23
Study Abroad Programs and Their Intersection with Gender

Noreen Siddiqui and Jody Jessup‐Anger

In the push to increase internationalization efforts on college campuses, study abroad is often looked to as a mechanism for increasing students' awareness of and appreciation for intercultural diversity (Clarke et al. 2009). Though internationalization outcomes can be achieved without sending students to other countries, the immersive experience of living, studying, and traveling in a host country is impossible to replicate at the home institution. Despite the overwhelming number of women who participate in study abroad experiences and emergent research on the effect of gender on this endeavor, the research has not been compiled into a holistic portrayal of the role of gender in study abroad. We have sought to perform such a synthesis in this chapter.

We define study abroad as when college students earn credit at their home university while taking coursework in a different country, or “a subtype of Education Abroad that results in progress toward an academic degree at a student's home institution” (Forum on Education Abroad 2015). This experience includes both coursework led by faculty from the student's home country and coursework taken at a university in the host country. Though international educational experiences that do not include coursework, such as international internships and volunteer trips, are valuable as standalone experiences, they fall outside the scope of this chapter.

To understand how gender influences study abroad, we begin by reviewing the rates and primary benefits associated with the experience. We then examine gender's influence on the study abroad context, foreign language acquisition, and experiences of sexual harassment and assault. Further, we explore the intersections between gender and other social identities: race, class, and sexual orientation and gender identity. Next, we look at men's experiences studying abroad, as they have consisted of a third of study abroad participants. We conclude with a discussion of what is missing from the literature and future areas of research.

Rates, Types, and Benefits of Study Abroad

The number of U.S. students participating in study abroad experiences has grown from about 50 000 in the mid‐1980s to more than 325 000 in 2015 (Koh Chin 2003; Bhandari and Chow 2009; Farrugia et al. 2017). In recent decades, universities and national governments have established initiatives to increase the number and percentage of college students going abroad, in order to meet internationalization goals and prepare graduates to work and solve problems in a global community (Ingraham and Peterson 2004; Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program 2005; European Commission 2015). Simultaneously, changes have occurred in the way in which students opt to go abroad. While historically, students went abroad for a semester or more and lived with a family or were integrated into a dormitory with international students from many different countries (Institute of International Education 2011), today students often study abroad for a shorter amount of time, and travel with a cohort of peers (Engle and Engle 1999).

Since data began to be collected in 1985, study abroad participants from the United States have been overwhelmingly female (Davis 1997; Koh Chin 2003; Bhandari and Chow 2009; Farrugia et al. 2017). Similarly, women in Australia and Canada study abroad at about twice the rate of men (Daly 2011; Canadian Bureau for International Education 2016). In the European Union, more than 3 million students have studied abroad in another EU country through the Erasmus program since its inception in 1987 (European Commission 2015); of these, two‐thirds are women (Brandenburg et al. 2014). Some researchers have speculated as to why this might the case: they have traced the roots of study abroad to the tradition of elite White women participating in a “Grand Tour” of Europe in the 1800s, hypothesized that more women pursue majors that have a higher participation in study abroad, and suggested that the goals of study abroad are more appealing to women. However, only a handful of scholars have tried to understand the phenomenon through rigorous study (Lucas 2009; Salisbury et al. 2009; Thirolf 2014).

Study abroad is considered a “high‐impact educational practice” on college campuses, one that is shown to deepen students' learning and to correlate with increased “rates of student retention and student engagement” (Kuh 2008, p. 9). The experience of studying abroad has been found to have many benefits for participants, improving foreign language fluency, increasing intercultural understanding, and encouraging personal growth.

Foreign language acquisition has often been referred to as a reason for students to study abroad. However, the research reveals a more complex picture. While students who study abroad have been shown to increase their fluency compared to students who study a foreign language in a typical classroom setting at their home school, they underperform compared to those who participate in an immersive home school experience (Freed et al. 2004). Students' level of language proficiency before studying abroad can also significantly influence how much fluency they gain from the experience (Freed 1995b). Despite this complicated picture, the research still shows that for some students, studying abroad can significantly increase their ability to speak, read, and understand another language (Brecht et al. 1995; Freed 1995b; Freed et al. 2004). Other research suggests that students who go abroad increase their conversational ability and understanding of the cultural contexts of communication in their language of study, which cannot be replicated in a home‐campus experience (Lafford 1995). Even though study abroad may not help all students increase their foreign language skills, for many students it can result in language growth.

Another frequently cited reason students mention for studying abroad is a desire to increase their understanding and knowledge of other cultures (Lesjak et al. 2015). Surveys of students who have studied abroad have supported the belief that the experience can increase certain aspects of intercultural growth, such as the ability to adapt to new cultures (Anderson et al. 2006). A study that utilized a control group of students who stayed at their home school found that students who studied abroad reported higher levels of “international political concern, cross‐cultural interest, and cultural cosmopolitanism” compared to those who did not (Carlson and Widaman 1988, p. 13). Using a quasi‐experimental approach, Pedersen (2010) found that utilizing an intervention that intentionally prompted students to explore and reflect upon the cultural differences and similarities they observed resulted in a statistically significant increase in intercultural understanding. When interviewed, students have also reported that studying abroad resulted in their personal, academic, and professional growth (Ingraham and Peterson 2004).

