Academic and Social Experience of

International Students in Norway

A cross-sectional survey

Maryam Rostami

Master of Philosophy in Higher Education

30 credits

Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences

University of Oslo

June 2023
Abstract
Academic and social adjustment are key to student success, particularly international students.
Given that international students are so diverse, it is critical to understand the relationships
between the background characteristics students bring to their academic lives and their
adjustment to academic life. This thesis considers the Norwegian context by analyzing survey
responses from international students at two smaller but public universities: the University of
Agder and the University of Stavanger. Using quantitative analysis and multiple regressions,
this thesis investigates the predictive relationship of age, gender, level of education, location,
department, interaction with faculty, and time spent in Norway on academic and social
adjustment through the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965), emotional regulation through
the College Adjustment Questionnaire (O’Donnell et al., 2018).
The findings of this study show that, among demographic characteristics, only time spent in
Norway had a statistically significant relationship with academic and social adjustment.
Moreover, this study found a significant negative relationship between international students’
interaction with faculty and their adjustment to university life.
This thesis aims at providing a better understanding of what factors contribute to international
students’ academic and social adjustment. I highlight the importance of quality support for
international students to adjust to a new educational environment, particularly the importance
of considering students’ experience with faculty and their adjustment to university to enhance
student learning in higher education.
Keywords: academic adjustment, social adjustment, international students, interaction with
faculty
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to my main supervisor, Mari Elken, who guided me
throughout this project. Without her wise guidance, excellent feedback skills, and advice, this
thesis would not have been completed.

I would like to also thank my co-supervisor, Rebecca Knoph, who was there for the entire data
collection and analysis process. I am extremely grateful for her patience, encouragement,
knowledge, and invaluable guidance throughout the process.

Thank you both for always being there to answer my questions.

Most importantly, I am deeply grateful for my husband, Morteza, who has been a constant
support to me throughout the completion of this project.

I am forever grateful for everyone’s time, patience, and belief that this project would be
completed.
Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 The Research Problem ......................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Research Aims and Questions .............................................................................................. 3
1.3 Definition of Terms and Concepts ....................................................................................... 4
1.4 Thesis Outline ...................................................................................................................... 5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Empirical Studies on Student Adjustment in the Academic Context ................................... 6
2.1.1 Academic adjustment ............................................................................................................. 7
2.1.2 Social Adjustment .................................................................................................................. 9
2.1.3 Student-Faculty Interaction .................................................................................................. 11
2.1.4 Background Characteristics and Adjustment ....................................................................... 12
2.1.5 International Students in Norway ......................................................................................... 14
3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING STUDENTS’
ACADEMIC AND SOCIAL EXPERIENCE ...................................................................... 16
3.1 Tinto’s (1993) Theory of Student Attrition ........................................................................ 16
3.2 Astin’s Theory of Involvement .......................................................................................... 17
3.3 Hypotheses Following the Theoretical Framework ........................................................... 19
4 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 21
4.1 Research Design ................................................................................................................. 21
4.2 Participants ......................................................................................................................... 21
4.3 Measures ............................................................................................................................. 22
4.3.1 Demographic Characteristics................................................................................................ 22
4.3.2 Academic and Social Experience ......................................................................................... 22
4.3.3 Reliability ............................................................................................................................. 23
4.3.5 Student-Faculty Interaction .................................................................................................. 25
4.4 Ethical Considerations........................................................................................................ 26
4.6 Data Collection and Analysis ............................................................................................. 27
4.6.1 Data Preparation and Cleaning ............................................................................................. 27
4.6.2 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................................... 28
5 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................. 29
5.1 Descriptive Statistics .......................................................................................................... 29
5.1.1 Background Characteristics .................................................................................................. 29
5.1.2 Academic Adjustment .......................................................................................................... 32
5.1.3 Social adjustment ................................................................................................................. 32
5.1.4. Psychological adjustment .................................................................................................... 33
 5.1.5 Interaction with Faculty........................................................................................................ 33
5.2. Is there a relationship between students’ background characteristics (e.g., age, gender, level
of study, time being in Norway, and field of study) and adjustment to the university? .......... 34
5.2.1 Statistical Assumptions ........................................................................................................ 34
5.2.2 Relationship between Background Characteristics and CAQ .............................................. 35
5.2.3 Relationship between CAQ and Age .................................................................................... 35
5.2.3 Relationship between CAQ and Gender............................................................................... 36
5.2.4 Relationship between CAQ and Field of study .................................................................... 37
5.2.5 Relationship between CAQ and Faculty .............................................................................. 38
5.2.6 Relationship between CAQ and University.......................................................................... 39
5.2.7 Relationship between CAQ and Degree Program ................................................................ 40
5.2.8. Relationship between CAQ and Time Spent in Norway ..................................................... 41
5.3 Is there a relationship between students’ interaction with faculty and adjustment to the
university? ................................................................................................................................ 43
Test H2: Correlation Between Academic and Social adjustment and Interaction with faculty.
.................................................................................................................................................. 43
6 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................... 47
6.1 Empirical Contribution ....................................................................................................... 48
6.1.1 RQ1: Students’ Adjustment and Demographic Characteristics............................................ 49
6.2.2 RQ2. Students’ Adjustment and Interaction with Faculty .................................................... 50
6.4 Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 51
7 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 52
7.1 Practical Implications ......................................................................................................... 53
7.2 Theoretical and Methodological Contributions.................................................................. 54
7.3 Future Research .................................................................................................................. 55
References ............................................................................................................................... 57
Appendecies ............................................................................................................................ 71
1 INTRODUCTION
Higher education has become more mobile and international in the last few decades, and the
number of students who study abroad is increasing rapidly. Higher education development from
elite to mass and universal education in many countries has made higher education accessible
for students with a greater variety of backgrounds (Trow, 1970). In addition, globalization and
worldwide migration have increased the need for higher education that is inclusive of students
with different backgrounds (Banks and Banks, 2013). As a result, the share of immigrant and
international students in Norway pursuing higher education has increased, along with different
forms of migration, including international student mobility (SSB, 2019). The Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports that the number of students studying
in higher education institutions outside their home countries increased from 2.1 million in 2000,
to more than 6.1 million in 2018, including both degree-seeking students and exchange students
(Wiers-Jenssen, 2022).

International students are invaluable for Norway as they not only contribute to future
recruitment but also play an important role in quality enhancement of higher education and are
thus considered a resource for potential employees (DIKU, 2019b). Norway experienced a
noticeable increase in international students because of political initiatives developed to support
the internationalization of higher education. According to Weirs-Jennsen (2020), the number of
international students registered in Norwegian higher education institutions has increased from
just over 5,000 in 2000 to more than 23,000 in 2018. In Norway, exchange students and degree-
seeking students are the two main groups of international students. The first group is those
coming to Norway to complete a full degree, while the latter come to Norway for one or two
semesters as part of a degree program affiliated with their home country. Until recently, all
public universities and colleges in Norway were tuition-free for all students regardless of
country of origin, and students are still only permitted to work part-time in addition to their
studies. Because of these two reasons, Norway has been an attractive study destination for
international students (OECD, 2019), especially those obtaining a master’s degree, as these
programs are available in English. Among all international students in Norway, at the
bachelor’s level, only 24% are degree students, while at the master’s level, 83% are degree
students (DIKU, 2019). However, the Norwegian government has introduced tuition fees for
students who come from countries outside the EEA to take a full degree in Norway. This means
that exchange students are excluded. This decision is taken in spite of the fact that there was an

1
agreement on continuing the policies on enhancing internationalization at home and attracting
new students from different parts of the world (Meld. St. 7 (2020–2021).

This decision applies to those students who apply for taking a full degree in Norway and
exchange students are excluded. This can lead to a reduction in the number of international
students in Norway, like Sweden that experienced a 60% decline in the number of international
students in the first year of adopting tuition fees for students from countries outside the
European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland (Nilsson and Westin,2022), and
consequently will affect the internationalization of education.

International students are a component of internationalization across campuses and

significantly influence prestige, general reputation, and cultural enhancement (Beine et al.,
2014; Forbes-Mewett, 2016). Furthermore, international students can become ambassadors of
the host countries if they go to another country or return to their home countries (Pandit, 2007).

International students are of particular interest because—whether they relocate for educational
or personal purposes—they are especially vulnerable while adapting to the new environment
(Forbes-Mewett, 2020). International students’ vulnerability is in relation to being away from
traditional family support, adapting to a different culture, study pressures and loneliness, and
psychological well-being/mental health (Forbes-Mewett, 2019; 2020). Also, international
students usually cope with challenges and stress while trying to be interculturally adjusted. This
stressful process contributes to a higher risk of vulnerable mental and emotional states for
international students (Gan and Forbes-Mewett, 2019), mainly because many first-year students
experience transitioning to higher education as challenging and lack feelings of belonging to an
educational institution (Tinto, 1993). Vincent Tinto is an essential contributor to research that
looks at students' experiences in higher education and has acknowledged that new students must
be socially and academically integrated at the educational institution (Tinto 1993). According
to Tinto’s research, becoming socially and academically integrated means that students become
part of the educational institution through social interaction within the academic environment.

How international students experience the academic and social environment in the Norwegian
higher education system can be important when many new students arrive each year. This thesis
considers academic and social integration and how international students can be understood as
integrated, as the starting point, before detailing Tinto’s (1993) foundational theory of student
integration. Then, previous empirical studies applying this theory in relation to students'
experiences and social interaction at educational institutions are reviewed. Finally, the research

2
overview provides arguments for examining how international students experience the
academic and social environment and how well they are integrated at Norwegian universities.

1.1 The Research Problem

As the number of international students at Norwegian universities has risen in the last decade
(Sin, Antonowicz, and Wiers-Jenssen 2019), it is important to investigate different dimensions
of their experience and find out about the adjustment process to the new environment with other
social, cultural, and academic characteristics. Understanding the international student
experience is especially crucial as such students benefit both the host and home countries and
academic institutions.

International students from different academic and personal backgrounds come to Norway to
study at higher education institutions. However, adjusting to a new educational and social
environment has challenges and problems that can lead to homesickness, stress, anxiety, and
depression for international students (Tochkov et al., 2010). Therefore, supporting international
students to transition and adjust to Norwegian higher education is important. For this purpose,
it is crucial to address the main factors that can contribute to facilitating the student experience.

This study examines international students’ experiences with academic and social adjustment
to the Norwegian higher education system. Considering the rapid increase in international
student enrollment at many universities and the lack of academic and social integration
knowledge, it is significant to look at international students’ experience. Moreover, considering
the introduction of tuition fees for some international students, there might be new expectations
about what institutions do to assist students’ academic and social integration.

This thesis examines the international students' experience in universities which aim to develop
internationalization initiatives and looks forward to attracting more international students.

1.2 Research Aims and Questions

With the increasing number of incoming students to Norway (Sin, Antonowicz, and Wiers-
Jenssen 2019), higher education institutions must understand the students’ experiences.
Documentation of students’ experiences can provide both higher education institutions and
students with valuable perspectives, which will enhance the quality of higher education in the
broadest sense. Moreover, this line of research has important implications for higher education
institutions to strengthen internationalization by identifying what supports international
students need while integrating into a new educational environment and for internationalization
policy in higher education. Finally, including international students’ voices gives policymakers

3
and educators a deeper understanding of international students’ lived experiences in Norwegian
universities to inform policy decisions.

This thesis assesses three dimensions of adjustment (Academic, Social, and

Emotional/Psychological) of international university students in Norway. The relationship
between international students’ academic and social adjustment and their background
characteristics such as age, gender, level of education, university, faculty or field of study, time
being in Norway, and their interaction with faculty is assessed in this study. This study
contributes to understanding the impact of higher education institutions’ environment on the
adaptation process of international students. This study aims to focus on both the international
student’s experience of their student life, as well as gaining an understanding of the academic
and social environment in which students participate. Gaining insight into the international
students’ academic and social experience can provide valuable information for both
international students and academics to improve the academic experiences of international
students and facilitate the student’s academic and social adjustment at Norwegian higher
education institutions.

This study addresses the research aims via quantitative analysis of questionnaire data to
measure the relationship between focused variables and answer the following research
questions:

RQ1. Is there a relationship between students’ background characteristics (e.g., age,

gender, level of study, time being in Norway, and field of study) and
adjustment to the university?
RQ2. Is there a relationship between students’ interaction with faculty and
adjustment to the university?

1.3 Definition of Terms and Concepts

1.3.1 International students
In this study, international students are undergraduate or graduate students enrolled in a
Norwegian university but not Norwegian citizens during data collection. International students
consist of two main groups: first group is full degree students who enrolled in higher education
institutions to take their entire degree in Norway, and second group is exchange students
registered at a university in their home country who come to Norway to take one or two
semesters as a part of their degree in another country. This thesis focuses only on international
full degree students, The top three fields of study for international students are (1) Natural

4
Science, (2) Arts and Humanities, and (3) Business and Economics. Eighty-three percent of
international degree students are enrolled in master programs, The number of women is more
than men in both exchange (61%) and full-degree students (51%) (Wiers-Jenssen, 2022).

1.3.2 Academic adjustment

Tinto (1987) defines academic integration as students’ academic and intellectual performance,
intellectual growth level, and connection with the academic setting. Baker and Siryk (1999)
explained that academic adjustment is students’ success in coping with the different educational
characteristics demanded by the educational environment, including various aspects of
motivation, application, and performance.

