Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Coping with cross-cultural re-entry stress : the development; implementation and evaluation of 1 day… Greenwood, Allan W. 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1992_spring_greenwood_allan.pdf [ 4.04MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0054189.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054189-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054189-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054189-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054189-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054189-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054189-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

COPING WITH CROSS-CULTURAL RE-ENTRY STRESS:THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF A1 DAY GROUP WORKSHOPByAllan W. GreenwoodB.A., Simon Fraser University, B.C., 1980A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(Department of Counselling Psychology)We accept this thes^o the requir standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA1992© Allan W. Greenwood, 1992In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature) Department of  COLL_ N3Ftl 11k L leSk(040 (..06"(The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate ^/\ re-lL DE-6 (2/88)AbstractThe phenomena of cross-cultural adaptation has been an area of focus in cross-culturalcounselling. More recently reverse culture shock (reentry), the stress associated withreturning home after living in another country, has become an area of growing interest.Despite interest in the nature of this phenomena, few group programs have beendesigned to assist international sojourners in returning home. Even fewer programshave had an evaluation of their effects upon the participants. The purpose of this thesisis to: (a) identify and describe the conceptual basis for the development of a reentryprogram, (b) present an applied reentry program for assisting participants in theirreentry adjustment, and (c) evaluate the short term effects of the reentry program uponthe anxiety levels and re-entry awareness of the participants. The fundamentaltheoretical basis for the program design is that stress arises when expectations do notmatch experience, and that expectation involves a world view as defined by the sense ofself. Levels of anxiety were investigated as one indicator of stress. Consequently theprogram attempted to increase awareness about reentry issues and to lower expectationsabout returning home, by an active multi-modal confrontation with aspects of thedenied or ignored self-awareness. A full day group program was led by a trainedfacilitator and co-facilitator. Participants were a group (n=10) of international studentsplanning upon returning home within six months and who had maintained a permanentresidence outside their home country, for at least six months. A qualitative analysis ofparticipants reactions to the program indicated that the participants generally found theprogram to be of high value, with the educational components and the sharing ofpersonal strategies to be of most perceived benefit. Anxiety levels, as measured by theSpielberger State-Trait anxiety scale, did not change, measured pre and post groupparticipation. While awareness levels about reentry, as measured by the prototypeMartin, Brislin Reentry Awareness Instrument moved generally in the direction ofincreased awareness, as measured pre and post participation, only two areas changedsignificantly. Participants were significantly less likely (a) to expect that friends andfamily would be interested in hearing about their international experience (at p<.05),and b), to expect their spouse to be able to participate in differentactivities than was the case prior to leaving (at p<.05). An examination of thesefindings are discussed.The results of this study are explored, as well as implications for future research, andpossible applications for counselling in the area of cross-cultural reentry.TABLE OF CONTENTSPageABSTRACT ^iiTABLE OF CONTENTS ivLIST OF TABLES ^viACKNOWLEDGMENTS viiCHAPTER I^Introduction ^1Purpose of the Study 4Justification for theStudy ^5The need for Applied Research 5Definition of Terms?Assumptions ^7CHAPTER II Review of the Related Literature ^9Part 1 Historical Perspective 9Part 2 Current Research on Reentry Adjustment ^10Conceptual Frameworks for Reentry ^11StageTheories 12Curves of Adjustment ^12Intercultural Learning/Communications 13Characteristics of Culture/reentry shock; Similarities andDifferences ^14Variables in Reentry 16Reentry Intervention Models ^16Review of the Available Resources; Programs on Reentry 17Part 3 Theoretical Orientation of the Current Reentry Program^18Rational for a Group Reentry Program 18Self Theory/Multi Dimensional Approach ^18Model for Change 21Multi-Modal Approach ^22Group Process 23Losses and Gains ^23Self-Validation Model 24Summary ^25CHAPTER III The Program Design and Rationale ^28Introduction 28Part 1 General Overview ^28Goals for a Reentry Program 28General Themes ^29Types of Activities 30Program Sections ^32Program Timetable 32Part 2 Activity Description and Rationale for each Activity ^33ivVCHAPTER IV Methodology and Results: Quantitative and Qualitative^43Methodology ^43Design ^43Measures/Instrumentation ^43Sample ^44Data Collection/Analysis ^45Results - Part 1 - Quantitative ^45Results - Part 2 - Qualitative ^47Discussion of the Reentry Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire^48Summary of open ended question responses ^48Additional Observations ^52CHAPTER V Discussion ^54Limitations of the study / Directions for Future Research ^55Qualitative Analysis ^56Implications for Counselling ^56References ^59Appendices ^65LIST OF TABLESTable 1.^A-State and A-Trait - Means and Standard Deviations^ 45Table 2.^Reentry Awareness - Means and t-test Probabilities^ 46v ivi iAcknowledgmentsI would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Marvin J. Westwood. He wasnot only a guiding force behind this project but also took an interest in my affairs thatwas beyond the ordinary. He has provided me with numerous opportunities for whichI am grateful. His convictions about my capabilities was a source of motivationthroughout my graduate degree, and what I have learned from him goes well beyondthe academic.I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. IshuIshyama, who offered kind advice when needed and to Dr.Tim Leung. In additionother people, to numerous to mention, have made contributions to my research alongthe way, especially Chandra Sen, Margot Mathews, and Frank Wang, again thankyou.I would also like to acknowledge my parents, Roy and Rosalie, for theirsupport and encouragement, especially my father who passed away during this project.I would also like to give special thanks to my wife Laura, who made this entireproject possible through her support and encouragement. Her efforts and sacrificeshave allowed me the opportunity to pursue my research.Finally I would like to acknowledge my sons, Christopher and Clayton, whoare helping me see more clearly, what is truly important in life.Allan Greenwood1CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONThe experience of travel to other cultures, to live, work and learn abroad isregarded, in North American culture, as a valuable and desirable facet of life. Acommonly held belief is that living in a foreign culture (a cross-cultural sojourn)expands the individual's perspective and potentially increase their quality of life. Interms of cross-cultural experiences in international education the goals have been lofty,the development of increased intra and inter personnel flexibility, self awareness, and aglobal perspective (Smith, 1990). There is little evidence that the growth of multi-national corporations, government, and International education will slow, but ratherincrease the movement of personnel across cultural boundaries.As well as the zeitgeist which supports cross-cultural exchanges, the role ofadvanced technology has significantly contributed to the phenomena of inter-culturaltravel by increasing both the opportunity and the pace of change (Tofler, 1970).As a consequence, a combination of factors serve to perpetuate and acceleratethe phenomena of cross-cultural exchanges. These factors include; a supportive milieu,an increasingly global economy, environmental interrelatedness, the technologicalcapability, a production surplus which allows discretionary travel, political imperativessuch as third world "development", etc.Especially in times of geo-political upheaval, world leaders frequently look tocross-cultural exchanges as a means of enhancing world peace. In a recent issue ofTime magazine (January 13/1992) sources as diverse as former American presidentRichard Nixon and leaders of an ancient Japanese Buddhist sect (Nichiren Soshu) have2argued separately that increased large scale cross-cultural exchanges will contribute toworld stability.From a Canadian perspective, government policy has either implicitly ordirectly encouraged cross cultural experiences through such organizations such as theCanadian International Development Agency (C.I.D.A.), the Canadian Bureau forInternational Education (C.B.I.E), the United Nations (U.N.), the Department ofNational Defense (D.N.D.), and other extensions of educational, business, or foreignpolicy. However the movement of people across cultures and especially in returninghome after an extended sojourn, is not without the potential for psychological risk, tothe persons involved.In terms of human biological and cultural time frames, this is a remarkably newphenomena and speaks of the plasticity of our responses to be able to cope with themyriads of adjustments necessary to partake in a cross-cultural experience. However,as well as benefits there may be psychological risks associated with entry and reentryinto differing cultures (Brislin, & Van Buren, 1974). For example Internationalstudents are a group at risk for the potential adverse effects of reentry shock which canlead to devastating psychological consequences. (Martin, 1986). It is the risks ofreentry which serve to undermine the potential benefits of the cross-cultural experience.Ashucion-Lande, (1976) has articulated an extensive list of difficulties reportedby cross-cultural sojourners in attempting to re-integrate into the home culture. Thesebroad areas of potential stresses include cultural, social, linguistic barriers, national andpolitical, education, and professional adjustments. Failure to adequately readjust tothese areas can, for some, lead to a chronic state of depression, alienation and personal3dissatisfaction, compounded by a host of other psychological and physiologicaldisorders.Despite these potential difficulties, counsellors in cross-cultural counsellinghave focused primarily on providing effective counselling services to the culturallydifferent (Sue & Sue, 1990). Some attention has been given to the adjustment ofproblems of people entering a new culture. Relatively little, and sporadic attention hasbeen given by the counselling community to the problems and potential areas of benefitassociated with successful reentry (Smith, 1990).It has only been recently that attention has been directed towards the numerousand difficult adjustments necessary in reintegrating into the home culture, of returninghome. This reverse culture shock or reentry shock can be as difficult or more difficultthen the initial adjustments necessary to living overseas (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Adler,1974; Adler, 1976; Martin, 1984). While the nature and extent of the difficultiesassociated with reentry shock are now being clearly delineated what has been lackingare reentry programs based on sound psychotherapeutic models designed to addresspotential reentry difficulties and enhance the participants opportunities for growthfullreentry (Pedersen, 1991). Further, there have been few, if any, systematic evaluationsof the short term impact of reentry programs on the participants.4Purpose of the studyThe purpose of the study was to;a) identify the conceptual basis for the development of a reentry program and todevelop a structured group program based on the selected theories of self identity andexpectation.(b)present an applied reentry program consisting of selected psychotherapeuticinterventions for assisting participants in their reentry adjustment, to enhance theaccuracy of the participants expectations of reentry, which would better prepareInternational sojourners for re-entering their home culture.(c) evaluate the short term effects of the reentry program upon measured levels ofanxiety and participant awareness of potential problems and solutions, as measured bythe Spielberger State-Trait and a Reentry Awareness Questionnaire respectively, as wellas a quantitative analysis of participants perceptions of the program.5Justification for the StudyThe Need for Applied Research on Reentry StressSignificance:Increased access to world travel and the generally high regard for interculturalexperiences increases the likelihood that intercultural experiences, including reentry willcontinue to be a significant phenomena in terms of global human migration.The justification for providing effective reentry interventions for returningsojourners are three fold;a) The economic losses associated with readjustment difficulties for the persons,organizations and countries involved may prove to be of increasing significance.