More recently, however, researchers have questioned the lasting effects of study abroad on intercultural understanding (Root and Ngampornchai 2013). Some even question the purpose of study abroad, terming it “academic tourism” (Breen 2012), “poverty tourism” (Dillard 2016), and a continuation of the “tourist gaze” (Sharpe 2015), where host country members are othered instead of the visiting students being immersed within the local community. Researchers have also questioned whether study abroad reproduces a colonial relationship between students from affluent Western countries and members of host countries in the global South (Caton and Santos 2009; Sharpe 2015). Worries about reinforcing colonial relationships could be mitigated by the development of intercultural understanding, which requires respect of the host country. In contrast, a colonial perspective engenders condescension and contempt of host peoples and their cultures. Despite these critiques, all of the authors cited here agree that study abroad could be an experience that prompts an increased understanding and appreciation of one's own and other cultures (Breen 2012; Root and Ngampornchai 2013; Sharpe 2015). Most find that it already functions that way for some students.

Other researchers have focused on how students experience personal growth from studying abroad. Dolby (2004) argues that students gain a deeper understanding of their own culture, rather than an increase in intercultural understanding. Ingraham and Peterson (2004) define personal growth as the skills students develop from being able to navigate a new environment and culture on their own. The results of a survey of more than 3600 individuals who had studied abroad through International Education of Students between the 1950s and the 1990s found that the experience had long‐term impacts on the participants (Dwyer 2004). Former students viewed their study abroad as a “catalyst” that increased their self‐confidence, level of maturity, and ability to tolerate ambiguity (p. 160). They also overwhelmingly responded that the experience had helped them to “better understand [their] own cultural values and biases” and that it still influenced their “interactions with people from different cultures” (p. 158).

Effects of Gender on the Study Abroad Experience

Students who study abroad thus experience clear benefits. However, when gender is taken into account, these benefits are not always realized. Students' gender identity and presentation can influence their experiences and complicate their understandings in ways that they do not anticipate. The following research analyzes how this occurs.

Gendered Social Context

Educational experiences, including study abroad, are filtered through an individual's social identities. James Coleman (2013), a U.K. professor who studies second language acquisition, explains, “[a]ll study abroad is a gendered experience, since socially constructed gender roles change with the social, geographical, socio‐economic and chronological context” (p. 34). By studying abroad, students leave the social context of their home institution to travel to another country where gender roles and norms may be slightly or very different. One study found that when students studied in cultures where gender norms were similar to those of their home country, they were less likely to gain awareness of the influence of gender (Jessup‐Anger 2008), as they used their home country's norms as a centering point, and thus did not question their assumptions. In contrast, students who studied abroad in a country with dissimilar gender norms were often jarringly confronted with these differences, making gender a more salient aspect of their experience (Anderson 2003; Rawlins 2012; Coleman 2013). In some cases, this awareness led to an increased understanding of the gender constructions of both their host and their home countries, especially when their coursework prompted them to “see” gender roles.

A case study of graduate students studying for 2 weeks in Rome exemplifies how study abroad can challenge students' understandings of gender (Squire et al. 2015). The authors found that even though both men and women were aware of different cultural expectations, women felt more pressure to conform to Italian gender norms, such as styles of dress. Further, both men and women articulated that, through their observations of Roman culture, they came to believe it was more patriarchal than U.S. culture. Students' expectations of culturally acceptable displays of physical contact between heterosexual men were also challenged by the custom of Italian men greeting one another with a hug or a kiss on the cheek. One student remarked that observing these interactions “defied what I considered gender norms” (Squire et al. 2015, p. 268). When discussing their experience in Rome, the students automatically compared what they saw to U.S. culture. While the authors did not discuss these comparisons, it was clear that students had to reconcile their observations of heterosexual male affection with a patriarchal culture. This reconciliation likely resulted in the students developing more complex understandings of gender in Rome and the United States, based on research of Saudi Arabian students studying in Western countries (Alhazmi and Nyland 2013; Alqudayri and Gounko 2018). It is important to note that the coursework for this group of students specifically asked them to observe the gendered social context around them. In this way, they were primed to look for and reflect upon the differences in gender between the United States and Italy.

In an ethnography of female students from the United States studying abroad in Costa Rica, Anderson (2003) found that they felt that the cultural norms of the host country were more restrictive for them than for their male peers. Female students and host families both talked about the expectation that women would tell their host family when they would be coming home late, not go out alone at night due to safety concerns, and dress conservatively. The act of traveling to a different country can allow students to exercise their independence. To then be chaperoned likely feels like a restriction on that independence. Female students reported feeling that these expectations infringed upon their personal rights: “Moral protection may seem a confusing and even offensive notion to U.S. female students abroad, especially when all the artifacts (the McDonald's hamburger stands, Pizza Huts, and adventure tours advertised in English) seem to signal modernity. Yet conservative cultural norms can be very much alive amid contemporary social realities” (Anderson 2003, p. 36). In contrast to the graduate students in Squire et al. (2015), there is no evidence that these students deepened their understanding of gender. To better prepare students for these dissonant experiences, Anderson (2003) recommends explicit pre‐departure education on the host country's gender norms and pairing female students together in homestays.

Gender may also affect students' ability to connect to a host country. In a study of British students studying abroad in Senegal, Coleman and Chafer (2011) found that many female students reported more difficulty in establishing friendships with Senegalese locals than their male peers. Female students also described lying about their marital status or wearing a ring to avoid the frequent marriage proposals they received from Senegalese men. Both men and women recounted how Senegalese locals would defer to the men in the group. In a subsequent analysis of this study, Coleman (2013) wrote that “the fact that both males and females reported more gender‐related incidents by the end of their stay may suggest that the experiences of both sexes led to a clearer understanding by sojourners of the cultural enaction of gender” (p. 34).