1.3.3 Social Adjustment

A student’s social adjustment is broadly defined as the student “fitting in” to the social
community of the academic environment and refers to student involvement in extracurricular
activities, participation in student groups and university events, and interaction with peers and
faculty (Tinto 1987, 1975). Baker and Siryk (1999) also define social adjustment as students’
success in coping with social characteristics demanded by the institution inherent in social
activities, interaction with others, and social environment.

1.4 Thesis Outline

This thesis is structured into seven chapters. Chapter one introduces the main topic, background
information, and the research questions this study addresses. Chapter two reviews relevant
empirical studies about academic adjustment and social adjustment. Chapter three presents the
theoretical framework and the resulting conceptualizations of students’ academic and social
adjustment. Chapter four describes the overall methodology, including the research design,
population and sampling, questionnaire design, data collection and analysis, ethical issues, and
statistical hypotheses. Chapter five summarizes the study's main findings regarding
relationships between background variables and adjustment. Chapter six discusses the practical
implications, conceptual contributions, methodological contributions, limitations, and future
directions. Finally, chapter five presents the conclusion, which will summarize the contents and
main findings of this study.

5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
According to Altbach & Knight (2007), higher education institutions develop their investment
in internationalization by setting up English-taught programs, internationalizing curricula, and
facilitating international students’ accommodation in the new environment. Therefore, higher
education institutions should pay more attention to supporting international students.
Specifically, it is crucial to investigate how international students’ individual characteristics
correlate to their academic and social experiences in the academic environment.

Norway has experienced rapid growth in inward student mobility due to the implementation of
internationalization policies. The ability to attend high-quality public higher education
institutions at no or little cost, in English, and in a peaceful society makes Norway an attractive
educational institution for international students, as evidenced by the 23,725 students in 2019
alone (Wiers-Jenssen, 2022). International students are seen as significant contributors to
internationalizing campuses and enhancing the quality of higher education (Wiers-Jenssen,
2019). The following literature review covers empirical studies on students’ academic and
social adjustment. Afterward, literature on individual characteristics, specifically age, gender,
and interaction with faculty that play an important role in student’s academic and social
adjustment process, are presented. Finally, this section will review studies on students’
adjustment in the Norwegian academic context. The studies chosen for the literature review
section are based on the relevancy to this study and focus on international students’ adjustment
to higher education institutions. This review of literature provides a comprehensive overview
of the existing research on the topic, based on a thorough and systematic search strategy.

The search for literature began with the identification of key search terms and phrases, which
were used to search a range of electronic databases, including google scholar and Oria. The
search was further refined through the use of inclusion and exclusion criteria, to ensure that
only relevant studies were included in the review.

2.1 Empirical Studies on Student Adjustment in the Academic Context

Research on student adjustment is broad and encompassed many areas of study. In the context
of higher education institutions, student adjustment has been studied through its relation to
study performance, academic success, and other various areas. The following section will
discuss the academic adjustment impact on students’ academic outcomes and the relationship
between background characteristics and academic adjustment.

6
 2.1.1 Academic adjustment

As study programs have become increasingly mobile and international (Brooks & Waters,
2010), students’ integration into higher education institutions have gained more attention
(Severiens & Schmidt, 2009). International students’ integration has been a key interest of many
studies in higher education as they play an important role in internationalization at home and
the quality of education. Beelen (2014) acknowledges that, from the perspective of
‘Internationalization at Home, the interaction between international and domestic students
benefits both sides. This kind of focus has also received emphasis from agencies such as Diku
also states that international classrooms can enhance learning outcomes and intercultural skills
for both international and domestic students. Moreover, it helps students build international
networks and social capital, which can be valuable for their future lives and careers (Diku,
2019).

A major study by Chrysikos et al. (2017) argues that students’ social and academic experiences
mainly determine their integration into higher education. In particular, students who could
integrate better into the educational environment were more likely to complete their studies.
Chrysikos et al. (2017) used Tinto’s (1993) student integration theory as the main theory for
their study, collected data using two questionnaires, and measured the social and academic
integration of 991 first-year undergraduate students at the UK institution. This study considers
students’ Integration within the academic and social communities as an indicator of their
persistence in university. Also, they found that students' interaction with university staff and
faculty positively influenced retention and is one of the most important contributors to students’
connection to the university and supports integration into the academic and social communities.

Ramsay, Jones, and Barker (2006) conducted research adopting a qualitative case study
approach identifying ten international students studying in undergraduate and graduate
programs. This study found that international students face different challenges while adapting
to the new educational system. The findings of this study showed that international students—
especially first-year students—experienced more problems than typical, mainly related to
transitions, such as difficulty with academic work, social isolation, and support needs (Ramsay,
Jones & Barker, 2006).

Much research regarding the presence of international students in higher education institutions
has focused on the motivations of international students to study outside their countries, the

7
challenges and difficulties they face in their experience of studying abroad, their adjustment
process to new cultures and academic systems, and their strategies for succeeding in their
academic and personal life. Wu et al. (2015) provided a set of challenges international students
face in the US and argued that universities should be prepared to meet international students'
academic, social, and cultural needs. They adopted a qualitative case study approach and
interviewed ten graduate and undergraduate students from different countries. The findings of
their study revealed that international students faced academic challenges such as
communication difficulties with professors, classmates, and university staff and consequently
faced problems when engaging in different social activities and this led to social isolation of
the international students. This study acknowledges that students use resources from the
university to overcome these challenges. Therefore, it is crucial for universities, faculty, and
staff to have a good understanding of student’s challenges and needs to provide supportive
services for them.

Previous research on international student integration has reported different factors linked to
the student's academic integration. However, several previous studies show findings consistent
with Tinto’s model. For example, Bers & Smith's (1991) results show that social integration is
an essential factor that positively influences students’ academic integration. Furthermore,
Mannan (2007) adopted Tinto’s model and identified academic and social integration as two
complementary components. According to Mannan's study, the level of students’ integration
into an academic environment can affect their academic outcomes.

However, Rienties, Beausaert, Grohnert, Niemantsverdriet, and Kommers (2012) conducted a

cross-institutional comparison at five business schools in the Netherlands and argued that
academic or social integration does not have a direct influence on students’ academic
achievement. Their study results indicated that international students' academic success is
multi-faceted. Although the social integration level of international students with non-Western
backgrounds was lower than other international students, they had similar study performance.
This shows a negative relationship between students’ social adjustment and study performance.
Li (2017) also investigated the challenges and coping strategies of academic integration from
Chinese students’ perceptive. They found that regardless of the host country, Chinese students
faced similar challenges and found that there is not necessarily a link between students’ social
integration and their academic achievement and adjustment.Several researchers consider social
and academic integration as two separate forms of integration. Wilcox, Winn, and Fyvie-Gauld
(2005) differentiated between social and academic integration and defined integration as social

8
relationships students develop at the educational institution. Wilcox, Winn, and Fyvie-Gauld
(2005) conducted interviews with 34 first-year students and found that those students who had
become socially integrated and made close friends received direct emotional support and
buffering support in stressful situations from them. This study identified social integration as
more important than academic integration and suggested that academic integration is related to
educational institutions’ staff. Therefore, academic staff support is important for students to
build self-confidence within the academic environment.

Now that academic adjustment and its relation to background characteristics and social
adjustment have been discussed (Winn and Fyvie-Gauld, 2005; Li, 2017, Rienties, Beausaert,
Grohnert, Niemantsverdriet, and Kommers, 2012), the following will go further into students
social adjustment.

2.1.2 Social Adjustment

Universities play a key role in developing meaningful intercultural interactions between
international and domestic students (Vaccarino et al., 2021). De Wit (2013) highlights that
“21st-century realities have magnified the importance of the global context globalization”.
Globalization brings the world closer, makes us more interconnected, and leads to growth in
the interdependence of different groups. Hence, diversity is a reality, and it is essential to be
interculturally competent to be able to have effective interactions with culturally diverse
individuals. However, it is not enough to bring a mix of international students to make a
university more internationalized and create spontaneous and meaningful intercultural
interactions between international and domestic students or develop valuable intercultural
communication skills and global perspectives from different backgrounds on a university
campus (Leask, 2009). Welch (2002) points out that the main requirement for internationalizing
universities is “genuine mutuality and reciprocal cultural relations within university
internationalization activities is required” (p. 439), which can be achieved by integrating
international and domestic students.

Volet and Ang (2012) state that one of the major aims of internationalizing higher education is
to develop students’ intercultural adaptability. The presence of international students on
university campuses makes the learning environment a unique social forum that helps the
students to achieve this goal. They examined the perception of 40 business students about
working in multicultural groups while completing assignments and explored the effect of the
formation of mixed cultural groups on students’ academic achievements. This study argues that
the presence of culturally diverse groups on international campuses provides both domestic and
9
international students with a unique opportunity to learn about each other’s cultures and value
systems. Their findings show that the social integration of international students has educational
benefits and should not be underestimated.

Social integration of international students is a significant component of internationalization in

higher education institutions. However, internationalization does not happen through simply
recruiting international students and creating a culturally diverse student body to increase
exposure to students from other countries. For this purpose, it is necessary to facilitate social
interactions and intercultural friendships through well-planned interventions by higher
education institutions (Spencer-Oatey & Dauber, 2015; Vaccarino et al., 2021).

Tinto (1975) defines social integration as the degree of harmony in the relationship between the
individual and their social environments, such as students’ informal affiliations with their peers,
faculty, and staff, and engagement in extracurricular activities. A rich social life has a positive
influence on students’ social integration as well as their academic performance (Rienties et al.,
2012).

In a review conducted by Zhang and Goodson (2011), sixty-four studies focused on predictors
of international student adjustment were summarized. They reported stress, social support,
English proficiency, region/country of origin, length of residence in the destination country,
acculturation, social interaction with native people (American), self-efficacy, gender, and
personality as the main predictors of international students’ psychosocial adjustment.

To sum up, previous research shows that universities have a critical role in creating an
environment to develop intercultural competence, understanding, and interactions between
international and domestic students. In this process, the social integration of international
students is one of the important elements and it is significant for universities to facilitate social
interactions and intercultural friendships. The presence of international students on university
campuses can provide valuable educational opportunities for both domestic and international
students to learn about each other's cultures. Also, can positively influence their academic
performance and psychosocial adjustment.

2.1.3 Student-Faculty Interaction

Prior research has demonstrated that student-faculty interaction plays an important role in
students’ experience in college (Kim & Sax, 2014; Mayhew et al., 2016). Pascarella and
Terenzini (2005) state that the concept of student-faculty interactions is broadly assumed as the
students’ collective experiences with faculty in and out of the classroom and captures different

10
experiences, including interactions related to advising and discussions about research or critical
topics or informal social activities. Previous research dominantly divided Interactions between
students and faculty into two main domains: formal or in-class interactions and informal or out-
of-class interactions. Both domains show positive relationships with student outcomes;
however, out-of-class interactions have demonstrated a stronger influence on student retention
(Terenzini & Pascarella (1980), Kim & Lundberg (2016).

Glass, Kociolek, Wongtrirat, Lynch, & Cong (2015) focused on educational experiences that
positively influence international students learning and development. They identified student-
faculty interaction as the most frequently mentioned high-impact experience among
international students. Further, they acknowledged that the relationship between students and
faculty significantly impacts international graduate students’ experience. In this study, they
took a qualitative approach to identify the motivational dynamics of international students’
interactions with professors and their impact on students' academic goal pursuits. This study's
findings highlight that international students are more adjusted to academic cultures when they
are more socialized by professors. This study affirms the generally positive influence of
professors on international students' academic and social adjustment.

Kim and Sax (2017) examined the effect of interaction between students and staff on students’
educational experiences. The researchers found that interaction between students and staff
positively impacts students’ educational situation and increases their motivation and
engagement in education. In addition, this study identified staff as important socializing agents,
significantly influencing students’ academic achievements and cognitive and personal
development.

A study by Webber, Krylow, and Zhang (2013) examined the relationship between the
frequency of students’ involvement and students’ academic outcomes and satisfaction with their
college experience. This study found that interaction with faculty positively influences
students’ academic outcomes. The authors claim that when institutions create an environment
where students can have an open dialogue with faculty and staff, students’ collaborative
learning techniques, academic knowledge, and personal and social skills will be developed.
According to their findings, those students who were more involved in academic and social
activities showed better learning outcomes as well as higher satisfaction with their college
experience.

11
In sum, previous studies show that interaction between faculty and students influences students’
experience in the academic environment, enhances learning outcomes, increases students’
engagement in education, develops social skills, and improves their academic and social
adjustment.

2.1.4 Background Characteristics and Adjustment

Many researchers assert the importance of demographic characteristics on students’ adjustment.
Jones (2013) investigated the effects of race and gender on the academic adjustment of first-
time African American college students by conducting a mixed-method approach. Jones used
four quantitative instruments for this research, including the Student Adjustment to College
Questionnaire (SACQ), the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity, and the Personal
Attributes Questionnaire. Additionally, Jones conducted focus group qualitative analyses for
one male and one female. Jones (2013) found that gender identity is a major contributor to the
students’ overall interactions on campus and is a powerful construct in predicting educational
attainment. Melendez (2016) found similar results when investigating the relationship between
three independent variables, including race/ethnicity, gender, athletic participation, and
academic adjustment; social adjustment; personal-emotional adjustment and institutional
attachment. Participants were 162 college students from a large nonresidential college campus
on the East coast of the United States, of which 102 were female (63%), and 60 were male
(37%). Findings revealed a significant correlation between gender, academic adjustment, and
institution attachment. Female students reported higher scores on the academic adjustment
subscales of the SACQ than male students, but no significant findings were revealed for the
social adjustment.

