion criteria and
feelings of isolation all have been found to affect ones professorial career success,
feelings of belonging and establishing a social network are very important.
Clearly, when achieving an effective sojourner adjustment, an over-riding theme
is the effect of the positive and extensive social exchanges foreign-bom faculty
experience with host nationals (Brein & David, 1971; Church, 1982; Klineberg & Hull,
24


1979; Ward & Kennedy, 1993; Ward, 1996). Social, interpersonal interactions and peer-
group-support measures have found a place among the other avenues for building
relationships and establishing networks of people to help influence others. Many
researchers have determined that interpersonal interactions with host nationals are a
defining feature of successful adaptation to a new cultural environment (Bennett, 1993;
Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). Bennett affirmed that becoming part of a peer group had a
positive effect on individuals experiencing cultural marginalization.
Resilience
A concept that has roots in acculturation, adaptation, and assimilation is
resilience. Resilience refers to the way one copes with life events within diverse
populations (Rutter, 1999). Resilience research examines the ways people meet
challenges, particularly challenges related to moving from one culture to another. In
other words, resilience is a component in cultural adaptation and acculturation.
Successful acculturation and adaptation within a new culture can involve a circuitous
path. This path includes facets of the new environment, challenging events such as
discrimination, adaptation responses that can include optimism, short-term outcomes
such as sociocultural integration, and long-term outcomes consisting of those with a
resilient nature such as economic advancement and career success as well as those of a
non-resilient nature such as impoverishment (Cervantes & Castro, 1985).
With the increasing emphasis on globalization in higher education as well as
business, efforts are being made to better understand resilience among different cultures.
Among the findings of some of these studies is that regardless of where one might live,
25


be that in the United States, Africa, on a Brazilian street, or in an Aboriginal community
in Canada, how one reacts to survival stress is dependent on ones culture (Unger, 2010).
Motivation Theories
What motivates people to succeed? Much has been written about the role
motivation plays in both academic success and career success. Dozens, if not hundreds,
of definitions of motivation exist. Nonetheless, motivation used in the context of this
study draws on the work of Alderman (2004), Bandera (1982, 1991), Deci and Ryan
(1985), (Jones (1955), Pink (2009), Steers and Porter (1991), and Vroom (1965) who
agree that work motivation consists of forces that originate both within and outside an
individuals being and initiate work-related behaviors.
Achievement Theories
Among the work motives that are most pertinent to this study are self-regulatory
motivation, goal setting, ability beliefs, self-efficacy, and self-determination. In many
respects, these motivation concepts merge together. With that in mind, the basic
motivation theory related to this study is self-regulation, which is a social-cognitive
theory used to describe ones motivation to learn, to understand ones competencies, and
to be willing to commit to goals in order to succeed (Alderman, 2004). Individuals have
certain beliefs in what they can do, and they set goals for themselves in order to produce
the outcome they seek (Bandura, 1991). It is these cognitive processes that form the
tenets of self-regulation.
Ability. Often when individuals come into contact with others, they form
preconceived beliefs about themselves, their culture, their lives, and their ability (Swann
& Snyder, 1980). A persons self-perception of ability is one of the constructs of
26


motivation. As Alderman (2004) stated, many people use social comparison to rate their
performance on given tasks. They also may use self-referenced comparison in which
they compare what they have done with previous performance.
Goal setting. One of the key variables of self-regulation is goal setting. The
setting of goals is one way in which individuals complete a task and possibly achieve
success. It is the object of an action, such as attaining a level of proficiency, as in
achieving tenure. Most employees, faculty included, each year outline a plan of activities
by which they will be evaluated. This can range from specific teaching related actions to
ones research agenda. Setting goals helps direct ones attention to the task at hand and
realizing an end result, whether that be submission of an article for publication or
introducing new teaching methods in the classroom (Locke & Latham, 1990).
Self-Determination. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is frequently used in
education and work settings and is an evolving body of work on motivation (Pinder,
2008). A key tenet of self-determination theory is that people are motivated by innate
psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness to others (Pinder, 2008).
Innate needs include pride, satisfaction, and a sense of accomplishment. It is interesting
to note that SDT recognizes that people tend to internalize and integrate behaviors that
serve self-determined behaviors. It is not uncommon that people will do something not
because they personally want to, but because of family or peer pressure.
Counter to what some behavior psychologists posit, SDT looks at intrinsic
(innate), rather than extrinsic (such as money), rewards as motivation (Ryan, Connell, &
Deci, 1985). Among the social-cognitive factors that add to intrinsic motivation are goal
27


setting in which satisfaction is gained from accomplishing goals and self-efficacy in
which is a high level of competence in achievement (Alderman, 2004).
Career Motivation. In the 1980s, London coined the term career motivation to
reflect the characteristics related to career decisions and the behaviors that are associated
with ones work life (year?). Since then, some researchers have used concepts similar to
Londons career motivation as a framework to study the relationship between culture and
career development (Arthur, 1994; Day & Allen, 2004; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005;
Lopes, 2006). Among the views related to this concept are that within ones career
motivation is career resilience, in which there is a tendency to ignore any type of career
disruption when operating or living in an environment that presents a challenge (London,
1983). Many foreign-born people possess an ability to adjust to every-changing
circumstances as they move from one country to another and adapt to their new
surroundings. Factors affecting career motivation include the age of the individual and
the availability of mentoring (Lopes, 2006).
Hofstedes studies (2005) built on two prominent theories developed by Hall
(2004) and Arthur (1994). Halls protean career theory reasons that ones career
development is based on the individual and the decisions that person makes related to her
or his career. The employer lies outside the relationship. Arthurs boundaryless career
theory is complemented by the protean theory in that the responsibility for growth and
success lie with the individual and not solely with the employer. However, the
organizations goals and values affect the individuals growth and success.
28


Motivation and Culture
Several individual differences compound the role motivation plays in ones
success. An area that has started to gain the interest of researchers is that of studying he
possible differences between native-born and foreign-born workers. The differences
among the various cultures provide a sound explanation in distinguishing between ones
work motivation, behavior, and attitude (Rousseau & Fried, 2001; Sorrentino &
Yamaguichi, 2008). Culture influences motivation (Erez, Kleinbeck & Thierry, 2001;
Ginsberg & Wlodkowski, 2009; Latham & Pinder, 2005; Sorrentino & Yamaguchi,
2008).
Individualism and Collectivism
Because a need exists to better understand global differences among todays work
force, several researchers have studied two different constructs: individualism and
collectivism (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Lam, Schaubroeck, & Aryee, 2002; Ronen,
2001; Triandis, 1995).
Individualism is defined as a social pattern in which people are more independent
of one another. They are motivated by their personal preferences. Collectivism, on the
other hand, is defined as a social pattern in which people are seen as part of a whole, such
as a co-worker or a department. In general, collectivism is associated with countries in
Asia, Western and Eastern Africa, Central and South America, the South Asian
subcontinent, Jamaica, and the Pacific Islands (Triandis, 1995). These cultures tend to
give more social support to those in their own groups, but they also frequently express a
self-critical attitude. They exhibit a mutual sympathy for one another (Triandis, 1995).
Individualistic societies are those associated with North American and Western Europe,
29


including Italy. People from individualistic societies typically express high self-esteem
and mutual respect for one another, but are more personal goal oriented (Triandis, 1995).
These cultural constructs also influence ones mode of communication.
The Roles of Mentoring and Social Networks
Mentoring in higher education received very little notice until recently. Since the
late 1990s, researchers have conducted in-depth studies on mentoring in the higher
education academy (Goodwin & Stevens, 1998; Goodwin, Stevens, & Bellamy, 1998;
Moody, 2004). Mentoring in the academic setting is frequently tied to professional
development, especially as it pertains to new faculty in their pursuit to become proficient
teachers and scholars (Lang, 2005; Luna & Cullen, 1995).
As the academy becomes more diverse, the role of mentoring develops into a vital
catalyst for foreign-born faculty as they establish successful academic careers in the
United States. In the past, diversity programs that created awareness and understanding
of peoples differences received considerable attention. The efficacy of these programs
has been established (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Goodwin, et al., 1998; Muth &
Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Roche, 1979; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005; Zaleznik, 1977; Zey,
1984), and the research supports the concept that foreign-born faculty are faced with
many challenges domestic faculty do not encounter.
Mentoring of minority faculty has been extensively explored. Several mentoring
relationships involving minority faculty have developed through a mutual understanding
between the mentor and the mentee (Parson, Sands, & Duane, 1992; Sadao, 2003; Sands,
Parson, & Duane, 1991). Variables such as group norms and societal pressures, mixing
with individual traits, affect mentoring outcomes. Several researchers have noted that
30


minority faculty often have difficulty finding a mentor because people tend to prefer to
mentor from within their own ethnic group (Bowman, Kite, Branscombe, & Williams,
2000; Margolis & Romero, 2001). However, as Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002) and
Chattergy (1994) have documented, cross-cultural mentoring relationships are key for
those who are struggling with cultural barriers. Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002)
studied cross-cultural mentoring and stated, mentoring across cultural boundaries is an
especially delicate dance . . (p. 15).
Further, as in the personal case of Johnson-Bailey and Cervero, cross-gender
relationships can also be successful. White men typically mentor Black men and women
primarily because more White men are in positions to mentor (Blake, 2000; Blake-Beard,
Murrell, & Thomas, 2007). While some research suggests that cross-gender and cross-
cultural mentoring may not be effective, Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002) found that
gender is less of a factor than cultural differences in the success of a mentoring
relationship.
Research on the success of international students supports these findings. Ellis,
Sawyer, Gill, Medlin and Wilson (2005) determined the need for non-English language
students to receive more orientation and introduction to the academic experience as a
bridge to understanding the cultural differences between the countries. Other studies
support the notion that international students have a more satisfying learning experience
and are more successful in their academic studies if offered mentoring programs (Ryan,
2005; Solem & Foote, 2004).
31


Mentoring as a Tool of Success
In Greek mythology, the goddess Athena took the form of Mentor and began the
journey of guiding, advising, and encouraging the young Telemachus to find the truth
about the death of his father. Since then, the concept of mentoring has been used to
signify a relationship in which a more experienced person helps guide the career of a
younger, junior member, and assists this person as he or she navigates the world of
work (Kram, 1985, p. 2). Deloz (1986) defines mentors as interpreters of the
environment (p. 207). Mentors are people who help those with less experience better
understand the culture in which they have find themselves.
Similarly, theorists suggest that mentoring is an academic socialization and
collegial process that helps shape the academic community (Knight & Trowler, 1999).
Regardless of what definition one uses for mentoring, research has shown that to become
successful and obtain professional advancement, it can be helpful to have a network of
people who can help open doors (Collins, 2008; Moody, 2004; Trower, 2010). This
philosophy is almost identical to that of Lave and Wenger (1991) who maintain that
learning is most effective when coupled with developing a sense of belonging and having
an identity with a specific community.
Mentoring is an important resource in the improvement of people (Higgins &
Kram, 2001). Those who have participated in a mentoring relationship report higher job
satisfaction, more career advances, and less work conflict (Dreher & Ash, 1990;
Goodwin & Stevens, 1998; Nielson, Carlson, & Lankau, 2001; Tenenbaum, Crosby, &
Gliner, 2001). Additional research indicates that meaningful mentoring helps faculty
better adapt to the academic setting (Kram, 1985; Young & Perrewe, 2000). The
32


organization, as a culture, benefits from these mentoring relationships because mentors
assist in creating an atmosphere that is conducive to proactive socializing and instills a
supportive attitude toward the organization. In turn, mentoring improves productivity
and fosters retention and leadership skills (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Goodwin &
Stevens, 1998; Goodwin et al., 1998; Lankau & Scandura, 2002; Muth & Browne-
Ferrigno, 2008; Wilson & Elman, 1990).
To date, little has been written about training and mentoring programs for foreign-
born faculty, leaving some question about the effectiveness of mentoring for non-native
born faculty. Although very little empirical research has been completed on the
effectiveness of mentoring for foreign-bom faculty, the benefits of mentoring for
international graduate students have been documented (Chattergy, 1994; Mortenson,
2006; Trice, 2005).
Immigrants have been likened to voluntary minorities who have moved to the
United States (Moody, 2004). Using this premise, I now explore the concept of cross-
cultural mentoring programs as they have been applied to ethnic minorities and the
possible effectiveness of these programs on the career success of foreign-born faculty.
Cross-Cultural Mentoring
Mentoring across cultures involves the understanding of other cultures and the
attitudes and beliefs that are associated with those cultures. In general, cross-cultural
relationships are rife with differing beliefs, especially with respect to beliefs about the
educational process. A paucity of research on mentoring of foreign-bom faculty exists.
However, a wealth of research on mentoring of minorities exists. In order to understand
33


some of the difficulties that cross-cultural relationships experience, I am extrapolating the
research that has been conducted on minority faculty to foreign-born faculty.
Faculty of color frequently experience a lack of inclusion by the majority faculty
(Johnsrud, 1993; Stanley, 2006). A lack of inclusion occurs for a variety of reasons, of
which some are: the cross-cultural and social differences among the different races
(Blake-Beard et al., 2007; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2008; Johnsrud, 1993).
Furthermore, non-majority faculty have difficulty learning the political and informal
norms of the academic culture and US ethnicities (Boice, 1992a, 1992b; Finkelstein &
LaCelle-Peterson, 1992). Many times these obstacles are not overcome until after the
faculty apply for tenure and promotion. Consequently, non-majority faculty do not have
as high a success rate at achieving tenure as their White counterparts (Carter & Wilson,
1992; Redmond, 1990).
Brinson and Kottler (1993) uphold that developing a mentor-mentee relationship
is one way by which minority faculty can formulate realistic career goals and achieve
success. Further, Ibarra (1995) produced evidence that ethnic minorities and women are
diligently establishing mentoring relationships through networking and casual
relationships. Developing a mentor-mentee relationship is one way through which
minority faculty can formulate realistic career goals and achieve success (Brinson &
Kottler, 1993; Patton & Harper, 2003). Taking this a step further, several studies support
the design and implementation of cross-cultural mentoring programs (Blake-Beard et al.,
2007; Harris and Kumra, 2000; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002; Ragins, 1997; Tillman,
2001).
34


Many academic institutions have begun to recognize their moral obligation to
provide mentoring for their underrepresented faculty (Moody, 2004). They understand
that mentoring relationships have value. They agree that mentoring programs are
beneficial for ethnic minorities (Ragins, 1997; Stanley and Lincoln, 2005; Tillman,
2001).
Using Tillmans (2001) original premise that mentoring is beneficial for ethnic
minorities, Campbell (2005) observed that given the majority of higher education faculty
are White, it is extremely likely that minority faculty will have a White mentor.
Furthermore, very likely the White mentor will lack the cultural context in which to
ensure a successful mentor relationship. In fact, researchers have found that a base
understanding of the cultures and attitudes of minority faculty is needed in order to
improve the mentoring process (Sadao, 2003; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005).
Cross-Cultural Mentoring Challenges
Minority faculty have been found to benefit from a mentoring experience that
fosters the development of ones career and assists in socialization, a context that leads us
to the complex cross-cultural aspects of mentoring (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002;
Williams & Kirk, 2008). Cross-cultural mentoring involves a contrast of social and
cultural norms (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002). Grant-Thompson (1997) and Brinson
and Kottler (1993) found that trust forms part of the fabric of solid mentoring
relationships. Later, Kea, Penny and Bowman (2003) confirmed that mentoring,
especially cross-cultural mentoring, should include a considerable measure of trust.
These studies suggest that cross-cultural mentoring might be most productive if
built on a solid foundation of understanding and trusta foundation devoid of racism and
35


judgment. Clearly, the institutional culture influences the nature of relationships between
junior and senior faculty (Cullen & Luna, 1993). Therefore, it is important that the
institutional culture appreciates and supports diversity.
Cross-cultural mentoring typically employs many of the same concepts as
traditional mentoring, with one major difference that cultural distinctiveness needs to be
addressed in the interactions. Family structure, ethnic identity, ethnic values, and
regional differences are factors that come into play in cross-cultural mentoring
relationships. Factors such as these present barriers that can adversely affect the value of
mentoring. It is not uncommon that people prefer to be mentored by others who are
similar in ethnic group or race (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2004). Consequently,
establishing a culture of trust and openly recognizing the cultural differences and
sociocultural factors can enhance the mentoring effectiveness (Johnson-Bailey &
Cervero, 2004).
To carry this thinking further, Mullen (2005) recognized that cross-cultural
mentoring is somewhat holistic in that it can be thought of as being a community-based
practice that encourages an awareness of diversity and antiracist programs, encourages
equal access to schools and promotes electronic learning communities. Campbell (2005)
has made it clear that in order to be effective, faculty who serve as mentors in a cross-
cultural mentoring relationship must have a multicultural point of view. Additionally,
cross-cultural mentoring should be approached with a mutual understanding of the ethnic
heritages and cultural differences of the mentor and the mentee (Brinson & Kottler, 1993;
Campbell, 2005; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005).
36


Benefits of Mentoring
Mentoring has taken place in many arenas for centuries, but in academic settings
mentoring has been carried out as an unstructured. Recently, academic institutions have
looked at mentoring more formally because it has been linked to career success (Roche,
1979), leadership development (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Zaleznik, 1977),
increased productivity (Zey, 1984), decreased stress (Fuller, Maniscalco-Feichtl &
Droege, 2008), and personal growth (Levinson, Darrow, Kleen, Levinson, & McKee,
1978).
Formal mentoring involves a relationship between a mentor and a mentee, usually
through an organized program. The make-up of formal mentoring relationships varies.
They can be in the form of peer mentoring, team or mentoring circles, and structured
networks (Douglas & McCauley, 1999; Kram & Hall, 1996). Formal mentoring periods
also vary. Normally, the program director or manager dictates the length of the program,
typically a year or less (Baugh & Fagenson-Eland, 2007). However, most of these formal
mentoring relationships have not considered inequalities of race/culture, gender, and class
(Darwin, 2000).
Informal mentoring relationships, on the other hand, generally have been
developed by happenstance. They are formed out of the needs and desires of the mentor
and the protege (Allen, Day, & Lentz, 2005; Lyons & Oppler, 2004). Unlike formal
mentoring relationships, informal ones can occur over any length of time. The content is
not structured and is up to the participants.
Mentoring functions in formal and informal relationships also vary, although not
all researchers agree to the extent of variation. Studies have shown that career support is
37


more prevalent in informal relationships and psychosocial support is more prevalent in
formal relationships (Baugh & Fagenson-Eland, 2007; Raabe & Beehr, 2003; Scandura &
Williams, 2001). Nonetheless, research by Chao, Walz, and Gardner (1992) and Sosik,
Lee, and Bouquillon (2005) determined that no differences were found between informal
and formal relationships in organizational commitment, career involvement, or job
satisfaction. However, no research could be found that examines the efficacy of
mentoring programs, whether informal or formal, for the difficulties that foreign-born
faculty experience as they begin to teach in the American academy and work towards
tenure and promotion. Thus, for the purposes of this study, both formal and informal
mentoring relationships, as they relate to ethnic minorities, are used as a benchmark to
study mentoring as a factor of academic career success for foreign-bom faculty.
Social Networks as A Form of Mentoring
Mentoring has been found to provide junior faculty with both socialization into
the academy and social networking connections (Williams & Kirk, 2008). A growing
body of research suggests social networks and being socially engaged play an important
part in the performance and ultimate success of individuals (Sparrowe et al., 2001;
Williams & Kirk, 2008). Among the individual benefits of becoming part of a social
network or a learning community are an increase in knowledge and skills, personal
productivity, job satisfaction, and a greater feeling of a sense of belonging (Fontaine &
Millen, 2004). The research of Fontaine and Millen, Ewing et al., (2008), Muth and
Browne-Ferrigno, (2008), and others corroborates the findings reported earlierthat
social contact and group interaction are vital components in becoming a well-functioning
part of the community in which they live and work.
38


Researchers studying the socialization of foreign-bom faculty found that, like
their domestic counterparts, they suffered from high workloads and stress induced by the
demands of teaching and research (Boice, 1992b; Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009;
Menges, 1999; Olsen & Sorcinelli, 1992; Soylu, 2007; Thomas & Johnson, 2004;
Tierney, 1997). Socialization involves acquiring behaviors of a group. It is not
uncommon for new faculty to find that the expectations and practices of their institutions
differ widely from those that they experienced as graduate students (Reynolds, 1992).
They also tend to believe they are underprepared and are plagued with finding a balance
between work and family (Reynolds, 1992). Minority and foreign-born faculty also
experience some loneliness, isolation, and alienation (Cooper & Stevens, 2002; Williams
& Kirk, 2008).
Becoming a member of a community is similar to being involved in a social
practice, such as serving as a mentor or a mentee. It is not unusual that studies about
situated learning are concomitant to those of mentor relationships. Participant-observer
behaviors, on-the-job training, and apprenticeships are examples of situated learning. It
is through guidance and oversight, essential components in situated learning, that skills
and behaviors are reinforced (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004).
Conclusion
The increase in and the importance of foreign-born scholars points to the need for
higher education to have more awareness of their lives, to have a better understanding of
the acculturation and adaptation they go through, the roles mentoring and social networks
play in their lives, and their motivations. The experience of adapting to a new country
and a new culture can put people in a position in which they experience feelings of being
39


an outsider by both their native bom culture as well as their adaptive culture. Much of
the research that has been conducted on adaptation and acculturation centers on the topics
of intercultural stress, communication, and interpersonal relationships. To a lesser
degree, but still very important, are immigration challenges. It is these areas related to
acculturation and adaptation that are a focus of this study.
Motivation theories are numerous. The theories most pertinent to this study are
those related to self-regulation and include ability, self-efficacy, self-determination, and
goal setting. Culture also enters into the motivation factors of foreign-born faculty. The
work of Triandis (1995) and London (1983) provide insight into the career motivation
section of this study.
Social interactions and interpersonal relationships are a feature in the successful
adaptation of foreign-born individuals to a new cultural environment (Mendenhall &
Oddou, 1985). As Campbell (2005) and Tillman (2001) reported, possessing a
foundation of knowledge about the junior faculty members cultural and social factors
has been known to advance effective mentoring.
Because of this need, mentoring has become a method to inculcate good teaching,
research, and service practices into newly minted higher education faculty. In turn, by
honing these skills it is assumed that the new faculty will be more productive and
successful in not only the classroom but also in their journey towards tenure and
promotion and other advancements.
Although American academic institutions are becoming more international and
global both curriculum and faculty development, it behooves colleges and universities to
be aware, act on the need, provide programs to support, and add to the success of foreign-
40


born faculty. The process is in place, but more institutions need to advocate for these
newcomers successes in the academy (Trower, 2010). The challenges of foreign-born
faculty to achieve reappointment, tenure, promotion, and, in many cases, advancement to
administrative positions within colleges and universities are many. The rewards should
follow.
41


CHAPTER III
METHODS
Research Design
The purpose of this study is to obtain an understanding of the factors affecting the
career success of foreign-bom faculty in the American academy. To uncover these
factors, I used a phenomenological approach. Phenomenology is used to investigate how
individuals interpret their experiences (Patton, 2002). Its focus is on understanding the
phenomenon and not looking specifically at the life of the individual. An underlying
principle for using phenomenology is the collection of stories of lived experiences.
Through the stories, experiences are uncovered, experiences that formed the basis of my
research.
Phenomenology generally is thought to be either descriptive or interpretive.
Descriptive phenomenology, according to Husserl (1970), is a rigorous human science.
Interpretive phenomenology, also known as hermeneutics, has been the focus of such
researchers as Heiddeger, van Manen, and Gadamer (Laverty, 2003). For this study, I
chose a combination of descriptive phenomenology and hermeneutics. While the
difference between the two rests mainly in the philosophical underpinnings of the
research method and the procedures for analyzing the textual materials, both study the
lived experience, and both involve using disciplined reflection. On the following pages, I
give a brief overview of phenomenology and hermeneutics and describe the data
generation and analysis used in this study.
42


Methodology
Edmund Husserl (1970), who promoted the idea that everyday experiences should
not be overlooked when studying lived events, founded phenomenology. The focus of
phenomenology is what an individual experiences and how that is translated to others in
such a way as to provide more insight into what is being studied and ultimately to get to
the basis of assumptions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Polkinghorne, 1989).
The descriptive, or empirical, phenomenological approach I use here modifies the
van Kaam (1966) and Giorgi (1985) methods. Giorgi, who aligned himself with
Merleau-Ponty, the French empirical phenomenologist, analyzed descriptive statements
of everyday experiences from a small (4 to 6) number of people. The crux of this
methodology involves isolating the meaning of the statements and the lived experiences.
Polkinghorne (1989), like Giorgi, believes isolating the meaning is a two-step process.
First, the researcher gives what he or she sees is the dominant meaning. Second, the
researcher delves deeper into the meaning by taking into consideration the topic of the
study. Thereby, the whole meaning of what is shared is extracted.
Using the methods of Moustakas (1994), I developed interview questions that
would
1. seek to reveal more fully the essences and meanings of human experience,
2. seek to uncover the qualitative rather than the quantitative factors in
behavior and experience,
3. engage the total self of the research participant and sustain personal and
passionate involvement,
4. do not seek to predict or determine casual relationships, and
43


5. illuminate, through comprehensive descriptions and vivid and accurate
renderings of the experience, rather than measurements, ratings, or scores
(Moustakas, 1994, p. 105).
Study Setting
This study was conducted in the Rocky Mountain region at a medium-size
doctoral-granting teaching and research institution of higher education where foreign-
born faculty comprise approximately 8% of the faculty. The interviews were all
conducted in private offices or the homes of the participants, depending on the preference
of the participant.
Participant Selection
Following the recommendation of Polkinghome (1989) who recommended
interviewing 5 to 25 people for a phenomenological study, I interviewed 11 faculty who
met the minimum criteria of not being bom in the United States and of having passed the
pre-tenure comprehensive review. For the purposes of this study, the term foreign-born
faculty means individuals who were not bom in the United States, although they could
presently be naturalized or United States citizens. The sample consisted of both male and
female faculty from the following countries: Canada, South Asia, Italy, Poland, Romania,
Taiwan, West Indies, and Zimbabwe.
In order to obtain a sufficient number of people for my study, I used a
combination of snowball, purposive, and convenience sampling techniques. Typically in
snowball sampling the sample is comprised of information rich key informants, located
by referrals from others. For this study, I obtained names of tenured and tenure-track
foreign-born faculty from the college deans, the Universitys Director of Institutional
44


Research, and from foreign-born faculty themselves. I then obtained their country of
origin, their rank, and, if an assistant professor, whether or not they had completed their
pre-tenure comprehensive review. I also considered their gender and the department of
which they were a member. Once I had this information, I selected equal numbers of
professors, associate professors, and assistant professors, representing as many different
disciplines and countries as possible, and ensuring that each gender was represented in
each rank.
In addition to the snowball sampling technique I used to obtain the specific
participants, I also employed convenience sampling because of the ease of identifying the
sample at the research site. I knew that this particular university employed foreign-bom
faculty from several countries and different disciplines. A downside, however, to
convenience sampling is that the samples are not scientific and should not be used to
generalize to a larger population (Lavrakas, 2008).
In snowball sampling, a danger arises that the informant may give false leads. A
danger also exists when employing snowball and convenience sampling techniques that
the sample may not be as representative as it could be and credibility might be
compromised (Miles & Huberman, 1994). To counter this, I asked all participants to
complete a demographic questionnaire that gave me their country of origin, whether they
were in a tenure track position and their rank, and if an assistant professor if they had
passed their pre-tenure comprehensive review. By asking these questions, I was able to
confirm that the participants met the minimum criteria of being born outside the United
States and having successfully passed the pre-tenure comprehensive review. I was also
45


able to confirm the rank of each of the participants, which allowed me to ensure I had all
professorial ranks represented.
Although I originally asked twelve faculty to participate, after collecting the
demographic information I discovered that one of the faculty was an associate professor
not an assistant professor. Given that this individual was from a country that was already
well represented and from a discipline that was represented as well, I decided not to
include her. In the end, I interviewed five female and six male faculty, born in eight
different foreign countries, and had passed their pre-tenure comprehensive review. All
professorial ranks were represented. Tables III. 1 and III.2 summarize the demographics
of the faculty, whom are identified by pseudonyms.
Table III.l Demographics of Foreign-Born Faculty
Respondent Country Rank Discipline Years in U.S. Degrees obtained in U.S.
Michelle W. Indies Professor Education 41 All degrees
Niraj India Professor Business 28 MS/PhD
Mahish India Professor Engineering 45 MS/PhD
Joseph T aiwan Professor Computer Science 32 MS/PhD
Ellen Canada Assoc. Prof. Criminal Justice 12 None
T eodor Romania Assoc. Prof. Mathematics 17 MS/PhD
Aurek Poland Assoc. Prof. Physics 34 PhD
Jenica Romania Asst. Prof. Mathematics 11 MS/PhD
Zaid Zimbabwe Asst. Prof. Geography 10 PhD
Eesha India Asst. Prof. Sociology 14 PhD
Amelia Italy Asst. Prof. Mathematics 5 None
Note. Gives faculty members name, country of origin, faculty rank, teaching discipline,
years in the United States, and the number of degrees obtained in the United States.
46


Table III.2 Demographics of Foreign-Born Faculty
Respondent Country Rank English as first language Years teaching Years teaching in US
Michelle W. Indies Professor Y 42 41
Niraj India Professor N 22 22
Mahish India Professor N 41 41
Joseph T aiwan Professor N 20 20
Ellen Canada Assoc. Prof. Y 17 11
T eodor Romania Assoc. Prof. N 16 16
Aurek Poland Assoc. Prof. N 34 34
Jenica Romania Asst. Prof. N 8 8
Zaid Zimbabwe Asst. Prof. N 5 5
Eesha India Asst. Prof. N 13 10
Amelia Italy Asst. Prof. N 9 5
Note. Gives faculty members name, country of origin, faculty rank, if English is the
persons first language, number of years teaching, and number of years teaching in the
United States.
Review of Research Methods
The phenomenological inquiry method that I used has three different processes
consisting of (a) bracketing my experiences, (b) interviewing the study participants to
find out their past and current experiences with the phenomena, and lastly by (c)
analyzing the data from the interviews. The following paragraphs summarize the method
I used.
First, I self-examined my personal ideas and assumptions with the phenomena in
order to obtain an idea of the experience. By doing this, I sought to approach the research
with an unbiased perspective (Creswell, 2007). In the second process, I investigated the
participants past and present experiences with the phenomena by conducting an
interview during which I asked them several questions. In order to gamer the
information I needed, I used in-depth interviewing, as recommended by Polkinghome
47


(1989), as my primary strategy. Similarly, Patton (2002) categorized interviews into
three types: the informal, conversational interview; the general interview with a guiding
approach; and the standardized open-ended interview. In-depth interviews are
conversation oriented and can be somewhat less formal than other forms. Although
simple yes and no answers could give me what I want to know, I was also interested in
obtaining additional information that more easily would come out by eliciting the
participants perspectives.
To determine personal information, I asked each faculty member in the study to
complete a basic demographic questionnaire, which was used to confirm my sample
characteristics and serve as a bias inhibitor, shown in Appendix A. This approach gave
me information about where the participants received their degrees, how long they have
been in the United States, their teaching experience, their rank and position, their gender,
and their native language, all which can work separately or come together to influence
mentoring relationships and, ultimately, their career success. Finally, I analyzed the data
obtained from the interviews. A more thorough description of the process I used to obtain
and analyze the data follows.
Interview Protocol
In phenomenological research, participants are commonly asked general, broad
questions (Moustakas, 1994). The overarching question for this study was what factors
affect the academic career success of foreign-bom faculty? The conceptual framework
found in Chapter 1 provided the foundation on which the study was conducted and the
other interview questions were developed. The questions, divided into three sections,
48


were asked in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the faculty members experiences
as a tenure track faculty member. I used the following interview protocol:
The first section on academic career success focused on finding out more about
the reasons the particular individual become a faculty member in an American
university and to what the foreign-born faculty attributed her or his academic
career success.
The section on the role of mentoring and social networks explored the experiences
the faculty members have with being mentored or being a mentor. It also
ascertained if other relationships, such as department social support or family
involvement, have helped her or him feel connected to the academic community.
Obstacles and motivation to succeed were examined the find out more about
different obstacles the faculty member may have experienced and what has
motivated her or him to overcome the obstacles and succeed.
The full set of interview questions, shown in Appendix B, were combined to form
broader, more open-ended questions (shown in Appendix C) in order to encourage an
open conversation about the faculty members experiences and their feelings, beliefs, and
convictions regarding the overarching question (Welman & Kruger, 1999). The
questions shown in Appendix C were used for the interviews.
Data Collection
In order to confirm that my research questions were stated clearly and the intent
of the question was understood, I conducted a trial interview with two foreign-bom
faculty researchers in non-tenure track positions. The information obtained from these
test interviews was not included in the findings; however, the results were useful to refine
49


the terminology of my questions and to ensure that the questions were clearly understood
and I had not used words that had the potential to be misunderstood.
Each interview was held in a location determined by the participant and lasted 60
to 90 minutes. I recorded the interviews using a digital tape recorder. I also took written
notes related to personal observations of the participant during the interview process.
Interviews were transcribed and returned to each participant for verification and
confirmation of what I had captured.
Data Analysis
In hermeneutics, analysis is not solely about semantics. Instead, it is about
thinking something through and finding a connection from the verbal text to what is
probable (Crotty, 1998). Some researchers talk about the hermeneutic circle, which
maintains that there is no certain starting point in the analysis of the written text
(Polkinghome, 1989). It is a mental, integrative process that looks carefully at each part,
then at the whole, and then returns to sections of the interview (Polkinghome, 1989).
With this in mind, and following both Polkinghomes and Creswells (2007)
recommendations, I began the analysis with bracketing my personal experiences with the
phenomenon.
Bracketing is the act of suspending judgment and preconceptions about the
natural world and to view the world as the participants see it and is a method used to
control bias. For this study, I sat down with a colleague not involved in the study and
articulated my personal thoughts, ideas, assumptions, and any biases I may have had
towards either foreign-bom faculty, their countries of origin, their language and
communication abilities, the different departments of which the faculty were members,
50


and what I knew of support systems offered to them. I also brought out any preconceived
ideas I had relating to what I would find when I analyzed the interviews.
The bracketing exercise forced me to realize these biases and set them aside so I
could approach the interviews and the analysis with no predetermined ideas of the
outcome based on gender, discipline, culture, language ability, or the specific department
and the university. The bracketing process, however, was not conducted only one time.
Instead, I found that occasionally my personal beliefs and suppositions would enter into
my analysis. When I realized that I was interjecting my own ideas into the study, I would
take a break and write down what I was thinking. This worked to clear my mind so I
could become more focused on the data as seen from the eyes of the faculty in the study.
To conduct the analysis, I used a combination of Creswells (2007) perspective on
data analysis, which is a combination of analytical techniques of Colaizzi (1978) and
Moustakas (1994), and open coding as explained by Strauss and Corbin (2008). The
Colaizzi and Moustakas combined method consists of multiple steps during which I
focuses on statements made by the studys participants. Significant statements were then
broken down into meanings and grouped into themes.
Open coding involves taking data, or in this case, words and phrases, and
examining them and breaking them down into ideas (Strauss & Corbin, 2008). To
employ the open coding method and to provide me with as thorough an understanding of
the interviews as possible, I listened and re-listened to the recorded interviews and read
the transcribed interviews multiple times. While a line-by-line examination of the data
could be used, that method tends to be very tedious. Instead, I concentrated on
paragraphs, sentences, and phrases, and broke these down into codes, which were then
51


formed into themes. In order to obtain a deeper understanding of the factors affecting the
career success of the participants, I coded each transcribed interview using terms derived
from the conceptual framework. After reviewing the conceptual framework (found in
Chapter I), I initially came up with 26 codes. Further readings and receiving input from
two independent coders resulted in a total of 30 codes. The resultant data were entered
into a spreadsheet on which I linked statements from each interview to the codes. This
provided a visual replication of all the codes as they were associated with each interview.
Once all interviews were coded and entered into the spreadsheet, clusters of sub-themes
were constructed. Using Colaizzis (1978) method, which consists of reviewing the
transcripts, picking out re-occurring phrases and words, and grouping the words or codes
into themes, I took the 30 codes and reduced them into three themes, as detailed in Table
III. 3 below. These themes related to the types of mentoring and social networking the
faculty experienced, obstacles they confronted, and motivational factors that played a role
in their career success.
52


