Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Volume 15, 2020
Accepting Editor Wing Shui Ng │Received: June 12, 2020│ Revised: September 18, October 22, December 9,
2020 │ Accepted: December 11, 2020.
Cite as: Hou, M, & Jam, A. (2020). International education equity for doctoral students: Duoethnographic re-
flections from China and Cameroon. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 759-786.
https://doi.org/10.28945/4673
(CC BY-NC 4.0) This article is licensed to you under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
License. When you copy and redistribute this paper in full or in part, you need to provide proper attribution to it to ensure
that others can later locate this work (and to ensure that others do not accuse you of plagiarism). You may (and we encour-
age you to) adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any non-commercial purposes. This license does not
permit you to use this material for commercial purposes.
INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION EQUITY FOR DOCTORAL
STUDENTS: DUOETHNOGRAPHIC REFLECTIONS FROM
CHINA AND CAMEROON
Minghui Hou*
Old Dominion University, Norfolk,
VA, USA
mhou009@odu.edu
Alma Jam
Idaho State University, Pocatello,
ID, USA
jamaima@isu.edu
* Corresponding author
ABSTRACT
Aim/Purpose
In our reflexivity in this duoethnographic study, we aimed to identify and
elicit the authentic voices, thoughts, and experiences of international stu-
dents from China and Cameroon to explore international education equity’s
complexities through the internationalization of curriculum in doctoral pro-
grams at U.S. institutions.
Background
Many studies have addressed the need for education equity in terms of gen-
der, age, and socioeconomic status. However, few studies have explored the
complex tensions of international education equity for international graduate
students as they relate to the internationalization of the curriculum in doc-
toral programs in the context of neonationalist political rhetoric.
Methodology
A duoethnographic method was utilized to create dialogic narratives and pro-
vide multiple perspectives on a variety of topics across disciplines and forms
of practices of one’s life history to act and give meaning to actions. As two
researchers and international doctoral students from China and Cameroon,
we conducted interviews and discussions to maintain an ongoing dialogue
debriefing our experiences.
Contribution
By focusing on the experiences as international doctoral students, this
duoethnographic study encourages readers to recognize how different cul-
tures, experiences, and needs reinforce and influence one another and the
importance of ensuring education equity for international doctoral students’
success.
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
760
Findings
Three elements of international education equity were defined as authentic
inclusion, differentiated teaching strategies and assessments, and individual-
ized resources including but not limited to financial and cultural resources.
Four prominent themes emerged related to international education equity for
international doctoral students: (1) academic support related to teaching and
learning strategies, assessments, language support, and mentorship; (2) finan-
cial support related to university funding and employment opportunities; (3)
administrative support related to staff/faculty/community training on inter-
cultural competence and training related complexities of visa status for inter-
national doctoral students; and (4) community support in the context of geo-
political tensions.
Recommendations
for Practitioners
The findings highlight the need for research universities to address interna-
tional doctoral students’ concerns, develop and innovate practices to ensure
international education equity, and help international doctoral students to
study in a safe and welcoming environment.
Recommendation
for Researchers
The findings suggest further critical research into the rationale of the diffi-
culty in international education equity and the impact of equity in the curric-
ulum and learning spaces of higher education through exploring the similari-
ties and nuances between international doctoral students from China and
Cameroon.
Impact on Society
These findings aim to ensure international educational equity and to build a
welcoming environment for international doctoral students through collabo-
ration among education providers, policymakers, and the community.
Future Research
Future research may use international educational equity to explore diverse
international doctoral students’ experiences, needs, and challenges in study-
ing at U.S. research universities, and how those experiences, needs, and chal-
lenges shift their mobility.
Keywords
international education equity, curriculum internationalization, Chinese,
Cameroon, current administration, academic, financial, community
INTRODUCTION
Worldwide, there has been a staggering growth of participation in higher education, which has been
encouraged by the personal development, social status, career possibilities, and overall lifetime earn-
ings the attainment of higher education has to offer (Chevalier, 2011; Colclough et al., 2010; Walker
& Zhu, 2011). Internationally, alongside quality and efficiency, equity is usually considered to be one
of the three fundamental measures of the effectiveness of a higher education system (Hanushek et
al., 2015; Hanushek & Woessmann, 2012) and beyond the idea of equity are the vague notions of
merit, fairness, and equality of opportunity (James, 2007). It must be said that none of these concepts
are straightforward, for each involves complex and problematic notions of justice and choice (Rawls,
2009). Because of this, equity policies and programs are closely related to choices about the curricu-
lum and approaches to teaching and learning (James, 2007). This has led institutions to adopt student
selection and recruitment initiatives that influence first-year curriculum decisions and require teach-
ing students who are more diverse and perhaps less-well prepared in conventional terms for higher
education (Larkin et al., 2016). However, in many nations, the ongoing policy issue of equity of ac-
cess is interwoven with speculation about a desirable overall participation rate in higher education
(James, 2007). From a public policy perspective, equity is a fine example of policy limits in creating
social change (García & Weiss, 2017).
Hou & Jam
761
Over the past ten years, research on international student experiences has increased (Ammigan, 2019;
Gautam et al., 2016; Kaya, 2020; Khanal & Gaulee, 2019; Rivas et al., 2019; L. Yan & Pei, 2018).
Many studies have addressed the need for education equity in terms of gender, age, and socioeco-
nomic status (Atuahene & Owusu-Ansah, 2013; David, 2012); however, few studies have related to
international education equity (Tannock, 2018). While an overwhelming majority of these studies
have focused on doctoral students, few have explored internationalization of the curriculum for in-
ternational doctoral students in the geopolitical context in the United States (Leask, 2015). In high-
lighting the current geopolitical context, such barriers include visa limitations, international students’
alienation and loneliness, discrimination and stereotypes (Pottie-Sherman, 2018), limitations in ad-
ministrative, faculty, community cultural competence and financial concern (Zhu & Reeves, 2019). In
review of the gaps presented, there is a critical need to explore the complex tensions of international
education equity for students as it relates to the internationalization of the curriculum in doctoral
programs in the United States.
Where equity has previously involved measures of fair access to higher education institutions within
national systems, new conditions of knowledge production and dissemination demand more expan-
sive and sophisticated analytical frameworks. According to Sellar and Gale (2011), globalization in
higher education will require an effective and in-depth review towards internationalization of the cur-
riculum and student equity in higher education that can help identify and readdress problems. Some
of this can be done by incorporating an expanded conception of equity with resources for interrogat-
ing the production of policy or knowledge across multiple scales and bringing attention to the lived
experience of inequality in particular localizations of global HE (Sellar & Gale, 2011). In addressing
some of these facets, we do not only limit this to the current Trump administration, but also to the
inequitable environment as a whole. In this article, equity is related to fairness and justice, which re-
quires special consideration and support for the disadvantaged and the marginalized. It is the first
step to achieve equitable access (Samoff, 1996). For this study, equity differs from equality in signifi-
cant ways. Equality refers to the same or equal treatment and consideration for all. Equity refers to
equality with fairness and justice according to individuals’ various cultures, situations, needs, etc.
(McDermott et al., 2013). Curriculum internationalization is defined as “the process of incorporating in-
ternational, intercultural and global dimensions into the content of the curriculum as well as the
learning outcomes, assessment tasks, teaching methods and support services of a program of study”
(Leask, 2015, p. 9).
The interacting narratives in this duoethnographic study assess international doctoral students’ vari-
ous experiences within the context of equity in an attempt to explore the complex tensions of inter-
national education equity for international students as it relates to the internationalization of the cur-
riculum in doctoral programs in the United States. In the utilization of a duoethnography research
method (Sawyer & Norris, 2013), we seek to interrogate the cultural contexts of two autobiographical
experiences in an attempt to gain insight into their perspectives, experience, and issues related to the
personal and professional identities as international doctoral students from China and Cameroon in
the United States. We aim to explore these perspectives as a knowledge base to inform international
education equity in consideration of curriculum internationalization.
Furthermore, we explore the complexities and barriers of support in providing international educa-
tion equity through the internationalization of curriculum in doctoral programs. We explore themes
in dialogue within the context of equity, identity, and culture of international doctoral students in
higher education, particularly in higher education under the current Trump administration but not
only limited to the current administration. In doing so, we seek a deeper understanding of how
higher education institutions, the community, and international doctoral students ensure international
education equity through internationalization of the curriculum by specifically focusing on the experi-
ences, needs, and barriers of international doctoral students. By focusing on international doctoral
students’ experiences, we encourage readers to recognize how different cultures, experiences, and
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
762
needs reinforce and influence one another and the importance of ensuring education equity for inter-
national doctoral students’ success.
Finally, we address the following research questions: How do international students define and de-
scribe international education equity in their experiences as international doctoral students in the
United States? How do international students articulate the factors to be considered for curriculum
internationalization equitably?
LITERATURE REVIEW
According to Espinoza (2007), some debates on equity and equality among scholars reveal some confu-
sion about what those concepts mean in terms of their scope and results. In this study, we delve into
the issue of equity and explore it from the perspectives of students from China and Cameroon to as-
sess the formal and informal curriculum. We use equity in the context of the internationalization of
the curriculum. Previous studies that have explored similar aspects of equity have found that alt-
hough international status often impacts identity and participation, not all students encounter its im-
pact similarly by revealing the different ways of “being international” (Ballakrishnen & Silver, 2019).
Other studies have investigated international students’ cultural adjustment, academic satisfaction,
turnover intentions (Gopalan et al., 2019), differences in learning contexts as they may affect the edu-
cational and social adjustment of international students (Chung et. al., 2018), international students’
study anxiety (Khoshlessan & Das, 2017), and the challenges international students face during their
higher education in the US (Rao, 2017). However, concerning international doctoral students, there
has been little discussion of equity of access (Li, 2018; Madge et. al., 2015) and what this might mean
in the international context. Much of internationalization and student mobility analysis has focused
on standards and the quality of provision, competition between countries, and university rankings
(Allen, 2005; Astin & Oseguera, 2004). There has been extensive research on the student experience
and discussion on the effects on the curriculum (Chao, 2016; Ilieva & Waterstone, 2013; Sawir,
2013). There has also been an increasing body of research related to the issue of exploring the aca-
demic experiences of international students for the purpose of improving equitable access and re-
sources (Ashong, & Commander, 2017; Ballakrishnen & Silver, 2019; Chung et al., 2018; Gopalan et.
al., 2019; Kim & Roh, 2017; McKinley, 2019; Rabia & Karkouti, 2017; Rao, 2017; Yakaboski et al.,
2017). However, there is little detailed research examining the composition of the student body par-
ticipating in international higher education in a formal and informal setting (Leask, 2015) with a duoeth-
nography methodology to inform equitable opportunities and access in US institutions.