Another study that looks at adjustment difficulties experienced by international students was
conducted by Shabeeb (1993). This study investigated adjustment challenges that Saudi
Arabian students encounter in the US. This study was conducted quantitatively and employed
the Michigan International Students Problem Inventory in six colleges and universities in
eastern Washington. This study identified the difference between students’ adjustment
problems based on demographic characteristics such as gender, age, level of study, length of
stay, and academic major. The findings of this study revealed that age, gender, level of study,
and field of study have a significant relationship with Saudi Arabian students’ adjustment.
Shabeeb (1993) reported that students who stayed longer in the US faced more challenges than
those with shorter stays. In addition, younger male students reported fewer academic adjustment
problems. Also, the level and field of study were significantly related to international students’

12
adjustment, as undergraduate students encountered more problems than graduate students.
Students in arts and humanities fields showed more difficulty adjusting than those who majored
in science-related fields.

Enochs and Roland (2006) conducted a study to see how social adjustment is affected by gender
in first-year students. They utilized the overall adjustment level and social adjustment scale to
compare overall, and social adjustment levels based on gender. Their study reconfirmed
differences in the adjustment level based on gender and that males were found to have
significantly higher overall adjustment levels than females in the college environment.

Similarly, Calaguas (2011) also investigated the differences in adjustment difficulties between
males and females and the relationship between adjustment difficulties and age. They analyzed
data collected from 470 first-year college students who participated in the survey and concluded
that there is a significant relationship between adjustment difficulties and gender. Furthermore,
males showed a lower level of adjustment than females, and there was a significant relationship
between academic adjustment difficulties and age. They state this can be because as people get
older, they are expected to be more responsible and do better, especially at the tertiary level.

Another study relevant to demographic characteristics and adjustment to the academic

environment was conducted by Toews and Yazedjian (2007). They investigated the impact of
personal and interpersonal factors, including age, gender, parental education level, and college
major, on college adjustment among first-year students. They found that personal and
interpersonal factors are moderate predictors of overall adjustment among all groups and that
predictors of college adjustment differ based on race and gender.

When discussing background characteristics and students’ adjustment, Stuart (2000)

investigated locus of control, psychological adjustment, and overall adjustment to college
among international students in respect to age and gender. He surveyed 75 international students
on the student adjustment to collage questionnaire and a demographic questionnaire. He found
no difference between males and females, nor younger and older students, with regard to overall
adjustment to college.

Another study with relevance to the relationship between background characteristics and
student adjustment was conducted by Mustaffa and Ilias (2013). They investigated a group of
demographic factors that could affect the process of international students’ adjustment at the
University of Utara Malaysia. This study reported that the level of education is one of the
background characteristics that contribute significantly to the sociocultural adjustment of

13
international students. In this study, Mustaffa and Ilias (2013) found that master’s and PhD
students had an easier time adjusting than undergraduate students, as evidenced by the
statistically significant relationship between the students’ level of education and cross-cultural
adjustment.

Another study that looks at international students’ adjustment was done by Wang (2003) to
investigate relationships between international graduate students’ resilience characteristics and
background factors and their adjustment problems. To identify the background characteristics
that significantly predict students’ adjustment, in this study, 289 international students enrolled
in two American universities responded to the Personal Resilience Questionnaire and the
Michigan International Student Problem Inventory. The findings of this study revealed that
background characteristics, including gender, major field of study, and level of education, are
not significant factors in predicting international students’ adjustment problem areas.

In sum, previous research on background characteristics and students adjustment to higher

education environment show that background characteristics can have different influence
on students adjustment in different contexts. Some studies showed background
characteristics have a significant relationship with student’s adjustment. However, other
studies identified age, gender, level of study, and field of study are not significant factors
in predicting international students’ adjustment challenges.

2.1.5 International Students in Norway

Within the Scandinavian context, Jensen et al. (2018) examined Danish and Norwegian first-
year students' experiences in mathematics and science subjects and investigated how they
understood their experiences by applying Expectancy-Value Theory and Tinto's theory. Jensen
et al. (2018) defined social integration as the point where students are integrated into the
informal social environment, how students relate to each other, and their experience fitting into
the study program’s social culture. Conversely, academic integration is defined as how
interesting courses for the students are, how students mastering the academic challenges, how
students’ perceived match between themselves, and the pace and requirements and identified
with the norms and cultures of the educational institution.

In their study examining international students’ academic and social integration in Norway,
Hauge and Pedersen (2018) found that the level of academic and social interactions between
Norwegian students and international students is relatively low. In this study, they cited student
surveys and government reports, including the three white papers that mention academic and

14
social integration of international students as a concern (e.g., p. 51-52 in St.meld. nr 14. 2008-
2009; p. 65 in Meld. St. 16 2016-2017). According to Hauge and Pedersen's (2018) findings,
less than 20% of Norwegian students participate in activities with international students, and
international students are not well integrated. The authors claim that international students are
considered a resource in improving internationalization at Norwegian higher education
institutions. Still, they are underused, and there is much room for improvement in international
students’ integration.

In conclusion, the studies by Jensen et al. (2018) and Hauge and Pedersen (2018) shed light on
the importance of academic and social integration of international students in the Scandinavian
context. Jensen et al.'s study focused on both social and academic integration in first-year
students' experiences and their overall success in their study programs. On the other hand,
Hauge and Pedersen's study highlighted the low levels of academic and social interactions
between Norwegian students and international students. According to their findings there is a
need for more efforts towards improving the integration of international students in Norwegian
higher education institutions.

15
3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING
STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC AND SOCIAL EXPERIENCE
Thus far, this thesis has presented a literature review on students’ academic and social
adjustment to the academic environment. Since the study aims to look at the relationships of
age, gender, interaction with faculty, and students’ academic and social experience, this chapter
will focus on previous research in these areas. In this thesis, two different theoretical approaches
are combined to develop a comprehensive theoretical framework to examine the international
students’ experiences during their studies: Tinto’s (1993) Academic and Social Integration
theory, and Astin’s (1984) Theory of Involvement. The two approaches complement each other
in our attempts to understand the factors contributing to students’ adjustment to the academic
environment, as they highlight different aspects of students’ integration into higher education
and their consideration about how to proceed. To get a better understanding of the effect of
interaction with faculty on student’s adjustment to the academic environment, and a better
conceptualization of the theoretical framework of this study, Astin’s (1984) Theory of
involvement will be presented in this section. At the end, a brief conclusion along with the way
that these theories are related to the research aims will be presented.

3.1 Tinto’s (1993) Theory of Student Attrition

A key theory guiding student integration research is a well-known model proposed by Tinto
(1975, 1993) that has built on Spady's (1970, 1971) work to explore the dropout process of
students. Academic and social integration of students into college or university is the core
concept of this longitudinal model and explains the complex interactions of factors that affect
students’ academic integration. According to Tinto’s revised Student Integration Model (1997),
students bring background characteristics and individual attributes such as family and
community backgrounds, educational experiences and achievements, skills, and value
orientations when they enter higher education institutions. These individual characteristics
create students’ educational expectations and commitments. It suggests that the decision to drop
out results from a low level of academic integration into higher education and a higher level of
commitment to the HEI; and the goal of completing college comes from a high degree of student
integration into the institution.

16
FIGURE 1
Tinto’s revised model of student attrition

Source: McCubbin (2003, p. 11)

Overall, Tinto’s theory provides a framework for understanding how different aspects of the
students’ experience affect students' college retention and success. Tinto stressed the
importance of student-faculty interaction as a significant factor in student retention, referring
to its positive influence on increasing social and academic integration. To define student-faculty
interaction, according to Pascarella & Terenzini (1977), all in-person contact between students
and professors/instructors outside of scheduled class time is considered student-faculty
interaction.

3.2 Astin’s Theory of Involvement

Astin’s (1984) Theory of Involvement adds to Tinto’s theory. The core concept of this theory is
that students’ involvement is directly linked to how much of the students’ physical and
psychological energy and efforts are used in the academic experience. (Astin, 1984).

Pascarella and Trenzini (2005) noted that Tinto’s and Astin’s (1984) theories are similar in their
fundamental dynamics to present an explicit, longitudinal, and interactional model. The only
difference is that Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) focuses specifically on the process of students
withdrawing from college. However, Astin emphasized the importance of quality of
involvement and, in contrast to other theories, considers students as active participants

17
responsible for their involvement in education. Furthermore, he asserted that more interaction
with faculty and peers leads to students’ more academic and social involvement.

According to Astin’s theory, student involvement is defined by the amount of physical and
psychological energy utilized for academic experience and students' behaviors. Astin (1984)
argues that students’ mental and physical engagement in interactions with faculty directly
influences students’ adjustment. Different interactions such as course or career-related
conversations, socializing interactions, and personal matter conversations are among the most
often distinguished interactions. Astin (1984) highlights that both academic and social aspects
of students’ experience at academic environment are important since both aspects affect their
learning outcomes. He argues that students with a higher level of involvement usually devote
more time and energy to activities on campus with academics and have more interaction with
faculty.

Astin (1984) recognized student-faculty interaction as one of the involvement forms that play
an important role in college adjustment. Academic involvement has a positive relationship with
students’ adjustment, but it should be at a certain level. Those students who spend most of their
time just on academic tasks and stay away from social activities become isolated from other
students and consequently cannot develop their social adjustment (Tinto, 1975, Astin, 1984).

Astin refers to students’ background and family characteristics, attributes, and experiences as
“input” and argues that these inputs influence the outcomes directly and through students’
engagement with the institutional environment. For example, Astin (1984) argues that students
who are more involved in the academic and social aspects of the college experience (i.e.,
spending more time and energy on campus interacting with faculty members and in extra-
curricular activities) see greater learning outcomes.

Tinto’s model distinguishes between academic and social integration. Academic integration is
mainly determined by a student's academic performance and level of intellectual development.
Academic integration takes place when students socialize with the academic context of the
study program and focuses on the subject matter addressed, the types of teaching activities,
students’ identification with the standards of the academic system as well as the degree of
student’s compliance with the instructions and requirements of the academic system (Tinto,
1975). In terms of social integration, the quality of students’ interactions with faculty and their
peer-group interactions are the primary components. However, Tinto suggests students’
interactions with faculty may also enhance academic integration.

18
Academic adjustment and integration are considered two complementary perspectives and are
often used interchangeably. However, as there are unclear theoretical groundings and
insufficient definitions for academic adjustment and integration, a multitude of interpretations
have been suggested for these two concepts, and the overlap of “academic integration” and
“academic adjustment” has been obscured (Willems et al., 2021).

Tinto's concept of academic integration is described as a "sense of belonging" throughout the

transition to higher education by Wolf-Wendel et al. (2009), and Hausmann et al. (2007)
defined it as a sense of acceptance and fitting the higher education institution community and
being a valued member of it. This aligns with an important idea expressed by Braxton (2000),
who defines social and academic integration as the psychological result of interactions with the
institutional systems (p. 63). So, theoretically, we can make a difference between academic
adjustment and integration. According to Baker and Siryk (1984), academic adjustment is a
process wherein students modify the attitudes and behaviors that enable them to acquire the
academic requirements they encounter during the first semester of their higher education.
According to Tinto’s theory, the academic adjustment process leads to a state of being at a
certain point in time. This psychological outcome, called academic integration, is based on how
students perceive and feel their experience in the new higher education environment (Wolf-
Wendel et al., 2009). Based on this argument, academic adjustment and integration are
considered two perspectives that complement each other, comprising components such as
students’ perception of fit with the new HE sphere, feeling supported and prepared (integration),
and the active process of adapting to the new behaviors and attitudes required for adjusting to
the new HE environment (Willems et al., 2021).

The two approaches complement each other in this study to understand different aspects of the
academic experience of international students and integration into the new higher education
environment.

3.3 Hypotheses Following the Theoretical Framework

The first hypothesis derived from the theoretical framework is that there would be a correlation
between students’ background characteristics (i.e., gender, age), which exist in students before
entering the higher education institution, with academic and social adjustment. According to
Tinto’s student integration theory (1975, 1993), individual personal characteristics affect
students’ adjustment to the academic environment. Therefore, students from different age
ranges would show different academic and social adjustment levels. Furthermore, Tinto (1975)
consider students’ age and sex as two factors that appear to be related to the student’s academic
19
and social adjustment. Considering the discussed models, in this thesis, the relation between
students’ social and academic adjustment levels and students’ background characteristics,
including age, gender, education level, the field of study, and time spent in Norway, were
examined.

The second hypothesis derived from the theoretical framework is that there would be a positive
correlation between the level of interaction with faculty and students’ social and academic
adjustment to higher education institutions. According to Astin’s theory of involvement, the
more interaction between students and faculty on campus, the better students’ social and
academic adjustment to the higher education institution. Developed from the theoretical
framework, which is based on Tinto’s student integration model and Astin’s involvement
theory, the hypothesis is that the more student interacts with faculty, the better social and
academic integration will have with the academic environment at the higher education
institution.

20
4 METHODOLOGY
This study uses a quantitative approach to give objective insight into international students’
academic and social experiences. A quantitative approach facilitates the statistical aggregation
of collected data and presents broad, generalizable, brief, and clear findings (Patton, 2002).

Specifically, this study applied multiple simple regressions to explore the relationship between
students’ background characteristics and academic and social experience in Norwegian
universities. The following chapter presents the methodological approach and discusses the
research design, sampling method, questionnaire design, hypotheses, data collection, and
analysis, followed by information on reliability and validity and potential limitations.