Table III.3 Codes and Resultant Themes
Code
Theme
Gender-biased work environment
Feelings of being alone
No sense of community
Language accent
Adaptation
Assimilation
Homesickness
Food
Teaching and research as time consuming
Alienation/exclusion
Freedom to do what you want
Flexibility
Willing to put in extra effort
Family academics
Family expectations
Commitment to task
Confidence in abilities
Enjoyment in helping others
Perseverance
Stubbornness
Time commitment
Grant incentives
Family
Friends
Department Chair/Supervisor
Colleagues
Advisor
No guidance
Teaching Advice
Publishing collaborations
Obstacles: Striving for
a sense of belonging
Motivation: Internal
and External
Influences
Mentoring: Support
through Relationships
Note. The codes are the result of further analyzing the phrases selected from the
interviews. The themes are the result of reoccurring codes and the meaning of the codes.
Verification and credibility. Some of the qualitative procedures for ensuring
credibility include clarification of researcher bias, member checks, observation, peer
review, and debriefing (Creswell, 2007). To support the concepts of validity and
credibility, I followed Creswells recommendations and by bracketing my experiences
with the phenomena as explained earlier I ensured that I, as the interviewer, did not
influence the contents of the participants descriptions in such a way that the descriptions
53


did not truly reflect the participants actual experience. To ensure that the transcription
of the interviews was accurate and conveyed the meaning of the oral presentation in the
interview, I sent each participant a copy of her or his transcript, and asked that they
review and make any revisions they saw were needed to answer the question with the
information they intended. Three of the participants revised some of their answers;
another clarified what he had said because it was inaudible.
Intercoder reliability. To assist in confirming validity, I used the intercoder
reliability method. Using the codes that I had determined, two professional colleagues,
who have no interest in the study and do not know any of the studys participants, each
coded two of the interview transcripts. In order to give them the context of the study, I
reviewed the study with each and sent them the conceptual framework and the list of
codes that I had determined. Upon their completing the coding, we reviewed the results
together in a conference call. The independent coders added a total of four codes to the
original 26 I had first come up with. This gave a total of 30 codes. They agreed that the
codes I had developed were sufficient given the conceptual framework and the studys
focus. However, the ones that they suggested adding provided more insight into the lives
of the faculty and what some of the faculty saw was important to them. In three instances
the codes I used were not the exact words one of the independent coders noted she would
use. However, the meanings were the same so we agreed that the codes overlapped. In
another case, the word that I used was agreed upon. By using this method, I was assured
that the codes I had assigned were viable, and with the addition of the codes from the
independent coders I was confident in my analysis of the interviews.
54


Threats to validity. Validity refers to the idea that research is well-grounded and
supported (Polkinghome, 1998). Of concern to researchers are several concepts, among
which is if the interviewer in some way influenced the content of the interviews
(Polkinghome, 1998). A potential threat to the validity of my data collection could have
been from the close proximity of my work place with those of the participants. We are
faculty at the same university; however, none of the participants report to me or are in my
college. Two of the participants are fellow deans and we have frequent and close
interactions. I knew two of the other participants, but did not have a working relationship
with either other than occasionally being in a meeting together. I knew of, but had not
personally met, the other seven.
A related potential threat was the fact that as a dean and a professor, I am at a
higher rank than the majority of the participants. I did not get the impression that this
interfered with their telling of their stories, even though some of what they talked about
was personal. In fact, since the interviews I have talked with five of the participants.
They are very interested in my progress and have given me encouragement to research
this topic further. Finally, the age, gender, cultural, and racial differences between each
of the participants and me did not seem to present any problems. I took additional care to
ensure that I did not project a higher status nor did I say or infer anything that would
reinforce that I am an older, White female. After all, the studys participants are the ones
with their doctorate, not me.
55


CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Several studies confirm that foreign-bom faculty bring a wealth of talent and
productivity to the American economy, they substantially contribute to the scholarship
and research of American colleges and universities, and they augment the
internationalization activities within higher education (Chellaraj, Maskus, & Mattoo,
2006; Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Liu, 2001; Mamiseishvili, 2010; Marvasti, 2005;
Regets, 2007; Theobald, 2007). Manrique and Manrique (1999) note that foreign-born
scholars were becoming among the most visible symbols of the changing landscape
within todays academic institutions. Perhaps, then, one of the more important roles of
foreign-born faculty is that they serve as a resource for internationalizing the curriculum
and contributing to the global competence and citizenship of the campus, a focus to
which many colleges and universities are committed (Basti, 1996; Mamiseishvili, 2011).
The conceptual framework, given in Chapter 1 and below, around which this
study was organized, connects the factors associated with ones success in higher
education with the research on the experiences of foreign-bom faculty. The framework is
a graphic of circular arrows connecting the overall successes of foreign-bom faculty with
potential factors that lead to these successes.
56


C'areerSuccess
Pruaoti4jn
( orapirhfBwvr How*
Informal Mentoring
Rflrtiomhip*
Foreign Bom
i'acufn
Colleagues
(currait orpast)
DepL Chair
(current orpast)
Obstacles
Figure 1.1 Conceptual framework showing factors affecting the career success of foreign-bom faculty
This study, based on prior literature that recognizes foreign-born faculty
experience obstacles in their quest to achieve tenure and promotion, assumes that such
faculty are motivated by activities, people, and their own volition motivate them; and that
they receive encouragement and guidance from a variety of people. In addition, one
question, which sought to determine the factors that affect the academic career success of
foreign-born faculty, guided my research.
This chapter focuses on the three themes that surfaced after analyzing the
participant interviews and the inter-relationship of these themes with the literature as they
relate to the overall academic career success of the 11 foreign-born faculty interviewed.
All quotations are from responses of the participants to the open-response questions that
constituted the interviews.
57


The full set of interview questions with prompts appears in Appendix B.
Appendix C is the set of questions that was developed by combining the questions from
Appendix B. The questions in Appendix C were used to frame the discussion. The
questions in Appendix B were used to obtain additional information in the event the
participant did not understand what I asked or if he or she was having difficulty
answering what was asked.
I posited that foreign-born faculty experienced obstacles much like those of their
native-born counterparts but also faced additional obstacles. I also speculated that
foreign-born faculty were motivated by both internal and external factors, and received
support and guidance in the way of mentoring (whether informal or formal) and support
from social networks such as friends. What I found follows.
Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging
Like most faculty, these foreign-born faculty were faced with obstacles in their
academic careers. Finding ones way as he or she becomes an effective teacher and
finding the time to accomplish the research that needs to be done to achieve tenure are
fairly common across academia.
Communication Obstacles
To be an effective teacher, faculty needs to communicate well verbally. Without
adequate communication skills, even those with significant discipline or subject expertise
can fail in the sense that students can become disengaged from the lesson (Kavas &
Kavas, 2008; Liu, 2004). The majority of the faculty in this study found that, irrespective
of the number of years that they had spoken English, dialect, accent, and other
interpersonal communications issues were difficulties for which they had to make
58


adjustments. For some it was easy. For others it was not. Zaid, an assistant professor
from Zimbabwe, stated that occasionally he found himself thinking that if he had an
American accent, his teaching scores would have been higher. Statements similar to that
illustrate the concern the faculty had with respect to their language ability. This faculty
had to make a concerted effort to become more proficient with American English, in
particular, oral English, and, to a lesser extent, written English. It has come down to
wanting to have a sense of belonging to the society in which they were living and
teaching.
Oral communication challenges. English is an official language in 52 countries
and is spoken by nearly one-third of the worlds population (ONeil, 2009). Nonetheless,
English is a language that differs among countries and, in particular, cultures. Regional
dialects are present in many cultures, as are accents. It is these dialects and accents that
may interfere with the teaching effectiveness of foreign-born faculty (Kavas & Kavas,
2008; Marvasti, 2005).
Ten of the eleven faculty had, what they considered, a suitable level of English
proficiency when they arrived in the United States. Of these ten, English was the first
language for two of the faculty. For the other eight, English was not their primary
language when growing up. As told below, seven of the ten faculty recounted some
anxiety in the classroom due to their language proficiency.
One of the studys participants is a native English language speaker. Canadian
English is this facultys first language. While the difference seems to be insignificant, it
is a difference that has caused her some discomfort and embarrassment and has not been
overlooked by some students. As Ellen, an associate professor from Canada, mentioned,
59


I had some students who kept a tally of the number of times I said au [Canadian
raising dialect]. Ellens discomfort was not because the students could not understand
what she was saying, nor was it because she was an ineffective instructor. Rather, it was
because they would laugh and mimic her accent when she talked. She was both
embarrassed and worried that such denigration might adversely affect her teaching
ratings.
The language differences Eesha related were similar to Ellens and supported the
research and indicates that accents alert people to a cultural difference, which can lead
some students to become critical of the accent (Marvasti, 2005; Mamiseishvili, 2010;
Kevas & Kevas, 2008). Eesha, an assistant professor from South Asia, fluently speaks
five languages, of which English is one. She has lived in several foreign countries and
has degrees from three different countries, including the United States. Even so, different
dialects and accents were a common obstacle with all of this studys participants. As
Eesha explained,
I came to the US straight from England and my accent used to be very
obviously English. Students would write in my evaluations that I sound
like the Queen and that I was a bit snobbish. I had to work on it, I had to
try to mellow out and sound a little bit American.
Like Eesha, Zaid, born and raised in Zimbabwe, learned English as a small child.
English was the primary language during his undergraduate and masters degree
years in Zimbabwe. He then went on to receive his doctorate in the United States,
where English became his primary language. Regardless of the fact that Zaid has
spent over 20 years speaking English almost daily, he has experienced several
language-related issues, which include accent, spelling, and pronunciation.
60


My accent is Britishspelling and pronunciation. So it becomes
challenging when you see blank faces on students. You think someone
says, the route (pronounced root) to Denver is on 1-25, it may take
people a minute to understand that you meant route and not root. You
have a few students who initially dont appreciate that diversification and
that they could learn a few things from this guy and where hes from.
Then you find students who appreciate it and take that into account when
they are evaluating you. It could be that your evaluations are a bit lower,
but I think that comes with the territory.
It is experiences like Zaids, Eeshas, and Ellens that demonstrate some of the difficult
interactions between foreign-born faculty and native-born students. With respect to
Zaids and Eeshas experiences, the conflict was both a language gap and a cultural gap.
Whereas Ellens conflict stemmed from a language gap of which her accent was the
trigger. As Kavas and Kavas (2008) reported, some foreign-born faculty experience what
they call the oh, no! syndrome which characterizes the students reactions when finding
out their teacher has a foreign accent.
Similarly, Niraj, a professor who was born and raised in South Asia, found that he
had to work diligently to reduce his accent and improve his speech patterns in order to not
be discriminated against. He said that his own experiences as an undergraduate student
in the United States showed him how difficult it can be to follow someone with a
different accent and dialect. The reaction voiced by Niraj supported the notion that
students perceptions of teachers with different accents or speech patterns than theirs
react unfavorably because they may not be able to understand the lectures and might do
poorly in the course (Borjas, 2000; Kavas & Kavas, 2008).
When graduate students would come in to teach, and if they were from
Eastern Asia, I would say, Oh, I wont be able to follow them. So I
didnt want remarks like that put on me. I had to work on my accent. It
was difficult because I did not get good scores my first semester, which
was very disappointing.
61


Eesha, Niraj, and Ellen experienced the ramifications of having an accent different from
the students they teach. Eesha strived to minimize her accent in order to sound less
snobbish. Niraj worked hard to lessen his South Asian accent so his students would
understand him and comprehend his lectures. Ellen? It has been these language gaps that
have enriched students lives and has provided them with a global experience without the
need of participating in international travel opportunities, such as study abroad.
To counter the possibility of a negative experience, some faculty introduced new
or different teaching strategies as mentioned below to communicate effectively with their
students. Zaid, for one, desired to be successful and was convinced that he would be
judged on his accent because he knew he would be evaluated on things that other
Americans may not be assessed on, such as his accent. Although he found the process
challenging, his teaching evaluations were high. Zaid still has an accent, but his high
teaching evaluations quite possibly have been due in part to the time he has taken time to
know his students and to encourage them to know more about him and where he is from.
What I do in my classes is that the first two slides are about me and my
background and where I am from. Then I talk a little about Zimbabwe and
then I give them that background. I tell them that initially, I am going to
be repeating things and talking more slowly until we get to the point
where you get used to my accent. And they are comfortable and
appreciate what I do.
Zaid made a point to introduce African culture to his students and encouraged them to
share their backgrounds. He turned what others may have regarded as a negative into a
positive trait and a means by which to encourage students to learn about differences and
to become more interested in other countries in the world. With this approach to his
teaching, Zaid sought to bridge the language and well as the cultural gap that seemed to
exist in the classroom. He used his accent to create a rich learning environment.
62


Like Zaid, Aurek found that taking an obstacle and turning it into an opportunity
worked well. Aurek, an associate professor from Poland, was the sole faculty member in
the study who arrived in the United States with very little English proficiency. Upon
finding that, as a first year doctoral student, his teaching assignment was to run a lab for
pharmacy students, he made an agreement that I would teach them something about
physics and they would teach me English. This approach was well received. By being
forthright about his lack of English language skills, Aurek felt that he was able to turn
what could have been a very difficult period in his first teaching assignment into a
positive one.
Interpersonal communication challenges. Interpersonal exchanges are also
among the language and communication obstacles related by the participants related.
Many of the interpersonal challenges described by the faculty had a cultural facet.
Cultural gaps exist because of differences in socialization and the discrepancies in
classroom expectations (citation). Cultural differences affect the ways students relate and
respond to faculty who are different from them (Diamini, 2002; Hamilton, 2002; Kavas
& Kavas, 2008). It is these differences that the faculty wanted to avoid, and when they
noticed confusion among their students, some, like Eesha and Zaid, took steps to erase
any misunderstandings that occurred.
People who move to a different culture as adults take with them those traits and
personal identities that they developed as a child. It is within these traits and identities
that cultural values and beliefs lie. What is considered acceptable in one culture to
discuss with others is not necessarily so in other cultures. For example, Eesha recalled
that it has been somewhat difficult getting used to local customs and the decreased level
63


of privacy exhibited among her colleagues. Discussing ones private life was not a
lunchtime topic that she was accustomed to engage in. According to Eesha, there was a
bit of culture shock. She was used to a more formal, yet collegial, environment.
Adjustments had to be made, adjustments related to how she interacted with office mates
and her students. She wanted to appear normal and strong to her students as well as
her teaching colleagues.
Nonetheless, she found a few things were difficult for her to understand and
accept. Over the past few years, she slowly became more accustomed to the informality
and open nature of conversations with others in her department and in particular with her
students. Although this has been somewhat difficult for her, she has become used to
being told too much information at times.
This type of cultural gap was also encountered by Zaid, who found the lack of
formality in the American university setting somewhat disturbing.
You are used to addressing your professors by their titles, but then you
have someone who just says, Hey, Zaid! The Zimbabwe system is the
British system and there is a huge gap between the instructor and the
student and you maintain that gap. You wouldnt say those kinds of
things. So there is a gap and sometimes you want someone who
appreciates those kinds of things. I mean those things are small, but it
makes a difference.
According to Zaid, this can be seen as a small thing, but it made a difference to him. He
realized that he was appreciated and respected by his students. However, to counteract
the feelings of not being appreciated due to the informality of some of the students, he
has made a conscious effort to learn more about the cultural differences and the
differences in the educational systems. He also reached out to a fellow Zimbabwean who
teaches in the Southeastern region of the United States, and the two of them discussed the
64


differences of the cultures at the universities where they teach.
In addition to the cultural differences regarding the level of privacy she described,
some of Eeshas students held beliefs about the provocative topics that she raised in the
classroom
Other obstacles are sometimes in the classroom I am viewed as a foreigner
so when I discuss controversial issues they think I have a personal agenda
or something, which is not the case. The odd part is I am teaching from
the syllabus whatever I am required to teach. But just because it is being
delivered by me there are one or two student who will start wondering,
wait a minute, she is trying to be critical. And I am a sociologist and I
have to refute that. I have to make them think. I have to push their
boundaries. Sometimes I think if I were a regular American professor
here they wouldnt even think twice that I raised these questions. But just
because of my foreign status. So thats a drawback.
For Eesha, these instances served as an opportunity to introduce her students to different
cultures and different ways of thinking. They also gave her a chance to reinforce her role
as a sociologist and to encourage her students to think critically.
Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation
Coping with some feelings of loneliness and isolation, or experiencing alienation
was indicated by 50% of the participants. Inclusion within the American higher
education system has, for several years, been discussed and debated.
Feelings of aloneness have been prevalent for Jenica, beginning with her arrival in
the United States to begin her coursework for a masters degree and then a doctorate. Not
only did Jenica, an assistant professor from Romania, not know anyone in the United
States when she moved here to work on her masters degree but once she started her
coursework, she also found that she felt very much isolated in her efforts to become a
good teacher and scholar. Could she reach out to others for support? Yes, but, as she
mentioned, the cultural divide gave her pause:
65


I have been feeling pretty much alone in my efforts to become a good
teacher and scholar. I get the feeling that the senior faculty in my
department have long gone over the stressful phase of the tenure track and
have not made any effort to be supportive of the junior faculty. Coming
from a culture that respects seniority greatly, I have been reluctant to ask
for guidance from these faculty.
Her sense of aloneness was rooted in the attitudes projected by senior faculty and her
hesitancy to seek help because she did not want to disturb them. These same feelings of
isolation were experienced by Eesha, but her explanation for her isolation differed.
When she was a doctoral student and now as a scholar, Eesha believed that her feelings
of al oneness were a by-product of her research and her areas of study, which have
interfered somewhat with her ability to make a core group of friends here in the United
States. As she remarked,
Being a doctoral student can be a lonely process, because your research is
yours and no matter your committee or whoever you have at the end of the
day, you are on your own with your data. That is one aspect and my
research was international research which means I was going to different
countries to get my data. I was not even here.
Unlike the others, Michelle, who is a full professor from the West Indies and moved to
the United States as a college freshman, experienced different feelings of being all by
ones self shortly after she took her first teaching position in the United States.
Michelles al oneness was a product of being put in charge of developing a new program
of study and having no resources to consult in order to establish and grow the program.
During the middle of the first semester, my dean called me in and told me
he was very disappointed in my performance. He said we got you here so
that you could create a reading department and you have done nothing at
all except teach. I was horrified. Nobody has ever called me incompetent
before. This was my first semester. I thought I would be able to fit in
some place. Nobody said here is a book you can use. No. It was, heres
your office and that was it. You were left alone. It was a very hard time.
Aloneness, isolation, and alienation involve different feelings. Michelle reflected on
66


receiving no help as she struggled to create a new program. Eesha, on the other hand,
talked about feelings of being alone and being left to ones own devices with respect to
conducting her research, which took her out of the country, making her not readily
available to cultivate friendships. Ellen and Aurek, on the other hand, experienced
alienation through unfriendliness, hurtful comments, and some hostility. Ellens feelings
of alienation stemmed from a skewed vision of the capabilities of our Canadian
neighbors:
The Canadian thing was more of a joke and most of the time I can laugh it
off. But it is sometimes these negative comments, the sarcasm about
Canada. It is petty things like, well, youre Canadian, how much could
you know? I dont know why people do it.
To counter these types of incidents, Ellen learned to laugh at herself and often would
make a Canuk joke. She has recognized that she is an accomplished researcher, but, to
her dismay, she occasionally would experience feelings of alienation and some hostility,
because she is Canadian.
Aureks feelings of alienation partly are due to his reticence to share the macho
image of his departmental colleague. Although he has male friends and gets along well
with his brother who is also an academician in the same discipline, Aurek acknowledged
that he is considerably more comfortable in the company of women and described what
he saw as a profound gender bias in his department.
One of the obstacles is the profound gender bias in my department. Since I
am comfortable in general around men and much more comfortable
around females even going to conferences is difficult. I cannot stand the
atmosphere which is 90-95% male and I just feel totally alienated. I feel
alienated in our tiny department. I feel very little contact with anybody
else because they are all males and they cant quite understand what is
wrong with me.
67


Nevertheless, Aurek did not let these feelings of alienation deter him from becoming
tenured and a respected member of the campus. Yet, he has made a conscious effort to
let his colleagues know how he felt when their comments became alienating to him. He
said he attends department meetings and when the locker room mentality comes out, he
steps forward and requests that his colleagues step back and asks them to
Stop your curt jokes which I dont understand, or I will come back when
you guys are done so we can get back to the business that we need to do.
Im not trying to change you, you can be whoever you want to be, but I
will wait.
It is this kind of thinking that has come from years of experience and the
knowledge that he has achieved what he has wanted. He related that he liked
teaching, he enjoyed being at the university, and little by little he was trying to set
a different, more accepting, tone in his department.
These four faculty are aware of loneliness due to leaving friends and family,
moving to a new country thousands of miles away, speaking a new language, arriving in
a new land with a different cultural background, or not receiving assistance and being left
alone to figure things out and develop a new program. Although native-born faculty
may experience feelings of aloneness due to moving to a new part of the country or to a
new academic setting, foreign-bom faculty are also likely to experience alienation and
feelings of aloneness and being different because of the cultural and language differences
they have to suffer.
Feelings of Differentness
Aureks feelings of alienation quite possibly are the result of his culture, a culture
that projects warmth and friendliness, a culture that thinks nothing of greeting someone
with a peck on the cheek or a hug, and a culture that has a tendency to be forthcoming of
68


ones thoughts (Schumacher, 2011). These feelings may also result from Aureks being a
member of a good old boy department, where those who are different tend to be left out
(Manrique & Manrique, 1999).
Other feelings of being different arose from having darker skin. As a dark
skinned South Asian, Mahish remarked that he has been subjected to some bias because
of the color of his skin as well as his country of origin.
You can say anything about this country getting away from racism but it
exists a lot. I would say that many people, not just of color, but maybe
like Eastern Europeans, even South Americans who are the same color. I
think for them they are brought up in a different society to look at things a
little bit differently so they are a little more subservient than the locals. So
color has a lot to do with it.
Michelle, a professor who grew up in the West Indies, has experienced similar feelings
and said that she never wanted anyone to think she was appointed to her job because of
her ethnicity. She also mentioned that no one can afford to be normal if you are the only
black woman on campus. However, as a Jamaican, she described herself as in the cleft
culturally and has found that her culture has been a source of confusion and added more
preconceptions about her than simply the fact that she has dark skin.
Many black adults feel I am not black, because my culture is a lot closer to
Croatians. My speech, my language, my being is in the cleft. African
Americans do not think I am black enough and Caucasians think I am
black, so there I stand in the cleft.
Teaching and Research Obstacles
For some faculty, whether native-born or foreign-born, becoming a good teacher
can be a demanding undertaking and threaten ones success. For five of the eleven
faculty, this was the case. As Joseph, a professor from Taiwan, mentioned
Teaching is very critical. I am very comfortable in terms of research, but
in terms of teaching and public speaking, I am not very comfortable at all.
69


The first thing I needed to do was how to make my lecture well organized.
I think students can find out how much effort you bring to teaching just by
looking at the organization of your content. But, there was no help. So I
found out I better find out how to teach, what is a good way to help
students and to organize my lectures, so I went to the library, and the
librarian helped guide me and found me some books and tapes. That
helped.
Even though Jenica had teaching experience as a graduate student, she still found
teaching as a faculty member to be somewhat difficult.
I have had my share of challenges. In terms of teaching, the hardest part
has been to adjust to a different student demographic, to find a common
ground with kids who have not been outside the country or the state, but
have also not been exposed to a lot of diversity in their own lives here.
Unfortunately, I have not found much help with my teaching.
It is, however, through teaching that foreign-born faculty can have the best effect on their
students (Mamiseishvili, 2010, 2011). Becoming and remaining an effective teacher
takes time, as some of the faculty mentioned. Amelia was a tenured professor in her
native country of Italy before she took a tenure track position in the United States, and
she has been teaching in the US for several years. However, she has continued to find it
to takes a considerable amount of time and effort in order to be prepared. Even though
her department has tried to accommodate her if she has a schedule conflict, she has found
it challenging when she has multiple preparations such as when she teaches two or even
three different courses, in a language that is not her first language.
Similarly, Jenica has also found that between her teaching and research
commitments she has little time for anything else. Like Amelia and the others, she
teaches an average load of two classes one semester and three another. On top of this,
she has an aggressive research agenda.
70


Although finding time to accomplish what is needed to be an effective teacher and
a productive researcher is not unique to foreign-born faculty, the one factor foreign-born
faculty experience that native-born faculty typically do not is the requirement to prepare
and execute their lesson plans in English. As Zaid explained
And then, for teaching, if English is not your first language you have to
have everything ready before class. You cant improvise so there is a lot
of preparation.
English fluency more commonly is a factor that affects ones teaching ability, or at the
least ones perceived teaching ability (Theobald, 2007). Likewise, fluency is also
connected to where one obtained their college degrees, country of origin, and ethnicity
(Theobald, 2007). Nonetheless, other reasons appertain for some of the teaching and
research discrepancies between foreign-born and native-born faculty, of which the type of
academic institution and the rigor of the universitys research expectations.
On the other hand, faculty, in spite of the fact that they worried about their
teaching ability and language skills in the classroom, have received encouragement and
excitement from teaching. Zaid was one of the faculty who appreciated the flexibility he
had been given and the ability to develop new courses for the curriculum. He also
understood the importance of his position as a teacher.
You learn to love something once you are in it. Just like some of my
students who are taking my course because they are required. Its my role
to excite them and let them know that this is a serious career, this is what
you can do and this is how much you can earn once you are done. So
thats how I treat my students, because some are taking the courses
because theyve been asked to take them, and then my role is to change
their minds.
When it came to discussing the challenges they have experienced regarding their
research, two of the faculty admitted they would benefit from having someone to assist in
71


the writing of grants and to proofread manuscripts. Regardless that he has received
several grants, Joseph remarked that it would be most helpful to him if someone would
proofread grant proposals. Some of this is simply because of the need to ensure
everything that is needed in the proposal was there. However, another part was the need
to have someone make sure the correct English terms and sentence structure has been
used.
Zaid needed assistance in writing because it took so much time to write in
English. English was not his first language, and many times he found that he had to
translate his thoughts into English.
If you want to write at the level of English speaking people, its going to
take a long time. It takes me double or triple the amount of time. Some of
my ideas I think about in my native language and then I have to translate
them.
Zaids publishing in English concern was not unfounded. However, not all foreign-born
faculty find they have to publish in English. Concurrently, not all native-born faculty
publish in English as ones research focus and discipline can dictate the language in
which the research is written. The fact remains that editors have found that they face
predicaments when editing manuscripts submitted by non-native researchers (Pagel,
Kendall, & Gibbs, 2002).
Mahish offered this explanation on conducting research for something more than
for the sake of simply fulfilling an obligation.
I think being in an academic institution is a unique position. First of all, it
introduces you to a lot of bright minds. When I came here, I came with a
multiple purpose of doing research, which is applicable to the local
industry. The interest in doing things for society, for the students is
somehow in my blood.
72


Visa Obstacles
Possessing the proper documents that allow an individual to live and work in the
United States is a multifaceted obstacle and one that all foreign-bom faculty confront.
Obtaining work permits and residency documents have become considerably more
complex and difficult since the September 11, 2001, events at the World Trade Center.
It is widely accepted that American immigration policies are confusing and
complex (Liu, 2004). The participants in this study were typical of other foreign-born
faculty in that they all had to obtain the appropriate visa in order to live and work in the
United States, regardless of whether they were here as a student or if they came to work.
The differences among the faculty in this study are more disparate because a little over
half of them arrived in the United States no fewer than 16 years ago, during a time when,
even though there were immigration policies and the need for proper work
documentation, the process was both easier and quicker. None of the faculty who had
been here 16 or more years mentioned having problems obtaining a work visa. However,
the remaining five mentioned visa challenges.
Among the complications experienced by the faculty included concern and stress
over the length of time it took to obtain the needed work permits. Amelia, an assistant
professor from Italy, recounted the feelings of stress that she felt as she was getting ready
to move to the United States to teach.
I still remember those six to eight hours after I moved here. I unpacked
everything and then I panicked. I was even sick, and thats because it was
very stressful with the visa because this is one of the things that makes life
hard if you are a foreign-bom faculty member. The J-l (student) visas are
a lot easier to get. But I moved here in August and was waiting for the H-
1 visa. It arrived 11 hours before my flight.
73


Another challenge the faculty faced has been the requirement that one must be a legal
resident of the United States in order to apply for most federal grants. Frequently,
obtaining grants are part of a colleges tenure and promotion criteria. With only six years
to obtain tenure, an urgency exists to receive permanent residency in order to apply for
and be awarded grants.
Eesha lamented that she currently was here on an H-1B visa and did not have
permanent residency, which made her ineligible to apply for grants. To her, her
residency status was a catch 22 situation. She needed to obtain grants in order to pass
her comprehensive review and ultimately receive tenure. However, she has been unable
to be awarded some grants because she does not have her permanent residency papers.
H-1B visas are not, however, the only document by which many of this studys
participants initially came to the United States. As Jenica mentioned, J-l visas, which are
given to students coming to the United States to study, are easier to get. A full 82% of
the participants in this study obtained at least one degree in the United States. Therefore,
only two of the 11 participants needed to obtain an H-l visa either prior to or shortly
upon arriving in the United States to teach. One emigrated here from Canada. Between
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and her ability to come here on a
spousal visa, she did not experience the delays and the stress the others did. However,
she was fortunate because she entered the U.S. as a spouse as well as under NAFTA. As
Ellen mentioned,
I actually wanted to stay in Canada, but I also wanted to be at a big PhD
school. I came down with my ex-husband; he was my husband at the
time. He was a dual citizen, and they had run out of J-l visas by the time I
came, so some schools would actually not have been able to bring me in
on a J.
74


Each of the other nine were originally here as students and worked either as a teaching
assistant or a research assistant while obtaining a doctorate. Only when they accepted a
teaching position and decided to remain in the United States were they required to apply
for their legal work permits and eventually apply for permanent residency.
Generational differences around residency seemed to exist as well. The faculty
who had been here longer than 10 years did not express concern with obtaining a visa.
As I discussed in Chapter 2, those who have come to the United States after September
11, 2001 have fallen under stricter visa requirements. It is the newer faculty who talked
about the stress and the challenges obtaining the appropriate work documentation.
Being faced with challenges tends to be a normal part of becoming a tenured
faculty member. Some of the obstacles experienced by foreign-bom faculty include
those commonly held by native-born faculty. However, there are unique challenges
foreign-born faculty face. Among these are feelings of loneliness, isolation or alienation;
cultural and language differences; teaching and research challenges; and problems getting
work permits, visas, and a green card (Collins, 2008, Nimoh, 2010).
For the faculty in this study, the obstacles the studys participants have
experienced varied because their cultures and backgrounds were different. In particular,
some have been in the U.S. since they were graduate students; others moved to the U.S.
to take a teaching position, after they had either attended graduate school in their home
country or, in one case, had been a tenured faculty member at an university in the region
where she grew up. Furthermore, each country has its own culture consisting of values,
attitudes, goals, and practices. For these reasons as well as others, the obstacles that
presented problems for some were not the exact same as those that were concerns or
75


discomforts for others. Nonetheless, all faculty were confronted with hurdles they had to
meet in order to move forward. Among the obstacles the faculty brought up,
communication and linguistic skills were the most common, followed by feelings of
aloneness, alienation, and isolation. Visa and immigration issues were prevalent among
the more junior faculty. Although not an obstacle for all, becoming a good teacher was
mentioned as a challenge for several of the faculty. Finally, an over-riding obstacle was
culture, which was embedded in each facultys professional life.
Finding Support Through Relationships
A central finding in the research indicates that mentoring has a positive effect on
ones career success. Additional research points to another dimension of mentoring that
involves more casual, less structured relationships as well as those that have been coined
as mentoring episodes and are more short term in duration (Fletcher & Ragins, 2007;
Kram & Ragins, 2007). These mentoring episodes can also be thought of as informal
mentoring or mutual mentoring as discussed by Trower (2010) and described in the
Mellon Mutual Mentoring Initiative, sponsored by the Mellon Foundation. This study,
however, found that very little formal mentoring has taken place. Instead, informal
mentoring and mentoring episodes were more frequent.
Mentoring episodes and mutual mentoring cross over into an area that can also be
thought of as social networking. Social interactions and interpersonal relationships are a
feature in the successful adaptation of foreign-born individuals to a new cultural
environment (Boice, 1982; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Menges, 1999). A growing
body of research suggests social engagement plays an important part in the performance
and ultimate success of individuals (Ewing et al., 2008; Fontaine & Millen, 2004;
76


Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne, & Kraimer, 2001; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Following, I
present the results that pertain to the experiences of the participants with formal or
informal mentoring programs, generational differences among the faculty with respect to
mentoring expectations, and social engagements with friends and family.
Formal Mentoring Experiences
When asked about their mentoring experiences, the faculty who had received tenure
more than 15 years ago remarked that they had no real mentoring, whether formal or
informal. Joseph, an engineering sciences professor from Taiwan and a 31 year resident
of the United States, was typical of the other more senior faculty in the study when he
recalled that mentoring programs were non-existent. As a faculty member, he had to seek
help on his own. He explained that he received encouragement from senior faculty and
mentioned that he got lucky because the junior faculty tended to help one another.
However, the faculty had no expectation that anyone would be available to provide
advice and to answer questions. You were expected to know what to do. You were
expected to make your own connections and establish your own networks with whom to
collaborate.
During the time when the senior faculty members were new in their careers,
finding ones own way was typical. Niraj mentioned that he did not think about getting a
mentor because he didnt know what life was like and he had no pre-conceived ideas
when he joined the ranks of tenure track faculty. In fact, the idea of mentoring was never
mentioned, neither as a student nor as a junior faculty member. He seemed to know that
if he was going to be successful, he had to find his own way. Like Joseph, Niraj took
the initiative and reached out to his department colleagues for advice. His outgoing
77


personality served him well as he forged new friendships and developed a network of
colleagues with whom he could interact and seek advice.
I think the good thing was that the faculty are really good in my college.
They have a way of just helping each other out. It just happens. There
was no formal mentoring program but if you reached out to someone, they
would respond to you. I felt support all the time.
Aurek, an associate professor who has been in the United States for nearly 30 years, had a
similar experience. He noted that faculty were left on their own to decipher what was
needed to pass the comprehensive review and then to become a tenured associate
professor. He credits the fact that he not only had teaching experience as a doctoral
student, but he also worked in a post-doctoral job prior to accepting a tenure track
position. It was these experiences that provided him with a basic understanding of the
expectations of the job, and he has been able to reach the level of success he has wanted.
When asked about his mentoring experiences, Mahish, a college dean from South
Asia and a veteran faculty member with more than 40 years in higher education in the
United States, reflected that he received no advice. Even though he sought help from a
senior faculty member, that person basically said no. Much like Aurek, Mahishs prior
work experience prepared him to be self-sufficient.
It was Michelle, however, who summed up the stories from the senior faculty
when she remarked that
There was no mentoring. Lest it be thought of negatively, lest it give the
impression that the University was a heartless thing, we need to remember
the psychological climate of the time. It was in the 70s, it wasnt even in
the 90s or the 80s. In the 70s people were not that touchy feely. We didnt
have people come in and try to make it nice. You came in as a
professional. Heres what you are supposed to do, heres the book that
tells you how to get tenure, get on with it.
These were stories that supported the notion that more senior faculty achieved their
78


academic career successes with very little, if any, formal or structured assistance from
others in their departments or universities. The help they received was what they
personally sought. It was not readily offered. In most cases, though, it was there if they
took the initiative to ask.
On the other hand, Jenica, an assistant professor who recently passed her
comprehensive review, stated
I was also contacted by the mentoring program director that was
implemented a couple years ago. The director was willing to facilitate a
mentoring connection with faculty of my choice. For some reason, I never
followed up on that. I felt like I didnt know what direction to go with it,
as I didnt really know many people and who I would like to have as
mentors. I have a better idea now, and am planning to initiate those
relationships.
Jenica was the only study participant who had been approached to join a formal
mentoring program. She declined because she was unsure about the program, the
purpose, and how it was set up. Instead, she has reached out to colleagues on her own
and established informal mentoring relationships that have given her emotional support.
In this case, the opportunity of being part of a formal mentoring program was made to the
faculty member, but the unknown of what the benefits would be was a deterrent.
Informal Mentoring Experiences
All of the faculty discussed having some type of informal mentoring as a faculty
member. The informal mentoring experiences in this study were unstructured, were
varied, and were numerous. For example, one of the senior faculty related what
happened after one of the Universitys high level administrators walked by one of her
classrooms.
What has made the biggest difference [in my career success] is not a what,
it is a who. It is Marsha. Fifteen or 20 years ago, I was teaching my class.
79


