As digital transformation has started to bring about new norms in almost every aspect of our lives from working to shopping to banking/finance to various other areas, higher education has also experienced its impact at a significantly increased pace, with the Covid-19 pandemic having acted as a catalyst. Now, this phenomenon has been even more accelerated thanks to AI (Artificial Intelligence) becoming an integral part of our daily lives.
In this context, among the various avenues of discussions on how the new norms of higher education would be defined, the pros and cons of digital/blended study mode vs. on-campus study mode have had its place across the mediums I have been following. As such, when it comes to international education (study abroad), I have noticed that the issue of “cultural immersion” has been mentioned as one of the many benefits of international education which can -supposedly- be mostly -if not only- experienced in a fully-on-campus delivery. That said, my own recent experience as a part-time international doctoral researcher suggests this may not necessarily be the case.
Let’s start with the basics: The perceived main advantage of the fully-on-campus study mode for cultural immersion is generally based on the argument that “because those students continuously living in the country they study in throughout their programmes are naturally ‘exposed to’ that country’s culture.” Admittedly, this argument has a point, as it may indeed be a significant benefit to live within the culture to experience the country’s way of life in one’s everyday life. On the other hand, let us make the distinction between being exposed to something and immersing oneself into something clear. Considering the dictionary definitions of these two terms, the latter requires a deliberate effort to “become completely involved in something,” whereas the former looks more like a potential facilitator of this. Therefore, being exposed to a culture may indeed make it easier for one to immerse themself into that culture, but this may not be a precondition. Nor does it look like a surefire means for immersion.
In my own recent experience as a part-time doctoral researcher -now an alumnus- at a UK university in London, I believe I have been able to make the most of my time with the university, trying to expand the focus of my development well beyond the doctorate itself. I was lucky enough to be doing my doctorate in a flexibly blended mode, enabling me to interact with my supervisors and with the university in a more general sense both via digital means and in-person, depending on my availabilities and preferences -and those of my supervisors, of course, when it came to meetings with them. As such, with typically two or three 1-week campus visits each year, supported by the vast availability of digital means for getting deeper into whatever aspect of British culture I would be curious about, I believe I have come to immerse myself to a good extent into the culture of the country I was studying in while not continuously residing in.
To this end, I would adopt the “when in Rome, do as the Romans do” approach during my time in the UK, and then chase every opportunity to maintain interaction with various communities of interest be that within or outside the university, such as attending live webinars on British history hosted by various organisations, subscribing to and being an active reader of a UK newspaper, continuously listening to and interacting with UK radio channels, including live phone-ins on radio on daily matters, joining live broadcasts of cultural events, and even observing some services or events provided by a church and a cathedral.
This helped me significantly not only in judging how my research was fitting into the wider cultural context of the country, but also in further expanding my understanding on various concepts such as inclusivity, diversity, reflexivity, and the value of inter-cultural interactions. I dare say that I do not even feel like a visitor when I am in London now, but more like I am somewhere home away from home. I do even have my say on the critical issue of whether the tea or the milk goes first into the teacup!
All in all, my view is that while accepting all the vast personal development opportunities a full-time on-campus study mode provides to international students, the innovative digital means of interaction are here to be exploited for an even fuller experience of international education for many more people across diverse age groups, geographical locations, and experience levels. Blended learning, in this sense, looks to be a promising new —or alternative— normal for international education so that a much larger pool of candidates with diverse profiles can experience its benefits, while at the same time significantly expanding the target audience for higher education institutions. I, personally, hold this topic as one with significant importance as international education is an important contributor to a better, peaceful, and civilised world.
StatsLife 