Running head: STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Study Abroad Reentry: Impact On Campus Life

Kari Berkas
SDAD 5990: Graduate Project 2015
Dr. Erica Yamamura
Seattle University
June 15, 2015

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Problem Statement and Purpose

International education is becoming increasingly valued in higher education. The
president of the Institute of International Education (IIE), Dr. Allan E. Goodman, claimed that
International experience is one of the most important components of a 21st century education,
and study abroad should be viewed as an essential element of a college degree (Institute of
International Education, 2015, para. 4). The IIE also started the Generation Study Abroad
campaign in 2014, which seeks to double the amount of study abroad participants by the end of
the decade (para. 9). Due to the importance that is being placed on studying abroad, it is worth
examining study abroad participants experiences upon returning to campus to see how the
experience shapes the remainder of their campus experience.
Problem
Research has pointed to a wide variety of study abroad outcomes, ranging from personal
growth (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2009; Brown & Graham, 2009; Doyle, 2009; Franklin,
2010; Ingraham & Peterson, 2004; Miller-Perrin & Thompson, 2010; Nash, 1976; Smith,
McAuliffe, & Rippard, 2014) to professional development (Franklin, 2010; Ingraham &
Peterson, 2004; Miller-Perrin & Thompson, 2010; Trooboff, Vande Berg, & Rayman, 2007;
Tucker & Weaver, 2013). However, returning to a home campus can also lead to negative
experiences. Students may become more attached to their sojourn country (Christofi &
Thompson, 2007; Rexeisen, Anderson, Lawton, & Hubbard, 2008; Wielkiewicz & Turkowski,
2010) or experience reverse culture shock (Gaw, 1995; Gullahorn & Gullahorn, 1963).
While positive effects of study abroad programs are fairly well documented and can be
categorized in clear themes, the negative effects are more varied and inconsistent. When
examined concurrently, positive and negative effects also show tension. Braskamp, Braskamp,

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

and Merrill (2009) found that students showed little change in social concern for others (p.
112) while studying abroad, but Miller-Perrin and Thompson (2010) reported that study abroad
participants were more inclined to serve others. Lindsey (2005) also found that social work
students deepened their values as a result of their overseas experience. With increased attention
being placed on study abroad programs, there is a need to more clearly articulate the benefits of
such programs.
Overall, the reentry picture is quite broad and contains conflicting themes. Is the reentry
experience positive or negative? Do students develop a deeper sense of purpose or responsibility,
or is this gain only superficial? Without a sufficient amount of qualitative studies, the
complicated nature of reentry is not being captured. Furthermore, there are few studies on the
impact of studying abroad on campus life. We may find that students have increased global
awareness or interpersonal growth through a quantitative assessment, but how does this actually
affect the way that students experience university life? With the effects of study abroad
programming being so unclear, it is important for campuses to understand the unique and often
conflicting nature of students experiences in order to effectively support them.
Purpose
Given this problem, the purpose of this study is to understand the reentry experience of
study abroad returnees on their home campus and identify ways to support students that meet
their needs. Although a reentry experience extends to several aspects of an individuals life, this
study will focus on the reentry experience as it pertains to campus life, which may include social,
academic, and other aspects.
With the insight gained in this study, campuses can form ideas of how to better serve
students returning from study abroad programs. This will create a more positive environment for