(Pedersen, 1991)b) There is a clear moral imperative to provide reentry programs as part of cross-cultural exchanges, the frequency and extent of sojourner difficulties with reentrysuggest that like travellers to malarial infected areas, appropriate precautions should betaken to prevent difficulties after returning home (Martin 1986).c) Finally, effective reentry programs encourage a proactive integration of the cross-cultural experience enhancing the benefit to the individual of the cross cultural sojourn,potentially enhancing the benefit not only to themselves but possibly the program oragencies responsible for the sojourn (Adler 1975).Smith (1990) has stated that encouragement for cross cultural exchangeswithout adequate reentry preparation is equivalent to "Building nuclear plants withoutknowing how to dispose of the waste. " It can be done but with potentially6psychonoxious consequences that may ultimately need to be dealt with, both onpersonal and possibly organizational level.As a consequence the utilization of an empirically tested program for reducingproblems associated with reentry adjustment may be of importance to individuals inboth the public and private sectors of the economy.In a review of some of the entry/reentry programs Westwood, Lawrence, andPaul (1986) and Martin (1986) have argued that the programs to date lack precision andevaluation, and provide only survival skills at best.While much research remains to be done in the area of cross-cultural reentry thepotential effects on the individual have been established (Asuncion-Lande 1976). Whatis needed is the development of quality programs built upon sound theoretical modelswhich will allow further exploration of this phenomena in terms of assisting individualswith this process. There are numerous studies describing the characteristics of reentrystress and the subjective experience of the process but few programs designed to assistparticipants in the reentry (Brislin & Van Buren 1974).Consequently the impetus behind the development of this program is to addresssome of these concerns. In addition there is a need to test the impact of theseprograms. Information gained from the evaluation of this program will help shed lighton what aspects of the program impacted the participants, and allow furtherenhancements to the program.Although initially focused on returning students it is hoped that this study willadd to the basis of knowledge to enhance development of reentry programs in general.In addition, as this program attempts to deal with underlying psychological phenomena,7common to all sojourning groups, it may also serve to provide a prototype of value toother returning sojourners.Definitions/Assumptions:The following terms are commonly found in the literature on reentry and areused throughout this thesis.Home culture, the somewhat self explanatory phrase which designates thesojourners primary cultural experience. The culture in which the sojourner has grownup, and which the sojourner returns to after the cross-cultural experience.Host culture/Foreign culture, Foreign culture has a pejorative elementthat is eliminated by the use of the term Host culture. For this reason the term Hostculture will be used to refer to the culture in which the sojourner lives and or works infor an extended period of time before returning to the Home culture.Sojourner, a person who partakes in a cross-cultural experience, for a varietyof reasons, which results in an extended residence in a culture different that the one thathas provided the initial and primary cultural assimilation.Culture shock, "an occupational disease precipitated by the anxiety thatresults from losing all familiar signs and symbols of social intercourse" (Oberg, 1960,p.177).Reentry/Reaculturation, "The process of readjusting to one's home cultureafter an extended period abroad" (Adler 1976). Reentry will be used primarilythroughout this document.8Cultural adjustment, "has been conceptualized as a psych-social processfocusing on the attitudinal and emotional adjustment of the individual to a new culture"(Martin 1984).Reentry shock, The acute psychological and physiological discomfortassociated with re-entering ones home culture, after an extended sojourn. The phase inthe reentry/acculturation process where the problems are "most intense, mostproblematic" (Martin 1984).Self Shock, Based on the relationship between self, behaviour and others itcan arise from "Any situation that alters the meaning for behaviour has the potential forhampering the individual's ability to maintain consistent recognizable identities." andthus which stresses the individual (Zaharna, 1989).Acculturation, "Cultural adjustment in a foreign culture" Martin 1984.Having outlined the purpose of the paper, and reviewed key definitions,Chapter II reviews the relevant and related literature.9CHAPTER IIREVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATUREThis chapter will review the related literature in the area of cross-culturalcounselling as it relates to reentry. It begins with a brief historical perspective (Part 1),followed by a more detailed analysis of current theories and research (Part 2) andfinally a presentation of the broad theoretical perspectives (Part 3) which form the basisfor the subsequent reentry group program activities.(Part 1)Historical PerspectiveCrossing cultural boundaries and returning home after experiences abroad havelong been part of the human odyssey. Homers famous tale of Odysseus encapsulatesin Greek mythology the potential of the demands made upon the individual who seeksthe lure of other lands, and then attempts to come home. As Odysseus mournfullycries out after seeing his home for the first time in many years, "Alas! and now whereon earth am I" could also capture the angst of many modern international sojourners.In general scholars from various disciplines such as psychologists,sociologists, and anthropologists have long been interested in the adaptation of theindividual to the cultural environment, in acculturation (Martin, 1984). In general thepsychiatric community had focused upon the mental health aspects of migration, whereas the sociological community has concentrated upon the individuals sense of self asdefined by the group. Psychologists and most typically counselling psychologists haveprovided the most direct research and applied research related to re-entry stress.1 0Reaculturation, or reentry, the process of readjusting to one's home culture hasreceived much less and sporadic interest. This is somewhat curious given that severalresearchers have suggested that reentry can be more difficult than adjusting to theforeign culture (Adler, 1975; Adler, 1976; Brislin & Pedersen, 1976).Various sojourning groups have captured the attention of researchers. Examplesare missionaries (Austin, 1983), returned Vietnam war veterans (Borus, 1973a,1973b), returned Peace Corp volunteers (Adler, 1976), corporate personnel (Adler,1981; Kendall, 1981; Noer, 1974), and students and scholars (Gullahorn & Gullahorn,1963; Westwood, Lawerence & Paul, 1986; ) Military personnel (Metres, 1972);government personnel (Adler, 1980) and others. Austin's (1983) "Cross CulturalReentry: an Annotated Bibliography" and subsequent addendum list over 500references to the topic of reentry.Despite the growing body of research there has been little agreement amongresearchers from a theoretical perspective and even fewer mentions of applied researchand programs to assist international sojourners with reentry (Al- Yasssinini, 1987;Marten, 1986).(Part 2)Current research on ReentryAdjustmentSuccessful adjustment to the foreign culture implies a change in the individualsin response to varying environmental demands. Bochner (1973) suggested that themore one adjusts to the host country, the more difficulties associated with readjustmentto the home culture. Most research on cross cultural adjustment indicates that the return1 1to the primary culture can be as difficult as the earlier adaptation to the new culture (Martin, 1986) . Three basic styles of coping have been identified for those returning tothe primary culture: alienation; reversion; and integration (Adler, 1974). The alienatedstyle involves rejection of the primary culture and glorification of the secondary culture.Reversions involve rejection of the values and changes associated with the secondaryculture. Finally integration which involves incorporating elements of meaning fromboth cultural experiences. It is an assumption that integration is the preferred scenariofor the cross-cultural sojourner.Conceptual Frameworks for ReentryAs Martin (1984) has stated from a theoretical perspective, "reentry has beengenerally viewed as one type of cultural adjustment, as the social psychologicaladaptation of the individual to the cultural environment. Later (1986) Martin extendsthis argument that "reentry shock like culture shock may be conceptualized as onephase of cultural transition, and that cultural transitions are similar to othertransitions..." This latter view is supported by Bridges (1980) and Smith (1990).Based on Martin's (1984) review of reentry research the following gives an overviewof the various approaches found in the literature.Stage TheoriesMany researchers have characterized the adjustment process to reentry in termsof stages (Adler, 1975; Rhinesmith, 1975). While often using different terms todescribe the stages, the stages can be generally identified as a honeymoon stage of highexpectation and excitement, shock stage of confusion depression and alienation and1 2finally some form of recovery stage. Bridges (1980) in a more general model ofchange characterizes the stages of "Freezing- Unfreezing-Freezing" analogous inconceptualization to the above stages, with opportunity for both disruption and growthoccurring at the "Unfreezing" or shock stage. Other researchers have suggested curvesrather that stages.Curves of adjustmentSmith (1955), has articulated a model of cross cultural adjustment called the U-curve where over time, the traveller initially experiences a high level of satisfaction withthe experience but this rapidly falls off only to increase at a later date as cross culturalcapabilities are increased. This model has been the dominant model with most earlyresearch seen to be "supporting, evaluating or rejecting the U-curve" (Al-Yassini,1987). Heath (1970) has argued in support of the U-model whereas Becker (1968) hasargued for an inverted U-model, that stress increases in the early entry stage and justprior to reentry, in his sample of third world students. Selby and Woods (1968) haveproposed a V-model of adaptation with an initial positive followed by a steep drop inadjustment, followed by quick adaptation. Gullahorn and Gullahorn (1963) haveextended the U-model to incorporate the reentry process resulting in a double-U model.Others have further extended the cycle of adaptation up to 10 stages (Rhinesmith,1981). It is clear from the research literature that no single model has been given clearprecedence. What is common to all the models is the cyclical nature of the adaptationprocess. I would propose that each conceptualization has sampled it participants atdifferent points on the sinusoidal curve, and thus presents only a portion of theadaptation process. The cyclical nature of these developmental models of adjustment13indicate the "natural and necessary" process by which the traveller adjusts to thetransition from culture to culture (Westwood, Lawrence & Paul 1984).Intercultural Learning/CommunicationsMore recent conceptualizations involve aspects of cultural learning (Bochner1972). Church (1982) suggests that acculturation and reentry are forms of culturallearning which follow basic operant conditioning and social learning principles. Martin(1984) has stated that this may have some limited value in an applied sense for reentryprograms, ie. viewing reentry as returning to a new culture. Smith (1990) has furtherarticulated an intercultural communication perspective suggests that through educationalintervention, the process of "cultural learning" can be greatly enhanced. Koester(1983) has supported the communication perspective and she proposes that returningsojourners pay particular attention to their interpersonal communications after returninghome.Identity Self ShockZaharna (1989) drawing from the intercultural communications perspective,focuses on the relationship between self, behaviour, and the other in terms of the cross-cultural adjustment process. He suggests that the difficulties associated in crossingcultures and returning home result from the shock to the perception of ourselves.Citing Adler (1975) , Church (1982) and others Zaharna (1989) states that we maintainour view of ourselves as we think others see us. The primarily mechanism of influenceis our behaviours which are then reflected back to us. The disruption in this "lookingglass" self (Cooley, 1924) when we are in an environment where the shared meanings1 4of behaviours are disrupted, ie. a cross cultural experience, can lead to "self-shock".Thus self shock results from and "Increased need to confirm self-identities, withdiminished ability to do so" (Zaharna, 1989). While posing some theoretical difficultiesin