Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
$
€
£¥
social sciences
Article
Cultural Immersion: A Trigger for
Transformative Learning
Oghenebruphiyo Gloria Onosu
David Berg Center for Ethics and Leadership, Katz School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
PA 15260, USA; o.g.onosu@pitt.edu
Received: 21 January 2020; Accepted: 17 February 2020; Published: 20 February 2020
Abstract:
This study examines the cultural immersion experience of 26 students who participated in
either a study abroad program (SAP) or global service learning program (GSL). Specifically, the study
investigates the transformative learning before, during, and after cultural immersion and the impact it
had on participants’ attitudes toward diverse others. The findings indicate that attitude change during
and after the cultural immersion experience is a multi-dimensional and unique process that differs
for individuals. Additionally, the results suggest that during cultural immersion, certain program
factors and personal factors are essential for transformative learning to occur. These factors include
intentionality in pre-immersion preparation, the intensity of cultural immersion, and willingness to
engage in reflection during post-immersion.
Keywords:
cultural immersion 1; global service learning 2; study abroad; transformative learning 3;
attitude change 4
1. Introduction
As society becomes increasingly interconnected, many educators are incorporating cultural
immersion programs into the curriculum to equip students with the skills they require to succeed in a
global environment (Addleman et al. 2014). Cultural immersion programs that have been shown to
support global outcomes include service learning (SL), global service-learning (GSL), study abroad
programs (SAP), and international internship (CIEE 2018). Studies show that participation in these
programs increases outcomes such as cultural tolerance, global awareness, self-development, listening,
intercultural communication, and critical thinking (Bringle and Hatcher 2011;Hartman et al. 2015).
The majority of the studies on cultural immersion have focused attention on the assessment
of program outcomes (Blake-Campbell 2014;Graham and Crawford 2012;Terzuolo 2018;
Yan Lo-Philip et al. 2015
). For instance, Yan Lo-Philip et al. (2015) found that during short-term
study abroad, students became culturally sensitive and aware of their own biases. Similarly,
Salisbury et al. (2013)
reported that a group of American undergraduate students who participated in
a long-term study abroad program in Europe experienced an increase in intercultural competence.
Tarrant et al. (2014)
measured the difference in students’ global citizenship after short-term SAP. After
controlling for age, gender, prior international travel experience, socioeconomic status, and race, the
results of this study showed that students who participated in the SAP had a higher score on global
citizenship than those who took part in the traditional class-based course. While there are plenty of
studies that have looked at program benefits, there has been a dearth of studies on the impact of process
factors on cultural immersion experience (Crabtree 2008;Engberg et al. 2016;
Hartman and Kiely 2014
).
Hence, this study uses the theoretical concept of transformative learning to understand how the
learning before, during, and after cultural immersion impacts participants’ attitudes. Particularly, this
study examines the unique impact of transformative learning before, during, and after study abroad
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20; doi:10.3390/socsci9020020 www.mdpi.com/journal/socsci
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 2 of 12
programs (SAP)/global service learning (GSL) and the effect it has on participants’ attitudes toward
diverse others in the community.
1.1. Transformative Learning
Transformative learning provides a framework that explains how students, through their learning,
can experience a change in perspective. Mezirow introduced the concept of perspective transformation
in his study, which looked at the experiences of adult learners who were re-entering college. He defined
perspective transformation as the process of developing a new interpretation and meaning of experience
due to a shift in perspective (Mezirow and Taylor 2009;Mezirow 2000). Since the introduction of
the Mezirow perspective transformation theory, the concept has evolved, and many disciplinary
perspectives of transformative learning have emerged (Hoggan 2016a). Some scholars also believe
that transformative learning involves a process that leads to a change in ways of thinking and acting
(Clark and Wilson 1991;Cunningham 1993;Damianakis et al. 2019;Newman 2010;Shor et al. 2017).
Most recently, Hoggan (2016b) defined transformative learning as “processes that result in
significant and irreversible changes in the way a person experiences, conceptualizes, and interacts
with the world” (p. 71). Based on an extensive literature review of several transformative learning
perspectives, Hoggan identified six categories of transformative outcomes that are byproducts of
transformative learning. These six categories of transformative learning outcomes include changes
in worldview, self, epistemology, ontology, behavior, and capacity (Hoggan 2016b). According to
Hoggan (2016a)
, a change in a person’s worldview represents a significant shift in how they understand
the world and its workings. These include changes in a person’s assumptions, beliefs, attitudes, and
expectations. The category “self” represents how one can experience a shift in their sense of self.
These changes include self-relation, empowerment, identity, self-knowledge, and personal narrative
(Hoggan 2016a)
. Epistemology refers to a change in how people construct and evaluate knowledge.