Marsha walked past my room and heard me teach and said to call her. I
think at that time she was a dean [in another college]. She said to me,
Listen, your message needs to get out. I didnt want that at all. She
said, Your message must get out and Im going to get involved in this.
And before I knew it I was teaching a course that aired in 50 states and 7
countries. Before I knew it I was on Mind Extension. Before I knew it I
was up for the Presidential Teaching Scholarship, and before I knew it I
had an endowment.
Because of her trust in me, I know I am not supposed to mess up. I
have pushed more because of her, not pushing, but support of me, of my
program, my work. I feel my success is owed to her.
Younger faculty, like Jenica, readily talked about the alliances they have made with their
doctoral advisors, which set the stage for ties with senior colleagues and others in their
field. To them, these people were their mentors, a word they all readily used. While
none of these associations were what is commonly thought of as a formal mentoring
relationship, they were, for the most part, informal ones that just happened.
For example, Eesha, an assistant professor, readily referred to two womens
studies activists with whom she has discussed her research focus as her mentors. These
women are not her University colleagues, nor were they part of her doctoral advising
team. However, they were professionals in her research field with whom she has
connected and reached out to for advice and guidance. It is this experience that supported
the notion that a mentor need not be someone from ones department or university. In
this case, the connection has been the field of specialty.
Graduate advisors, however, most frequently were referred to as being a mentor.
Although one could argue that graduate advisors are expected to advise and coach, which
are two of the provisions of formal mentoring, once the student receives her or his
doctorate and joins the ranks of others in academic teaching and research positions, this
more formal relationship of teacher and student evolves into a less formal one much like
80


peers consulting with one another and working together (Trower, 2010). Ellens
experiences fit that example.
Her name is Susan and she was my dissertation advisor. I was in a big
school with over 200 PhD students. You could really get lost there. The
thing I liked about her was she could have suggested that I work on her
data like the other grad students. But she didnt. She said, You are much
better off with sole-authored work.
Ellen found she had the turned the corner and was no longer the student. Instead, she was
a colleague, a peer, someone who, like her former advisor, was collecting data, working
on grants, teaching, and considered a scholar. It was, however, with Susans advice and
guidance that Ellen was able to move from being a student to being a respected scholar.
Teodor, an associate professor from Romania, credited his PhD advisor for being
one of the most influential people in his career. His advisor introduced him to this area of
research and guided him through what a good practice is, how much effort you should
put into one problem, how much you should expect, and how to judge a problem as being
one that should be solved or not. Teodor and his advisor had a very strong relationship
that lasted long past his receiving his doctorate. In fact, in the middle of his masters
degree, Teodors advisor moved to another state to teach. Teodor also moved. As he
mentioned
The most influential person was my PhD advisory because he introduced
me to this area of research and guided me through what a good practice is,
how much effort you should put into one problem, how much to expect.
On the same par, I would put my post doc advisor. Extraordinary. Both
were extraordinary good personalities and extremely pleasant to work with
and true professors.
In addition to his graduate advisors, Teodors undergraduate advisor was an important
person in his early academic schooling. Long after Teodor received his degree, his
undergraduate advisor continued to offer advice, even though he was thousands of miles
81


away on another continent.
The collaborations and the mentorships I have had were the greatest
contributors to my success. I went back this summer after I got tenure and
talked to my undergraduate advisor. [I was] blown away by how
unchanged that person has been, despite all the environment and the care
he gives to his students and former students. Like what to do with the
tenure now and things that are so relevant and he is remote from the
system. That is the kind of discussion that Ive never had with my
colleagues here.
The relationship with ones advisor, whether it continued once one left student life and
became a member of academia or not, was seen as a powerful one in which there was
guidance and coaching. This relationship helped shape this particular students future
research. In the case of the majority of the faculty in this study, their advisors were key
in their moving from being a student to becoming a scholar. In fact, so important have
advisors been to the faculty, those who have received tenure reported that they make a
conscious effort to become effective mentors for their own graduate students.
Mutual Mentoring
Working collaboratively with colleagues was a shared experience of all but one of
the faculty. Although collaborations were not, per se, mentoring, they did share some of
the same characteristics. Most collaborator relationships built on a common goal and
provided a positive sense of accomplishment, much like informal or mutual mentoring.
One characteristic of a mutual mentoring was receiving advice and being
encouraged to publish and apply for grants, as illustrated by Jenica who talked about
several of her current and former collaborations.
I have collaborated with both former grad school colleagues and new
colleagues here. Both types have been very helpful and useful. On the one
hand, they pushed me to be more productive.
82


Jenicas mutual mentoring relationships have taken the place of more formal alliances,
which she would have made had she accepted the offer to participate in her campus
mentoring program or had she felt comfortable asking senior faculty in her department
for advice.
Taking a bit different approach, Ellen found that her collaborations have been a
result of the connections she made as a faculty member at other institutions. Serving as a
co-principal investigator on several grants opened doors for her and gave her a solid
foundation on which to build. As Ellen stated
I walked in the door with a half million dollar grant. I collaborated with
people from one university. I started working with another person who
left for Florida, but now she is in Colorado. Everything I do is
collaboration.
Some faculty established long standing collaborative relationships through post-doctoral
fellowships. Heeding the advice of her former PhD advisor, Amelia accepted a post-
doctoral fellowship in the United States following a successful career in Italy as a tenured
faculty member. For several years she traveled between Italy and the United States
working with researchers. The colleagues she made while working on the post-doc
guided her and provided a support system that led to additional projects and a permanent
teaching and research position in the US.
Teodor also talked about his post-doctoral experience and the opportunities it
afforded.
I started collaborating on research when I was a grad student. Then when
as a post-doc I continued to expand my collaborations with people from
other quality institutions. When I moved here I continued with those links.
With my research there have been opportunities to collaborate with people
outside my department here.
The support and guidance offered by colleagues, former doctoral advisors, and former
83


post-doctoral supervisors provided a link or a lifeline for foreign-bom faculty. Forming
relationships that are encouraging and helpful allowed the faculty member to grow, to
achieve a sense of satisfaction, and ultimately to succeed.
Finding Support From Others
Socialization plays an important part in the success of foreign-bom faculty in that
having the encouragement of friends and family can bridge the gap between the setting
they once were a part of to that which is new (Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Soylu, 2007). It
is this mutually respectful environment that friends and family provide that can enrich
ones experience in the American academy. Every faculty member in this study
commented on the support of friends or family, with family being the number one
external support system. Even though some of the faculty arrived in the United States
with a family member either as a student or as a newly hired faculty, most did not. In
fact, eight of the eleven came to the United States by themselves. Of these, seven arrived
here to attend school, either as an undergraduate or a graduate student, and one moved to
the U.S. to accept a position in a post-doctoral program. Among the remaining three, one
immigrated to the U.S. to teach and the other two moved here with a spouse.
Regardless of their familial status, knowing they had the support of and ongoing
contact with their family and close friends, even though these people quite possibly were
thousands of miles away, has given them a foundation on which to complete their studies
and to become productive members of the American academy. It has been being able to
look at life and work through the same cultural lens of which they are accustomed that
has enriched their experiences.
84


Support from family. The new landscape of being in a foreign country has, in
part, been made less worrisome by the support of family. Eeshas recollections of her
first years in the United States told of the role her mother played in her completion of
graduate studies as well as her first few years in a tenure track faculty position.
My mother was my lifeline. If I got into trouble or if I had a dilemma of
any sort I would run to her, meaning I would call her from here. Her
mentoring was pretty grounded, the fact that she learned herself, she was
very well read, very intellectual so it was not just motherly advice, it was
practical, pragmatic advice.
Like Eesha, Nirajs mother provided words of wisdom and encouragement.
My mother was the real force. She always told me I would succeed no
matter what I do. I had no friends or family where I was when I came.
Two weeks into the semester, I sat on the sidewalk crying because I
wanted to go home. So I called my mom up after I had cried and said I
wanted to come back home. My mom said that I could come back home
but then Id have to worry about family prestige because going to the US
was a big deal. So I went back [to class] and I started working hard.
Aurek spoke of the support he has received from his brother and sister who are also
university professors and have since emigrated from Poland to Canada. Aurek referred to
himself as a pioneer because he was the first of his family to leave Poland. However, it
has been the constant support he received from his family that made this pioneer
approach possible. He came from what he refers to as a whole family of physicists. It
is his family from whom he gained moral support. It has also been his family with whom
he has collaborated on research projects and subsequent articles.
The support of a spouse has also proven beneficial. Mahish arrived in the central
Midwest in 1964 to begin his doctoral studies. He had an older sister in the United
States, so he was not completely alone. However, she lived hundreds of miles away, but
was still considerably closer than the rest of his family who were in South Asia. Within
85


three years of finishing his doctoral program, Mahish returned home to marry. Shortly
after, he and his wife came back to the United States. Mahish was a researcher and had
formed his own company in the US. However, returning to South Asia was always on his
mind. He did not expect to make the United States his permanent home. Soon, though,
he found that life here treated him so well that he and his wife decided to stay. Mahish
credited his wife with providing him encouragement and supporting his decision to sell
his company and become a university professor. For him, having this type of backing
served as reinforcement that he could become successful.
Joseph, who married just prior to completing his graduate studies, gave full credit
to his wife.
Everyone needs to know that behind every successful man is a woman.
My wife used to work at the hospital as a registered dietician but when we
came here she stayed home to take care of the kids so I come home and
food is there. She sacrificed for me.
Support from friends. The importance of friends was a common thread among
the interviews. Jenica reflected that friends were her pillars and provided her with a
sense of home, regardless of where they, or she, may be. These relationships were a
constant sense of strength as well as a source of comfort and support as she confronted
challenges. Her friends were here to remind her of her resolve to have moved to and
studied in a different country, in a foreign language, in a field of study that she first began
as a graduate student.
Zaid, an assistant professor from Zimbabwe, echoed Jenicas feelings about
friends being a source of comfort and support. In spite of the fact that t very few people
from Africa were in this university community, a rather large African population existed
nearby. Everyone got together a few times a year at a neighboring park or someones
86


Full Text

PAGE 1

BECOMING PART OF THE ACADEMY: FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACADEMIC CAREER SUCCESS OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY by Teri R. Switzer AB, University of Illinois, 1971 MS, University of Illinois, 1973 MBA, Colorado State University, 1977 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado Denver in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Educational Leadership and Innovation 2012

PAGE 3

2012 by Teri Reynolds Switzer All rights reserved.

PAGE 4

This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy degree by Teri R. Switzer has been approved for the Educational Leadership and Innovation by Ellen A. Stevens, Chair and Advisor Candan Duran-Aydintug Farah Ibrahim Rodney Muth Date December 12, 2011

PAGE 5

Teri R. Switzer (Ph.D., Educational Leadership and Innovation) Becoming Part of the Academy: Factors Affecting the Academic Care er Success of ForeignBorn Faculty Thesis directed by Associate Professor Ellen A. Stevens The entire diversity landscape of our university campuses is changing. As Amer ican colleges and universities address their need for more globally aware campuses, aca demic institutions are hiring well-qualified foreign-born scholars to teach in their programs. Both non-re sident alien faculty as well as those who are foreign-born but are classified permanent residents or American citizens, whether U.S. educated or educated in foreign countries, bring an immense amount of talent to the American academy. These faculty not only provide diversity but the y also satisfy vital needs in several disciplines, predominantly those in the sciences and engine ering. Foreign-born faculty enhance the lives of the students they teach and the curri culum of the universities in which they teach. They bring with them international connections which are important to global collaborations involving both teaching and research. Yet, little is known about their experiences as faculty, in particular the unique obstacles they fac e, what motivates them to overcome these distinctive challenges, and the effect mentoring and soci al networks have had on their career successes. In order to gain a better understanding of foreign-born faculty, this study unc overed some of the factors affecting their academic career successes. The faculty in this study experienced the same obstacles as native-born faculty. However, they also were confronted with addit ional obstacles such as, problems with visas and immigration; communication challenges, in partic ular: Those

PAGE 6

related to oral and interpersonal communication; feelings of being different; and isolation and alienation. While mentoring is known to be a support system that can affect individualsÂ’ successes, the faculty in this study found success without the aid of mentoring. I nstead, more informal collaborations and support from colleagues, friends, and family took the plac e of formal mentoring. Finally, motivation that was both internal and externally driven was a n important factor in the facultiesÂ’ successes. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Ellen A. Stevens

PAGE 7

DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my family: husband, Gene Luthman; daughter, Lois Switzer Reaume and her husband, Moosah Reaume; son, R. Vincent Switzer III, and his wi fe, Marielle Mori; our family pet, Wilma; and Mom and Dad Chief. Your love and support duri ng this journey has been my inspiration. I learned from you to never give up. I now have ti me for grandchildren!

PAGE 8

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I will always be greatly indebted to my committee chair and advisor, Ell en Stevens, for not giving up on me, and for being there whenever I would get so very frustrated. You have inspired me and given me hope. Thanks also go to my two original committee members, Ca ndan Duran-Aydintug and Rod Muth. Like Ellen, you never gave up and your encouragement w ill always be remembered. Finally I give a note of gratitude to my new commi ttee member, Farah Ibrahim, for joining me as I completed my dream. I am grateful for the ongoing support of my lab cohort partners, Dr. Barbara Bates Dr. Patrick Lowenthal, and Dr.Michael Wray. I treasure the hours we spent worki ng on projects, discussing the merits of quantitative research, and what makes faculty att end faculty development programs. Oh and who can forget the fun we had giving presentations that took us to beautiful parts of North America, such as Montreal, Canada; Las Angeles California; and Jackson Hole, Wyoming. All graduate students should have research partners like you. I am especially thankful to the support and encouragement I received from my Pr ovost, Dr. Peg Bacon. Your interest in my progress has been appreciated. I still l augh when you admitted that your house was never so clean as when you were writing your diss ertation. Glad I had that period of procrastination because my house was really clean a few mont hs ago. It is now very dirty, and I have not cared because I did not want to let you, and me, down. I also want to acknowledge the thousands of foreign-born faculty who have made a nd will continue to make the United States their home. Special gratitude goes to the el even faculty who I interviewed for this study. I have learned so much from you. I admire your pione er spirit

PAGE 9

and your dedication to the processes of teaching and learning. Our academic inst itutions are enriched by your presence.

PAGE 10

ix TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1 Context .....................................................................................................................2 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................4 Mentoring Support .........................................................................................6 Social Networks .............................................................................................6 Obstacles as a Factor of Success ....................................................................7 Motivations to Succeed .........................................................................................7 Overview of Methodology ....................................................................................8 ResearcherÂ’s Perspective .......................................................................................9 Organization of Dissertation ..................................................................................9 II. Review of the Literature ............................................................................................11 Internationalization of Higher Education ............................................................11 Internationalization of Academic Professions .....................................................14 Supply and Demand .....................................................................................14 Immigration in the United States .................................................................15 Value of Foreign-Born Workers ..........................................................................18 Fiscal Implications .......................................................................................18 Academic and Scholarly Implications ..........................................................19 Adaptation and Acculturation of Foreign-Born Academics ................................19 Processes of Adaption and Acculturation ....................................................21 Culture Shock as an Acculturation Variables ..............................................22 Resilience .....................................................................................................25 Motivation Theories ............................................................................................26 Achievement Theories ..................................................................................26 Ability .......................................................................................................26 Goal Setting ..............................................................................................27 Self-Determination ...................................................................................27 Career Motivation ....................................................................................28 Motivation and Culture ........................................................................................29 Individualism and Collectivism ...........................................................................29 Roles of Mentoring and Social Networks ...........................................................30 Mentoring as a Tool of Success ...................................................................32 Cross-Cultural Mentoring ............................................................................33 Cross-Cultural Mentoring Challenges .........................................................35 Benefits of Mentoring ..........................................................................................37 Social Networks as a Form of Mentoring ............................................................38 Conclusion ...........................................................................................................39

PAGE 11

x III. METHODS ...............................................................................................................42 Research Design...................................................................................................42 Methodology ........................................................................................................43 Study Setting ................................................................................................44 Participant Selection .....................................................................................44 Review of Research Methods ..............................................................................47 Interview Protocol ........................................................................................48 Data Collection .............................................................................................49 Data Analysis ...............................................................................................50 Verification and Credibility ..................................................................53 Inter-Reader Reliability .........................................................................54 Threats to Validity.................................................................................55 IV. RESULTS .................................................................................................................56 Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging ......................................................58 Communication Obstacles ............................................................................58 Oral Communication Challenges ..........................................................59 Interpersonal Communication Challenges ............................................63 Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation ...........................................................65 Feelings of Differentness .............................................................................68 Teaching and Research .................................................................................69 Visa Obstacles ..............................................................................................73 Finding Support Through Relationships ............................................................76 Formal Mentoring Experiences ....................................................................77 Informal Mentoring Experiences .................................................................79 Mutual Mentoring ........................................................................................82 Finding Support From Others ......................................................................84 Support from Family .............................................................................85 Support from Friends ............................................................................86 Serving as a Mentor ............................................................................................87 Motivation to Succeed ........................................................................................88 Self-Regulation Theory ................................................................................89 Goal Setting Theory .....................................................................................90 Self-Determination Theory ..........................................................................93 Ability Theory ..............................................................................................94 Self-Efficacy Theory ....................................................................................95 Summary .............................................................................................................97 V. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS .....................................................................101 Culture as an Overarching Complication ..........................................................101 Stereotypes ..................................................................................................102 Individualism and Collectivism ..................................................................102 Revisiting the Conceptual Framework .........................................................103

PAGE 12

xi Review of Findings ...........................................................................................105 Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging ...................................................106 Communication Challenges .......................................................................106 Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation .........................................................109 Feelings of Differentness ...........................................................................110 Teaching and Research Challenges ............................................................111 Visa Difficulties .........................................................................................112 Mentoring: Finding Support through Relationships .........................................113 Motivation to Succeed ......................................................................................115 Recommendations from the Study ...................................................................118 Implications for Future Research .....................................................................120 Conclusion ........................................................................................................122 APPENDIX A. DEMOGRAPHICS SURVEY OF STUDY PARTICIPANT ...........................125 B. SURVEY INSTRUMENT ................................................................................127 C. SURVEY INSTRUMENT, GROUPED QUESTIONS ....................................132 D. RECRUITMENT SCRIPT FOR SURVEY ......................................................135 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................137

PAGE 13

xii LIST OF TABLES Table Table III.1 DEMOGRAPHICS OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY..................................56 Table III.2 DEMOGRAPHICS OF FOREIGN-BORN FACULTY..................................57 Table III.3 CODES AND RESULTANT THEMES .........................................................64

PAGE 14

xiii LIST OF FIGURES Figure I.1 Factors Affecting the Career Success of Foreign-Born Faculty ................................ .....7, 57, 104 V.1 Factors Found to Affect the Career Success of Foreign-Born Faculty, Revis ed ............105

PAGE 15

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION As American colleges and universities address their need for more global ly aware campuses, academic institutions are hiring well-qualified foreign-born schol ars to teach in their programs. In fact, the entire diversity landscape of our university campus es is changing such that over the past several years, new faculty are not predominantl y White males as they were 20 and 30 plus years ago. Postdoctoral fellows with a temporar y visa comprise 25.2% of all post-doctorates as determined by a National Science Foundation (NSF) 2010 survey. A survey of graduate students and post-doctorates in science a nd engineering place that number at 62.4%. Non-resident alien faculty, those who are not permanent residents or U.S. citizens, comprise 4.2% of the faculty in American colle ges and universities (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2010). Both non resident alien faculty as well as those who are foreign-born but are classi fied permanent residents or American citizens, whether U.S. educated or educated in foreign countr ies, bring an immense amount of talent to the American academy. These faculty not onl y provides diversity, but they also satisfy vital needs in several disciplines, pre dominantly in the sciences and engineering (NCES, 2010; NSF, 2011). Foreign-born faculty enha nce the lives of the students they teach, and the curriculum of the universities in which t hey teach. They bring with them international connections, which are important to global collaborations involving both teaching and research. Yet, little is known about their experiences as faculty, in particular the unique obstacles they face, such a s immigration and visa problems, what motivates them to overcome these distinctive challenges, and t he effect informal or formal mentoring has had on their career successes.

PAGE 16

2 Foreign-born faculty are sometimes included in studies on non-dominant US populations. However, a great number of the foreign-born faculty are White, thus woul d not be included in this research. Only during the past decade has research been conducted on foreign-born professionals, their experiences in the American workforc e, the obstacles they face, their motivations, and their job satisfaction. Nonetheless very little research is available on the role that these experiences, obstacle s, and motivational factors have played in their career success as a tenure-track faculty me mber. Further, no studies focus on the role that support measures, such as mentoring relationships and programs, have played in foreign-born facultiesÂ’ academic career succ ess. In order to gain a better understanding of foreign-born faculty, this study uncovered som e of the factors affecting their academic career successes. Primarily, t his study focuses on the obstacles foreign-born confront, what motivates them to work through the obstacles; the effect of mentoring, whether formal or informal has had on their careers; and the role social networks, such as family and friends have played as they progress thr ough tenure and promotion. It provides information on the career lives of foreign-born faculty, which, in some cases, began when they were a graduate student in the United States Context of the Problem College and university teaching faculty in the United States number 703,000 (Lowell, 2007). Of these, 120,000 are considered to be of a minority class and 31,000 are designated as foreign-born and are not U.S. citizens (Lowell, 2007). Additionally, research has shown that between 2002 and 2012, 603,000 new postsecondary teaching positions will require a doctoral degree. Foreign-born teachers are likely to fill 17% of these new teaching positions (Lowell, 2007).

PAGE 17

3 Importing the talents of foreign-born scholars fills several gaps, particula rly those in the sciences and engineering (Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009; NSF, 20 06). During 2006, American academic institutions employed nearly 31,400 noncitizens and temporary visa holders and 31,300 naturalized United States citizens with an American science and engineering doctorate (National Science Board [NSB], 2010). In fact, for eign-born doctoral scholars have accounted for more than 50% of all academic researchers a nd fulltime faculty in the computer sciences and for 39% to 48% of all academic resea rchers and full-time faculty researchers in mathematics and engineering (N SB). Moreover, foreign-born scholars in many other disciplines such as the social sciences a nd the life and physical sciences represent approximately 21% of full-time faculty researchers Why should this trend be of interest? The teaching, research, and creative activi ty of foreign-born faculty bring different viewpoints to the universityÂ’s faculty, staff, and students, and they help create a more diverse and globally aware campus. In additio n to fostering an atmosphere of acceptance of differences on campus they also contr ibute to diverse teaching, research, and creative activities (Welch, 1997). Furthermore foreignborn faculty add greatly to the research missions of American colleges and unive rsities due to their stronger preference for the research component of academia than their American born colleagues (Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Mamiseishvili, 2010; Mamiseishvili & Rossner, 2010; Marvasti, 2005). Perhaps, though, among the most compelling reasons why this trend should be of interest is that as fewer Americ ans enter the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields, for eign-born physical scientists are needed to fill the gap. For example, in 1999, 90,000 Americans were awarded patents, compared to 70,000 from other countries (West, 2010). Within 10

PAGE 18

4 years, 96,000 patents were awarded to foreign-born inventors, compared to 93,000 awarded to Americans (West, 2010). As mentioned previously, prior studies have indicated that foreign-born faculty have different needs and confront additional obstacles that make the tenure and promotion journey more stressful. Among these are cultural and language diffe rences (Collins, 2008; Theobald, 2007). In addition, some research suggests that foreign-born faculty are less satisfied with their jobs than their American counterpa rts (Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Wells, Seifert, Park, Reed, & Umbach, 2007). Although research exists about the job satisfaction of foreign-born faculty, very little resear ch exists on the support given to foreign-born faculty as they establish themselves in their ac ademic careers, build their dossiers, and apply for tenure and promotion exists. On the other hand, the support offered to minority faculty and international graduate students i s welldocumented (Alberts, 2008; Grant-Thomas, 1997; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002; Johnsrud, 1993; Knight & Trowler, 1999; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005; Tillman, 2001). It is from the studies discussing the success and support systems experienced by mi nority faculty (primarily those of color), international graduate students, as wel l as the few studies that have studied the job satisfaction and experiences of foreign-born facult y that I extrapolated the elements to determine the factors that affect the car eer success of foreign-born faculty. Conceptual Framework The question guiding this study is: What factors affect the success of forei gn-born faculty? A small body of research exists that examines the obstacles expe rienced by foreign-born faculty and the level of job satisfaction they have. In addition, other

PAGE 19

5 research focuses on the contribution of motivation to oneÂ’s success and the effe ct sociocultural influences have on motivation. Finally, several others have documented the benefits of mentoring minorities and the benefits of mentoring international student s (Chattergy, 1994; Dedrick & Watson, 2002; Ryan, 2005). These areas provide much of the foundation on which to extrapolate the factors affecting the career succes s of foreignborn faculty. The conceptual framework for this study shown in Figure I.1 is loosely patterned after models developed by Grayson (2008) in his study of the academic achieveme nt of domestic and international students. GraysonÂ’s models illustrate general educ ation outcomes and link these to university experiences such as peer involvement, hours of study, English language, faculty support, and support from other students.

PAGE 20

6 The conceptual framework for this study has as its focal point foreign-born faculty, who are shown at the top in the center of the framework. Connected to the faculty are concepts of gender, language, cultural background, discipline, number of years in the United States, teaching experience, and research focus that per tain to the faculty as well as to colleagues, friends, and family involved in either form al or informal relationships. Arrows have been used to illustrate the synergism that exists among all the concepts of the conceptual framework. Chapter II contains a review of the litera ture on the concepts presented in the conceptual framework. In the following paragraphs, I accentuate on the conceptual framework components as they relate to the succes s of foreign-born faculty and the larger body of the literature. Mentoring Support A solid line represents the connections between informal and formal mentoring relationships and the mentee, who is the foreign-born faculty member. For many y ears, mentoring has been seen to be one of the strategies to improve workplace achievement s. Several mentoring theories and philosophies exist. Among the more recent scholar s investigating the need for and the benefits of mentoring is Trower (2010) who argues t hat mentoring has finally come to the point when it is needed now more than ever. Realizi ng that formal and informal mentoring opportunities are afforded to many faculty, bot h are considered in this study. Social Networks as Support The concept of social networks is included because social engagement frequently has been used as a tool to alleviate feelings of isolation and loneliness (Collins, 2008; Cooper & Stevens, 2002; Fontaine & Millen, 2004; Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Williams

PAGE 21

7 & Kirk, 2008). Furthermore, social engagement and group interaction augment career success (Fontaine & Millen, 2004; Ewing, Freeman, Barrie, Bell, OÂ’Connor, Waugh, & Sykes, 2008; Muth & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne, & Kraimer, 2010; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Several individual benefits of being socially engaged are an increase in knowledge and skills, personal productivity, job satisfaction, and a gre ater feeling of a sense of belonging (Fontaine & Millen). Social networks, consist ing of colleagues, friends, and family, are slightly connected to informal mentoring relationships as shown by the solid line connecting social networks with informal mentoring in Figure I.1. Obstacles as a Factor of Success The concept of obstacles is included because, like their native-born counterparts, foreign-born faculty confront various challenges and roadblocks as they progress through the tenure track. Among the more common challenges are work-life balance, st ress, time constraints, alienation and isolation, and uncertainty of expectations (Collins, 2008) Unlike their native-born counterparts, foreign-born faculty also frequently enc ounters what can be considered obstacles such as communication, language, and cultural differences and visa complications (Collins, 2008; Liu, 2004; Nimoh, 2010; Theobald, 2007). Motivation to Succeed Motivation theories point to a relationship between oneÂ’s accomplishments and such concepts as goal setting, self-determination, and ability beliefs. T he ability to set goals, have determination, and to believe in oneself would be important deterrents to the obstacles mentioned above. Working with the other factors, motivation plays a role in

PAGE 22

8 the overall career success of foreign-born faculty, shown by the arrows show ing the interaction among the concepts. Overview of Methodology This study is a phenomenological inquiry designed to provide a better understanding of the factors that affect the career success of foreign-bo rn faculty. Phenomenology was first discussed in the late 1960s and early 1970s by Husserl. As many researchers state, the operative phrase in phenomenological resear ch is “to describe” (Creswell, 2007; Groenewald, 2004). For this study, that is exactly what t he participants were invited to do—to describe their experiences as a foreignborn faculty member in the American academy. Based upon prior research recounting experiences of foreign-born faculty in the American academy (Liu, 2004; Mamiseishvili, 2011; Marvisti, 2005; Theobald, 2007), I developed interview questions that provided insight into the roles that mentoring and social engagement, motivation, and obstacles play in the foreign-born faculty m ember’s success (see Appendix B). Interviews consisting of open-ended, semi-structured questions were used to collect the stories from each of the participants. In addition to the interviews demographic questions were asked of each participant (see Appendix A). These questions were constructed to provide information about their country of origin; United States residency status; rank; dates of tenure, promotion, or comprehensive review;

PAGE 23

9 native language; language in which they teach; and faculty responsibilities. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed by hand as recom mended by Creswell (2007) and Moustakas (1994). In Chapter 3, I detail the coding methods and how I formed the resultant themes. Additionally, two independent researchers who w ere not familiar with the study coded two of the interviews so that inter-rater re liability was achieved. ResearcherÂ’s Perspective Researchers are encouraged to disclose personal characteristics and possi ble biases, which may affect how they approach their analysis as well as the ir research topic (Subedi, 2006). My interest in the success of foreign-born scholars first start ed when I was an undergraduate student studying English as a second language. Having worked with international students as a graduate student at the University of Ill inois, been a professional colleague of various foreign-born faculty for the past 38 years, and havi ng immediate family members who immigrated to the United States, I have bee n immersed in and aware of some of the struggles that they have faced. Organization of Dissertation In addition to this first chapter, which introduces the problem, discusses the conceptual framework on which the research question is developed and the interviews are constructed, and gives a very brief overview of the methodology, four other chapter s follow. Chapter II presents a review of the literature and takes a broad look at the global

PAGE 24

10 landscape of higher education and the roles motivation and social engagement play in faculty membersÂ’ success. Chapter III includes the study design, methods of data collection, information about the studyÂ’s subjects, and methods of data analysis. Chapter IV presents the re sults, and Chapter V presents a discussion of the results and covers implications and limita tions of the study.

PAGE 25

11 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE During the past four decades, the American academy has been host to thousands of international students and foreign-born faculty. Some foreign-born facult y have been students in the United States. Some have not (NCES, 2010). Regardless of whether they receive one or more degrees in the U.S. or they arrive here specifically to teac h in the American higher education system, their experiences tend to be challengin g. This study explores the factors that affect the academic career success of fore ign-born faculty. In this chapter, I present the historical landscape of the globalization of ac ademia and the internationalization of higher education as furthered by foreign-born schol ars. I then examine the role that acculturation plays in the learning and scholarship of f oreignborn faculty. I end with background studies and information about the role motivation plays in success and the importance of mentoring and social networks in supporting foreign-born faculty. The Internationalization of Higher Education Historically, the international elements of higher education have been timehonored notions made possible by the mobility of scholars and knowledge (Welch, 1997). In the fifth century BC, the Sophists were committed to learning and sharing knowle dge. Following them, medieval scholars assumed that role. Now, in the twenty-first c entury, a proliferation exists of exchanges and cross-continent collaborations, which ill ustrate the importance of trading knowledge by traveling between countries (Welch, 1997). Boy er, Altbach, and Whitelaw (1994) resolved that higher education has an international aspect that is accepted and the faculty is becoming a “global community.” Several governments

PAGE 26

12 world-wide view the immigration of skilled workers as vital contributors to the expertise of their workforce (NSF, 2010). At the same time, global competition for highly ski lled workers, in particular those in the sciences and engineering, is growing. While the internationalism of higher education is not a new phenomenon, it has only now started to receive focused attention. The democratic political system of the US, its national support for learning, and its ethnic diversity all have contributed to thi s increased awareness (Liu, 2001). Other nations have begun to realize the economic and cultural benefits of foreign students and employees and are investing more heavily in their graduate programs (NSF, 2010). However, the United States continues to be considered the center of scholarship and research (NSF, 2010). Until this standard changes, American higher education will draw talent from foreign countries. Students from foreign countries continue come to the United States in large numbers to learn, to grow, and to become productive and successful professionals (Bollag, 2006; Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Solem & Foote, 2004). Even though the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks created significant roadblocks for foreign s cholars due to visa delays and entry denials even with a valid visa, the American share of international students dropped only four points, from 25.3% to 21.6 % (Institute of International Education [IIE], 2008. This drop, however, was short lived. By the start of the 2007-2008 academic year, the number of new international graduate students increased 10.1% from the prior year and comprised 27.9% of the total graduate student population in American universities (IIE, 2008). The most recent statistics show that during 2009-2010, American universities and colleges enrolled 690,923 foreign students, which is a 3% increase from 2008-2009 (IIE,

PAGE 27

13 2010). Foreign doctoral students numbered 116,254, a 7.4% increase from the prior year. This represents a record number of international students in the U.S, with the growth driven by a 30% increase in students from China. Chinese students now make up 18% of the total international student population and students from South Asia make up 15% of the international students (IIE, 2010). The top fields of study for international stude nts in 2009-2010 were business and management (21% of total), engineering (18%), physical and life sciences (9%), and mathematics and computer sciences (9%) (IIE, 2010). While some international students return to their home countries, others stay in the United States, and a large number enter the American academic labor mar ket. In fact, according to the NSF (2010), the number of students who remained in the U.S. following graduation decreased slightly after the events of September 11, 2001. During the past 10 years, this figure increased, which is a result of an employment or postdoctor al commitment from 67.2% of the temporary visa holders in 2009, an increase of 1% from 2004 (NSF, 2010). Of these temporary visa holders, 40.8% are working in U.S. academic institutions and 53% are in American businesses and industries. These United States educated scholars play an important role in the American higher education academy because they not only add to the diversity of its academ ic institutions, but they also contribute to the scholarly and research components of academia as well as to the economic well-being of the schools and communities in which they study and live. Foreign-born faculty add “intellectual and scientific t alent” to American universities and colleges (Foote, Li, Monk, & Theobald, 2008, p. 168).

PAGE 28

14 The Internationalization of the Academic Profession American academic institutions hold among their faculty both U.S. educated and internationally educated foreign-born faculty. Over the past several years hundreds of foreign-born scholars have become teaching faculty at American colleges a nd universities, thereby making the academic workforce more diverse than ev er. Supply and Demand In 2003, 630,092 total faculty resided in the U.S. By 2009, this number had grown to 728,977 total faculty (NCES, 2010). Between 2003 and 2009, non-resident alien faculty in the United States had increased from 21,153 to 30,745, which represents a 1% increase in non-resident alien faculty as a percentage of the total facul ty. In 2003, 2.8% of these faculty were tenured or tenure track faculty. By 2009, 3.1% were tenure d or tenure track (NCES, 2010). Fifty percent of foreign-born sciences and engineering graduates who we re in the United States in 1991 and remained through 2003 had obtained U.S. citizenship (NSF, 2010). More recently, three out of four foreign-born sciences and engineering gradua tes between the years 2004 and 2007 anticipated working in the U.S. (NSF, 2010). Over half had employment contracts in United States. Additional information released by the NSF (2010) states that 23% of all academic positions are held by either naturali zed or non U.S. citizens, and another 11.5% are held by naturalized citizens. Eight percent of all f ull-time teaching faculty are non-U.S. citizens with another 12% classified as na turalized citizens. Furthermore, 42% of postdoctoral research positions in higher education are held by non-U.S. citizens and another 5.6% are held by naturalized citizens.