Public policy discourses about equitable access to and participation in higher education have been
growing in research (David, 2004; Espinoza, 2007). In regards to public policymaking, equity must be
considered as the primary basis of distributive justice, which Deutsch (1975) notes, “is concerned
with the distribution of the conditions and goods which affect individual well-being” (p. 137). Secada
(1989) makes numerous strong arguments that equality is not synonymous with equity. To clarify, equal-
ity implies sameness in treatment by asserting the fundamental or natural equality of all persons, while
equity is the fairness or justice in the provision of education or other benefits, which considers the in-
dividual circumstances of the person or group (Corson, 2001). Therefore, rather than striving for
equality among groups of people, policymakers should work towards identifying inequalities among a
particular group, examine the source of the inequality, and determine the reasons for the inequality in
order to effectively address equitable inequalities that reflect the needs and strengths of various
groups (Espinoza, 2007).
INTERNATIONAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT
International doctoral students in the United States have brought economic benefits, creation of
jobs, and cultural diversity (Campbell, 2015; Cantwell, 2019; NAFSA, 2019). Yet, institutions con-
tinue to report the declining international student enrollment due to an unstable visa application pro-
cess, social and political environment, and personal safety (NAFSA, 2020). Such political and
Hou & Jam
763
economic decisions from the current administration’s immigration policies were symbolized by travel
bans (Maltz, 2018; Pierce & Meissner, 2017), the change of unlawful presence (Galati, 2018), hire
Americans (Natarajan, 2017), the announcement of a multiagency National Vetting Center (Burke,
2018; Department of Homeland Security, 2018), United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’
(USCIS) adoption of a stricter interpretation of rules regarding the employee-employer relationships
and conditions for third-party placements for international students participating in the optional
practical training STEM extension program, and ending DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Ar-
rivals) and temporary status (Dussault, 2018; Pierce et al., 2018). These immigration policies were a
unique challenge for international graduate students (Gao, 2019). As a result, international students
have been living in a troubling, uncertain, and unwelcoming time in history (Pottie-Sherman, 2018;
Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017) and are starting to worry about their future immigration sta-
tus, causing “distractions for graduate students” (Gao, 2019, p. 262) as they struggle to pursue their
academic and professional work. It is essential for scholars in the field of international studies to re-
assess the research agenda under the current political context (Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood,
2017). In doing so, it may help instructors to “soothe the blend of anxiety, fear, and bewilderment”
(Hamann & Morgenson, 2017) among international students. Existing literature suggested that inter-
national students have to reconcile their ability to take advantage of higher education institutions’ ef-
fort to support themselves (Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017). However, both higher educa-
tion institutions and international students’ responsibility is to create an equal and supportive envi-
ronment while studying in the United States, particularly through formal and informal curriculum in-
ternationalization (Leask, 2015).
INTERNATIONAL DOCT ORAL STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCES
International doctoral students studying in the United States have experienced English language bar-
riers, cultural differences, and intellectual challenges (Lin & Scherz, 2014; Liu et al., 2010; Xu &
Grant, 2017; Xu & Hu, 2019). Linguistic differences place a burden on international doctoral stu-
dents, particularly, when professors use slangs and idioms (Lin & Scherz, 2014). Notably, interna-
tional doctoral students experience difficulties as graduate researching and teaching assistants (Le &
Gardner, 2010). They have to rely on their positions for the monthly stipend sources, tuition waivers,
and opportunities for research or teaching due to the restricted work authorization as international
students, which cause these students to feel overwhelmed to maintain positive relationships with
their supervisors (Campbell, 2015).
Campbell (2015) revealed that international doctoral students have difficulty establishing mutual in-
teractions/relationships with supervisors, which may lead to cultural and psychological problems to
impact their academic performance. In addition, international doctoral students have limitations to
involvement in activities in an informal setting. Some participants articulated that they had “little so-
cial life” because they had to work in the labs, which caused them a slow integration into American
culture (p. 294).
In addition, international doctoral students have experienced confusion, exclusion, insecurity, and
stress under the current U.S. political climate (Pottie-Sherman, 2018; Todoran & Peterson, 2020).
Todoran and Peterson (2020) found that international doctoral student feel extremely uncertain
about the situation related to immigration policies, which might affect their mobility and employment
upon graduation. More specifically, international doctoral students have experienced a more hostile
environment under the political discourse (Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017; Todoran & Pe-
terson, 2020).
Chinese international students’ experiences
In the United States, China has remained the largest source of international students for a decade
with 369,548 students in undergraduate, non-degree, and optional practical training (OPT) programs
(Institute of International Education [IIE], 2019). The large number of benefits international
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
764
students have brought cannot ensure positive educational experiences in host countries. In the cur-
rent climate of commercialization of higher education, international students are considered objects
or cash cows or university commodities for financial and reputational gains (Cantwell, 2019; Hayes,
2019; Lee et al., 2017). Once international students have paid their tuition, many higher education in-
stitutions are less likely to pay attention to supporting them after arrival (Lee, 2010). Chinese interna-
tional students have been suffering from stress, racial discrimination, lack of support, academic and
social integration challenges in U.S. institutions (Zhang, 2015).
Asians worldwide, mostly the Chinese, have been experiencing heightened tensions in their institu-
tions and communities and instances of xenophobic or racist behavior (Chiu, 2020). Chinese interna-
tional students are “fleeing back to China” due to the increase in racist attacks triggered by the so-
called “Chinese virus” (Chiu, 2020) and maskphobia (Weale, 2020) as a result of the COVID-19 cri-
sis. Maskphobia refers to an individual’s dislike or prejudice against people wearing masks. For in-
stance, Chinese students suffer from hostility from their landlords. One Chinese postgraduate stu-
dent at the University of Manchester described that the drivers rolled down windows and sneezed at
them while shopping in the city center with a friend because they wore masks (Weale, 2020).
Linguistic factors, including but not limited to English proficiency, accent, and dialogue competence,
affect Chinese international student academic confidence and achievement (Heng, 2018). English lan-
guage ability affects student academic achievement and experience despite students with high
TOEFL or IELTS or GRE scores (Will, 2016). Language issues are the most cited challenges in
Heng’s (2017) study. Although they have started to learn English from middle school, Chinese stu-
dents feel the inadequacy in the U.S. speaking and writing. In Will’s (2016) study, Chinese partici-
pants stated that they had difficulty articulating and expressing some deeper thoughts during class
discussions. Faculty in host institutions tend to complain that Chinese international students are inca-
pable of reading articles or orally summarizing due to their deficient English language skills and lack
of motivation (Heng, 2018). One Chinese student recalled that the professor ignored her questions
and only listened to American students, and she was also given the cold shoulder in a group project
(Bartlett & Fischer, 2011). According to Kaur (2019), a Duke University professor warned Chinese
students against Chinese communication and urged them to speak English. Other professors com-
plained about Chinese international students speaking their native language in the student lounge and
study areas.
Chinese international students are more likely to encounter more stress and challenge to adjust to the
host culture than international students from predominantly English-speaking countries due to social
and cultural adjustment (Guo & Guo, 2017; Heng, 2018; Moores & Popadiuk, 2011). Chinese inter-
national students socialize less with U.S. peers than they do with other international students
(Cheung, 2010) and have few or no American friends (Gareis, 2012). Will (2016) found that Chinese
students were not seriously treated during class discussions by their American peers. There was a “rift
or divide” between Chinese and American students (p. 1072). Students from Asia have less social
contact and more difficulties bridging cultural differences (Glass et al., 2014). Although Chinese in-
ternational students desire to interact with American peers, it is challenging to do so due to “a lack of
knowledge regarding American cultural references and how to start a conversation with American
students” (Will, 2016, p. 1072). Thus, Chinese students have faced discrimination from American
peers (Guo & Guo, 2017). Pritchard and Skinner (2002) found that their participants adapted to the
host culture and developed an intercultural competence to negotiate different worldviews. It was
hard to adjust to different food tastes, views regarding sexual openness, and perceptions of time, and
gender roles.
Cameroon international students’ experiences
Cameroon is a coastal country situated in the central-western part of Africa. It shares its borders with
Chad, the Central African Republic (CAR), Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and Nigeria. Of the millions
of international students who study abroad, less than 1,200 of them in the United States come from
Hou & Jam
765
Cameroon (IIE, 2019). Given this small number, it is understandable that the literature on their expe-
riences is comparatively less. When mentioned, they are often included in studies on international
students in general (Evivie, 2009).
The challenges of studying in the United States for international students from Cameroon and other
parts of Africa include differences in the societal value system, unusual food, gender role adjust-
ments, loss of social status and power, differences in climate and living conditions, alienation and
loneliness, discrimination and stereotypes, language proficiency, cultural and academic expectations,
and financial concerns (Constantine et al., 2005; Evivie, 2009; Okusolubo, 2018). Some of the chal-
lenges experienced by African international students were revealed by various studies such as Evivie’s
(2009) phenomenological case study conducted at a U.S. metropolitan research university where in-
depth interviews explored the challenges faced by six students from Western Sub-Saharan Africa and
the factors they attribute to their success. Constantine et al.’s (2005) consensus qualitative study also
examined 12 Kenyan, Nigerian, and Ghanaian international college students’ cultural adjustment ex-
periences in America through semi-structured interviews. Okusolubo (2018) did a sequential autoeth-
nographic study aimed at identifying and categorizing the different types of academic and social chal-
lenges faced by African international students in collegiate institutions in America to find possible
solutions to those challenges faced by African students.
Specific to African international graduate students, feeling marginalized due to their race, ethnic-
ity/nationality, foreign-status, and age were some of the barriers reported while studying in the
United States. Also, they experienced cognitive dissonance or a disorienting dilemma about their ra-
cial positioning in America. Similar to other international students, African international graduate stu-
dents also felt like faculty and peers perceived them differently due to factors such as accent/lan-
guage differences as well as cultural differences, which often led to negative treatment or stereotypes
(Kumi–Yeboah & James, 2014; Lee & Opio, 2011; Mwangi et al., 2018). In considering Cameroonian
international students specifically, the civil unrest currently taking place in the country’s breakaway
region of Ambazonia (Human Rights Watch [HRW], 2018) heightens adjustment and security issues
for families with students studying in the United States. Considering these events, students studying
in the United States from these regions faced the potential of emotional distress concerning the fear
and safety of their families facing civil unrest and displacement back home.
Supporting postgraduate learning experiences
Supporting international doctoral students also includes aspects of equity that could improve post-
graduate learning experiences. As doctoral students, these areas of support are not limited to instruc-
tion/learning support, faculty and staff cultural competence awareness and training (Isomine, 2015;
Mantai, 2019; National Education Association [NEA], 2017; O’Meara et al., 2017; K. Yan & Berliner,
2013) but also include funding for research and development and access to practical internship or
employment opportunities (Alkathiri & Olson, 2019) to support their postdoctoral transition into the
workforce. Educational equity is relevant to “distributed justice,” which means that international
postgraduate students need not only the equal access to educational resources, experiences, and out-
comes, but also need relational justice that leads individuals to “practices and habits relating to one
another as equals” (Tannock, 2018, p. 18). Confucian values have influenced Chinese students in the
Chinese educational system, which might cause cultural tension or cultural shock in a westernized
classroom setting in their first year. Particularly, Chinese students may experience a lack of culture
and knowledge in the social science field compared to the STEM field. Thus, the emphasis should be
placed on first-year international students to accustom to western culture and learning environments
(Wu, 2018).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
One way to achieve international educational equity is through Leask’s (2015) framework of the in-
ternationalization of the curriculum. Internationalization of the curriculum pays attention to intended
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
766
learning and teaching objectives, content, and innovation in teaching. It is a shared cooperation of an
institution and the various communities to meet the needs of students by recognizing the various
learning pathways needed to get there. Leask’s (2015) framework understands the internationalization
of the curriculum from the collaboration among higher education institutions, the community, and
international students.