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

each individual student who studies abroad, as campuses should be doing their best to support all
students in a way that meets their needs. This is also important on a larger level because
international education and global awareness are becoming focal points within higher
educations overall purpose and function. However, if campuses are truly trying to become more
global, they must draw upon the experiences of those students who have global experiences. In
addition, although tension exists as to whether or not students are more inclined to serve others
after returning from a study abroad program (Braskamp et al., 2009; Engberg, 2013; Lindsey,
2005; Luo & Jamieson-Drake, 2015; Miller-Perrin & Thompson, 2010), deeper exploration of a
reentry experience can also contribute to resolving this tension, thus giving campuses a better
ability to advance social justice learning outcomes.
Literature Review
Upon reviewing the literature on reentry, it is clear that reentry can encompass a wide
array of experiences, and thus a students experience on campus can be quite complex. While
there are many positive aspects to reentry, there are also many challenges. There also seems to be
a lack of detailed information regarding students experiences of returning to campus, and certain
promising practices could be better informed with this increased information.
Positive Effects of Study Abroad Programs
Research has shown multiple positive effects of study abroad programs. Several of these
positive effects could be considered academic, including improved language skills (Cubillos and
Ilvento, 2012; Vande Berg, Connor-Linton, & Paige, 2009; Watson, Siska, & Wolfel, 2013),
greater persistence in college (Young, 2007), or increased performance, especially through
research with faculty (Luo & Jamieson-Drake, 2015). In addition, several studies (Anderson &
Lawton, 2011; Ingraham & Peterson, 2004; Kitsantas, 2004; Sutton & Rubin, 2004; Vande Berg,

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Connor-Linton, & Paige, 2009; Watson, Siska & Wolfel, 2013) have shown that students who
study abroad make gains in different areas of intercultural development or global awareness.
Personal Growth. Research has also implied that study abroad experiences impact the
sojourners personal growth (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2009; Brown & Graham, 2009;
Doyle, 2009; Franklin, 2010; Ingraham & Peterson, 2004; Miller-Perrin & Thompson, 2010;
Nash, 1976; Smith, McAuliffe, & Rippard, 2014). For instance, Nash (1976) found that students
autonomy increased through studying abroad, through using a pre-test post-test design and
comparison with a control group that did not study abroad. Brown and Graham (2009) found that
studying abroad resulted in the elevation of self-direction over public opinion (p. 90), with
Braskamp, Braskamp, and Merrill (2009) similarly finding that education abroad may be an
important catalyst for students developing personal attributes, like a sense of self direction (p.
112). Smith, McAuliffe, and Rippard (2014) found that participants learned to function with
self-sufficiency and take responsibility for pursuing self-chosen goals (p. 313). Engberg (2013)
wrote that students developed a stronger understanding of their sense of self (p. 477).
Professional Development. Professional development is another benefit that appears in
research. Some studies have approached professional development from a student perspective by
investigating how a sojourn impacts an individuals professional path and goals (Franklin, 2010;
Ingraham & Peterson, 2004; Miller-Perrin & Thompson, 2010; Tucker & Weaver, 2013).
Trooboff, Vande Berg, and Rayman (2007) examined the employers perspective and found that
although employers do not necessarily believe that studying abroad enhances certain critical job
skills, they do value skills inherent in study abroad programs, such as adaptation and analytical
abilities. This gives students a framework to depict their skills in a meaningful way to employers.
Negative Effects and Challenges Experienced Upon Reentry

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Despite the reported positive effects, there may be challenges that students experience
upon return. Reverse culture shock is one potential challenge. Gullahorn and Gullahorn (1963)
advanced the idea of the W-curve, saying: In looking at the total exchange experience,
therefore, we may speak of a W-curve rather than a U-shaped curve to characterize the temporal
patterning in individual reactions to foreign settings and subsequently to their home cultures (p.
34). In studying Americans who lived abroad as dependents and returned to pursue college
education in the United States, Gaw (1995) discovered that returnees experiencing a higher
degree of reverse culture shock were affected interpersonally more than returnees who
encountered low levels of reverse culture shock (p. 22). Those with higher levels of reverse
culture shock were also less likely to use student support services or seek counseling. Although
this study is not related to a higher education study abroad program, it is important to note that
severity of reverse culture shock affects a college students experience on campus.
Reentry challenges can appear in a variety of other forms. Rexeisen, Anderson, Lawton,
and Hubbard (2008) found that students may tend to romanticize their study abroad experience
to such an extent that they experience reversal and thereby impede their intercultural
development (p. 16), which is similar to Wielkiewicz and Turkowskis (2010) finding that
returnees may become skeptical of American culture. Savicki and Cooley (2011) discussed
American identity and found that study abroad participants thought more about identity than
those that remained home. The experience provoked them to alter their attitudes toward their
home culture (p. 344), which can create distance between peers. Christofi and Thompson (2007)
researched individuals who decided to return to their sojourn country. They write how the
reality of home was described as disappointing (p. 61) for participants, and they further
illuminate how returnees felt conflicted between two cultures. In terms of communication