4.1 Research Design

The current thesis employs a cross-sectional design to collect data at a specific point in time via
a self-completion online survey. According to Bryman (2012), The cross-sectional survey
approach makes it possible for the researcher to use more than one case, describe the nature of
existing conditions, identify the possible correlation between the focused variables, the strength
of correlation, pattern of association, and the significance level. The characteristics of a
quantitative cross-sectional study mentioned above are required and consistent when exploring
the academic and social experience of international students while adapting to a new
educational environment.

4.2 Participants
This study's population is international students currently enrolled in two public universities in
Norway, university of Agder and university of Stavanger, to take a full degree at either the
bachelor's or master's level. The two universities chosen for this research are young universities
located in southern part of Norway. While students on short exchange programs are important,
their motivation and adjustment process likely look different; hence they are excluded. This
thesis aims to look directly at one specific group of students, international students in public
universities in Norway. One of the benefits of choosing only the Norwegian public university
context is that students generally do not pay tuition fees, so we can highlight relationships that
exist outside of socioeconomic factors. International students in private Norwegian universities
are omitted since they pay tuition fees, and this possibly affects their experiences.

Out of necessity, the current study used convenience sampling--a non-probability sampling
technique commonly employed in quantitative social research due to accessibility and
convenience but limiting the ability to generalize findings beyond the current sample (Bryman,

21
2012). The researcher contacted the international student office at five Norwegian public
universities: the Arctic University of Norway (UiT), the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU), the University of Agder (UiA), the University of Bergen (UiB), and the
University of Oslo (UiO). Universities have very restrictive policies regarding student survey
research, so only UiA and UiS agreed to participate. International students at both universities
received the survey via email on November 4th, followed by a reminder email on November
11th. The survey was open for voluntary participation between November 4 th and 15th.

4.3 Measures
Following Sikt1’s regulations (see Appendix D), the first part of the questionnaire presented
respondents with general information about the research, an explanation of how the data will
be handled and stored, and a consent letter requiring individuals’ electronic consent to move
forward. After, participants completed a demographic questionnaire regarding their age,
gender, field of study, level of study (degree), and time spent in Norway. Then, students
received a portion of two validated questionnaires related to their experience at the university
and with faulty, as explained below. Data was collected through Nettskjema, a secure and
private questionnaire platform.

4.3.1 Demographic Characteristics

After consent was given, students were asked to answer the following: gender (female, male,
other, prefer not to say), age (18-24 years old, 25-30 years old, 31-35 years old, 36 or older),
level of education (bachelor’s, master’s, other), Time spent in Norway (less than six months, 6-
12 month, more than 1 year, more than 2 years), and faculty enrolled in (see Appendix B).
These were used as the components for students’ background characteristics (Table 3,4).

4.3.2 Academic and Social Experience

As students’ academic and social experience has received a considerable amount of academic
attention throughout the years, there are several scales for measuring different dimensions of
student experience. Among the existing scales, this study uses “The College Adjustment
Questionnaire (CAQ) by O’Donnell et al. (2018), which is short, accessible, user-friendly,
reliable and representative of the variables being under investigation. The CAQ consists of 14
self-rating responses scored on a 5-point Likert scale from, ‘Very Inaccurate’ to ‘Very

1
Sikt, Strukturendring i kunnskapssektoren
NSD, Norsk Senter for Forskningsdata
From 1 January 2022 NSD is a part of Sikt- The knowledge sector’s service provider

22
Accurate’ that examines how students adjust to their university environment (O’Donnell et al.,
2018), for example, “I am succeeding academically” and “I am satisfied with my social
relationships.” O’Donnell and colleagues (2018) report the overall reliability of the CAQ as
0.82. Indiana University granted the license to use the CAQ for this research (see Appendix
A).

4.3.3 Reliability
Reliability is concerned with the instruments' consistency and determines whether the measure
produces the same outcome when done again. Reliability includes three areas: stability, internal
reliability, and inter-observer reliability (Bryman, 2012). Stability is not applicable to this study
because to determine stability, the measure should be repeated over time through the test-retest
method (Bryman, 2012). Due to the limited time to conduct this quantitative study, conducting
a test-retest method was extremely difficult. The second area is internal reliability which can
be tested by Cronbach’s alpha (Bryman, 2012). For this study, Cronbach’s alpha was used to
assess the internal reliability of the scales. According to Bryman (2012), Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient ranges from 0 (no internal reliability) to 1 (perfect internal reliability). Computing
Cronbach’s alpha determines the correlation of items in the scale and the researcher can identify
and remove those items that have little correlation with the total scale. The higher coefficient,
the more reliable the scale is. 0.8 is most employed as the acceptable level. The reliability tests
of all the scales used in this study are presented in chapter five. Lastly, inter-observer
consistency addresses the issue of subjective judgment which might be involved in recording
the data by the researcher (Bryman, 2012). Since this study is a cross-sectional survey design
and uses an online self-completion questionnaire as the research instrument, there is little
chance of subjective judgment to record and analyze statistical data.

Additionally, using a self-report survey for collecting data can have the risk of bias among the
respondents. First, there is a possibility of misinterpretation of questions by respondents.
Moreover, self-reports are subject to bias in terms of introspective ability and interpretation of
questions. All respondents may not be able to assess themselves accurately or interpret the
questions correctly and in the same way as others. The questions may have different meanings
to different respondents. Another limitation of self-reports is that respondents can be biased and
answer the way they think the researcher wants them to or make them more socially acceptable
responses instead of being honest.

23
The CAQ includes three functional subscales: Educational Functioning, Relational
Functioning, and Psychological Functioning. Educational Functioning assesses things like class
performance and therefore is a valid measure of Academic Adjustment. Relational Functioning
assesses social life, connectedness, and interpersonal relationships, as a measure of Social
Adjustment. Psychological Functioning assesses individual feelings about the college
experience, for example handling stress, and therefore discusses Emotional Adjustment. Five
items on this scale are reverse coded, including items 2, 8, 9, 11, and 13. Question 13 belongs
to the academic adjustment subscale, questions 2 and 9 are from the social adjustment subscale,
and questions 8 and 11 are in the psychological adjustment subscale. O’Donnell and colleagues
(2018) report the individual subscale reliabilities as 0.89, 0.84, and 0.78 respectively.

4.3.4 Validity

Validity is concerned with the consistency of measures and whether an indicator really
measures the concept it claims it’s measuring. There are different ways to establish validity in
social research (Bryman, 2012). In this study, construct validity, content validity, and external
validity will be addressed. According to Bryman (2012), to measure construct validity in the
present study, it is required to determine whether the Likert scales that measure dimensions of
student’s academic and social adjustment are actually measuring what they were supposed to
measure. This study used a Likert scale, which is a multiple indicator to measure a concept by
a multiple-item measure and through developing hypotheses based on the existing theories and
previous research conducted in the relevant field of students’ academic and social adjustment
to higher education institutions (Bryman, 2012). The CAQ and CSEQ have been used in
empirical studies (see chapter 2) that addressed similar topics. Content validity shows the
degree to which indicators or tests evaluate all aspects of a concept (de Vaus, 2014). As this
study aims to look at the relationship between age, gender, interaction with faculty and students’
academic and social experience each scale adequately represents each of the aims. Interaction
with faculty is measured by the “Experiences with Faculty” section of (CSEQ), different
dimensions of academic and social adjustment by (CAQ).

External validity is also very significant in quantitative research especially with cross sectional
and case studies (Bryman, 2012). External validity mainly concerns about how a study can be
generalizable to outside of the current context of the study. As this study employed a
convenience sampling strategy, there is not much external validity for this study and the
findings cannot be generalized to a wider population of international students. Secondly, the
ecological validity that according to Bryman (2012) addresses how well the findings are
24
applicable to the people’s every day, natural social setting. The ecological validity of this study
may be poor because of using a self-completion questionnaire as the research instrument. The
issue with the questionnaire that acquires data from participants is that it is not possible to find
out the difference between the participants’ behavior in the experiment setting and their real-
life (Bryman, 2012).

4.3.5 Student-Faculty Interaction

The second instrument used in this study is “College Students Experiences Questionnaire”
(CSEQ) developed by Pace and Kuh (1989). The (CSEQ) is a self-reporting instrument which
consists of 85 items and collects information about the student’s background, college activities,
the college environment, and estimate of gains. In this thesis, only the “Experiences with
Faculty” section was used to assess the frequencies of different types of Student-faculty
interactions. This section of the (CSEQ) made up of 10 items that were measured through a 4-
point Likert scale, from “Very often “to “Never”. None of the questions were reverse-coded in
this section. The license use of the CSEQ for this research has been granted by Indiana
University (see Appendix B).

4.4. Instrument

International Students’ Academic and Social Experience Questionnaire (ISASEQ) is the scale
used for this thesis. The reliability of the ISASEQ was determined by measuring internal
consistency. The result of this analysis is shown in Table 1. The Cronbach’s Alpha scores for
all the adjustment sub-scales and the overall reliability of the scale are presented. It indicates
high internal consistency for the instrument as a whole and within its’ sub-scales separately.

Table 1
ISASEQ Reliability
Scale Chronbach's Alpha Number of Items
Overall CAQ Reliability 0.89 14
Educational Functioning 0.83 5
Relational Functioning 0.90 5
Psychological Funcitoning 0.81 4
Overall ISASEQ Relaibiity 0.87 30
CSEQ 0.80 10

25
4.4 Ethical Considerations

For conducting a social study that involves human subjects, it is essential to consider ethical
issues. Prior to collecting data, an approval letter was obtained from the Sikt to ensure that
ethical considerations are followed. The questionnaire was designed in the authorized data
collection platform, Nettskjema. Using the quantitative approach helped the researcher to keep
an objective distance from the topic, which is especially important due to my own experiences
as an international student in Norway.

First, voluntary participation and informed consent should be considered (de Vaus, 2014). For
this study, the decision to complete the online questionnaire was by each individual who
received the invitation link, without any force or reward. The survey invitation was sent via
email and participants had the choice to click and complete it. An information-consent letter
was at the beginning of the questionnaire and participants had to consent (see Appendix I)
electronically before they proceed forward. Detailed information about the aim of the study, the
questionnaire, responsible parties, and how the data will be used and stored were presented on
the front page of the online survey. At the end of the questionnaire, to make sure that each
participant submitted in their own willingness, a submit button was added that participants had
to click on it to complete the questionnaire.

Other ethical issue that should be taken into consideration are no harm to participants,
participants’ privacy, Anonymity (de Vaus, 2014). It is important to note that this study
obtained an approval letter from the Norsk Senter for Forskningsdata (NSD) (see Appendix D).
This ensured that no harm comes to the participants during this study. Regarding anonymity,
all personal identifiers is removed, and participants’ identity could not be traced back. Besides,
data was collected through Nettskjema which is an authorized online service for data collection
(Nettskjema.no, 2022). Privacy of participants is guaranteed as Nettskjema automatically coded
each participants’ submission. Therefore, participants’ identity was not recognizable. All the
collected data was deleted at the end of project.

4.6 Data Collection and Analysis

Data was collected during the fall semester of 2022 through an online questionnaire. The survey
was sent through international office to 298 international students at UiA and 1557 international
students at UiS. Survey invitations were open for participants specifically from November 4th,
2022 – November 15th, 2022. The questionnaire was constructed in Nettskjema where the data
26
was collected. Table 2 shows the target population and respondents. Overall response rate in
the sample presented here is 7 %, which is relatively low.

Table 2

Number of international students who answered the ISASEQ questionnaire in UiA and UiS,
total target population in both universities (in parentheses), and response rates.

UiA respondents (total UiS respondents (total Total UiA + UiS respondents (total
population) population) population)
298(14096) 1557(12000) 1855(26096)

36 94 130

Response rate (%) 12% 6% 7%

4.6.1 Data Preparation and Cleaning

Raw data from Nettskjema was not amenable for statistical analysis and required extensive
cleaning. After importing the data from Nettskjema, Stata MP17 was used for analysis. Given the
small cell sizes across many university faculties, I categorized faculties into overarching fields
by combining the Faculty of Arts and Education, Faculty of Fine Arts, Faculty of Humanities
and Education into the field Humanities, Education, and Arts. Similarly, Faculty of
Engineering and Science, Faculty of Science and Technology became Science and Technology
and School of Business and Law, UiS Business School became Business as a field.
Consequently, five fields were compared.

Then, the reversed items flipped before calculating the average of the scales, and the average
of each subscale was created as a new variable to be used for conducting regressions.
Furthermore, items 2,8,9,1,13 in the CAQ scale were reversed items, thus their values flipped
before calculating the average of the scale.

Data was checked for missing values and three missing values founded and removed before
calculating the average of the scales.

Finally, averages were calculated for the CAQ and its’ three subscales including academic
adjustment, social adjustment and psychological adjustment and the average for CSEQ, and the
data was ready for some actual statistics.

27
 4.6.2 Statistical Analysis
To answer research question 1 descriptive statistics analysis (mean, standard deviation) has
been used and the relationship between each of the focused background characteristics and
adjustment sub-scales has been analyzed using simple regressions.

For research question 2, the relationship between the student's interaction with faculty
(independent variable) and students’ adjustment (dependent variable) has been analyzed using
regression analysis. Multiple regressions were conducted to determine the participants’
academic and social adjustment level and to find out if the relationship between each of the
independent variables (age, gender, time being in Norway, level of education, faculty, and
interaction with faculty) and the academic and social adjustment dimensions is statistically
significant or not (see Appendix G).

28
5. RESULTS
This chapter covers the main findings of the collected quantitative data in three main sections.
First, the description of demographic characteristics of the data will be presented. Then, the
reliability of the survey scales is presented. The last section focuses on the hypothesis test on
each of the hypotheses and the results of correlation and group differences. The correlation
analysis presented in this section aimed to reveal the relationships between the three adjustment
factors, educational, functional, and psychological adjustments, and the international students’
interaction with faculty. A Stata regression output is used to show the relationship between the
subscales of CAQ, and independent variables, age, gender, degree, time in Norway, faculty,
and interaction with faculty.