Leask (2015) uses the framework to situate the disciplines “and therefore, the disciplinary teams who
construct the curriculum, at the center of the internationalization process” (p. 27). The different lay-
ers in the framework interact with one another individually and collaboratively to “conceptualize and
enact internationalization of the curriculum” (p. 27). The first part of the framework demonstrates
the following pivotal resources for internationalization of the curriculum: “the international and in-
tercultural requirements of professional practice and citizenship and the systematic development and
assessment of intercultural and international knowledge, skills, and attitudes across the program” (pp.
28-29). In order to do so, the sole use of Western models need to be moved away, which requires ex-
amination of the underlying dominant paradigms and finding alternative ways of viewing the world
beyond the dominant (Maringe, 2010).
A critical understanding of the internationalization of the curriculum needs to think beyond the
Western paradigms to imagine and practice new ways of thinking and doing (Leask, 2015). The inter-
nationalization of the curriculum aims to prepare ethical and responsible citizens in this globalized
world. In order to create professional practice and citizenship, decisions on developing students’ un-
derstanding of and capacity to meet moral responsibilities need to be made from local (institution
and community), national, and global entities. Furthermore, providing a relevant assessment of stu-
dent learning from a formal and informal environment is essential in the internationalization of the
curriculum. Leask (2015) also notes that systematic development across the program, such as lan-
guage capability and intercultural competence, needs to be embedded in various courses for a posi-
tive learning outcome.
For the study, formal and informal curriculum is included in a variety of contexts, particularly in in-
stitutional and local contexts. Formal curriculum refers to the “sequenced programme of teaching
and learning activities and experiences organised around defined content areas, topics, and resources,
the objectives of which are assessed in various ways including examinations and various types of as-
signments, laboratory sessions, and other practical activities” (Leask, 2009, p. 207). Informal curricu-
lum refers to the:
various extracurricular activities that take place on campus: those optional activities that are
not part of the formal requirements of the degree or programme of study, which neverthe-
less contribute to and in many ways define the culture of the campus and thus are an im-
portant part of the landscape in which the formal curriculum is enacted. (Leask, 2009, p.
207)
In this study, Leask’s framework is combined with the literature on international education equity to
fill the current literature gap. We postulated that involving interplay between the formal and informal
curriculum in the internationalization of the curriculum is essential to achieve international education
equity. In addition to the formal and informal curriculum, “resources; respect and recognition; love,
care, and solidarity; power; and working and learning” (Lynch & Baker, 2005, p. 132) need to be pro-
vided to international students. Domestic and international students should have the same opportu-
nities and resources. However, at the same time, extra resources should be provided to individuals
who are “educationally disadvantaged by their social background” (Tannock, 2018, p. 17). Interna-
tional students have more difficulties in academic and social adjustment than domestic students (An-
drade, 2006). They have suffered more severe emotional stress, fear, uncertainty, and racial discrimi-
nation in this unstable world (Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017).
Hou & Jam
767
METHODOLOGY
DU OE TH N OGR AP H IC INQUIRY
Framed as a lived-curriculum, duoethnography is a new research methodology grounded in Pinar’s
(1975) concept of currere – a critical form of autobiography and curriculum studies in which inquirers
examine the various dialectical relationships within the intertwined curriculums of lived experience. It
is collaborative in that it engages the researcher in a multi-dialogic process (Sawyer & Liggett, 2012)
in which two or more researchers juxtapose their life histories in order to provide multiple under-
standings of a social phenomenon (Norris & Sawyer, 2004; Norris et al., 2012; Sawyer & Norris
2015). As a method, it is more conceptual than prescriptive and rejects the notion of a single, fixed,
and absolute reality existing independently of human consciousness and imagination (Sawyer & Lig-
gett, 2012). Using the researchers’ biographies as sites of data inquiry, we utilized a duoethnographic
method to create dialogic narratives and provide multiple perspectives of a phenomenon for the
reader. Furthermore, it invites the viewer to enter the conversation.
Being born in curriculum theory, a duoethnography method is an appropriate fit for this study be-
cause it provides various topics across disciplines and forms of practices—curriculum of practice.
The dialogue research of this method creates an informal curriculum or currere, which considers one’s
life history to act and give meaning to actions and explore how the life history of individuals impacts
“the meanings they give to those experiences by employing multiple voices in dialogue” (Sawyer &
Norris, 2015, p. 2). International students tend to be considered as cash cows, objects, and intellectu-
ally unequal (Cantwell, 2019; Hayes, 2019). As a result, international doctoral students have been ex-
periencing challenges based on cultural differences, limitations on sociocultural connections, lan-
guage barriers, etc. (Xu & Grant, 2017; Xu & Hu, 2019). The utilization of a duoethographic method
allows us, as international doctoral students, to explore four tenets— “its polyvocal/dialogic nature,
the examination of life history as curriculum, the intent not to profess but rather to learn and change
as the result of the conversation, and the importance of learning from difference” (Sawyer & Norris,
2015, p. 2). Overall, this process also allows us to examine our lived experiences and histories for the
discourses that have shaped our views, perspectives, thoughts, and interactions (Sawyer & Norris,
2015). In addition, the dialectic process of creating duoethnography recognizes that openness to oth-
ers’ stories and opinions offers the potential for the reconceptualization of one’s existing beliefs
(Sawyer & Norris, 2013) and is also designed to be transformative to the writers (Norris et al., 2012).
Although duoethnography is a relatively new research methodology, it supports the foundation of
this study because it evolves into a conceptual method for critical and reflective conversation be-
tween two researchers who have different perspectives and backgrounds (Norris & Sawyer 2004;
Sawyer & Norris, 2015) and provides a variety of topics across disciplines and forms of practices—
curriculum of practice. Here, researchers can examine their lived experiences and histories for the
discourses that have shaped their views, perspectives, thoughts, and interactions (Sawyer & Norris,
2015). Furthermore, this research method’s dialogue nature is a currere that considers one’s life history
to act and to give meaning to actions (Pinar, 1975, 1994).
We sought to answer the following questions: How do international students define and describe in-
ternational education equity in their experiences as international doctoral students in the U.S.? How
do international students articulate the factors to be considered for curriculum internationalization
equity? The interview protocol included questions about the reasons we choose to study in the
United States, our initial perceptions of the United States and the U.S. higher education, how these
perceptions have changed since enrolling in the institution, our experiences and needs in our learning
process, and how we have negotiated these experiences and needs.
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
768
Context and participants
In this study, we delved into an anthropological hermeneutics (Wood, 2002), within a mode of narra-
tive inquiries, developed over a period of three to four months. In utilizing some practices of herme-
neutics in this duoethnographic study, we explored the dialogue between each other as international
doctoral students who have different perspectives, experiences, backgrounds, and dimensions infused
into the narrative as part of the currere, considering “one’s life history, both in and outside of school,
as a curriculum” (Norris & Sawyer, 2016, p. 2). By focusing on our individual experiences as interna-
tional doctoral students, duoethnography encourages one to recognize how different cultures, experi-
ences, and needs reinforce and influence one another. Both of us are international doctoral students.
Zhen (pseudonym) and Victoria (pseudonym) are doctoral students at a medium-sized public re-
search university of 13,000 students in the U.S. Northwest. Zhen, who comes from China, received
her master degree in the United States, then received acceptance into an Ed.D in higher education
administration program with Victoria. She later transferred to a PhD in higher education program in
another university. Victoria comes from Cameroon and has been studying at the institution in which
the study was conducted for five years. She also received bachelors and master degree in the United
States and now pursues her Ed.D in higher education administration.
Table 1. Researchers’ Demographic Information
RESEARCHERS
AGE
MARITAL STA-
TUS
COUNTRY OF
ORIGIN
STATE OF
GRADUATE
PROGRAM
PARENTAL
STATUS
Zhen
29
Married
China
2nd year in PhD
Higher Educa-
tion
No
Victoria
29
Single
Cameroon
3rd year in EdD
Higher Educa-
tion
No
Data collection and analysis
Qualitative methods expand the boundaries of curriculum studies in dialog conversation and life
writing, bringing forward critical structures of teaching and learning through research methods. The
duoethnographic methodology promotes organic, theory-practice connections, deepening conversa-
tions within and between particular traditions of curriculum theory, including arts integrated studies,
and pace conscious curriculum (Sameshima, 2013). Such a method also recognizes the potential of
dialogue to expand the meaning researchers make of academic culture and their investment in that
culture (Jones Jr & Calafell, 2012). As such, we used this particular mode of inquiry to allow us to ex-
plore the multiple meanings made individually and together as critical pedagogues committed to pro-
moting education as a practice of freedom (hooks, 1994).
This duoethnographic inquiry study was conducted during the spring of 2019 and the spring of 2020
in the United States. In order to engage effectively in a duoethnographic dialogue, we conducted au-
dio recordings during each interview and discussion session, where we maintained an ongoing dia-
logue debriefing our experiences as international doctoral students, noting any important ‘critical mo-
ments’ in our (separate, but concurrent) interviews and/or discussions. In this way, the data (reflec-
tions) became an ethnographic basis, which informed the process of engaging with them as a duoeth-
nography. We also employed several reliability procedures (Creswell, 2007), which included transcrib-
ing all interviews and reviewing transcripts multiple times to reduce mistakes in our narratives of ex-
periences. This dialogue was based on our experiences as international doctoral students in U.S.
higher education institutions. This method “follows the model of representation in duoethnography;
that is, a text written as a dialogue between two people, without merging or subsuming two voices or
Hou & Jam
769
perspectives (co-authors) into one coherent text, and without relying or drawing extensively on exte-
rior voices or texts for substantiation” (Seidel & Hill, 2015).
The first-round interview, lasting about two hours, was conducted toward the middle of the 2019
spring semester. The second-round of interview lasting about three hours was conducted via a zoom
meeting towards the middle of the 2020 spring semester. Interviews reviewed an exploration of what
brought us to the United States from a critical perspective and explored our experiences throughout
our time in higher education. Examples of questions included “How would you describe the treat-
ment you received from your professors, classmates, and the community?” and “Have you experi-
enced or found any challenges in your curriculum?” “Describe any challenges or barriers you experi-
enced as an international student in the classroom, on campus and in the community?” and “What
kind of support, if any, did you receive from individuals, institutions or your community?” Unique to
the conversation in 2019, the conversation in 2020 started with our specific experiences due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. We held a number of formal and informal conversations, some of which were
recorded, journaled, transcribed, and analyzed. The data was then generated through the written and
spoken dialogues of all formal and informal conversations.