terms of reentry this approach may provide an insight into the nature of change to theindividual, which are reflected in the reentry transition.Characteristics of Culture/Reentry Shock; Similarities andDifferencesJanet Bennet (1977) has argued that readjustment to the home culture is similarto the adjustment process experienced in adjusting to the foreign culture, which isculture shock. In that they both involve transition and change for the individual,adjustment to the host culture and to the home culture can be viewed as similar. Inaddition both the rate and the amount of change demanded of the individual can lead to"shock".Both Bennet (1977) and Martin (1986) have suggested that culture/reentryshock is similar to other transitional experiences in life, in that most transitions involveloss and change for the individual.Martin (1986) has further added that "....If their are similarities among thevarious life transitions of individuals, then traditional theoretical perspectives whichdescribe and explain the process of change and human response to change andtransition should help us to understand the reentry transition including the reentry shockphase". In other words reentry does not appear to need special theories to explain thisparticular transitional experience.1 5In terms of change these may include: "change of life style related to passages,loss of familiar frames of reference in an intercultural encounter, change of valuesassociated with rapid social innovation..." (p. 45).Other researchers have articulated a unique aspects of reentry, sojournerexpectation, the sojourner does not expect to encounter difficulties because they arereturning to an environment which they expect to be familiar (Adler, 1984; Martin1984; Upobor, 1974).Rather than focusing on the negative aspects of reentry stress other researchershave focused upon the positive aspects of growth and change for the individual mostnotably Adler (1975) and Martin (1986).In addition to the literature regarding the painful difficulties associated withreentry other theorists have recognized the enormous creative potential of this period(Bennet, 1977; Bridges, 1980; Mansell 1981). Zempke and Zempke (1981) haveargued that transitions such as reentry are major motivators of adult learning.Bennet (1977) states that increased "tolerance for ambiguity" and "cognitiveflexibility " can be a result of a successful transition experience, including reentry.Variables in ReentrySeveral variables have been delineated which have been suggested to influencethe reentry experience. Gama and Pedersen (1977) and Baty and Dold (1977) founddifferential effects on gender in the reentry experience. Age and academic level havealso been suggested by Gullahorn and Gullahorn (1963) to be important with moreestablished sojourners having less difficulties than younger ones who have not yet"found themselves". In addition previous transition experiences such as cross-cultural1 6experiences seem to inoculate and reduce the effects of subsequent cross-culturalexperiences and reentry. Brislin and Van Buren (1974) have suggested that thoseindividuals who have readily absorbed the host cultures meaning system will have agreater difficulty in re-entering the home culture. In addition they also suggest thatreadiness to return home also effects the reentry experience, with those most ready toreturn having the least difficulty. While further research is needed to differentiate theseeffects upon the reentry experience (Martin 1986), these conceptualization can beviewed as providing indirect support for Zaharna's (1989) concept of "self shock" oridentity crisis, discussed previously, in that those with a stronger identity, ie older andmore experienced appear to be better protected from reentry shock.Reentry intervention modelsSeveral approaches to the difficulties in reentry and models for interventionhave been reported (Martin 1986). These can be generally categorized as cognitive, andbehavioral. The cognitive approach, has been the dominant model and has provided theconceptual framework for most applied programs on reentry. Information aboutreentry has been provided in an academic milieu with little follow up. Behavioralapproaches have been reported including stress inoculation (Meichenbaum, 1975) andthe Jacobson relaxation technique (Wolpe & Lang, 1964). What has been lacking is anexploration of the affective domain. With the exception of Westwood, Lawrence, andPaul (1986) few if any models and programs address reentry from this perspective. Inreviewing the relevant models it appears what has been lacking is a multi-modalapproach which combines all three levels of approach, cognitive, behavioral andespecially affective in a synergistic and powerful manner.1 7Review of Available Resources; programs for reentryThe need for reentry programs has led to many in house or adhoc attempts atproviding first-aid resources to returning sojourners. These programs usually sufferfrom lack of funding and low perceived value by both participants and administration(Brislin & Van Buren, 1974; R. Brislin, personal communication, May 1991)). As aconsequence many of these programs have been regarded as too little, too late and havegenerally lacked a sound theoretical focus.Despite these formidable difficulties at providing assistance to internationalsojourners several programs have been reported in the research literature on reentry.Brislin and Van Burens (1974) outlined a reentry program used at the East-West Centrein Hawaii, which contains general guidelines for running these programs, based ontheir experiences, most notably the difficulties encountered. The National AmericanForeign Students Association (N.A.F.S.A.) Wingspread Colloquium Handbook(1976) reports on the 1974 Wingspread N.A.F.S.A. Conference on Reentry Seminars,which contains guidelines and further resources to provide reentry programs.Westwood and Tillman (1984) has provided one of the more comprehensive attempts atproviding a resource for reentry titled "Returning Home". Other educationalinstitutions have offered courses on reentry and take a primarily cognitive approach tothe area. These include Behrens and Bennet (1984) course at Texas Technical Instituteand courses offered at Bringham Young University- Language Research Centre. Otherprograms have been made available through organizations such as C.I.D.A. as well assome inhouse programs developed for international corporations.1 8With the exception of Westwood et al (1986) these programs have in generallacked a delineated theoretical basis, and have focused on generally one modality, thecognitive. Few if any programs have begun to systematically investigate the effectsupon the participants (P. Pedersen personal communication, May 1991).Consequently this new reentry program attempts to address these needs byproviding a carefully delineated theoretical model focussing on a multi-modal approach(cognitive, behavioral and affective) and followed by an initial investigation of theprograms short term effects upon the participants.(Part 3)Theoretical Orientation of the Current Reentry ProgramSelf theory/Multi Dimensional approachThe theoretical underpinnings of this program are based upon the concept thatcross cultural transition is essentially a confrontation with the self (Zaharna, 1989).Other theoretical perspectives are incorporated under this perspective, drawing fromeach essential elements as they relate to the umbrella perspective of the self. Each ofthese contributing perspectives will be discussed later. The second core perspective isthat to access change in the concept of self, it is more effective to use a multi-dimensional approach incorporating the basic components of self, the cognitive,affective, and behavioral dimensions. As a consequence each of the activities in thisprogram reflect an attempt to allow the participant to actively confront theirconceptualization of themselves as it relates to their cross-cultural experience, especiallytheir reentry home, through various cognitive, affective, and behavioral based1 9activities. The specific activities will be discussed in more detail in Chapter III, in termsof their specific theoretical orientation. The following is an brief overview of thecorroborating theoretical orientations which link to the concept of self as it relates toreentry.The theoretical underpinnings drawn upon in the development of this reentryprogram have been varied and hierarchical, with a central theme common to all, thesojourners sense of self. Each theory provides the groundwork for the next, and canbe viewed as levels of explanation, moving from the fundamental to the moreoperational (practical), from the broad to the specific.The fundamental underlying model comes from the literature of socialpsychology and self awareness. Berger ( 1975) has stated that "Identities are sociallybestowed. They must also be socially sustained and fairly steadily so. One cannot behuman all by oneself and apparently, one cannot hold on to any particular identity all byoneself". Baumeister (1986) states that identities "exist only in societies that define andorganize them". Other theorists have stated that we use others to gain a sense ofourselves, most notably Erickson (1960), Cooley (1924) and Festigner (1954).In terms of the cross cultural experience Adler (1975) has stated that it beginswith "an encounter of another culture and evolves into the encounter with the self' andlikens it to many other transition experiences". Zaharna (1989) has discussed thedifficulties in crossing cultures in terms of "Self shock" that both culture shock andreentry shock can be viewed in terms of identity confusion brought on by a loss ofshared meanings. Difficulties thus arise in the relationship between the sense of self,behaviour and the Other.2 0The model for the nature of the difficulties reported by international sojournerscomes from Festigner's (1957) notion of cognitive dissonance. In it he argues thatwhen we hold two cognitions that are in opposition to each other we are motivated torelieve the dissonance.The cross cultural encounter is ripe for many disconfirming experiences which leads toa confrontation with the sense of self (Kohls, 1979; Aguilar, 1981) and heighteneddissonance. In an attempt to lessen cognitive dissonance sojourners begin to adapt tothe new environment, in part, by modifying their view of themselves.Since the self is the "central axiom" for the individuals whole life theory (Lecky1968) any strain on the individuals perception of the self, as occurs in a cross culturalsojourn, may lead to the sense of "free floating anxiety " reported by many sojourners(Furnham & Bochner, 1986). Crossing cultures implies adaptation to the new culture,to new meanings. This adaptation process however can often be out of awareness(Bateson 1971). Zaharna (1986) states that " the out of awareness change of identity-bound behaviour helps to explain why reentry shock is so prevalent". The specificmodel for the explanation of the difficulties associated with reentry have to do withexpectation theory. An extension of this perspective, which forms the basis for manyof the activities in this program is that when experience does not match expectation,than psychological difficulties can arise. As Martin (1986) states "Several researchershave suggested that developing realistic expectations, examining internal and externalchanges, and discussing potential problems of reentry is useful for sojourners in thatthey accomplish the "work of worrying" Brislin & Van Buren, 1974; Marsh, 1976).The theoretical basis for these assertions lies with Janis (1958). In writingabout the preparation for stressful events he postulated that worrying about the stressful2 1event is helpful in that it allows the individual psychological preparation time andlowers the chances of unpleasant surprises as the person is already expecting the worst.This view was supported by the work of Egbert (1964) who found significantreductions in post operative pain in those patients who were counselled prior to thesurgery to expect specific discomforts after surgery, and thus had more accurateexpectations about their post operative experiences. Thus several of the programactivities seek to lower the often idealized expectations of the participants to moreaccurately match the experiences reported by other returning sojourners. These potentialreentry stressors are presented not as certainties but as potential areas of difficulties thatthe individual may encounter (Marsh, 1976; Brislin & Van Buren, 1974).Model for ChangeMarten (1984) and Smith (1990) have articulated the nature of the changes thatconfront the re-entering sojourner. The individual must deal with 3 levels of change:(1) the change between the home and foreign environments,(2) changes that have occurred at home, some of which are unknown to thesojourner, and most importantly in terms of intervention,(3) changes that have occurred within oneself, much of which may still not bein awareness. Clearly the sojourner is faced with many levels of change, mostpotentially problematical, the change to their perception of self.A model of change which incorporates these elements and the role ofexpectation is the ABCX Model of Change. This program uses the dynamic theoreticalunderpinning of Hill (1958) that proposes that A (the stressor or activating event)interacts