When taken as a whole, these studies illustrate that there are gendered dynamics at work in study abroad, especially when students experience a host country with distinct differences in gender roles or expectation or when they are prompted to examine the gender differences between host and home countries. Furthermore, the studies point to different gendered realities in a given host country, with women often shouldering the weight of these differences in the form of restricted travel, increased caution in socializing, and the need to rebuke sexual advances.

Language Acquisition

In recognizing the additional burdens women face in the study abroad context, researchers have explored how gender affects their academic achievement, specifically in learning a foreign language. Improving foreign language skills has long been promoted as a benefit of studying abroad. However, in Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context (Freed 1995a), the researchers raised questions about whether gains in students' language accusation were consistent across gender. They focused on U.S. women studying in Russia.

Brecht et al. (1995) found that women studying in Russia had smaller gains in their language acquisition skills than their male classmates. They postulated several explanations for the gender gap, including that “cultural differences” based on gender could have influenced the students' interactions with male and female Russians (p. 57), implying that women may be negatively affected by these gendered interactions.

In a related study, another researcher confirmed some of the differences related to gender that may have affected these women's language acquisition. Polanyi (1995) analyzed the journals of U.S. women studying abroad in Russia. Her research illustrated that these women were experiencing sexual harassment and pressure from Russian men, including men with whom they were acquainted. These interactions often hindered the students' attempts at communication. In one such encounter, a student wrote about attending an Easter service with a Russian man who tried to pressure her into a romantic relationship and then accused her of prejudice when she explained that she only wanted friendship. Polanyi noted that this incident demonstrated how “even the most accomplished speaker becomes uncertain, mute, when language fails because no one is listening” (p. 282). From having to deal with these experiences, Polanyi determined that the U.S. women acquired language skills for deflecting unwanted male attention. But, because these skills are not in standardized tests, they contribute to the gap in language learning between female and male study abroad students. “Rather than discussing music, politics and debating the relative merits of a totally free market based economy, [female students] are learning how to get out of humiliating social encounters, how to interpret the intentions of even polite‐seeming educated young men, how to get themselves home in one piece after an evening spent in fending off unwanted advances” (p. 289). The combination of Polanyi's and Brecht et al.'s studies creates a powerful suggestion that a woman's gender can inhibit her from increasing her foreign language skills to the same level as her male peers when studying in a country where overt displays of male dominance are culturally acceptable.

More recent studies have shown mixed results. Some researchers have found gender to be less predictive of language acquisition, even in Russia (Magnan and Back 2007; Davidson 2010), while others have continued to find a gender gap that works against women (Segura 2008). Disappointingly, women continue to encounter instances of sexual harassment and sexual assault while studying abroad – issues that are described in more detail in the next section. The negative effects of sexual harassment and assault on women's academic achievement have been well documented (Jordan et al. 2014; Baker et al. 2016; Mengo and Black 2016). There is little reason to believe that the educational endeavor of second language acquisition would be immune to these harmful effects. Cultural norms in some countries may also restrict casual interactions across gender or minimize the role women can play in public life, further diminishing the capacity for female students to practices their language skills (Coleman 2013). Clearly, gender cannot be ignored when assessing the ability of students to increase their language abilities while studying abroad.

Sexual Assault and Harassment

As awareness of sexual harassment and assault has increased on college campuses, researchers have begun to realize that these incidents are not limited to students' home institutions. Though limited to a handful of studies, the research suggests that sexual harassment and assault may be a common, if unanticipated, experience for female students studying abroad.

Female students from the United States are frequently confronted with the stereotype that U.S. women are sexually promiscuous, which contributes to instances of sexual harassment (Twombly 1995; Landau and Moore 2001; Rawlins 2012). By interviewing 10 female study abroad participants to better understand how gender influenced their experience, Rawlins (2012) identified a pattern of harassment. These experiences occurred in what are often considered modern, Western countries, such as France and Spain. Rawlins found that her interviewees often adopted strategies such as walking in groups or avoiding being out at night to discourage harassment. However, these strategies did not always protect them. Women reported being sexually propositioned as prostitutes or having men expose themselves while they were walking with other women. These students' safety strategies could also feel restrictive, preventing a full immersion within the host country. “At times during their study abroad, some of the young women … experienced a conflict between their desires to fully experience the host culture and to be independent travelers and the advice to always remain in groups or not travel at night” (Rawlins 2012, p. 483). This conflict adds a layer of challenge to the study abroad experience. In a separate study, but one with similar themes, women described this conflict as an “infringement” on their right to act as independent adults (Anderson 2003, p. 33).

Interpreting incidents of sexual harassment becomes even more challenging when female students are unsure of the cultural contexts in which they are operating. Rawlins found that some students minimized their experiences of harassment and “were very concerned to ensure that they were not misinterpreting a more innocuous interaction as harassment” (p. 491). Students reported feeling unsure whether comments directed at them by strangers in public were inappropriate or culturally acceptable. Across several studies, this confusion became especially difficult for African American women when comments held racial and gendered connotations (Talburt and Stewart 1999; Rawlins 2012). In the instances when women told their peers, instructors, or homestay parents about being sexually harassed, they were often told that the harassment was innocuous and to ignore it (Twombly 1995; Talburt and Stewart 1999).