For data analysis, we began with deductive coding – coming from theory or prior research (Ravitch
& Carl, 2019), which included a start list based on the theoretical framework. Deductive coding could
help us as insiders build protections against biases and control for alternative explanations (Creswell,
2014). We searched for broad categories and then developed themes that emerged from our experi-
ences. During the review sessions of our data inquiry process, we reflected on conversations to ex-
plore all the various themes embedded in each conversation for specification and expansion on vari-
ous dialogs that required deeper understanding, clarification, or further reflection on experiences and
meanings. Several themes emerged, with central theme of academic support, financial support, ad-
ministrative support, and community support due to factors like discrimination, isolation, xenopho-
bia, and lack of cultural competence and resource connections. Saturation is commonly taken to indi-
cate that further data collection and analysis are unnecessary based on the data that has already been
collected or analyzed (Breault, 2016). We utilized Urquhart’s (2012) definition on saturation to code
our data until “no new codes occur” (p. 194).
Trustworthiness and credibility
Central to duoethnography is the concept of phenomenology and social constructionism. Phenome-
nology is a qualitative research method that describes how human beings experience a particular phe-
nomenon (Wertz, 2005). More specifically, it is a form of qualitative research that focuses on the
study of an individual’s lived experiences within the world (Neubauer et al., 2019). Grounded in in-
terpretivist philosophy, it maintains that “meaning is negotiated mutually in the act of interpretation;
it is not simply discovered” (Schwandt, 2000, p. 195), therefore making the goal of phenomenological
inquiry one to describe a lived experience fully. In the utilization of this conceptual framework,
duoethnographers engage in conversation to unveil interpretations and create intersubjective mean-
ing by promoting conscious awareness of new constructions of meaning within a social context (Saw-
yer & Liggett, 2012). Unlike an autoethnography process that contributes to a critical process of indi-
vidual perspective (Chang, 2008), duoethnography provides multiple collective perspectives on phe-
nomena. This dialogue transaction (between others and within themselves) allows for the pursuit of
critical tensions, insights, and perspectives to surface, critique, and reconceptualize our perceptions
of the borders and in-between spaces (Asher, 2007) of phenomena.
As an interpretive method, we address two critical issues found within qualitative research: represen-
tation and trustworthiness. Validity in qualitative research means “appropriateness” of the tools, pro-
cesses, and data. This establishes whether the research question is valid for the desired outcome, if
the choice of methodology is appropriate for answering the research question, if the design is valid
for the methodology, if the sampling and data analysis is appropriate, and finally if the results and
conclusions are valid for the sample and context (Leung, 2015). Qualitative research depends on
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
770
factors that both distance and alienate the inquirer from the inquiry, such as credibility, triangulation,
dependability, confirmability, and transferability (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). In establishing the validity
of this study, we utilized data triangulation and member checks, which involve the use of different
sources of data/information (Guion, 2002) from various representatives and stakeholders. In-depth
interviews on involving international students and administrative staff (i.e., faculty, advisers, program
coordinators, and directors) from the International Programs Office, Study Abroad Program and
Graduate School of a Midwestern research institution were conducted to triangulate and evaluate
perceived outcomes of curriculum internationalization and international student equity in higher edu-
cation. The themes and outcomes that were agreed upon by all stakeholder groups generated from
these interviews established the validity of this study.
Researchers’ reflexivity
Reflexivity is a critical lens into the research process through delving into researchers’ thoughts, feel-
ings, reactions, and interpretations of the data (Stake, 1995). We considered reflexivity not only as a
concept of qualitative validity but also as a tool for achieving the emancipatory goals intrinsic to our
experiences as international students. As an insider, our reflexivity was essential because we were the
other and we experienced everything by ourselves. Considering the relationship as international doc-
toral students from China and Cameroon in U.S. institutions, our experiences were quite similar. This
might be explained by the fact that though we were from different countries or cultural backgrounds,
we both received relatively similar treatment within the geographical context as ‘international stu-
dents’ in a U.S. university. In other words, the university did not offer differential treatment to stu-
dents based on their country of origin. We were all received and treated as international students re-
gardless of where we came from. Considering this, we were able to sympathize with the experiences
and positions of other international students. On the other hand, our cultural backgrounds impacted
the role of English in our academic and social identities.
FINDINGS
In-depth interviews with researchers from China and Cameroon provided a deeper understanding of
the experiences and needs of international doctoral students studying in the United States. Our dia-
logue began to take on a life of its own as we dug deeper into conversations of culture shock, assimi-
lation, and adaptation and the changing identities and experiences of becoming international students
in our host university and community. We recorded and journaled relevant ideas from the interview
and documented our thoughts, feelings, emotions, and ideas that emerged during the interview using
analytical memos. Transcript, coding, and preliminary analysis were necessary to structure and guide
other interviews. The data collection included recorded semi-structured in-depth interviews, critical
journaling, conversational power-sharing interviews to clarify understanding, and transcripts. The
data were analyzed and broken into codes, then clustered into groups considering preliminary con-
nections among them. Some categories or themes were then assigned to identify main aspects of
lived experiences that were repeatedly mentioned by each of us as participants throughout our narra-
tives (Norris et. al., 2012; Sawyer & Norris, 2012, 2013, 2015).
We defined international education equity through our dialogues and emerging themes. The major
themes, each of which was concluded from the coding process, addressed the essential aspects of in-
ternationalization of the curriculum to reach international education equity. Four prominent themes
were identified related to international education equity for international doctoral students: (1) aca-
demic support (formal curriculum) related to teaching and learning strategies, language support, and
mentorship; (2) financial support (informal curriculum) related to university funding and employment
opportunities; (3) administrative support (formal curriculum) related to staff/faculty/community
training on intercultural competence and training related to complexities of visa status for interna-
tional doctoral students; and (4) community support (informal curriculum) in the context of geopolit-
ical tensions due to unequal and stereotyped treatment, discrimination, exploitation, xenophobia, and
maskphobia. Despite such encounters, the findings revealed that some faculty and staff are willing to
Hou & Jam
771
support international students without knowing how to support. As international students, we both
shared the same needs to support our formal and informal experiences. For instance, we both needed
financial support and mentorship. However, we also shared some nuances concerning academic sup-
port. Zhen, as a non-native English speaker, needed support on articulating and writing skills,
whereas Victoria needed support on public speaking skills because English was already her primary
language in Cameroon.
DEFINITION OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION EQUITY
We defined international education equity in response to our exploration of the experiences and needs of
being international students. The term international education equity was neglected by higher education
institutions. Zhen expressed strong systemic hegemony that constructs Chinese international stu-
dents as powerless students. At the same time, we articulated the features of what international equity
means.
Zhen: Chinese international students’ voices are not being heard. The majority of interna-
tional students were Chinese students in my master’s program. Most subjects were online,
we had to post on the forum, so we had no face-to-face interaction with professors and
American students. ...We as newcomers had a hard time clearly expressing and understand-
ing local people. We had a conversation with our advisor and professors to ask if we could
have a face-to-face class. However, it didn’t work out. After our graduation, the program
didn’t recruit international students anymore.
Dimension and emphasis
The outline of the meaning of international education equity was described with three dimensions
and emphasis: authentic inclusion, differentiated teaching strategies and assessments, and individual-
ized resources including but not limited to financial resources and intercultural resources. Zhen artic-
ulated, “Chinese international students’ voices are not being heard.” We characterize listening to in-
ternational students’ voices in policymaking as the authentic inclusion that indicates international stu-
dents not only being included in the classroom but also that universities are obliged to provide guid-
ance and consider international students’ needs as policymaking. Victoria recalled that asking for help
could be difficult for her in that in her culture “students aren’t encouraged to directly approach in-
structors for help as it may indicate a lack of ability to grasp knowledge or learn on their own.” Zhen
described her fear to ask questions on some common terminology that her American classmates un-
derstand, “All my classmates in that class are from the US and have been working in higher educa-
tion for several years. If the professor knew my academic background, maybe he would spend a bit
more time to explain it or provide some resources for me to understand.”
Academic support
Our interviews revealed a range of opinions about our experiences, needs in our academic field, and
how we are treated by faculty. We both articulated that faculty are willing to help and support inter-
national students under the condition of being asked. However, as a formal curriculum, effective aca-
demic support requires instructional strategies and teaching styles to better connect with the learning
barriers or limitations international doctoral students face.
Zhen: The good thing is that whenever I ask my professors for help, they are willing to help
me. Once I had some misunderstandings on concepts, my professor realized it and spent ex-
tra time after class explaining and making some examples for me to understand. I really ap-
preciate that all my professors in my department are willing to spend more time to help me.
Victoria: Most of the professors I’ve had in the past have always been willing to help me ...
but then again, the help only comes if you ask or seek for it.
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
772
Although faculty members are willing to help and support us, we felt it was challenging for us to ask
questions in class. Zhen from China explained different ways of teaching in China and how that im-
pacted her learning despite her taking initiatives to make friends with American students. Notably,
she recalled that she needed more help with social science subjects due to a lack of social science
background.
Zhen: I was in China for undergraduate study. My professors would ask students which part
they need help with, and they would spend 30 minutes or a whole lesson time for students to
ask them questions, in particular when exams were around the corner. However, when I
came to the United States for graduate study, professors usually won’t ask students which
part they need help unless students ask or seek it. Sometimes I am hesitating to ask questions
because I am scared that professors may think my questions are stupid. All my classmates in
that class are from the United States and have been working in higher education for several
years. If the professor knew my academic background, maybe he would spend a bit more
time explaining it. It is the same with other classes, especially for social science subjects.
Victoria: [Asking for help] can be challenging for some international students. It was for me
particularly because I come from a culture where students aren’t encouraged to directly ap-
proach instructors for help as it may indicate a lack of ability to grasp the knowledge or learn
on their own. ...For me personally, I relied on the Internet (e.g., YouTube, Google) for aca-
demic support as well as journals and articles to better understand concepts. Being in school
for a long time helps in knowing who or where to go to for help because you become famil-
iar with the process and begin to learn how to navigate yourself to get the help/support you
need. Delaying to ask professors for help assuming that they already have a lot on their plate;
don’t want to be an annoyance or waste their time on something I can probably teach myself
about.
We both identified we need academic support in our language, presentation, and publication, but in
various ways due to our different backgrounds. Zhen, as a non-native English speaker, from China,
needed help in speaking and expressing in English and understanding scholars’ presentations and
questions because it took time for her to translate and reflect on the contents. In contrast, Victoria
from Cameroon spoke English in her country but with a different accent. Due to Victoria’s quiet-
ness, although she had no difficulty in talking or expressing herself, she had challenges in communi-
cation and presentations.
Our interviews further elaborated that faculty need support to reach beyond the White curriculum
and to design an internationalized curriculum. Zhen shared her concern that the curriculum was
White, and there was “not any international background covering it. Maybe it is because our region
doesn’t pay attention to the internationalization of higher education.” Victoria described that:
It can be challenging here for professors at times because they are operating under a one-size
fits all model within the curriculum...we have to acknowledge that the ones [professors] that
are willing to help, usually have to go out of their way to provide extra time, effort and re-
sources to meet the needs of a student who can benefit from a different teaching style.
