After six decades: Applying the U-curve hypothesis to the adjustment of international postgraduate students

Abstract

The research described in this article concludes that the widely cited U-curve hypothesis is no longer supported by research data because the adjustment of international postgraduate students is a complex phenomenon that does not fit easily with attempts to define and categorize it. Methodological issues, different internal and external factors, cultural expectations, individual responses or attitudes, and global developments are also discussed as aspects associated with the improper application of the U-curve hypothesis. This research adds to theoretical understanding associated with the adjustment of international students and, in practical terms, increases our current knowledge regarding student recruitment and international student support services.

Keywords

Academic adjustment international postgraduate socio-cultural U-curve

Introduction

The internationalization of higher education is an important phenomenon in this globalized era. Teichler (1996) states, ‘[w]e might consider internationalization of higher education as the next theme, which gives rise to a new focus of both higher education policy and higher education research’ (p. 435). Clearly, research on international higher education and international students needs to be given serious consideration.

The U-curve hypothesis is often used by researchers to explain the changing adjustment process of cross-cultural sojourners, starting from positive and new feelings at the beginning, followed by feelings of rejection, and then arriving at a compromise or balance in the end. This study explored whether the U-curve hypothesis could be applied to a qualitative interview-based investigation into the adjustment of the first-year, full-time, postgraduate, international students at a south west UK university. The academic and socio-cultural experiences of international students in their early months at the university were first investigated. The U-curve hypothesis was then considered in order to see whether it could be applied to and explain the research findings of the study.

One reason for embarking upon this research was that the U-curve hypothesis has traditionally played an important role in research on sojourners’ adjustment investigation since its development by Lysgaard in 1955; more recently, however, its applicability to research in the context of international students has been more controversial. Another reason for conducting research was that international students are a very special and important population in the higher education system: although they represent the minority of students in the United Kingdom’s higher education system, they occupy a unique niche in global communication and development. The third reason is that international students bring benefits to both host countries and their countries of origin. Therefore, it is important to explore international students’ adjustment to a host country’s learning and living environments because it will be detrimental both to students and to their host institutions if many international students are not able to adjust well to their overseas lives and studies.

This research and its findings contribute to a more complex and nuanced understanding regarding the application of the U-curve hypothesis to a different research context. Data collection through visual graph evaluation of adjustment processes and interview participants’ monthly self-evaluation of their adjustment progress enabled the collection of empirical research data from diverse time points and contexts. The visual graph evaluation of adjustment processes for exploring the U-curve hypothesis is an original feature of the research design of this study because it allows the study to investigate the various adjustment processes that international students perceive. The U-curve hypothesis is finally re-examined in the light of the empirical data collected.

The study intends to make both academic and practical contributions to education. It aims to contribute to academic knowledge, to inform practical international student support services, and to contribute to an understanding of the internationalization of UK higher education, in the context of an academic environment that seeks to foster global cooperation and communication.

Literature review

Discussions related to international students, adjustment, and the U-curve hypothesis constitute the literature review that informed this research. This literature review provides not only a fundamental introduction to the concepts and theory relating to the existing research but also the essential debates and insightful controversies regarding why the U-curve hypothesis is worthy of further investigation in the present day.

International students

The majority of the research projects focused on international students define them as individuals studying in a foreign country, often with a student visa. International students are defined by Andrade (2006) as ‘individuals enrol[ling] in institutions of higher education who are on temporary student visas and are non-native English speakers (NNES)’ (p. 134). However, because of the special situation in the United Kingdom, as one of the European Union (EU) members, the definition in this study is different from that used in some other research contexts. In this study, the term ‘international student’ refers to any student who is not a UK citizen or permanent resident.

Adjustment

After arriving in a foreign country for the purposes of education, international sojourners often need to adjust to life and cultural differences. These differences may require both academic and socio-cultural adjustments. Pedersen (1995) states that adjustment implies the concept of ‘change’. This study defines adjustment as a process of change or adaptation in response to the situation or environment in which people find themselves. Rienties et al. (2012) consider adjustment within the academic arena to be the extent to which a person adapts to aspects of the educational context such as ‘motivation, application, performance and satisfaction with the academic environment’ (p. 687). In this study, academic adjustment is interpreted as the process of students conforming to an academic environment. Rienties et al. (2012) describe social adjustment as ‘how well students deal with … interpersonal-societal demands … such as making friends, being part of social activities or being able to work in groups’ (p. 687). Socio-cultural adjustment in this research is defined as the process of individuals becoming familiarized with a new social and cultural environment.

The U-curve hypothesis

The U-curve hypothesis has been commonly adopted to describe sojourners’ adjustment. It begins with a sojourner’s initial optimistic experience and high expectations, but then declines. After the downward stage, the sojourner experiences a recovery toward better adjustment, at a level similar to the initial level. The U-curve model was first described by Lysgaard in his 1955 study of Norwegian Fulbright scholars in the United States. He stated,

Adjustment as a process over time seem[ed] to follow a U-shaped curve: adjustment [was] felt to be easy and successful to begin with; then follow[ed] a ‘crisis’ in which one [felt] less well-adjusted, somewhat lonely and unhappy; finally one [began] to feel better adjusted again, becoming more integrated into the foreign community. (Lysgaard, 1955: p. 50)