PAGE 29

15 A National Science Foundation (2006) survey reported that the number of foreign-born U.S. educated science and engineering doctorates increased 150 % si nce 1973. During this same period, U.S. educated native-born sciences and engineering doctorates increased by only 90 %. It is interesting to note that, according to the Association of American Universities, 11 of its 61 member institutions had forei gn-born presidents or chancellors in 2006 which is double from what it was 5 years ago (Foderaro, 2011). Taking the above numbers into account and the reality that a great number of international students remain in the American academy as faculty, t he academic profession is more internationally diverse and is a fast-growing global community. In addition, a shift toward increasing international perspectives is also occurr ing across the American workforce in general (Goodwin & Nacht, 1991; Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009). With respect to the persistent high unemployment rates, discussion has taken place whether the United States really needs highly skilled foreign wor kers. However, the demand for skilled foreign workers is considerably greater than t he supply. Under the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act, an H1B visa cap of 65,000 indicates an unmet need (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). Although individuals going into U.S. institutions of higher education are exempt from this, the private sector, where much of the science and technology research is conducted is held under the cap. Immigration and Visas in the United States Immigration processes within the United States have long been complicated and confusing. This has only become more difficult since the September 11, 2001 terrorist

PAGE 30

16 events. The adoption of the Patriot Act (2001) imposed limitations on a variety of relationships, in particular that which is related to the scholarly exchange of students and faculty. The Patriot Act and ensuing legislation such as the Enhanced Border Se curity and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, the REAL ID Act of 2005, which stipulates that a driverÂ’s license cannot be obtained without proof of citizenship or legal immigr ation to the U.S., and the Student Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) enacte d in 2007, have increased the complexity of the visa process due to national security. Currently, one can apply for several different visas. International students and scholars who come to the United States under an exchange program need one of the J-1 visas, depending on the purpose of the visit and the length of stay. One of the J-1 visas is issued for a short, temporary stay of no longer than 6 months. Another allows a researcher or scholar to remain in the U.S. for a period not to exceed 5 years. One of the stipulations of obtaining a J-1 visa for those in the professorial ranks is that the U.S. teaching position cannot be on the tenure-track. Those international students who are not on an exchange program, but are instead attending school in the U.S. as a regularly admitted student, must be issued a F-1 visa. The F-1 visa allows the student to remain i n the U.S. for as long as he or she is a full-time student. H-1B visas are for temporary workers and can be issued for a 3-year period and have the possibility of being renew ed for another 3 years. The FY 2012 H-1B visa cap is 85,000, which includes 20,000 visas given for advanced (masterÂ’s or higher) completion (U.S. Citizenship and Immig ration Service, 2011). A great number of these visa holders are foreign-educated professionals. In 2006, the National Science Foundation (2010) determined that 41% of doctorate holders

PAGE 31

17 and 79% of professional degree holders on H-1B visas did not obtain their graduate degrees from the United States. To complicate matters, Canadian and Mexican residents can obtain a TN NAFTA visa. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was recreate d to promote certain trade and economic partnerships between the U.S. and Canada and Mexico. Under NAFTA, individuals who qualify can work in the U.S. for a period of 3 years. Among the 60 professions that are on the qualifying list are a wide range of scientists, post-secondary researchers and post-secondary teachers. In addition to the standard visa requirements, over the past 12 years a few legislative rulings have affected the issuance of H-1B visas. Among thes e is the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, which increased the annual quota of H–1B temporary visas for foreign professional workers at the s ame time provided protection of American workers whose employers may have wante d to hire international workers at a lower pay rate. Another is the American Competitivene ss in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000, which amended the Immigration and Nationali ty Act with respect to H-1B nonimmigrant visas for the years 2001-2003. Aside from the immigration challenges foreign-born workers experience, restrictions also pertain to the ability of researchers to participate in federal grants. Mainly, there has arisen with respect to foreign-born researchers being involved in sensitive technology and data, which heightens issues surrounding awarding grant s on sensitive research to foreign-born students and professors (Brainard, 2006). Accordi ng to the National Science Foundation website (2011), researchers who are not U.S. citiz ens or

PAGE 32

18 do not have national or permanent resident status are ineligible to receive a grea ter majority of, if not any, grants issued by the NSF. The Value of Foreign-Born Workers If the United States is going to maintain its dominance in such areas as scien ce and technology, it is vital that we recruit highly skilled foreign-born workers to fill the demand, because there are not enough U.S. born workers to meet the demand (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). A study by the Harvard Business School and reported by the Immigration Policy Center (2011) states that for the past 15 y ears, the H1B visa program for highly skilled foreign workers has played an important role i n U.S. innovation patterns. The abilities and talents of foreign-born skilled workers c omplement those of native-born workers. Fiscal Implications A confirming statistic of the fiscal advantages of hiring foreign-born w orkers is between 2003 and 2007, U.S. educated foreign-born professionals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics increased the gross domestic product by $13.5 bi llion and added between $2.7 billion and $3.6 billion in taxes (Holen, 2009). During the 2009-2010 academic year, $18.7 billion was contributed to the U.S. economy by international students and their families (National Association of International Educator s, 2011). Furthermore, companies that employ H-1B workers in order to fulfill their demand, make significant donations to educational institutions in order to increase support to U.S. students studying in the sciences and engineering fields (National Foundation for American Policy [NFAP], 2007). The American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 instituted a $500 (raised to $1,500 in 2004) training

PAGE 33

19 fee that must accompany H-1B applications. Since 2000, more than $2.3 billion has been collected and is earmarked for training and scholarships for U.S. workers (NFAP, 2011) A portion of these fees go to the National Science Foundation for scholarships to encourage U.S. students to study in the STEM disciplines, and additional funding is available for K-12 public schools to enrich their STEM programs. Academic and Scholarly Implications Foreign-born professionals contribute considerably more than contributing to t he economic growth of the country. Foreign faculty not only contribute to academia thr ough their content knowledge, they also bring a positive change in an institutionÂ’s cul ture and they add an international experience to the classroom by their teaching and t heir research. Foreign-born faculty can be seen as models of international collaboration. Wi th the broadening focus of offering students international experiences within a global curriculum, foreign-born faculty undoubtedly add to the experience. Foreign-born faculty have a profound effect on stabilizing the higher education marketplace and encouraging a global curriculum (Green, 2007; Lin, Pearce, & W ang, 2008; Raby, 2007). As colleges and universities expand their curriculum to include a global component, they are implementing strategies such as promoting study abr oad opportunities for students and encouraging international exchange programs. Adaptation and Acculturation of Foreign-Born Academics As the academy becomes internationally diverse, administrators are beginning to pay more attention to the experiences of foreign-born faculty. The challenges of foreignborn faculty as they establish themselves in the American academy, and the need for support programs, such as mentoring and social networks, has been established (Lin et

PAGE 34

20 al., 2008; Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009; Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Trower, 2010). Faculty members from other countries have expressed the need for an internationa l community of scholarship in which faculty from all countries can connect with one another and share philosophy and research (Altbach, 1996; Boyer et al., 1994; Sadao, 2003). Likewise, faculty from different countries share many of the same thoug hts and concerns about higher education, the nucleus of which is collaboration, acculturation, and adaptation. As I studied the internationalization of American higher education and the iss ues foreign-born faculty confront in their quest for success in the United States, I found it beneficial to review the initial philosophical theories of cross-cultural asso ciations from the early twentieth century. This history provides a better understanding of the conflicts raised and broadens the foundation of the contextual factors that are related to thi s success. Kallan (1915), a controversial philosophy professor who, with his colleagues advocated cultural diversity and believed that American democracy was stre ngthened by racial differences, championed a pluralistic society, one in which many lan guages and religions would thrive. While Kallan’s pluralism did not immediately take hold, Kal lan’s and Berkson’s (1920) philosophical views of pluralism, ethnic communications, political life, and cultures have become more accepted than Kallan’s pluralistic view of society. Since the first decades of the last century, researchers have continued to study and promote multiculturalism. The majority of the research on acculturation has focus ed on three dominant areas: intercultural stress, ability to communicate, and abil ity to establish interpersonal relationships (Ward, 1996). The research on adaptation, which is closely related to acculturation, has focused on two areas—domestic adjustment and internat ional

PAGE 35

21 adjustment (Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991). Language and cultural differences exacerbate the stress that occurs in adjusting to a foreign country or cult ure (Black et al.; Nimoh, 2010; Theobald, 2007). In order to address the academic successes of foreign-born faculty, a better understanding of the processes associated with accult uration and adaptation is necessary. The Processes of Adaptation and Acculturation Acculturation is the change that occurs because of contact between individuals of different cultural backgrounds (Iceland, 2009; Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits, 1936). Berry and Kim (1988) and Sam and Berry (2006) compared acculturation to pluralist ic communities in which native people interact with ethnic groups. However, a lack of boundaries within the course of acculturation initiates considerable speculation a bout the process of acculturating into another way of life. Acculturation consists of multiple phases (Berry, 1980). The first phase occurs when two different groups have contact with one another. Their differences surface a nd can instill conflict. The second stage consists of these conflicts and the need to a dapt to one another in order to lessen or eliminate the conflicts. Adaptation is the third phas e of acculturation. Within the context of adaptation rests the necessity for the dispar ate groups to adjust their language, their personality, their attitudes, and their accult urative stress (Berry, Poortinga, Segall & Dasen, 1992). Adjustment into the new culture occurs when an individual becomes a member of a new, unfamiliar setting, a setting that causes a level of disruption in oneÂ’s lif e (Black et al., 1991). The adjustment processes disparate groups go through are similar to the phases of socialization in which the groups become familiar with and conform to the ne w

PAGE 36

22 setting. Berry (1980) questions this and posited that two questions should be asked as an individual begins the adjustment process. First, one should question whether retaining one’s own cultural identity is necessary. Second, one should determine if assimilat ing and conforming to the more dominant society is beneficial. Liu (2001) suggested tha t disparate groups consider both their cultural identity as well as their involve ment with the host culture as they acculturate into the majority culture. Culture Shock as an Acculturative Variable Appearing in 1951, the term “culture shock” (DuBois, 1951) paved the way for anthropologist Kalvero Oberg to conduct in-depth studies about the adjustment of Americans working in Brazil. Subsequent studies have referred to the stress a nd anxiety experienced by people traveling and living abroad and, consequently referred to the role culture shock plays in the successful adaptation to one’s new surroundings (Oberg, 1960; Ward, 1996). In general, culture shock occurs as a result of recurrent adaptati on to an environment of new food and new friends, and a loss of nearby family. It also occurs as a result of the host community being less welcoming and possibly alienating, a fee ling of incompetence, discomfort with new values, and an uncertainty of identity (Argyle, 1982). Among the many symptoms of culture shock is stress from the adjustment to the new surroundings (Weaver, 1993). Elmer’s (2002) research on cross-cultural connections distinguishes between two paths one can take when experiencing culture shock. Cultural differences cause frustration, confusion, tension, lack of self-est eem, a sense of inadequacy, and embarrassment. Individuals can either cope or react to the se feelings. If coping is chosen, the individual engages in observation, listening, and inquiring about the new environment (Elmer, 2002). These actions encourage rapport

PAGE 37

23 building and understanding with the host community. Others, however, choose to react to these feelings. Reactive responses result in criticism, rationalizi ng, and eventual withdrawal, which result in alienation and isolation (Elmer, 2002). In addition to culture shock other variables affect adaptation to a new culture. Some of these include duration of stay, self-efficacy, personality, attachme nt to oneÂ’s home culture, and language (Black et al., 1991; Tomich, McWhirter, & King, 2000). Another acculturation variable that affects successful adaptation of a new cult ure and achievements in oneÂ’s job is language (Tomich et. al.). Legislation addressing t he need for academic institutions to provide programs of language proficiency for higher education faculty has become more prevalent since the early 1990s (Monoson & Thomas, 1993; Williams, 1998). Although this legislation seems to have been a trend, it is not without controversy. Researchers assert that such legislation is a narrow approach (Thomas & Monoson; Williams). Contrary to assumptions about the effectiveness of foreign accented teachers, some researchers have determined that forei gn teaching assistants were as effective in the classroom as native teaching ass istants (Jacob & Freidman, 1988; Kavas & Kavas, 2008). Similarly, Marvasti (2001) found that the adverse effect foreign teaching assistants had on students was not the result of their lack of English language skills. Instead, it was due to other factors such as differenc es between cultural expectations, social skills, and prior teaching experience s. Some researchers have linked language with culture (Boas, 1982; Kramsch & Widdowson, 1998). Not unexpected, a connection exists with the ease of acculturation of foreign-born individuals from English-speaking countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom. Those from non-English speaking countries had more difficulties

PAGE 38

24 acculturating into American society (Borjas, 1985). Nonetheless, it should not be surprising that the amount of time spent in the United States positively affects one’s language ability (Chiswick & Miller, 1995; Mora, 2003). Training, previous experience, social support, and relations with host nationals are among the variables influencing successful acculturation and, ultimately, e ffective job performance (Liebkind, 2006; Ward, 1996). A study by Cui and Awa (1992) identified five factors that contribute to effective cross-cultural adjustment and job perfor mance. These are personal traits, language and interpersonal skills, managerial ability, cultural empathy, and social interactions. In addition to these factors, Cui and Awa also determined that effective cross-cultural adjustment involves personality tr aits, interpersonal skills, social interaction and cultural empathy – in that order For effective job performance, interpersonal skills and cultural empathy come before personal ity traits. They also found that married people adjusted better to the new cultural environment t han those who were single. Several other studies have examined the role of social interaction in job performance (Boice, 1992a; Dinges & Baldwin, 1996; Menges, 1999; Obiakor & Grant, 2002; Tierney, 1997; Tierney & Bensimon, 1996; Ward, 1996). Although other challenges such as confusion and uncertainty about tenure and promotion criteria a nd feelings of isolation all have been found to affect one’s professorial career s uccess, feelings of belonging and establishing a social network are very important. Clearly, when achieving an effective sojourner adjustment, an over-riding the me is the effect of the positive and extensive social exchanges foreign-born fa culty experience with host nationals (Brein & David, 1971; Church, 1982; Klineberg & Hull,

PAGE 39

25 1979; Ward & Kennedy, 1993; Ward, 1996). Social, interpersonal interactions and peer-group-support measures have found a place among the other avenues for building relationships and establishing networks of people to help influence others. Many researchers have determined that interpersonal interactions with host nati onals are a defining feature of successful adaptation to a new cultural environment (Bennett, 1993; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). Bennett affirmed that becoming part of a peer group had a positive effect on individuals experiencing cultural marginalization. Resilience A concept that has roots in acculturation, adaptation, and assimilation is resilience. Resilience refers to the way one copes with life events withi n diverse populations (Rutter, 1999). Resilience research examines the ways people meet challenges, particularly challenges related to moving from one culture to anothe r. In other words, resilience is a component in cultural adaptation and acculturation. Successful acculturation and adaptation within a new culture can involve a circui tous path. This path includes facets of the new environment, challenging events such as discrimination, adaptation responses that can include optimism, short-term outcomes such as sociocultural integration, and long-term outcomes consisting of those with a resilient nature such as economic advancement and career success as well as those of a non-resilient nature such as impoverishment (Cervantes & Castro, 1985). With the increasing emphasis on globalization in higher education as well as business, efforts are being made to better understand resilience among differ ent cultures. Among the findings of some of these studies is that regardless of where one might li ve,

PAGE 40

26 be that in the United States, Africa, on a Brazilian street, or in an Aboriginal community in Canada, how one reacts to survival stress is dependent on oneÂ’s culture (Unger, 2010). Motivation Theories What motivates people to succeed? Much has been written about the role motivation plays in both academic success and career success. Dozens, if not hundre ds, of definitions of motivation exist. Nonetheless, motivation used in the context of this study draws on the work of Alderman (2004), Bandera (1982, 1991), Deci and Ryan (1985), (Jones (1955), Pink (2009), Steers and Porter (1991), and Vroom (1965) who agree that work motivation consists of forces that originate both within and outside a n individualÂ’s being and initiate work-related behaviors. Achievement Theories Among the work motives that are most pertinent to this study are self-regulat ory motivation, goal setting, ability beliefs, self-efficacy, and self-det ermination. In many respects, these motivation concepts merge together. With that in mind, the basic motivation theory related to this study is self-regulation, which is a social -cognitive theory used to describe oneÂ’s motivation to learn, to understand oneÂ’s competencies, and to be willing to commit to goals in order to succeed (Alderman, 2004). Individuals have certain beliefs in what they can do, and they set goals for themselves in order to pr oduce the outcome they seek (Bandura, 1991). It is these cognitive processes that form the tenets of self-regulation. Ability. Often when individuals come into contact with others, they form preconceived beliefs about themselves, their culture, their lives, and their abilit y (Swann & Snyder, 1980). A personÂ’s self-perception of ability is one of the constructs of

PAGE 41

27 motivation. As Alderman (2004) stated, many people use social comparison to rate their performance on given tasks. They also may use self-referenced comparison in which they compare what they have done with previous performance. Goal setting. One of the key variables of self-regulation is goal setting. The setting of goals is one way in which individuals complete a task and possibly achie ve success. It is the object of an action, such as attaining a level of proficienc y, as in achieving tenure. Most employees, faculty included, each year outline a plan of a ctivities by which they will be evaluated. This can range from specific teaching r elated actions to oneÂ’s research agenda. Setting goals helps direct oneÂ’s attention to the tas k at hand and realizing an end result, whether that be submission of an article for publication or introducing new teaching methods in the classroom (Locke & Latham, 1990). Self-Determination. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is frequently used in education and work settings and is an evolving body of work on motivation (Pinder, 2008). A key tenet of self-determination theory is that people are motivated by inna te psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness to others (Pinder, 2008). Innate needs include pride, satisfaction, and a sense of accomplishment. It is i nteresting to note that SDT recognizes that people tend to internalize and integrate behaviors that serve self-determined behaviors. It is not uncommon that people will do something not because they personally want to, but because of family or peer pressure. Counter to what some behavior psychologists posit, SDT looks at intrinsic (innate), rather than extrinsic (such as money), rewards as motivation (Ryan, Conne ll, & Deci, 1985). Among the social-cognitive factors that add to intrinsic motivation a re goal

PAGE 42

28 setting in which satisfaction is gained from accomplishing goals and self-e fficacy in which is a high level of competence in achievement (Alderman, 2004). Career Motivation. In the 1980s, London coined the term “career motivation” to reflect the characteristics related to career decisions and the behaviors t hat are associated with one’s work life (year?). Since then, some researchers have used concepts similar to London’s career motivation as a framework to study the relationship between cultur e and career development (Arthur, 1994; Day & Allen, 2004; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Lopes, 2006). Among the views related to this concept are that within one’s career motivation is career resilience, in which there is a tendency to ignore any t ype of career disruption when operating or living in an environment that presents a challenge (London, 1983). Many foreign-born people possess an ability to adjust to every-changing circumstances as they move from one country to another and adapt to their new surroundings. Factors affecting career motivation include the age of the indivi dual and the availability of mentoring (Lopes, 2006). Hofstede’s studies (2005) built on two prominent theories developed by Hall (2004) and Arthur (1994). Hall’s protean career theory reasons that one’s career development is based on the individual and the decisions that person makes related to her or his career. The employer lies outside the relationship. Arthur’s boundaryless career theory is complemented by the protean theory in that the responsibility for growth and success lie with the individual and not solely with the employer. However, the organization’s goals and values affect the individual’s growth and success.

PAGE 43

29 Motivation and Culture Several individual differences compound the role motivation plays in oneÂ’s success. An area that has started to gain the interest of researchers is that of studying he possible differences between native-born and foreign-born workers. The differ ences among the various cultures provide a sound explanation in distinguishing between oneÂ’s work motivation, behavior, and attitude (Rousseau & Fried, 2001; Sorrentino & Yamaguichi, 2008). Culture influences motivation (Erez, Kleinbeck & Thierry, 2001; Ginsberg & Wlodkowski, 2009; Latham & Pinder, 2005; Sorrentino & Yamaguchi, 2008). Individualism and Collectivism Because a need exists to better understand global differences among tod ayÂ’s work force, several researchers have studied two different constructs: individualism and collectivism (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Lam, Schaubroeck, & Aryee, 2002; Ronen, 2001; Triandis, 1995). Individualism is defined as a social pattern in which people are more independent of one another. They are motivated by their personal preferences. Collectivism on the other hand, is defined as a social pattern in which people are seen as part of a whole, s uch as a co-worker or a department. In general, collectivism is associated wi th countries in Asia, Western and Eastern Africa, Central and South America, the South Asian subcontinent, Jamaica, and the Pacific Islands (Triandis, 1995). These cultures tend to give more social support to those in their own groups, but they also frequently express a self-critical attitude. They exhibit a mutual sympathy for one another (Tr iandis, 1995). Individualistic societies are those associated with North American and West ern Europe,

PAGE 44

30 including Italy. People from individualistic societies typically express high self-esteem and mutual respect for one another, but are more personal goal oriented (Triandis, 1995). These cultural constructs also influence oneÂ’s mode of communication. The Roles of Mentoring and Social Networks Mentoring in higher education received very little notice until recently. Sinc e the late 1990s, researchers have conducted in-depth studies on mentoring in the higher education academy (Goodwin & Stevens, 1998; Goodwin, Stevens, & Bellamy, 1998; Moody, 2004). Mentoring in the academic setting is frequently tied to professional development, especially as it pertains to new faculty in their pursuit to become proficient teachers and scholars (Lang, 2005; Luna & Cullen, 1995). As the academy becomes more diverse, the role of mentoring develops into a vital catalyst for foreign-born faculty as they establish successful acad emic careers in the United States. In the past, diversity programs that created awareness a nd understanding of peopleÂ’s differences received considerable attention. The efficacy of th ese programs has been established (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Goodwin, et al., 1998; Muth & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Roche, 1979; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005; Zaleznik, 1977; Zey, 1984), and the research supports the concept that foreign-born faculty are faced with many challenges domestic faculty do not encounter. Mentoring of minority faculty has been extensively explored. Several mentori ng relationships involving minority faculty have developed through a mutual understanding between the mentor and the mentee (Parson, Sands, & Duane, 1992; Sadao, 2003; Sands, Parson, & Duane, 1991). Variables such as group norms and societal pressures, mixing with individual traits, affect mentoring outcomes. Several researchers have noted that

PAGE 45

31 minority faculty often have difficulty finding a mentor because people tend to pre fer to mentor from within their own ethnic group (Bowman, Kite, Branscombe, & Williams, 2000; Margolis & Romero, 2001). However, as Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002) and Chattergy (1994) have documented, cross-cultural mentoring relationships are key for those who are struggling with cultural barriers. Johnson-Bailey and Cervero ( 2002) studied cross-cultural mentoring and stated, “mentoring across cultural boundaries i s an especially delicate dance . .” (p. 15). Further, as in the personal case of Johnson-Bailey and Cervero, cross-gender relationships can also be successful. White men typically mentor Black men a nd women primarily because more White men are in positions to mentor (Blake, 2000; Blake -Beard, Murrell, & Thomas, 2007). While some research suggests that cross-gender and cross cultural mentoring may not be effective, Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002) found that gender is less of a factor than cultural differences in the success of a m entoring relationship. Research on the success of international students supports these findings. Elli s, Sawyer, Gill, Medlin and Wilson (2005) determined the need for non-English language students to receive more orientation and introduction to the academic experience as a bridge to understanding the cultural differences between the countries. Other s tudies support the notion that international students have a more satisfying learning exper ience and are more successful in their academic studies if offered mentoring progr ams (Ryan, 2005; Solem & Foote, 2004).

PAGE 46

32 Mentoring as a Tool of Success In Greek mythology, the goddess Athena took the form of Mentor and began the journey of guiding, advising, and encouraging the young Telemachus to find the trut h about the death of his father. Since then, the concept of mentoring has been used to signify a relationship in which a more experienced person helps guide the caree r of a younger, junior member, and assists this person as he or she “navigates the world of work” (Kram, 1985, p. 2). Deloz (1986) defines mentors as “interpreters of the environment” (p. 207). Mentors are people who help those with less experience better understand the culture in which they have find themselves. Similarly, theorists suggest that mentoring is an academic socializati on and collegial process that helps shape the academic community (Knight & Trow ler, 1999). Regardless of what definition one uses for mentoring, research has shown that to bec ome successful and obtain professional advancement, it can be helpful to have a network of people who can help open doors (Collins, 2008; Moody, 2004; Trower, 2010). This philosophy is almost identical to that of Lave and Wenger (1991) who maintain that learning is most effective when coupled with developing a sense of belonging and havin g an identity with a specific community. Mentoring is an important resource in the improvement of people (Higgins & Kram, 2001). Those who have participated in a mentoring relationship report higher job satisfaction, more career advances, and less work conflict (Dreher & Ash, 1990; Goodwin & Stevens, 1998; Nielson, Carlson, & Lankau, 2001; Tenenbaum, Crosby, & Gliner, 2001). Additional research indicates that meaningful mentoring helps facult y better adapt to the academic setting (Kram, 1985; Young & Perrewe, 2000). The

PAGE 47

33 organization, as a culture, benefits from these mentoring relationships because me ntors assist in creating an atmosphere that is conducive to proactive socializing and instills a supportive attitude toward the organization. In turn, mentoring improves productivity and fosters retention and leadership skills (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Goodwin & Stevens, 1998; Goodwin et al., 1998; Lankau & Scandura, 2002; Muth & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Wilson & Elman, 1990). To date, little has been written about training and mentoring programs for foreig nborn faculty, leaving some question about the effectiveness of mentoring for non-native born faculty. Although very little empirical research has been completed on the effectiveness of mentoring for foreign-born faculty, the benefits of mentor ing for international graduate students have been documented (Chattergy, 1994; Mortenson, 2006; Trice, 2005). Immigrants have been likened to “voluntary minorities” who have moved to the United States (Moody, 2004). Using this premise, I now explore the concept of cross-cultural mentoring programs as they have been applied to ethnic minorities a nd the possible effectiveness of these programs on the career success of forei gn-born faculty. Cross-Cultural Mentoring Mentoring across cultures involves the understanding of other cultures and the attitudes and beliefs that are associated with those cultures. In gener al, cross-cultural relationships are rife with differing beliefs, especially with respec t to beliefs about the educational process. A paucity of research on mentoring of foreign-born facult y exists. However, a wealth of research on mentoring of minorities exists. In order to underst and

PAGE 48

34 some of the difficulties that cross-cultural relationships experience, I a m extrapolating the research that has been conducted on minority faculty to foreign-born faculty. Faculty of color frequently experience a lack of inclusion by the majority fa culty (Johnsrud, 1993; Stanley, 2006). A lack of inclusion occurs for a variety of reasons, of which some are: the cross-cultural and social differences among the differe nt races (Blake-Beard et al., 2007; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2008; Johnsrud, 1993). Furthermore, non-majority faculty have difficulty learning the politic al and informal norms of the academic culture and US ethnicities (Boice, 1992a, 1992b; Finkelstein & LaCelle-Peterson, 1992). Many times these obstacles are not overcome until after the faculty apply for tenure and promotion. Consequently, non-majority faculty do not have as high a success rate at achieving tenure as their White counterparts (C arter & Wilson, 1992; Redmond, 1990). Brinson and Kottler (1993) uphold that developing a mentor-mentee relationship is one way by which minority faculty can formulate realistic career g oals and achieve success. Further, Ibarra (1995) produced evidence that ethnic minorities and women are diligently establishing mentoring relationships through networking and casual relationships. Developing a mentor-mentee relationship is one way through which minority faculty can formulate realistic career goals and achiev e success (Brinson & Kottler, 1993; Patton & Harper, 2003). Taking this a step further, several studies support the design and implementation of cross-cultural mentoring programs (Blake -Beard et al., 2007; Harris and Kumra, 2000; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002; Ragins, 1997; Tillman, 2001).

PAGE 49

35 Many academic institutions have begun to recognize their moral obligation to provide mentoring for their underrepresented faculty (Moody, 2004). They understand that mentoring relationships have value. They agree that mentoring programs ar e beneficial for ethnic minorities (Ragins, 1997; Stanley and Lincoln, 2005; Tillm an, 2001). Using Tillman’s (2001) original premise that mentoring is beneficial for e thnic minorities, Campbell (2005) observed that given the majority of higher education fa culty are White, it is extremely likely that minority faculty will have a Whit e mentor. Furthermore, very likely the White mentor will lack the cultural context in whi ch to ensure a successful mentor relationship. In fact, researchers have found that a base understanding of the cultures and attitudes of minority faculty is needed in order to improve the mentoring process (Sadao, 2003; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005). Cross-Cultural Mentoring Challenges Minority faculty have been found to benefit from a mentoring experience that fosters the development of one’s career and assists in socialization, a context that leads us to the complex cross-cultural aspects of mentoring (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Cross-cultural mentoring involves a contrast of social a nd cultural norms (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002). Grant-Thompson (1997) and Brinson and Kottler (1993) found that trust forms part of the fabric of solid mentoring relationships. Later, Kea, Penny and Bowman (2003) confirmed that mentoring, especially cross-cultural mentoring, should include a considerable measure of t rust. These studies suggest that cross-cultural mentoring might be most productive if built on a solid foundation of understanding and trust—a foundation devoid of racism and

PAGE 50

36 judgment. Clearly, the institutional culture influences the nature of relations hips between junior and senior faculty (Cullen & Luna, 1993). Therefore, it is important that the institutional culture appreciates and supports diversity. Cross-cultural mentoring typically employs many of the same concepts as traditional mentoring, with one major difference that cultural distinctiveness ne eds to be addressed in the interactions. Family structure, ethnic identity, ethnic value s, and regional differences are factors that come into play in cross-cultural me ntoring relationships. Factors such as these present barriers that can adversely a ffect the value of mentoring. It is not uncommon that people prefer to be mentored by others who are similar in ethnic group or race (Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2004). Consequently, establishing a culture of trust and openly recognizing the cultural differenc es and sociocultural factors can enhance the mentoring effectiveness (Johnson-Bai ley & Cervero, 2004). To carry this thinking further, Mullen (2005) recognized that cross-cultural mentoring is somewhat holistic in that it can be thought of as being a community-bas ed practice that encourages an awareness of diversity and antiracist progra ms, encourages equal access to schools and promotes electronic learning communities. Campbell (2005) has made it clear that in order to be effective, faculty who serve as mentors in a crosscultural mentoring relationship must have a multicultural point of view. Additiona lly, cross-cultural mentoring should be approached with a mutual understanding of the ethnic heritages and cultural differences of the mentor and the mentee (Brinson & Kottler, 1993; Campbell, 2005; Stanley & Lincoln, 2005).

PAGE 51

37 Benefits of Mentoring Mentoring has taken place in many arenas for centuries, but in academic s ettings mentoring has been carried out as an unstructured. Recently, academic insti tutions have looked at mentoring more formally because it has been linked to career success (R oche, 1979), leadership development (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Zaleznik, 1977), increased productivity (Zey, 1984), decreased stress (Fuller, Maniscalco-F eichtl & Droege, 2008), and personal growth (Levinson, Darrow, Kleen, Levinson, & McKee, 1978). Formal mentoring involves a relationship between a mentor and a mentee, usuall y through an organized program. The make-up of formal mentoring relationships varie s. They can be in the form of peer mentoring, team or mentoring circles, and str uctured networks (Douglas & McCauley, 1999; Kram & Hall, 1996). Formal mentoring periods also vary. Normally, the program director or manager dictates the length of the program, typically a year or less (Baugh & Fagenson-Eland, 2007). However, most of t hese formal mentoring relationships have not considered inequalities of race/culture, gender, a nd class (Darwin, 2000). Informal mentoring relationships, on the other hand, generally have been developed by happenstance. They are formed out of the needs and desires of the mentor and the protg (Allen, Day, & Lentz, 2005; Lyons & Oppler, 2004). Unlike formal mentoring relationships, informal ones can occur over any length of time. The cont ent is not structured and is up to the participants. Mentoring functions in formal and informal relationships also vary, although not all researchers agree to the extent of variation. Studies have shown that caree r support is

PAGE 52

38 more prevalent in informal relationships and psychosocial support is more prevalent in formal relationships (Baugh & Fagenson-Eland, 2007; Raabe & Beehr, 2003; Scandura & Williams, 2001). Nonetheless, research by Chao, Walz, and Gardner (1992) and Sosik, Lee, and Bouquillon (2005) determined that no differences were found between informal and formal relationships in organizational commitment, career involvement, or job satisfaction. However, no research could be found that examines the efficacy of mentoring programs, whether informal or formal, for the difficulties that f oreign-born faculty experience as they begin to teach in the American academy and work t owards tenure and promotion. Thus, for the purposes of this study, both formal and informal mentoring relationships, as they relate to ethnic minorities, are used as a benc hmark to study mentoring as a factor of academic career success for foreign -born faculty. Social Networks as A Form of Mentoring Mentoring has been found to provide junior faculty with both socialization into the academy and social networking connections (Williams & Kirk, 2008). A growing body of research suggests social networks and being socially engaged play an im portant part in the performance and ultimate success of individuals (Sparrowe et al., 2001; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Among the individual benefits of becoming part of a social network or a learning community are an increase in knowledge and skills, personal productivity, job satisfaction, and a greater feeling of a sense of belonging (Fontaine & Millen, 2004). The research of Fontaine and Millen, Ewing et al., (2008), Muth and Browne-Ferrigno, (2008), and others corroborates the findings reported earlier—t hat social contact and group interaction are vital components in becoming a well-functi oning part of the community in which they live and work.

PAGE 53

39 Researchers studying the socialization of foreign-born faculty found that, li ke their domestic counterparts, they suffered from high workloads and stress induced by t he demands of teaching and research (Boice, 1992b; Mamiseishvili & Hermsen, 2009; Menges, 1999; Olsen & Sorcinelli, 1992; Soylu, 2007; Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Tierney, 1997). Socialization involves acquiring behaviors of a group. It is not uncommon for new faculty to find that the expectations and practices of their instit utions differ widely from those that they experienced as graduate students (Re ynolds, 1992). They also tend to believe they are underprepared and are plagued with finding a bala nce between work and family (Reynolds, 1992). Minority and foreign-born faculty also experience some loneliness, isolation, and alienation (Cooper & Stevens, 2002; Willia ms & Kirk, 2008). Becoming a member of a community is similar to being involved in a social practice, such as serving as a mentor or a mentee. It is not unusual that studies about situated learning are concomitant to those of mentor relationships. Participant -observer behaviors, on-the-job training, and apprenticeships are examples of situated lear ning. It is through guidance and oversight, essential components in situated learning, that skills and behaviors are reinforced (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004). Conclusion The increase in and the importance of foreign-born scholars points to the need for higher education to have more awareness of their lives, to have a better understandi ng of the acculturation and adaptation they go through, the roles mentoring and social networks play in their lives, and their motivations. The experience of adapting to a new count ry and a new culture can put people in a position in which they experience feelings of being

PAGE 54

40 an outsider by both their native born culture as well as their adaptive culture. Much of the research that has been conducted on adaptation and acculturation centers on the topics of intercultural stress, communication, and interpersonal relationships. To a les ser degree, but still very important, are immigration challenges. It is these are as related to acculturation and adaptation that are a focus of this study. Motivation theories are numerous. The theories most pertinent to this study are those related to self-regulation and include ability, self-efficacy, sel f-determination, and goal setting. Culture also enters into the motivation factors of foreign-born fa culty. The work of Triandis (1995) and London (1983) provide insight into the career motivation section of this study. Social interactions and interpersonal relationships are a feature in the suc cessful adaptation of foreign-born individuals to a new cultural environment (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). As Campbell (2005) and Tillman (2001) reported, possessing a foundation of knowledge about the junior faculty memberÂ’s cultural and social factor s has been known to advance effective mentoring. Because of this need, mentoring has become a method to inculcate good teaching, research, and service practices into newly minted higher education faculty. I n turn, by honing these skills it is assumed that the new faculty will be more productive and successful in not only the classroom but also in their journey towards tenure and promotion and other advancements. Although American academic institutions are becoming more international a nd global both curriculum and faculty development, it behooves colleges and universities to be aware, act on the need, provide programs to support, and add to the success of foreign-

PAGE 55

41 born faculty. The process is in place, but more institutions need to advocate for these newcomersÂ’ successes in the academy (Trower, 2010). The challenges of for eign-born faculty to achieve reappointment, tenure, promotion, and, in many cases, advancement to administrative positions within colleges and universities are many. The rew ards should follow.

PAGE 56

42 CHAPTER III METHODS Research Design The purpose of this study is to obtain an understanding of the factors affecting the career success of foreign-born faculty in the American academy. To uncover t hese factors, I used a phenomenological approach. Phenomenology is used to investigate how individuals interpret their experiences (Patton, 2002). Its focus is on understanding the phenomenon and not looking specifically at the life of the individual. An underlying principle for using phenomenology is the collection of stories of lived experiences. Through the stories, experiences are uncovered, experiences that formed the bas is of my research. Phenomenology generally is thought to be either descriptive or interpretive Descriptive phenomenology, according to Husserl (1970), is a rigorous human science. Interpretive phenomenology, also known as hermeneutics, has been the focus of such researchers as Heiddeger, van Manen, and Gadamer (Laverty, 2003). For this study I chose a combination of descriptive phenomenology and hermeneutics. While the difference between the two rests mainly in the philosophical underpinnings of the research method and the procedures for analyzing the textual materials, bot h study the lived experience, and both involve using disciplined reflection. On the following pages, I give a brief overview of phenomenology and hermeneutics and describe the data generation and analysis used in this study.