Financial support
From different backgrounds and with different visa status, we both reported that we struggled with
financial situations. Zhen used metaphors and images that conveyed how they were regarded as inter-
national students, then contrasted that with the realities of her life. We described that we had to pay a
large number of tuition fees but with limited employment opportunities. The emphasis on networks
with international students was illustrated by Zhen, who described she had no financial support from
her graduate institution. International students are considered as an ATM, which means universities
can withdraw money from them unlimitedly. “There was no scholarship or assistantship for any in-
ternational graduate students. I feel I’m like an ATM machine. In China, if we say one is our ATM
Hou & Jam
773
machine, which means we can withdraw money from them anytime. My university is withdrawing
money whenever it wants.” Victoria described, “Tuition is challenging. Sometimes when I think
about it, I’m shocked that I’ve made it this far.” However, Victoria mentioned that there are some
opportunities in place that can support international students financially if they are aware of them.
These did not come easily and you needed to speak to the right people to learn about them.
Victoria: I joined clubs and organizations on campus that provided some sort of financial
assistance through scholarship or subsidies to cover tuition. For example, being a part of the
student body senate helped me a great deal. This opportunity waived or subsidized my tui-
tion for every semester I was elected as a student senator. When I got into graduate school, I
also learned very quickly to apply for teaching or research assistantships. These were very
helpful, too, because they literally covered all my tuition while providing monthly stipends
for every year you were awarded one.
We both articulated that we had limited opportunities to support ourselves; we were exploited, re-
jected, and discriminated against in searching for jobs. We could only apply for lower-paid and lower-
status jobs. Zhen described, “At my previous university in the US, I applied for several on-campus
jobs, but I only get the custodian job up to 20 hours each week. Once I applied for a daycare job on
campus, I was rejected due to my nationality even though I had a rich experience taking care of kids.
... Even though off-campus jobs could pay higher salaries, I cannot work off-campus because it is il-
legal; otherwise, I would be sent back to my country.”
Administrative support
Despite the presence of international students in U.S. institutions, our interviews revealed a gap of
cultural training for administrative staff, particularly for faculty, in understanding the various cultures
international students come from and the lack of knowledge in internationalization or the interna-
tionalization of the curriculum. Such gaps directly affect how quickly international students assimilate
into American postsecondary learning culture and how they perform academically. Zhen’s experi-
ences with the language reveal that academically, language barriers can impact how international stu-
dents perform in class, including assignment writing, understanding lectures, oral and written exami-
nations, and the ability to ask questions in class. Victoria described that she had to learn to adapt to
the new discussion-based learning environment in graduate school.
Zhen: I want to participate in the classroom by answering and asking questions, but I was
worried that my answer was wrong, or my questions were so easy so that my professors and
classmates would think I am stupid. ... For this situation, if my professors could encourage
me, I think I would be more active in class.
Victoria: When I started going to college, I did not speak in any of my classes. It hurt my
grade in some of the courses that required active and verbal participation. It wasn’t until I
was pulled out of class and told by an instructor that not participating could hurt my grade
and I had to explain to her that the reason I didn’t speak in class is because in my culture,
unless signaled approval or being called upon, speaking or talking without request by the
teacher was considered disrespectful.
Both Zhen and Victoria agree that, while faculty may lack the training to recognize such needs for
students, lack of funding from administration may also impact the accessibility of these resources for
instructors to provide to their students. Deep state cuts in funding for higher education over the last
decade have contributed to financial challenges that have also limited systems of support and re-
sources international students could benefit from, such as interpretative services in the classroom.
Interviews in this study also revealed the changing policies on international student statuses and how
it affected their academic experiences. Zhen disclosed feelings of fear, discomfort, and isolation given
the visa status restrictions for international students and how constant changes to these policies
sometimes caused confusion, misinformation, and discrimination against international students. A
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
774
lack of organizational knowledge among administrative staff to better inform or advise international
students about the changes to visa statuses as mandated by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Ser-
vices (USCIS) may cause severe implications to the statuses of international students studying in
American institutions.
Zhen: I feel unsafe. It doesn’t only mean physical safety, more about status safety. Since
President Trump took office, there has been a big shift in immigration policies. I feel so un-
stable and I have to be very careful about my visa status. The USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services) policy went into effect August 9, 2018, which determined interna-
tional students’ unlawful presence time spent out of lawful immigration status would be rec-
orded immediately from the first day of violation. But you know, the immigration policies
are very complicated and keep changing, how I can know that. If I stayed in the U.S. after
180 days of unlawful presence, I would trigger a three-year bar, which means I couldn’t enter
the U.S. in three years. When I read the news a 17-year-old Palestinian student Ajjawi was
detained for eight hours at Boston Logan International Airport and was sent back home to
Lebanon. The reason was that an immigration office claimed she found people posting polit-
ical points of view that oppose the US, even though she discovered nothing Ajjawi posted
himself. I feel horrible about it. Now I don’t want to post anything on social media because I
don’t want to be in trouble. One thing really pisses me off is that my husband wanted to
transfer to my current university because I am here. However, my current university rejected
him, and the reason was that he wanted to immigrate to the US. What a ridiculous reason! If
I were not here, how could my husband want to come here to study? Plus he is at a better
university. What we can do? Nothing. Now we have to be separate from each other. It is
such a pain. We just got married in May, and now we can’t live together
Community support
The interviews revealed feelings of alienation for international students in the community. These
feelings were manifested in how community members would react or respond to actions or practices
that may seem “strange” or “foreign” to typical American norms and practices.
Zhen: Once I had dinner with my friends, I asked the waiter if he could microwave my salad
for me because I will be sick if I have cold dish. Then my friend said that, “You are such a
weirdo. Who would microwave the salad”? Another example is that in the first beginning,
my American friends would feel confused when I drank hot water in a restaurant.
As Zhen described, such perceptions and responses made “it difficult to be involved in their life as
good friends and to understand their culture.” However, both Zhen and Victoria agree that when it
comes to community support, faith-based organizations helped provide opportunities to learn about
the culture and resources to help international students assimilate into the community. Zhen: One
good way for me is to be active in the church. Everyone is very friendly and kind. They invited me to
have dinner at their houses, which gave me better opportunities to experience the local culture. I like
the peaceful environment, and friendly people.
Victoria: Faith-based groups can provide great support for international students. Interna-
tional students are very appreciative of their support especially when the support is genuine
and not with intentions to obtain conversion to their religion.
The interviews also revealed how political views and practices shaped the experiences of international
students in the community. It was clear that international students were often mistaken as targets of
prejudice or discrimination, especially if their physical appearances were similar to that of targeted
groups. Notably, Chinese students were targeted in this pandemic.
Zhen: When I was walking on campus wearing a mask, a male American student looked at
me and suddenly ran away from me. Once, I wore a mask on my way home from my even-
ing class, one American male student said something to me, which I didn’t understand. He
Hou & Jam
775
was walking in front me, but he suddenly stopped and turned in another direction because
he didn’t want to walk with me. I guess he thought I might have the virus.
Victoria: I remember a friend of mine (who was an international student) tell me that some-
times she felt discriminated against because people often assumed she was “Mexican” even
though she was Nepalese.
Zhen also described that her friends in the community “got burgled, and their car got smashed. Now
the universities in the Middle East have blocked her friends’ universities.” Such treatments leave in-
ternational student populations in fear and isolation and force them to maneuver cautiously off-cam-
pus.
DISCUSSION
The duoethnographic study helps us, as both researchers and international doctoral students, explore
and examine our dialectical relationships within our lived stories and experiences (Sawyer & Norris,
2013). We interpret international students’ experiences and needs and how to negotiate them equita-
bly in studying in U.S. universities through internationalization of the curriculum. The three dimen-
sions and emphasis of international education equity address international students’ needs in aca-
demia, administration, finance, and community areas. The support from academia and administration
as a formal curriculum in an institutional context provides teaching, learning, training activities, and
experiences among students, staff, and faculty (Leask, 2015). The support from financial institutions
and community as an informal curriculum in local and institutional contexts contributes to students’
access, cultural, and emotional needs. Our findings support the collaboration among international
students, higher education institutions, and the community to achieve curriculum internationalization
to build an equitable and welcoming environment for international doctoral students.
As supported by O’Meara et al. (2017), this duoethnography indicates that effective academic sup-
port for international students requires instructional strategies and teaching styles to better cope with
the learning barriers or limitations international doctoral students face when compared to their do-
mestic counterparts. Even if international doctoral students are required to have the same textbooks
and receive the same instruction from their professors, their academic success and learning satisfac-
tion can be better facilitated if a range of teaching and learning strategies, assessments, and profes-
sional practices are implemented (Liu et al., 2010). Our findings also indicate that international doc-
toral students might feel that, when grading, faculty tend to pay more attention to their assignments,
particularly for writing, compared to other students. Another significant barrier international doctoral
students face upon arrival to the United States is the language, which may significantly affect their
ability to communicate. Research supports the fact that international doctoral students have a strong
need for language support and practice opportunities throughout their academic study (Isomine,
2015; K. Yan & Berliner, 2013).
Also, it is noteworthy to mention that the variations between Ph.D. and Ed.D. may vary. Ed.D. pro-
grams require more administrative and practical focus within coursework with the capability to work
while attending classes. Ph.D. programs are more research-intensive, requiring more tuition and re-
search funding to publish and present in conferences. Considering these factors, international doc-
toral students in Ed.D programs would benefit from internship opportunities that provide practical
training in administrative roles while international doctoral students in Ph.D. programs would benefit
from assistantships with more access to funding to help support their focus on research.
International students’ financial needs are often not considered because host institutions tend to re-
gard international students as ‘cash cows’ and rich (Cantwell, 2019; Ma, 2020). International students
often feel that being non-citizens disqualifies them for job opportunities or internships within the
community. This result ties well with previous studies (Arkoudis et al., 2009), wherein international
students feel discriminated against for employment opportunities in their institutions. A lack of fund-
ing in higher education is challenging and concerning for students (Alkathiri & Olson, 2019). Such
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
776
findings indicate the importance of providing financial support as informal curriculum for institu-
tions to take responsibility and the necessary steps to provide staff training and competence to elimi-
nate such biases in employment.
Administrative support to the formal curriculum is an institutional-wide recognition and effort for
faculty, staff, and community training. Our diverse classrooms have awakened the urgent need for
culturally competent educators and practitioners in education (NEA, 2017). When applied to educa-
tion, cultural competence centers on the awareness of one’s own cultural identity and views about
differences (NEA, 2008). Our findings indicate that orientations need to consider the specific needs
of international graduate students compared to their undergraduate counterparts. Also, workshops
and seminars should be provided during post-arrival orientations that address American value sys-
tems and culture to help international students with information about life in the United States (K.
Yan & Berliner, 2013). Due to the unwelcoming and unstable environment, international students
have to be more careful and more aware of their interactions (Pottie-Sherman, 2018). Notably, under
the current administration, it is essential for the international office to emphasize immigration poli-
cies changes and provide training for international students so that they can better protect themselves
from xenophobia, racism, and rejection.