These changes include critical assessment, utilizing extra rational ways of knowing, and openness.
Ontology deals with a person’s mental, emotional, and physical existence in the world. Evidence
of change in ontology includes affective experience of life, ways of being, and changes in habitual
tendencies, increase, and development of particular attributes. Behavior refers to change in cause
of action. These changes include social actions, actions that are consistent with new perspectives,
professional practices, and skills. Finally, capacity represents a developmental process that indicates
qualitative changes in a person’s abilities that affect the way they see, interpret, and function in the world.
Changes in capacity include cognitive development, consciousness, and spirituality
(Hoggan 2016a)
.
In this study, Hoggan’s typology of transformative learning outcomes is used to analyze the impact of
cultural immersion on participants’ attitudes toward diverse others in the community.
1.2. Study Abroad Programs (SAP)
Study abroad programs (SAP) are a form of cultural immersion experience that purposely exposes
students to a cultural environment that is different from their local society (Grusky 2000). SAP can
either be credit-based or noncredit-based educational and cultural activities that require students
to live and study in a foreign country for a specific period (Goode 2007). There are three types of
SAP programs commonly referred to in the literature; these include the topic focus instructor-led
short-term study abroad, community engagement study abroad, and immersion semester enrolment
study abroad (Graham and Crawford 2012;Hanouille and Leuner 2001). Each of these SAP programs
uses both formal academic activities and cultural experience to foster transformative learning. Overall,
the findings from various studies indicate that people who participate in the different types of SAP
programs gain global outcomes, such as cultural awareness, cultural sensitivity, self-development, and
global competency (Blake-Campbell 2014;Engberg et al. 2016;Graham and Crawford 2012;Rubin and
Matthews 2013).
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 3 of 12
1.3. Global Service Learning (GSL)
Global service learning (GSL) is a growing model in the cultural immersion field. The GSL model
provides students with opportunities to live and interact with, and learn about a host community. GSL
involves participation in a local or international experiential learning activity that combines community
service with educational reflections (Hartman and Kiely 2014). GSL programs are reciprocal, in that
they connect education and community service in a way that benefits both program participants and
the host communities (Bringle and Hatcher 2011;Hartman and Kiely 2014;Kiely 2005). There are four
basic types of GSL programs; these include the co-curricular global service learning, short-term global
service learning, course-embedded spring break global service learning, and the curricular-embedded
global service learning (Alonso Garcia and Longo 2017).
Depending on the program type, participants either stay with host families in a homestay or other
forms of housing within the community (Niehaus and Crain 2013). A significant aspect of the GSL
program is that the participants, while living among the host community, engage in service projects
within the community (Hartman and Kiely 2014). Studies show that GSL engagement promotes
transformative learning and supports the development of global competence (Hartman and Kiely 2014;
Hartman 2008;Jones et al. 2016).
1.4. SAP/GSL as a Trigger for Perspective Transformative Learning
SAP and GSL share similarities in that both programs use cultural immersion engagement
to facilitate transformative learning (Parker and Dautoff2007). A major distinction between
SAP and GSL programs is that the GSL program emphasizes reciprocity in all phases of the
cultural immersion experience, pre-immersion preparation, cultural immersion, and post-immersion
(Hartman and Kiely 2014)
. Studies show that often when students participate in study abroad and
global service learning trips, the cultural experience triggers a new consciousness that enables them to
reevaluate their view of self and others (Crowder 2014;Slimbach 2017;
Trilokekar and Kukar 2011
).
For instance,
Crowder (2014)
found that a group of Canadian students who participated in a
GSL program in Kenya witnessed various events that caused a change in their worldview on
poverty in African nations. The GSL experience provided the students with a broader lens to
understand the impact of global policies and the effect it has on smaller economies around the world.
Trilokekar and Kukar (2011)
reported that pre-service teacher candidates from York University who
participated in a four-week SAP program experienced unfamiliar situations that forced them to realize
the connection that exists between power and privilege. Evidence from this study showed that SAP
exposure allowed the students to engage in daily reflective practices that enabled them to recognize
the layers of privilege and power between the program participants and their host community.
Similarly, Lumkes et al. (2012) investigated the impact that a two-week-plus faculty-led study
abroad program in China had on the development of cultural awareness and sensitivity among
participants. They found that students developed deeper appreciation and respect for other cultures
because of their cultural experience. Other studies show that during SAP, cultural awareness develops
in stages (Anderson et al. 2006;Pedersen 2010). For example, Pedersen (2010) found that cultural
awareness begins with the reversal stage, where it is “us versus them”. At this stage, the students feel
that their culture is better than that of the host. Next comes the minimization stage, where students
begin to sense the similarities between cultures. Finally, there is the acceptance and adaptation stage,
where students begin to accept and respect cultural differences. However, these studies only focused
on understanding the program outcomes. Thus, the current research focuses on understanding the
impact of transformative learning based on Hoggan’s model (Hoggan 2016b) across the pre-immersion,
immersion, and post-immersion phases of the cultural immersion experience. This research also
examines perspective transformative learning differences between global service learning programs
versus study abroad programs.