PAGE 57

43 Methodology Edmund Husserl (1970), who promoted the idea that everyday experiences should not be overlooked when studying lived events, founded phenomenology. The focus of phenomenology is what an individual experiences and how that is translated to others in such a way as to provide more insight into what is being studied and ultimately to get to the basis of assumptions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Polkinghorne, 1989). The descriptive, or empirical, phenomenological approach I use here modifies the van Kaam (1966) and Giorgi (1985) methods. Giorgi, who aligned himself with Merleau-Ponty, the French empirical phenomenologist, analyzed descriptive sta tements of everyday experiences from a small (4 to 6) number of people. The crux of this methodology involves isolating the meaning of the statements and the lived experience s. Polkinghorne (1989), like Giorgi, believes isolating the meaning is a two-step proce ss. First, the researcher gives what he or she sees is the dominant meaning. Second, t he researcher delves deeper into the meaning by taking into consideration the topic of the study. Thereby, the whole meaning of what is shared is extracted. Using the methods of Moustakas (1994), I developed interview questions that would 1. seek to reveal more fully the essences and meanings of human experience, 2. seek to uncover the qualitative rather than the quantitative factors in behavior and experience, 3. engage the total self of the research participant and sustain personal and passionate involvement, 4. do not seek to predict or determine casual relationships, and

PAGE 58

44 5. illuminate, through comprehensive descriptions and vivid and accurate renderings of the experience, rather than measurements, ratings, or scores (Moustakas, 1994, p. 105). Study Setting This study was conducted in the Rocky Mountain region at a medium-size doctoral-granting teaching and research institution of higher education where f oreignborn faculty comprise approximately 8% of the faculty. The interviews were a ll conducted in private offices or the homes of the participants, depending on the prefere nce of the participant. Participant Selection Following the recommendation of Polkinghorne (1989) who recommended interviewing 5 to 25 people for a phenomenological study, I interviewed 11 faculty w ho met the minimum criteria of not being born in the United States and of having passed the pre-tenure comprehensive review. For the purposes of this study, the term foreig n-born faculty means individuals who were not born in the United States, although they could presently be naturalized or United States citizens. The sample consisted of bot h male and female faculty from the following countries: Canada, South Asia, Italy, Pola nd, Romania, Taiwan, West Indies, and Zimbabwe. In order to obtain a sufficient number of people for my study, I used a combination of snowball, purposive, and convenience sampling techniques. Typically in snowball sampling the sample is comprised of information rich key informants, loca ted by referrals from others. For this study, I obtained names of tenured and tenure-track foreign-born faculty from the college deans, the UniversityÂ’s Direct or of Institutional

PAGE 59

45 Research, and from foreign-born faculty themselves. I then obtained their countr y of origin, their rank, and, if an assistant professor, whether or not they had completed t heir pre-tenure comprehensive review. I also considered their gender and the departme nt of which they were a member. Once I had this information, I selected equal numbers of professors, associate professors, and assistant professors, representing as many different disciplines and countries as possible, and ensuring that each gender was represente d in each rank. In addition to the snowball sampling technique I used to obtain the specific participants, I also employed convenience sampling because of the ease of i dentifying the sample at the research site. I knew that this particular university employ ed foreign-born faculty from several countries and different disciplines. A downside, however to convenience sampling is that the samples are not scientific and should not be used to generalize to a larger population (Lavrakas, 2008). In snowball sampling, a danger arises that the informant may give false l eads. A danger also exists when employing snowball and convenience sampling techniques tha t the sample may not be as representative as it could be and credibility might be compromised (Miles & Huberman, 1994). To counter this, I asked all participants t o complete a demographic questionnaire that gave me their country of origin, w hether they were in a tenure track position and their rank, and if an assistant professor if the y had passed their pre-tenure comprehensive review. By asking these questions, I was able to confirm that the participants met the minimum criteria of being born outside the United States and having successfully passed the pre-tenure comprehensive review. I was also

PAGE 60

46 able to confirm the rank of each of the participants, which allowed me to ensure I had a ll professorial ranks represented. Although I originally asked twelve faculty to participate, after collect ing the demographic information I discovered that one of the faculty was an associate professor not an assistant professor. Given that this individual was from a country that was a lready well represented and from a discipline that was represented as well, I de cided not to include her. In the end, I interviewed five female and six male faculty, born in e ight different foreign countries, and had passed their pre-tenure comprehensive revie w. All professorial ranks were represented. Tables III.1 and III.2 summarize the demographics of the faculty, whom are identified by pseudonyms. Table III.1 Demographics of Foreign-Born Faculty ___________________________________________________ __________________________ Respondent Country Rank Discipline Years Degr ees in U.S. obtained in U.S. ______________________________________________ _________________________________________ . Michelle W. Indies Professor Education 41 All degrees Niraj India Professor Business 28 MS/PhD Mahish India Professor Engineering 45 MS/P hD Joseph Taiwan Professor Computer Science 32 MS/PhD Ellen Canada Assoc. Prof. Criminal Justice 12 None Teodor Romania Assoc. Prof. Mathematics 17 M S/PhD Aurek Poland Assoc. Prof. Physics 34 PhD Jenica Romania Asst. Prof. Mathematics 11 M S/PhD Zaid Zimbabwe Asst. Prof. Geography 10 PhD Eesha India Asst. Prof. Sociology 14 PhD Amelia Italy Asst. Prof. Mathematics 5 N one ___________________________________________________ ___________________ _________________ Note. Gives faculty memberÂ’s name, country of origi n, faculty rank, teaching discipline, years in the United States, and the number of degre es obtained in the United States.

PAGE 61

47 Table III.2 Demographics of Foreign-Born Faculty ___________________________________________________ __________________________ Respondent Country Rank English Years Year s as first language teaching teaching in US ___________________________________________________ ____________________________ Michelle W. Indies Professor Y 42 41 Niraj India Professor N 22 22 Mahish India Professor N 41 41 Joseph Taiwan Professor N 20 20 Ellen Canada Assoc. Prof. Y 17 11 Teodor Romania Assoc. Prof. N 16 16 Aurek Poland Assoc. Prof. N 34 34 Jenica Romania Asst. Prof. N 8 8 Zaid Zimbabwe Asst. Prof. N 5 5 Eesha India Asst. Prof. N 13 10 Amelia Italy Asst. Prof. N 9 5 ___________________________________________________ ___________________ _________________ Note. Gives faculty memberÂ’s name, country of origin, faculty rank, if English i s the personÂ’s first language, number of years teaching, and number of years teaching in the United States Review of Research Methods The phenomenological inquiry method that I used has three different processes consisting of (a) bracketing my experiences, (b) interviewing the study pa rticipants to find out their past and current experiences with the phenomena, and lastly by (c) analyzing the data from the interviews. The following paragraphs summarize t he method I used. First, I self-examined my personal ideas and assumptions with the phenomena in order to obtain an idea of the experience. By doing this, I sought to approach the resea rch with an unbiased perspective (Creswell, 2007). In the second process, I invest igated the participantsÂ’ past and present experiences with the phenomena by conducting an interview during which I asked them several questions. In order to garner the information I needed, I used in-depth interviewing, as recommended by Polkinghorn e

PAGE 62

48 (1989), as my primary strategy. Similarly, Patton (2002) categorized intervie ws into three types: the informal, conversational interview; the general interview w ith a guiding approach; and the standardized open-ended interview. In-depth interviews are conversation oriented and can be somewhat less formal than other forms. Although simple yes and no answers could give me what I want to know, I was also interes ted in obtaining additional information that more easily would come out by eliciting the participantsÂ’ perspectives. To determine personal information, I asked each faculty member in the study to complete a basic demographic questionnaire, which was used to confirm my sampl e characteristics and serve as a bias inhibitor, shown in Appendix A. This approach gave me information about where the participants received their degrees, how long they have been in the United States, their teaching experience, their rank and position, their gender, and their native language, all which can work separately or come together to inf luence mentoring relationships and, ultimately, their career success. Finally, I a nalyzed the data obtained from the interviews. A more thorough description of the process I used to obtain and analyze the data follows. Interview Protocol In phenomenological research, participants are commonly asked general, br oad questions (Moustakas, 1994). The overarching question for this study was what factors affect the academic career success of foreign-born faculty? The conce ptual framework found in Chapter 1 provided the foundation on which the study was conducted and the other interview questions were developed. The questions, divided into three sections,

PAGE 63

49 were asked in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the faculty memberÂ’s ex periences as a tenure track faculty member. I used the following interview protocol: The first section on academic career success focused on finding out more about the reasons the particular individual become a faculty member in an American university and to what the foreign-born faculty attributed her or his academic career success. The section on the role of mentoring and social networks explored the experiences the faculty members have with being mentored or being a mentor. It also ascertained if other relationships, such as department social support or famil y involvement, have helped her or him feel connected to the academic community. Obstacles and motivation to succeed were examined the find out more about different obstacles the faculty member may have experienced and what has motivated her or him to overcome the obstacles and succeed. The full set of interview questions, shown in Appendix B, were combined to form broader, more open-ended questions (shown in Appendix C) in order to encourage an open conversation about the faculty memberÂ’s experiences and their feelings beliefs, and convictions regarding the overarching question (Welman & Kruger, 1999). The questions shown in Appendix C were used for the interviews. Data Collection In order to confirm that my research questions were stated clearly and t he intent of the question was understood, I conducted a trial interview with two foreign-born faculty researchers in non-tenure track positions. The information obtained from t hese test interviews was not included in the findings; however, the results were us eful to refine

PAGE 64

50 the terminology of my questions and to ensure that the questions were clearly under stood and I had not used words that had the potential to be misunderstood. Each interview was held in a location determined by the participant and laste d 60 to 90 minutes. I recorded the interviews using a digital tape recorder. I al so took written notes related to personal observations of the participant during the interview process Interviews were transcribed and returned to each participant for verifica tion and confirmation of what I had captured. Data Analysis In hermeneutics, analysis is not solely about semantics. Instead, it is about thinking something through and finding a connection from the verbal text to what is probable (Crotty, 1998). Some researchers talk about the hermeneutic circle, whic h maintains that there is no certain starting point in the analysis of the writte n text (Polkinghorne, 1989). It is a mental, integrative process that looks carefully at ea ch part, then at the whole, and then returns to sections of the interview (Polkinghorne, 1989). With this in mind, and following both PolkinghorneÂ’s and CreswellÂ’s (2007) recommendations, I began the analysis with bracketing my personal experie nces with the phenomenon. Bracketing is the act of suspending judgment and preconceptions about the natural world and to view the world as the participants see it and is a method used to control bias. For this study, I sat down with a colleague not involved in the study and articulated my personal thoughts, ideas, assumptions, and any biases I may hav e had towards either foreign-born faculty, their countries of origin, their languag e and communication abilities, the different departments of which the faculty were me mbers,

PAGE 65

51 and what I knew of support systems offered to them. I also brought out any preconceive d ideas I had relating to what I would find when I analyzed the interviews. The bracketing exercise forced me to realize these biases and set them aside so I could approach the interviews and the analysis with no predetermined ideas of the outcome based on gender, discipline, culture, language ability, or the specific depart ment and the university. The bracketing process, however, was not conducted only one time. Instead, I found that occasionally my personal beliefs and suppositions would enter int o my analysis. When I realized that I was interjecting my own ideas into the study, I would take a break and write down what I was thinking. This worked to clear my mind so I could become more focused on the data as seen from the eyes of the faculty in the study. To conduct the analysis, I used a combination of CreswellÂ’s (2007) perspective on data analysis, which is a combination of analytical techniques of Colaizzi (1978) and Moustakas (1994), and open coding as explained by Strauss and Corbin (2008). The Colaizzi and Moustakas combined method consists of multiple steps during which I focuses on statements made by the studyÂ’s participants. Significant sta tements were then broken down into meanings and grouped into themes. Open coding involves taking data, or in this case, words and phrases, and examining them and breaking them down into ideas (Strauss & Corbin, 2008). To employ the open coding method and to provide me with as thorough an understanding of the interviews as possible, I listened and re-listened to the recorded intervie ws and read the transcribed interviews multiple times. While a line-by-line exami nation of the data could be used, that method tends to be very tedious. Instead, I concentrated on paragraphs, sentences, and phrases, and broke these down into codes, which were then

PAGE 66

52 formed into themes. In order to obtain a deeper understanding of the factors affe cting the career success of the participants, I coded each transcribed interview usi ng terms derived from the conceptual framework. After reviewing the conceptual framework (found i n Chapter I), I initially came up with 26 codes. Further readings and receivin g input from two independent coders resulted in a total of 30 codes. The resultant data were enter ed into a spreadsheet on which I linked statements from each interview to the codes. This provided a visual replication of all the codes as they were associated with eac h interview. Once all interviews were coded and entered into the spreadsheet, clusters of sub-themes were constructed. Using ColaizziÂ’s (1978) method, which consists of reviewing t he transcripts, picking out re-occurring phrases and words, and grouping the words or codes into themes, I took the 30 codes and reduced them into three themes, as detailed in Table III.3 below. These themes related to the types of mentoring and social networ king the faculty experienced, obstacles they confronted, and motivational factors that pl ayed a role in their career success.

PAGE 67

53 Table III.3 Codes and Resultant Themes ______________________________________________________________ Code Theme ___________________________________________________________________ Gender-biased work environment Feelings of being alone No sense of community Language accent Adaptation Assimilation Homesickness Food Teaching and research as time consuming Alienation/exclusion Freedom to do what you want Flexibility Willing to put in extra effort Family academics Family expectations Commitment to task Confidence in abilities Enjoyment in helping others Perseverance Stubbornness Time commitment Grant incentives Family Friends Department Chair/Supervisor Colleagues Advisor No guidance Teaching Advice Publishing collaborations ____________________________________________________________________ Note. The codes are the result of further analyzing the phrases selected fr om the interviews. The themes are the result of reoccurring codes and the mea ning of the codes. Verification and credibility. Some of the qualitative procedures for ensuring credibility include clarification of researcher bias, member checks, obser vation, peer review, and debriefing (Creswell, 2007). To support the concepts of validity and credibility, I followed CreswellÂ’s recommendations and by bracketi ng my experiences with the phenomena as explained earlier I ensured that I, as the interviewe r, did not influence the contents of the participantsÂ’ descriptions in such a way that the des criptions Obstacles: Striving for a sense of belonging Obstacles: Striving for a sense of belonging Motivation: Internal and External Influences Motivation: Internal and External Influences Mentoring: Support through Relationships Mentoring: Support through Relationships

PAGE 68

54 did not truly reflect the participantsÂ’ actual experience. To ensure that the transcription of the interviews was accurate and conveyed the meaning of the oral presentati on in the interview, I sent each participant a copy of her or his transcript, and asked that t hey review and make any revisions they saw were needed to answer the question wit h the information they intended. Three of the participants revised some of their answe rs; another clarified what he had said because it was inaudible. Intercoder reliability. To assist in confirming validity, I used the intercoder reliability method. Using the codes that I had determined, two professional c olleagues, who have no interest in the study and do not know any of the studyÂ’s participants, each coded two of the interview transcripts. In order to give them the context of the st udy, I reviewed the study with each and sent them the conceptual framework and the lis t of codes that I had determined. Upon their completing the coding, we reviewed the res ults together in a conference call. The independent coders added a total of four codes to the original 26 I had first come up with. This gave a total of 30 codes. They agreed t hat the codes I had developed were sufficient given the conceptual framework and the st udyÂ’s focus. However, the ones that they suggested adding provided more insight into the li ves of the faculty and what some of the faculty saw was important to them. In three ins tances the codes I used were not the exact words one of the independent coders noted she would use. However, the meanings were the same so we agreed that the codes overlapped. In another case, the word that I used was agreed upon. By using this method, I was a ssured that the codes I had assigned were viable, and with the addition of the codes from the independent coders I was confident in my analysis of the interviews.

PAGE 69

55 Threats to validity. Validity refers to the idea that research is well-grounded and supported (Polkinghorne, 1998). Of concern to researchers are several concepts among which is if the interviewer in some way influenced the content of the interviews (Polkinghorne, 1998). A potential threat to the validity of my data collection could have been from the close proximity of my work place with those of the participants. We are faculty at the same university; however, none of the participants report to me or a re in my college. Two of the participants are fellow deans and we have frequent and close interactions. I knew two of the other participants, but did not have a working relationship with either other than occasionally being in a meeting together. I knew of, but ha d not personally met, the other seven. A related potential threat was the fact that as a dean and a professor, I am a t a higher rank than the majority of the participants. I did not get the impression tha t this interfered with their telling of their stories, even though some of what they talke d about was personal. In fact, since the interviews I have talked with five of the part icipants. They are very interested in my progress and have given me encouragement to r esearch this topic further. Finally, the age, gender, cultural, and racial difference s between each of the participants and me did not seem to present any problems. I took additional care to ensure that I did not project a higher status nor did I say or infer anything that would reinforce that I am an older, White female. After all, the studyÂ’s part icipants are the ones with their doctorate, not me.

PAGE 70

56 CHAPTER IV RESULTS Several studies confirm that foreign-born faculty bring a wealth of talent and productivity to the American economy, they substantially contribute to the scholars hip and research of American colleges and universities, and they augment the internationalization activities within higher education (Chellaraj, Maskus, & Mattoo, 2006; Corley & Sabharwal, 2007; Liu, 2001; Mamiseishvili, 2010; Marvasti, 2005; Regets, 2007; Theobald, 2007). Manrique and Manrique (1999) note that foreign-born scholars were becoming among the most visible symbols of the changing landscape within todayÂ’s academic institutions. Perhaps, then, one of the more important roles of foreign-born faculty is that they serve as a resource for internationali zing the curriculum and contributing to the global competence and citizenship of the campus, a focus to which many colleges and universities are committed (Basti, 1996; Mamisei shvili, 2011). The conceptual framework, given in Chapter 1 and below, around which this study was organized, connects the factors associated with oneÂ’s success in higher education with the research on the experiences of foreign-born faculty. The fr amework is a graphic of circular arrows connecting the overall successes of foreignborn faculty with potential factors that lead to these successes.

PAGE 71

57 This study, based on prior literature that recognizes foreign-born faculty experience obstacles in their quest to achieve tenure and promotion, assumes that s uch faculty are motivated by activities, people, and their own volition motivate them ; and that they receive encouragement and guidance from a variety of people. In addition, one question, which sought to determine the factors that affect the academic caree r success of foreign-born faculty, guided my research. This chapter focuses on the three themes that surfaced after analyzing the participant interviews and the inter-relationship of these themes with the li terature as they relate to the overall academic career success of the 11 foreign-born facul ty interviewed. All quotations are from responses of the participants to the open-response questions that constituted the interviews.

PAGE 72

58 The full set of interview questions with prompts appears in Appendix B. Appendix C is the set of questions that was developed by combining the questions from Appendix B. The questions in Appendix C were used to frame the discussion. The questions in Appendix B were used to obtain additional information in the event the participant did not understand what I asked or if he or she was having difficulty answering what was asked. I posited that foreign-born faculty experienced obstacles much like those of the ir native-born counterparts but also faced additional obstacles. I also speculated that foreign-born faculty were motivated by both internal and external factors, and r eceived support and guidance in the way of mentoring (whether informal or formal) and support from social networks such as friends. What I found follows. Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging Like most faculty, these foreign-born faculty were faced with obstacle s in their academic careers. Finding oneÂ’s way as he or she becomes an effective t eacher and finding the time to accomplish the research that needs to be done to achieve tenure ar e fairly common across academia. Communication Obstacles To be an effective teacher, faculty needs to communicate well verbally. Without adequate communication skills, even those with significant discipline or subject e xpertise can fail in the sense that students can become disengaged from the lesson (Kavas & Kavas, 2008; Liu, 2004). The majority of the faculty in this study found that, irrespect ive of the number of years that they had spoken English, dialect, accent, and other interpersonal communications issues were difficulties for which they had to m ake

PAGE 73

59 adjustments. For some it was easy. For others it was not. Zaid, an assistant profes sor from Zimbabwe, stated that occasionally he found himself thinking that if he had an American accent, his teaching scores would have been higher. Statements si milar to that illustrate the concern the faculty had with respect to their language abili ty. This faculty had to make a concerted effort to become more proficient with American English, i n particular, oral English, and, to a lesser extent, written English. It has come dow n to wanting to have a sense of belonging to the society in which they were living and teaching. Oral communication challenges. English is an official language in 52 countries and is spoken by nearly one-third of the worldÂ’s population (OÂ’Neil, 2009). Nonetheless, English is a language that differs among countries and, in particular, cultures. R egional dialects are present in many cultures, as are accents. It is these dialec ts and accents that may interfere with the teaching effectiveness of foreign-born faculty ( Kavas & Kavas, 2008; Marvasti, 2005). Ten of the eleven faculty had, what they considered, a suitable level of English proficiency when they arrived in the United States. Of these ten, English was t he first language for two of the faculty. For the other eight, English was not their prima ry language when growing up. As told below, seven of the ten faculty recounted some anxiety in the classroom due to their language proficiency. One of the studyÂ’s participants is a native English language speaker. Canadi an English is this facultyÂ’s first language. While the difference seems to be i nsignificant, it is a difference that has caused her some discomfort and embarrassment and has not been overlooked by some students. As Ellen, an associate professor from Canada, menti oned,

PAGE 74

60 “I had some students who kept a tally of the number of times I said ‘au’ [Canadian raising dialect].” Ellen’s discomfort was not because the students could not understa nd what she was saying, nor was it because she was an ineffective instructor. Ra ther, it was because they would laugh and mimic her accent when she talked. She was both embarrassed and worried that such denigration might adversely affect her t eaching ratings. The language differences Eesha related were similar to Ellen’s and support ed the research and indicates that accents alert people to a cultural difference which can lead some students to become critical of the accent (Marvasti, 2005; Mamiseishvili, 2010; Kevas & Kevas, 2008). Eesha, an assistant professor from South Asia, fluently spe aks five languages, of which English is one. She has lived in several foreign countrie s and has degrees from three different countries, including the United States. Even so, di fferent dialects and accents were a common obstacle with all of this study’s partici pants. As Eesha explained, I came to the US straight from England and my accent used to be very obviously English. Students would write in my evaluations that I sound like the Queen and that I was a bit snobbish. I had to work on it, I had to try to mellow out and sound a little bit American. Like Eesha, Zaid, born and raised in Zimbabwe, learned English as a small child. English was the primary language during his undergraduate and master’s degre e years in Zimbabwe. He then went on to receive his doctorate in the United States, where English became his primary language. Regardless of the fact that Zaid has spent over 20 years speaking English almost daily, he has experienced several language-related issues, which include accent, spelling, and pronunciation.

PAGE 75

61 My accent is British—spelling a nd pronunciation. So it becomes challenging when you see blank faces on students. You think someone says, “the route (pronounced root) to Denver is on I-25”, it may take people a minute to understand that you meant route and not root. You have a few students who initially don’t appreciate that diversification and that they could learn a few things from this guy and where he’s from. Then you find students who appreciate it and take that into account when they are evaluating you. It could be that your evaluations are a bit lower, but I think that comes with the territory. It is experiences like Zaid’s, Eesha’s, and Ellen’s that demonstrate some of the difficult interactions between foreign-born faculty and native-born students. With respect to Zaid’s and Eesha’s experiences, the conflict was both a language gap and a cultural gap. Whereas Ellen’s conflict stemmed from a language gap of which her accent was the trigger. As Kavas and Kavas (2008) reported, some foreign-born faculty experie nce what they call the “oh, no!” syndrome which characterizes the students’ reactions when finding out their teacher has a foreign accent. Similarly, Niraj, a professor who was born and raised in South Asia, found that he had to work diligently to reduce his accent and improve his speech patterns in order to not be discriminated against. He said that his own experiences as an undergraduate s tudent in the United States showed him how difficult it can be to follow someone with a different accent and dialect. The reaction voiced by Niraj supported the notion that students’ perceptions of teachers with different accents or speech patterns than theirs react unfavorably because they may not be able to understand the lectures and might do poorly in the course (Borjas, 2000; Kavas & Kavas, 2008). When graduate students would come in to teach, and if they were from Eastern Asia, I would say, “Oh, I won’t be able to follow them.” So I didn’t want remarks like that put on me. I had to work on my accent. It was difficult because I did not get good scores my first semester, which was very disappointing.

PAGE 76

62 Eesha, Niraj, and Ellen experienced the ramifications of having an accent diff erent from the students they teach. Eesha strived to minimize her accent in order to sound “less snobbish.” Niraj worked hard to lessen his South Asian accent so his students would understand him and comprehend his lectures. Ellen? It has been these language gaps t hat have enriched students’ lives and has provided them with a global experience without the need of participating in international travel opportunities, such as study abroad. To counter the possibility of a negative experience, some faculty introduced new or different teaching strategies as mentioned below to communicate effecti vely with their students. Zaid, for one, desired to be successful and was convinced that he would be judged on his accent because he knew he would be evaluated on things that “other Americans may not be assessed on,” such as his accent. Although he found the process challenging, his teaching evaluations were high. Zaid still has an accent, but his high teaching evaluations quite possibly have been due in part to the time he has taken ti me to know his students and to encourage them to know more about him and where he is from. What I do in my classes is that the first two slides are about me and my background and where I am from. Then I talk a little about Zimbabwe and then I give them that background. I tell them that initially, I am going to be repeating things and talking more slowly until we get to the point where you get used to my accent. And they are comfortable and appreciate what I do. Zaid made a point to introduce African culture to his students and encouraged them to share their backgrounds. He turned what others may have regarded as a negat ive into a positive trait and a means by which to encourage students to learn about differences and to become more interested in other countries in the world. With this approach to his teaching, Zaid sought to bridge t he language and well as the cultural gap that seemed to exist in the classroom. He used his accent to create a rich learning environme nt.

PAGE 77

63 Like Zaid, Aurek found that taking an obstacle and turning it into an opportunity worked well. Aurek, an associate professor from Poland, was the sole faculty mem ber in the study who arrived in the United States with very little English proficie ncy. Upon finding that, as a first year doctoral student, his teaching assignment was t o run a lab for pharmacy students, he “made an agreement that I would teach them something about physics and they would teach me English.” This approach was well received. By bei ng forthright about his lack of English language skills, Aurek felt that he was able to turn what could have been a very difficult period in his first teaching assignment i nto a positive one. Interpersonal communication challenges. Interpersonal exchanges are also among the language and communication obstacles related by the participants related. Many of the interpersonal challenges described by the faculty had a cultur al facet. Cultural gaps exist because of differences in socialization and the discrepa ncies in classroom expectations (citation). Cultural differences affect the ways students relate and respond to faculty who are different from them (Diamini, 2002; Hamilton, 2002; Kavas & Kavas, 2008). It is these differences that the faculty wanted to avoid, and when they noticed confusion among their students, some, like Eesha and Zaid, took steps to erase any misunderstandings that occurred. People who move to a different culture as adults take with them those traits and personal identities that they developed as a child. It is within these traits and identities that cultural values and beliefs lie. What is considered acceptable in one cultur e to discuss with others is not necessarily so in other cultures. For example, Eesha r ecalled that it has been somewhat difficult getting used to local customs and the decreas ed level

PAGE 78

64 of privacy exhibited among her colleagues. Discussing one’s private life wa s not a lunchtime topic that she was accustomed to engage in. According to Eesha, “there wa s a bit of culture shock.” She was used to a more formal, yet collegial, environment. Adjustments had to be made, adjustments related to how she interacted with office mat es and her students. She wanted to appear “normal” and “strong” to her students as well as her teaching colleagues. Nonetheless, she found a few things were difficult for her to understand and accept. Over the past few years, she slowly became more accustomed to the infor mality and open nature of conversations with others in her department and in particular with her students. Although this has been somewhat difficult for her, she has become used to being told “too much information” at times. This type of cultural gap was also encountered by Zaid, who found the lack of formality in the American university setting somewhat disturbing. You are used to addressing your professors by their titles, but then you have someone who just says, ‘Hey, Zaid!’ The Zimbabwe system is the British system and there is a huge gap between the instructor and the student and you maintain that gap. You wouldn’t say those kinds of things. So there is a gap and sometimes you want someone who appreciates those kinds of things. I mean those things are small, but it makes a difference. According to Zaid, this can be seen as a small thing, but it made a difference to hi m. He realized that he was appreciated and respected by his students. However, to count eract the feelings of not being appreciated due to the informality of some of the students he has made a conscious effort to learn more about the cultural differences and the differences in the educational systems. He also reached out to a fellow Zimba bwean who teaches in the Southeastern region of the United States, and the two of them discusse d the

PAGE 79

65 differences of the cultures at the universities where they teach. In addition to the cultural differences regarding the level of privacy she d escribed, some of Eesha’s students held beliefs about the provocative topics that she raised i n the classroom Other obstacles are sometimes in the classroom I am viewed as a foreig ner so when I discuss controversial issues they think I have a personal agenda or something, which is not the case. The odd part is I am teaching from the syllabus whatever I am required to teach. But just because it is being delivered by me there are one or two student who will start wondering, “wait a minute, she is trying to be critical.” And I am a sociologist and I have to refute that. I have to make them think. I have to push their boundaries. Sometimes I think if I were a regular American professor here they wouldn’t even think twice that I raised these questions. But just because of my foreign status. So that’s a drawback. For Eesha, these instances served as an opportunity to introduce her students to diffe rent cultures and different ways of thinking. They also gave her a chance to reinf orce her role as a sociologist and to encourage her students to think critically. Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation Coping with some feelings of loneliness and isolation, or experiencing alienati on was indicated by 50% of the participants. Inclusion within the American higher education system has, for several years, been discussed and debated. Feelings of aloneness have been prevalent for Jenica, beginning with her arrival in the United States to begin her coursework for a master’s degree and then a doctora te. Not only did Jenica, an assistant professor from Romania, not know anyone in the United States when she moved here to work on her master’s degree but once she started her coursework, she also found that she felt very much isolated in her efforts to become a good teacher and scholar. Could she reach out to others for support? Yes, but, as she mentioned, the cultural divide gave her pause:

PAGE 80

66 I have been feeling pretty much alone in my efforts to become a good teacher and scholar. I get the feeling that the senior faculty in my department have long gone over the stressful phase of the tenure track and have not made any effort to be supportive of the junior faculty. Coming from a culture that respects seniority greatly, I have been reluctant to a sk for guidance from these faculty. Her sense of aloneness was rooted in the attitudes projected by senior faculty and her hesitancy to seek help because she did not want to disturb them. These same feelings of isolation were experienced by Eesha, but her explanation for her isolation diff ered. When she was a doctoral student and now as a scholar, Eesha believed that her feeli ngs of aloneness were a by-product of her research and her areas of study, which have interfered somewhat with her ability to make a core group of friends here in the U nited States. As she remarked, Being a doctoral student can be a lonely process, because your research is yours and no matter your committee or whoever you have at the end of the day, you are on your own with your data. That is one aspect and my research was international research which means I was going to different countries to get my data. I was not even here. Unlike the others, Michelle, who is a full professor from the West Indies and moved to the United States as a college freshman, experienced different feelings of b eing all by oneÂ’s self shortly after she took her first teaching position in the United Stat es. MichelleÂ’s aloneness was a product of being put in charge of developing a new pro gram of study and having no resources to consult in order to establish and grow the program. During the middle of the first semester, my dean called me in and told me he was very disappointed in my performance. He said we got you here so that you could create a reading department and you have done nothing at all except teach. I was horrified. Nobody has ever called me incompetent before. This was my first semester. I thought I would be able to fit in some place. Nobody said here is a book you can use. No. It was, hereÂ’s your office and that was it. You were left alone. It was a very hard time. Aloneness, isolation, and alienation involve different feelings. Michelle refl ected on

PAGE 81

67 receiving no help as she struggled to create a new program. Eesha, on the other hand, talked about feelings of being alone and being left to one’s own devices with respect to conducting her research, which took her out of the country, making her not readily available to cultivate friendships. Ellen and Aurek, on the other hand, experienced alienation through unfriendliness, hurtful comments, and some hostility. Ellen’s fee lings of alienation stemmed from a skewed vision of the capabilities of our Canadian neighbors: The Canadian thing was more of a joke and most of the time I can laugh it off. But it is sometimes these negative comments, the sarcasm about Canada. It is petty things like, “well, you’re Canadian, how much could you know?” I don’t know why people do it. To counter these types of incidents, Ellen learned to laugh at herself and often would make a “Canuk” joke. She has recognized that she is an accomplished researcher, but, to her dismay, she occasionally would experience feelings of alienation and some hos tility, because she is Canadian. Aurek’s feelings of alienation partly are due to his reticence to share t he ‘macho’ image of his departmental colleague. Although he has male friends and gets a long well with his brother who is also an academician in the same discipline, Aurek acknowled ged that he is considerably more comfortable in the company of women and described what he saw as a profound gender bias in his department. One of the obstacles is the profound gender bias in my department. Since I am comfortable in general around men and much more comfortable around females even going to conferences is difficult. I cannot stand the atmosphere which is 90-95% male and I just feel totally alienated. I feel alienated in our tiny department. I feel very little contact with anybody else because they are all males and they can’t quite understand what is wrong with me.

PAGE 82

68 Nevertheless, Aurek did not let these feelings of alienation deter him from be coming tenured and a respected member of the campus. Yet, he has made a conscious effort to let his colleagues know how he felt when their comments became alienating t o him. He said he attends department meetings and when the “locker room mentality” comes out, he steps forward and requests that his colleagues step back and asks them to Stop your curt jokes which I don’t understand, or I will come back when you guys are done so we can get back to the business that we need to do. I’m not trying to change you, you can be whoever you want to be, but I will wait. It is this kind of thinking that has come from years of experience and the knowledge that he has achieved what he has wanted. He related that he liked teaching, he enjoyed being at the university, and little by little he was t rying to set a different, more accepting, tone in his department. These four faculty are aware of loneliness due to leaving friends and fami ly, moving to a new country thousands of miles away, speaking a new language, arriving in a new land with a different cultural background, or not receiving assistance and bein g left alone to “figure things out” and develop a new program. Although native-born faculty may experience feelings of aloneness due to moving to a new part of the country or to a new academic setting, foreign-born faculty are also likely to experience alienation and feelings of aloneness and being different because of the cultural and langua ge differences they have to suffer. Feelings of Differentness Aurek’s feelings of alienation quite possibly are the result of his culture, a culture that projects warmth and friendliness, a culture that thinks nothing of greeting some one with a peck on the cheek or a hug, and a culture that has a tendency to be forthcoming of

PAGE 83

69 one’s thoughts (Schumacher, 2011). These feelings may also result from Aurek’s be ing a member of a “good old boy” department, where those who are different tend to be left out (Manrique & Manrique, 1999). Other feelings of being different arose from having darker skin. As a dar k skinned South Asian, Mahish remarked that he has been subjected to some bias because of the color of his skin as well as his country of origin. You can say anything about this country getting away from racism but it exists a lot. I would say that many people, not just of color, but maybe like Eastern Europeans, even South Americans who are the same color. I think for them they are brought up in a different society to look at things a little bit differently so they are a little more subservient than the locals So color has a lot to do with it. Michelle, a professor who grew up in the West Indies, has experienced simila r feelings and said that she never wanted anyone to think she was appointed to her job because of her ethnicity. She also mentioned that no one “can afford to be normal if you are the only black woman on campus.” However, as a Jamaican, she described herself as “in the cleft culturally” and has found that her culture has been a source of confusion and added mor e preconceptions about her than simply the fact that she has dark skin. Many black adults feel I am not black, because my culture is a lot closer to Croatians. My speech, my language, my being is in the cleft. African Americans do not think I am black enough and Caucasians think I am black, so there I stand in the cleft. Teaching and Research Obstacles For some faculty, whether native-born or foreign-born, becoming a good teacher can be a demanding undertaking and threaten one’s success. For five of the eleven faculty, this was the case. As Joseph, a professor from Taiwan, mentioned Teaching is very critical. I am very comfortable in terms of rese arch, but in terms of teaching and public speaking, I am not very comfortable at all.

PAGE 84

70 The first thing I needed to do was how to make my lecture well organized. I think students can find out how much effort you bring to teaching just by looking at the organization of your content. But, there was no help. So I found out I better find out how to teach, what is a good way to help students and to organize my lectures, so I went to the library, and the librarian helped guide me and found me some books and tapes. That helped. Even though Jenica had teaching experience as a graduate student, she still found teaching as a faculty member to be somewhat difficult. I have had my share of challenges. In terms of teaching, the hardest part has been to adjust to a different student demographic, to find a common ground with kids who have not been outside the country or the state, but have also not been exposed to a lot of diversity in their own lives here. Unfortunately, I have not found much help with my teaching. It is, however, through teaching that foreign-born faculty can have the best e ffect on their students (Mamiseishvili, 2010, 2011). Becoming and remaining an effective teach er takes time, as some of the faculty mentioned. Amelia was a tenured professor i n her native country of Italy before she took a tenure track position in the United States, a nd she has been teaching in the US for several years. However, she has continued to find it to takes a considerable amount of time and effort in order to be prepared. Even though her department has tried to accommodate her if she has a schedule conflict, she ha s found it challenging when she has multiple preparations such as when she teaches two or even three different courses, in a language that is not her first language. Similarly, Jenica has also found that between her teaching and researc h commitments she has little time for anything else. Like Amelia and the ot hers, she teaches an average load of two classes one semester and three another. On top of t his, she has an aggressive research agenda.