with B (the resources the individual brings to the situation) which interacts2 2with C (the perception of the event) to produce X (the crisis or X-PLOSION w III), inthis case reentry difficulties. This group reentry program attempts intervention on atleast two levels of this model, at B, by attempting to marshal resources prior to theevent and most importantly at C, by attempting to alter and reduce the expectation ofanticipated events, ie. altering the perception of the event.Multi-modal approachAs was noted previously what is needed is an intervention programs whichcontains aspect of all three elements of personality, namely the cognitive, behavioraland affective. As various researchers have typified reentry as a compromised functionin these separate areas dependent on their theoretical orientation, it would be rational toassume a system approach to intervention. By attempting to provide a format whichallows the participants to access and develop functional capacity in these three areasthey may be better equipped to handle their unique reentry reality than if they had beenequipped with only one dominant coping modality. As in the living human theinterplay of these three areas is where we live, consequently the program is designed toassist with reentry in these three essential elements ofpersonality.Group ProcessesThe program is embedded within a group context. The theories of Trotzer(1989) and Corey (1987) describe the stages of group development appropriate to thiscontext. The impact of this program is enhanced by the fact that the activities take placein a social milieu. The group format for this program is assumed to offer several2 3advantages over individual counselling. Group counselling is both cost effective and"utilizes the powerful affective stimulus of the group to catalyze an optimum cognitivereorganization" (Westwood et al, 1986). In addition, group process allows thereduction of "Defensive Communication" (Gibb, 1961) essential to the free flow ofinformation and the establishment of trust, thereby enhancing the appropriate cognitiveframework to begin the personal exploration of reentry issues.Loss and GainsA core assumption is that change involves loss and that saying goodbye is anecessary step in readjustment. As Bowlby (1969) has stated, without attachment thereis no loss, and thus the sojourner must learn to discriminate between elements of theirexperience that will be lost and those that they may take back to their home culture, bothas an internalized view of self and in external manifestations of behaviour.In terms of reentry there is also an element of anticipatory loss for the homeenvironment which has changed relative to the sojourner. Cultural relativity isanalogous to Einstien's famous thought experiment of the traveller in a space shiptravelling at the speed of light. While the travellers perception of time is unaltered, s/hewill find upon returning home that the clocks at home have been running at a differentrate of time. This loss of time, a metaphor for the sense of oneness with others in theformer home community, is indeed a loss and needs to be acknowledged as such withthe facilitation of a personally appropriate expression of this loss. Both time andinternalized aspects of culture have an inherent relativity; both derive their meanings forthe individual, from the context in which the person finds themselves. This is offundamental importance for the returning individual since their sense of self is reflected2 4back to them on two changing levels: a community which has changed relative to thesojourner and the sojourner who has changed relative to his home community. Boththese elements serve to profoundly disrupt the continuity of the world view of thesojourner, in part because they do not expect it to be so.As a consequence, the participants will be provided the opportunity to examinethe nature of the changes (losses and gains) that have occurred, and to plan to minimizethe potentially deleterious effects using several different personalized strategies.Self Validation ModelIshiyama's (1989) model of self validation accounts for not only the disruptionto the sense of self in a cross-cultural sojourn as well as providing guidelines forameliorating these effects. Several aspects of this model are relevant to reentry and fallunder the broad category of "Social Reinforcers vs. Lack of Social Reinforcers". Asdiscussed previously, the reentry process is the individual's confrontation with aspectsof the self that have changed, mostly out of awareness. The sojourner has had to adaptto new social reinforcers in the host country as part of the adaptation process, and theseadaptations can lead to a temporary disruption in the sense of self, as the individualintegrates the new experiences. Furthermore social reinforcers in the home countrymay now be different or now irrelevant to the individuals sense of self. These factorsserve to reduce the validation of the individuals sense of themselves and may lead to asense of meaninglessness and anxiety. This may be due to the lack of validation, orconfirmation of the sense of self in reentry, since the individual has been removed fromthe host country's validation mechanisms and validation from the home country maynot be as relevant to the returning individual (although the sojourner may expect them to25be). This model provides the background rationale for many of the group programactivities.SummaryTo summarize, the crucial elements in the cross cultural sojourn are the changesthat occur within the individual as s/he adapts to the host culture, and the subsequenteffects upon her/his perception of themselves. Anxiety results from the dissonancebetween these changing perceptions of self as the sojourner adapts to the new culture;to a new set of meanings. These internalized meanings and (often unconscious)changes that have occurred within the individual can lead to further dissonance whenthe individual returns to the home culture. The process by which this is mediated has todo with expectation. The individual does not expect to have difficulties because she/heis unaware of the changes that have occurred within his/her sense of identity, andconsequently the stage is set for difficulties as further rapid onset challenges to theindividual's sense of identity occurs.If this argument is correct then the most effective approach to engaging the selfwith this internal struggle of identity during the reentry process, is to involve the self atthese levels; the cognitive, behavioral, and affective. This reentry program consists ofspecific activities designed for each of these levels and these are carried out in a socialmilieu, ie. a group format.These activities will allow the individual to accurately reflect upon the lossesand gains which have occurred during his/her sojourn and which may have impactedupon the self on pre-conscious levels. Since adaptation incorporates both losses andgains, this self analysis will enhance the accuracy of the participant's self perception2 6and, combined with relevant information about re-entry, lower the expectation aboutreentry to more accurately reflect their potential experience. Implicit in this analysis isthat losses and gains can be viewed in terms of self validation, and the participant'sheightened awareness around these issues may assist in developing more effectivestrategies for coping with reentry.The group format allows both the opportunity for inward reflections andembeds that experience in the context of a social phenomena, the group process. Theindividual activities related to each of these three levels comprise the program and willbe discussed later in reference to each of these levels of self.This combination of intrapersonal and interpersonal, given context through thegroup process allows those essential aspects of self to be become effectively engaged.The ABCX model of change, typifying this program incorporates activities whichattempts to increase the individual's self awareness of possible changes in self, as wellas lowering his/her expectations in returning home, and thus potentially loweringdissonance by having a more congruent match between expectation and the realities ofthe reentry experience.Chapter III begins to delineate the program by describing the activities withineach of the three levels and provides a conceptual analysis and rational of theinterventions. By doing so the reader will gain a comprehensive perspective toappreciate the program.27CHAPTER IIITHE PROGRAM: DESIGN AND THEORETICAL RATIONALEIntroductionThe Reentry group program is now presented in terms of the structured sequence ofactivities which comprise the program and the relevant theoretical rationale that underlies them.Part (1) begins with a general overview of the program. In Part (2) a rationale is provided foreach activity outlining the relative weighting of the levels of self involved at each of thefollowing levels; cognitive, affective and behavioral. The impact of group dynamics is alsoexamined in each of the activities.In Chapter Ill, the analysis builds on the theoretical basis described in Chapter II,identifying and describing the relevant rationale in an applied perspective.Part (1)General OverviewGoals for a Reentry Program:"Men [Women] are not so much bothered by events but bywhat they think of them." Epictitus c.120Based on Foust (1984), the following are several broad goals used in this program toassist re-entry adjustment: First, to assist the participants to reflect upon the changes andlearning that have taken place and consider changes in the home environment. Secondly, toidentify the personal expectations for returning home and increase awareness of the2 8psychological dynamics of the re-entry process. Finally, to bring about the experience abroadto some form of closure, hopefully, but not necessarily, a positive one.Based on the literature outlined in Chapter II, the operational rational for the design ofthis program can be summarized as; Reentry shock occurs when the experience of returninghome does not match one's expectations. Consequently the overall focus of this program is toincrease awareness about the individual's potential for reentry difficulties and to allow them tobegin to prepare for these potential difficulties. This type of preparation is accomplished by asequenced order of structured activities which serve to involve the individual at the followinglevels: cognitive, affective, and behavioral.Four perspectives are used to examine the program (a) general themes, (b) the types ofactivities (c) the focus of each half of the program and (d) the individual activities.(a) General ThemesThe following perspectives guided the development of the individual activities.1)Group dynamics serve to heighten the individual experience.2) Group dynamics have been used in the structuring of the various activities.3) Risk taking increases as member inclusion increases.4) The program moves from the general to the specific.5) The program moves from sensitizing the individual to potential problems (awareness) toaction and problem solving.6) The program incorporates both educational as well psychotherapeutically based components.7) Because it deals implicitly with group dynamics and psychotherapeutically based techniques,it is assumed that the leader will be fluent in these areas.8) Has cognitive, affective and behavioral components.299) Learning takes place at an experiential, knowledge, and skills level.(b) Types of ActivitiesThe following gives an overview of the categories of activities which comprise thegroup program on reentry. The individual activities are numbered from one to ten and aredetailed later. For ease of identification these activities are divided into the following categoriesfrom (a) to (g).a) Introduction; Outlines the course of the days activities and takes care of theinitial details.b) Warm-up Activities; Allows the participants and leader to warm up and get toknow each other. Sets the tone for later activities. Helps participants begin to relax and initiatesa feeling of inclusion. This is an important but often neglected aspect of group workshops.c) Awareness — Focus on Changes (host country) Activities; Allowsparticipants to focus on changes that have occurred, and how they have themselves changedwhile in the host country.d) Education/Didactic Activities; Provides an opportunity to educate participantson the scope and nature of reentry stress, how this transition period can impact their lives bothpositively and negatively.e) Awareness — Potential Problems (home country) Activities; Allowsparticipants to focus on returning home and to anticipate specific problems that are significantto them, from the range of problems that have been generated.f) Problem-Solving and Commitment Activities; Allows the participants tobegin to generate solutions based on the awareness gained from the previous activities. Allows30the stating of individual goals and the public declaration of future commitment, which bothenhances that commitment and provides modelling for other participantsg) Closure; Closure provides the symbolic and appropriate ending to the day'sactivities.Having reviewed the key activity types, it is noted that they all can becategorized into one of the following;Like many group programs these categories of activities allow the participantsto;1)come together (A and B).2) to increase awareness (C and D).3) and to problem solve (E, F and G).