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 4 of 12
2. Materials and Methods
Since the aim of this research was exploratory, the study employed a qualitative method to collect
and analyze the data examined. Marshall and Rossman (1999) believe that qualitative inquiry provides
the most appropriate tools for exploratory study. They argued that the use of qualitative research
methods allows the researcher to gain in-depth insight into the concept examined. Additionally, the
researcher used a qualitative design because the study explored a socially constructed concept that
happened in a natural setting (cultural immersion, before, during, and after SAP/GSL participation).
Patton (2002) claims that the qualitative research method lends itself naturally as the most appropriate
tool to answer questions about social and personal experiences.
2.1. Study Participants
This study used a snowball sampling method to recruit participants. Noy (2008) suggests that
for social research, snowball sampling produces a distinct category of participants that provides rich
knowledge of the subject of interest. The sampling technique offered direct access to students and
faculty members who had participated in a credit-based curriculum SAP/GSL program. The selected
participants were from public and private universities in the northeastern, western, and southern
regions of the United States. The researcher informed the participants about the nature of the research
and ensured that each person gave their consent before they participated in the interview.
A total of n=26 past and current students from various academic majors (international business,
management, pre-engineering, Spanish, nursing, sociology, education, and global studies) participated
in the study. The participants’ gender, social class, race, age, and programs they attended varied.
The participants interviewed included two SAP faculty members (n=2), one from a private university,
and the other a public university. GSL faculty members (n=4) included two from private universities
and two from public universities. Student participants included SAP undergraduate students (
n=10
),
four from private universities, and six from public universities. GSL graduate students (n=5) were all
from public universities. GSL undergraduate students (n=5) included four from private universities
and one from a public university. The gender of the participants included male (n=10), female (
n=16
).
Participants’ race included White (n=16), Latino (n=1), Hispanic (n=1), Asian (n=4), Biracial (n=
2), and African American (n=2). Family socioeconomic status included working class (n=2), and
middle class (n=22). The ages of students interviewed ranged from 18 to 30, and the ages of faculty
members interviewed ranged from 35 to 65.
2.2. Data Collection
The data collection process happened over nine months after we obtained the Institute Review
Board approval for Log number (l6-300). The primary data collection involved conducting in-depth
individual interviews with participants. For participants that resided within the study location, the
interviews took place at a private and convenient site, while for participants who lived out of the
study region, the interviews happened online via Zoom. Each of the interview sessions lasted between
45 and 60 min. At the start of each interview, we used a question guide to initiate the conversation
before probing further. Patton (2002) sees the use of a question guide as a good practice and a way to
start the information flow. The secondary data process involved reviewing the program information
from the brochures, program proposals, and program curriculum obtained from faculty members.
Patton (2002)
and Grbich (2013) believe that the review of program documents provides researchers
with information that may not ordinarily be observable.
2.3. Data Analysis
I recorded all the interviews digitally and then transcribed them verbatim into a Microsoft
Word document. To ensure consistency in the findings, I only analyzed data from participants who
participated in a short-term credit-based curriculum program within the last one to seven years. I then
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 5 of 12
used NVivo 11 (Pro), a qualitative research software tool created by QSR International, to organize and
code the data. Next, I used an analytical approach that entailed a three-cycle process to analyze the
data. The process involved a preliminary data analysis, structural coding, and thematic data analysis
(Gibbs 2007;Patton 2002;Saldana 2013).
The preliminary analysis involved reading and rereading the interview transcript to search
for similarities in words that participants used to describe their cultural experiences (Grbich 2013;
Patton 2002
). The process generated several initial themes from the data, which we shared with some
of the faculty members that we interviewed. According to Patton (2002), sharing emerging themes
with experts enhances the data analytical process. Based on their feedback, I re-coded the themes
using the structural coding technique. The structural coding method entailed applying a phrase that
described the participants’ experience to a segment of the data that related to the research question
(Saldana 2013). I then grouped these segments of the data into categories. Finally, through the process
of thematic analysis, the themes and categories that represented the experiences shared by the study
participants developed.
3. Results
The data analysis process generated several categories and subcategories consistent with
categories outlined by the typology of the transformative learning model (Hoggan 2016b). The data
indicated that program structure was essential in promoting transformative learning, while personal
reflection, motivation, and openness were necessary for transforming participants’ perspectives
and attitudes. Additionally, the findings suggested that transformative learning happened before
(pre-immersion), during (immersion), and after (post-immersion). These findings are summarized in
Table 1, shown below.