PAGE 85

71 Although finding time to accomplish what is needed to be an effective teacher and a productive researcher is not unique to foreign-born faculty, the one factor forei gn-born faculty experience that native-born faculty typically do not is the requirem ent to prepare and execute their lesson plans in English. As Zaid explained And then, for teaching, if English is not your first language you have to have everything ready before class. You canÂ’t improvise so there is a lot of preparation. English fluency more commonly is a factor that affects oneÂ’s teaching abi lity, or at the least oneÂ’s perceived teaching ability (Theobald, 2007). Likewise, fluency is also connected to where one obtained their college degrees, country of origin, and ethnic ity (Theobald, 2007). Nonetheless, other reasons appertain for some of the teaching and research discrepancies between foreign-born and native-born faculty, of which the type of academic institution and the rigor of the universityÂ’s research expectati ons. On the other hand, faculty, in spite of the fact that they worried about their teaching ability and language skills in the classroom, have received encoura gement and excitement from teaching. Zaid was one of the faculty who appreciated the fle xibility he had been given and the ability to develop new courses for the curriculum. He also understood the importance of his position as a teacher. You learn to love something once you are in it. Just like some of my students who are taking my course because they are required. ItÂ’s my role to excite them and let them know that this is a serious career, this is what you can do and this is how much you can earn once you are done. So thatÂ’s how I treat my students, because some are taking the courses because theyÂ’ve been asked to take them, and then my role is to change their minds. When it came to discussing the challenges they have experienced regarding the ir research, two of the faculty admitted they would benefit from having someone to ass ist in

PAGE 86

72 the writing of grants and to proofread manuscripts. Regardless that he has recei ved several grants, Joseph remarked that it would be most helpful to him if someone would proofread grant proposals. Some of this is simply because of the need to ensure everything that is needed in the proposal was there. However, another part was the need to have someone make sure the correct English terms and sentence structure has be en used. Zaid needed assistance in writing because it took so much time to write in English. English was not his first language, and many times he found that he had to translate his thoughts into English. If you want to write at the level of English speaking people, itÂ’s going to take a long time. It takes me double or triple the amount of time. Some of my ideas I think about in my native language and then I have to translate them. ZaidÂ’s publishing in English concern was not unfounded. However, not all foreign-bor n faculty find they have to publish in English. Concurrently, not all native-born faculty publish in English as oneÂ’s research focus and discipline can dictate the language i n which the research is written. The fact remains that editors have found that they face predicaments when editing manuscripts submitted by non-native researchers (Pagel, Kendall, & Gibbs, 2002). Mahish offered this explanation on conducting research for something more than for the sake of simply fulfilling an obligation. I think being in an academic institution is a unique position. First of all, it introduces you to a lot of bright minds. When I came here, I came with a multiple purpose of doing research, which is applicable to the local industry. The interest in doing things for society, for the students is somehow in my blood.

PAGE 87

73 Visa Obstacles Possessing the proper documents that allow an individual to live and work in the United States is a multifaceted obstacle and one that all foreign-born facul ty confront. Obtaining work permits and residency documents have become considerably more complex and difficult since the September 11, 2001, events at the World Trade Center. It is widely accepted that American immigration policies are confusing a nd complex (Liu, 2004). The participants in this study were typical of other foreign -born faculty in that they all had to obtain the appropriate visa in order to live and work in the United States, regardless of whether they were here as a student or if they c ame to work. The differences among the faculty in this study are more disparate because a l ittle over half of them arrived in the United States no fewer than 16 years ago, during a time when, even though there were immigration policies and the need for proper work documentation, the process was both easier and quicker. None of the faculty who had been here 16 or more years mentioned having problems obtaining a work visa. However, the remaining five mentioned visa challenges. Among the complications experienced by the faculty included concern and stres s over the length of time it took to obtain the needed work permits. Amelia, an assistant professor from Italy, recounted the feelings of stress that she felt as she was getting ready to move to the United States to teach. I still remember those six to eight hours after I moved here. I unpacked everything and then I panicked. I was even sick, and thatÂ’s because it was very stressful with the visa because this is one of the things that makes life hard if you are a foreign-born faculty member. The J-1 (student) visas are a lot easier to get. But I moved here in August and was waiting for the H-1 visa. It arrived 11 hours before my flight.

PAGE 88

74 Another challenge the faculty faced has been the requirement that one must be a lega l resident of the United States in order to apply for most federal grants. Frequentl y, obtaining grants are part of a college’s tenure and promotion criteria. Wit h only six years to obtain tenure, an urgency exists to receive permanent residency in order to apply f or and be awarded grants. Eesha lamented that she currently was here on an H-1B visa and did not have permanent residency, which made her ineligible to apply for grants. To her, her residency status was a “catch 22 situation.” She needed to obtain grants in order to pass her comprehensive review and ultimately receive tenure. However, she has been unable to be awarded some grants because she does not have her permanent residency pape rs. H-1B visas are not, however, the only document by which many of this study’s participants initially came to the United States. As Jenica mentioned, J-1 vis as, which are given to students coming to the United States to study, are easier to get. A full 82% of the participants in this study obtained at least one degree in the United States Therefore, only two of the 11 participants needed to obtain an H-1 visa either prior to or shortly upon arriving in the United States to teach. One emigrated here from Canada. Betw een the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and her ability to come here on a spousal visa, she did not experience the delays and the stress the others did. However, she was fortunate because she entered the U.S. as a spouse as well as under NAFTA. As Ellen mentioned, I actually wanted to stay in Canada, but I also wanted to be at a big PhD school. I came down with my ex-husband; he was my husband at the time. He was a dual citizen, and they had run out of J-1 visas by the time I came, so some schools would actually not have been able to bring me in on a J.

PAGE 89

75 Each of the other nine were originally here as students and worked either as a te aching assistant or a research assistant while obtaining a doctorate. Only when they accepted a teaching position and decided to remain in the United States were they required to a pply for their legal work permits and eventually apply for permanent residency. Generational differences around residency seemed to exist as well. The fac ulty who had been here longer than 10 years did not express concern with obtaining a visa. As I discussed in Chapter 2, those who have come to the United States after Septem ber 11, 2001 have fallen under stricter visa requirements. It is the newer faculty who ta lked about the stress and the challenges obtaining the appropriate work documentation. Being faced with challenges tends to be a normal part of becoming a tenured faculty member. Some of the obstacles experienced by foreign-born faculty include those commonly held by native-born faculty. However, there are unique challenges foreign-born faculty face. Among these are feelings of loneliness, isolation or alienation; cultural and language differences; teaching and research challenges; a nd problems getting work permits, visas, and a “green card” (Collins, 2008, Nimoh, 2010). For the faculty in this study, the obstacles the study’s participants have experienced varied because their cultures and backgrounds were different. In par ticular, some have been in the U.S. since they were graduate students; others moved to the U.S. to take a teaching position, after they had either attended graduate school in the ir home country or, in one case, had been a tenured faculty member at an university in the reg ion where she grew up. Furthermore, each country has its own culture consisting of val ues, attitudes, goals, and practices. For these reasons as well as others, the obsta cles that presented problems for some were not the exact same as those that were concer ns or

PAGE 90

76 discomforts for others. Nonetheless, all faculty were confronted with hurdles they had to meet in order to move forward. Among the obstacles the faculty brought up, communication and linguistic skills were the most common, followed by feelings of aloneness, alienation, and isolation. Visa and immigration issues were prevalent among the more junior faculty. Although not an obstacle for all, becoming a good teacher wa s mentioned as a challenge for several of the faculty. Finally, an over-riding obstacle was culture, which was embedded in each faculty’s professional life. Finding Support Through Relationships A central finding in the research indicates that mentoring has a positive eff ect on one’s career success. Additional research points to another dimension of mentoring t hat involves more casual, less structured relationships as well as those that have bee n coined as “mentoring episodes” and are more short term in duration (Fletcher & Ragi ns, 2007; Kram & Ragins, 2007). These mentoring episodes can also be thought of as informal mentoring or mutual mentoring as discussed by Trower (2010) and described in the Mellon Mutual Mentoring Initiative, sponsored by the Mellon Foundation. This study, however, found that very little formal mentoring has taken place. Instead, informal mentoring and mentoring episodes were more frequent. Mentoring episodes and mutual mentoring cross over into an area that can also be thought of as social networking. Social interactions and interpersonal relations hips are a feature in the successful adaptation of foreign-born individuals to a new cultural environment (Boice, 1982; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Menges, 1999). A growing body of research suggests social engagement plays an important part in the perf ormance and ultimate success of individuals (Ewing et al., 2008; Fontaine & Millen, 2004;

PAGE 91

77 Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne, & Kraimer, 2001; Williams & Kirk, 2008). Following, I present the results that pertain to the experiences of the participants with for mal or informal mentoring programs, generational differences among the faculty with respect to mentoring expectations, and social engagements with friends and family. Formal Mentoring Experiences When asked about their mentoring experiences, the faculty who had received tenure more than 15 years ago remarked that they had no real mentoring, whether formal or informal. Joseph, an engineering sciences professor from Taiwan and a 31 year res ident of the United States, was typical of the other more senior faculty in the study when he recalled that mentoring programs were non-existent. As a faculty member, he had to seek help on his own. He explained that he received encouragement from senior faculty and mentioned that he “got lucky” because the junior faculty tended to help one another. However, the faculty had no expectation that anyone would be available to provide advice and to answer questions. You were expected to know what to do. You were expected to make your own connections and establish your own networks with whom to collaborate. During the time when the senior faculty members were new in their careers finding one’s own way was typical. Niraj mentioned that he did not think about getting a mentor because he didn’t know what life was like and he had no pre-conceived ideas when he joined the ranks of tenure track faculty. In fact, the idea of mentoring was never mentioned, neither as a student nor as a junior faculty member. He seemed to know that if he was going to be successful, he had to “find his own way.” Like Joseph, Niraj took the initiative and reached out to his department colleagues for advice. His outgoin g

PAGE 92

78 personality served him well as he forged new friendships and developed a network of colleagues with whom he could interact and seek advice. I think the good thing was that the faculty are really good in my college. They have a way of just helping each other out. It just happens. There was no formal mentoring program but if you reached out to someone, they would respond to you. I felt support all the time. Aurek, an associate professor who has been in the United States for nearly 30 yea rs, had a similar experience. He noted that faculty were left on their own to decipher what was needed to pass the comprehensive review and then to become a tenured associate professor. He credits the fact that he not only had teaching experience as a doctor al student, but he also worked in a post-doctoral job prior to accepting a tenure track position. It was these experiences that provided him with a basic understanding of the expectations of the job, and he has been able to reach the level of success he has wanted. When asked about his mentoring experiences, Mahish, a college dean from South Asia and a veteran faculty member with more than 40 years in higher education in t he United States, reflected that he received no advice. Even though he sought help from a senior faculty member, that person “basically said no.” Much like Aurek, Mahish’s pr ior work experience prepared him to be self-sufficient. It was Michelle, however, who summed up the stories from the senior faculty when she remarked that There was no mentoring. Lest it be thought of negatively, lest it give the impression that the University was a heartless thing, we need to remember the psychological climate of the time. It was in the 70s, it wasn’t even in the 90s or the 80s. In the 70s people were not that touchy feely. We didn’t have people come in and try to make it nice. You came in as a professional. Here’s what you are supposed to do, here’s the book that tells you how to get tenure, get on with it. These were stories that supported the notion that more senior faculty achieved their

PAGE 93

79 academic career successes with very little, if any, formal or struct ured assistance from others in their departments or universities. The help they received was what the y personally sought. It was not readily offered. In most cases, though, it was the re if they took the initiative to ask. On the other hand, Jenica, an assistant professor who recently passed her comprehensive review, stated I was also contacted by the mentoring program director that was implemented a couple years ago. The director was willing to facilitate a mentoring connection with faculty of my choice. For some reason, I never followed up on that. I felt like I didnÂ’t know what direction to go with it, as I didnÂ’t really know many people and who I would like to have as mentors. I have a better idea now, and am planning to initiate those relationships. Jenica was the only study participant who had been approached to join a formal mentoring program. She declined because she was unsure about the program, the purpose, and how it was set up. Instead, she has reached out to colleagues on her own and established informal mentoring relationships that have given her emotional s upport. In this case, the opportunity of being part of a formal mentoring program was made t o the faculty member, but the unknown of what the benefits would be was a deterrent. Informal Mentoring Experiences All of the faculty discussed having some type of informal mentoring as a fac ulty member. The informal mentoring experiences in this study were unstructure d, were varied, and were numerous. For example, one of the senior faculty related what happened after one of the UniversityÂ’s high level administrators walked by one of her classrooms. What has made the biggest difference [in my career success] is not a what, it is a who. It is Marsha. Fifteen or 20 years ago, I was teaching my c lass.

PAGE 94

80 Marsha walked past my room and heard me teach and said to call her. I think at that time she was a dean [in another college]. She said to me, “Listen, your message needs to get out.” I didn’t want that at all. She said, “Your message must get out and I’m going to get involved in this.” And before I knew it I was teaching a course that aired in 50 states and 7 countries. Before I knew it I was on Mind Extension. Before I knew it I was up for the Presidential Teaching Scholarship, and before I knew it I had an endowment. Because of her trust in me, I know I am not supposed to mess up. I have pushed more because of her, not pushing, but support of me, of my program, my work. I feel my success is owed to her. Younger faculty, like Jenica, readily talked about the alliances they have made wi th their doctoral advisors, which set the stage for ties with senior colleagues and other s in their field. To them, these people were their mentors, a word they all readily used. Whi le none of these associations were what is commonly thought of as a formal mentoring relationship, they were, for the most part, informal ones that just happened. For example, Eesha, an assistant professor, readily referred to two women’s studies activists with whom she has discussed her research focus as her mentors. T hese women are not her University colleagues, nor were they part of her doctoral advisi ng team. However, they were professionals in her research field with whom she has connected and reached out to for advice and guidance. It is this experience that s upported the notion that a mentor need not be someone from one’s department or university. In this case, the connection has been the field of specialty. Graduate advisors, however, most frequently were referred to as being a mentor. Although one could argue that graduate advisors are expected to advise and coach, which are two of the provisions of formal mentoring, once the student receives her or his doctorate and joins the ranks of others in academic teaching and research positions, thi s more formal relationship of teacher and student evolves into a less formal one muc h like

PAGE 95

81 peers consulting with one another and working together (Trower, 2010). Ellen’s experiences fit that example. Her name is Susan and she was my dissertation advisor. I was in a big school with over 200 PhD students. You could really get lost there. The thing I liked about her was she could have suggested that I work on her data like the other grad students. But she didn’t. She said, “You are much better off with sole-authored work.” Ellen found she had the turned the corner and was no longer the student. Instead, she was a colleague, a peer, someone who, like her former advisor, was collecting data, wor king on grants, teaching, and considered a scholar. It was, however, with Susan’s advice and guidance that Ellen was able to move from being a student to being a respected schola r. Teodor, an associate professor from Romania, credited his PhD advisor for being one of the most influential people in his career. His advisor introduced him to this area of research and guided him through “what a good practice is, how much effort you should put into one problem, how much you should expect, and how to judge a problem as being one that should be solved or not.” Teodor and his advisor had a very strong relationship that lasted long past his receiving his doctorate. In fact, in the middle of his mas ter’s degree, Teodor’s advisor moved to another state to teach. Teodor also moved. As he mentioned The most influential person was my PhD advisory because he introduced me to this area of research and guided me through what a good practice is, how much effort you should put into one problem, how much to expect. On the same par, I would put my post doc advisor. Extraordinary. Both were extraordinary good personalities and extremely pleasant to work with and true professors. In addition to his graduate advisors, Teodor’s undergraduate advisor was an importa nt person in his early academic schooling. Long after Teodor received his degree his undergraduate advisor continued to offer advice, even though he was thousands of miles

PAGE 96

82 away on another continent. The collaborations and the mentorships I have had were the greatest contributors to my success. I went back this summer after I got tenure and talked to my undergraduate advisor. [I was] blown away by how unchanged that person has been, despite all the environment and the care he gives to his students and former students. Like what to do with the tenure now and things that are so relevant and he is remote from the system. That is the kind of discussion that IÂ’ve never had with my colleagues here. The relationship with oneÂ’s advisor, whether it continued once one left student life and became a member of academia or not, was seen as a powerful one in which there w as guidance and coaching. This relationship helped shape this particular student Â’s future research. In the case of the majority of the faculty in this study, their advi sors were key in their moving from being a student to becoming a scholar. In fact, so important have advisors been to the faculty, those who have received tenure reported that they make a conscious effort to become effective mentors for their own graduate student s. Mutual Mentoring Working collaboratively with colleagues was a shared experience of all but one of the faculty. Although collaborations were not, per se, mentoring, they did share som e of the same characteristics. Most collaborator relationships built on a common g oal and provided a positive sense of accomplishment, much like informal or mutual mentoring. One characteristic of a mutual mentoring was receiving advice and being encouraged to publish and apply for grants, as illustrated by Jenica who talked about several of her current and former collaborations. I have collaborated with both former grad school colleagues and new colleagues here. Both types have been very helpful and useful. On the one hand, they pushed me to be more productive.

PAGE 97

83 JenicaÂ’s mutual mentoring relationships have taken the place of more formal alliances, which she would have made had she accepted the offer to participate in her campusÂ’ mentoring program or had she felt comfortable asking senior faculty in her departm ent for advice. Taking a bit different approach, Ellen found that her collaborations have been a result of the connections she made as a faculty member at other institutions. Servi ng as a co-principal investigator on several grants opened doors for her and gave her a s olid foundation on which to build. As Ellen stated I walked in the door with a half million dollar grant. I collaborated with people from one university. I started working with another person who left for Florida, but now she is in Colorado. Everything I do is collaboration. Some faculty established long standing collaborative relationships through pos t-doctoral fellowships. Heeding the advice of her former PhD advisor, Amelia accepted a pos tdoctoral fellowship in the United States following a successful career in Ital y as a tenured faculty member. For several years she traveled between Italy and the United States working with researchers. The colleagues she made while working on the postdoc guided her and provided a support system that led to additional projects and a perman ent teaching and research position in the US. Teodor also talked about his post-doctoral experience and the opportunities it afforded. I started collaborating on research when I was a grad student. Then when as a post-doc I continued to expand my collaborations with people from other quality institutions. When I moved here I continued with those links. With my research there have been opportunities to collaborate with people outside my department here. The support and guidance offered by colleagues, former doctoral advisors, and former

PAGE 98

84 post-doctoral supervisors provided a link or a lifeline for foreign-born faculty. F orming relationships that are encouraging and helpful allowed the faculty member to g row, to achieve a sense of satisfaction, and ultimately to succeed. Finding Support From Others Socialization plays an important part in the success of foreign-born faculty in that having the encouragement of friends and family can bridge the gap between the set ting they once were a part of to that which is new (Thomas & Johnson, 2004; Soylu, 2007). It is this mutually respectful environment that friends and family provide that c an enrich oneÂ’s experience in the American academy. Every faculty member in this stud y commented on the support of friends or family, with family being the number one external support system. Even though some of the faculty arrived in the United State s with a family member either as a student or as a newly hired faculty, mos t did not. In fact, eight of the eleven came to the United States by themselves. Of thes e, seven arrived here to attend school, either as an undergraduate or a graduate student, and one moved to the U.S. to accept a position in a post-doctoral program. Among the remaining three, one immigrated to the U.S. to teach and the other two moved here with a spouse. Regardless of their familial status, knowing they had the support of and ongoing contact with their family and close friends, even though these people quite possibly were thousands of miles away, has given them a foundation on which to complete their studies and to become productive members of the American academy. It has been being able to look at life and work through the same cultural lens of which they are accustomed that has enriched their experiences.

PAGE 99

85 Support from family. The new landscape of being in a foreign country has, in part, been made less worrisome by the support of family. Eesha’s recollec tions of her first years in the United States told of the role her mother played in her com pletion of graduate studies as well as her first few years in a tenure track facult y position. My mother was my lifeline. If I got into trouble or if I had a dilemma of any sort I would run to her, meaning I would call her from here. Her mentoring was pretty grounded, the fact that she learned herself, she was very well read, very intellectual so it was not just motherly advice, it was practical, pragmatic advice. Like Eesha, Niraj’s mother provided words of wisdom and encouragement. My mother was the real force. She always told me I would succeed no matter what I do. I had no friends or family where I was when I came. Two weeks into the semester, I sat on the sidewalk crying because I wanted to go home. So I called my mom up after I had cried and said I wanted to come back home. My mom said that I could come back home but then I’d have to worry about family prestige because going to the US was a big deal. So I went back [to class] and I started working hard. Aurek spoke of the support he has received from his brother and sister who are also university professors and have since emigrated from Poland to Canada. Aurek refe rred to himself as a “pioneer” because he was the first of his family to leave Pol and. However, it has been the constant support he received from his family that made this “pioneer” approach possible. He came from what he refers to as “a whole family of phy sicists.” It is his family from whom he gained moral support. It has also been his family w ith whom he has collaborated on research projects and subsequent articles. The support of a spouse has also proven beneficial. Mahish arrived in the central Midwest in 1964 to begin his doctoral studies. He had an older sister in the United States, so he was not completely alone. However, she lived hundreds of miles awa y, but was still considerably closer than the rest of his family who were in South As ia. Within

PAGE 100

86 three years of finishing his doctoral program, Mahish returned home to marry. S hortly after, he and his wife came back to the United States. Mahish was a researche r and had formed his own company in the US. However, returning to South Asia was always on his mind. He did not expect to make the United States his permanent home. Soon, though, he found that life here treated him so well that he and his wife decided to stay. Mahis h credited his wife with providing him encouragement and supporting his decision to sell his company and become a university professor. For him, having this type of backing served as reinforcement that he could become successful. Joseph, who married just prior to completing his graduate studies, gave full credit to his wife. Everyone needs to know that behind every successful man is a woman. My wife used to work at the hospital as a registered dietician but when we came here she stayed home to take care of the kids so I come home and food is there. She sacrificed for me. Support from friends. The importance of friends was a common thread among the interviews. Jenica reflected that friends were her pillars and provided he r with a sense of home, regardless of where they, or she, may be. These relationships wer e a constant sense of strength as well as a source of comfort and support as she confront ed challenges. Her friends were here to remind her of her resolve to have moved to and studied in a different country, in a foreign language, in a field of study that she first began as a graduate student. Zaid, an assistant professor from Zimbabwe, echoed JenicaÂ’s feelings about friends being a source of comfort and support. In spite of the fact that t very fe w people from Africa were in this university community, a rather large Africa n population existed nearby. Everyone got together a few times a year at a neighboring park or someoneÂ’s

PAGE 101

87 home to play games and connect with others from their homeland. It was a sense of having a piece of home, which gave them a sense of belonging. They shared a simila r culture, which drew them together. JosephÂ’s first experience with a social network in the United States was a bit different from the others. Expecting to make the U.S. by himself and having to f ind his own way, Joseph discovered that he had a built in support system that he did not know about. While on the airplane, he was introduced six others who also were headed to the United States to study. On the long flight they formed a bond. To their surprise, upon landing, they were met by the universityÂ’s Chinese Student Association. Joseph adm itted that he was lucky to have made friends on the airplane and then finding he had a built-in support system within the Chinese Student Association. Clearly friends and family have been important. Two of the faculty used the wor d pillar to refer to people who have made a difference, who have provided encouragement and guidance. These pillars worked as a bridge to allow a more direct crossi ng to achieve success as teaching and research faculty. Serving as a Mentor A commitment to assisting junior faculty was infused among the senior faculty All the professors have made a point to mentor the junior and new faculty in their colleges. As Niraj mentioned I sit the new folks down and try to take the fear out by saying not to get sucked up into the little things or you end up missing the big picture. I send them to teaching workshops and I tell them to seek out faculty because when you seek faculty out, they can really help you. Aurek has been committed to working with junior faculty because he gets enjoyme nt out of helping others.

PAGE 102

88 I always get a lot of pleasure from helping people. No matter what it is, whether it is someone struggling to start a car or someone who is trying to get tenure and has this huge opposition from the department. That makes life much easier. Dealing with all the ups makes dealing with all the downs easier. And it is for me because I get a lot of pleasure helping people. Joseph brought some additional insight in the mentoring of junior faculty by relating what he has found to be the attitude of some of his new faculty. We start to do some mentoring, but even with a mentor like Dr. X, we tell young people, “You are here, here is an opportunity.” Sometimes they are hesitant, sometimes they get scared. They got intimated a little bit, so I think we still need to work through and find a good formula to help people. Let them understand there is a lot of help, but it is not just one-sided. They need to feel comfortable saying, “Okay, there is a senior faculty there I can ask for help and asking for help is not a shame, it is okay.” Just as Niraj, Aurek, and Joseph mentor junior faculty, so do Michelle and Mahish, who both mentioned they are committed to ensuring new faculty in their colleges have someone to lean on, to talk with, and to get advice from. They have included junior faculty in research grants. They advised them on teaching. They counseled them on finding a balance between being a tenure track faculty member and having a fa mily and a social life. Motivation to Succeed What contributes to one’s success? Perhaps success is not just a product of the guidance from colleagues, mentors, friends, and family. Instead, success quit e possibly results from a combination of factors of which one is motivation. As mentioned in Chapter 2, numerous motivation theories can explain why some people are successful a nd others possibly are not. Several researchers have found that work motivation consists of forces that originate both from within and without a person’s being (Day & Al len, 2003;

PAGE 103

89 Jones, 1955; Pink, 2009; Steers & Porter, 1991; and Vroom, 1965). People are also motivated by situational influences such as evaluations and rewards similar to g rants as well as by more personal influences such as accomplishment of goals (Schunk, 1995). It is these forces that initiate work-related behaviors and it is these force s that provide the motivation constructs of this study The motivation paradigms that are most pertinent to this study include selfregulation, goal setting, ability beliefs, self-determination, and self -efficacy. Using the work of Bandura (1991), Locke (1990), Ryan and Deci (2000), Schunk (1994; 2000), Zimmerman (1989), and others, I found that in many ways these motivational constructs build on one another. They can be seen as individual cogs in a wheel of motivation. They work together as incentives. In the following section, I describe the moti vating factors experienced by the faculty and relate these to the motivation cons tructs mentioned above and discussed in Chapter 2. Self-Regulation Theory Self-regulation is a social-cognitive perspective used to describe oneÂ’s mot ivation to learn (Alderman, 2004). It is the development of a set of behaviors that will produc e a desired result. As we understand from ZimmermanÂ’s (2000) research, self-re gulated learners use a variety of strategies to achieve what they want. They als o are confident that they can accomplish what is needed. Among the sub-constructs of self-regulation is the use of oneÂ’s time. Time management is an important concept for self-regulated individuals. To accomplish their goals, they have learned to manage their time wisely. Becoming a good teache r and a productive researcher clearly takes time, and when coupled with language chal lenges that

PAGE 104

90 some of the faculty experienced, the amount of time spent on teaching preparati ons can be significant. As Amelia, an assistant professor from Italy, mentioned Teaching takes a lot of time and effort and you try to do it right. It is questionable always but you try to do the best you can and you invest a lot of time and effort. But at the same time you want to keep doing your research so your time is extremely limited. I really didn’t have much ti me to do my research so I would end up working on my research projects on the weekends and then that means that I didn’t have time for anything else. Finding a balance among being a good teacher, being a productive researcher, and ha ving some sort of personal life has taken time. As Theobald (2007) discovered, many foreig nborn faculty are conflicted about establishing a healthy equilibrium between w ork and life. Goal-Setting Theory Self-regulation is also about learning strategies, understanding one’s competencies, and being willing to commit to goals (Alderman, 2004). Goals have an important role in everyone’s life. Without goals we might possibly wander aimle ssly, and while we may accomplish something, those accomplishments would be happenstance, not planned. Goals provide a target by which one can measure how well he or she is doing. For all practical purposes, tenure-track faculty are inspired by one goal – to be awarded with tenure and promotion. Zaid was typical of the faculty in that he admitted he has been very goal-dri ven and goal-oriented. He set goals along the way and everything he did has moved him closer to those goals. I’m goal-driven and goal-oriented. This is it, so I might as well strive f or excellence. And excellence in academia means going towards tenure and getting tenure. So that’s my goal. Not getting tenure is some kind of

PAGE 105

91 failure. I mean, if you are in this profession, you have to be successful. Achieving tenure is preceded by short-term goals such as first year revie w or reappointment, comprehensive review, and finally tenure and promotion to associate professor. For many the next goal has been to promote to professor then possibly to higher-level administrative positions within the academic setting. Mixed in he re have also been shorter-term goals such as obtaining large dollar grants or recei ving campus or university system awards. It has been these goals that provided the motivation i n the way of a framework and a time schedule that was needed in order to complete the researc h, obtain the grants, and excel at teaching, components required to receive tenure and to achieve this major part of what constituted academic career success. Niraj was one of the faculty who has already achieved a significant amount of career success. As a professor and an officer at the university, he has achie ved this level of success in part because of the goals he set for himself. Niraj’s current goa l has been to continue to do well because he has “the greatest job in the world.” As he remarked, How many people in this world get to do what they like to do and get paid for it? When I teach a late class like 7:00 to 9:30, I can’t sleep until 1:00 am because I am so hyped up. It’s like being on drugs. So if you love to teach, this is the best thing you can do. You research what you want to research, and you serve on the committees you want to serve on. So technically, you live your life the way you want it. I think you get the best of everything and you get to build futures for these kids. It is a privilege to be in this profession. Ellen’s goal was very similar to Niraj’s—to do well so she could continue to have the freedom she wanted. Yes, I have a boss, but my boss doesn’t tell me what to research so 40% of my time is totally determined by me. The freedom to do that and the freedom to say I’m going to stay home this summer or I’m going to go to Toronto to collect data. It doesn’t get much better than this. Obtaining grants was a goal of both tenured and tenure-track faculty. Obtaining g rants

PAGE 106

92 has been a major part of Ellen’s academic career. From when she received her first academic position to the present, she has either served as a PI or a CO-PI on se veral federal grants. The odds of getting them are slim to none, right? Eventually you can publish a paper, you can always keep lowering the quality of the paper and it will get published somewhere. But with a grant there’s some motivation to keep going. I’ve had many more rejected than accepted, but it’s knowing what they buy me. The time they buy me, the offloads, and then someone paying you to do the work. For Ellen, receiving grants has been the impetus she needed to continue to enjoy the benefits and the gratification they bring. According to Niraj and Ellen, they ha ve ideal jobs and are satisfied with their lives. Amelia’s long-term goal is tenure. However, mixed in here is a more immedi ate goal to succeed as a teacher. I think it is absolutely fair that if 40% of your job is about teaching, when you have to do it and you have to do it right and the students have rights to judge your performance as a teacher. My goal is to do the best I can to give all of them the tools to succeed. When she was a pre-tenure faculty member, Michelle’s goal was, first a nd foremost, to publish in top tier journals. Then, knowing she had to be strong in both, she focused on her teaching. Now that she is tenured, and a full professor, she has made a conscious decision to focus on teaching and to keep being an excellent educator as her goal beca use that is what she is—a teacher. I was very fortunate because I am not a researcher, and I never intended to be. When I moved into tenure, I made a decision at that point, an overt decision, that I said out loud, that I would never be a researcher. I made up my mind to say out loud you need to be a teacher of quality and that’s my forte and that’s where I am. On my way to tenure, I wrote four books and wrote for some journals. However, I also focused on teaching, on being the best that I could be.

PAGE 107

93 Self-Determination Theory Self-determination theory is used most often in educational and work settings to describe individuals’ inner needs for competence and relatedness to others (P inder, 2008). These inner needs include such aspects as pride, satisfaction, and a sense of accomplishment. Among the reasons why some people do what they do is because of family, friends, or peer pressure (Pinder, 2008). Jenica’s motivation fits in this category. Like many of her colleagues, it has been her friends, in particular those friends who have been ver y close to her and who have provided the impetus to keep going, to do well. I’ve always found friends to be an immense source of inspiration, growth, and motivation. And I’ve always had amazing friends that I have admired tremendously in different ways. Some have motivated me to be more driven, put my skills to good use, and persevere. Others have taught me to be true to myself, or generous, kind and non-judgmental. Similarly, Aurek gave credit to his family for teaching him the value to succee d. Both of his parents were academics and to them teaching and research were critic al to the success of a faculty member. He said he was “indoctrinated early” because of the man y conversations at home about students and the teaching experience. It was not, though, only the conversations and the encouragement from family that instilled him to go further. It was also the support from family and knowing the y would be there. Aurek best expressed this feeling when he said, To a large extent it was my family because I knew and always know that they will be there for me. No matter what. I mean I’ve done a gazillion things they would not normally approve of, but nevertheless, there is always support. Michelle’s sense of responsibility to her family and to her heritage was her motivation to succeed.

PAGE 108

94 Our sense of responsibility was honed at a very early age. I knew I couldn’t let my family down. That’s the first thing. And then I knew that I was the only Black professor. That to me was probably more motivation than anything else. Family has also been the motivation for Eesha to be self-disciplined and to keep g oing forward and working hard. Eesha’s family has long valued education. As she mentioned, “There is no excuse. I didn’t have any type of pressure but there was an underlying assumption, such as, I thought you were bright, if you are bright then do something with your brains.” Ability Theory Quite often when someone meets another person, they form an opinion or a preconceived notion about that individual. This opinion can be whether they think the person would be fun to be with, is nice, or even whether the person is smart, is capable to do a particular job, to successfully complete a task, and to succeed. Foreign-born fac ulty, as well as others who look, speak, or act differently from what the majority do or expe ct, are frequently confronted with this type of assumption. How others react to us and wha t they may say can affect what we do and how we do it. It can also affect our mot ivation to either succeed or not at a task. Ellen has firsthand knowledge of preconceived notions about one’s abilities. Upon finding out she was from Canada, some colleagues would make negative comments such as, “Well, you are Canadian, how much could you know?” In many respects, it was negative comments like this that pushed Ellen to e xcel. She knew what she was capable of and her abilities had no connection to whether she was from Canada or the United States. Another facet of ability beliefs is how one perceives her or himself. For som e of the faculty, confidence of their ability is high because of their education or the ir past

PAGE 109

95 experiences. The confidence Mahish has had in his abilities comes from a combi nation of being from a top university and also being a successful businessman and consultant. When he first started teaching, he said he knew the subject content. That, coupled with prior teaching experience as a graduate student, gave him the confidence in hi s abilities. He knew he could do what was needed to achieve tenure and progress through the professorial ranks. Eesha also remarked that she was very competent in her field of study. She considered herself to be an authority in the subject and was sure of her ability to be a successful teacher and researcher. As she remarked I think my education and training has been the strongest. What I teach, I am confident in that field, I have some expertise and authority in what I am teaching. Self-Efficacy Theory Self-efficacy is the belief that one has the ability to perform a task in a g iven domain (Bandura, 1982). Research by Pajares (1996) and Schunk (1995) support the notion that self-efficacy influences academic motivation, learning, and achi evement. Because self-efficacy is a multidimensional construct, it is necessary to keep this in mind and to focus the discussion on the concept of self-efficacy as a motivational fact or of academic success. The faculty in this study quite often questioned if they could succeed in their academic careers. In turn, they told stories of believing in their capabilit ies to become good teachers and researchers and to obtain tenure and additional academic successes For some, having received evaluations from their department chair and course evaluations from students provided the feedback they needed be aware of their

PAGE 110

96 performance. From the evaluations, they learned what needed to be done to become a better teacher or researcher. One of the faculty who has been motivated by performance and by improving and adding to what he knows is Teodor. Teodor, an associate professor, credited his care er success to being motivated to continuously learn and improve upon what he knows. Both he and his wife have enjoyed learning about everything, including cultures and diff erent societies. He has been committed to improving his knowledge base and to become familiar with a host of topics with which he knows little. This goal of continuous learning has kept him involved in different topics and informed. AmeliaÂ’s impetus to do well and become the best possible teacher moved her forward. She wanted nothing more than for her students to learn and to become more knowledgeable, not for them to all get AÂ’s. However, she realized how difficult it wa s to do when she would be evaluated by the students, with some student basing the evaluation on whether they received an A or not. Nonetheless, it was the feedback from former students that provided the motivation she needed to continue to be an excellent teacher. I see former students and I stop to ask them how it is going. The ones that have decided to stick with me until the bitter end have come back to tell me that I set the bar so high and they learned so much that they are now just skating through the following classes. Last semester before Christ mas I got a gift card from a student with a note saying I was so inspiring and this student decided to pursue a career in math. Encouragement in the form of grants, patents, and the acknowledgement from others gave Joseph the knowledge that he was competent, that he knew his subject, and he was a good researcher. When you get a grant or when you have done a good job or gotten teacher of the year award, they pat you. A previous Dean helped me get a contract and throughout the project we got a U.S. patent. My three studentsÂ’ names

PAGE 111

97 are on my patent. So I saw that I could do these things. It was wonderful. Then I got a second grant that put me on the map. Amelia was also very confident and recognized what she was capable of doing. Some of this confidence stemmed from her past academic life in Italy, where she was a tenured professor of mathematics. However, upon accepting the teaching post in the United States, she began her career over again and was, once again, a tenure track faculty member. Because she was not new to the rigors of tenure, she was aware of the expectations. She admitted that it was her stubbornness and need to persevere that drov e her. She also was willing to start over again and face challenges if that was needed to be a successful faculty member in the U.S. Similarly, Eesha credited her personality and her sheer will to accomplis h what she set out to do. Mahish saw himself as having an aggressive personality and has not been afraid to stand his ground. He admitted he was “bullheaded” and took control of his life. It was all my own doing. Maybe that is my ego part, being bullheaded or something. I will listen to others but make up my own decisions and mind. Nobody controls my life. These reflections support the view that persistence, resilience, and achievem ent are all influenced by self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1977; Schunk, 1995). The faculty worked hard at their teaching, their research, and their language skills. They were c ommitted to improving their teaching evaluations. They set goals and kept track of their progr ess through their annual evaluations and their student evaluations. Summary The overall academic career successes of the faculty vary. Four have pas sed their pre-tenure comprehensive reviews and are working on creating a dossier that support

PAGE 112

98 their tenure. Three others have received tenure and continue to build their academi c record. One is involved with two fast-growing programs in her college and recent ly received a high dollar multi-year grant. The four professors have continued to grow, with three serving as academic officers of their respective colleges and another has received recognition for outstanding teaching. They attribute these academic care er successes to many things, among which are informal mentoring, social networks of friends and family, and their own motivation and desire to succeed. These are factors that ca n be seen as more positive in nature. However, obstacles have impinged on their successes Prior research claims that mentoring and social networking are positive contributors to success are supported, in part, by this study. The faculty were not formally mentored, but they all established some type of informal mentoring net work. For some this was their graduate school advisor, and in one case an undergraduate advisor. For others it was a department chair, a dean, or, in most cases, other facul ty with whom they cultivated a relationship of collaboration and mutual support. The senior faculty told of their commitment to mentor junior faculty, in particular those who are foreign-born. They reach out to them. They include them in their grants. They give them teaching and research advice. However, as one faculty ment ioned, some new faculty are hesitant to either seek or to accept these supporting rela tionships when they are offered. Motivation also has a role in the facultyÂ’s successes. For the faculty, their drive and commitment to become good teachers, good researchers, and valued contributors to the academic missions of the university and their disciplines has been the impe tus for what they have accomplished. Among the dozens of motivation theories, the ones found

PAGE 113

99 to be most relevant to this study are goal setting and self-regulation, which i ncludes selfdetermination, self-efficacy, and ability. The faculty are motivated by situational influences such as evaluations and grants as well as by their accomplishment of personal goals. They have confidence in their ability to achieve their goals, and they ha ve obtained a great sense of satisfaction from their accomplishments. Like their native-born colleagues, the faculty confronted obstacles. However unlike their United States born colleagues, they also experienced communication difficulties, visa and immigration concerns, and feelings of loneliness and alie nation. Some obstacles have been overcome; others, such as those related to oneÂ’s communication skills, have been slower to be resolved. In order to be effective in the classroom, one needs to be able to communicate with people who are culturally different (Nimoh, 2010). The faculty have experienced oral, written, and interpersonal communication difficulties. All the faculty in this study spoke some English w hen they arrived in the United States. English was the native language for two of the fac ulty; for the others it was not. The majority, however, had been speaking English since elementary school, but it was not their primary language. Nonetheless, going from an environment in which they may have spoken two or more languages in a given day to one in which English was the standard resulted in being a challenge. Some of the faculty was confronted with interpersonal communication exchanges that gave them pause. Many of these had a cultural facet. Culture influences all aspects of the facultyÂ’s lives. Culture seems to be the underpinning factor in how they approach their tenure track positions and their communication styles. The faculty wanted to be perceived as competent communic ators.