Other researchers (Adler, 1975; Brown, 1980; Gullahorn and Gullahorn, 1963; Mohamed, 1997; Oberg, 1960; Torbiörn, 1994) have conducted research building on Lysgaard’s theory. Oberg (1960) originally used terms such as ‘honeymoon’, ‘crisis’, ‘recovery’, and ‘adjustment’ to illustrate the four stages of the U-curve hypothesis. Based on a sojourner’s self- and cultural awareness, Adler (1975) then separated the culturally adaptive process into five stages: initial contact (exciting and fresh experience), disintegration (confusing and disoriented period), reintegration (rejection of the second stage), autonomy (understanding the host culture), and independence (gaining benefit from cultural differences and similarities). His research regarding cross-cultural adjustment has been commonly used to interpret the changing process of sojourners’ adjustment to cultural transition – from positive and new feelings at first, negative responses in the succeeding period, and compromising and achieving balance at the end. Other researchers (Chang, 1973; Davis, 1971; Scott, 1956; Sewell and Davidsen, 1961; Torbiörn, 1982) later borrowed and applied the U-curve hypothesis to diverse forms of adjustment, including host culture perceptions, culture-specific knowledge, social interaction with hosts, homesickness, adjustment attitudes, and even academic adjustment. More recently, Kealey (1989) proposed that different sojourners experience different cross-cultural adjustment, while Hanvey (1976) suggested that superficial tourism, cultural clash, intellectual analysis, and cultural immersion are the main four stages of cultural adjustment. Kauffman et al. (1992) argued that practical anticipation and a long duration of stay (usually more than six months) contributed to individuals’ cultural immersion.

However, more recent and comprehensive reviews of research in this field have concluded that support for the U-curve hypothesis is limited (Anderson, 1994; Furnham and Bochner, 1986), and the evidence for the hypothesis is now ‘weak, inconclusive and overgeneralized’ (Church, 1982: 542). Ward et al. (1998) argued that there are two main shortcomings of the empirical research behind the U-curve hypothesis: ‘[f]irst, the majority of the studies that had explicitly investigated the phenomenon had been based on cross-sectional, rather than longitudinal designs … Secondly, there was some conceptual confusion over the definition and measurement of sojourner “adjustment”’ (p. 279). Additionally, a study by Brown and Holloway (2008) related to the initial stage of international sojourners discovered that ‘the initial stage of the sojourn was not characterized by feelings of excitement, as suggested by the U-curve model (and its successors): though such feelings were present, [the sojourners] were overwhelmed by negative symptoms more commonly associated with culture shock’ (p. 33). It is therefore appropriate to re-examine the relevant issues associated with the U-curve hypothesis, in the light of the central position it has held in research and theory on transition and adjustment.

Methodology

This study sought to answer the question, can the U-curve hypothesis be used in this research to explain the adjustment of international postgraduate students? It used a qualitative interview approach, along with a quantitative monthly self-evaluation, and a visually graphical evaluation, to investigate international postgraduates’ adjustment.

The research participants were 26 first-year, full-time, postgraduate, international students studying at a south west UK university during the 2010–2011 academic year. In order to ascertain the socio-cultural and academic experiences of foreign sojourners, two face-to-face in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with audiotape recording, handwritten note-taking, and interview transcription in the middle of the autumn (October/November 2010) and spring (February/March 2011) terms of the 2010–2011 academic year to investigate, qualitatively and longitudinally, the adjustment of international postgraduate students. The time period between the first and second interviews was about three months.

The 26 research participants were purposefully sampled based on the maximum heterodoxy of the students’ distribution of background demographic characteristics including gender, degree of study, geographic areas of origin (Asia, Europe, America, Oceania, Africa, and Middle East), and study program. According to Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998), such purposive strategy is called ‘sampling for heterogeneity: cases are selected such that their combination provides the maximum heterogeneity on certain attributes (e.g., ethnicity, education) that are important to the research objective of the study’ (p. 76). This sampling approach arose from the research expectation of gathering the most potentially useful, meaningful, and broad information for the later data analysis in order to facilitate understanding.

Background characteristics of the interview participants are presented in Table 1, using pseudonyms to protect their anonymity.

Table 1.

Interview participants data.

Interviewee	Degree of study	College/School	Gender	Region of origin
0001	PhD	College of Live and Environmental Sciences	Male	Africa
Adam		College of Live and Environmental Sciences
0002	PhD	College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences	Male	Middle East
Brian		College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences
0003	PhD	School of Education	Female	Middle East
Claire
0004	Master’s	School of Education	Male	Europe
David
0005	PhD	College of Humanities	Male	Europe
Edward
0006	Master’s	Medical School	Female	Africa
Flora
0007	Master’s	School of Education	Male	Asia
George
0008	PhD	College of Humanities	Female	Europe
Helen
0009	Master’s	School of Education	Female	Europe
Iris
0010	Master’s	School of Business	Male	Latin America
Jack
0011	Master’s	School of Business	Male	Asia
Kevin
0012	Master’s	College of Life and Environmental Sciences	Female	Anglo America
Lucy		College of Life and Environmental Sciences
0013	Master’s	School of Business	Female	Latin America
Megan
0014	Master’s	School of Education	Female	Europe
Nancy
0015	Master’s	College of Social Sciences and International Studies	Female	Europe
Olivia		College of Social Sciences and International Studies
0016	PhD	College of Engineering, Mathematics, and Physical Studies	Male	Asia
Peter		College of Engineering, Mathematics, and Physical Studies
0017	Master’s	School of Business	Male	Asia
Quincy
0018	Master’s	School of Education	Male	Asia
Richard
0019	Master’s	College of Social Sciences and International Studies	Male	Asia
Steven		College of Social Sciences and International Studies
0020Tina	Master’s	College of Life and Environmental Sciences	Female	Europe
0021	Master’s	School of Business	Female	Europe
Uinise
0022	Master’s	Medical School	Female	Asia
Veronica
0023	Master’s	College of Life and Environmental Sciences	Male	Africa
Walter		College of Life and Environmental Sciences
0024	PhD	College of Social Sciences and International Studies	Female	Europe
Xana		College of Social Sciences and International Studies
0025	Master’s	College of Social Sciences and International Studies	Male	Middle East
Yarran		College of Social Sciences and International Studies
0026	Master’s	School of Business	Female	Asia
Zoe