5.1 Descriptive Statistics

To provide a description of the participants’ demographic information related to the research,
descriptive statistics analysis is presented in this section. The collected data had a total of 130
participants.

In this research, five background characteristics were investigated: gender, age, level of
education (degree), field of study, and time being in Norway. In the following section, the
demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented.

5.1.1 Background Characteristics

Table 3 and Table 4 show the descriptive statistics related to participants’ gender. As presented
in the table, although the number of female respondents is more than the male respondents, the
difference is not large. Out of 130 respondents, 55 individuals (42%) listed themselves as male
and 73 individual (55.7%) identified their gender as female, 1(0.8%) responded other and 2
(1.5%) responded prefer not to say. This is similar to the gender differences we see in
Norwegian universities at large, where 60% of the students’ population is female and 40% is
male (Statistics Norway [SSB], 2021a). Also, close to the gender differences in international
students in Norway where 55% of the students’ population is female and 45% is male.

Participants’ age is categorized into four groups. Nearly 35 % of the participants (n=45) were
at the age of 18-24. The majority of the participants (39.7%, n=52) were at the age of 25 to 30
years old. Almost 16% (n =21) of the participants were at the age of 31 to 35 years old, and
nearly 10% (n =13) at the age of 36 years or older. This is also close to the trend in Norwegian
universities at large where we see 22% at age of over 30 years old. (Statistics Norway
[SSB], 2021b) .

29
According to Table 4, a total number of 113 full degree students participated and the
respondents include 25 bachelor’s students and 95 master’s degree students, counting for
approximately19% bachelor’s students and 72.5 % master’s students. The majority of the
respondents (56.5 %, n=74) have been in Norway for less than six months. Nearly 7% (n=9) of
them have been in Norway for six to twelve months, more than 22% (n=29) of them for more
than one year, and 14.5% (n= 19) for more than two years.

Table 3
Participant Demographics, University of Agder
University of Agder

School of
Engineering and Fine Humanities and Social
Business and
Science Arts Education Sciences
Law

All Students 5 2 19 3 11
Gender
Female 2 1 15 1 8
Male 3 1 4 2 3
Age
18-24 1 2 10 0 5
25-30 4 0 7 2 2
31-35 0 0 0 1 3
36+ 0 0 2 0 1
Degree Level
Bachelor 1 2 13 0 2
Master 4 0 6 3 9
Time in Norway
Less than 6 months 5 1 10 3 8
6-12 Months 0 0 0 0 1
More than 1 Year 0 1 5 0 2
More than 2 Years 0 0 4 0 0

30
Table 4
Participant Demographics, University of Stavanger
University of Stavanger Total
Science
Business Arts and Health
and
School Education Sciences
Technology

All Students 26 37 4 6 113

Gender
Female 17 14 3 3 64
Male 9 23 1 3 49
Age
18-24 5 12 0 0 35
25-30 12 17 1 2 47
31-35 8 5 0 1 18
36+ 1 3 3 3 13
Degree Level
Bachelor 2 1 1 0 22
Master 24 36 3 6 91
Time in Norway
Less than 6 months 11 17 1 4 60
6-12 Months 1 3 1 1 7
More than 1 Year 8 10 1 0 28
More than 2 Years 6 7 1 0 18

The International Students’ Academic and Social Experience Questionnaire (ISASEQ) in the
current study consisted of 4 subscales, made up of 30 items. As it is presented in Table 5 the
sub-scales in the current study consisted of Educational Functioning (Cronbach’s Alpha =
0.83), Relational Functioning (Cronbach’s Alpha =0.90), and Psychological Functioning
(Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.81), Experience with faculty (Cronbach’s Alpha =0.80). The sub-scales
has Excellent reliability. The overall reliability of the scale is also excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha
= 0.87).

31
Table 5
Descriptive Statistics on the CAQ
Item N Mean SD
Overall CAQ 113 3,16 0.30
Educational Functioning Subscale 113 3,63 0.85
(1) I am succeeding academically. 113 3,62 1,04
(5) I am doing well in my classes 113 3,33 1,01
(7) I am happy with the grades I am earning in my classes 113 3,53 1,12
(12) I am meeting my academic goals. 113 3,75 1,11
(13) I have performed poorly in my classes since starting college. * 113 2,24 1,10
Relaional Functioning Subscale 113 3,03 1,11
(2) I don’t have as much of a social life as I would like.* 113 2,80 1,35
(4) I am happy with my social life. 113 3,18 1,25
(9) I have had a hard time making friends since coming to college. * 113 2,92 1,44
(10) I am as socially engaged as I would like to be. 113 3,02 1,33
(14) I am satisfied with my social relationships. 113 3,23 1,18
Psychological Functioning Subscale 113 3,31 1,06
(3) I feel that I am doing well emotionally since coming to college. 113 3,13 1,31
(6) I am happy with how things have been going in college. 113 3,59 1,05
(8) I feel that I am emotionally falling apart in college. * 113 3,25 1,36
(11) I have felt the need to seek emotional counseling since coming to
college.* 113 3,26 1,52
Note: Items on a 5 point scale from 1= Very Inaccurate about me to 5=
Very Accurate about me

5.1.2 Academic Adjustment

Academic adjustment is measured by the educational functioning subscale which has 5
questions and one of the questions is reverse coded. Table 4 shows that the overall mean for
academic adjustment sub-scale is over 3. Since the mean is over 3, it is above neutral for the
educational sub-scale. The scoring for the sub-scales is like a closer score to 5 (which implies
very accurate about me) indicates a better adjustment level. The question CAQ13, which is
reversed coded in this sub-scale, “I have performed poorly in my classes since starting
college.*.” has the highest mean among the questions in this sub-scale. The mean for this
question is 3.75 (SD=1.11). The lowest mean in this sub-scale is for the Q7, “I am happy with
the grades I am earning in my classes.” M=3.33, SD=1.12.

5.1.3 Social adjustment

For the social adjustment sub-scale, which has five questions, a mean closer to 5 shows better
adjustment and a mean closer to 1 shows less adjustment. According to Table 5 the overall
mean for this sub-scale is 3.03, that is slightly over the natural mean score. The highest mean
is related to the question CAQ14 in this sub-scale “I don’t have as much of a social life as I

32
would like.*.” which is 3.23. The lowest mean is related to the CAQ2 in this sub scale in this
sub-scale, which is a reversed coded question, “I am satisfied with my social relationships.”
M=2.80. The social adjustment sub-scale’s mean shows that, in general, the level of social
adjustment among international students is slightly over the mid-point.

5.1.4. Psychological adjustment

The last sub-scale in this questionnaire examined international student’s’ psychological
adjustment and consists of four questions. The overall mean for this subscale is 3.31.

According to Table 5, the lowest mean belongs to the CAQ3, “I feel that I am doing well
emotionally since coming to college.” Which is 3.11, and the CAQ6 in this sub-scale “I am
happy with how things have been going in college.” has the highest mean 3.59. Table 5 presents
the summary of mean score for each adjustment sub-scales.

Academic adjustment (3.63), social adjustment (3.03), psychological adjustment (3.31) and
shows a positive level of adjustment according to the mean scores for each question. However,
there is no response at the extreme ends of the five-point Likert scale. Moreover, from the
analysis of the means for each sub-scales it can be concluded that the social adjustment has the
lowest mean among all of the adjustment sub-scales examined in this study (M=3.03, SD=1.11).
and the highest mean belongs to the academic adjustment (M=3.63, SD=0.85). It indicated that
international students participated in this study, are more academically adjusted to the
educational environment compared to socially or psychologically.

5.1.5 Interaction with Faculty

Interaction with faculty is measured by CSEQ which consists of 10 questions. The overall mean
for this subscale is 3.24. Table 6 shows that the overall mean for the CSEQ sub-scale is 3.24.
Since the mean is over 3, it is above neutral for the CSEQ sub-scale. The scoring for the sub-
scales is like a closer score to 4 (which implies very often) indicates a higher level of interaction.
The question CSEQ10, in this sub-scale, “worked with a faculty member on a research project”
has the highest mean among the questions in this sub-scale. The mean for this question is 3.56
(SD=0.74). The lowest mean in this sub-scale is for the CSEQ9, “Worked harder than you
thought you could to meet an instructor’s expectations and standards.” M=2.86, SD=0.94.

33
 Table 6
Descriptive Statistics on the CSEQ
Item N Mean SD
Overall CSEQ 113 3.24 0.47
(1) Asked your instructor for information related to a course you were
taking 113 2.98 0.66
(2) Discussed your academic program or course selection with a faculty
member 113 3.29 0.79
(3) Discussed ideas for a term paper or other class project with a faculty
member 113 3.18 0.80
(4) Discussed your career plans and ambitions with a faculty member 113 3.51 0.66
(5) Worked harder as a result of feedback from an instructor 113 2.92 0.94
(6) Socialized with a faculty member outside of class 113 3.53 076
(7) Participated with other students in a discussion with one or more
faculty members outside of class 113 3.23 0.82
(8) Asked your instructor for comments and criticisms about your
academic performance 113 3.38 0.71
(9) Worked harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor’s
expectations and standards 113 2.86 094
(10) worked with a faculty member on a research project 113 3.56 0.74
Note: Items on a 4 point scale from 1= Very Often to 4= Never

5.2. Is there a relationship between students’ background characteristics (e.g., age,

gender, level of study, time being in Norway, and field of study) and adjustment to the
university?
As age, gender, time in Norway, university, faculty, and degree can have an influence on
student’s adjustment, it is important to look at whether they have significance in this study.
Thus, the following will look at the background variables in relation to academic and social
adjustment.

5.2.1 Statistical Assumptions

Normality test is used to see whether the data are normally distributed or not. The two well-
known tests of normality, namely, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and the Shapiro–
Wilk test are most widely used methods for assessment of the normality of data. The Shapiro-
Wilk is recommended as the best tool for testing the normality of data as it provides better
power than the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (Ghasemi & Zahediasl, 2012). Hence this study uses
Shapiro-Wilk tests for normality test. The Shapiro-Wilk test is based on the correlation between
the data and the corresponding normal scores and if the p value of the test is lower than 0.05,
the data is not normally distributed (Ghasemi & Zahediasl, 2012).

34
Before conducting the correlation tests, a normality test was used to determine if data is
normally distributed. A Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted for the CAQ and CSEQ. As p = 0.26
(CAQ) and p = .0.005 (CSEQ), the CAQ and CSEQ data is normally distributed.

5.2.2 Relationship between Background Characteristics and CAQ

To determine if CAQ can be predicted based on age, gender, level of education. Time being in
Norway, faculty, and university, a multiple regression was conducted. The result showed that
the background characteristics were not able to statistically significantly predict the CAQ
(p =0.66, R2=0.03) .

In order to determine if lack of significance was due to multicollinearity, we next assessed

individual relationships between each variable and the CAQ.

5.2.3 Relationship between CAQ and Age

A simple regression test determined that participant age alone was not able to predict average
scores on the CAQ (p = 0.62, R2 = 0.00, see Table 7). Additionally, participant age alone was
unable to predict average scores on any of the three CAQ subscales: Educational Functioning,
Relational Functioning, nor Psychological Functioning (p = 0.70, 0.68, and 0.22, respectively;
Table 8).
Table 7
CAQ Scores by Age
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Age Group N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
18-24 35 3,17 0,26 Reference Group
25-30 47 3,12 0,33 -0,04 -0,73 0,47
31-35 18 3,23 0,23 0,05 0,62 0,54
36+ 13 3,19 0,34 0,01 0,17 0,87
Overall Model Fit
p 0,62
R2 0,00

35
Table 8
CAQ Subscales Scores by Age
Academic Social Psychological
Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
Age Group b t p b t p b t p
All Students
18-24 Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
25-30 0,07 0,41 0,68 0,01 0,06 0,95 0,08 0,38 0,71
31-35 0,15 0,63 0,53 0.14 0,43 0,67 0,29 0,96 0,90
36+ 0,31 1,14 0,26 0,40 1,12 0,26 0,67 1,97 0,05
Overall Model Fit
p 0,70 0,68 0,22
R2 -0,01 -0,01 0,01

5.2.3 Relationship between CAQ and Gender

Among 116 participants, 64 respondents choose their gender as “female”, 49 responded as
“male” and 3 chose “Other” as their gender. Before conducting the regression test, those 3
participants who chose their gender as “Other” were removed from the data set. A simple
regression test determined that participant gender alone was not able to predict average scores
on the CAQ (p = 0.36, R2 = 0.00, see Table 9).

Table 9
CAQ Scores by Gender
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Gender N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
Female 64 3,14 0,27 Reference Group
Male 49 3,19 0,33 -0,02 -0,4 0,68
Overall Model Fit
p 0,68
R2 0,001

Additionally, participant gender alone was unable to predict average scores on any of the three
CAQ subscales: Educational Functioning, Relational Functioning, nor Psychological
Functioning (p = 0.25, 0.87, and 0.14, respectively; Table 10).

36
 Table 10
CAQ Subscale Scores by Gender

5.2.4 Relationship between CAQ and Field of study

A simple regression test determined that participant field of study alone was not able to predict
average scores on the CAQ (p = 0.86, R2 = 0.01, see Table 11). Additionally, participant field
of study alone was unable to predict average scores on any of the three CAQ subscales:
Educational Functioning, Relational Functioning, nor Psychological Functioning (p = 0.95,
0.08, and 0.76, respectively; Table 12).