Table 1. Summary of transformative learning outcomes themes.
Cultural Immersion Experience Themes Transformative Learning Outcomes
Associated with Themes
Pre-Immersion Phase
Seek knowledge about the host
community, mental anxiety,
motivation.
Self: self-knowledge.
Ontology: affective experience of life.
Immersion Phase
Openness, readiness to learn from
experience, willingness to engage
with the host community, and
rethink ways of knowing
(education).
Epistemology: openness,
utilizing extra rational way of
knowing, critical assessment
Worldview: assumptions, attitudes,
beliefs, new awareness, and
understanding
Capacity: consciousness
Post-Immersion Phase
Career choices expand
understanding, and change in
perceptions of self and others
impacts decision-making skills
Behavior: action consistent with the
new perspective, social actions,
professional practices, skills
Capacity: cognitive
development,Ontology: ways of being
Self: view of self and others, and
responsibility
3.1. Pre-Cultural Immersion Period
Most of the participants stated that outside of the program preparations, they took personal
initiative to research the social and political history of the host community. The data suggested that for
most of the global service learning participants, this was important because of concerns about going
into a developing country. For instance, one participant explained that for her to get the most out of
her cultural experience, it was vital to know about the host community. She said, “I was going to a
former colony and a place where my skin color would be the minority, and I wanted to understand
how the Jamaicans may view us.” For most of the study abroad participants, the reason for wanting
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 6 of 12
to know about the host culture was because they wanted to be able to manage the language and
cultural differences.
Participants talked about dealing with mental anxiety before and during the cultural immersion.
Many participants shared that besides the academic preparations, they had to prepare mentally for
the trip. For example, participants who were from minority backgrounds noted that they had to deal
with both family anxieties as well as personal worries about the trip. A participant said that she
had to go on the journey with her best friend to ease her parent’s fears as well as to provide social
and mental support during the program. She explained, saying, “I applied to the program with my
best friend; I wanted to make sure that my mom was happy, and also that I wasn’t alone.” Another
participant, an African American male, said that he had to spend some time “talking to his family
members and getting their mind ready before the trip.” Overall, participants acknowledged that
having a support system was essential, but nothing prepares you for the shock of going away from
family and friends. The participants indicated that the support received from family, friends, program
facilitators, and mentors helped them manage the anxieties associated with the cultural immersion
experience. During the pre-immersion phase, the participants showed a desire to learn more about
their host community and figured ways to manage the pre-immersion mental and physical anxieties.
The characteristics displayed by these participants were consistent with aspects of self and ontology,
two vital elements of Hoggan’s typology of transformative learning. The decision to participate in
the cultural immersion experience challenged most of the participants in ways that pushed them out
of their comfort zone (family, friends, and teachers). The cultural immersion experience then forced
them to engage in transformative learning that led to changes in self-knowledge, effective experience,
strength, motivation, and self-development (Hoggan 2016b).
3.2. Cultural Immersion
During the cultural immersion, participants quickly recognized that one could never be fully
prepared to experience a new culture. The participants observed that physically being in a location is
much different from reading about it in a book. A reoccurring theme from the interviews alluded to
the need for students to go into the cultural experience with openness and a readiness to learn from all
situations. A participant reiterated the importance of this concept, saying, “honestly, I believe that if
you are willing to put yourself out there and not be holding on stubbornly to your [own] view of things,
you will experience and learn something new.” Other participants mentioned that pre-immersion
preparation was an important component that set in motion transformative learning. They also
indicated that a flexible mindset was essential to be able to adapt when the unexpected occurs during
the immersion. Participants shared that open-mindedness was necessary to experience transformative
learning that allowed for a change in their way of thinking and understanding. One participant
explained this concept, saying, “If you want to know about a culture, you can learn about it, but
to understand the culture, you have to immerse yourself in the experience.” During the cultural
immersion phase, participants exhibited elements that related to epistemology, as categorized in
Hoggan’s transformative learning. Participants recognized the need to be open to construct and
evaluate new ways of knowing and viewing the world (Hoggan 2016a).
Findings also suggested that transformative learning during cultural immersion does not depend
on the length of the stay but on the willingness and extent to which the participants engage with the
host community. One of the participants explained this notion, saying that: “you could go to Jamaica,
and you spend your entire trip surrounded by other European or Americans, never really experiencing
Jamaica.” Participants also described the impact of living with a host family and the effect it had on
transformative learning. For example, a participant said that the host family is huge, and it is one of
the best things about the program for students. She said, “It gives you a way in, and once your family
accepts you, the community accepts you.” Another participant noted that the host family was the key
to transformative learning because it provides situations that force people to step out of their comfort
zones and venture into the unfamiliar. She explained:
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 7 of 12
If we had gone back to dorms, hotel rooms, or any other kind of stuff, the experience would
not have affected us as deeply as it did. At least for me, it definitely wouldn’t have, because
you can shut it out, you can compartmentalize it, you can shut yourself offfrom it, but here,
there was no getting away from it (Participant’s interview 2017).