While negotiating the experiences and needs, our findings address the importance of community sup-
port in internationalizing the curriculum in an informal setting. The community remains a rich source
to which international students can and should build such networks of support and connection. Our
findings suggest that some of the most significant stressors, specifically for Chinese students, are so-
cial isolation and inability to integrate with domestic students, making cultural adjustment and social
integration more difficult than academic adjustment (K. Yan & Berliner, 2013). Our findings also
supported Okusolubo’s (2018) study on challenges like cultural shock, isolation, and tuition cost that
Cameroon and other African international students face in the United States. Some of these chal-
lenges can be reduced or limited if academic institutions who accept the admission of African inter-
national students created supportive systems to assist them before they are in need. These systems
could facilitate detailed orientation programs to help orient, educate, and integrate them into the new
environment and community. Okusolubo (2018) also suggested that orientations should cover broad
social issues like drunk driving, public indecency, anger control, sexual harassment, and many socially
tense issues to help them have an awareness of the culture and reduce social challenges faced in
America. Also, institutions are encouraged to be more student-oriented rather than policy-oriented in
aspects concerning students’ academic courses, tuition, and financial aid to support students’ aca-
demic success (Okusolubo, 2018). Social support also plays a significant role in doctoral students be-
cause it helps them to feel welcomed, reassured, valued, and included (Mantai, 2019).
It is also noteworthy to mention that financial support, administrative support, increased cultural
competence, and social isolation are common complaints from the general graduate student body.
However, for international graduate students, these challenges can be different in comparison to their
domestic counterparts. First, a difference in academic culture may add to the existing stresses of lan-
guage or cultural barriers. Depending on a students’ background, one may have a difficult time un-
derstanding the grading of assignments. According to Sovic (2008), for example, international stu-
dents sometimes find it confusing when more importance is given to the process of working on the
assignment (e.g., creating drafts/outlines for an article) than on the completion of the composition
itself. Such cultural differences in the academic context of teaching and learning present additional
challenges for international students. Secondly, international doctoral students’ financial support may
differ in that though they may have been granted assistantships, they may also be supporting multiple
family members in their home countries financially. The cultural expectations and responsibility as a
breadwinner for some of these students present additional challenges in their finances. Lastly, social
isolation may be different for international students because they cannot just travel back home in the
upcoming school break due to the distance and cost. Such a burden can be lonely and stressful at
times.
Hou & Jam
777
The findings highlight the need for research universities to address international doctoral students’
concerns, develop and innovate practices to ensure international education equity, and help interna-
tional doctoral students to study in a safe and welcoming environment. The above dialogue calls for
urgent and socially just transformations of existing perceptions deeply embedded in international stu-
dent narratives while promoting in exchange the understanding of lived-experiences from students
and its potential to inform and shape curriculum and administrative practice in higher education. The
reader of this duoethnographic study is encouraged to engage in a conversational currere with the
texts and is challenged to investigate and identify the various contradictions embedded in diverse stu-
dent experiences, which in turn encourage deeper questioning (Sameshima, 2013).
LIMITATIONS
The first limitation regards ethical questions surrounding collaboration in duoethnography. As
Breault (2016) notes, because of the “potentially intimate relationship between co-researchers, the
ethical stance between participants [must be] deliberately negotiated and requires constant vigilance”
(p. 779). We want to echo Breault’s (2016) thoughts here. We found that checking in with each other
repeatedly about our choices to reveal or remove information has been vitally important given the
dialogue we had with one another. Another limitation that surfaced in this project was the question
of what other international students might feel about the questions we explored and how our re-
sponses in the duoethnography may relate to their own experiences. We acknowledge generating a
degree of the ambivalence of the experiences of other international students, given the differences in
country of origin, culture, age, gender, economic status, program of study, and institution.
In addition, we acknowledge that our positionality as both researchers and participants of this study
is distinguished in the roles we take during this study’s analytical process. On the one hand, the
voices we have represented are real and recognizable as our own while at the same time understood
as textual selves, or discursive constructs (Kelly, 2015). This challenge positioned us in starting points
and pathways continually traveling between the hyphen that connects post- and -critical in our inter-
pretation and understanding of the selves we were constituting. When it came time to represent and
interpret the selves in the text, we both attempted to cultivate a level of detachment. Rather than au-
thentic versions of us, we imagined Victoria and Zhen as social actors who articulated broader cul-
tural scripts and meanings and invited each other to comment on, and edit, both speaking positions
in the duoethnography, and to act as interpreters of the discourses that circulate within them (Bur-
ford & Mitchell, 2019).
Despite these limitations, our findings provide valuable insights into establishing international educa-
tion equity in internationalization of the curriculum in academia, finance, administration, and com-
munity areas for building an authentic, inclusive, equitable, supportive, and welcoming formal and
informal learning environment for international students. We offer valuable insights to investigate the
sociocultural context of international students in doctoral programs in U.S institutions.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The findings suggest further critical research into the rationale of the difficulty in international educa-
tion equity and the impact of equity in higher education curriculum and learning spaces. Thus, re-
turning to our conversation of understanding the emerging themes to achieve international educa-
tional equity through curriculum internationalization, we offer the following suggestions for faculty
and administrators working with international doctoral students.
First, faculty and administrators need to reconsider the quality of teaching and how to ensure the
quality of teaching for an effective, inclusive, and responsive curriculum and environment for inter-
national doctoral students. Faculty need to understand the educational culture “where students aren’t
encouraged to directly approach instructors for help as it may indicate a lack of ability to grasp
knowledge or learn on their own” (Victoria’s quote) and to encourage students to ask questions.
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
778
Faculty should expect and encourage international doctoral students to participate in scholarly re-
search or activities so that students could be included in the learning community. Gaining the sup-
port of mentors could be helpful to student academic success and professional development.
Second, faculty and administrators need to have cultural training and awareness of the influence of
the current geopolitical context to international doctoral students. According to Zhen and Victoria,
the changes of immigration policies on international student status cause “confusion,” “anxiety,”
“isolation,” and “uncertainty” about their future. Cultural and visa training workshops would equip
faculty and administrators with cultural understanding, international doctoral students’ concerns and
situations. During the pandemic, more attention needs to be paid to international doctoral students
through weekly check in from their advisors or mentors, particularly to Chinese/Asian students for
being targeted. Last but not least, faculty and administrators need to understand international doc-
toral students’ financial situation and to provide financial support to particular students in need. For
some universities with limited or no graduate assistantships, more on-campus working opportunities
should be provided to international doctoral students.
In terms of curriculum internationalization, students and faculty both experience difficulties in transi-
tions because they are moving to a new learning/teaching environment. While institutions are
providing support for international students, it is indispensable to provide support, such as cultural
training, relationship building, financial and language support, for faculty and administrators through
workshops or seminars to build a safe, inclusive, and welcoming environment. Furthermore, continu-
ous assessment of teaching and learning drives program effectiveness and improvement. However, it
may not be practical or sustainable by providing only a checklist. Instead, this requires ongoing plan-
ning and practice to identify obstacles and impacts of achieving equity through curriculum interna-
tionalization.
CONCLUSION
In pursuit of graduate studies in the United States, we explore the experiences of international educa-
tion equity from the perspectives of two international students from China and Cameroon as it re-
lates to the internationalization of the curriculum in doctoral programs in the United States. This
project has been one through which we have engaged in critical conversations about international
doctoral students’ experiences in addressing the gaps and needs of equity in higher education, partic-
ularly the gap in the current Trump administration. After writing, reading, and re-writing multiple
drafts of this duoethnography, it became clear that we needed to engage in a final reflective conversa-
tion again. We needed to talk candidly and explicitly about the ethnic differences between us: Zhen, a
doctoral student from China and Victoria, a doctoral student from Cameroon. The revelations in this
conversation were quite poignant. Although our working relationship sparked a transformative learn-
ing experience for both of us, the lingering gaps uncovered the associated challenges in aiming to dis-
rupt normative equity gaps of international students in American higher education institutions.
Particularly, we recognized a variance in our experiences in American higher education, given the dif-
fering durations of times we have resided in the states. The social support differences also play a big
role in how we compartmentalize and seek support in our experiences. Victoria has her immediate
family in the states. Rather than leaving some of these complexities unsaid, we acknowledge and shed
light on the unique dynamics that international students face. This study was situated in a conceptual
framework focused on exploring the various gaps in curriculum equity of higher education interna-
tionalization initiatives. Our examination of academic support, financial support, administrative sup-
port, and community support dove into more profound reflections of our questions to further mu-
tual understanding and meaning. In examining these questions directly, we unearthed the subcon-
scious ways in which gaps of equity pervaded this study.
The dialogue of this duoethnography contributed to the awareness of international students’ strug-
gles in the cultural and academic adaptation process, and language barriers, as well as the need for
Hou & Jam
779
greater interaction with domestic students. This study also addressed the inequitable gaps affecting
international students in higher education today. This awareness can serve as a foundational base for
higher education administration, counselors, and community support groups to create meaningful
understanding and relationships with international students upon their arrival. The recommendations
for international student support can also be implemented in higher education administration prac-
tice and curriculum to better support host institutions serve international doctoral students effec-
tively. Future research may use international educational equity to explore diverse international doc-
toral student experiences, needs, and challenges in studying at U.S. research universities, and how
those experiences, needs, and challenges affect their academic success.
In conclusion, this duoethnography highlights the importance of equity in the transformative learn-
ing experience from the vantage point of international doctoral students. We experienced transfor-
mation in that our personal views or horizons for becoming scholars were expanded through this
learning partnership. Further, this study opens up the possibilities for both educators and administra-
tors to recognize the impact of equity in the curriculum and learning spaces of higher education, and
how higher education institutions can better support international students to study in a safe and wel-
coming environment in the United States.
REFERENCES
Alkathiri, M. S., & Olson, M. R. (2019). Preparing doctoral students for the professoriate through a formal pre-
paratory course. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 33-67. https://doi.org/10.28945/4174
Allen, W. R. (2005). A forward glance in the mirror: Diversity challenged–access, equity and success in higher
education. Educational Researcher, 34(7), 18-23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x034007018
Ammigan, R. (2019). Institutional satisfaction and recommendation: What really matters to international stu-
dents? Journal of International Students, 9(1), 262-281. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v9i1.260
Andrade, M. S. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities: Adjustment factors. Journal of
Research in International Education, 5(2), 131-154.