(c) Program SectionsFurther, in terms of an overview of the days activities, the day could be divided in halfand conceptualized as;FIRST SECTION : Awareness focus1) To sensitise participants to the process of reentry.2) To promote self-reflection, examine self identity and reflect upon the changes thathave occurred within the individual.SECOND SECTION : Problem Solving1) Effective coping through integration, problem solving, goal setting and contracting.312) Learning how to utilize both inner and outer resources to cope with reentry. Outerresources include spouse or significant other, others who have shared reentryexperiences, contact with researchers, host organizations, written material aboutreentry, etc.The following program timetable gives an overview of the structure and theorder of the days activities. This is followed by a more detailed analysis of the activitiesincluding rational. See Appendix A for a complete description of the program activities,including suggested narratives.PROGRAM TIMETABLEFULL DAY WORKSHOP on REENTRYActivity 1: INTRODUCTION 15 minutes• welcome, reasons for program, housekeeping announcements• Einstellung effect talk.Activity 2: WARM UP-MY NAME MEANS (In Pairs) 15 minutes• briefly introduce partner, state own goals for participating.• discuss meaning of ones name.Activity 3• SELF REFLECTION (Small Groups) 30 minutes• discuss first impressions of the host country and its citizens, both positive andnegative, and report back to the large group.Activity 4 LOSSES and GAINS (Small Group) 30 minutes32• discuss what they miss in leaving and what they are looking forward to uponreturning home. (Report to large group).Activity 5: RELAXATION and VISUALIZATION (Large Group) 30 minutes• lead group through a brief relaxation exercise and have them visualize their returnhome.Activity 6: EDUCATIONAL-DIDACTIC (Large Group) 15 Minutes• conduct a brief discussion about reentry problems (with guest, if possible).Lunch^60 Minutes. Return from lunch.Activity 7: CRITICAL INCIDENTS and ROLE PLAY 60 Minutes• each group is given 1 of 3 typical reentry critical incidents. They discuss them andthen are invited to re-enact them in front of the larger group. Potential solutions aregenerated by the large group.Activity 8: PROBLEM-SOLVING; PERSONAL STRATEGIES and CONTRACTING60 minutes• generalize themes and suggest other potential strategies for coping. Members givenan opportunity to develop their own strategies for reentry.• discuss program goals as they relate to individual goals (as described earlier).• Participants are asked to make contracts in the group; "what" and "how" they planto act.Activity 9 CLOSURE (Large Group) 30 Minutes• "Gateway Activity."• Closure and symbolic ending of the days activities.Part 2Activity description and Rationale for each ActivityEach of the programs activities are now examined in terms of their rationale forinclusion in the program and are rated in terms of impact on the individual at each of cognition,3 3affect and behavioral levels. The rationale for each is presented in a three point format (a), (b),and (c).(a) Each activity is rated in terms of contribution to the three modalities cognitive, affective andbehavioral, based on the author's analysis of their impact at each of these levels ofinvolvement, both on a theoretical and observed basis, for example;Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b) In point form the major attributes are delineated.(c) Finally a generalized summary is included, with particular attention to group dynamics.These three methods of analysis are presented to assist the reader in theconceptualization of the activities and to allow comparison between the different activities.Activity 1: INTRODUCTION 15 minutes• welcome, reasons for program, housekeeping announcements•Einstellung effect talk.Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)to create a warm and receptive atmosphere.2) to acknowledge people's choice to participate.3) to help reduce anxiety about the program.4) to encourage a positive mental mindset prior to the onset of the structured activities. The"Einstellung Effect" (Luchins, cited in Mendenhall, 1982) is that prior warning has beendemonstrated to positively enhance participant satisfaction. This may be especially crucial forreentry participants who traditionally have felt little need for this type of program prior toexperiencing reentry shock.345) to begin to normalize the experience of reentry.(c)The facilitator sets a positive tone for the group development and attempts tomodel positive regard for the participants which will later generalize as group cohesionincreases (Corey, 1987). This activity helps form the participants first impressions of theprogram and can help lower defensive communications styles (Gibb, 1961) which is importantfor later group activities.Activity 2: WARM UP (In Pairs) 15 minutes• briefly introduce partner, state own goals for participating.Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1) to promote inclusion and to reinforce basic listening skills.2) to reinforce basic communication skills.3) to meet one member of the group and have experiences communicated and understood.4) to listen to and acknowledge the individuality of all participants.5) participants will begin to get a sense of other members and the commonalities of experience.6) subsequent activities build upon this initial sense of inclusion.7) to reduce social anxiety by successfully completing a relatively non-threatening exercise.(c)Defense and anxiety are lowered by the successful completion of a low affect task(Trotzer, 1989). Speaking about oneself is one of the simpler social skill tasks. The facilitatorcan also model the positive regard for the presentation and introduction of the individual,helping to reduce participant reluctance to disclose emotionally relevant material. Initial contact35is made successfully with another participant which enhances the sense of involvement. Groupconsensus on goals assists group cohesion (Corey, 1987).Activity 3: SELF REFLECTION (Small Groups) 30 minutes• discuss first impressions of the host country and its citizens, both positive andnegative, and report back to the large group.Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1) to give participants the opportunity to share personal information within a supportive groupstructure.2) to allow participants to reflect upon their experiences in the host country, to become moreself reflective.3) this activity also provides the substrate for further self reflective activities.4) to establish a norm of self disclosure.5) to reinforce interaction with the original partner and increase trust level.6) for each participant to interact with two new group members in a supportive environmentthereby reducing social anxiety.7) to find the commonality of themes within the group.8) writing down their thoughts allows more time for integration and provides a rehearsal priorto verbal disclosure. This may enhance participation of those participants with English as aSecond Language (ESL).9) heightens perception and experience of dissonance (Festigner 1957)(c)Activities 2 and 3 offer a gentle integration into the group activities, and in this casemodelling a caring and nurturing environment (Corey, 1987). The potentially multi-culturalapproach in this exercise attempts to highlight differences as well as similarities in the36individuals experience, and promotes a reflective stance which is further engaged by lateractivities (Zaharna, 1989). The discussion at the end of the exercise begins to raise dissonance(Festigner, 1957) as participants begin to sense the nature of the adaptations that haveoccurred.Activity 4 LOSSES and GAINS (Small Group) 30 minutes• discuss what they miss in leaving and what they are looking forward to uponreturning home. (Report to large group).Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)further self reflection and group inclusion.2) requires minimal self disclosure.3) shifts the focus to the target area of intervention, their return home.4) moves the focus from there and then to the present and future time space.(c)Participants experiences are normalized and an opportunity for the underlying variables,namely change and the individuals adaptation to the at experience, begin to emerge. Thiscommon shared experience again enhances group development (Trotzer, 1989). This activityallows participant reflection on the attachment and losses that have occurred and begins toallow the acknowledgment of the feelings of loss associated with saying goodbye (Bowlby,1969).Activity 5 RELAXATION and VISUALIZATION (Large Group) 30 minutes• lead group through a brief relaxation exercise and have them visualize their returnhome.37Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)Group cohesion should be sufficiently strong to be able to share more personal feelingsabout reentry.2) Gives participants an initial opportunity to confront ambiguous feelings about returninghome.3) Lowered levels of anxiety are possible for self reflection as there is no immediate selfdisclosure.4) Physiological involvement through tone of voice, music, and lighting permits greaterfocusing of thoughts.5) Relaxation and visualization are preferred as means of accessing previously subconsciousfeelings and thoughts. These insights are then allowed to surface.(c)This activity begins to shift awareness to the target area of intervention, namelyreturning home. It also begins to develop the idea of expectation which is fundamental to theprograms goals (Martin, 1986). It begins to shift the activity from the more cognitive to themore affective as issues of change, longing, and loss begin to emerge for the participantsBowlby, 1969). These feelings now emerging will be accentuated by subsequent activities of areflective nature. This activity may further heighten dissonance and may begin to initiate thework of worry (Festigner, 1957; Janis, 1958). This activity primes the affective substrate andprovides the opportunity for participants to engage their awareness on a deeper more intuitivelevel. It focuses their attention on the return home and attempts to disengage more cognitivedefense structures, to allow a greater sense of authenticity to the experience of returning home.38Activity 6 EDUCATIONAL-DIDACTIC (Large Group) 15 Minutes• conduct a brief discussion about reentry problems (with guest, if possible).Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)To give an overview of the literature. To alert the participants to their potential for reentryshock and outline the common areas of concern, i.e., depression, shock, feelings ofdisorientation, feeling invalidated, etc.2) To give information to increase participant awareness.3) To sensitize participants to the possibility of difficulties.4) This is necessary as participants may not be fully cognizant of the range and magnitude ofthe potential problems.5) The personal testimonial makes the information more immediate and heightens the validity ofthe presentation.6) This process normalizes concerns that may have been evoked during the previousvisualization exercise and helps lessen overall anxiety.7) This didactic presentation shifts participants to a more intellectual mode of functioning afterthe experiential/emotional mindset of the previous activity. This may allow for furtherintegration of those experiences.8) Allows the participants some psychological preparation time before the lunch break.(c)This activity provides the cognitive overview to the major issues and potentialdifficulties in reentry. This heightening of awareness is designed to lower expectations(Martin, 1986) and is timed to maximize the impact to the participants, after the morningsactivities have somewhat lowered defensive postures (Corey, 1987). The "work of worry"has begun as the participants integrate the wealth of information provided, and match thesepotential difficulties to their personal expectations (Janis,1958). Cognitive dissonance is39postulated in the participants as they consider new awareness of reentry issues(Festigner,1957).Activity 7 CRITICAL INCIDENTS and ROLE PLAY 60 Minutes• each group is given 1 of 3 typical reentry critical incidents. They discuss them andthen re-enact them in front of the larger group. Potential solutions are generated by thelarge group.Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1) to better develop coping strategies through rehearsal.2) to heighten awareness of the nature of reentry shock.3)to participate in either situational or observational learning, and so make concrete theconcepts previously learned.4)to become involved in risking the exploration of a possibly anxiety-provoking scenario, in acontrolled environment, and to begin to rehearse possible strategies for coping.5) to allow group dynamics and interaction to heighten the experience of re-enactment.6) to increase group solidarity and reduce a sense of personal isolation and despair.(c)While group dynamics are at a minimum during this activity, the presentation of theinformation on reentry as a potential for adjustment difficulties, further consolidates the feelingof shared experience. Insights gained can be shared and reviewed during the lunch break.Activity 8 PROBLEM-SOLVING; PERSONAL STRATEGIES and CONTRACTING 60minutes• generalize themes and suggest other potential strategies for coping. Members given anopportunity to develop their own strategies for reentry.40• discuss program goals as they relate to individual goals (as described earlier).