Interestingly, the findings also showed that the cultural immersion experience allowed participants
to begin to think of their education differently. Participants recalled that before engaging in the cultural
immersion experience, they had limited knowledge about other countries. For example, a participant
shared that before studying abroad, she thought there was only one way of doing things. She explained,
“We were very much taught that the American way is the way, I went to the Netherlands, and I saw a
completely different way of life, a completely different way of social policies, and government interaction
with its people.” For others, the experience made them question the conventional education system
and the limitation it places on the ability to reflect critically on personal perspectives. For instance,
one participant said, “You can now look at things from an outsider’s perspective, and you see yourself
and the bubble you grew up in from a different lens.” Other participants also acknowledged that the
cultural immersion experience made them aware of the benefit of engaging in reflective learning and
the critical knowledge that develops from this process. Participants explained that during the cultural
immersion phase, they developed more holistic and reflective ways of understanding people and
viewing things.
Interestingly, findings showed that based on race and age, there were unique differences in
the challenges that participants had to overcome during the cultural immersion phase to achieve
transformative learning outcomes. Most of the participants who lived in small rural communities
had to step out of their comfort zone to interact in their host community. One of the participants
shared that:
I was raised in Mississippi in the South, I was raised in Mississippi, and so, I was raised very
much in a bubble, the Southern bubble, then I went on this trip, and I saw how backward a
lot of the things we do could be. You know that is what travel and going out of your comfort
zone does. You can look at things from an outsider’s perspective and you kind of see yourself
and the bubble you grew up in from a different lens (Participant’s Interview 2017).
Findings also suggested that for most of the individuals from minority backgrounds integrating
into the cultural immersion experience was much easier. For example, one participant said, “Let us just
put it like this, I’m a first-generation Taiwanese American, so growing up, I had an extremely diverse
experience, so it was easy for me to relate.”
The findings also indicated that older participants faced unique challenges during the cultural
immersion phase. Several of the older participants talked about the struggles they had to overcome
during the cultural immersion phase because they were unprepared for the transition of living close to
other participants who were younger than they were. One of the older participants shared, “To be
honest, I didn’t experience much culture shock. It was more of discomfort, which I think was a product
of my age and staying with five students.” Another older participant expressed similar feelings. He
said, “We were together all the time, and there were times where I just need five minutes to listen to
music and be by myself (laughing).”
One of the older participants summarized her experience, saying:
I don’t know that I necessarily prepared myself emotionally because being an older person
uh, and having lived on my own for a very long time, it was difficult for me to be kind of
thrown into this like, here is an 8
×
8 room and you shared it with other people. (Participant’s
interview 2017)
Many of the older participants attributed the discomfort experienced during the cultural immersion
phase to their age and to the fact that they were accustomed to living by themselves and having
control over their time and daily schedule. Overall, the findings in the cultural immersion phase are
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 8 of 12
consistent with key elements reflected in Hoggan’s typology of transformative learning outcomes,
such as epistemology, worldview, and capacity.
3.3. Post-Cultural Immersion
The findings showed that throughout the different cultural immersion phases, many of these
participants began to realize that, despite the difference in geographical location and culture, humans
share many characteristics. One of the participants noted that the cultural immersion experience
changed her perceptions about people. She explained:
The experience opened me up to be able to see beyond stereotypes and lump sum
generalizations. I realized that in the ways that truly, truly matter, humans are far more alike
than they are different, we all want love, we all want peace, and we all are just trying to make
a living for ourselves, the way people go about doing that, changes with different cultures
(Participant’s interview 2017).
Other participants shared that the cultural experience expanded their understanding of people,
and now they know that the differences between humans come from variation in peoples’ cultures.
Illustrating this idea, one participant said, “No matter what culture you are from, no matter what
religion or the color of your skin, people are people. I met good people in China.” She further elaborated,
saying, “We did not speak the same language, but we still got along; It made me appreciate people
more.” Other participants shared that they had to make an effort to step out of their comfort zone and
be willing to interact. For instance, a participant talked about how the cultural experience helped in
overcoming her introverted personality. She explained that it is “really hard to reach out [to others],
but once you do it, you get more comfortable doing it, and then you get comfortable with yourself.”