Arkoudis, S., Hawthorne, L., Baik, C., Hawthorne, G., O’Loughlin, K., Leach, D., & Bexley, E. (2009). The
impact of English language proficiency and workplace readiness on the employment outcomes of tertiary
international students (Full Report., 157 pp.). Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education,
University of Melbourne. https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=imrc
Asher, N. (2007). Made in the (multicultural) U.S.A.: Unpacking tensions of race, culture, gender, and sexuality
in education. Education Researcher, 36(2), 65-74. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x07299188
Ashong, C., & Commander, N. (2017). Brazilian and Nigerian international students’ conceptions of learning in
higher education. Journal of International Students, 7(2), 163-187. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i2.319
Astin, A. W. & Oseguera, L. (2004). The declining “equity” of American higher education. Review of Higher Edu-
cation, 27(3), 321-341. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2004.0001
Atuahene, F., & Owusu-Ansah, A. (2013). A descriptive assessment of higher education access, participation,
equity, and disparity in Ghana. Sage Open, 3(3), 2158244013497725.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013497725
Ballakrishnen, S. S., & Silver, C. (2019). A new minority? International JD students in US Law Schools. Law &
Social Inquiry, 44(3), 647-678. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2018.12
Bartlett, T., & Fischer, K. (2011, November 3). The China conundrum. The New York Times. https://www.ny-
times.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/the-china-conundrum.html
Breault, R. (2016). Emerging issues in duoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
29(6), 777-794. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1162866
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
780
Burford, J., & Mitchell, C. (2019). Varied starting points and pathways: A duoethnographic exploration of ‘di-
verse’ students’ uneven capacities to aspire to doctoral education. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Meth-
odology, 10(1), 28-44. https://doi.org/10.7577/rerm.3242
Burke, A. (2018). The implementation of the extreme visa vetting policy and its effects on international stu-
dents and scholars. Capstone Collection, 3076. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/capstones/3076
Campbell, T. A. (2015). A phenomenological study on international doctoral students’ acculturation experi-
ences at a US university. Journal of International Students, 5(3), 285-299.
Cantwell, B. (2019). Are international students cash cows? Examining the relationship between new interna-
tional undergraduate enrollments and institutional revenue at public colleges and universities in the US.
Journal of International Students, 512, 512-525.
Chang, H. (2008). Autoethnography. In H. Chang, Autoeothnography as Method (pp. 43-57). Left Coast Press.
Chao, X. (2016). Community service learning as critical curriculum: Promoting international students’ second
language practices. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 13(4), 289-318.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2016.1173513
Cheung, P. T. A. (2010). Depressive symptoms and help-seeking preferences among Chinese (including Mainland China, Hong
Kong, and Taiwan) international students [Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston]. ProQuest Disserta-
tions and Theses Global.
Chevalier, A. (2011). Subject choice and earnings of UK graduates. Economics of Education Review, 30(6), 1187-
1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.04.007
Chiu, A. (2020, March 20). Trump has no qualms about calling coronavirus the ‘Chinese Virus.’ That’s a dan-
gerous attitude, experts say. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/na-
tion/2020/03/20/coronavirus-trump-chinese-virus/
Chung, A., Y., Chen, K., Jung, G., & Li, M. (2018). Thinking outside the box: The national context for educa-
tional preparation and adaptation among Chinese and Korean international students. Research in Comparative
& International Education, 13(3), https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499918791364.
Colclough, C., Kingdon, G., & Patrinos, H. (2010). The changing pattern of wage returns to education and its
implications. Development Policy Review, 28(6), 733-747. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2010.00507.x
Constantine, M. C., Anderson, G. M., Berkel, L. A., Caldwell, L. D., & Utsey, S. O. (2005). Examining the cul-
tural adjustment experiences of African international college students: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Coun-
seling Psychology, 52, 57-66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.1.57
Corson, D. (2001). Language diversity and education. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
David, M. E. (2004). Equality and equity in higher education: Learning to develop new paradigms from the
U.S. experience? European Educational Research Journal, 3(4), 813-819.
https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2004.3.4.8
David, M. E. (2012). Changing policy discourses on equity and diversity in UK higher education: What is the
evidence? In T. Hinton-Smith (Ed.), Widening participation in higher education (pp. 22-36). Palgrave Macmillan,
London.
Department of Homeland Security. (2018). The National Vetting Center.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/02/06/national-vetting-center
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of dis-
tributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 137-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb01000.x
Dussault, S. B. (2018). Who needs DACA or the DREAM Act? How the ordinary use of executive discretion
can help (some) childhood arrivals become citizens. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 22, 441-449.
https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/26745-lcb222article5dussaultpdf
Hou & Jam
781
Espinoza, O. (2007). Solving the equity–equality conceptual dilemma: A new model for analysis of the educa-
tional process. Educational Research, 49(4), 343-363. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880701717198
Evivie, L. G. (2009). Challenges faced by African international students at a metropolitan research university: A phenomenolog-
ical case study [Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte]. https://li-
bres.uncg.edu/ir/uncc/f/Evivie_uncc_0694D_10077.pdf
Galati, M. (2018, May 15). United States: USCIS reverses unlawful presence policy, risking draconian conse-
quences for students, exchange visitors, and their families. Mondaq Business Briefing. https://ad-
vance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:5SB7-R1C1-JCF5-V26H-00000-
00&context=1516831
Gao, Y. (2019). Experiences of Chinese international doctoral students in Canada who withdrew: A narrative
inquiry. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14(1), 259-276. https://doi.org/10.28945/4240
García, E. & Weiss, E. (2017). Education inequalities at the school starting gate: Gaps, trends, and strategies to address them.
Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/education-inequalities-at-the-school-starting-
gate/
Gareis, E. (2012). Intercultural friendship: Effects of home and host region. Journal of International and Intercul-
tural Communication, 5(4), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2012.691525
Gautam, C., Lowery, C. L., Mays, C., & Durant, D. (2016). Challenges for global learners: A qualitative study of
the concerns and difficulties of international students. Journal of International Students, 6(2), 501-526.
Glass, C. R., Gómez, E., & Urzua, A. (2014). Recreation, intercultural friendship, and international students’
adaptation to college by region of origin. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 42, 104-117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.05.007
Gopalan, N., Beutell, N. J., & Middlemiss, W. (2019). International students’ academic satisfaction and turno-
ver intentions. Quality Assurance in Education, 27(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-01-2019-0001
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Sage.
Guion, L. A. (2002). Triangulation: Establishing the validity of qualitative studies. EDIS.
https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-fy394-2002
Guo, Y., & Guo, S. (2017). Internationalization of Canadian higher education: Discrepancies between policies
and international student experiences. Studies in Higher Education, 42, 851-868.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1293874
Hamann, E. T., & Morgenson, C. (2017). Dispatches from flyover country: Four appraisals of impacts of
Trump’s immigration policy on families, schools, and communities. Anthropology & Education Quarterly,
48(4), 393-402. https://doi.org/10.1111/aeq.12214
Hanushek, E. A., Ruhose, J., & Woessmann, L. (2015). Economic gains for U.S. states from educational reform (No.
w21770). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w21770
Hanushek, E. A. & Woessmann, L. (2012). The economic benefit of educational reform in the European Un-
ion. CESifo Economic Studies 58(1), 73–109. https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifr032
Hayes, A. (2019). Inclusion, epistemic democracy and international students: The teaching excellence framework and education
policy. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11401-5
Heng, T. T. (2017). Voices of Chinese international students in USA colleges: ‘I want to tell them that … ‘.
Studies in Higher Education, 42(5), 833-850. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1293873
Heng, T. T. (2018). Chinese international students’ advice to incoming first-year students: Involving students in
conversations with them, not about them. Journal of College Student Development, 59(2), 232-238.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2018.0020
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.
Human Rights Watch. (2018). Cameroon: events of 2018. World report 2019. https://www.hrw.org/world-re-
port/2019/country-chapters/cameroon
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
782
Ilieva, R., & Waterstone, B. (2013). Curriculum discourses within a TESOL program for international students:
Affording possibilities for academic and professional identities. TCI (Transnational Curriculum Inquiry), 10(1),
16-37.
Institute of International Education. (2019). Places of origin. https://www.iie.org/en/Research-and-In-
sights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students/Places-of-Origin
Isomine, S. (2015). Interview and assessment: Practice of international student services in higher education.
Online Submission. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED555614.pdf
James, R. (2007). Social equity in a mass, globalised higher education environment: The unresolved issue of widening access to
university. University of Melbourne, Centre for the Study of Higher Education. http://web.educa-
tion.unimelb.edu.au/news/lectures/pdf/richardjamestranscript.pdf
Jones Jr., R. G., & Calafell, B. M. (2012). Contesting neoliberalism through critical pedagogy, intersectional re-
flexivity, and personal narrative: Queer tales of academia. Journal of Homosexuality, 59(7), 957–981.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2012.699835
Kaur, H. (2019, January 29). A Duke professor warned Chinese students to speak English. CNN.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/28/health/duke-professor-warns-chinese-students-speak-english-
trnd/index.html
Kaya, J. (2020). Inside the international student world: Challenges, opportunities, and imagined communities.
Journal of International Students, 10(1), pp. 124-144. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v10i1.1031
Kelly, F. (2015). A day in the life (and death) of a public university. Higher Education Research & Development,
34(6), 1153-1163. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1024628
Khanal, J., & Gaulee, U. (2019). Challenges of international students from pre-departure to post-study: A litera-
ture review. Journal of International Students, 9(2), 560–581. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v9i2.673
Khoshlessan, R., & Das, K. P. (2017). Analyzing international students’ study anxiety in higher education. Jour-
nal of International Students, 7(2).
Kim, D., & Roh, J. Y. (2017). International doctoral graduates from China and South Korea: A trend analysis
of the association between the selectivity of undergraduate and that of US doctoral institutions. Higher Ed-
ucation: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 73, 615-635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-
016-9984-0
Kumi–Yeboah, A., & James, W. (2014). Transformative learning experiences of international graduate students
from Asian countries. Journal of Transformative Education, 12(1), 25-53.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344614538120
Larkin, K., Rowan, L., Garrick, B., & Beavis, C. (2016). Student perspectives on first year experience initiatives
designed for pre-service teachers in their first weeks of university study. Journal of University Teaching &
Learning Practice, 13(1), 7.
Le, T., & Gardner, S. K. (2010). Understanding the doctoral experience of Asian international students in the
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of College Student Development, 51(3), 252.
Leask, B. (2009). Using formal and informal curricula to improve interactions between home and international
students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(2), 205-221.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315308329786
Leask, B. (2015). Internationalizing the curriculum. Routledge.
Lee, J. (2010). International students’ experiences and attitudes at a US host institution: Self-reports and future
recommendations. Journal of Research in International Education, 9(1), 66-84.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240909356382
Lee, J., Jon, J. E., & Byun, K. (2017). Neo-racism and neo-nationalism within East Asia: The experiences of
international students in South Korea. Journal of Studies in International Education, 21(2), 136-155.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315316669903
Lee, J., & Opio, T. (2011). Coming to America: Challenges and difficulties faced by African student athletes.
Sport, Education and Society, 16(5), 629-644. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2011.601144
Hou & Jam
783
Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Pri-
mary Care, 4(3), 324-327. https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.161306
Li, Y. (2018). Rethinking education through self-study: An international doctoral student’s narrative. Reflective
Practice, 19(4), 530-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2018.1538946
Lin, S. Y., & Scherz, S. D. (2014). Challenges facing Asian international graduate students in the US: Pedagogi-
cal considerations in higher education. Journal of International Students, 4(1), 16-33.
Liu, X., Liu, S., Lee, S., & Magjuka, R. J. (2010). Cultural differences in online learning: International student
perceptions. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 177-188.
Lynch, K., & Baker, J. (2005). Equality in education: An equality of condition perspective. School Field, 3(2),
131-164.