Table 11
CAQ Scores by Field of Study
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Field of Study N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
Business 29 3,12 0,29 Reference Group
Health Sciences 6 3,14 0,34 0,01 0,13 0,9
Humanities and 25 3,16 0,29 0,04 0,48 0,63
Education
Science and 42 3,2 0,29 0,07 1,06 0,29
Technology
Social Sciences 11 3,13 0.36 0,01 0,1 0,92
Overall Model Fit
p 0,86
R2 0,01

37
 Table 12
CAQ Subscales Scores by Field of Study
Academic Adjustment Social Adjustment Psychological Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
Field of Study b t p b t p b t p
All Students
Business Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
Health Sciences -0,21 -0,55 0,581 0,13 0,27 0,788 0,17 0,36 0,722
Humanities and -0,01 -0,08 0,937 -0,73 - 0,015 -0,16 -0,57 0,569
Education 2,47
Science and Technology -0,03 -0,14 0,885 -0,08 - 0,757 0,08 0,34 0,732
0,31
Social Sciences -0,19 -0,62 0,535 -0,12 - 0,747 -0,21 -0,56 0,579
0,32
Overall Model Fit
p 0,95 0,09 0,83
R2 0,006 0,035 0,013

5.2.5 Relationship between CAQ and Faculty

A simple regression test determined that participant faculty alone was not able to predict
average scores on the CAQ (p = 0.83, R2 = 0.03, see Table 13). Additionally, participant’s
faculty alone was unable to predict average scores on any of the three CAQ subscales:
Educational Functioning, Relational Functioning, nor Psychological Functioning (p = 0.50,
0.19, and 0.66, respectively; Table 14).

Table 13
CAQ Scores by Faculty
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Faculty N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
Arts and Education 4 3,26 0,13 Reference Group
Engineering and Science 5 3,31 0,23 0,04 0,22 0,82
Fine Arts 2 3,35 0,10 0,08 0,34 0,73
Health Sciences 6 3,14 0,34 -0,12 -0,63 0,53
Humanities and Education 19 3,12 0,32 -0,14 -0,85 0,39
Science and Technology 37 3,18 0,30 -0,07 -0,49 0,62
Social Sciences 11 3,13 0,36 -0,13 -0,73 0,46
Business and Law 3 3,26 0,10 -0,00 -0,03 0,98
UiS Business School 26 3,10 0,30 -0,15 -0,96 0,34
Overall Model Fit
p 0,83
R2 0,03

38
Table 14
CAQ Subscales Scores by Faculty
Academic Adjustment Social Adjustment Psychological Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
Faculty b t p b t p b t p
All Students
Arts and Education Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
Engineering and 0,02 -0,55 0,581 0,48 0,27 0,788 -0,18 -0,26 0,79
Science
Fine Arts -0,3 -0,08 0,937 -1,1 -2,47 0,015 -1,31 -1,41 0,16
Health Sciences -0,83 -0,14 0,885 0,16 -0,31 0,757 -0,43 -0,63 0,52
Humanities and -0,80 -0,62 0,535 -0,81 -0,32 0,747 -0,88 -1,50 0,13
Education
Science and -0,73 -0,11 -0,56 -1,00 0,31
Technology
Social Sciences -0,80 -0,09 -0,82 -1,31 0,19
Business and Law -0,7 -4,97e -0,02 -0,03 0,98
UiS Business -0,60 0,03 -0,67 -1,17 0,24
School
Overall Model Fit
p 0,502 0,19 0,66
R2 0,06 0,09 0,05

5.2.6 Relationship between CAQ and University

A simple regression test determined that participant university alone was not able to predict
average scores on the CAQ (p = 0.68, R2 = 0.00, see Table 15). Additionally, participant
university alone was unable to predict average scores on Educational Functioning, and
Psychological Functioning (p = 0.58, 0.66;). However, participant university alone was able to
predict average scores on relational functioning(p=0.01)(Table 16).

Consequently, we do not reject the null hypothesis one in the context of university. The
regression results also showed no statistically significant relationship between international
students’ university and other adjustment subscales.

39
 Table 15
CAQ Scores by University
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
University N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
Agder 31 3,18 0,28 Reference Group
Stavanger 82 3,15 0,31 -0,02 -0,4 0,68
Overall Model Fit
p 0,68
2
R 0,001

Table 16
CAQ Subscales Scores by University
Academic Adjustment Social Adjustment Psychological Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
University b t p b t p b t p
All Students
Agder Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
Stavanger -0,09 -0,55 0,58 0,58 2,54 0,01 0,09 0,43 0,66
Overall Model Fit
p 0,58 0,01 0,66
R2 0,002 0,05 0,001

5.2.7 Relationship between CAQ and Degree Program

A simple regression test determined that participant degree program alone was not able to
predict average scores on the CAQ (p = 0.95, R2 = 0.00, see Table 17). Additionally, participant
degree program alone was unable to predict average scores on any of the three CAQ subscales:
Educational Functioning, Relational Functioning, nor Psychological Functioning (p = 0.91,
0.50, and 0.98, respectively; Table 18)

40
Table 17
CAQ Scores by level of education (Degree)
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Degree N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,16 0,30
Bachelor 22 3,16 0,33 Reference Group
Master 91 3,17 0,30 0,00 0,06 0,95
Overall Model Fit
p 0,95
R2 0,00

Table 18
CAQ Subscales Scores by level of education (Degree)
Academic Adjustment Social Adjustment Psychological Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
Degree b t p b t p b t p
All Students
Bachelor Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
Master -0,02 -0,11 0,916 0,17 0,68 0,5 0,006 0,03 0,98
Overall Model Fit
p 0,91 0,5 0,98
R2 0,00 0,004 0

5.2.8. Relationship between CAQ and Time Spent in Norway

To determine if significant differences in academic and social adjustment exist between
students who spent a long time in Norway or been in Norway for a short time, a simple
regression was conducted to predict average scores on the CAQ. “6-12 months” was used as
the reference group in our model. There was a significant difference between mean scores for
students who has been in Norway for 6-12 months and those students who spent more than
2years in Norway(p=0.03). Consequently, we cannot reject null hypothesis one in terms of time
being in Norway. However, there was no significant difference between mean scores for
students that spent less than 6 months, more than 1 year and those who have been in Norway
for 6-12months (p=0.15, and p=0.80 respectively).

The overall model was therefore significant (p = 0.02) and accounts for 8.5% variance in CAQ
scores (R2 = 0.083). Also, there was no significant difference between mean scores for students
who have been in Norway for 6-12months (mean = 3.30) and students who have been in

41
Norway for less than 6months (mean=3.13), students who have been in Norway more than 1
year(mean=3.27), students who spent more than 2 years in Norway (mean=3.02).

Another post-hoc analysis by subscale also showed a significant relationship between Time
being in Norway and average scores on the social adjustment subscale (p=0.03).

However no significant relationship between Time being in Norway and average scores on the
academic, and psychological adjustment subscales individually (p = 0.76, and 0.32
respectively). The descriptive data of the relationships between CAQ and Time being in
Norway are presented in Table 19,20.

Table 19
CAQ Scores by Time being in Norway
Overall CAQ
Descriptive Statistics Simple Regression
Time N Mean SD b t p
All Students 113 3,22 0,83
6-12 Months 7 3,3 0,18 Reference Group
Less than 6 months 60 3,13 0,27 -0,16 -1,42 0,16
More than 1 year 28 3,27 0,27 -0,03 -0,25 0,81
More than 2 years 18 3,02 0,38 -0,27 -2,13 0,04
Overall Model Fit
p 0,02
R2 0,08

Table 20
CAQ Subscales Scores by Time being in Norway
Academic
Social Adjustment Psychological Adjustment
Adjustment
Simple Regression Simple Regression Simple Regression
Time b t p b t p b t p
All Students
6-12 Months Reference Group Reference Group Reference Group
Less than 6 0,13 0,41 0,68 0,47 1,09 0,278 0,09 0,23 0,82
months
More than 1 year 0,58 1,66 0,1 -0,05 -0,12 0,902 0,07 0,16 0,875
More than 2 years -0,06 -0,17 0,86 -0,19 -0,4 0,689 -0,27 0,57 0,57
Overall Model Fit
p 0,04 0,052 0,63
R2 0,07 0,06 0,01

42
5.3 Is there a relationship between students’ interaction with faculty and adjustment to
the university?
Test H2: Correlation Between Academic and Social adjustment and Interaction with
faculty.
H2: There is no relationship between student-faculty interaction and students’ academic and
social adjustment.

A simple regression indicated that student scores on interaction with faculty was able to predict
scores on academic adjustment (p = .004). However, the slope was negative (b = -0.16),
indicating that as students reported more interaction with faculty, they felt less adjusted. Still,
the amount of explained variance is quite small (R2 = 7.08%). Figure 1 shows a scatterplot of
individual scores on the Interaction with Faculty and CAQ, along with the estimated regression
line in red. Consequently, interaction with faculty has a significant effect on students’
adjustment. Accordingly, students’ interaction with faculty and their adjustment to the
university are negatively correlated. Therefore, we can reject the null hypothesis two.

Moreover, the regression models for the three subscales of CAQ showed that there is a
significant correlation between students’ interaction with faculty and academic adjustment
subscale. The p value for this regression was 0.01. However, the relationship between the
interaction with faculty and social adjustment subscale (p=0.15), and psychological adjustment
(p=0.053) was not statistically significant.

43
FIGURE 2
Scatterplot for CSEQ and CAQ

Note: The red line indicates the fitted regression line.

44
FIGURE 3

Scatterplot for CSEQ and Academic adjustment

Note: The red line indicates the fitted regression line

The descriptive statistics showed that overall, students scored above the neutral point on the
Likert scale, indicating overall levels of adjustment. The simple regressions of demographic
variables on the CAQ found a statistically significant relationship between only one of the
demographic variables, time being in Norway, and the CAQ.

Post-hoc simple regressions of demographics variables on CAQ subscales also found a

significant relationship between academic adjustment subscale and time being in Norway.
However, no other significant relationship founded between the CAQ subscales and age,
gender, degree, university and faculty.

The final simple regression of interaction with faculty found that interaction was able to predict
CAQ and the academic adjustment subscale, but not the social and psychological adjustment
subscales.

After statistical analysis of the collected data and by testing the null hypothesis of relationship
between variables, it is discovered that male adjustment to the higher education environment
was slightly higher than female. However, it was not statistically significant. Moreover, there

45
is a correlation between international students ‘adjustment and the time they lived in Norway.
At the same time, it is inferred that international students who have more interaction with
faculty showed less adjustment to the university. Finally, there is no significant difference in
international students’ age, degree, faculty/ field of study, university, and their adjustment.

46
6 DISCUSSION
This chapter presents a more in-depth analysis of the results presented in Chapter 5. This study
examined the relationship between international students’ social and academic adjustment and
background characteristics and interaction with faculty. The results also indicated some
important relationships between student-faculty interaction and students’ adjustment. This
chapter also provides a discussion, practical implications, limitations, theoretical reflection, and
further research.

The data presented in the previous chapter was to investigate if there is a statistically significant
relationship between international student’s adjustment to university, background
characteristics including age, gender, degree, time being in Norway, faculty or field of study,
and their interaction with faculty. Among all the focused variables explored in this study, only
time being in Norway and interaction with faculty were found to have a statistically significant
relationship with students’ adjustment to university.

According to the analysis of the descriptive statistics for research questions, the mean score for
three subscales of CAQ (academic adjustment, social adjustment, psychological adjustment)
was higher than the neutral point (3) in the 5-point Likert scale. The highest mean score belongs
to the academic adjustment subscale which indicates a higher level of academic adjustment of
international students. On the other hand, the social adjustment subscale showed the lowest
mean score which indicated a lower level of international students’ social adjustment compared
to other adjustment sub-scales examined in this study. The findings of the regression models
revealed that one of the focused background characteristics examined in this study has a
significant relationship with international students’ adjustment (and the adjustment sub-scales)
to university. There is a positive relationship between time being in Norway and students
adjustment to university. In other words, in this study, by increasing the time being in Norway,
the international students’ adjustment to university increases. However, no significant
relationship found between international students’ adjustment and other focused background
characteristics including age, gender, degree, faculty, and university. Therefore, a clear pattern
to show how is the relationship between these background characteristics of international
students and their academic and social adjustment to the university was not found. Additionally,
International students’ interaction with faculty was found to have a statistically significant
relationship with adjustment to university. According to the results of the regressions students’
interaction with faculty significantly predicted students’ adjustment to university. The results

47
of the regression indicated that 7.08% of the variance in CAQ can be predicted from the
frequency of students’ interaction with faculty. However, it was also found that the interaction
with faculty has a negative correlation with the students’ adjustment. In other words, as the test
results showed that an increase in interaction with faculty leads to lower students’ adjustment.

6.1 Empirical Contribution

This thesis has presented two research questions that addressed the relationships between
students’ background characteristics such as age, gender, faculty or field of study, level of
education, time being in Norway, as well as interaction with faculty and students’ academic and
social experience. This includes the use of The College Adjustment Questionnaire (CAQ) by
O’Donnell et al. (2018), and The Collage Student Experience Questionnaire (CSEQ) by Pace
(1998). This study applied a survey design and collected information from international
students who enrolled in two public universities in Norway in the academic year 2022-23.

The theoretical framework presented in chapter three is framed by two main theories that have
similar underlying dynamics. Tinto’s (1993) Theory of Students attrition and Astin’s (1984)
Theory of Involvement. Tinto indicated how different aspects of the students’ experience
affects students’ retention and success at college. Tinto stressed the importance of student-
faculty interaction as a significant factor in student retention referring to its’ positive influence
on increasing social and academic integration.