Among the 26 first-year postgraduate international students, seven were married, one had a partner, and 18 were single. Seven students studied in a PhD program and 19 were in a Master’s program. Nine were from Europe, including one from Russia, and eight participants were from Asia, including one from Kazakhstan. Three participants were from Africa, three from the Middle East. One student was from Anglo America and two from Latin America. A total of 19 interview participants were under or about 30 years old, and two were over 40 years old. A total of 17 of the interviewees identified with a religion, with nine of them participating in religious activities regularly. A total of 10 interviewees regularly took part in student club activities or activities outside the university.

Two interview studies were conducted based on the two separate but correlated interview schedules used as the interview guiding tool. One characteristic of this method is that all the interviewees are asked the same basic questions with both the same wording and sequence determined in advance. A strength of this type of interview is the increase in comparability of the responses because all respondents answer the same questions. Another advantage is that the data collected are complete for each interviewee on the same topics addressed in the interview. Additionally, interview effects and bias can be reduced when there is more than one interviewer. The open-ended interview approach allows decision-makers to review the instrumentation adopted. It also benefits the organization and analysis of the data collected (Cohen et al., 2007). Interviews focused on issues including participants’ interpretations and thoughts regarding experiencing an overseas education, their academic and socio-cultural experiences, and the U-curve hypothesis. The first interviews, depending on the individual participant’s available time schedule, took between 40 minutes and one hour. The second interviews generally took at least one to one-and-a-half hours. A research journal was also kept during the study. Rules and ethics for conducting interviews were carefully established and followed.

During the second interview, one evaluative task was designed to explore interviewees’ adjustment situation (related to the visual investigation of the U-curve hypothesis) during their study-abroad period. This task asked students to judge which line graph (see Appendix 1) best represented their experience. The line graphs include the U-curve and other different shapes of curve. The special design of the visual graphs is an original feature of this study, which importantly and innovatively contributes to research methods and relevant knowledge in this field. Additionally, a self-evaluation form relating to interviewees’ monthly adjustment was also implemented to investigate quantitatively the adjustment process of the interview participants and to see whether this process mirrored the U-curve hypothesis.

Finally, the research followed the guidelines of the British Educational Research Association (BERA) and the Ethics Committee of a recognized UK university, which include issues of confidentiality. Before conducting the research, the research proposal was also reviewed for the human rights protection of the research participants by the authorized ethics committee.

Research findings

Analysis of the research findings is based on data collected from the interview, visual graphical evaluation, and the monthly quantitative self-evaluation with respect to different adjustments. Findings are presented as follows.

Visual graphical evaluation of adjustments

Visual graphical evaluation of adjustments was designed for exploring the changing process of the research participants’ academic, socio-cultural, and overall adjustments through an imaging device. The purpose of the design was to avoid the ambiguity of oral or verbal expression. Through choosing the representative visual graph, the adjustment process could be more accurately demonstrated.

Academic adjustment

With regard to academic adjustment, most of the research participants (24 of the 26) did not choose a U-curve graph, indicating that most participants did not believe that the U-curve hypothesis reflected their academic experience. A total of 11 interview participants (Adam, David, Edward, Helen, Kevin, Lucy, Olivia, Peter, Tina, Veronica, and Yarran) chose graph (a) to demonstrate their academic adjustment process (Figure 1). Graph (a) shows a person’s adjustment as a process that moves up and down in relation to occasional difficulties; however, the overall trend shows the adjustment process as continually moving upward. Both Tina and Edward stated that their academic adjustment gradually became better without too sharp up and down events or frustrations. David, Kevin, Lucy, Olivia, Peter, and Yarran agreed that their academic adjustment had gradually improved, although sometimes difficulties or uncertainties arose and they needed to adjust to them. Adam indicated that difficulties or anxiety sometimes caused fluctuations to his gradually improving academic adjustment. Although academic uncertainties might frustrate academic adjustment, Helen thought that her academic adjustment improved through supervisors’ supportive advice and suggestions. With initial low adjustment, Veronica agreed that her academic adjustment generally improved, though some difficulties related to her family life interrupted her academic adaptation.

Figure 1.

Graph (a) for academic adjustment.

Two interview participants (Flora and Xana) chose graph (c), a non-U-shaped curve, to indicate their academic adjustment process. Graph (c) demonstrates a positively and steadily increasing trend without any fluctuation (Figure 2). Xana indicated that her academic adjustment continuously improved upward without any negative interruption. Flora stated that she had kept learning a lot of new academic things, especially those related to research, so her academic adjustment continuously improved without any variance or frustration.