•Participants are asked to make contracts in the group; "what" and "how" they plan toact.Rationale:(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)integration of awareness into behavioral correlates.2) to provide individuals with an opportunity for goal setting and contracting.3) public disclosure may enhance commitment.4) enhances the repertoire of strategies for the participant.5) leaves the participant in a proactive stance.6) provides some resolution or direction to any new anxiety-provoking awareness.(c)High group consensus and cohesion will serve to heighten the impact of the individualsgoal setting (Corey, 1987). Increased trust levels will allow a more intimate sharing of goals,concerns and potential solutions to problems of reentry. These solutions can then also begeneralized and potentially viable solutions to unresolved or unspoken individual concerns canbe generated. Heightened awareness, based on previous activities and a proactive stance leavesthe participants in an enhanced mode to continue the "work of worrying" postulated to assisttheir reentry (Janis, 1958). This process also validates the nature of their internal struggle withthe sense of self for as they define their strategies they define themselves (Ishiyama, 1989;Zaharna, 1989).Activity 9 CLOSURE (Large Group) 30 Minutes• "Gateway Activity."• Closure and symbolic ending of the days activities.Rationale(a)Cognition: Low - Middle - HighAffective: Low - Middle - HighBehavioral: Low - Middle - High(b)1)provides a sense of closure for the day's activities.2) provides a forum for the expression of feelings/emotions about the day.3) allows a "cooling off' before returning to the rest of the day's activities.4) provides a behavioral correlate to the sense of beginning a new task, i.e., returning home.5) provides a sense of ceremony that is often lacking in group workshops and that is valuedhighly by some cultures.6) leaves participants with a tangible positive acknowledgment.7) provides a symbolic context with which to remember the day's activities and therebycontinue to process the day's experiences.8) positive reinforcement enhances participants commitment to the procedure.(c)Provides the often neglected aspect of symbolic meaning for the participants, andprovides a positive closure, as well as activation for further individual development concerningreentry (Trotzer, 1989). This activity validates the participants experiences and helpscontribute to the sense of meaningfullness in terms of a shared experience (Ishiyama, 1989). Italso provides a metaphor for their continuing process of reentry (Martin, 1986).The preceding presents each of the activities in reference to the appropriate theoreticalrationale. Chapter IV presents the results of the evaluation component of the study, the initialimpact on the participants anxiety levels and awareness of reentry issues, as measured by therespective instruments. A brief anecdotal section incorporates comments from the participantsto form a more qualitative analysis of the impact to the participants.4142CHAPTER IVMETHODOLOGY AND RESULTS:QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVEIn order to investigate the short term impact of the program on the participants level offunctioning in terms of both anxiety and awareness of reentry issues, the following design andmethodology were used. This will be followed by a discussion of the results and a briefqualitative analysis of the participants comments, based on a post group programquestionnaire.MethodologyDesign:The design of the program consisted of a pre/post experimental only group design.Both instruments, described later were given to the participants just prior to the onset of theactivities and just after the last activity of the day. The days activities were designed to take onefull day including a lunch break, approximately of seven hours in duration, in this case from9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. which include approximately two- thirty minute sessions for completingthe measurement instruments. In addition the post testing psychometric package included astructured comment form on the days activities.Measures/Instrumentation:The measurement instruments used were the Spielberger State/Trait AnxietyQuestionnaire and the Marten, Brislin, Reentry Awareness Questionnaire. The ReentryQuestionnaire consisted of questions designed to access the respondents awareness levels onreentry issues on the commonly experienced reentry parameters as outlined by Aushcion,Lalonde (1986). Since awareness impacts expectations this was a key variable to access,however this necessitated using a prototype version of this instrument, as this was the onlyknown type available. Since no overall scoring key was available at the time of testing, acomprehensive item by item analysis was carried out for each of the pre/post Awarenessmeasurements. (Subsequent personal communications (August 1991) with both RichardBrislin and Judith Martin indicate that the further development of this instrument has been4 3postponed, the reader interested in an instrument of this type is directed to a new instrumentcurrently being developed at the University of British Columbia, Counselling PsychologyDepartment, (1992).The State-Trait Inventory (STAI), which was, developed by Spielberger, Gorsuch, andLushene (1970), has become a commonly used instrument. It's usage has only been exceededby the WAIS , WISC, and MMPI.The rationale for the use of these instruments is as follows. Firstly since anxiety isconceptual correlate of cognitive dissonance Festigner (1957), the author was interested to seehow the program impacted the level of anxiety of the participants. Since many of the programactivities were designed to raise the participants dissonance and potential anxiety an analysis ofthe impact was warranted. Secondly, since expectation is predicated on awareness access tothe participants levels of reentry awareness pre and post intervention was warranted.Sample:The sample of the participants were volunteer recruited form several Vancouver postsecondary institutions. The program was offered under the auspices of International House atthe University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. International house is a facilitydedicated to International Students attending U.B.C. and is responsible for assistinginternational students from pre-arrival to post-departure. As such, it provided not only thefacility and context for the program but also support in recruitment of the participants. Sinceattracting participants to reentry programs is notoriously difficult (Brislin & Van Buren, 1974)this program was offered to the international student at several other local institutions. Four ofthe participants were encouraged to attend as part of their pre-departure orientation, for afederally funded agency. Criteria for acceptance to the program was being away from home forat least six months and planning to return home in the following six months. A total of 11participants were recruited (N=11), one participant had to leave early, an N=10 was used formost of the statistical analysis.44Data Collection/AnalysisThe data was collected, for the pre-program condition at 8:30 a.m. just prior to theonset of the group program. The participants were handed the questionnaire package andasked to fill them out. Participants filled out the questionnaires individually under informalconditions in a large room outside of the program site. As additional participants arrived theywere given the questionnaire package. Completion of the q questionnaires tookapproximately 15 minutes for each person. At the end of the program upon leaving the roomthe participants were asked to complete the post-program questionnaire and to hand it in priorto leaving. Again this took approximately 15 minutes from each participant (4:30 p.m.).Results - Part 1- QuantitativeDescription of statistical analysis performed and summary of the results.A paired t-test was conducted on State-Anxiety (S-Anxiety) before and after the reentrygroup program. No significant difference was found in the level of state anxiety as a result ofthe program.In order to examine whether the program had any effect on S-Anxiety as compared toTrait-Anxiety (T-Anxiety) measured before the intervention, a paired t-test was conducted tocompare the levels of these two variables. No significant difference was found. Means onboth variables were almost identical. Table 1 displays the mean and standard deviation of boththe State and Trait anxiety variables for both pre and post reentry group program conditions.Table 1A-State and A-Trait - Means and Standard Deviations VARIABLE PROB. MEAN STANDARD STANDARDSANXAMSANXAM.278 50.3044.30DEVIATION ERROR10.858.763.422.77N=10, Degrees of Freedom=94 5Paired t-tests were conducted on all the items of the Awareness Questionnaire, tocompare the participants responses before and after the group program. A significantdifference was found for item #27 (Do you expect your friends to listen to your description ofexperiences abroad?). Participants expected their friends at home to listen to their descriptionof experiences abroad to a significantly lesser extent than they had expected before theprogram.Although only 3 subjects were married a significant difference was found for theirresponse for item# 18 (Did you expect changes in the types of activities my wife/husbandwould be able to participate in after your return?). Participants expected more change in thetypes of activities the spouse would be able to participate in when they returned home, after thegroup program.Although no other statistically significant differences were found there was a similartrend to that found for item #27, with regard to family (items #5 and 9). Participants appearedto expect their family to listen to their experiences to a lesser extent after the counselling sessionthan before (item #24).Table 2 summarizes these results as well as others of near significance. The "VariableName" refers to the designation used for computational purposes, the first two letters referringto the Awareness Instrument (AW), while the digits refer to the individual question. SeeAppendix K for a complete description of the individual item. The "Variable Descripters" areabbreviations of the key concept contained in the question.Table 2Reentry-Awareness: Summary of means and t-test probabilitiesVARIABLE VARIABLE Y N MEAN SNAME DESCRIPT. PRE/POSTAWAMO5 "family" .081 10 4.1-3.5AWAMO9 "souvenirs" .066 10 4.1-3.4AWAM18 "spouse" .038* 3 3.0-4.7AWAM24 "friends" .087 10 4.5-3.7AWAM27 "friends ls." .010** 10 4.0-3.1AWAM44 "express" .081 10 2.9-3.5AWAM67 "work" .089 5 2.4-1.4*P>.05 **P>.0146Part 2: QualitativeDiscussion of the Reentry Workshop Evaluation QuestionnaireThe following table provides the results of the Reentry workshop evaluationQuestionnaire, which was given to the participants immediately after the program. The mean,mode and range of scores for each question is provided, as well a graphic depiction of themean imbedded in the Likert scale (•=mean). This is followed by a analysis of other qualitativedata provided by the participants response to open ended questions. The rationale for the useof qualitative analysis is that one of the goals of the research was to evaluate the short termeffects of the program on the participants, the participants comments on the program is thus ofcrucial importance in further design and enhancement of this group reentry program.Results of: Post Reentry Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire1.The workshop should be offered at anearlier date 12 3. 4 5 a later date?2. The time allocated for the discussion wassufficient 1 -2 3 4 5 insufficient?3. The length of the workshop should havebeen extended,disagree 1 2. 3 4 5 agree?4. The workshop should have includedmore practical strategies for makingthe reentry adjustment easier.disagree 1 2 3. 4 5 agree?5. The theoretical background wasinformative 1 .2 3 4 5 wasteful?6. The group activities werestimulating 1 .2 3 4 5 boring?7. The group activities wereinformative 1 .2 3 4 5 wasteful?8. Group discussions were generallyrelevant 1 .2 3 4 5 irrelevant?9. The objectives and the rationale of theworkshop were,very clear 1 .2 3 4 5 very unclear?10.To what degree were the objectivesaccomplished?high degree 1 2. 3 4 5 low?11. In preparing myself for leaving thissetting, the workshop was,very useful 1 2. 3 4 5 useless?.=Mean 3.27, Mode 3, Range 1-5•=Mean 1.81, Mode 1, Range 1-3-.Mean 2.36, Mode 3, Range 1-5•=Mean 3.72, Mode 3 Range 1-5-.Mean 1.72, Mode 1, Range 1-3•-,--Mean 1.54, Mode 1, Range 1-4•=Mean 1.72, Mode 1, Range 1-4-.Mean 1.63, Mode 1, Range 1-4•=Mean, 1.54 Mode 1, Range 1-2•=Mean 2.27, Mode 2 Range, 1-4-.Mean 2.0, Mode 2 Range, 1-34712.In preparing myself for re-enteringmy home culture the workshop was,very useful 1 2. 3 4 5 useless?^•=Mean 2.0, Mode 1-3, Range 1-313.With respect to the possible problemsexperienced by others in leaving theirinstitution and re-enteringtheir home countries, I learned,very much 1 2. 3 4 5 very little?^•.Mean 2.09, Mode 1-3, Range 1-314.With respect to the possible problemswhich I could experience in re-enteringmy home culture, I learned,very much 1 2. 