Though Western countries, such as the United States and Canada, may have a reputation for being less tolerant of public sexual harassment than other countries, these incidents are not exclusive to non‐Western contexts. Fryer and Wong (1998) describe various anecdotes from female Japanese students who experienced sexual harassment and assault while studying abroad at a Canadian university. A common thread in these experiences was that the perpetrators were White Canadian men who used these women's limited understanding of Canadian culture to mask their inappropriate behavior. Fryer and Wong strongly recommend educating Canadian men about sexual harassment, and educating female international students about Canadian customs. This education would help these students be able to distinguish inappropriate from appropriate behavior. Clearly, it would be beneficial for all universities engaged in study abroad and hosting international students to adopt such recommendations.

In addition to sexual harassment, sexual assault is all too common in study abroad. Flack et al. (2015) surveyed more than 200 female study abroad participants after they returned home to the United States and found that they had experienced higher absolute rates of sexual assault while abroad than on their home campuses. The authors found this particularly alarming since students typically spend more time on their home campuses than they do abroad. Further, studies focused on home campus experiences usually ask students about the last 12 months at the short end, while the majority of Flack and colleagues' respondents (nearly 80%) had studied abroad for a semester or less. The authors concluded that “in the case of attempted or completed rape victimization, the risk appears to be greater during study abroad than on the home campus” (p. 3460). One notable finding that surprised the authors was that most of the perpetrators of the sexual assault that occurred abroad came from the survivors' same home institutions. In this instance, the stereotype of the stranger as perpetrator was refuted, as was the notion from the harassment studies we discussed earlier that locals from the host country are the most common perpetrators. These studies reveal the critical need for more research to understand the extent of sexual harassment and assault that students experience while studying abroad. Additionally, they imply that students are not adequately prepared for the risk of being sexually harassed or assaulted while abroad.

Intersectionality

When reviewing the research on the experiences of women while studying abroad, it is important to recognize that various social identities intersect with gender, which can result in women experiencing study abroad in different ways. The research in this section reveals how students' race, class, sexual orientation, and gender identity interact with their gender to influence their study abroad experience.

Race and Gender

From 2005 to 2015, more African American, Latinx, Asian American, and Native American students from the United States participated in a study abroad program than during any other 10‐year period. Despite this increase, White students continue to be the largest racial group of U.S. students studying abroad, at more than 70% (Farrugia et al. 2017). Researchers recently turned their attention to the experiences of students of color. Within this population, specific attention has been paid to African American women.

African American students in general are noted by researchers as unique in some of their reasons for studying abroad and what their experiences entail. With regard to the former point, particular attention is paid to those who seek out an African destination. Landau and Moore (2001) describe this phenomenon as turning “to Africa both for a metaphoric and physical home” (p. 33). Dillard (2016) explains that studying abroad in a “spiritual heritage homeland” for African American students can be an exploration of self that can counteract the negative stereotypes of Black culture fostered by White supremacy (p. 420). These experiences can counteract the absence of African heritage in U.S. schools, which leaves “children without the recognition of themselves as builders of civilizations and knowledge and cultural producers from a long line of Black brilliance and legacy” (p. 421). Several researchers assert how powerful an experience studying in a heritage country can be, specifically for African American women (Morgan et al. 2002; Willis 2015; Dillard 2016).

However, despite the expectation of many African American students that going to Africa will be a homecoming, the experience can be more challenging than they expect. In their study of U.S. students studying in Legon, Ghana, Landau and Moore (2001) found differences in the ways in which White and Black students approached their experiences. White students expressed a “tourist identity” (p. 53), whereas African American students saw traveling to Ghana as “part of a quest for personal history or roots” (p. 32). More specific to women students, Morgan et al. (2002) touch on this subject in their explorations of their own personal narratives as a way to understand encounters between African and African American women. One of the narratives reveals the “mutual stereotypes” and “unrealistic expectations” these two groups have of each other (p. 348): “African American women immediately expect to feel a sense of sisterhood, while African women are grounded in the economic reality of providing for their family by selling to American ‘tourists’” (p. 348). This disconnect between expectations can lead to disappointment among African American women seeking a connection with the African women they meet while studying abroad.

Concerningly, the research suggests that African American women commonly encounter microaggressions and racism while studying abroad. Though women in general are targeted by local men for sexual harassment, African American women have the added burden of racialized sexual harassment. When these women receive catcalls, the words used frequently highlight their race (Talburt and Stewart 1999; Willis 2015). Black U.S. and Canadian women have also faced refusal of service at restaurants in Spain, assumptions of prostitution in Italy, and questions about why their skin is “dirty” in China (Trilokekar and Kukar 2011; Willis 2015). For a portion of the students, the racist jokes and microaggressions came from classmates from their home institution (Talburt and Stewart 1999; Willis 2015). In a telling example, a student who related her experiences of being the target of racially tinged sexual harassment during class had her concerns minimized by both the instructor and some of her classmates (Talburt and Stewart 1999).

In contrast to the sometimes negative experiences reported in other studies, Lu et al. (2015) looked at a unique China program led by an African American faculty member in which the majority of students were African American. Despite students' initial concerns that they would encounter worse or similar levels of racism in China compared to the United States, all of the students reported positive encounters with locals after returning home. “The Black women, in particular, discussed how they had never felt more attractive than they did when they were in China because they were often stopped and told how their hair and skin were beautiful” (Lu et al. 2015, p. 447).

The research suggests that African American women would likely benefit from having peers and faculty who identified similarly to themselves while studying abroad. The one study where African American women reported overwhelmingly positive experiences in a non‐African country was where the trip was led by an African American male professor and included a majority of African American students (Lu et al. 2015). The ability to debrief racialized and gendered encounters with peers or mentors who have similar experiences could provide a valuable sounding board for these students (Talburt and Stewart 1999; Willis 2015).