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

challenges, Sicola (2005) found that newly accepted (foreign) norms of behavior yielded new
expectations for interpersonal interactions (p. 166), while Martin (1986) found that
communication in friend relationships was characterized as more superficial (p. 193).
In addition to challenges, some researchers have investigated the extent of a study abroad
programs impact. Root and Ngampornchai (2013) discovered that many of the participants
accounts reflect only superficial levels of intercultural understanding (p. 524). Braskamp,
Braskamp, and Merrill (2009) showed that the study abroad experience was more about
acquiring knowledge than thinking critically; students may learn about cultural differences but
not internalize them to the point where it affects their perspectives. They also found that college
students in general did not show much change in their social concern for others during their
semester abroad (p. 112), which is echoed by Engberg (2013), who found that study abroad
participants experienced a low gain in social responsibility. This is in conflict with other
research. For instance, Lindsey (2005) found that social work students gained new values
overseas and wrote: Living in and observing a society in which there are different concepts of
social justice from those of the United Statesseemed to help U.S. students develop a deeper
sense of appreciation for these values (p. 244-245). Luo and Jamieson-Drake (2015) also found
that study abroad made a unique contribution to understanding moral and ethical issues (p. 51).
Promising Practices for Helping Students Upon Reentry
It is common practice for higher education institutions to offer reentry information and
services. This may include photo contests, opportunities for submitting writing about the
experience, handbooks about reentry, and a list of resources for overseas jobs or fellowships
(George Washington University, 2015; Marquette University, 2015; Michigan State University,
2015; Seattle University, 2015; University of Minnesota, 2012; Washington College, 2015).

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Professional development is also a key practice. Michigan State University offers a special
workshop called Unpacking Your Study Abroad Experience (Gardner, Steglitz, & Gross,
2009; Michigan State University, 2015), and many other institutions provide handouts or online
information about career development (Haverford College, 2015a; Kalamazoo College, 2014;
Mendelson, 2004; University of Minnesota, 2012). In addition, there are several promising
practices that are more unique and that relate to suggestions called for in the research.
Workshops. One more unique promising practice is hosting workshops for students
specifically regarding reentry. Lerstrom (1995) presented a paper about a four-part workshop at
Luther College that allowed students to reflect upon their experiences. The University of North
Carolina at Greensboro (University of North Carolina, 2011) also hosts a two-part workshop that
allows students to first reflect upon what they are going through and then to determine ways to
make use of their experiences. Since researchers (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2009;
Rexeisen et al., 2008) alluded to the importance of reflection, workshops such as these may help
students solidify the gains they make through studying abroad.
Courses. Another promising practice is courses offered by the home institution that are
related to the study abroad program or cultural development, as this is a longer-term, structured
opportunity that allows for reinforcement of development. The University of the Pacific (The
University of the Pacific, 2015; Young, 2014) offers a course called Cross-Cultural Training
II, and Wake Forest University has a course entitled Cross-Cultural Engagement and Re-entry
(Wake Forest University, 2015).
Leadership Programs. A third promising practice is leadership programs for study
abroad returnees. Kalamazoo College has a V.I.P. program where returnees can share
experiences with potential participants and serve on panels (Kalamazoo College, 2014).

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

Haverford College has a Student Study Abroad Advisory Board where returnees meet multiple
times per semester to help the Dean with study abroad issues and initiatives (Haverford College,
2015b). Such programs could satisfy what Wielkiewicz and Turkowski (2010) call for in terms
of students needing to discuss their experiences upon return, as students can speak with a
network of peers.
There is not a clear picture as to whether studying abroad has positive or negative
outcomes, and it is even more unclear how various positive and negative outcomes play out
when students return to campus. Without understanding this, it is difficult to know whether these
promising practices would actually be useful in supporting students, and thus a greater
understanding of students reentry experience will lend greater knowledge as to whether or not
these programs should be replicated, altered, or transformed.