3 4 5 very little?^-.Mean 2.18, Mode 3, Range 1-315.As a result of the workshop, thepossible problems I anticipated in leavingthis setting and returning home were,greater before 1 2 .3 4 5 less before?^-.Mean 2.63, Mode 1-2, Range 1-316. The general effect of the workshop on me was,beneficial 1 -2 3 4 5 detrimental?^•..Mean 1.63, Mode 1-2, Range 1-3Summary of open ended questions responsesEach respondent is identified alphabetically. Not all questions were answered by allrespondents.Part II1. What workshop activities do you feel will prove to be the most beneficial?Give specific reason why.(a) discussion after group activities, requires you to think about your own position.(b) tips of what to do and expect or strategies with respect to reentry.(c) visualizing the scenes when I go back and how it seems like. This makes it easy to.(d) The discussions about the possible problems is the most beneficial because I realized them and beginsmental preparations. Liked the list of problems very realistic.(e) relaxation technique, felt less stress, to hear the common problems from other people, more understanding.lecture of common problems got me thinking not so surprised.(f) When we had to give a particular thing we looked forward to and not looked forward to, because it was themost personal thing for me.(h) strategies discuss.(i) Discussions about the possible problems expected, because it is sharing the feeling and exchanging ideason some problems we are expecting.(j) Working out what I was most and least looking forward too.(k) Role play, because I discovered I was being too negative about myself.482. What workshop activities do you feel will prove to be the least beneficial?Give specific reason why.(a) questionnaires, too long, inappropriate, ambiguous.(b) role playing, each individual has different circumstances and background, whereas role playing can onlyinclude one issue(one person).(c) nothing(d)none-all were related.(e) role playing, not same problem as I, too individual not a common problem, very time limited.(f) role playing, because it was not my case being discussed.(i) Problem Solving; because problems are often so complex and specific to certain situation, can't begeneralized.(j) Role-play- You can't easily reproduce the conditions that will actually exist at home.(k) filling out questionnaires, too long, confusing.3. What would you include in the workshop to improve it's usefulness?(b) more practical stuff tips.(d) More group discussions, ask questions then discuss people talk together, both small and big groups, smallgroups maybe better, not enough strategies to deal with all the problems.(e) More Expert analysis, more high level people give info, low level people just confuse us. More scientificanalysis, psychological analysis. When it happens, never think about discussion has lower ideas, we wantexpert ask question but then give analysis, to get more idea's.(0 More role plays and /or discussion after the role play.(h)discuss for typical problems.(i) more problem solving oriented. Collect many cases of different situation together with information on howthese problems were solved.(j) more discussion of previous actual experiences of returning students.(k) perhaps more theory.4. What other suggestions do you have for improving the workshop?(b) less group discussion and more strategies.(c) longer question period.(d) how others deal with problems, examples strategies.(e) a little longer, more food more relaxed.(0 One or two "getting to know each other" exercises.(h) more story analysis. (Activity 7)(k) Someone to go to afterwards, or in weeks afterwards to discuss what's come up.5. Please comment on the overall usefulness of the reentry workshop.(a) very useful, even people that think they're prepared should attend. You don't feel so alone, you listen toothers and share each other ideas, you structure your own feeling and thoughts(b) it was useful, we became more aware of pitfalls of reentry.(c) made me think alot.(d) good, for mental preparation.(e) very useful, because before I did not think about this. If I go home without this I would think that it is mypersonal problem, but it is not uncommon.49(f) very useful. Needs to be thought about in the future, before I go back then I think it will be very useful.(h) It is very useful. It makes us alert for problems we will meat. It also helps to get some strategy toovercome them. At least, one will not be puzzled when meet these kinds of problems.(i) As Allan said, discussing problems and exchanging ideas is 1st step to solve problems. After workshop, Ifeel problems become more clear and specific, accordingly so is how I should be prepared.(j) Very Useful, A much more focused awareness of what I am likely to feel.(k) I found it useful to realize that these problems were not a failure on my part, but a natural consequence ofthe situation.Part III1. What changes in your expectations about going home have been altered as aresult of participating in this workshop?(b) Can't expect my country to be the same as Canada. I have to pick up things I missed from my countryduring my stay in Canada.(c) more anxious to go back.(d) lowered expectations, expect less from colleagues and family members, not interested in my life in Canada,don't care what I experience.(e) lowered expectations, maybe less disappointment.(f) NOW I have lowered expectations. I do not expect anything from my friends. I expect myself to develop astrategy.(h) not expect too much for colleagues, also for working environment, alert for friends.(i) lowering my expectation level. I will be more flexible and adaptive.(j) Professional Jealousy, general disinterest in my experiences abroad.2. Were there any specific events, activities, information in today's workshopthat contributed to altering your expectations about returning home?(a) discussions, other peoples opinions and problems.(b) Allan's presentation (Activity 6) and people's comments changed my expectation. I realized values I beganto adopt in the home country won't necessarily fit my country. I have to either readjust or introduce it slowlyin my home country.(c) other people's opinions because I'd never thought about that before.(d) group discussions, list of problems. Liked chance to hear from other cultures in the workshop, like toknow what they were thinking, very curious.(e) Lecture (Activity 6), case studies. Liked to see different culture, western country people.(f) The overall talk made me less optimistic about going home.(i) Allan's presentation (Activity 6) about the roots of the problem.(j) Listening to others speaking, the relaxation session was very good.(k) Discussions with others, made me see my own position more clearly. Realization that returning may notbe an appropriate decision.5 03. Did your level of comfort in the group change over the course of the daysevents?(a) yes, felt more comfortable after awhile, good size group! (10)(b) after knowing some people in the session, I got more comfortable.(d) little improved time is short!(e) little improved.(f) I got more and more comfortable, because we were doing more and more things together.(i) At the beginning we discuss the 1st problem on Canada. That helped to share the same experience and mademe feel sense of member in a friendly group.(j) Wasn't comfortable to think about reality of going home. My attention faded towards the end, needed acoffee break.(k) Yes, towards the end I was very relaxed with everyone.4. Was there anything in today's workshop which made you feeluncomfortable or awkward?(a) progressive muscle relaxation-unnecessary, just listening to music would have been fine, relaxation feltawkward.(b) Role playing and introducing oneself because I don't like all eyes directed upon me.(c) Yes, My English is not good enough to explain my feelings.(d) No!(e) went by too quickly, too rushed.(f) The most of all the discussions wee quite negative. None of the "exercises" made me feel uncomfortable.(h) No.(j) No.(k) Relaxation technique, I didn't relax at all.5. Speaking about your own experiences today, did revealing about yourselfseem helpful or not helpful?(a) useful, more structure thoughts, [positive feedback.(b) not really because I believe no everybody is enthusiastic about hearing other's experiences.(c) Yes, I think it's useful. But I was not brave enough to do that.(d) helpful, to have a chance too talk about myself. I want to open my thinking this helped me.(e) Not very useful to me, don't have a close relationship with the person, people just listened, want otheropinions.(f) Very useful because it made me realize and made me prepare for a problem I didn't see prior.(h) Helpful. It help me to think it more deeper help other to think about it. I also benefit from others.(i) Definitely helpful, experience is one of the most helpful things I can talk about. They are specific andpractical.(j) Neither, helped focus my feelings.(k) Yes it was helpful to reveal myself as I felt support and understanding.516. Part of today's workshop attempted to help you develop strategies orapproaches for re-entering your own culture. Do you think that you gainedsome specific skills or knowledge that will assist your reentry process?(a) was developed before, more structured thoughts positive feedback.(b) I don't think I gained specific skills but certainly I became more aware of the potential dangers of havingtoo high expectations and the possible impact.(c) I learned not too expect too much.(d) Not much, just mental preparation, not much on concrete strategies, when they will happen I will try tofigure them out.(e) Yes, just helped with mental preparation, how to deal with relationships, colleagues, work place friends.(f) It is hard to know right now, but yes I think I learned how to deal with problems around people when Ireturn.(h) Yes. I need to know more about back home before going back. Connecting friends. Think about myattitude strategies for going back with friends and colleges.(i) Yes, I think. Strategy I think I have to cure are: Be humble, Don't be superior to your colleagues, keepyourself updated.(k) Not really, I think there is little answer, best to go through it, time will tell.7. Any other comments?(a) ambiguous questionnaire, too long!(e) want handouts of the common problems to keep, just beginning to start thinking about them.(I) talk about positive things.(j) Too many questionnaires! Good Program Though.(k) On the whole, extremely beneficial. Raise some very disturbing questions which I am glad I am facing upto. I'm very glad I came here today and it makes me much more comfortable about returning!Additional ObservationsAfter Activity 6, the educational component, the participants had a 1 hour break forlunch. Upon returning to the group setting a general check in occurred, where participantswere asked to respond by verbalizing about their energy levels and general mood, before theafternoon session began. At this point 2 participants (b and k) verbalized that they were feelingquite low and depressed. There was also other participants non verbal corroboration of thisstatement, by head nodding, etc. In general the mood of the group appeared low, with tiredlooks, slumping in their seats, etc. These feelings were acknowledged and reframed in termsof an opportunity to explore some strategies to help resolve some of the potential difficulties inreentry. This invitation was readily accepted, and a quite energized and active second half ofthe program occurred.5 2Further comments were reported to the author directly by 2 of the participants (c and i),post the group program. As background to their comments, the reader should know that theparticipants in the program were racially diversified with approximately half Oriental and halfCaucasian. Each of the respondents (1 Oriental, 1 Caucasian) reported that one thing theyfound of value in the group was hearing about the other racial groups analysis of theirproblems and some of their solutions, they both implied that they benefited from hearing theother's world view, and widened there respective behavioral repertoire with additionalstrategies. Although not stated directly the authors interpretation of these comments, coupledwith the observations from the group were that the Caucasians framed their personal responsestrategies in terms of individual action, whereas the Oriental group spoke more of generalizedcommunal strategies concerning friends, colleague and family, it may be this difference that thetwo participants were alluding too. In addition there was an elegant complementariness in thesimilarity of the two participants comments which served to acknowledge and appreciate theperceived differences.53CHAPTER VDISCUSSIONLimitations of the study / Directions for Future Research:Several limitations to this study serve to limit the genaralizability of the program. Alarger sample size would have contributed to the reliability of the results, as would theopportunity to run several groups over a period of time. In addition the group studied aretechnically not a pure sample as some volunteered as participants and it can be arguedlegitimately that they may have different qualities than non-volunteers. However, nodifferences were discovered between the volunteers and the volunteered in the program. Thevolunteer participants may have been more motivated in thinking