Though less researched than the experiences of African American students, a national study found that U.S. Latina women were much more likely to intend to study abroad than their White peers (Salisbury et al. 2009). Unfortunately, no research could be found that explores the reasons for this gap in interest, or the subsequent drop in actual participation. This same study also found that identifying as Asian American or Pacific Islander did not significantly increase or decrease a woman's likelihood that she would intend to study abroad. Clearly, more research needs to explore the study abroad experiences of these groups of women.

Class and Gender

Despite the overwhelming evidence that low‐income students are studying abroad at much lower rates than their more affluent peers, few researchers have focused specifically on how class influences the study abroad experience or study abroad choices. Of the 10 U.S. colleges with the highest percentage of students studying abroad in 2017, all were private, and eight had tuition over $30 000 a year (Friedman 2017). Community colleges, which educate high numbers of low‐income students, have the lowest rates of participation in study abroad, with many having no dedicated offices or staff for international education. According to the yearly Open Doors reports by the Institute of International Education, community college students have accounted for less than 3% of the total population studying abroad each year since tracking began in 1993 (Koh Chin 2003; Bhandari and Chow 2009; Farrugia et al. 2017). These institutions have the fewest students studying abroad, so it is unsurprising that a large study found that female community college students are significantly less likely to intend to study abroad than their peers at 4‐year institutions (Salisbury et al. 2009). The gender gap in participation remains consistent, however: at community colleges, nearly twice as many females study abroad as males (Rhodes et al. 2016).

After interviewing students who did not study abroad despite expressing interest in their first year, Simon and Ainsworth (2012) found differences in how students viewed study abroad based upon their socioeconomic status (SES). Compared to students with high SES, who saw study abroad as a normalized part of the college experience, students from low‐income backgrounds saw it as a “luxury” (p. 17). Low‐SES students were also less likely to have friends who had studied abroad. Simon and Ainsworth (2012) propose that this lack of “guides and mentors” for navigating the study abroad process disadvantaged these students even when they were interested in studying abroad (p. 17). They make the case that low‐SES students face the challenge of a lack of both financial and social capital to be able to study abroad.

There has been a consistent call to increase the number of low‐income students who get to study abroad (Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program 2005). Understanding how low‐SES women navigate the study abroad process is important to increasing their participation – but understanding how they make meaning of their study abroad experience is equally so.

Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity and Gender

For LGBQ students, there are many – if general – resources available online concerning study abroad, including personal accounts and advice from LGBQ students who have already made the sojourn. These resources reveal that LGBQ students are seeking out information to specifically help them choose where they will go. Unfortunately, transgender students (those who do not identify with their assigned gender at birth) are often only superficially included. Their unique needs and concerns regarding health care and identification on official documents are not typically addressed. The professional organization for international educators, NAFSA, recognized this need and established the Rainbow Special Interest Group to meet it (www.rainbowsig.org).

Research has lagged behind the expressed need for information from students and the professionals working with them. At the time of publication, only one peer‐reviewed article focuses on LGBQ and transgender students and the study abroad experience. This cursory study is entirely descriptive, finding that lesbian, gay, and bisexual students are more likely to study abroad than their heterosexual peers, while gender‐queer and transgender students are neither more nor less likely to do so (Bryant and Soria 2015). This suggests that LGBQ and transgender students are not discouraged from studying abroad despite the unique challenges they may encounter while living and studying internationally. However, students who travel to countries where violence against LGBQ and transgender individuals is normalized can encounter unexpected safety concerns. This can be especially challenging for women of color going to heritage countries looking for a homecoming‐like experience (Willis 2015).

Men and the Study Abroad Experience

In contrast with many educational experiences, study abroad participants have historically been overwhelmingly female. Since 1985, when data were first collected nationally, men have persistently remained at about a third of the U.S. study abroad population (Davis 1997; Koh Chin 2003; Bhandari and Chow 2009; Farrugia et al. 2017). As already noted, this one‐to‐two ratio is surprisingly consistent across Western countries (e.g. Australia, Canada, the Euroepan Union). This imbalance is frequently pointed to when universities talk about increasing their study abroad numbers. Despite the persistence of the gender gap, few researchers have specifically asked: Why aren't men studying abroad? And the few who have are based in the United States, despite evidence that this is an international phenomenon.

The largest study focused on the gender gap was conducted using survey data from 2772 first‐year students from 19 2‐ and 4‐year institutions (Salisbury et al. 2009). Using a cultural capital framework, the authors found that some forms of capital had dissimilar effects on students' intent to study abroad based upon their gender. For example, involvement in high school and the influence of peers both negatively affected the level of men's intent to study abroad, while having no effect on women. The more involved male students were in high school activities, the less likely they were to intend to study abroad. The authors speculated “that for men greater high school involvement may promote greater involvement in college activities other than study abroad such as those more similar to their co‐curricular high school activities” (p. 633).

In contrast, men were unaffected by their parents' level of education, while women became more likely to intend to study abroad as the educational level of their parents increased. The findings also suggest that financial considerations provide no distinctions between men and women's decision‐making process. Both genders were positively influenced by their “openness to diversity and challenge,” though the effect on male students was significantly larger (Salisbury et al. 2009, p. 633).