PAGE 114

100 For some of them this meant they have had to work at understanding their personal language differences as well as obtaining insight into how they interact w ith other colleagues and, in particular, students. In the next chapter, I discuss these findings and relate them back to my conceptual framework and the literature. I also discuss what aspects of the hypotheses for this study did not emerge from the results of this study as well as what did that I did not expec t. Lastly, I make recommendations for the application of my findings and for fut ure research.

PAGE 115

101 Chapter V Summary and Implications This study explored the factors that have affected the career success of foreignborn faculty. Faculty membersÂ’ successes have not come easily. In addition to t he rigors of publishing and proving they were effective teachers and researchers, the f aculty also faced other challenges such as immigration procedures, language, and cultur al differences. They felt they needed to work harder than their American-bor n colleagues in order to overcome these challenges. Much like their native-born colleagues, for eign-born faculty have been motivated and have support systems in the way of family, friends, a nd other teaching and research colleagues. AmeliaÂ’s opinion of what contributes t o oneÂ’s success is summed up in the following statement: The United States is still to a lot of people a land of opportunity. There is no question about the fact that you are expected to work very hard. You are evaluated at every single step, every single stage of your life but at the same time if you did a good job then they are very prompt at acknowledging this fact. And you see, to me this is a big motivation. You work hard but you see that something comes out of it. In this chapter I review the findings reported in chapter 4 and discuss the three t hemes that surfaced from the analysis of the interview in the context of the resear ch question. I also discuss modifications to the conceptual framework (Figure I.1), propose a re vised conceptual framework, examine subsequent implications of the findings, and I suggest recommendations for further research. Culture as an Overarching Component The effect culture has on oneÂ’s life, oneÂ’s job satisfaction, and oneÂ’s career successes have become increasingly apparent in this study. The faculty in t his study represented eight different cultures, with all of them now living and working in the

PAGE 116

102 United States, which has its own culture that has been formed by everyone living here Stereotypes. Many immigrants face stereotyping and discrimination as they become members of their new communities. Two of the faculty talked about stereot ypes. Last semester, there was one student who kept constantly asking me what my religious background was. I don’t want to disclose all sorts of personal details that are not relevant to the course, and she keeps asking in front of the class. She had this question, “ Tell me, what’s your thing, because it seems you are sympathetic towards certain groups.” Firstly I think she thought I was Middle Eastern, which I am not. So in her mind I am Middle Eastern. I am a certain stereotype and under other circumstances one would feel compelled to say, “Wait a minute, wait a minute, I am not Middle Eastern.” But the fact is why should I have to do that? Who cares? You are teaching a topic. I am trained for that. I am sharing my knowledge and my research. (Eesha) My father used to say every time you stepped your foot out of the house, “You are either breaking a stereotype of supporting a stereotype. There is no middle ground. You step out, everything you do is telling people, “I told you” or “wow.” I have this responsibility. (Michelle) For these faculty, breaking a stereotype was important. In the case of Mic helle, her father was speaking specifically of the stereotype of their race and their skin col or. Too often when we stereotype people or groups of people, we are making assumptions about the whole. These are assumptions that can cause hurt feelings, confusion, alienation, a nd isolation (Lott, 2010). Individualism and Collectivism. Consistent with previous research, several factors with cultural facets that help predict how people from different soci eties react to situations are present (Chen, 2007; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Triandis, 1995). Some researchers, such as Bandura (1977) and Triandis, believe that all people want to be effective in their jobs whether they are from a more individualistic or a more col lectivist culture, and people tend to have both traits and values, depending on the situation. Specific to this study, the faculty represented both cultures. Individualistic c ultures were

PAGE 117

103 represented by the faculty from Canada, Jamaica, Romania, and Italy. The col lectivistic cultures were represented by the faculty from South Asia, Poland, and Taiwan. Individualism and collectivism can also be used to explain communication differences as well as motivation (Gudykunst, 2004; (Hofstede & Hofstede 2005; Triandis, 1995).). It is interesting to consider that some of the comments made by the faculty have been attributed to a lack of mentoring opportunities and other support, when, instead, some of the problems could stem from the facultiesÂ’ cultural and societa l backgrounds. EeshaÂ’s confrontation with being stereotyped happened in the classroom. As an a woman from South Asia who has lived and attended school in five different countries, Eesha wondered out loud if her students knew that and they had a certain image about her, and that was what incited the question. To counteract her initia l feelings of shock and irritation, she said she tried to be as professional as possibl e and explained that they were discussing such and such. Like many immigrants, the faculty have embraced their communities and the live s they have established in the United States. Their culture has been an integral par t of who they are. Some have adopted reasoning such as EeshaÂ’s and MichelleÂ’s, that i t is their responsibility to break the stereotype. Revisiting the Conceptual Framework Several important concepts, which are described in the conceptual framework f ound in Figure I.1 shown in Chapter I and below and linked to prior theories and research, were validated in this study.

PAGE 118

104 However, taking the studyÂ’s findings into account, the conceptual framework presented in Figure I.1 should be revised to reflect that the faculty in the stud y have, so far, achieved academic career successes without the benefit of being involved i n a formal mentoring program. In addition, the conceptual framework can now be more complete with the addition of what I call the sub-factors that surfaced in my analysis of the data. A revised framework follows.

PAGE 119

105 Review of Findings This study was conducted using a set of questions that were developed to elicit personal stories relating to the research question: What are the factors aff ecting the academic career success of foreign-born faculty? The interview quest ions were grouped into three categories. Two of the groups were directly related to the conceptua l framework and covered the broad areas of mentoring and social networks and motivations and obstacles. The third grouping was constructed to serve as an “ice breaker” and to find out more about the reasons the particular individual become a facult y member in an US university and to what the foreign-born faculty attributed her or hi s academic career success. Faculty interviews resulted in three major t hematic findings.

PAGE 120

106 The following sections provide a summary of the findings and discuss subsequent implications. Obstacles: Striving for a Sense of Belonging As foreign-born faculty adapt to non-native cultures and become acculturated int o the American higher education system and achieve success in their academ ic careers, they face obstacles that their native counterparts typically do not. The stories of the faculty in this study support DuBois’ (1951) research on “culture shock” and resea rch on acculturation by researchers such as Argyle (1982), Oberg (1960) and Ward (1996). Overall, the faculty reflected on their loss of familiar food, companions, friends, and experiencing confusion of values and discomfort of new values. They relayed stori es of stress from the uncertainty of their new surroundings. They mentioned occasional feelings of alienation and being alone and the need for more proficiency in the American English language. These are all obstacles that are experienced by many pe ople who live in bicultural environments (Cross, 1978, 1991; Padilla, 1980; Smith, 1991; Tomich et al., 2000). Three main obstacles emerged from this study: oral and interpersonal communication challenges; feelings of isolation, alienation, and loneliness; and vi sa difficulties. Communication Challenges Prior research supports the notion that in order to be an effective teacher in the United States, one should be proficient in English, preferably American English (J enkins, 2000; Kavas & Kavas, 2008; Liu, 2004; Manrique & Manrique, 1999; Marvasti, 2005; Nimoh, 2010). It is common that cultural confrontations occur in the classroom, especially when either or both the faculty and the students are unable to recognize their

PAGE 121

107 differences and develop an appreciation for their differences (Nimoh, 2010). Most frequently conflicts are the result of attitudes towards individuals who are not a s linguistically proficient as others (Marvasti, 2005). Although some of the facul ty expressed concern that their imperfect English adversely affected thei r teaching scores, upon further inquiry about their teaching challenges and concerns, they unanimously stated that they did not have problems with teaching and their teaching evaluations were “good.” Perhaps this is due to their knowledge of the subject matter. It could a lso be that they have an understanding of the language differences. Many diligently worked t o lessen their accents with the belief that by sounding more like their student s, their teaching evaluations would improve. For another of the faculty, using his accent as a catalyst to teach the students about his culture created a bridge joining the c ultures in the classroom and infused a respect for one another’s differences. It is necessary, however, to note that some researchers, such as Collins (2008) a nd Kavas and Kavas (2008), explored student perceptions of foreign accents and determined that, contrary to popular belief and previous research, international graduate stude nt teaching assistants were as effective as teachers as native-born te aching assistants, and the teacher’s accent was not considered in the evaluations. Although this contradic ts the findings of Borjas’ (2000), Manrique & Manrique (1999), and Marvasti (2005), Kavas and Kavas attributed the contradiction to what they call a cultural gap rather t han a language gap between the international teaching assistant and the student. La nguage can make a difference in the teaching effectiveness, but so do other factors such as prior teaching experience, social skills, and cultural differences. Furthermore, a s the world becomes more internationalized and there is additional emphasis on the benefits of and

PAGE 122

108 the need for a global curriculum, it is reasonable that differences, in partic ular those related to language and accents, are more accepted. It might also be that some students found being taught by foreign-born faculty with an accent meant they had to pay m ore attention and listen more carefully to what the professor was saying (Colli ns, 2008). Collins also found that students liked being taught by a foreign-born professor because it not only exposed them to perspectives that differed from theirs but they also had the opportunity to experience other approaches to teaching. Nine of the faculty obtained one or more degrees in the United States. Moreover, of the nine faculty who received at least one degree in the U.S., all except one had been a teaching assistant as a graduate student. Each of the eight faculty with prio r teaching experience mentioned that they did not encounter any problems in the classroom. It is probable that their prior teaching experience in US colleges and universiti es has had an effect on both their language proficiency as well as their familiarity with the American culture, and the educational system. The two faculty who did not receive a degree in the U.S. had prior teaching experience either as a graduate student or, as in AmeliaÂ’s case, had received t enure in her home country before moving to the United States. Joseph was the only one who did not have prior teaching experience. As a graduate student in the U.S. he served as a rese arch assistant. Following graduate school, he took a tenure-track position as a teacher. H e struggled as an educator, and notes that, more than 20 years later, teaching rem ains a challenge. JosephÂ’s expertise is research and he is considerably more comfor table, and successful, in his research role. Yet, he has worked on his teaching skills and, even though he continues to be uncomfortable as a teacher and his Asian accent still comes

PAGE 123

109 through, he is well respected in the classroom and receives better than avera ge evaluations. Loneliness, Isolation, and Alienation The feelings of aloneness, isolation, and alienation described by the faculty a re obstacles that tend to be common among those from different cultures and from other parts of the world (Collins, 2010; Gardner, 2005). While obstacles that both can be and have been more easily overcome, some feelings of isolation, loneliness, and aliena tion have remained with several of the faculty. On the other hand, some of these feelings have lessened or disappeared for several of the faculty. EeshaÂ’s loneliness was not as prevalent because she recently got married. As she put it, she now has family wi th her, someone to share the dayÂ’s events with, and someone with whom to cultivate a life outside of academia. It is the presence of family that has contributed to the happiness and satisfacti on of the majority of the faculty. Of the 11 faculty in the study, only two, one man and one woman, were married when they moved to the U.S. Either just before or shortly after receiving their doctoral degrees, the remaining men married. The marrie d faculty contributed their job satisfaction and their successes to their spouses. Only one of the female faculty is not married nor does she have a significant other. Her friends, who are 90 miles away, remain her lifeline, so to speak. It ha s been these people with whom she was first associated when she came to the US, and the sa me people who provided the impetus for her to find a teaching job in the region and leave her native Italy. As she mentioned, her friends have been very important to her happiness and her productivity. This is even more meaningful because she is the only female i n her

PAGE 124

110 department, a fact that she recognized. While she was proud that she broke that ba rrier, she realized that there would continue to be times when she would feel out of the l oop simply because of her gender. One of the other female faculty lamented that her significant other lived many miles away, so even though she was in the process of feeling more comfortable he re and has made some friends, his absence was an obstacle to her full engagement in her j ob. It is interesting to note that it is this faculty member who is considering joini ng the mentoring program even though she declined when she was first hired. As she sees i t, the mentoring program would give her someone nearby to talk with, someone to discuss research ideas with, and someone with whom to seek advice. It is also interesti ng to note that the female faculty perceived the campus climate to be somewhat le ss welcoming than the men. This corresponded with what others have ascertained – that women often are not as well integrated into the academic environment as men (Ag uirre, 2000; Johnsrud, 1993). Feelings of Differentness Related to experiencing feelings of isolation and alienation are those that a re a result of cultural differences. Even though feelings of differentness were not prevalent among the study’s participants, they could be used to explain what one faculty me mber referred to as alienation. Upon more consideration of this faculty member’s cult ure and the discipline of which he is a member, the alienation he sensed quite possibly has be en caused by cultural differences. The faculty member came from a culture th at projected warmth and affection, while his department was very White male-oriented a nd, as he referred to it, macho. These experiences support the research of Schumacher (2011) and

PAGE 125

111 demonstrate that culture plays an important role in both being accepted and sensing exclusion. Two of the faculty expressed differentness because of the color of their ski n. For one, however, the feelings of differentness could have multiple connotations. As she mentioned, she never wanted anyone to think she was hired because of her ethnicity. On the other hand, she realized that she was setting an example for others who are Black. As she said, “As one of the few Black people on campus, I cannot afford to be normal.” Teaching and Research Challenges Teaching and research are the two primary missions of most academic insti tutions and are the major components in tenure and promotion criteria. Several of the faculty had teaching experience prior to accepting their current positions. Some were graduate teaching assistants; others were researchers. However, with a typica l tenure criteria distribution of 40% teaching and 40% research it has been important that the faculty were proficient in both teaching and research. The time commitment involved to be an effective teacher was one of the factors some of the faculty mentioned. Some of the amount of time it took to prepare a lesson was a result of the language differences Moreover, fluency in English, as well as one’s accent, can have an affect p erceived teaching ability (Theobald, 2007). Two of the faculty reported difficulties publishing but for different reasons. For one, the problem was that she spent her time on teaching because that was her exper tise. She was a master teacher, but realized that to be tenured she also needed to publis h therefore she did what was expected and created a research agenda that not only supported her tenure application, but also was one that was worthy of promotion to

PAGE 126

112 professor. Some native-born faculty also confront challenges with publishing, so this faculty memberÂ’s experience was not unique, but nonetheless it was a factor of concern during the time she was on tenure track. The other faculty member talked about conce rns with publishing in English, which is not his first language. Because of the language difference, it took him more than double the amount to time to write an article due to the need to translate from his native language to English. Visa Difficulties Not at the top of the obstacle list, but no less important were the problems with visas and residency requirements. Again, there was a generational differen ce. However, unlike the generational differences discussed earlier, these had to do with the fact that world events in 2001 have restricted travel and obtaining work visas and permanent residency. Because a majority of the faculty first entered the United S tates under a student (J-1) visa, obtaining a work visa was considerably easier than the faculty who were not students in the U.S. prior to accepting a teaching position. Instead, their challenge primarily has been obtaining permanent residency, in order to be eligible for most, if not all, federal research grants. The junior faculty who arrived here after 2001 had experienced apprehension and uncertainty regarding their visa status. They realized that it took time t o get permanent residency. And, for those who needed permanent residency to obtain some federal grants, they have had to find a way to accomplish what they wanted and needed while waiting for the residency documents. Unfortunately, it has taken time and for f aculty on the tenure track, the time has been limited.

PAGE 127

113 Mentoring: Finding Support through Relationships When asked about mentors and other supportive relationships, the faculty acknowledged that they had to cultivate their own support systems. Although the institution, for the most part, projected a welcoming and supportive environment, none of the faculty received formal mentoring, and, overall very little structured or ientation to the expectations of tenure track faculty was provided. The faculty was expected to ta ke the initiative to find out about the university, their jobs, and the expectations of being tenure track faculty on their own. Those who joined the American academy 30 and 40 years ago had no expectations of being mentored as a junior faculty member. In fact, being paired w ith someone whose role was to provide you with guidance and encouragement was unheard of. For some faculty being mentored meant you were deficient, that you neede d remediation in order to become the teacher and researcher the university expec ted of you. Having a mentor was a sign of weakness (Collins, 2008). However, none of the faculty expressed the thought that being mentored was a sign of weakness. Maybe it was hindsight now that they know the benefits of mentoring In fact, each of the senior faculty actively mentor junior faculty in their col leges. They know the benefits of having someone help you become acclimated to the university, the college, and the departmentÂ’s procedures and climate. Knowing the advantages, they have made a point to include new faculty in their research and their grants, they wo rk with them on their teaching, and they acknowledge that they make a conscious effort to reach out and offer assistance and friendship speaks to advocacy of mentoring. This faculty spoke of the value they see mentoring offers and have offered their com mitment

PAGE 128

114 to provide that support to new faculty in their departments and colleges – something tha t was not afforded to them. Conversely, the younger, more junior, faculty referred to their advisors, department chairs, college deans, and other professional colleagues as mentors. Although none of the junior faculty had participated in a formal mentoring program, they were familiar with the term and readily acknowledged they had received advice and guidance from someone with more experience. A few used the word mentor when referring to those individuals who worked with them, gave them advice and guidance, and included them in their grants and other research. Largely, the interviews revealed that the faculty have been involved in two types of supporting relationships. One was the support they have received from people within the academic setting, whether as a graduate student or as tenure track f aculty. These people included their doctoral advisor with whom some of the faculty had maintained contact and with whom they have joint grants and publications. Others included professional colleagues, such as their department chair and faculty in their department. These are what I call informal mentoring relationships. It has been these interactions that have become essential in the faculty’s growth and success as scholars. The second type of supporting relationship was more socially connected, such as what one might receive from family and friends. Social networking also assis ts in lessening obstacles, increasing job satisfaction, and ultimately achieving tenure and promotion (Fontaine & Millen, 2004; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Muth & Browne-Ferrigno, 2008; Williams & Kirk 2008). Spouses, parents, siblings, and close friends have all played an important role in overcoming many of the obstacles the faculty

PAGE 129

115 encountered. In fact, family has been integral to the success of two faculty m embers because they had little, if any, departmental faculty support. Although he rec eived tenure long ago, one of the faculty continued to find encouragement and scholarly collaborative opportunities with his family. As mentioned above, I noted some variations in expectations that are age-related. More recently, Trower (2010) studied generational differences among scholars and what the scholars expect in the way of support as a tenure-track faculty member. T he basic requirements for receiving tenure have not changed much over the years. What has changed, however, are the expectations of the type of support new faculty receive. What do our faculty want? What do our faculty need to be effective teachers and scholar s? As Trower found, all tenure-track faculty have wanted the same thing – to be successf ul, to become tenured, and, for some, to rise in the ranks of professorship. What is different now than 10, 20,30, 40 years ago is that those faculty we know as Boomers (1956-1963) and those known as Gen X (1964-1980) both live and work in a world different from those born prior to 1946 through 1955. Gen X not only want but expect to have supportive workplaces and departments. They also expect to have frequent and helpful feedback about their development as a faculty member. They need and expect to be mentored (Trower, 2010). The faculty in this study represented the Traditionalist s (those born before 1946) through the Gen X generation. It is no wonder, therefore, that generational differences, especially surrounding the expectations of ment oring, surfaced. Motivation to Succeed The third theme that emerged is the role motivation has played in the career success of the participants. This study’s results corroborated earlier f indings that work

PAGE 130

116 motivation consisted of both internal and external influences (Jones, 1955; Pink (2009); Steers & Porter, 1991; Vroom, 1965). It also supports research on self-concordance in that goals represent an individual’s interest and are not developed because they are an expectation. Several researchers have studied the complexity of achievement motivation w ith respect to different cultural and demographic variables (Chen, 2007; Lopes, 2006; Sheldon, Elliott, Ryan, Chirkov, Kim, Wu, Demir, & Sun, 2004). The participants in this study represented a wide variety of cultures, ethnicities, and other demograp hic variables (e.g. gender, social class, marital status, faculty rank, and location of schooli ng). Research confirming the motivational differences among different cultur es aside, all the faculty exhibited a desire to be successful and a resolve to do their best to ensure the y obtained tenure. Corresponding to the research cited above, the majority of the faculty attribut ed their success to such traits as being stubborn, having a desire to continuously learn and expand one’s knowledge base, and wanting to take control of her or his life – all self-regulatory motivation attributes. From the faculty’s point of view, their success es have been their responsibility and are accomplished by these personal traits. They also recognized that their career successes have been strongly infl uenced by others such as family and friends. Family influences are known to be associated with achievement motivation and self-determination theory (Chen, 2007; Pinder, 2008; Steinberg, Dornbusch, & Brown, 1992). The faculty in this study soundly credited family members and friends with the desire and need to surmount obstacles and accomplish their goals. Some of the motivation was from the encouragement of fami ly;

PAGE 131

117 others were from a sense of duty to the family – a sense of fear of disappointm ent. Confidence in one’s ability to achieve was an over-riding trait among the faculty None expressed doubt that they would not achieve what they wanted. I found it interesting that among the faculty, there were two deans, one associate dea n, one professor who has been recognized with receiving the first endowed professorship in he r name, and one more junior faculty member who was a director of a unit and the recipient of numerous high dollar grants. When asked if they aspired to these levels of achievement, they all concurred that they are committed to the institution’s mission and values. They see themselves as an integral part of the university’s success More importantly, they have a passion for teaching and for conducting research, and they love what they do. Along the way, opportunities arose. They took the initiative and applied for the new position or applied for grants, or worked hard to be an outstanding teacher. However, that, in itself, was telling. Maybe they didn’t consciously aspire to “c limb the ladder,” but their drive, their confidence, and the desire to contribute at a higher level provided the impetus to go further. Quite possibly that has been their key to success as tenured faculty – high job satisfaction brought about by a variety of factors, among which motivation to succ eed was one. Believing in oneself was important. Knowing family and friends were there to give encouragement and, in many cases, to collaborate with was also essent ial. Nonetheless, even though they were motivated by family, friends, and a love of their jobs, the pre-tenure faculty were also motivated by the goal – achieving tenur e. Goal attainment was critical for the faculty. Several goals motivated t hem, with the final goal, at least at the beginning, being tenure. In this study, the goal of the pre-

PAGE 132

118 tenure foreign-born faculty was no different nor more important than the goal of pr etenure native born faculty. Tenure was what they worked towards. The difference w as that for some of the foreign-born faculty, not achieving tenure meant they possibly would have to leave the country, if they did not have their permanent residency. The facult y in this study expressed no doubt that they would achieve tenure. All had successfully passed their comprehensive review and knew what was expected of them – something that a couple of them did not have a concept of four years ago. They enjoyed being at their institution, and they enjoyed the effect they have had on students. Recommendations from the Study Several factors of success were explored in this study. Among these, mentor ing was the one factor that could be used to positively influence the others, in particul ar the obstacles. Even though the senior faculty have realized successful academi c careers without participating in a mentoring program or having anyone they considered as a mentor, they stated that they believe mentoring is important, and they have m ade a conscious effort to mentor others in their departments. The junior faculty mentione d that a mentor would be helpful as they navigated the tenure track. Given that, institutions should become more aware of both the collegiality needs of all new faculty a s well as their procedural needs, and put procedures in place to ensure they are welcomed int o the university and their departments (Theobald, 2007). New faculty, whether foreign or native-born, should be oriented upon joining the faculty as well as periodically during their pre-tenure years, at a minimum. It is commonly understood that all faculty, not just those who are foreign-born, are expected to find their own support systems, and are responsible to develop their own

PAGE 133

119 teaching skills and to draft a research agenda that reflects both quality and quantity. However, as mentioned earlier, there is a generational difference. Prior t o 2006, in the research participants’ school there was very little, if any, pre-tenur e support required of the colleges by the university or by the university system. In 2006, however, the university system issued a policy on faculty development and mentoring for thei r institution, which provided some impetus for the universities in the system to i nvestigate how they would develop and implement a mentoring program. Three years later, in 2009, the university of which the study’s participants are members issued a pol icy on pretenure mentoring. These policies serve as a charge for the university to address the pre-t enure needs of its faculty. The charge is there. However, with the exception of one, the pre-tenure faculty in this study remarked that they have not been approached to participate i n the formal mentoring program. One of the pre-tenure faculty is in a department that reaches out to its faculty members, in particular to its foreign-born faculty, and they ha ve developed a supportive environment. The others have not been afforded that level of support. It is not that they have received no support from their departments; inste ad any support they have received has been acquired on their own volition. Nonetheless, whether faculty are involved in a mentoring program or not, the real need is for departments within the university to have “consistent and multi-pronged” communicat ion (Theobald, 2007). It is this communication component and reaching out to the junior faculty that is important. On a lesser level, but still worthy to note, are the challenges the faculty have had with teaching and research, in particular writing papers and grants. Having someone to

PAGE 134

120 proofread grant proposals and manuscripts would be welcome and is something our academic institutions should consider providing for not only their foreign-born fa culty but for all faculty. Lastly, several issues surfaced that call for proactive measures re garding diversity awareness and training for faculty and students. A respect of and appreciation of al l differences should be cultivated in our institutions. In particular, academic institutions should work with students to become more tolerant and less biased and prejudiced of cultural and ethnic differences, such as accents and speech patterns and dialect. Limitations of the Study Patton (2002) remarked that there are generally trade-offs when designing one Â’s research. Some of the limitations apparent at the start of this study include the effect human variation has on the overall study. In order to obtain a broader sense of the factors affecting foreign-born facultiesÂ’ academic career success, the stud y sample should consist of faculty from a more comprehensive range of academic institutions around the Uni ted States. A wider variety of disciplines should also be studied. It should also include people from all regions, if not from every country. Ethnicity and cultural difference s as well as gender could possibly make a difference in the participantsÂ’ experiences w ith mentoring programs and/or mentor relationships in general. It could also affect any feelings of alienation one might experience. The sample should consist of faculty who have not been successful in obtaining pre-tenure review or obtaining tenure. Perhaps, though, the one factor that makes it difficult to obtain a large enough sample to be able to generalize the findings i s that once foreign-born faculty become permanent residents or U.S. citizens, it is dif ficult to find

PAGE 135

121 them because they lose their ethnicity status as a non-citizen. For some, they move into the African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic categories. Another limitation is the interview instrument, which could have been designed to allow for more discussion. Although the questions were open ended, probes were used, and the probes possibly were a trigger for the faculty to focus on that word, rather t han to use the probe as an incentive to talk more about the particular question. Although the focus was on the five concepts from the conceptual framework (formal mentoring informal mentoring, social networking, obstacles, and motivation), the tightness of the questions did not leave much room for extraneous information, which quite possibly would have added more depth to the interviews. Implications for Future Research This research was rather tightly constructed and focused on what obstacles foreign-born faculty have experienced, the role mentoring and social networks ha ve played, and the motivational forces that have affected career successes. Fut ure research could take several different avenues. One is to broaden the scope and explore in more depth the effect of oneÂ’s immediate family, such as spouse and children, have on job satisfaction and the attainment of tenure. Work-life balance could also be investig ated. It would also be both interesting and informative to analyze the differences am ong the various departments as far as support that is given their faculty in general. E nough information was gleaned from this study to suggest that some departments appear to be more supportive in general of not only junior faculty but also of foreign-born faculty. By knowing how specific departments address the needs of their new faculty, in partic ular those who are foreign-born, university and college administrators will gain a better

PAGE 136

122 understanding of foreign-born faculty in the American academy and the support sys tems their departments offer to faculty. Another area for future research could focus on institutions that have formal mentori ng programs and look at their best practices. As Trower (2010) argues, mentoring of new faculty is too important to leave to be unplanned and taken casually. Finally, because cross-cultural issues were an over-riding concept in thi s study, it would be beneficial to take a more in-depth look at the different cross-cultural interactions in the academic setting. When developing programs of diversity and c ultural awareness and mentoring, more information about cross-cultural considerations woul d be helpful and could then be embedded in the curriculum. Conclusion The purpose of this study was to determine factors that affect the academic ca reer success of foreign-born faculty. In general, this study confirmed much of the l iterature about obstacles foreign-born faculty encounter. They seem to experience more incidences of loneliness, isolation, and alienation than many native-born faculty. Unl ike native-born faculty, they are troubled with language, in particular linguist ic, differences and experience stress from uncertain visa status and obtaining permanent residenc y. While these obstacles are not insurmountable, they are additional stressors, along with dealing with in an unfamiliar country. Centrally, most people are motivated to work and to succeed. This motivation may exist because of rewards, such as salary increases, being awarded hig h dollar grants, and receiving excellent teaching evaluations. Or, the motivation may come fr om the fun, the challenge, and the value of the work. Foreign-born faculty are no different. Some a re

PAGE 137

123 more self-regulated; others are more confident in their abilities. The bottom l ine is that the faculty were motivated by the same things—a love of teaching and conducting research. As Amelia said, “ Quisque faber fortunae suoe,” which is Latin for “Everybody makes his own fortune.” The effect of culture on the faculty’s lives is interwoven throughout the study. Culture not only affects one’s teaching and research proficiencies, but it also a ffects one’s motivation. Although there was no overwhelming indication that culture can explain the motivational factors that the faculty possesses, prior research supports the philosophies of individualism and collectivism as motivational theories as well as interpers onal differences. Foreign-born faculty contributes positively to the diversity of today’s worl d. They afford both students and other colleagues an opportunity to learn about other parts of the world while remaining within the country’s borders. It befits higher educati on institutions to support foreign-born faculty to ensure that they excel at tea ching and research and they realize job satisfaction, and ultimately job successes. A mong the supporting programs that can be made available to all faculty, not only those who are foreign-born, can be faculty development programs that address increasing teaching and research skills, writing center programs providing review of manuscripts and a series on cultural awareness that would be available for faculty, support staff, and stude nts. Specifically for foreign-born faculty, the institution could provide assistance with immigration and obtaining the appropriate visa and language and linguistic suppor t. Finally, mentoring and other supportive programs that facilitate networking and prom ote

PAGE 138

124 job satisfaction and tenure success are activities that could not only be cre ated but also appreciated and promoted across the university. As our universities place more focus on creating global competencies and citizenship, cultivating an international faculty contingent will serve three purposes. First, these individuals will add to the diversity and multiculturalism of the cam pus. Second, they will strengthen and assist in fulfilling the universityÂ’s goal t o infuse a global component to its curriculum. Finally, for some universities and departments, forei gnborn faculty will fill a void in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, a nd math) disciplines, fields that are more appealing, (because of the rigorous training pr ovide in their native cultures) to many international scholars than they are to nativ e-born scholars. [Being in higher education] is a wonderful opportunity. It exposes you to different cultures, it gives you the opportunity to travel and get to know the world. I have been traveling a lot to conferences or for research visits or collaborations and being able to do this as a part of your job is just so exciting to me. But I know it is not easy. ItÂ’s not. You really have to be willing to put a lot of effort and many times you donÂ’t see the results immediately, it is easy to get discouraged. I would certainly encourage anybody to do it. (Amelia)

PAGE 139

125 APPENDIX A Factors Affecting the Career Success of Foreign-Born Faculty Demographic Questions Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research effort designed to understand t he career success of foreign-born faculty and their participation in mentoring programs. I know that your time is valuable and I greatly appreciate your assistance with this project. I have obtained Human Subjects approval for this study. Your responses to survey questions are strictly confidential and nothing you say will be attributable directly to you. Your participation is entirely voluntary and you have the right to discontinue the questionnaire at any time. You also have the right to refuse to answer specific questions by leaving the question(s) blank. Thank you, again, for your participation in this study. Demographics 1. What is your nationality of origin? _____________________ 2. Are you a U.S. citizen? Yes _______ No ________ If yes, how long have you been a citizen? If no, are you a permanent resident? Yes _______ No _______. 3. How long have you been in the United States? __________________ 4. Is English your first language? Yes_____ No_____ If not, how many years have you been speaking English? ________ How old were you when you began speaking English? ________ 5. What degrees do you have and where did you get each degree? _____________________________________________________________ 6. What is your professorial rank? Assistant Professor____ Associate Professor____ Professor___ 7. I want to find out more about your tenure track timeline. Have you received tenure? Yes ____ No ______. If yes, what year were you awarded tenure?______ How many years were you on tenure track? ________ If no, have you passed your pre-tenure comprehensive review? Yes ____ No _____ If yes, when?

PAGE 140

126 8. LetÂ’s talk about your teaching experience. How many years experience do yo u have teaching college ________high school __________ other __________? 9. Tell me more about your teaching experience. Where have you taught? _________________________________________________When you taught, did you teach in English? _________________________ How long have you taught in English? ________________________________ 10. What describes you. Choose all that apply: Teaching Faculty _____ Researcher ______ Department Chair _____ Assistant/Associate Dean _____ Dean _____ Other (Name) ______________

PAGE 141

127 APPENDIX B Factors Affecting the Academic Career Success of Foreign-Born Facult y Full Set of Interview Questions Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research effort designed to understand t he career success of foreign-born faculty and their participation in mentoring programs. I know that your time is valuable and I greatly appreciate your assistance with this project. I have obtained Human Subject Committee’s approval for this study. Your responses to these questions are strictly confidential and nothing you say will be attributable directly to you. Your participation is entirely voluntary and you have the right to discontinue the questionnaire at any time. Thank you, again, for your participation in this study. I. Academic Career Success – I want to find out more about your decisi on to become a faculty member in an American university and your academic career success. 1. Describe the events that led to your decision to come to the United States. 2. How old were you? 3. When did you come here and why? 4. If as a student, was that for your bachelor’s, master’s, doctorate Or, were you younger? 5. If you came for a job, what job was that? 6. Tell me about family members who came with you. 7. Were they already here or did they came later? 8. If you were a student, why did you decide to stay after you received your degree(s)? 9. Tell me about friends who were here, came with you, or came shortly after you arrived in the U.S. 10. Tell me about anyone or anything in particular that has influenced your decisi on to come to the U. S.