Figure 2.

Graph (c) for academic adjustment.

However, two participants (Iris and Richard) chose graph (g), a U-shaped curve, to represent their academic adjustment process (Figure 3). Iris indicated that in addition to her difficulties with language issues, this was because she gradually lost interest and enthusiasm for academic activities. Richard suggested that the reasons for choosing a U-shaped curve were that he felt bored with lectures and was distracted by non-academic daily life issues even though he had academic enthusiasm at the beginning.

Figure 3.

Graph (g) for academic adjustment.

Socio-cultural adjustment

For socio-cultural adjustment, only about 1/10th of the research participants chose (Peter and Richard) or drew (Kevin) a graph similar to the U-curve, indicating that most of the interviewees did not perceive their socio-cultural adjustment as a pattern following the U-curve hypothesis. For example, Brian, George, Nancy, and Tina chose graph (c), a non-U-shaped curve, to represent their socio-cultural adjustment (Figure 4). With initial homesickness, Nancy’s socio-cultural adjustment progressed from low to be better. Brian indicated that his socio-cultural adjustment steadily improved because of his maturity, honesty, and trust of people. Tina thought that her socio-cultural adjustment advanced without frustration or up and down experiences. With feelings of good adjustment, George gradually became familiar with and used to local British things so his socio-cultural adjustment steadily became better.

Figure 4.

Graph (c) for socio-cultural adjustment.

Claire, Uinise, Veronica, and Yarran chose graph (i) to show how they perceived their socio-cultural adjustment (Figure 5). Both Uinise and Veronica already had previous UK living experience so did not think that they needed to adjust to any socio-cultural difference. With prior living abroad experience in other countries, Claire and Yarran had a more usual, natural, or nonchalant attitude toward their UK socio-cultural adjustment.

Figure 5.

Graph (i) for socio-cultural adjustment.

Flora, Walter, and Zoe chose graph (a) to show their socio-cultural adjustment (Figure 6). Generally, they agreed on some unavoidable issues related to socio-cultural adjustment but also thought they had gradually become used to various socio-cultural differences with improvement. Flora indicated that learning and adjusting to new and strange things made her socio-cultural adjustment unstable under the positively improving trend. When he experienced new or special events or things, Walter’s socio-cultural adjustment went up and down although the overall trend kept improved. Zoe’s socio-cultural adjustment also gradually progressed, although some difficulties or bad situations frustrated her adjustment.

Figure 6.

Graph (a) for socio-cultural adjustment.

Edward and Xana chose graph (e) to represent their socio-cultural adjustment (Figure 7). Both Edward and Xana came from Europe and studied in a PhD program; both were usually busy with their studies so their socio-cultural adjustment improved when they had spare time occasionally for more interaction with friends or local cultural engagement.

Figure 7.

Graph (e) for socio-cultural adjustment.

Peter and Richard chose graph (g), a U-shaped curve, to show their socio-cultural adjustment (Figure 8). Both were Asian students. However, because of lack of familiarity with British culture and difficulties in language-related issues, Peter had experienced an uneasy period in his socio-cultural adjustment process. Richard, unlike Peter, noted that because of high expectations, he had tended to experience a downward trend in his socio-cultural adaptation with experiencing the practical foreign reality. Additionally, Kevin drew a curve similar to the U-curve because he was at a confusing stage with high expectations for his current socio-cultural relationship with local British people and other international students, although he was happy with his first-year socio-cultural experiences in the preparation program for his current study.

Figure 8.

Graph (g) for socio-cultural adjustment.

Overall adjustment

Regarding overall adjustment, none of the interview participants chose a U-shaped curve to represent their experience. For instance, Adam, Claire, David, Kevin, Lucy, Nancy, Peter, Tina, Xana, and Yarran chose graph (a) to represent their overall adjustment process (Figure 9). Graph (a) shows a positively progressing process with some up and down variance or fluctuations caused by some difficulties or special events in life. After considering both academic and socio-cultural adjustments, Adam, David, Kevin, Lucy, Peter, Tina, and Yarran chose the same graph to represent both their overall and academic adjustments because most thought that their main purpose for being in the United Kingdom was to study and their overall adjustment was mainly influenced by their academic adjustment and dominated by academic issues. Through combining and averaging both academic and socio-cultural adjustments, Claire, Kevin, Nancy, and Xana agreed that graph (a) well demonstrated their overall adjustment in the United Kingdom.

Figure 9.

Graph (a) for overall adjustment.

George, Helen, Jack, Olivia, and Walter chose graph (c) to demonstrate their overall adjustment process (Figure 10). Through averaging the academic and socio-cultural adjustments, George considered his overall adjustment as a steadily increasing shape. Helen agreed that her overall adjustment was positive, so the improving tendency demonstrated her situation. Without any serious problem or homesickness, Jack felt his overall adjustment was progressing steadily. Olivia stated that her overall adjustment was getting better and better. Walter thought that he had gradually become used to the UK environment so his overall adjustment increasingly improved.

Figure 10.

Graph (c) for overall adjustment.

Richard, Veronica, and Zoe chose graph (e) to represent their overall adjustment process (Figure 11). When there were special activities or events, Richard felt his overall adjustment improving. With more self-control, Zoe perceived better overall adjustment so her overall adjustment trend moved upward, whereas Veronica’s overall adjustment fluctuated downward while distinct events in life especially frustrated her mood.