Salisbury et al. (2009) examined the variation in participation of males across race and ethnicity and found that identifying as Asian American or Pacific Islander reduced the likelihood that a male student would intend to study abroad by 28%. In a smaller study, Van Der Meid (2003) found an even wider gap among actual study abroad participation, with only 20% of his Asian American respondents identifying as male. These studies suggest that even among men, something is specifically preventing or discouraging Asian American males' interest or participation in study abroad programs.

In seeking to understand male motivation for and lack of participation in study abroad, Lucas (2009) conducted a mixed‐methods study, first administering a survey and then conducting interviews. Lucas's survey revealed that male students had four motivations to study abroad: (i) major or career benefits, (ii) resume‐building, (iii) fun, and (iv) cultural learning. Of these, major or career benefits was the strongest. Subsequent interviews with male students who opted not to study abroad indicated that adherence to traditional notions of masculinity was a deciding factor, as men in the study felt pressure to be the bread winner and to advance their careers in lieu of other pursuits. A study conducted by Thirolf (2014), in which men were asked in focus groups why they had chosen not to study abroad, echoed these findings. Thirolf (2014) found that men “associated empathy and caring of others, as well as other stereotypical female traits with global education programs” such as study abroad (p. 255). They also tended to value paid internships over other types of experiences, referring to internships as part of their plan for gaining employment after graduating. Men described the costs in time and money as making study abroad unappealing. While Thirolf's participants were mostly White, 9 of the 20 students identified as men of color.

Missing from the Research

Despite a growing interest in the impact of gender on study abroad, the body of research needs additional growth and development. Further research is required to understand how gender influences a student's experience, intercultural development, and foreign language acquisition. This section looks at some specific areas ripe for exploration.

The Risk and Impact of Sexual Assault and Harassment

While a handful of studies have asked students about sexual assault, more research needs to be conducted to understand whether study abroad increases the risk of victimization for women. Future research should also include male and transgender student survivors. The ways in which a sexual assault can impact a student's study abroad experience also need further examination in order for universities to improve their ability to support students while they are abroad and when they return.

Missing Voices

Unfortunately, there are voices that are missing from the research. At the time of publication, there was only one study looking at the experiences of transgender or gender‐nonconforming students, and it was very limited in scope. Its primary finding was that the transgender and genderqueer students surveyed studied abroad at similar or higher rates than their peers (Bryant and Soria 2015). Clearly, more research needs to be conducted to understand these students' decision‐making process when choosing to study abroad and what their experiences are like once there.

The intersection of gender and other social identities is also ripe for further exploration. Studies on race and gender mainly focus on Black female college students from the United States. Even these students' experiences are limited to a handful of studies. Current studies focused on Latinx and Asian American students make few distinctions based upon gender. Mostly, gender is mentioned briefly to describe the population demographics. Native American students are largely absent from the study abroad research. Intersections of gender with class, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, and religion are also areas in need of exploration, in order to better understand how various identities can influence study abroad outcomes for students.

Also, more peer‐reviewed research needs to be conducted on why male students are not studying abroad. Specific attention needs to be paid to Asian American men, whose levels of interest and actual participation in study abroad are significantly lower than those of their peers.

Obtaining a better understanding of the factors that influence the decision‐making process for male students will help universities increase their participation in study abroad. By expanding the focus of gender to include transgender students, male students, and women with other oppressed identities, a more textured picture of how gender effects study abroad will form.

Unfortunately, almost all of the literature focuses on students from the United States. Some of this relates to the perspectives of who is writing the articles. While Brazilian students coming to the United States for a semester are identified as international students by the U.S. school, the Brazilian students' home university sees them as study abroad students. These two perspectives provide different lenses for understanding the students' experiences. It is important for researchers outside the United States to understand their own students' experiences while studying abroad in order to better prepare them for their time in another country and help them process the experience once they return home. Doing so can only help deepen students' learning.

Conclusion

As study abroad participation continues to grow, it is important for university administrators to understand the impact that gender has on students' decisions to go abroad and their experiences while there. Study abroad clearly has academic and personal benefits for many students. However, these benefits can be decreased for women as they potentially encounter sexist attitudes, sexual harassment, sexual assault, racism, and other barriers. For men, the challenges come from trying to increase their participation, as they continue to lag behind women at a rate of one to two. The literature is still limited to a handful of studies on each of these topics, but clear trends are pointing to where future research needs to expand.

With the research that is available, there are some concrete recommendations that those working with study abroad can adopt:

  • In predeparture orientations, special attention needs to be paid to the gendered considerations for each destination. All students need to be prepared for the gendered norms of the host country to which they are traveling, whether they are similar to or different from those of their home country. This preparation should include educating men and women about local norms and culturally located appropriate and inappropriate behavior, so that women especially are equipped to interpret situations in which they feel uncomfortable.
  • On faculty‐led trips, coursework that focuses on the culture of the host country needs to ask students to take note of how gender is constructed. Students can then debrief with one another and their instructors regarding what they have observed. This allows them time to reflect on and process their experiences.
  • Study abroad programs that have a focus on language acquisition need to account for how gender will influence how students interact with locals and what it is considered culturally appropriate for men and women to say or do.
  • When faculty and staff travel with students, they should be aware of and address microaggressions, sexism, and racism. Students should feel confident going to faculty and staff from their home institution when they encounter these incidents. Faculty and staff should know how to respond so students feel supported and so that they do not feel that their concerns are being minimized or attributed to local customs.
  • Considerable effort should be made to recruit faculty of color to lead trips. While there is only one study on which to base this recommendation, we believe that it demonstrates how powerful it was for Black students to be led by a Black professor as they studied abroad.
  • To recruit more men, study abroad must be linked to the things they value – specifically, career benefits. Concretely showing male students how study abroad can enhance their job or internship prospects after college will help them make it part of their career plan.