PAGE 142

128 11. Talk with me about your decision to become a faculty member and your experiences as a faculty member so far. 12. Tell me about anyone or anything in particular that has influenced you. 13. If you have collaborated with colleagues on research, who were they? 14. Who has helped you with your teaching if you have needed it? 15. What are some of the questions you have had and who answered them? 16. Elaborate on your experiences as a faculty member. What has been good? What has not? 17. What are your long-term career goals? 18. Who, in particular, has been an influence to you? 19. If someone has helped guide your decisions, who is that person or those people? 20. Tenure and promotion is an important factor as a faculty member in the University of Colorado system. Tell me about your experience as a tenure track faculty member. 21. Who talked with you about the process? o Your department chair? o A colleague? o Anyone else? 22. If someone offered to help you with your teaching, tell me about this person or people. 23. Why do you think you have been successful (passed comprehensive review, achieved tenured, awarded promotion)? 24. Who, in particular, has been a help to you? 25. What did you do or what was offered to you that has helped? 26. Who are the family members who motivated you? 27. Which friends provided motivation for you? 28. Tell me about any personal or cultural beliefs that have driven you to succeed.

PAGE 143

129 II. Role of Mentoring and Social Networks I want to talk with you about mentoring and what experience you have had being mentored or being a mentor. I also want to find out about other relationships that help with feeli ng connected, such as social support and family involvement. 29. Can you describe the ideal mentor? 30. Tell me about any mentoring experiences you have had, whether as a student, a faculty member, or outside academia. 31. Who have you established a relationship with? 32. Tell me about your experiences serving as a mentor to others. o When was this? o Who was this? 33. Tell me about your experiences as a mentee. 34. Tell me about traits that make a good mentor. 35. If you think it helps having a mentor with similar or the same research interests why is that? 36. If you think it helps having a mentor in the same discipline, why is that? 37. Does gender make a difference? Why? 38. Does being from the same country of origin make a difference? Why? 39. If you currently are or have been a mentee, tell me about who initiated the mentoring relationship. o Yourself? o Department Chair? o A colleague? o University’s Faculty Development Center or the Teaching and Learning Center? o If someone else, who? 40. If you do not currently or never have had a mentor, tell me why. 41. Whether you have served as a mentor or you have had or currently have a mentor, what would you look for in that person? 42. Why or why not has having a mentor helped you – whether as a student or as a faculty member?

PAGE 144

130 43. If having someone, such as a friend, colleague, faculty member, or family member, to talk with about your research has been important or helpful, tell me about who this person or these people were. 44. What, in particular, has been the benefit from this relationship? 45. What might have made the relationship work better? 46. Tell me about your research program. Have you found anyone in particular to collaborate with? Who is this person or these people? Do you think this has had a positive effect on you? Why ? 47. If having someone, such as a friend, colleague, faculty member, or family member, to talk with about your classroom and teaching activities has been important or helpful, tell me about who this person or these people were. 48. If you have had a mentor or would consider having a mentor, what do you look for in that person and do you think this would make a difference? Probing Questions Same gender? Yes______ No ______ Why? Same country of origin? Yes _____ No ______ Why? Same discipline? Yes_____ No ____ Why? Same research interests? Yes_____ No_______ Why? Same ethnicity? Yes________ No________ Why? Anything else? 49. Who initiated the mentoring relationship? Yourself? Department Chair? A colleague? University’s Faculty Development Center or the Teaching and Learning Center? Someone else? 50. Why or why not is it beneficial your mentor shared the same cultural values or beliefs? III. Obstacles and Motivation to Succeed – All faculty members have been confronted with obstacles at some point in their career. These can be a nything – not having enough time to do what you need to do; not getting the support you need from colleagues, friends, administrators, family; or feelings of alienatio n or loneliness. Let’s talk about some of the obstacles you may have experienced and what has motivated you to overcome these and succeed.

PAGE 145

131 51. What are some of the obstacles you have encountered in your career? 52. Tell me about any feelings of exclusion you may have had. 53. Tell me about any feelings of alienation or loneliness. 54. If you have experienced any doubt with your career choice, tell me about the circumstances. 55. If you have had someone to talk with who understands what you are going through, who is that person? 56. What steps did you take to surmount these obstacles and did you enlist help from anyone in doing so? 57. What did you do? 58. If you received help from a person, who was this? 59. Did this help? 60. Would you do it again? 61. Would you do something different? 62. Elaborate on anything that has helped you achieve what you have. 63. Tell me about the role your friends have played. 64. Tell me about the role your family has played. 65. Tell me about the role your academic colleagues have played. 66. If your personal beliefs have made a difference, what are these? 67. If being in a mentoring relationship has helped with whom were you associated? 68. Were you the mentor or the mentee? 69. Of all the things that have contributed to your success as a faculty member, wha t has been the biggest help? 70. Do you have any suggestions for others who want to pursue a career in higher education?

PAGE 146

132 APPENDIX C Factors Affecting the Academic Career Success of Foreign-Born Faculty Shortened Set of Interview Questions Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research effort designed to understand t he career success of foreign-born faculty and their participation in mentoring programs. I know that your time is valuable and I greatly appreciate your assistance with this project. I have obtained Human Subjects approval for this study. Your responses to these questions are strictly confidential and nothing you say will be attributable directly to you. Your participation is entirely voluntary and you have the right to discontinue the questionnaire at any time. You also have the right to refuse to answer specific questions by leaving the question(s) blank. Thank you, again, for your participation in this study. I. Academic Career Success – I want to find out more about your decisi on to become a faculty member in an American university and your academic career success. 71. Describe the events that led to your decision to come to the United States. 72. Talk with me about your decision to become a faculty member and your experiences as a faculty member so far. 73. What are your long-term career goals? 74. Tenure and promotion is an important factor as a faculty member in the University of Colorado system. Tell me about your experience as a tenure track faculty member. 75. Why do you think you have been successful (passed comprehensive review, achieved tenured, awarded promotion)? II. Role of Mentoring and Social Networks I want to talk with you about mentoring and what experience you have had being mentored or being a mentor. I also want to find out about other relationships that help with feeli ng connected, such as social support and family involvement. 76. Can you describe the ideal mentor?

PAGE 147

133 77. Tell me about any mentoring experiences you have had, whether as a student, a faculty member, or outside academia. 78. Why or why not has having a mentor helped you – whether as a student or as a faculty member? 79. If having someone, such as a friend, colleague, faculty member, or family member, to talk with about your research has been important or helpful, tell me about who this person or these people were. 80. Tell me about your research program. Have you found anyone in particular to collaborate with? Who is this person or these people? Do you think this has had a positive effect on you? Why or why not? 81. If having someone, such as a friend, colleague, faculty member, or family member, to talk with about your classroom and teaching activities has been important or helpful, tell me about who this person or these people were. 82. If you have had a mentor or would consider having a mentor, what do you look for in that person and do you think this would make a difference? 83. Who initiated the mentoring relationship? Yourself? Department Chair? A colleague? University’s Faculty Development Center or the Teaching and Learning Center? Someone else? 84. Is or was your mentor the same ethnicity as you? Yes_____ No _____ Does this make a difference to you? Why or why not? Do you think it would be more beneficial your mentor shared the same cultural values or beliefs? Why or why not? III. Obstacles and Motivation to Succeed – All faculty members have been confronted with obstacles at some point in their career. These can be a nything – not having enough time to do what you need to do; not getting the support you need from colleagues, friends, administrators, family; or feelings of alienatio n or loneliness. Let’s talk about some of the obstacles you may have experienced and what has motivated you to overcome these and succeed. 85. What are some of the obstacles you have encountered in your career?

PAGE 148

134 86. What steps did you take to surmount these obstacles and did you enlist help from anyone in doing so? 87. Elaborate on anything that has helped you achieve what you have. 88. Of all the things that have contributed to your success as a faculty member, w hat has been the biggest help? 89. Do you have any suggestions for others who want to pursue a career in higher education?

PAGE 149

135 APPENDIX D Recruitment Script for Survey The following script was given to each participant prior to the interview: Thank you for your interest in my dissertation research on the fac tors affecting the career success of foreign-born faculty. I value the unique contribution that y ou can make to my study and am excited about the possibility of your participation in i t. I greatly appreciate your commitment of time, energy, and effort. The research model I am using is a qualitative one through which I am seeking comprehensive descriptions of your experiences. In this way I hope t o illuminate or answer my main question: “What factors affect the career suc cess of foreign-born faculty?” You are being asked to be in a research study that involves approxim ately 12 foreignborn faculty members at the University of Colorado. I will give y ou a survey that asks questions regarding your experiences and how such experiences relat e to your career success as a faculty member at an American university. I am seeking vivid, accurate, and comprehensive portrayals of what these experiences were like for you: your thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, as well as situations, events, places, and peopl e connected with your experiences. Although there are no direct benefits to your participation, the informa tion is important to those interested in understanding what contributes to the success of our foreign-born faculty. Your participation is voluntary. You do not have to complete the interview. During the interview you may feel some discomfort or fatigue. Since the ques tions relate to your experiences, you may feel some embarrassment or dismay over you r experiences. To reduce fatigue, boredom or feelings of embarrassment or dismay, you may choose not to participate or stop the interview at any time. If you have questions regarding the survey or research study, you may contact me via email or phone. I will give you my business card with my contact information if you care to contact me. Furthermore, I will write the number to the UCD Human Subject Research Committee (HSRC). You can call them at 303-315-2732. Every effort will be made to keep your records a secret. It cannot be guar anteed. Both the records that identify you and the consent form signed by you may be looked at by others. They are: Human Subject Research Committee

PAGE 150

136 The research group doing the study Regulatory officials from the institution where the research is being conduc ted who want to make sure the research is safe The results from the research may be shared at a meeting. The results fro m the research may be in published articles. Your name will be kept private when information is presented.

PAGE 151

137 REFERENCES Aguirre, A., Jr. (2000). Women and minority faculty in the academic workplace: Recruitment, retention, and academic culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Alberts, H. C. (2008). The challenges and opportunities of foreign-born instructors in the classroom. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32, 189-203. Alderman, M. K. (2004). Motivation for achievement: Possibilities for teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Allen, T. D., Day, R., & Lentz, E. (2005). The role of interpersonal comfort in mentoring relationships. Journal of Career Development, 31, 155-169. Altbach, P. G. (Ed.). (1996). The international academic profession: Portrait of fourteen countries. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000, Pub L 106-313. Retrieved from http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/PUBLAW/HTML/ PUBLAW/0-0-0-22204.html The American Competitiveness: Workforce Act of 1998, Pub. L. No.105-277. Retrieved from http://commdocs.house.gov/committees /judiciary/hju66211.000/hju66211_0.HTM Argyle, M. (1982). Inter-cultural communication. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction (pp. 61-80). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A new perspective for organizati onal inquiry. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 295-306. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory New York, NY: General Learning Press. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50, 248-287. Basti, C. (1996). A study of the professoriate from the prospective of select foreign-born faculty (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL. Baugh, S. G., & Fagenson-Eland, E. A. (2007). Formal mentoring programs: A poor cousin to information relationships? In B. E. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The

PAGE 152

138 handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 249-271). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Beck, C. T. (1994). Reliability and validity issues in phenomenological research. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 16 254-267. Bennett, J. M. (1993). Cultural marginality: Identity issues in intercultural training. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for intercultural experience (pp. 109-135). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Berkson T. B. (1920). Theories of Americanization: A critical study, with special reference to the Jewish group. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9-26). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Berry, J. W., & Kim, U. (1988). Acculturation and mental health. In P. Dasen, J. W. Berry & N. Sartorious (Eds.), Health and cross-cultural psychology (pp. 207-236). Newberry Park, CA: Sage. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M. E., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspective s. Academy of Management Review, 16 291-317. Blake, S. (2000). At the crossroads of race and gender: Lessons from the mentoring experiences of professional black women. In A. J. Murrell, F. J. Crosby, & R. J. El y (Eds.), Mentoring dilemma: Developmental relationships within multicultural organizations (pp. 83-104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence? Erlbaum. Blake-Beard, S., Murrell, A., & Thomas, D. (2007). Unfinished business: The impact of race on understanding mentoring relationships. In B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (E ds.), The Handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice (pp.617-632) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Boas, F. (1982). Race, language, and culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education. An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed ). Boston: Pearson/ Allyn and Bacon.

PAGE 153

139 Boice, R. (1992a). Lessons learned about mentoring. In M. D. Sorcinelli & A. E. Austin (Eds.), Developing new and junior faculty. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 50. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Boice, R. (1992b). The new faculty member: Supporting and fostering professional development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bollag, B. (2006). Enrollment of foreign students holds steady. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53, 13. Borjas, G. J. (1985). Assimilation, changes in cohort quality, and the earnings of immigrants. Journal of Labor Economics, 3, 463-489. Borjas, G. J. (2000). FTBA and academic performance of undergraduates. Academic Economic Review: Paper and Proceedings, 90 355-359. Bowman, S. R., Kite, M. E., Branscombe, N. R., & Williams, S. (2000). Developmental relationships of Black Americans in the academy. In A. J. Murrell, F. J. Crosby & R. J. Ely (Eds.), Mentoring dilemmas: Developmental relationships within multicultural organizations (pp. 21-46) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Boyer, E. L., Altbach, P. G., & Whitelaw, M. J. (1994). The academic profession: An international perspective. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Brainard, J. (2006, August 15). Defense department shelves proposal to increase restrictions on foreign scientists. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Defense-Department-Shelves/118900 Brein, M., & David, K. H. (1971). Cross-cultural communication and adjustment of the sojourner. Psychology Bulletin, 76, 215-230. Brinson, J., & Kottler, J. (1993). Cross-cultural mentoring in counselor education: A strategy for retaining minority faculty. Counselor Education and Supervision, 32, 241-253. Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Muth, R. (2004). Leadership mentoring in clinical practice : Role socialization, professional development, and capacity building. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40 468-494. Campbell, M. (2005). Cross-cultural faculty mentoring: Making it work. Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 15, 14-15. Carter, D. J., & Wilson, R. (1992). Minorities in higher education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

PAGE 154

140 Cervantes, R. C., & Castro, F. G. (1985). Stress, coping and Mexican American mental health: A systematic review. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 7, 1-73. Chao, G. T., Walz, P. M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with non-mentored counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, 619-636. Chattergy, V. O. (1994). Taking a cultural journey through mentorship: A personal stor y. In M. A. Wunsch (Ed.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 57, (pp.115120). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Chellaraj, G., Maskus, K. E., & Mattoo, A. (2006). Skilled immigrants, higher educati on, and U.S. innovation. In C. Ozden & M. Schiff (Eds.), International migration, remittances and the brain drain (pp. 245-260). Washington, DC: The World Bank and Palgrave Macmillan. Chen, J. J. (2007). Achievement motivation among Chinese immigrant and Chinese American students: Examining cultural, psychosocial, and sociohistorical cont exts. In P. R. Zelick (Ed.), Issues in the psychology of potivation (pp. 97-113). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science. Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (1995). The endogeneity between language and earnings: International analyses. Journal of Labor Economics, 13, 246-288. Church, A. T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 540-572. Colaizzi, P. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. In R. V alle & M. Kings (Eds.), Existential phenomenological alternative for psychology (pp. 4871). New York: Oxford University Press. Collins, J. M. (2008). Coming to America: Challenges for faculty coming to Unite d StatesÂ’ universities. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32 (2), 179-188. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Corley, E. A., & Sabharwal, M. (2007). Foreign-born academic scientists and engi neers: Producing more and getting less than their U.S.-born peers? Research in Higher Education, 48, 909-940. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cross, W. E., Jr. (1978). The Tomas and Cross models of psychological nigrescence: A review. Journal of Black Psychology, 5 (1): 13-31.

PAGE 155

141 Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. London: Sage. Cui G., & Awa, N. (1992). Measuring intercultural effectiveness: An integrat ive approach. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 16 311–328. Cullen, D. L., & Luna, G. (1993). Women mentoring in academe: Addressing the gender gap in higher education. Gender and Education, 5, 125-137. Darwin, A. (2000). Critical reflections on mentoring in work settings. American Education Quarterly, 50, 197-211. Day, R., & Allen, T. D. (2003). The relationship between career motivation and selfefficacy with protg career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64 72-91. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Dedrick, R. F., & Watson, F. (2002). Mentoring needs of female, minority, and international graduate students: A content analysis of academic research g uides and related print material. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 10 275-289. doi:10.1080/1361126022000024541 Deloz, M. (1986). The activities of the Council of Europe concerning the recognition of studies and diplomas of higher education and of academic mobility. Higher Education in Europe 11 (1), 2127. Diamini, S. (2002) From the other side of the desk: Notes on teaching about race when racialized Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 5 (1): 51-66. Dinges, N. G., & Baldwin, K. D. (1996). Cross-cultural competence: A research perspective. In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 106-123). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Douglas, C. A., & McCauley, C. D. (1999). Formal developmental relationships: A survey of organizational practices. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10, 203-220. Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professional, and technological positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 539-546. DuBois, C. A. (1951). Culture shock. Paper presented at the Regional Conference of Institute of International Education, Chicago, IL. Elmer, D. (2002). Cross-cultural connections. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

PAGE 156

142 Ellis, B., Sawyer, J., Gill, R., Medlin, J., & Wilson, D. (2005). Influences of the learnin g environment of a regional university campus on its international graduates. The Australian Educational Researcher, 32 ( 2 ) 65-86. Erez, M., Kleinbeck, U., & Thierry, H. (2001). Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ewing, R., Freeman, M., Barrie, S., Bell, A., OÂ’Connor, D., Waugh, F., & Sykes, C. (2008). Building community in academic settings: The importance of flexibil ity in a structured mentoring program. Mentoring & Tutoring: partnership in Learning, 16 294-310. Finkelstein, M. J., & LaCelle-Peterson, M. W. (1992). New and junior faculty: A re view of the literature. In M. D. Sorcinelli and A. E. Austin (Eds.), Developing new and junior faculty (pp. 5-14) New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 50. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Fletcher, J. K., Ragins, B. R. (2007). Stone Center relational cultural theory: A window on relational mentoring. The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 373-400). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Foderaro, L. W. (2011, March 9). More foreign-born scholars lead U.S. universities. New York Times Retrieved from www.nytimes.com /2011/03/10/education/10presidents.html Fontaine, M.A., & Millen, D. R. (2004). Understanding the benefits and impact of communities of practice. In P. Hildreth & C. Kimball (Eds.), Knowledge networks: Innovations through communities of practice. Retrieved from http://www.chriskimble.com/KNICOP/Chapters/Chapter_1.html/ Foote, K. E., Li, W., Monk, J., & Theobald, R. (2008). Foreign-born scholars in US universities: Issues, concerns, and strategies. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32 (2), 167-178. Fuller K, Maniscalco-Feichtl, M., Droege M. (2008). The role of the mentor in retaining Junior Pharmacy faculty members. American Journal of Pharmacology Education, 72 (2), Article 41. Gardner, J. (2005). Barriers influencing the success of racial and ethnic minorit y students in nursing programs. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 16 : 155-162. doi: 10.1177/1043659604273546 Ginsgberg, M. B., & Wlodkowski, R. J. (2009). Diversity & motivation: Culturally responsive teaching in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

PAGE 157

143 Giorgi, A. (1985). The phenomenological psychology of learning and the verbal learning tradition. In A. Giorgi (Ed.), Phenomenology and psychological research (pp. 2385). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Goodwin, C & Nacht, M. (1991). Missing the boat: The failure to internationalize American higher education. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Goodwin, L. D., & Stevens, E. A. (1998). An exploratory study of the role of mentoring in the retention of faculty. Journal of Staff, Programs, and Organizational Development, 16, 39-47 Goodwin, L. D., Stevens, E. A., & Bellamy, G. T. (1998). Mentoring among faculty in schools, colleges, and departments of education. Journal of Teacher Education, 49 334-343. Grant-Thomas, S. K. (1997). Cross-cultural mentor effectiveness and African Ame rican male students. Journal of Black Psychology, 23, 120-134. Grayson, J. P. (2008). Sense of coherence and academic achievement of domestic and international students: A comparative analysis. Higher Education, 56, 473-492. Green, M. F., (2007). Internationalizing community colleges: Barriers and stra tegies. In E. J. Valeau & R. L. Raby (Eds.), International reform efforts and challenges in community colleges (pp. New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 138 15-24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3 (1). Article 4. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1/pdf/groenewald.pdf Gudykunst, W. B. (2004). Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65 1-13. Hamilton, K. (2002). Race in the college classroom: Minority faculty often fac e student resistance when teaching about race. Black Issues in Higher Education, 42: 258-265. Harris, H., & Kumra, S. (2000). International manager development: Cross-cultural training in highly diverse environments. Journal of Management Development, 19 602-614. Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: A developmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 264-288.

PAGE 158

144 Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill. Holen, A. (2009). The budgetary effects of high-skilled immigration reform. Washington, DC: Technology Policy Institute. Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 673-703. Iceland, J. (2009). Where we live now: Immigration and race in the United States. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Immigration Policy Center. (2011). The U.S. economy still needs highly skilled foreign workers. Washington, DC: American Immigration Council. Institute of International Education (2008). Open doors 2008 report on international educational exchange. New York, NY: Institute of International Education. Institute of International Education (2010). Open doors 2010 report on international educational exchange. New York, NY: Institute of International Education. Jacobs, L. J., & Friedman, C. B. (1988). Student achievement under foreign teaching associates compared with native teaching associates. Journal of Higher Education, 59 551-563. Jenkins, S. (2000). Cultural and linguistic miscues: A case study of international t eaching assistant and academic faculty miscommunication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24 477-501. Johnson-Bailey, J., & Cervero, R. M. (2002, Winter). Cross-cultural mentoring as a context for learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No.96. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Johnson-Bailey, J., & Cervero, R. M. (2008). Different worlds and divergent paths: Academic careers defined by race and gender. Harvard Educational Review, 78 311-332. Johnsrud, K. L. (1993). Women and minority faculty experiences: Defining and responding to diverse realities. In J. Gainen & R. Boice (Eds.), Building a diverse faculty (pp. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 53 3-16).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

PAGE 159

145 Jones, M. R. (Ed.). (1955). Nebraska symposium on motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Kallan, H. M. (1915). Democracy versus the melting pot. The Nation, 100, 190-194, 217220. Kavas, A. & Kavas, A. (2008). An exploratory study of undergraduate college studentsÂ’ perceptions and attitudes toward foreign accented faculty. College Student Journal, 42 879-890. Kea, C. D., Penny, J. M., & Bowman, I. J. (2003). The experiences of African American students in special education masterÂ’s programs at traditionally white inst itutions. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26 273-287. Klineberg, O., & Hull, F. W. (1979). At a foreign university: An international study of adaptation and coping. New York, NY: Prager. Knight, P. T. & Trowler, P. R. (1999). It takes a village to raise a child: Mentoring and the socialization of new entrants to the academic professions. Mentoring & Tutoring, 7 23-34. Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Kram, K. E., & Hall, D. T. (1996). Mentoring in a context of diversity and turbulence. In E. Kossek & S. Lobel (Eds.), Managing diversity: Human resources strategies for transforming the workplace (pp. 108-136). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Kram, K. E., & B. R. Ragins (2007). The landscape of mentoring in the 21st Century. In B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp.659-692). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kramsch, C., & Widdowson, H. (1998). Language and culture. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Lam, S. S. K., Schaubroeck, J., & Aryee, S. (2002). Relationship between organizational justice and employee work outcomes: A cross-national study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (1) 1-18. Lang, J. (2005). Life on the tenure-track: Lessons from the first year. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Lankau, M. J., & Scandura, T. A. (2002). An investigation of person learning in mentoring relationships: Content, antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 779-790.

PAGE 160

146 Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485-516. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2 (3), article 3. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/2_3final/pdf/laverty.pdf Lavrakas, P. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods. Los Angeles: Sage. Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Kleen, E. B., Levinson, M. H., & McKee, B. (1978). The seasons of a man’s life. New York, NY: Ballantine. Liebkind, K. (2006). Ethnic identity and acculturation. In D. L. Sam & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Lin, Z., Pearce, R., & Wang, W. (2008). Imported talents: Demographic characteri stics, achievement and job satisfaction of foreign-born full time faculty in four –yea r American colleges. Higher Education, 57 (6), 703-721. doi: 10:1007/s10734-0089171-z Liu, M. (2001). The adaptation and experience of foreign-born faculty members in the United States (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA. Locke, E. A., Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal se tting and task motivation. American Psychologist, 57, 705-717. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goals setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. Academy of Management Review, 8 620-630. Lopes, T. P. (2006). Career development of foreign-born workers: Where is the career motivation research? Human Development Review, 5, 478-493. doi: 10.1177/1534484306293925. Lott, B. (2010). Multiculturalism and diversity: A social psychological perspective. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

PAGE 161

147 Lowell, B. L. (2007). Immigration and labor force trends. (Conference Board Report #08-09). Economics Working Paper Series. New York, NY: The Conference Board. Luna, G., & Cullen, D. L. (1995). Empowering the faculty: Mentoring redirected and renewed. Washington, DC: ERIC Higher Education Clearinghouse. Lyons, B., & Oppler, E. S. (2004). The effects of structural attributes and demogra phic characteristics on protg satisfaction in mentoring programs. Journal of Career Development, 30, 215-229. Mamiseishvili, K. (2010). Foreign-born women faculty work roles and productivity at research universities in the United States. Higher Education, 60, 139-156. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9291-0. Mamiseishvili, K. (2011, April 25). Teaching workload and satisfaction of foreign-born and U.S. born faculty at four-year postsecondary institutions in the United States Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. doi: 10.1037/a0022354 Mamiseishvili, K., & Hermsen, J. M. (2009). Employment patterns and job satisfaction of foreign-born science and engineering doctorate recipients in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.academicleadership.org/empirical _research/570_printer.shtml Mamiseishivili, K., & Rosser, V. J. (2010). International and citizen faculty in the U nited States: An examination of their productivity at research universities. Research in Higher Education, 51, 88-107. doi:10.1007/sl11162-009-9145-8 Manrique, C. G., & Manrique, G. G., (1999). The multicultural or immigrant faculty in American society. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press. Margolis, E., & Romero, M. (2001). In the image and likeness: How mentoring functions in the hidden curriculum. In E. Margolis (Ed.), The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 89-96) New York, NY: Routledge. Marvasti, A. (2005). US academic institutions and perceived effectiveness of foreignborn faculty. Journal of Economic Issues, 39, 151-176. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 89, 975990. Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturations. Academy of Management Review, 10, 39-47. Menges, R. J. (Ed.) (1999). Faculty in new jobs: A guide to settling in, becoming established, and building institutional support. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

PAGE 162

148 Miles, M. B., & Huberman,A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Monoson, P. K., & Thomas, C. F. (1993). Oral English proficiency policies for faculty in U.S. higher education. The Review of Higher Education, 16(2), 127-140. Moody, J. (2004). Faculty diversity. New York, NY: Routledge Falmer. Mora, M. (2003). An overview of the economies of language in the U.S. labor market: Presentation notes. (American Economic Summer Minority Program Presentation Notes). Denver, CO: University of Colorado. Mortenson, S. (2006). Cultural differences and similarities in seeking social suppor t as a response to academic failure: A comparison of American and Chinese college students. Communication Education, 55( 2): 127-146. Moustakas, C. A. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mullen, C. A. (2005). The mentorship primer. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishers. Muth, R., & Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2008). Perspectives on faculty mentoring for individual development, organizational innovation, and institutional success. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), The handbook of formal mentoring in higher education: A case study approach (pp. 191-208). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon. National Association for International Educators. (2011). The economic benefits of international education to the United States for the 2009-2010 academic year: A statistical analysis. New York, NY: National Association of Foreign Student Advisors. Retrieved from http://www.nafsa.org/publicpolicy/default.aspx?id=23158 National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Digest of education statistics. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Education. National Foundation for American Policy. (2007, May). NFAP policy brief, May, 2007. Washington, DC: National Foundation for American Policy. Retrieved from http://www.nfap.com/pdf/0507brief-business-immigration.pdf National Foundation for American Policy. (2011, March). NFAP Policy Brief, March 2011. Washington, DC: National Foundation for American Policy. Retrieved from http://www.nfap.com/pdf/H1B_Visa_Fees_NFAP _Policy_Brief_March2011.pdf National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics (2006). Survey of doctorate recipients. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics /srvydoctoratework/

PAGE 163

149 National Science Foundation. (2010). Science and engineering indicators, 2010 (NSB 10-01) Arlington, VA: National Science Board. Nielson, T. R., Carlson, D. S., & Lankau, M. J. (2001). The supportive mentor as a means of reducing work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 362-381. Nimoh, P. (2010). Communication challenges faced by foreign-born faculty. Creative Nursing, 16 (2), 59-62. doi: 10.189/1078-4535.16.2.59 Oberg, K. (1960). Cultural shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology, 7, 177-182. Obiakor, F. E., & Grant, P. A. (2002). Foreign-born African Americans: Silenced voices in the discourse on race. New York, NY: Nova Science. Olsen, D., & Sorcinelli, M. D. (1992). The pre-tenure years: A longitudinal perspecti ve. In M. D. Sorcinelli & A. E. Austin (Eds.), Developing new and junior faculty (pp.1525). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. OÂ’Neil, D. (2009). Language and culture: An introduction to human communication. Retrieved from http://anthro.palomar.edu/language Padilla, A. M. (1980). Acculturation: Theories, models and some new findings. Boulder, CO: Westview. Pagel, W. J., Kendall, F. E., & Gibbs, H. R. (2002). Self-identified publishing needs of nonnative English-speaking faculty and fellows at an academic medical insti tution. Science Editor, 25, 111-114. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578. Parson, L. A., Sands, R. G., & Duane, J. (1992). Sources of career support for university faculty. Research in Higher Education, 33, 161-176. Patton, L. D., & Harper, S. R. (2003). Mentoring relationships among African America n women in graduate and professional schools. New Directions for Student Services, 104, 67-78. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Riverhead Books.

PAGE 164

150 Pinder, C. C. (2008). Work motivation in organizational behavior (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press. Polkinghorne, L. D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. S. Valle & S. Halling (Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology (pp. 41-60). New York, NY: Plenum. Raabe, B., & Beehr, T. A. (2003). Formal mentoring vs. supervisor and coworker relationships: Differences in perceptions and impact. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 271-293. Raby, R. L. (2007). Internationalizing the curriculum: On-and-off campus str ategies. In E. J. Valeau & R. L. Raby (Eds.), International reform efforts and challenges in community colleges (pp. New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 138 514).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ragins, B. R. (1997). Diversified mentoring relationship in organizations: A power perspective. Academy of Management Review, 22, 482-521. Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38, 149-152. Redmond, S. P. (1990). Mentoring and cultural diversity in academic settings. American Behavioral Scientist, 34, 188-200. Regets, M. C. (2007). Research issues in the international migration of highly skilled workers: A perspective with data from the United States. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation Division of Science Resources Statistics. Reynolds, A. (1992). Charting the changes in junior faculty: Relationships among socialization, acculturation, and gender. Journal of Higher Education, 63, 637-652. Roche, G. R. (1979). Much ado about mentors. Harvard Business Review, 57, 14-24. Ronen, S. (2001). Self-actualization versus collectualization: Implications for mot ivation theories. In M. Erez, U. Kleinbeck, & H. Thierry (Eds.), Work in the context of a globalizing economy (pp. 341-369). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. (2001). Location, location, location: Contextualizing organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior (22): 1-13. Rutter, M. (1999). Resilience as the millennium Rorschach: Response to Smith and Gorrell Barnes. Journal of Family Therapy, 21, 159-160.

PAGE 165

151 Ryan, J. (2005). The student experience: Challenges and rewards. In J. Carroll & J. Ry an (Eds.), International students: Improving learning for all (pp. xx-xx) New York, NY: Routledge. Ryan, R. M., Connell, J. P., & Deci, E. L. (1985). A motivational analysis of selfdetermination and self-regulation in education. In C. Ames & R. E. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: The classroom milieu (pp. 13-51). New York, NY: Academic Press. Sadao, K. C. (2003). Living in two worlds: Success and the bicultural faculty of color. The Review of Higher Education, 26, 397-418. Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2006). The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Sands, R. G., Parson, L. A., & Duane, J. (1991). Faculty mentoring faculty in a public university. The Journal of Higher Education 62 174-193. Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (2001). An investigation of the moderating effects of gender on the relationship between mentorship initiation and protg perceptions of mentoring functions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 342-363. Schumacher, M. E. (2011). Polish characteristics and manners through eyes of American observer. Retrieved from http://culture.polishsite.us /smculture.html Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum Press. Sheldon, K. M., Elliott, A. J., Ryan, R. M., Chirkov, V., Kim, Y., Wu, C., Demir, M., & Sun, Z. (2004). Self-concordance and subjective well-being in four cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 209. doi: 10.1177/0022022103262245 Smith, E. J. (1991). Ethnic identity development: Toward the development of a theory within the context of majority/minority status. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70 181-188. Solem, M., & Foote, K. (2004). Concerns, attitudes and abilities of early career geography faculty, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94 889912. Sorrentino, R. M., & Yamaguichi, S. (2008). Handbook of motivation and cognition across cultures. New York: Elsevier.

PAGE 166

152 Sosik, J. J., Lee, D., & Bouquillon, E. A. (2005). Context and mentoring: Examining formal and information relationships in high tech firms and K-12 schools. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 12 (2), 94-108. Soylu, A. (2007). Foreigners and workplace stress. Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 12 313-327. Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 316-325. Stanley, C. A. (2006). Faculty of color: Teaching in predominantly white colleges and universities. Bolton, MA: Anker. Stanley, C. A., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005, March-April). Cross-race faculty mentoring Change 44-50. Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (Eds.). (1991). Motivation and work behavior (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S. M., & Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic differences in adolescent achievement. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729. Subedi, B. (2006). Theorizing a “Halfie” researcher’s identity in transnatio nal fieldwork. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 573-593. Swann, W. B., & Snyder, M. (1980). On translating beliefs into action: Theories of ability and their application in an instructional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38 879-888. Tenenbaum, H. R., Crosby, F. J., & Gliner, M. D. (2001). Mentoring relationships in graduate school. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 326-341. Theobald, R. B. (2007). Foreign-born early career faculty in American higher education: The case of the discipline of geography (Unpublished dissertation). University of Colorado, Boulder. Thomas, J. M., & Johnson, B. J. (2004). Perspectives of international faculty members: Their experiences and stories. Education and Society, 22(3), 47-64. Tierney, W. G. (1997). Organizational socialization in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 68 (1), 1-16. Tierney, W. G., & Bensimon, E. M. (1996). Promotion and tenure: Community and socialization in academe. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

PAGE 167

153 Tillman, L. C. (2001). Mentoring African American faculty in predominantly Whit e institutions. Research in Higher Education, 42 295-325. Tomich, P., McWhirter, J. J., & King, W. E. (2000). International student adaptation: Critical variables. International Education, 29 (2), 37-46. Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview. Trice, A. G. (2005). Navigating in a multinational learning community: Academic departmentsÂ’ responses to graduate international students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9, 62-89. Retrieved from http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi /content/abstract/9/1/62 Trower, C. A. (2010, Summer). A new generation of faculty: Similar core values in a different world. Peer Review, 12 (3), Unger, M. (2010). Cultural dimensions of resilience among adults. In J. W. Reich, A. J. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of adult resilience (pp. 404-423). New York: Guilford. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2011). H-1B fiscal year cap season. Retrieved from http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem .5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=4b7cdd1d5fd37210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=73566811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD van Kamm, A. (1966). Existential foundations of psychology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: John Wiley. Ward, C. (1996). Acculturation. In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of crosscultural training (pp. 124-147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Acculturation and cross-cultural adaptation of British residents in Hong Kong. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 395-397. Weaver, G. R. (1993). Understanding and coping with cross-cultural adjustment stres s. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press Welch, A. R. (1997). The peripatetic professor: The internationalism of the acade mic profession. Higher Education, 34, 323,345.

PAGE 168

154 Wells, R., Seifert, T., Park, S., Reed, E., & Umbach, P. D. (2007). Job satisfaction of international faculty in U.S. higher education. Journal of the Professoriate, 2 (1), 532. Welman, J. C., Kruger, S. J., & Kruger, F. (2001). Research methodology for the business and administrative services. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. West, D. M. (2010). Brain gain: Rethinking U.S. immigration policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Williams, J. (1998, March 8-13). State-mandated English proficiency requirements for classroom instructors. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English of Other Languages, Chicago, IL. ED296593. Williams, S. E., & Kirk, A. (2008). Recruitment, retention, and promotion of minority faculty. The Department Chair, 19 (2), 23-25. Wilson, J. A., & Elman, N. S. (1990). Organizational benefits of mentoring. Academy of Management Executive, 4 (4), 88-94. Young, A. M., & Perrewe, P. L. (2000). The exchange relationship between mentors and protgs: The development of a framework. Human Resource Management Review, 10 (2), 177-209. Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, 55, 67-75. Zey, M. (1984). The mentor connection. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historic al background, methodological development, and future prospects. American Education Research Journal, 45, 166-183. doi: 10.3102/0002831207312909