Ma, Y. (2020). Ambitious and anxious: How Chinese college students succeed and struggle in American higher education. Co-
lumbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/ma--18458
Madge, C., Raghuram, P., & Noxolo, P. (2015). Conceptualizing international education: From international
student to international study. Progress in Human Geography, 39(6), 681-701.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132514526442
Maltz, E. M. (2018). The Constitution and the Trump travel ban. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 22, 391-412.
https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/26743-lcb222article3maltzpdf
Mantai, L. (2019). ‘A source of sanity’: The role of social support for doctoral candidates’ belonging and be-
coming. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14(1), 367-382. https://doi.org/10.28945/4275
Maringe, F. (2010). The meanings of globalization and internationalization in HE: Findings from a world sur-
vey. In F. Maringe & N. Foskett (Eds.), Globalization and internationalization in higher education – Theoretical,
strategic and management perspectives (pp. 17-34). Continuum. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350091122.ch-
0002
McDermott, M., Mahanty, S., & Schreckenberg, K. (2013). Examining equity: A multidimensional framework
for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services. Environmental Science & Policy, 33, 416-427.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.006
McKinley, M. T. (2019). Supervising the sojourner: Multicultural supervision of international students. Training
and Education in Professional Psychology, 13(3), 174-179. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000269
Moores, L., & Popadiuk, N. (2011). Positive aspects of international student transitions: A qualitative inquiry.
Journal of College Student Development, 52, 291-306. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2011.0040
Mwangi, C. A. G., Changamire, N., & Mosselson, J. (2018). An intersectional understanding of African interna-
tional graduate students’ experiences in U.S. higher education. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12(1).
https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000076
NAFSA. (2019). Economic value statistics. https://www.nafsa.org/policy-and-advocacy/policy-resources/nafsa-
international-student-economic-value-tool-v2
NAFSA. (2020). Losing talent 2020: An economic and foreign policy risk America can’t ignore.
https://www.nafsa.org/sites/default/files/media/document/nafsa-losing-talent.pdf
Natarajan, N. (2017, March 12). Trump govt. puts H1B workers’ spouses on thin ice; H4 work authorisation in
spotlight - Analysis. Eurasia Review. https://www.eurasiareview.com/12032017-trump-govt-puts-h1b-
workers-spouses-on-thin-ice-h4-work-authorisation-in-spotlight-analysis/
National Education Association. (2008). Promoting educators’ cultural competence to better serve culturally diverse students.
http://beta.nsea-nv.org/assets/docs/PB13_CulturalCompetence08.pdf
National Education Association. (2017). Diversity toolkit: Cultural competence for educators. http://ftp.arizo-
naea.org/tools/30402.htm
Neubauer, B. E., Witkop, C. T., & Varpio, L. (2019). How phenomenology can help us learn from the experi-
ences of others. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(2), 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0509-2
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
784
Norris, J. & Sawyer, R. D. (2004). Null and hidden curricula of sexual orientation: A dialogue on the curreres of
the absent presence and the present absence. In L. Coia, M. Birch, N. J. Brooks, E. Heilman, S. Mayer, A.
Mountain, & P. Pritchard (Eds.), Democratic responses in an era of standardization (pp. 139-159). Educator’s In-
ternational Press.
Norris, J. & Sawyer, R. D. (Eds.) (2016). Theorizing curriculum studies, teacher education, and research through duoethno-
graphic pedagogy. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51745-6
Norris, J., Sawyer, R. D., & Lund, D. (2012). Duoethnography: Dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research
(Vol. 7). Left Coast Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315430058
Okusolubo, G. S. (2018) Academic and social challenges faced by African international students in collegiate
institutions in America. International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 7(2), 514.
https://doi.org/10.4172/2162-6359.1000514
O’Meara, K., Griffin, K. A., Kuvaeva, A., Nyunt, G., & Robinson, T. N. (2017). Sense of belonging and its
contributing factors in graduate education. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12(12), 251-279.
https://doi.org/10.28945/3903
Pierce, S., Bolter, J., & Selee, A. (2018). Trump’s first year on immigration policy: Rhetoric vs. reality. Migration Policy
Institute (MPI). https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/trump-first-year-immigration-policy-rhetoric-
vs-reality
Pierce, S., & Meissner, D. (2017). Trump executive order on refugees and travel ban: A brief review. Migration Policy In-
stitute (MPI). https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/trump-executive-order-refugees-and-travel-ban-
brief-review
Pinar, W. (1975). Curerre: Toward reconceptualization. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing (pp. 396–414).
McCutchan.
Pinar, W. (1994). The method of Currere (1975). In W. Pinar (Ed.), Autobiography, politics and sexuality: Essays in
curriculum theory, 1972–1992 (pp. 19–27). Peter Lang.
Pottie-Sherman, Y. (2018). Retaining international students in northeast Ohio: Opportunities and challenges in
the ‘age of Trump’. Geoforum, 96, 32-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.07.015
Pritchard, R. M., & Skinner, B. (2002). Cross-cultural partnerships between home and international students.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 6(4), 323-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/102831502237639
Rabia, H. A., & Karkouti, I. M. (2017) A qualitative exploration of the factors affecting Arab international stu-
dents’ persistence in the United States. College Student Journal, 51(3), 347-353. https://www.ingentacon-
nect.com/contentone/prin/csj/2017/00000051/00000003/art00005
Rao, P. (2017). Learning challenges and preferred pedagogies of international students: A perspective from the
USA. International Journal of Educational Management, 31(7), 1000-1016. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-01-
2016-0001
Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2019). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. SAGE
Publications.
Rawls, J. (2009). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Rivas, J., Hale, K., & Burke, M. G. (2019). Seeking a sense of belonging: Social and cultural integration of inter-
national students with American college students. Journal of International Students, 9(2), 682-704.
https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v9i2.943
Rose-Redwood, C., & Rose-Redwood, R. (2017). Rethinking the politics of the international student experience
in the age of Trump. Journal of International Students, 7(3), I-IX. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i3.201
Sameshima, P. (2013). Duoethnography. Understanding qualitative research & duoethnography: Promoting
personal and societal change within dialogic self-study. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Stud-
ies, 11(1), 174-190.
Samoff, J. (1996). African education and development: Crisis, triumphalism, research, loss of vision. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 42(2), 121-147.
Hou & Jam
785
Sawir, E. (2013). Internationalisation of higher education curriculum: The contribution of international stu-
dents. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 11(3), 359-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2012.750477
Sawyer, R. D., & Liggett, T. (2012). Shifting positionalities: A critical discussion of a duoethnographic inquiry
of a personal curriculum of post/colonialism. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(5), 628-651.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100507
Sawyer, R. D. & Norris, J. (2012). Understanding qualitative research: Duoethnography. Oxford University Press.
Sawyer, R. D. & Norris, J. (2013). Duoethnography. Oxford University Press.
Sawyer, R. D. & Norris, J. (2015). Duoethnography. International Review of Qualitative Research, 8(1), 1–4.
Schulmann, P. (2017). African student mobility: Regional trends and recommendations for U.S. HEIs. World Education
News and Reviews. https://wenr.wes.org/2017/03/african-student-mobility-insights-and-recommenda-
tion-for-u-s-heis
Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and
social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd ed.,
pp. 189-213). Sage.
Secada, W. G. (1989). Agenda setting, enlightened self‐interest, and equity in mathematics education. Peabody
Journal of Education, 66(2), 22-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619568909538637
Seidel, J., & Hill, L. (2015). Thinking together: A duoethnographic inquiry into the implementation of a field
experience curriculum. in education, 21(2), 49-64. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1246764.pdf
Sellar, S., & Gale, T. (2011). Mobility, aspiration, voice: A new structure of feeling for student equity in higher
education. Critical Studies in Education, 52(2), 115-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2011.572826
Sovic, S. (2008). Coping with stress: The perspective of international students. Art, Design & Communication in
Higher Education, 6(3), 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.6.3.145_1
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.
Tannock, S. (2018). Educational equality and international students. Palgrave Macmillan.
Todoran, C., & Peterson, C. (2020). Should they stay or should they go? How the 2017 US Travel Ban affects
international doctoral students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(4), 440-455.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315319861344
Urquhart, C. (2012). Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical guide. Sage.
Walker, I., & Zhu, Y. (2011). Differences by degree: Evidence of the net financial rates of return to undergrad-
uate study for England and Wales. Economics of Education Review, 30(6), 1177–1186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.01.002
Weale, S. (2020, March 17). Chinese students flee UK after ‘maskaphobia’ triggered racist attacks. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/mar/17/chinese-students-flee-uk-after-maskaphobia-trig-
gered-racist-attacks
Wertz, F. J. (2005). Phenomenological research methods for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychol-
ogy, 52(2), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.167
Will, N. L. (2016). From isolation to inclusion: Learning of the experiences of Chinese international students in
U.S. Journal of International Students, 6(4), 1069-1075. https://www.ojed.org/index.php/jis/article/view/337
Wood, D. (Ed.). (2002) On Paul Ricoeur: Narrative and interpretation. Routledge.
Wu, H. (2018). Three dimensions of China’s “outward-oriented” higher education internationalization. Higher
Education, 77, 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0262-1
Xu, L., & Grant, B. (2017). International doctoral students’ becoming: A dialogic perspective. Innovations in Edu-
cation and Teaching International, 54, 570–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1318711
Duoethnography: International Education Equity for International Doctoral Students
786
Xu, L., & Hu, J. (2019). Language feedback responses, voices and identity (re)construction: Experiences of Chi-
nese international doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(6), 724-735.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1593214
Yakaboski, T., Perez-Velez, K., & Almutairi, Y. (2017). Breaking the silence: Saudi graduate student experiences
on a U.S. campus. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 11(2), 221-238.
https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000059
Yan, K. & Berliner, D. C. (2013). Chinese international students’ personal and sociocultural stressors in the
United States. Journal of College Student Development, 54(1), 62-84. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2013.0010
Yan, L., & Pei, S. (2018). “Home away from home”? How international students handle difficult and negative
experiences in American higher education. Journal of International Students, 8(1), 453–472.
Zhang, Y. L. (2016). International students in transition: Voices of Chinese doctoral students in a US research
university. Journal of International Students, 6(1), 175-194.
Zhu, L., & Reeves, P. (2019). Chinese students’ decisions to undertake postgraduate study overseas. International
Journal of Educational Management, 33(5), 999-1011. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-11-2017-0339
BIOGRAPHIES
Minghui Hou is a PhD student in the higher education program at Old
Dominion University, Norfolk. She is passionate about working with in-
ternational students to build a welcoming and supportive learning envi-
ronment. Her research interests are international education equity, inter-
nationalization of the curriculum, geopolitical tensions, neoracism, etc.
Alma Jam was born in Ambazonia (a region commonly associated with
Cameroon in West-Central Africa). She is currently a doctoral student at
Idaho State University and founder of TCOF (The Cost of Freedom)
Campaign -an anti-human trafficking awareness organization. Her passion
is driven by her quest to listen and understand others’ lived experiences
and how we can find commonality to support equity through the contri-
bution of our diverse backgrounds and knowledge.