Many of the participants also came to understand that people interpret situations differently based
on their cultural experience. One participant said, “It’s not about right or wrong; nothing is black or
white; everything is pretty relative.” Most of the participants indicated that the cultural immersion
experience helped them to become more appreciative of people’s culture and identity. This finding is
consistent with Hoggan’s assumption that transformative learning increases one’s capacity to see and
interpret things differently.
Additional findings showed that the pre-immersion, immersion, and post-cultural immersion
experiences helped participants to become conscious of how the decision-making process impacts others.
For instance, one of the participants described how the trip changed her process of decision-making,
saying, “I’m more conscious of my actions, I’m more conscious about the decisions I make and the
outcome it has on me and others.” Other participants explained that while working on the project at
the host community, they witnessed firsthand the effect decision-making has on society. Most of the
participants also acknowledged that the transformative learning process that happened during the
pre-cultural immersion, cultural immersion, and post-cultural immersion increased their understanding
of self and others in many aspects. One of the participants summarized the impact of the transformative
learning in this quotation
the world is so much bigger than just where we are, not just this space, this experience
opened my eyes to how much is out there and how much we [participants] can see and
experience and learn from other people, and their culture (Participant’s Interview 2017).
Another participant explained that, “I came back understanding stupid questions, curiosity, and
the biggest thing is that I now have empathy when I see people going through the same thing.”
A participant said that she feels that her respect for others increased on her return from the cultural
immersion experience. In her words, “I treat people with a little bit more respect now.” One other
participant explained, “I came back a little bit more patient and a little bit more understanding of
people’s reality.”
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 9 of 12
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Overall, the findings allude to the importance of immersion, reflection, and openness in achieving
transformative learning during and after cultural immersion. Importantly, participants noted that
the pre-immersion preparation (assigned readings, reflection activities, and the community project
at the host location) collectively enhanced transformative learning. The evidence from this study
shows that the pre-immersion preparation helped participants transform difficult situations during the
immersion experience to transformative outcomes. These findings support Slimbach’s (2017) argument
that adequate preparation before cultural engagement facilitates the development of intercultural
skills during the immersion experience. These findings also are consistent with elements of Hoggan’s
typology of transformative learning outcome, such as worldview, self, and epistemology that signifies
a change in a person’s perspective.
The findings also suggest that a combination of factors, such as the intensity of participant
engagement in the local environment, housing, and reflective practice, cumulatively contribute
to the transformative learning (change in worldview, epistemology, self, behavior, capacity, and
ontology) that occurs during cultural immersion experience. This finding is also consistent with
Kang et al. (2019)
study, which found that 12 schoolteachers who engaged with their host community
experienced a change in their epistemology and worldview after a study abroad engagement in China.
Some participants indicated that transformative learning would not have happened without the lived
experience and the opportunity it provides to interact with the host community. Participants stated that
the service component gave them the means to connect directly with their host community. Again, this
finding supports Slimbach’s (2017) claims that learning during cultural immersion does not happen in
a vacuum. He argues that the participant’s character will interact with external factors, such as the
environment, to either restrict or enhance transformative learning outcomes.
The findings suggest that on re-entry, most participants noticed a transformation in how they
think and act towards others in their community. However, some of the participants said that because
of societal influence, they struggle to keep up with this new attitude. Some participants acknowledged
that on return to their community, over time, it becomes challenging to keep up with the attitude change
achieved during the cultural immersion experience. One participant explained that it was hard to keep
up because the culture is ingrained and a massive part of one’s environment and personality. For some,
this cultural immersion experience signaled the start of a transformative change that they continue to
navigate on re-entry to their society, through platforms such as career, community activism, and civic
engagement. Others struggle to sustain the transformation because of social pressures. Explaining this
observation, IIIeris (2014) argues that “sometimes progressive transformation can be too demanding
and challenging for learners so that the outcome instead becomes withdrawal or regression, which also
can be a kind of transformation” (p.160). The participants all agreed that for transformative learning
and attitude change to continue during the post-immersion phase, it requires a process of reflective
thinking and conscious actions. Overall, the findings show that for a cultural immersion program to
foster transformative learning there must be adequate pre-immersion preparations, cultural immersion
engagement, and post-immersion reflections.
Study Limitations
Since the snowball sampling approach involves using individuals to identify participants, the
risk of systematic bias and the likelihood of interviewing a homogenous sample that might not
reflect an accurate representation of the larger population exists. To limit this effect, I triangulated
the data collection and analysis process by using multiple sources to gather and interpret the data.
Another source of limitation in this study was the use of a single data collection instrument. Although
qualitative research allows the researcher to serve as the data collection instrument, the researcher
needs to take steps to reduce the effect of personal bias. To minimize the impact of personal preference,
I created analytical memos and used member checks to verify all transcribed information. This process
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 10 of 12
ensured that the data analysis procedure was reflective and that the themes that emerged reflected the
participants’ perspectives of their experience (Saldana 2013).