Figure 11.

Graph (e) for overall adjustment.

Monthly quantitative self-evaluation of adjustments

A monthly self-evaluation of students’ academic, socio-cultural, and overall adjustments was implemented in order to investigate the research participants’ adjustment process through quantitative data collection. This quantitative self-evaluation aimed to test whether any adjustment process fitted the U-curve hypothesis. It required the participants to rank their experiences on a scale from 0 (the worst or lowest adjustment situation) to 10 (the best or highest adjustment situation). Due to the timing of the data collection, the participants could only evaluate their actual adjustment situation up until the date when the second interview was conducted. Therefore, the evaluation from August 2010 to February 2011 showed the data based on actual or real experiences. The self-evaluation from March 2011 to September 2011, however, was based on research participants’ anticipation of the future adjustment process. Table 2 shows one example of the raw quantitative adjustment data according to the academic adjustment, where each student is represented by a number rather than letter.

Table 2.

Monthly self-evaluation of academic adjustment.

Academic adjustment
Participant	Time
	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep
	2010	2010	2010	2010	2010	2011	2011	2011	2011	2011	2011	2011	2011	2011
1	2	2	3	3	4	4	4	5	5	5	6	6	6	6.5
2	0	1	3	5	6	6.8	6	6.5	7.5	6	5.5	6	6	7.5
3	0	0	2.5	3.5	4	4.5	5	5	5	5.3	5.5	5.6	6	6.5
4	2	8	7	8	5	10	8	6	6	10	7	9	4	M
5	0.2	1	1.6	2.5	2.9	3.2	4.8	5.5	6	7	8.5	9	9.5	9.9
6	0	0	2	3	5	4	7	8	9	10	10	10	10	10
7	M	5.5	6.7	6.5	7.5	8	7.8	7	8	7.5	7	9	M	M
8	0	2	4	5	M	7	7	7	8	8	8	8	8	6
9	M	M	6	4	4	0	2	7	7	7	9	8	8	10
10	M	M	4	5	6	7	6.5	8.5	8.5	9	9	M	M	M
11	0	1.5	3.0	6.8	7.5	6.2	6	7.4	4.5	7.8	7.8	8	8	9
12	0	2	3	7	7	7	7	6	7	7	7	7	6.5	0
13	0	8	7	8	9	10	10	10	10	9	10	M	M	M
14	0	0	3	6.5	6.5	7	8	8	8	8	8	8	8	8
15	0	0.5	1.5	3	5	6	6.5	7	7.3	8	8.6	9	9.5	10
16	0	0.1	1.5	2.7	3.9	4.2	6.3	7	7.5	8	8.2	8.4	8.5	9
17	3	3.5	5	7	8.5	9	8.5	9.2	9.5	9	9.3	9.5	8	9
18	0	0	5	5	7	7	8	8	8	9	9	9	M	M
19	0	5	5	7	7	7	7	7	7	5	6	7	7	5
20	0	0	4	5	6	6	7	7	7	7	8	8	8	9
21	M	M	1	1	2	3	4	5	5	M	M	M	M	M
22	0	0	1	1	1	2	3	4	5	6	6	8	8	8
23	M	0	2	5	6	7	7.2	7.4	7.5	7	7.8	7.9	7.9	8
24	0	6	7	8	8.5	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9
25	0	0	7	5	8	7	6	7	M	M	M	M	M	M
26	8	8	2	5	5	7	7.8	8	0	8.5	8.6	0	0	M
Mean	0.72	2.35	3.76	4.94	5.69	6.11	6.52	7.02	6.89	7.67	7.87	7.70	7.30	7.80

M: missing value.

In order to understand and express accurately the shape of the international student adjustment process, visual figures were depicted and analyzed based on the monthly self-evaluation data and used to demonstrate the adaptive change and development of the individual research participants during the period from August 2010 to September 2011. The general trend of the average scores based on the academic adjustment of the 26 research participants tended to gradually move up with a very tiny drop in two time periods, April and August 2011. The general trend of the average scores based on the socio-cultural adjustment among the international postgraduate participants tended to gradually increase with three slight declines. This is similar to the general trend for the overall adjustment with three small decreases. Through viewing all the individual adjustment trend lines, it was found that none of the individual adjustment trend lines fitted the U-shaped curve. Based on the monthly self-evaluation, therefore, no research participant’s adjustment process could be demonstrated and explained by the U-curve hypothesis.

The research result shows that none of the quantitative data of the self-evaluation, including academic adjustment, socio-cultural adjustment, and overall adjustment actually followed the pattern of the U-curve hypothesis, no matter whether examined from the individual data or from the mean data of the different monthly timings. From the visual demonstration of the adjustment figures (academic, socio-cultural, and overall adjustments), the U-curve hypothesis is not seen in the 26 interview participants’ self-evaluation of the adjustment process.

Interview reflection on the U-curve hypothesis

In order to comprehensively investigate various phenomena associated with adjustment and the U-curve hypothesis, the study was also designed to examine the relevant information shared by the research participants. In general, the data collected demonstrate that the U-curve hypothesis does not apply well to the first-year, full-time, international postgraduates’ experience within this research project. This challenges the U-curve hypothesis as the common pattern for student adjustment because the research data suggest that simple models of this type will never capture the complexity of the student experience.

