Memo on the Concept Map

Memo on the Concept Map

As Creswell (2007) suggest that researchers begin studies with their conceptual and theoretical maps, a concept map can be useful to present my research design.  The concept map is developed with my personal experiences and previous theoretical or conceptual models

Student Success. Various studies of student success in college have been done using different methods of measuring success.  First, research on student retention and college graduation has mainly measured college student outcomes (Barkley, 2010; Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005; Shapiro, Dundar, Chen, Ziskin, Park, Torres, & Chiang, 2012), which were conducted as an important indicator of student success related to academic, economic and social interaction (Cahalan & Perna, 2015; Tinto, 1993).  Kuh and colleagues (2007) offered an extended definition of student success with effects of student engagement on their academic achievement.  As another study for students’ academic success, research on psychological well-being and individual motivation has been demonstrated as an expanded view for improving students’ learning outcomes (Schreiner, McIntosh, Nelson & Pothoven, 2009).  In a recent study of student success, Schreiner (2014) suggested a student thriving model to increase student persistence, academic success, and satisfaction. 

International Student Success. There are various approaches for understanding of student success, because students have various racial and ethnic backgrounds, their unique history and experiences, and diverse learning patterns and perceptions (Harper & Quaye, 2009; 2014).  For example, researchers have demonstrated different results of student-faculty interaction (which was one of the most prominent motivational factors on student success) across student race and their cultural (or social) awareness (Kim & Sax, 2009).  Grayson (2008) interestingly found that international students engaged in campus activities that related to their educational outcomes as much as American students when they meet their academic supports from their school.  Other researchers explained that nontraditional students (including students of color, underrepresented minority students, and international students) have been one of the most struggled from their academic success (Shapiro, et al., 2012). 

Critical Component of Diversity.  Hurtado and Carter (1997) also described that student interaction with diverse ethnic/racial group has positive impact for students’ academic success.  The study of international students who increase a critical component of campus diversity in higher education is significantly examined as a general impact on student success (Bevis & Lucas, 2007; Renn & Reason, 2013).  In addition, a study of international students’ thriving is essential to “advocate for the creation of conditions in the learning environment” that takes into account their particular needs (Schreiner, Louis, & Nelson, 2012, p. xxii). 

Two Theoretical Concept Maps

From the prior research, I use two existing theoretical frames in my qualitative research.  First, Astin’s (1993) Inputs-Environments-Outputs (I-E-O) model provides a basic conceptual framework for my research of international student success.  This conceptual framework focuses on the importance of considering student and institutional characteristics together for evaluating student outcomes in education.  This model is useful to clarify complex college experiences of international students with the following procedures: college readiness, college enrollment, college achievement, and post-college attainment. 

Second, for the study of international students’ success, a college student development model is another theoretical framework, which includes students’ psychological and behavioral development related to cognitive and affective results of student success.  Among the student development models, I used a holistic perspective on student development framework of Baxter Magolda’s (2009) psychosocial concept that integrates cognitive, interpersonal, and intrapersonal dimensions of individual development.

These two conceptual frameworks may useful for me to make a sense and have ideas for doing the qualitative research.  However, there are also risks when I use the conceptual frameworks for the qualitative study.  For example, these conceptual frameworks may mislead me to try to fit my observation into these frameworks.  I may unconsciously judge or define participants’ perspectives within the theories.  Therefore, I should take account of the tension between advantage and disadvantage when I use the conceptual frameworks to do my research. To make good use of existing theory, I prepare to open to the international students who have absence of a clear, consistent, and comprehensive definition for student success as well as to turn my careful attention to their diverse opinions on how to define their student success.  

Figure 1.1 The Concept Map with I-E-O & Development Model

Figure 1.2 The Concept Map for a Study of International Student Success