By adopting these recommendations, study abroad can begin the process of better preparing students for their experiences abroad, inviting a more diverse cohort of participants, and providing more support for students in their host country.

References

  1. Alhazmi, A. and Nyland, B. (2013). The Saudi Arabian international student experience: from a gender‐segregated society to studying in a mixed‐gender environment. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 43 (3): 346–365.
  2. Alqudayri, B. and Gounko, T. (2018). Studying in Canada: experiences of female graduate students from Saudi Arabia. Journal of International Students 8 (4): 1736–1747.
  3. Anderson, A. (2003). Women and cultural learning in Costa Rica: Reading the contexts. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 9: 21–52.
  4. Anderson, P.H., Lawton, L., Rexeisen, R.J., and Hubbard, A.C. (2006). Short‐term study abroad and intercultural sensitivity: a pilot study. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 17: 1–20.
  5. Baker, M.R., Frazier, P.A., Greer, C. et al. (2016). Sexual victimization history predicts academic performance in college women. Journal of Counseling Psychology 63 (6): 685–692.
  6. Bhandari, R. and Chow, P. (2009). Open Doors 2009: Report on International Education. New York, NY: Institute of International Education.
  7. Brandenburg, U., Berghoff, S., Taboadela, O., Bischof, L., Gajowniczek, J., and … Xhomaqi, B. (2014). The Erasmus Impact Study: Effects of Mobility on the Skills and Employability of Students and the Internationalisation of Higher Education Institutions (European Commission report: EAC‐2012‐0545). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  8. Brecht, R.D., Davidson, D.E., and Ginsberg, R.B. (1995). Predictors of foreign language gain during study abroad. In: Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context (ed. B. Freed), 37–66. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  9. Breen, M. (2012). Privileged migration: American undergraduates, study abroad, academic tourism. Critical Arts: South‐North Cultural and Media Studies 26 (1): 82–102.
  10. Bryant, K.M. and Soria, K.M. (2015). College students' sexual orientation, gender identity, and participation in study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 25: 91–106.
  11. Canadian Bureau for International Education (2016). Special feature: education abroad. Available from https://cbie.ca/wp‐content/uploads/2017/01/SpecialFeature_EducationAbroad‐EN.pdf (accessed January 28, 2020).
  12. Carlson, J.S. and Widaman, K.F. (1988). The effects of study abroad during college on attitudes toward other cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 12 (1): 1–17.
  13. Caton, K. and Santos, C.A. (2009). Images of the other: selling study abroad in a postcolonial world. Journal of Travel Research 48 (2): 191–204.
  14. Clarke, I. III, Flaherty, T., Wright, N., and McMillen, R. (2009). Student intercultural proficiency from study abroad programs. Journal of Marketing Education 31 (2): 173–181.
  15. Coleman, J.A. (2013). Researching whole people and whole lives. In: Social and Cultural Aspects of Language Learning in Study Abroad (ed. C. Kinginger), 17–44. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  16. Coleman, J.A. and Chafer, T. (2011). The experience and long‐term impact of study abroad by Europeans in an African context. In: Analysing the Consequences of Academic Mobility and Migration (ed. F. Dervin), 67–96. Newcastle, U.K.: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  17. Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program (2005). Global Competence and National Needs: One Million Americans Studying Abroad. Available from https://www.aifs.com/pdf/lincoln_final_report.pdf (accessed January 28, 2020).
  18. Daly, A. (2011). Determinants of participating in Australian university student exchange programs. Journal of Research in International Education 10 (1): 58–70.
  19. Davidson, D.E. (2010). Study abroad: when, how long, and with what results? New data from the Russian front. Foreign Language Annals 43: 6–26.
  20. Davis, T.M. (1997). Open Doors 1996–1997: Report on International Educational Exchange. New York, NY: Institute of International Education.
  21. Dillard, C.B. (2016). Turning the ships around: a case study of (re)membering as transnational endarkened feminist inquiry and praxis for black teachers. Educational Studies 52 (5): 406–423.
  22. Dolby, N. (2004). Encountering an American self: study abroad and national identity. Comparative Education Review 48 (2): 150–173.
  23. Dwyer, M.M. (2004). More is better: the impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10: 151–163.
  24. Engle, L. and Engle, J. (1999). Study abroad levels: toward a classification of program types. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 5: 1–19.
  25. European Commission (2015). Erasmus: Facts, Figures & Trends. The European Union Support for Student and Staff Exchanges and University Cooperation in 2013–14. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  26. Farrugia, C., Bhandari, R., Baer, J., Robles, C., and Andrejko, N. (2017). Open Doors 2017: Report on International Education. New York, NY: Institute of International Education.
  27. Flack, W.F., Kimble, M.O., Campbell, B.E. et al. (2015). Sexual assault victimization among female undergraduates during study abroad: a single campus survey study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30 (20): 3453–3466.
  28. Forum on Education Abroad (2015). Study abroad. Available from https://forumea.org/glossary‐term/study‐abroad/ (accessed January 28, 2020).
  29. Freed, B. (ed.) (1995a). Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  30. Freed, B. (1995b). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In: Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context (ed. B. Freed), 37–66. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  31. Freed, B.F., Segalowitz, N., and Dewey, D.P. (2004). Context of learning and second language fluency in French: comparing regular classroom, study abroad, and intensive domestic immersion programs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26 (2): 275–301.