According to the interview data, 22 interview participants did not think that the U-curve model fitted any of their adjustment processes. Only four out of the 26 agreed with the U-curve hypothesis based on their experiences in academic, socio-cultural, or overall adjustment. Among these four interviewees, Iris thought that the U-curve was similar to both her academic and overall adjustment processes. Kevin claimed that his socio-cultural adjustment process resembled a U-curve, but his development curve did not go steadily downward and then move upward near the end, like a U-curve. Peter admitted that the U-curve hypothesis was very similar to his socio-cultural adjustment process because it was his first time studying abroad and he had experienced problems with the language barrier at the beginning of his studies. However, his academic and overall adjustment processes both improved and went up gradually so did not look like a U-curve. Peter attributed his adjustment difficulty to the language barrier as,

The U-curve hypothesis especially fits my socio-cultural adjustment because I had language problems at the beginning … I need to talk and communicate with local people. Language barriers are quite the main difficulties in my daily life experience.

Richard agreed with the U-curve hypothesis and thought that it fitted his personal situation for both academic and socio-cultural adjustments but not for his overall adjustment. He suggested that this might have resulted from his high expectations before coming to the United Kingdom.

Among the research participants whose adjustment did not fit the U-curve hypothesis, several key elements were mentioned by them as important factors that could impact their academic, social, or overall adjustment. These influential factors and the relevant supportive evidence with associated descriptions are expressed as follows.

Cultural similarity

Most of the participants from Europe and the continent of America thought that greater cultural similarity gave them better understanding of the UK environment and helped them experience a better adjustment different from what the U-curve hypothesis described. For instance, Lucy from Anglo America mentioned,

Cultural similarity helps my adjustment as well because it is not a massive difference within the culture for me to study in the UK. Additionally, I do not have any language problem. This also helps me have better adjustment.

Tina stated,

I do not think everything here is all new for me because I come from another European country. Therefore, I do not feel that things here are like a big shock for me. I do not think or feel things here are new or exciting for me.

Previous visit, work, study, or travel abroad experience

Previous visit, travel, study, or work either abroad or in the United Kingdom also advantages international sojourners, giving them better adaptability and familiarity with the UK environment. For instance Helen, who had worked in the United Kingdom before for one year, mentioned,

It is possible that I am more familiar with the UK culture here because I worked in England before.

Uinise also stated,

There is no change for me so it is constant. I am used to the socio-cultural adjustment. Additionally, I studied in London for three years before. I do not have language problems.

Yarran mentioned that previous work abroad experience also affected his adjustment:

I do not feel that I need to do a lot of adjustment … I worked in another country before. I already know that if I live in a foreign country, I have something to adjust … I already know that and prepare in mind.

Additionally, previous travel abroad experience may be influential to one’s adjustment to a new culture. Quincy mentioned,

Studying in the UK is not my first experience to travel or study abroad … The more time one travels abroad, the less culture shock for one.

George also claimed that previous travel abroad experience might have affected his adjustment process:

The U-curve hypothesis does not represent my case because I have traveled to many countries, including very poor countries … I had been in very bad situations or societies without regulations. Therefore, UK is totally fine.

Personal internal characteristics

Age, personality, and maturity may also be associated with one’s adjustment. For example Brian, a PhD participant from the Middle East, mentioned,

I am mature and older with many experiences so I have good approaches or attitudes to life. I participate in different activities and arrange my wife to have English lessons and engage in local international or British culture.

Uinise stated,

I had worked for few years in hotels in London … as a supervisor [so I managed] people … I think that also benefits my maturity to deal with things. I would no more be like a kid.

Quincy indicated,

Maybe it is related to my personality because I do not really refuse new cultures or things. Sometimes I would try new things by myself. It is okay for me even if it is a new culture. Sometimes I may get shocked or depressed but not so much.

Additionally, Tina stated,

I think age is important because one usually gets more resilience when one gets older. One does not feel so affected by bad, negative, or offensive things and adventures when one is getting older … I think age also affects my adjustment a lot.

Language

Different language issues also affect adjustment. Better English generally benefits everyday communication; however, language barriers may hinder one’s adjustment. Lucy, from Anglo America with better adjustment, commented,

I do not have any language problems. This also helps my better adjustment … It may make me cry if I have some language problems or do not understand the language so well. Therefore, I think these factors definitely contribute to my better adjustment.

Academic factors

Study fields or degrees of study, supportive staff members, intensity of a study program, and focus only on academic purposes may also influence adjustment. Xana claimed,

My study field is related to cultural things so my attitude may be more positive. Therefore, I can overcome any difficulty.

Some interview participants indicated that postgraduate and undergraduate students might have different attitudes about how to deal with life adjustments or difficulties. Usually, postgraduate students are more mature so they can handle things better than undergraduate students who have less knowledge, experience, and skills. For instance, Adam indicated how his adjustment could be different from the U-curve hypothesis:

I started my study here as a postgraduate student … undergraduate students may feel differently … When I just came here as a postgraduate student … I did not have any fear because I knew if I had any problem … I could ask.

Quincy said that the focus only on academic purposes influenced his adjustment:

Being a student is better because the stress is not so heavy … If one wants to join a new society, like working in America, one then needs more communication with others. One then may have more culture shock.