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

10
References

Anderson, P.H., & Lawton, L. (2011). Intercultural development: Study abroad vs. on-campus
study. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 21, 86-108.
Braskamp, L.A., Braskamp, D.C., & Merrill, K. (2009). Assessing progress in global learning
and development of students with education abroad experiences. Frontiers: The
Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 18, 101-118.
Brown, L., & Graham, I. (2009). The discovery of self through the academic sojourn. Existential
Analysis: Journal of the Society for Existential Analysis, 20(1), 79-93.
Christofi, V. & Thompson, C.L. (2007). You cannot go home again: A phenomenological
investigation of returning to the sojourn country after studying abroad. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 85(1), 53-63.
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cubillos, J.H., & Ilvento, T. (2012). The impact of study abroad on students self-efficacy
perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 45(4), 494-511. doi:10.1111/j.19449720.2013.12002.x
Doyle, D. (2009). Holistic Assessment and the Study Abroad Experience. Frontiers: The
Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 18, 143-155.
Engberg, M.E. (2013). The influence of study away experiences on global perspective-taking.
Journal of College Student Development, 54(5), 466-480.
Franklin, K. (2010). Long-term career impact and professional applicability of the study abroad
experience. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 19, 169-190.

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

11

Gardner, P., Steglitz, I., & Gross, L. (2009). Translating study abroad experiences for workplace
competencies. Peer Review, 11(4), 19-22.
Gaw, K.F. (1995). Reverse culture shock in students returning from overseas. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED394082
George Washington University. (2015). Returned Students. Retrieved from
http://studyabroad.gwu.edu/returned-students
Gullahorn, J.T., & Gullahorn, J.E. (1963). An extension of the U-curve hypothesis. Journal of
Social Issues, 19, 33-47.
Haverford College. (2015a). After Study Abroad. Retrieved from
http://www.haverford.edu/studyabroad/after_study_abroad/
Haverford College. (2015b). Get In Touch. Retrieved from
http://www.haverford.edu/studyabroad/contact/#board
Ingraham, E.C., & Peterson, D.L. (2004). Assessing the impact of study abroad on student
learning at Michigan State University. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad, 10, 83-100.
Institute of International Education. (2015). Press Release: Open Doors 2014 International
Students in the United States and Study Abroad by American Students are at All-Time
High. Retrieved from http://www.iie.org/en/Who-We-Are/News-and-Events/PressCenter/Press-Releases/2014/2014-11-17-Open-Doors-Data
Kalamazoo College. (2014). Welcome Back, Study Abroad and Away Students! Retrieved from
https://reason.kzoo.edu/cip/returning/

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

12

Kitsantas, A. (2004). Study abroad: The role of college students goals on the development of
cross-cultural skills and global understanding. College Student Journal, 38(3), 441-452.
Lerstrom, A.C. (1995). International study transitions: Creating and leading a reentry
workshop. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication
Association. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED393133
Lessons From Abroad (2014). Lessons From Abroad: Study Abroad Returnee Conference
Washington. Retrieved from http://www.lessonsfromabroad.org/washington/
Lindsey. E.W. (2005). Study abroad and values development in social work students. Journal of
Social Work Education, 41(2), 229-249.
Luo, J., & Jamieson-Drake, D. (2015). Predictors of study abroad intent, participation, and
college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 56(1), 29-56.
doi: 10.1007/s11162-014-9338-7
Marquette University. (2015). Reverse Culture Shock. Retrieved from
http://www.marquette.edu/abroad/resources-reverse-culture-shock.shtml
Martin, J. (1986). Patterns of communication in three types of reentry relationships: An
exploratory study. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 50(2), 183-199.
Mendelson, V.G. (2004). Hindsight is 20/20: Student perceptions of language learning and the
study abroad experience. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 10,
43-63.