Astin (1984) presents a model that explains students’ background and family characteristics,
interaction with faculty as involvement activities and refers to these factors as “input”. Astin
argues that students more involvement in academic and social aspects of the college experience
i.e., spending more time and energy on campus interacting with academics and faculty members
and participating in the extra-curricular activities and student organizations brings about more
learning outcomes for students.

This study examined the relationship between international students’ interaction with faculty
and their academic and social adjustment. The findings of this study revealed that international
students’ adjustment to university is related to their interaction with faculty.

Moreover, the relationship between a few background characteristics including age, gender,
university, level of education, faculty, and international students’ academic and social
adjustment to the university was investigated. However, no statistically significant relationship
was found between the focused background characteristics and students’ adjustment to
university.

48
The findings in regard to each research question indicated that: RQ1. This study was unable to
find a statistically significant relationship between international student’s background
characteristics and their academic and social adjustment. Research question 1 was exploring
the relationship between age, gender, university, level of education, faculty and students’
adjustment to university. The CAQ was used to answer this question, and find out the
relationship between the focused background characteristic and three subscales: educational
functioning, social functioning, and psychological functioning. Moreover, this study found a
significant relationship between international students’ interaction with faculty and their
adjustment to university, however, this was in the opposite direction than the researcher would
predict given previous literature.

This study contributes to the understanding of the academic and social experience of
international students and the factors that can influence their adjustment process into the new
educational environment. This study looked at a phenomenon that could be researched further
in order to benefit students’ academic and social experience, simultaneously benefiting student
academic outcomes and social well-being. The section below elaborates on the findings
summarized above.

6.1.1 RQ1: Students’ Adjustment and Demographic Characteristics

In previous research, student adjustment has been shown to have a relationship with age, and
gender. Jones (2013) found that gender identity is a major contributor to the students’ overall
interactions on campus and is a powerful construct in predicting educational attainment.
Melendez (2016) revealed that there is a significant correlation between gender and academic
adjustment. And indicated that female students have a higher level of academic adjustment than
male students. A study by Enochs and Roland (2006) reconfirmed as other studies have, that
there were differences in the adjustment level based on gender, and males were found to have
a significantly higher overall adjustment level than females to the college environment.
Calaguas (2011), and Shabeeb (1993) also found differences in adjustment difficulties between
males and females. Despite previous research finding this relationship, this thesis, similar to
Stuart’s (2000) study, found no significant relationship between students’ adjustment and
gender.

In regard to age, Calaguas (2011) found that age could be related to adjustment difficulties and
concluded that there was a significant relationship between students’ academic adjustment
difficulties and age. The findings of the present study were in contrast with Calaguas (2011)
and Shabeeb (1993). The present study found no significant differences between students’
49
adjustment based on age. These findings, on the other hand, are similar to Stuart’s (2000)
research in that showed no difference between age categories on overall adjustment to college.

In regard to faculty or field of study, Shabeeb’s (1993) study showed that the problems that
international students face while adjusting to a new educational environment vary based on
their field of study. His study found that students enrolled in arts and humanities fields were
more likely to experience difficulties adjusting to university in the U.S. This is contradictory to
the results of this study that indicated no statistically significant relationship between
international students’ faculty (field of study) with their adjustment to university. However, this
finding is similar to wang’s (2003) study that showed there is no significant statistical
relationship between the background factors including the field of study, and students’
adjustment process.

Students’ level of education was also found not to have any significant difference between
students’ academic and social adjustment. This variable was considered because previous
research suggested that being either an undergraduate or graduate student affects how easily a
student can adjust to the educational environment. In terms of the level of education, the
findings of the present study is contradictory to the findings of Shabeeb(1993), Mustaffa and
Ilias (2013) that reported the level of education as a significant factor that plays a vital role in
international students’ cross-cultural adjustment to university. The present study found no
significant differences between students’ adjustments based on their level of education.

6.2.2 RQ2. Students’ Adjustment and Interaction with Faculty

The results of the regression tests showed that 4.5% of the variance in international student
adjustment can be accounted for their interaction with faculty. According to these results,
students’ interaction with faculty negatively affected students’ adjustment to the university.
This means that there is a negative correlation between the frequency of international students’
interaction with faculty and their adjustment to the university. In other words, a lower level of
interaction with faculty leads to a better students’ adjustment to university. In previous research,
interaction with faculty has been identified to have a relationship to students’ adjustment. Glass,
Kociolek, Wongtrirat, Lynch, & Cong (2015); (Kim & Sax, 2014; Mayhew et al., 2016). Similar
to previous research finding this relationship, this study found a significant relationship between
students’ interaction with faculty and their adjustment to university but in a different way.
Previous research showed that more interaction with faculty leads to more students’ adjustment,
while according to the findings of the current study, students who scored higher in their
interaction with faculty, showed lower levels of adjustment. This finding could be explained by
50
the sampling method that was chosen. Convenience sampling does not guarantee that the
sample is distributed evenly, resulting in this study’s sample having a far larger percentage of
students being in Norway for less than 6 months.

Moreover, the findings of this study showed that there is a significant correlation between
students’ interaction with faculty and academic adjustment. However, no significant
relationship was found between the students’ interaction with faculty and social and emotional
adjustment.

6.4 Limitations
As with any other research study, there were several limitations of the present study that need
to be discussed. Regarding methodology, convenience sampling, which is a non-probabilistic
approach, was utilized for recruiting participants. A request for conducting the survey was sent
to the five public universities in Norway with the most international students, but only UiA and
UiS agreed to forward the survey to their international students. This sampling strategy not only
limited the population’s representation of the sample but also affected the data quality. Besides,
due to the reasons mentioned in chapter four, the sample size for this study was not big enough
to make the conclusion generalizable. Out of the 2,000 international students between UiA and
UiS, 130 responded to our survey (Response rate = 7%). Given the small response rate, our
sample may not be representative of all UiA and UiS international students. Further, small
sample sizes can lead to more false negatives as achieving significant p-values becomes more
difficult. The rule of thumb is 30 participants per condition, but I was far from achieving this
goal (Table 2). Using a larger sample size could have provided more information about
students’ experience at universities. Additionally, the study’s population was all international
degree students studying at public Norwegian higher education institutions. While the online
survey of this study was initially designed to be distributed to all the international degree
students in Norway (approximately 25,000 students), due to the universities’ regulations for
forwarding information to students from the international offices, the population was limited to
a sample of 1856 students in two public universities (UiA and UiS). As a result, a total of only
130 international students participated in the survey. This study could not include the total
population of international students enrolled in Norwegian universities. Therefore, is not
representative of the whole population of international students in Norway.

Furthermore, the survey was conducted in English. Since English was not the native language
for many of the participants, they may not understand the survey questions or interpret questions

51
in the same way. Another possible limitation of the study is that data was collected solely
through the self-reported online survey. Employing a wider variety of data sources and
collection methods such as mixed-methods research design and triangulation techniques, which
was extremely difficult due to the fact that there is limited time for conducting a master’s thesis,
could have increased the quality of the generated data and provided some more in-depth insights
into understanding the academic and social experience of international students in Norway.

Besides, the theoretical framework for this study was formed based on two theories that focused
on specific dimensions of student adjustment and attrition to university. However, other
theoretical models of university transition focused on other variables such as self-esteem or
expectations about higher education that can have a significant effect on students’ adaptation
could be considered to provide a more detailed picture of student’s adjustment.

In addition, the analytical framework used in this study describes only some parts of the big
picture. The social and academic integration of students happens in a diverse and complicated
context where the students’ backgrounds and environments are more complexly interrelated
than what was described in the analytical framework.

Another limitation of this study is that the survey was conducted in November. This means that
the students were in their first or the third semester. According to the data, most of the
participants were at their first semester. Therefore, this study is not representative of the whole
experience of students in University and it is predictable that most of the international students
dealing with the same challenges, and this could affect their adjustment.

52
7 CONCLUSION
The importance of students’ experience, and the adjustment process is agreed upon, yet the
complexity of various dimensions of students’ experience requires more studies in the area to
gain a better understanding of how higher education institutions can improve their student’s
academic and social adjustment. In addition, international students are in a more vulnerable
position compared to other students in higher education institutions, and review studies have
shown that students’ academic and social adjustment process at the postgraduate level is under-
researched.

This thesis set out to look at the relationship between international students’ experience with
academic and social adjustment. An analytical cross-sectional design was used to address the
research aims, and the results of the analyzed quantitative data collected through an online
survey using found that international students’ adjustment and their interaction with faculty
have a significant relationship. Students with more interaction with faculty showed a lower
level of adjustment to university compared to other students. Therefore, the relationship
between international students’ adjustment and their interaction with faculty was negative. In
addition, this study could find a significant relationship between one of the students’
demographic characteristics and their adjustment experience. Students who lived in Norway for
more than 2 years showed higher levels of social adjustment than those students who spent a
short time in Norway. Accordingly, time being in Norway had a significant relationship with
students’ adjustment.

This thesis contributes to the academic world in the understanding of the academic and social
experience of international students and the factors that can influence their adjustment process
into the new educational environment. This study looked at a phenomenon that could be
researched further in order to benefit students’ academic and social experience, simultaneously
benefiting student academic outcomes and social well-being.

7.1 Practical Implications

An important implication from these study results is for universities to help international
students to have a quality and positive experience at the university, with high levels of academic
and social adjustment. The present study highlights the importance of background
characteristics on students’ academic and social adjustment. The finding of the current study
showed that international students’ academic and social adjustment to universities has a
significant relationship with students’ interaction with faculty. This will be notable for

53
universities specifically international office and admission units to consider these factors when
planning for international students’ academic and social affairs at university.

Furthermore, universities similar to the focused universities in this study are recommended to
expand their adjustment plans to facilitate international students’ involvement in social
activities in higher education institutions. Allocation of resources for extracurricular activities
and planning such activities specifically for international students may encourage them to
actively participate in those programs.

7.2 Theoretical and Methodological Contributions

This study has constructed a new scale to address international students’ academic and social
experiences at higher education institutions. This scale addressed students’ educational,
relational, and psychological adjustment as well as experience with faculty. The scale had
excellent internal reliability that found significant relationships that could contribute to the
literature in the field of students’ experience, social and academic adjustment.

The conclusion of this study supported only one of the theories used to structure the theoretical
framework. Tinto’s theory of Student Attrition (1987) was an important part of the theoretical
framework structured for this study and the conclusion supported this theory. Tinto (1987)
stated that students enter higher education institutions with different background characteristics,
skills, and dispositions that affect their academic and social experiences at the institution. It
provided a clear insight into the way a student’s adjustment to an educational environment can
alter based on background characteristics. The findings of this study did not indicate that
background characteristics have a direct influence on students’ academic and social experience
at higher education institutions. Perhaps, Tinto’s theory would have been better suited if the
study was conducted in a period of time closer to the time it developed.

If time allowed, this study could have considered students’ academic and social adjustment with
another scale as well. This could have provided insight into the adjustment challenges an
international student face when entering a new educational environment and compare the
adjustment level at a time close to their graduation with that as well.

Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement was used for students’ interaction with faculty and the
thesis author has reflected on this after conducting the analysis and discussed previously.
Similar to Astin’s theory, the findings of this study indicated that interaction with faculty affects
students’ adjustment to the institutional environment. However, in contrast to Astin’s theory
the relationship between interaction with faculty and international students’ adjustment was

54
negative. This might be because of the focused population. This theoretical model could have
been better suited if the population was not specifically international students or if the research
was conducted in a country with a different education system.

This study examined the relationship between age, gender, interaction with faculty, and three
adjustment subscales at university. It was found that none of the focused background
characteristics had a significant relationship with a specific adjustment sub-scale and overall
adjustment to university. It was also indicated that international students’ adjustment is
correlated with none of the personal-emotional, educational, and social adjustment sub-scales
of CAQ.

7.3 Future Research

As mentioned earlier, for the current study only a quantitative method was used. To further
study this issue, a qualitative or mixed method approach might be utilized with a larger
population to investigate students’ adjustment process to the academic environment and gain a
more detailed understanding of the relationships between each factor and the academic and
social experience of the students. Also, for further research, a study can employ a longitudinal
design, to measure students’ adjustment twice in one year to find out if there have been any
changes in students’ adjustment.

Moreover, this study focused on the effect of students’ interaction with faculty on their
academic and social experience. Future research with participants from different universities is
recommended to look closer at university and faculty differences. Also, including other
countries with similar educational systems could provide the opportunity to make a comparison
between universities. Besides, further research can be conducted considering more recruitment
time.

Future studies are needed to examine the generalizability of the employed model in this study
to a different population and context. It would also be interesting to investigate different types
of student-faculty interaction to find out which type of interaction could be more effective on
students’ adjustment. The present study only looked at the frequency of interactions between
students and faculty. Including questions about different types of interaction such as in-person
meetings or digital meetings, individual or group meetings, and electronic communications,
perhaps would have provided better insight into this relationship.

The results showed that interaction with faculty has a significant relationship with students’
educational adjustment. However, the results have not explained how and to what extent this

55
factor may affect students’ academic and social experiences. Future studies may investigate
which type of interaction i.e. face to face meetings or online meetings, individual or group
meetings, between students and faculty may affect international students’ academic or social
experiences.

Further studies in this area could help to find out which strategies can help higher education
institutions to enhance the academic and social adjustment process of international students and
to minimize the challenges international students face while adjusting to a new educational
environment.