Globalization and development in technology and transportation

Globalization, information dissemination through the mass media and Internet, and convenient transportation may also alleviate the distance between people of different cultures and make international students’ adjustment different from the U-curve hypothesis. For instance, Walter noted,

I think I have prepared in mind through reading about England, and seeing British and Western films. I already have ideas about what Western life is … I knew and read on the international websites about what the English would like to see … I already constructed concepts before coming to the UK. That is why I should not say that the U-curve fits my situation … I had googled South West … I have some preparation in mind already … Globalization and the global vision of the world also benefit my adjustment process. For example, we also have BBC in Nigeria … It helps us know British things and what is happening in the world in Nigeria.

Religion

Religion also plays an important role in some students’ adjustment. Brian, a Muslim from the Middle East, stated,

I think that my adjustment curves do not look like the U-curve may be [because] I believe in God strongly. I have faith in God and feel the support from God every day.

Walter, a Christian African Master’s student, also claimed that

My religious faith is everything for me. I have strengths to do what I have to do because I have faith in God … I believe that God is with me and helps me get used to the environment … Faith is the inner strength to support and encourage me to do what I have to do.

Relationship

Good friendships or interactions with friends, and the relationship between a sending country and a host country, may also make participants’ adjustment process different from the U-curve hypothesis. For instance, Tina stated that her good friendship and interaction with friends influenced her adjustment:

I think that having friends here and getting close to them is also important for my adjusting process not to be like the U-curve.

Walter mentioned that the close colonial relationship between the United Kingdom and his home country might have reduced his language problems and enhanced his familiarity with things in the United Kingdom:

The relationship between Nigeria and England is close. We were colonized by the UK so we always have British talk shows and British styles in many things. I also do not have language problems because English is the official language in Nigeria.

Discussion

The U-curve hypothesis, focusing on the adjustment of international students or sojourners, provides a useful framework for analyzing and explaining the research findings in this study. Through the interviews, monthly self-evaluations, and visual graphical evaluations of the adjustment process, research participants indicated how each individual adjustment process could be represented. Overall, in contrast to the simple pattern of responses suggested by the U-curve hypothesis, the data here reveal the variability and complexity of the international postgraduate student experience. Various factors, such as previous experience and globalization, were suggested by interviewees for explaining the lack of relevance of the hypothesis to this context; but issues related to research methods used could also contribute to the explanation.

Generally, the data in this study, including the empirical interview information and both the visual graphical evaluation and the monthly quantitative self-evaluation evidence, suggest that the U-curve model does not represent the experience of most international postgraduates, and the appropriateness of the U-curve hypothesis for understanding adjustment is challenged because international postgraduates usually encounter more diverse, complex, and uncertain situations while studying abroad. Far from being a predictable curve, the data presented here reveal that adjustment is a complex set of experiences influenced in various ways by different internal and external factors, different cultural expectations, and the student’s adaptation, negotiation, and resistance to social norms in the host context. The internal factors include age, previous UK experience, previous work or travel abroad experience, previous work experience, language ability, level or field of study, religion, whether focus is on academics alone, and good friendship or interaction with friends. External factors include cultural similarity, globalization, technology for information dissemination, convenient transportation, supportive university staff, an intensive study program, and the relationship between a sending country and a host country.

For most of the research participants, the patterns of adjustment for the three contexts examined – academic, socio-cultural, and overall – are all different. However, for some students who see academic achievement as their priority, the pattern of their academic adjustment tends to be the same as that of their overall adjustment or similar to that of their socio-cultural adjustment because the academic adjustment usually guides or influences the primary focus of their life or daily activities. In general, the research participants who agreed with the more common patterns (graphs [a], [c], and [e]) for their academic, socio-cultural, and overall adjustments tended to gradually improve in a linear fashion, although sometimes there might be some difficulties in the adjustment process. Four interviewees thought that their socio-cultural adjustment would stay the same without any change. The research findings generally suggest a lack of applicability of the U-curve model to this research project.

Since the research data indicate that the U-curve hypothesis is not adequate in explaining the adjustment of first-year, full-time, international postgraduates at a south west UK university, it is important to illustrate carefully how the data may be conceptualized based on the empirical research evidence. The research has found that individual participants’ adjustment situation varies based on differences related to the different internal and external factors, different cultural expectations, and one’s responses or attitudes in the host context. For instance, in relation to one of the external factors, cultural similarity or difference, this study found that it is easier for European or Anglo-American students to adapt to the UK socio-cultural environment because British culture has links with European or Anglo-American culture. However, it is relatively more difficult for Asian students, compared to students from other parts of the world, to adjust to the local UK socio-cultural context because of the greater cultural dissimilarity between Asian and British (or European or Anglo-American) cultures. For instance, Xana stated that her UK experiences did not fit the U-curve hypothesis because of the similarity of her culture to the UK culture; however, her previous experiences in a North West African country were a better fit to the U-curve hypothesis because of the greater cultural difference with difficulties in language.

With regard to language issues, one of the internal factors associated with students’ adjustment, this study finds that students from a country where English is the official language usually experience better academic adjustment because they are used to the various English learning contexts and have fewer language-related difficulties. Furthermore, some students might have had previous UK study, work, visit, or travel experience. These experiences helped them have better academic or socio-cultural experiences unlike those students who had had no previous experience of the United Kingdom. As for the relationship between the relevant internal or external factors and both the academic and socio-cultural adjustments of international students, this study suggests that it would be worthwhile to further investigate this relationship and then systematically build up a theoretical model through a more advanced statistical data analysis method.