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

13

Michigan State University. (2015). Returning From Abroad: How To Sell Your Experience.
Retrieved from
http://studyabroad.isp.msu.edu/studenthandbk/returning/sell_your_experience.html
Miller-Perrin, C., & Thompson, D. (2010). The development of vocational calling, identity, and
faith in college students: A preliminary study of the impact of study abroad. Frontiers:
The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 19, 87-103.
Nash, D. (1976). The personal consequences of a year of study abroad. Journal of Higher
Education, 47(2), 191-203.
Rexeisen, R.J., Anderson, P.H., Lawton, L., Hubbard, A.C. (2008). Study abroad and
intercultural development: A longitudinal study. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal
of Study Abroad, 17, 1-20.
Root, E., & Ngampornchai, A. (2013). I came back as a new human being: Student
descriptions of intercultural competence acquired through education abroad experiences.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(5), 513-532.
Savicki, V., & Cooley, E. (2011). American identity in study abroad students: Contrasts,
changes, correlates. Journal of College Student Development, 52(3), 339-349.
Seattle University. (2015a). Education Abroad Office: Annual Student Activity Report: Summer
2013-Spring 2014. Retrieved from https://www.seattleu.edu/abroad/
Seattle University. (2015b). The Life You Change May Be Your Own. Retrieved from
https://www.seattleu.edu/global/
Seattle University. (2015c). Mission and Outcomes. Retrieved from
https://www.seattleu.edu/abroad/about/mission/

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

14

Seattle University. (2015d). Mission, Vision and Values. Retrieved from

http://www.seattleu.edu/about/mission/
Seattle University. (2015e). New Education Abroad Sponsored Program Model. Retrieved from
http://www.seattleu.edu/abroad/sponsored-programs/
Sicola, L. (2005). Communicative lingerings: Exploring awareness of L2 influence on L1 in
American expatriates after re-entry. Language Awareness, 14(2/3), 153-169.
Smith, J.E., McAuliffe, G., & Rippard, K.S. (2014). Counseling students transformative
learning through a study abroad curriculum. Counselor Education & Supervision, 53(4),
306-319. doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6978.2014.00065.x
Sutton, R.C., & Rubin, D.L. (2004). GLOSSARI project: Initial findings from a system-wide
research initiative on study abroad learning outcomes. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary
Journal of Study Abroad, 10, 65-82.
Trooboff, S., Vande Berg, M., & Rayman, J. (2007). Employer attitudes toward study abroad.
Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 15, 17-33.
Tucker, M., & Weaver, D. (2013). A longitudinal study of student outcomes from participation
in an international study tour: Some preliminary findings. Journal of University Teaching
& Learning Practice, 10(2), 1-12.
University of Minnesota. (2012). After Youre Back. Retrieved from
http://www.umabroad.umn.edu/students/process/reentry/
The University of North Carolina Greensboro. (2011). Re-Entry Workshops. Retrieved from
http://www.uncg.edu/ipg/reentry.html
The University of the Pacific. (2015). When you Return from Abroad. Retrieved from
http://pacific.abroadoffice.net/return.html

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

15

Vande Berg, M., Connor-Linton, J., & Paige, R.M. (2009). The Georgetown Consortium Project:
Interventions for student learning abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Study Abroad, 18, 1-75.
Wake Forest University. (2015). After Your Return. Retrieved from
http://studyabroad.wfu.edu/planning-your-experience/after-you-return/
Washington College. (2015). Re-Entry. Retrieved from
https://www.washcoll.edu/offices/global-education/study-abroad/re-entry.php
Watson, J.R., Siska, P., & Wolfel, R. L. (2013). Assessing gains in language proficiency, crosscultural competence, and regional awareness during study abroad: A preliminary study.
Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 62-79. doi: 10.1111/flan. 12016
Wielkiewicz, R.M., & Turkowski, L.W. (2010). Reentry issues upon returning from study abroad
programs. Journal of College Student Development, 51(5), 649-664.
Young, G.E. (2014). Reentry: Supporting students in the final stage of study abroad. New
Directions for Student Services, 2014(146), 59-67.

STUDY ABROAD REENTRY

16