Finally, the variations in the structure and design in the different types of GSL/SAP programs that
the participants in this study attended created another source of limitation. Only data from students
who participated in short-term credit-based curriculum GSL and SAP programs were included in this
study to reduce this effect. However, no long-term data were available, so these results provide a
limited time frame to examine the impact of these transformative experiences, which is an additional
limitation of the current research.
Funding: This research was funded by the David Berg Center for Ethics and Leadership.
Acknowledgments:
I express thanks to Audrey Murrell, Acting Dean of the Honors College University of
Pittsburgh for her guidance and mentorship. Ray Jones, Director, David Berg Center of Ethics and Leadership,
Jennifer Petrie, Associate Director, David Berg Center of Ethics and Leadership, and Ingrid Gomez-O’Toole Project
Coordinator, David Berg Center of Ethics and Leadership for their encouragement and support. I also want to
thank Beth Mabry, Melanie Hildebrandt, Christian Vaccaro, Melissa Swauger, all of the Sociology Department,
Indiana University of Pennsylvania for their support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
Addleman, Rebecca A., Robert Ch. Nava, Tatiana Cevallos, Carol J. Brazo, and Kristin Dixon. 2014. Preparing
teacher candidates to serve students from diverse backgrounds: Triggering transformative learning through
short-term cultural immersion. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 43: 189–200. [CrossRef]
Alonso Garcia, Nuria A., and Nicholas V. Longo. 2017. Doing more with less: Civic practices for longer-term
impact in global service learning. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 29: 35–50. Available
online: https://frontiersjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ALONSOGARCIA-LONGO- Doing-More-
with-Less-XXIX-2.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2019).
Anderson, Philip H., Leigh Lawton, Richard J. Rexeisen, and Ann C. Hubbard. 2006. Short-term study abroad and
intercultural sensitivity: A pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30: 457–69. [CrossRef]
Blake-Campbell, Barbara. 2014. More than just a sampling of study abroad: Transformative possibilities at best.
Community College Enterprise 20: 60–71.
Bringle, Robert. G., and Julie A. Hatcher. 2011. International service learning. In International Service Learning:
Conceptual Frameworks and Research. Edited by Robert G. Bringle, Julie A. Hatcher and Steven G. Jones.
Sterling: Stylus, pp. 3–28.
CIEE. 2018. International Programs around the World. Available online: https://www.ciee.org/(accessed on 10
May 2018).
Clark, M. Carolyn, and Arthur L. Wilson. 1991. Context and rationality in Mezirow’s theory of transformational
learning. Adult Education Quarterly 41: 75–91. [CrossRef]
Crabtree, Robbin D. 2008. Theoretical foundations for international service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community
Service Learning 16: 18–36. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3239521.0015.102 (accessed on 19
January 2017).
Crowder, Shannan L. 2014. International service learning: Transformational Learning through Experience.
Doctoral dissertation, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada. Available online: http:
//ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3810&context=etd (accessed on 8 April 2017).
Cunningham, Phyllis M. 1993. Let’s get real: A critical look at the practice of adult education. Journal of Adult
Education 22: 3–15.
Damianakis, Thecla, Barrett Betty, Archer-Kuhn Beth, Samson Patricia, Martin Sumaiya, and Ahern Christine.
2019. Teaching for transformation: Master of social work students identify teaching approaches that made a
difference. Journal of Transformative Education, 1–22. [CrossRef]
Engberg, Mark E., T. J. Jourian, and Lisa M. Davidson. 2016. The mediating role of intercultural wonderment:
Connecting programmatic components to global outcomes in study abroad. Higher Education 71: 21–37.
[CrossRef]
Gibbs, Graham R. 2007. Analyzing Qualitative Data. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 11 of 12
Goode, Matthew L. 2007. The role of faculty study abroad director: A case study. Frontiers Interdisciplinary Journal
of Study Abroad 15: 149–72.
Graham, Natalie, and Pat Crawford. 2012. Instructor-led engagement and immersion programs: Transformative
experiences of study abroad. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement 16: 107–10.
Grbich, Carol. 2013. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Grusky, Sara. 2000. International service learning: A critical guide from an impassioned advocate. The American
Behavioral Scientist 43: 858–67. [CrossRef]
Hanouille, Leon, and Peter Leuner. 2001. Island programs: Myths and realities in international education. World
Education News & Review 14: 1–6.
Hartman, Eric H. 2008. Educating for Global Citizenship through Service-Learning: A Theoretical Account and
Curricular Evaluation. Doctoral Dissertation. Available online: http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/9657
(accessed on 17 January 2017).