  32. Friedman, J. (2017). 10 colleges where studying abroad is common. U.S. News & World Report. Available from http://www.usnews.com/best‐colleges/rankings/most‐study‐abroad (accessed January 28, 2020).
  33. Fryer, C. and Wong, L. (1998). Sexual harassment: experiences of Japanese women studying in Canada. TESL Canada Journal 15 (2): 75–78.
  34. Ingraham, E.C. and Peterson, D.L. (2004). Assessing the impact of study abroad on student learning at Michigan State University. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10: 83–100.
  35. Institute of International Education (2011). Open Doors: Report on International Educational Exchange. Available from http://www.iiebooks.org/opdoreonined.html (accessed January 28, 2020).
  36. Jessup‐Anger, J.E. (2008). Gender observations and study abroad: how students reconcile cross‐cultural differences related to gender. Journal of College Student Development 49 (4): 360–373.
  37. Jordan, C.E., Combs, J.L., and Smith, G.T. (2014). An exploration of sexual victimization and academic performance among college women. Trauma, Violence & Abuse 15 (3): 191–200.
  38. Koh Chin, H. (Ed.) (2003). Open Doors 2003: Report on International Education. New York, NY: Institute of International Education.
  39. Kuh, G.D. (2008). High‐Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Available from http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/hip_tables.pdf (accessed January 28, 2020).
  40. Lafford, B.A. (1995). Getting into, through and out of a survival situation. In: Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context (ed. B. Freed), 97–121. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  41. Landau, J. and Moore, D.C. (2001). Towards reconciliation in the motherland: race, class, nationality, gender, and the complexities of American student presence at the University of Ghana, Legon. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 7 (3): 25–59.
  42. Lesjak, M., Juvan, E., Ineson, E.M. et al. (2015). Erasmus student motivation: why and where to go? Higher Education 70 (5): 845–865.
  43. Lu, C., Reddick, R., Dean, D., and Pecero, V. (2015). Coloring up study abroad: exploring Black students’ decision to study in China. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 52 (4): 440–451.
  44. Lucas, J. (2009). Where are all the males? A mixed methods inquiry into male study abroad participation. Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
  45. Magnan, S.S. and Back, M. (2007). Social interaction and linguistic gain during study abroad. Foreign Language Annals 40 (1): 43–61.
  46. Mengo, C. and Black, B.M. (2016). Violence victimization on a college campus: impact on GPA and school dropout. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 18 (2): 234–248.
  47. Morgan, R.M., Mwegelo, D.T., and Turner, L.N. (2002). Black women in the African diaspora seeking their cultural heritage through studying abroad. NASPA Journal 39 (4): 333–353.
  48. Pedersen, P.J. (2010). Assessing intercultural effectiveness outcomes in a year‐long study abroad program. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34 (1): 70–80.
  49. Polanyi, L. (1995). Language learning and living abroad: stories from the field. In: Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context (ed. B. Freed), 271–291. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
  50. Rawlins, R. (2012). “Whether I'm an American or not, I'm not here so you can hit on me”: public harassment in the experience of U.S. women studying abroad. Women's Studies 41 (1): 476–497.
  51. Rhodes, G.M., Thomas, J.M., Raby, R.L. et al. (2016). Community college study abroad and implications for student success: comparing California and New Jersey community colleges. In: International Education at Community Colleges: Themes, Practices, and Case Studies (eds. R.L. Laby and E.J. Valeau), 281–292. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
  52. Root, E. and Ngampornchai, A. (2013). “I came back as a new human being”: student descriptions of intercultural competence acquired through education abroad experiences. Journal of Studies in International Education 17 (5): 513–532.
  53. Salisbury, M.H., Paulsen, M.B., and Pascarella, E.T. (2009). To see the world or stay at home: applying an integrated student choice model to explore the gender gap in the intent to study abroad. Research in Higher Education 51 (7): 615–640.
  54. Segura, T.B. (2008). Defining self: negotiating cultural, gender, and ethnic identity in a short‐term study abroad program in Russia. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
  55. Sharpe, E.K. (2015). Colonialist tendencies in education abroad. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 27 (2): 227–234.
  56. Simon, J. and Ainsworth, J.W. (2012). Race and socioeconomic status differences in study abroad participation: the role of habitus, social networks, and cultural capital. ISRN Education 2012: 413896.
  57. Squire, D.D., Williams, T.E., Cartwright, M. et al. (2015). Exploring gender through education abroad programs: a graduate student case study. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 52 (3): 262–274.
  58. Talburt, S. and Stewart, M. (1999). What's the subject of study abroad? Race, gender, and living culture. Modern Language Journal 83 (2): 163–175.
  59. Thirolf, K.Q. (2014). Male college student perceptions of intercultural and study abroad programs. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 51 (3): 246–258.
  60. Trilokekar, R.D. and Kukar, P. (2011). Disorienting experiences during study abroad: reflections of pre‐service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education 27 (7): 1141–1150.
  61. Twombly, S.B. (1995). “Piropos” and friendships: gender and culture clash in study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 1: 1–27.
  62. Van Der Meid, J.S. (2003). Asian Americans: factors influencing the decision to study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 9: 71–110.
  63. Willis, T.Y. (2015). “And still we rise …”: microaggressions and intersectionality in the study abroad experiences of Black women. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 26 (1): 209–230.
..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
3.143.247.53