Finally, the U-curve model was first proposed in 1955, and was based on a research context relevant to that era. But the world continues to change and develop. When Lysgaard (1955) and Oberg (1960) discussed this research model over half a century ago, the global environment was completely different from the present one. Information dissemination, transportation, technology, and internationalization have continued to improve so studying abroad and sojourners’ adjustment may mean something other than what it did previously. It is therefore important for researchers to review the hypothesis and continue to investigate the associated issues based on the different research context of the present day.

Conclusion

This study has highlighted a number of important issues related to adjustment and the U-curve hypothesis. The qualitative interview data regarding adjustment of international postgraduates indicates the variation to be found in independent individuals. In a field largely informed by survey data, this research design brings greater insights through its combination of different data collection approaches, and has been successful in demonstrating that simple adjustment models such as the U-curve hypothesis do not account for the complexity encountered in this research context. Additionally, academic adjustment and socio-cultural adjustment interact in a fluid and complex way, so contributing to the potential outcomes of international students’ overseas education. Additionally, the findings related to the U-curve hypothesis imply that culture shock does not play a major role in student adjustment in this study, and that the adjustment process of international students nowadays, given the changes brought about by globalization, high-tech and transportation development, and internationalization of higher education, is not adequately explained by the hypothesis.

This study has led to a number of recommendations for future research, since more research will contribute to greater understanding, improvement in international student support services, and policies regarding the internationalization of higher education. First of all, it is recommended that future research should include international students from more diverse backgrounds, including not only initial volunteers. In this research, all of the interviewees participated voluntarily so most of their experiences were quite positive. If researchers can in future research use strategies to invite as participants students with fewer characteristics of a volunteer community, they may be able to collect research results that include negative and perhaps more insightful findings that are closer to a larger body of students’ actual experiences. Regarding the research period, future research could be conducted for a longer period than was this research, which may help researchers to identify a greater variation of issues related to the development of the students’ adjustment.

With regard to recommendations for future practice, this research suggests that international students and host nationals should be encouraged to have more opportunities to interact with each other. Activities such as visiting host families and trips during vacations should be provided in order to increase this interaction, perhaps with input from and organization by university student support staff. Finally, since studying abroad brings more advantages than disadvantages, and benefits both international students and the host country, this research recommends that future policies related to the recruitment of international students to study in the United Kingdom should be continued and even improved in order to increase mutual understanding between people in the world.

Footnotes

Appendix

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author biography

Yu-Yi Grace Chien was awarded her PhD in Education by the University of Exeter, UK. She is from Taiwan and her research interests relate to international higher education and multicultural studies.

References

Adler

(1975) The transitional experience: an alternative view of culture shock. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 15(4): 13–23.

Anderson

(1994) A new look at an old construct: cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 18: 293–328.

Andrade

(2006) International students in English-speaking universities: adjustment factors. Journal of Research in International Education 5(2): 131–154.

Brown

(1980) The optimal distance model of second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 14(2): 157–164.

Brown

Holloway

(2008) The initial stage of the international sojourn: excitement or culture shock? British Journal of Guidance & Counselling 36(1): 33–49.

Chang

(1973) Attitudes of Chinese students in the United States. Sociology and Social Research 58: 66–77.

Church

(1982) Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin 91(3): 540–572.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2007) Research Methods in Education, 6th edn. London: Routledge.

Davis

(1971) The two-way mirror and the U-curve: America as seen by Turkish students returned home. Sociology and Social Research 56: 29–43.

10.

Furnham

Bochner

(1986) Culture Shock: Psychological Reactions to Unfamiliar Environments. New York: Methuen.

11.

Gullahorn

(1963) The role of the academic man as a cross-cultural mediator. American Sociological Review 25(3): 414–417.

12.

Hanvey

(1976) An Attainable Global Perspective. New York: American Forum for Global Education.

13.

Kauffman

Martin

Weaver

. (1992) Students Abroad: Strangers at Home. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

14.

Kealey

(1989) A study of cross-cultural effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 13: 387–428.

15.

Lysgaard

(1955) Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees visiting the United States. International Social Science Bulletin 7(1): 45–51.

16.

Mohamed

(1997) Counselling for excellence: adjustment development of Southeast Asian students. In: McNamara

Harris

(eds) Overseas Students in Higher Education: Issues in Teaching and Learning. London: Routledge, pp. 156–172.

17.

Oberg

(1960) Cultural shock: adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology 7: 177–182.

18.

Pedersen

(1995) The Five Stages of Culture Shock: Critical Incidents around the World. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

19.

Rienties

Beausaert

Grohnert

. (2012) Understanding academic performance of international students: the role of ethnicity, academic and social integration. Higher Education 63: 685–700.

20.

Scott

(1956) The American Experience of Swedish Students: Retrospect and Aftermath. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

21.

Sewell

Davidsen

(1961) Scandinavian Students on an American Campus. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

22.

Tashakkori

Teddlie

(1998) Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

23.

Teichler

(1996) Comparative higher education: potentials and limits. Higher Education 32: 431–465.

24.

Torbiörn

(1982) Living Abroad: Personal Adjustment and Personnel Policy in the Overseas Setting. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

25.

Torbiörn

(1994) Dynamics of cross-cultural adaptation. In: Althen

(ed.) Learning across Cultures. New York: NAFSA, pp. 31–55.

26.

Ward

Okura

Kennedy

. (1998) The U-curve on trial: a longitudinal study of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transition. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22(3): 277–291.