Hartman, Eric, and Richard Kiely. 2014. Pushing boundaries: Introduction to the global service-learning special
section. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 21: 55–63.
Hartman, Eric, Lough Benjamin J., Toms Cynthia, and Reynolds Nora. 2015. Assessing intercultural capacities,
civic engagement, and critical thinking: The global engagement survey. In Going Glocal in Higher Education:
The Theory, Teaching, and Measurement of Global Citizenship. Edited by John Friedman, Vick Haverkate,
Barbara Oomen, Eri Park and Marcin Sklad. Middelburg: University College Roosevelt, pp. 125–42.
Hoggan, Chad. 2016a. A typology of transformation: Reviewing the transformative learning literature. Studies in
the Education of Adults 48: 65–82. [CrossRef]
Hoggan, Chad D. 2016b. Transformative learning as a metatheory: Definition, Criteria, and Typology. Adult
Education Quarterly 66: 57–75. [CrossRef]
IIIeris, Knud. 2014. Transformative learning and Identity. Journal of Transformative Education 12: 148–63. [CrossRef]
Jones, Stephen W., Hof David D., and Tillman Douglas R. 2016. Assessing global service learning: A
mixed-method approach to evaluating students’ intercultural development. International Journal of Psychology:
A Biopsychosocial Approach 18: 29–50. [CrossRef]
Kang, Haijun, Qi Sun, and Lei Lyu. 2019. Learning to transform through interplay between the Confucian and
western cultural heritages: A case study of school leadership development in Beijing, China. Journal of
Transformative Education, 1–20. [CrossRef]
Kiely, Richard. 2005. A transformative learning model for service-learning: A longitudinal case study. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning 12: 5–10. Available online: http://link.galegroup.com.proxy-iup.klnpa.
org/apps/doc/A187695548/AONE?u=indi68545&sid=AONE&xid=5889d41 (accessed on 19 January 2017).
Lumkes, John H., Steven Hallett, and Linda Vallade. 2012. Hearing versus experiencing: The impact of a
short-term study abroad experience in China on students’ perceptions regarding globalization and cultural
awareness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36: 151–59. [CrossRef]
Marshall, Catherine, and Gretchen B. Rossman. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Mezirow, Jack. 2000. Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, Jack, and Edward W. Taylor. 2009. Transformative Learning in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace,
and Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Newman, Michael. 2010. Calling transformative learning into question. Adult Education Quarterly 62: 36–55.
[CrossRef]
Niehaus, Elizabeth, and L. Kavaliauskas Crain. 2013. Act local or global? Comparing student experience in
domestic and international service-learning programs. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 20:
31–40.
Noy, Chaim. 2008. Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory & Practice 11: 327–44. [CrossRef]
Parker, Barbara, and Diane A. Dautoff. 2007. Service-Learning and study abroad: Synergistic learning opportunities.
Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 13: 40–52.
Patton, Michael Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Pedersen, Paula J. 2010. Assessing intercultural effectiveness outcomes in a year-long study abroad program.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34: 70–80. [CrossRef]
Soc. Sci. 2020,9, 20 12 of 12
Rubin, Donald L., and Paul H. Matthews. 2013. Learning outcomes assessment: Extrapolating from study abroad
to international service learning. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement 17: 67–85.
Saldana, Johnny. 2013. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers’ Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Salisbury, Mark H., Brian P. An, and Ernest T. Pascarella. 2013. The effect of study abroad on intercultural
competence among undergraduate college students. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 50: 1–20.
[CrossRef]
Shor, Rachel, Lauren Cattaneo, and Jenna Calton. 2017. Pathways of transformational service learning: Exploring
the relationship between context, disorienting dilemmas, and student response. Journal of Transformative
Education 15: 156–73. [CrossRef]
Slimbach, Richard. 2017. Balancing the Benefits: The Art of Intervention. Sterling: Stylus.
Tarrant, Michael A., Rubin Donald L., and Stoner Lee. 2014. The added value of study abroad: Fostering a global
citizenry. Journal of Studies in International Education 18: 141–61. [CrossRef]
Terzuolo, Eric R. 2018. Intercultural development in study abroad: Influence of student and program characteristics.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 65: 86–95. [CrossRef]
Trilokekar, Roopa D., and Polina Kukar. 2011. Disorienting experiences during study abroad: Reflections of
pre-service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education 27: 1141–50. [CrossRef]
Yan Lo-Philip, Stephanie W., Charles Carroll, Teen Li Tan, Ooi Y. Ann, Yong Heng Tan, and Siew Hwee Seow.
2015. Transforming educational practices: Cultural learning for short-term sojourners. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations 49: 223–34. [CrossRef]
©
2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).