56
REFERENCES
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations
and Realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305.
https://doi.org/10.1177/102831530730354

Awadh, M. (2019). The Relationship Between the Quality of Academic Advising and the
Perception of Academic Outcomes of First-year Saudi College Students (Doctoral
dissertation, Edgewood College).

A world of opportunities - international student mobility in higher education Meld. St. 7

(2020–2021).

Beine, M., Noël, R., and Ragot, L. (2014). Determinants of the international mobility of
students. Econ. Educ. Rev. 41, 40–54. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.03.003

Brooks, R., & Waters, J. (2010). Social networks and educational mobility: The experiences of
UK students. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(1), 143-157.

Bridgeman, B., & Wendler, C. (1991). Gender differences in predictors of college mathematics
performance and in college mathematics course grades. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 83(2), 275.

Beelen, J. (2014). The other side of mobility: The impact of incoming students on home
students. In B. Streitwieser (Ed.), Internationalisation of higher education and global
mobility, 287-299.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed., pp. xli, 766). Oxford University Press.

Chrysikos, A., Ahmed, E., & Ward, R. (2017). Analysis of Tinto’s student integration theory
in first year undergraduate computing students of a UK higher education institution.
International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 19(2/3), 97–121.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-10-2016-0019

Calaguas, G. M. (2011). Sex differences and the relation of age in adjustment difficulties among
college freshmen. Journal of Advances in Developmental Research, 2(2), 221-226.

De Wit, H. (2013). Internationalisation of higher education, an introduction on the why, how

and what. In H. De Wit (Ed.), An introduction to higher education internationalisation
(pp. 13–46). CHEI) Universit`a Cattolica del Sacro Cuore.

57
De Vaus, D. A. (2014). Surveys in social research (6th ed). Routledge.

Enochs, W. K., & Roland, C. B. (2006). Social adjustment of college freshmen: The importance
of gender and living environment. College Student Journal, 40(1).

Forbes-Mewett, H. (2016). “Foreward,” in Exploring the Social and Academic Experiences of

International Students in Higher Education Institutions, eds K. Bista and C. Foster
(Hershey, PA: IGI Global).

Forbes-Mewett, H. (2020). Vulnerability and resilience in a mobile world: The case of

international students. Journal of International Students, 10(3), ix-xi.

Ghasemi, A., & Zahediasl, S. (2012). Normality Tests for Statistical Analysis: A Guide for
Non-Statisticians. International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 10(2), 486–
489. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.3505

Glass, C., Kociolek, E., Wongtrirat, R., Lynch, J., & Cong, S. (2015). Uneven experiences: The
impact of student-faculty interactions on international students’ sense of belonging.
Journal of International Students, 5(4), 353–367.

Hauge, Magnus Strand, and Lars Fredrik Pedersen (2018). Academic and Social Integration of
International students in Norway.
www.nokut.no/globalassets/studiebarometeret/2018/studiebarometeret_-5-2018.pdf.

Jensen, F., Henriksen, E. K., Holmegaard, H. T., Madsen, L. M., & Ulriksen, L. (2018).
Balancing Cost and Value: Scandinavian Students’ First Year Experiences of
Encountering Science and Technology Higher Education. Nordina: Nordic studies in
science education, 14(1), 3-21.

Jones, R. (2013). The Vulnerable Ones: The Intersections of Race and Gender on Academic
Adjustment of First Time In College (FTIC) African American Students (Doctoral
dissertation).

Kim, Y. K., & Lundberg, C. A. (2016). A Structural Model of the Relationship between
Student-Faculty Interaction and Cognitive Skills Development among College Students.
Research in Higher Education, 57(3), 288-309.

Keels, M. (2013). Getting them enrolled is only half the battle: College success as a function of
race or ethnicity, gender, and class. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83(2pt3),
310-322.

58
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.

McCubbin, I. (2003). An examination of criticisms made of Tinto’s 1975 student integration

model of attrition. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.

Melendez, M. C. (2016). Adjustment to college in an urban commuter setting: The impact of

gender, race/ethnicity, and athletic participation. Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory & Practice, 18(1), 31-48.

Mesidor, J. K., & Sly, K. F. (2016). Factors that contribute to the adjustment of international
students. Journal of international students, 6(1), 262-282.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (Third Edition). California:
Sage.

Pandit, K. (2007). The importance of international students on our campuses. Yearbook Assoc.
Pacific Coast Geograph. 69, 156–159. doi: 10.1353/pcg.2007.0012

Mustaffa, C. S., & Ilias, M. (2013). Relationship between Students Adjustment Factors and
Cross Cultural Adjustment: A Survey at the Northern University of Malaysia.
Intercultural communication studies, 22(1).

Meld. St. 16 2016-2017. Kultur for kvalitet i høyere utdanning.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-16-20162017/id2536007/.
Modood, T. (2007/2013). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Oxford: Polity Press.

Meld. St. 7 2014-2015. Langtidsplan for forskning og høyere utdanning 2015-2024 -

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/Meld-St-7-20142015/id2005541/

Meld. St. 16 2016-2017. Kultur for kvalitet i høyere utdanning.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-16-20162017/id2536007/

Nilsson, Per A., and Lars Westin. "Ten years after. Reflections on the introduction of tuition
fees for some international students in Swedish post-secondary education." Education
Inquiry (2022): 1-21.

Severiens, S. E., & Schmidt, H. G. (2009). Academic and social integration and study progress
in problem based learning. Higher Education, 58(1), 59-69.

59
St.meld. nr 14. 2008-2009. Internasjonalisering av utdanning.
https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/stmeld-nr-14-2008-2009-/id545749/

Norwegian Agency for International Cooperation and Quality Enhancement in Higher

Education (2019). International Students in Norway; Contributors to Quality in Higher
Education https://diku.no/en/reports/international-students-in-norway-contributors-to-
quality-in-higher-education.

OECD (2019), Education at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris,
https://doi.org/10.1787/f8d7880d-en

O'Donnell, M. B., Shirley, L. A., Park, S. S., Nolen, J. P., Gibbons, A. M., & Rosén, L. A.
(2018). The college adjustment questionnaire: A measure of students' educational,
relational, and psychological adjustment to the college environment. Journal of College
Student Development, 59(1), 116-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2018.0009

Parliament, E., For Internal Policies of the Union, D.-G., Egron-Polak, E., Howard, L., Wit, H.,
& Hunter, F. (2016). Internationalisation of Higher Education. European Parliament,
10.2861/6854.

Pace, C. R., & Kuh, G. D. (1998). College Student Experiences Questionnaire, Fourth Edition.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning.

Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes. Review of

Educational Research, 50 (4), 545-595.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1978). Student-faculty informal relationships and

freshman year educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Research, 71 (4), 183-189.

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights
from twenty years of research. Vol. 1. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of
research. Vol. 2. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rienties, B., Beausaert, S., Grohnert, T., Niemantsverdriet, S., & Kommers, P. (2012).
Understanding academic performance of international students: The role of ethnicity,
academic and social integration. Higher education, 63(6), 685-700.

60
Spencer-Oatey, H. & Dauber (2015) How internationalised is your university? From structural
indicators to an agenda for integration. GlobalPAD Working papers.
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/globalpadinterculturalMay2021.

Shabeeb, S. S. (1996). Saudi and Arabian Gulf students' adjustment problems in Eastern
Washington. Gonzaga University.

Stuart, M. C. (2000). An investigation of locus of control, psychological adjustment, and

adjustment to college among international students from the Caribbean, enrolled at a
private, historically black university. Howard University.

Statistisk sentralbyrå (2019). Studenter i Høyere Utdanning. Retrieved from

https://www.ssb.no/utdanning/statistikker/utuvh

Statistics Norway (2021a). Table 09817: 05576: Students in tertiary education in Norway, by
sex, contents and year [Statistics]. https://
https://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/05576/tableViewLayout1/

Statistics Norway (2021b). Table 06129: Resident students in higher education in Norway , by
age, contents, year and sex [Statistics]. https://
https://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/06129/tableViewLayout1/

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 45, 89–125.

Toews, M. L., & Yazedjian, A. (2007). College adjustment among freshmen: Predictors for
White and Hispanic males and females. College Student Journal, 41(4), 891-901.

Tochkov, k., Levine, L., & Sanaka, A. (2010). Variation in the perception of cross-cultural
adjustment by Asian-Indian students in the United Sates. College Student Journal, 44(3),
677-689.

Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Toward the validation of Tinto’s model of college
student attrition: A review of recent studies. Research in Higher Education, 12(3), 271-
282.

61
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of educational research, 45(1), 89-125.

Vaccarino, F., Feekery, A., & Matanimeke, V. (2021). Birds of a feather end up flocking
together when studying abroad. Can a university bridge the cultural differences that
challenge friendships between Pacific Island students and New Zealand students?
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 81, 204-213.

Volet, S., & Ang, G. (2012). Culturally mixed groups on international campuses: An
opportunity for inter-cultural learning. Higher Education Research & Development,
31(1), 21–37.

Webber, K. L., Krylow, R. B., & Zhang, Q. (2013). Does involvement really matter? indicators

of college student success and satisfaction. Journal of College Student Development,

54(6), 591-611

Welch, A. (2002). Going global? Internationalising Australian universities in a time of global

crisis. Comparative Education Review, 46(4), 433–471.

Wilcox, P., Winn, S., & Fyvie‐Gauld, M. J. S. i. h. e. (2005). ‘It was nothing to do with the
university, it was just the people’: the role of social support in the first‐year experience
of higher education. 30(6), 707-722.

Wiers-Jenssen, J. (2022). International Students in Norway: Satisfaction, Coping and Social

Networks. Journal of Studies in International Education, 0(0).
https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153221082720

Wang, J. (2003). A Study of the Adjustment of International Graduate Students at American

Universities, Including Both Resilience Characteristics and Traditional Background
Factors. Retrieved from http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-1270

Zhang, J., & Goodson, P. (2011). Predictors of international students’ psychosocial

adjustment to life in the United States: A systematic review. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations 35(2), 139-162.

62
 Appendices
Appendix A
College adjustment questionnaire (CAQ)

63
 Appendix B

Collage Students Experience Questionnaire (CSEQ) (Pace and Kuh. 1989. p. 4)

64
 Appendix C

Demographic Questions

65
Appendix D

Norsk Senter For Forskningsdata (NSD) Approval Letter

66
 Appendix E

Item Usage Agreement Proposal (College Student Experiences Questionnaire

Assessment Program)

67
68
 Appendix F

Questionnaire Consent Form

Hi everyone!
Are you an international student in Norway and interested in participating in
a study about academic life as an international student? We ask that you
take this quick survey for my master’s thesis about the academic and social
experiences of international students.
It takes only 10 minutes.
Here’s important information about the research project and what your
participation will involve.
The Academic and Social Experience of International Students in
Norwegian Higher Education Institutions.
Purpose:
You are invited to participate in a research project where the main purpose
is to understand the process of international students’ academic and social
adjustment and investigates the relationship between background
characteristics, interaction with faculty, and international students'
experience. The research project will be done for a master’s thesis project
in higher education at the University of Oslo.
Responsible:
The University of Oslo is the institution responsible for the project.
Participants:
This project is recruiting participants who are international degree students
studying in Norway.
Participation:
If you choose to take part in the project, it will involve you filling in this
online questionnaire. It will take approx. 10 minutes. This includes
questions about your social and academic experience at university. Your
answers will be recorded electronically.
Participation is voluntary
Participation in the project is voluntary. If you chose to participate, you can
withdraw your consent at any time without giving a reason. All
information about you will then be made anonymous. There will be no
negative consequences for you if you chose not to participate or later
decide to withdraw.
Storage and Use of Personal Data:

69
We will only use your personal data for the purpose specified in this
information letter. We will process your personal data confidentially and
in accordance with data protection legislation (the General Data Protection
Regulation and Personal Data Act).
 In connection with the institution responsible for the project, the
researcher and the supervisor will have access to the personal
data.
 The possibility of identification due to background variables is
small and all personal information will be deleted once the project
is finished.
 Participants will NOT be recognizable in publications.
The project is scheduled to end on 30th December 2022. All personal data,
including any digital recordings, will be deleted at the end of the project.
Your Rights:
So long as you can be identified in the collected data, you have the right to:
 access the personal data that is being processed about you
 request that your personal data be deleted
 request that incorrect personal data about you be
corrected/rectified
 receive a copy of your personal data (data portability), and
 send a complaint to the Data Protection Officer or The Norwegian
Data Protection Authority regarding the processing of your
personal data
Our Rights:
We will process your personal data based on your consent.
Based on an agreement with the University of Oslo, Data Protection
Services has assessed that the processing of personal data in this project is
in accordance with data protection legislation.
Find Out More:
If you have questions about the project or want to exercise your rights,
contact:
 The student researcher: Maryam Rostami,
 e-mail: [email protected]
 telephone: 986 26 732
 The University of Olso via Main Supervisor Mari Elken
 e-mail: [email protected]
 telephone: 960 94 033
 Our Data Protection Officer: Roger Markgraf-Bye
 Data Protection Services
 e-mail: [email protected]

70
  telephone: 53 21 15 00
Yours sincerely,
Project Leaders
Supervisor: Mari Elken
Co-supervisor: Rebecca Knoph
Student: Maryam Rostami

Consent Form
I have received and understood information about the project “The Academic and
Social Experience of International Students in Norway "and have been given the
opportunity to ask questions. I give consent:.
 To voluntarily participate in the questionnaire.
 For my personal data to be processed until the end date of the
project, approx. 30th December 2022
You have to select at least one option.

I consent

71
 Appendix F

A script of the Stata log

72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106