about reentry in general thanthose who did not choose to participate.The sample population of international students is a highly select group, near the topacademically in their respective countries, and may possess personality variables which maylimit the generalizability of the results to other sojourning groups. An assumption has been thatbecause this reentry program deals with underlying psychological factors its appropriatenessfor other groups may be valid, however this assumption needs further analysis andverification.The use of a control group design with some groups receiving no treatment, or themore ethically acceptable, receiving the educational component of the program in a didacticfashion, would have allowed a better analysis of the efficacy of elements of this program ascompared to traditional reentry program. At this time it is still unclear as to which componentsof the program proved most efficacious, and why. Further research in this area will allow theprogram to be enhanced.The use of a prototype measurement instrument, Reentry Awareness Questionnaire,poses concern over the validity of the instrument. Far preferable would have been the use ofan instrument that had been validated by several other researcher, over time. This lack ofconfidence in the instrument confounds the analysis of how much did the expectations of theparticipants change over the course of the program?The possibility exist based on grammatical inconsistencies as evidenced by some of theparticipants responses, that the instrumentation may have been too difficult in terms of thesubtleties of the questions for some of the participants with English as a second language5 4(E.S.L.) this variable was not controlled for on the assumption that admission to the universitysuggested a high functional English competence, however this assumption may have beensomewhat optimistic.Although beyond the scope of this current research, the next logical step would be afollow up study on the effects on the participants after they return home. This may provideinsight into the potential long term effects of the program, which by definition could not beexamined in the present study. This analysis would be crucial in further development of thisprogram and others of this type and forms the most essential next step in this research.Furthermore the effects upon the participants anxiety and awareness concerning reentryissues over time would be warranted. At this time little is known about the long term effects ofRe-entry programs on these important variables.In addition individual variables in the re-entry experience need to be further delineated.Individual differences in personality and life experiences, as well as length of stay, awarenessof anxiety, levels of perceived success in adjusting to the host country, anticipated negativeevents upon return may all be factors worthy of consideration, and which may impact theindividuals re-entry experience.Qualitative analysisThe spontaneous reporting of high levels of anxiety/depression by 2 participants, postthe educational component (Activity 6) suggest that the effects of the participants anxiety mayhave fluctuated throughout the day and a more robust level may have been encountered ifmeasurement had occurred at the midpoint of the program. It can be speculated that subsequentactivity served to ameliorate the anxiety associated with reentry by providing positive, proactivesteps towards resolution. Potentially the initial anxiety generated a motivation toward seekingsolutions to the anticipated problems, however further analysis of this finding are necessary.Overall the perceived benefit of the program to the participants was quite high. Boththe liken scale (M=1.63) as well as the comments the "very high" usefulness of the program(i,e,f,h,j) indicate that the participants found a high face validity to the program and its content.Levels of satisfaction were high as evident by the participants responses and by theirfilling out the lengthy questionnaires, despite complaints about so doing (a,j). This element ofprotest regarding the instrumentation also calls into question the strength of the findings onthese instruments (awareness and anxiety) as participants may have been in a hurry to fill them5 5out, or may have protested more passively by not carefully answering the questions. A furthercaution to further research in this area is that the participants while highly motivated andcooperative may feel that a lengthy questionnaire, such as these ones, is too much to ask forafter a program which may be somewhat draining. In addition the comments from some of theparticipants about wanting more time in some areas (such as role playing) could easily havebeen accomplished, if the instrumentation component is minimized or eliminated.The varied nature of responses to the questions of what was the highest value to theprogram, provides indirect support to the multi-modal approach that formed the basis of theprogram. Despite the strong theoretical underpinnings for each activity, it would be difficult topredict (a priori) which of the activities would be perceived to be of the most benefit, it is bothpractical and powerful to approach the elements of reentry from the different domains,cognitive, behavioral, and affective. This approach allows the program to capture the widestvariety of participant response styles, by providing activities which not only explore thedifferent domains of personality, but do so with several different approaches.Overall the perceived benefit of the program was high, and possibly best described byparticipant (h) "At least one will not be puzzled when meet these kinds of problem (reentry)" aneloquent, though grammatically incorrect testimonial of the programs goals of attempting tomore closely match expectation with experience.Implications for CounsellingThe reentry group program that has been developed and tested here appears to be ofsome value to the participants in lowering their expectations about returning home. This ispostulated to reduce the levels of perceived disruption in returning to the home environment,and help generate a more positive outcome for the individual. With the initial findingssupporting this theory additional research is warranted to establish the long term impact of theprogram.It would appear that this program offers a comprehensive, structured interventionwhich facilitates the active involvement of the participants. The participants high perceivedvalue of the program suggests that the activities involved had high intrinsic value to theparticipants and is suggestive of accessing and engaging the individual at a number of differentlevels.5 6The program as presented does appear to facilitate the learning goals that were intended,namely, activation of awareness, lowered expectations and adoption of personalized strategiesto cope with the stresses of reentry. Based on participant perceptions the program could beenhanced in the following ways. Increased emphasis on the "Critical Incidents" and "RolePlaying" could allow more participants to explore their individual situation using thistechnique. Increased emphasis on providing information on how others handled their returnexperiences, as well as handouts and availability of other institutional resources both pre andpost departure, could also be useful to participants..An interesting question remains in that despite the participants acknowledgments ofwanting more practical strategies for solving reentry problems the author is not totallyconvinced of the efficacy of this approach. Firstly on pragmatic grounds the solutions are notyet available in terms of a "Fact Sheet" which can assist in universal adjustment to reentry. Ifthe argument presented here is correct in that reentry is a form of confrontation with the self itis difficult to see how a recipe approach (which has previously been the most common formatof reentry program) could provide solutions for the individual's sense of self identity, mediatedby dissonance and expectation. As these concepts are somewhat ephemeral (except for theperson involved) the interventions may need to be more indicative of direction rather thandestination. In other words since reentry can be argued to be a process, this process cannot beeliminated as a short cut to reentry adjustment. Any intervention which curtails this approachmay in fact disrupt the necessary and natural re-examination of the self by providing a falsesense of security and identity, confounding the "work of worry".The reader may be somewhat uncomfortable in the notion of a counselling interventionwhich seeks as one of its goals to leave the participants feeling worse about the situation. Thisis clearly a complex scenario with some ethical implications. However this program attemptedto arouse concern about reentry on a personal basis and attempted to assist the participants tomartial resources based on this new found insight. In this respect the program was successfulin activating this concern, the request for more specific strategies by the participants can beviewed as further corroboration that this effect occurred. In addition the results of the Anxiety(STAI) Instrument further establishes that the participants were in the short term not undulyanxious in terms of their prospective reentry to their home country at the end of the program.5 7With further development of the program, based on long term follow up studies andparticipants perceptions, it is hoped that this program can begin to address the needs of thegrowing number of individuals who return from living abroad. The current program is beingused in a replication study, which will include long term follow up (Flinders University,Adelaide, Australia, 1992). There is both an necessity for further research in this area bycounselling psychologists as well as need for counsellors to be aware of the reentry process.The development of this program has been an initial attempt to provide an effective counsellingtool which may serve to lessen the stressful impact of reentry and potentially enhance thedevelopment of the individuals pro-active reentry style.58REFERENCES:Adler, N. (1976). Growthful re-entry theory. Unpublished mimeograph. GraduateSchool of Management, University of California, Los Angeles.Adler, N. (1980). Re-entry: A study of the dynamic coping processes used byrepatriated employees to enhance effectiveness in the organization. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 1679A.Adler, N. (1981). Re-entry: managing cross-cultural transitions.  Group and OrganizationStudies, 6, 341-356.Adler, P. (1974). Beyond cultural identity: An alternative view of culture shock. Journalof Humanistic Psychology, 15, 13-23.Adler, P. (1975). The transitional experience: an alternative view of culture shock.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15, 13-23.Al-Yassini, A. (1987). Entry and Re-entry: the search for answers. Canadian Bureau forInternational Education,  Ottawa, Canada.Aguilar, J. (1981). Insider's research: an ethnography of a debate. In D.Messerschmidt(Ed.), Anthropologist at home in North America. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.Asuncion-Lande, N. (1976). Inventory of reentry problems.  In H. Marsh,Reentry/transition seminars: report on the wingspread colloquium. Washington,D.C:NAFSA, 1976.Austin, C.N., (1983). Reentry stress: the pain of coming home. Evangelical Missions Quarterly, 19, 4, 278-287.Austin, C.N., (1983). Cross-cultural Reentry: An Annotated Bibliography.  ACU Press:Austin, Texas.Bateson, G. (1971). Introduction. In The natural history of an interview. University ofChicago Library microfilm Collection of Manuscripts in Cultural Anthropology,Series 15, 95-98.Baumeister, R.F. (1986). Identity: Cultural change and the struggle for self.  New York:Oxford University Press.5 9Baty, R.M., Dold, E. (1977) Cross cultural homestays: an analysis of college studentsresponses after living in an unfamiliar culture. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 1, 66-76.Behrens, J.S., & Bennet, W.F. (1981) A course on the re-entry/transition of internationalstudents. Texas Technical University.Bennet, J.M. (1977). Transition Shock: Putting culture shock in perspective. In N.C. Jain(Ed.) International and Intercultural Communication Annual (Volume 4), 45-52.Becker, T. (1968). Patterns of attitudinal changes among foreign students. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 431-442.Bochner, S. (1972). Problems in cultural learning. In S.Bochner & P.Wicks (Eds.),Overseas students in Australia. Randwick, N.S.W.: New South Wales UniversityPress.Bochner, S. (1973). The mediating man and cultural diversity. In R. Brislin (Ed.), Topicsin Cultural Learning pp. 23-37. East-West Cultural Learning Institute. Honolulu,Hawaii.Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Attachment (Vol. I). New York: Basic Books.Borus, J.F., (1973). Re-entry: I. Adjustment issues facing the Vietnam returnee.Archives of General Psychiatry, 28, 501-506.Borus, J.F., (1973). Re-entry: II. "Making it" back in the states. American Journal ofPsychiatry, 36, 850-854.Bridges, W.F. (1980). Transition: Surviving life's changes. Boston, MA:Addison Wesley.Brislin, R.W. (1974). The establishment of re-entry/transition seminars for overseas sojourners. Paper presented for the First National Conference on Re-entry/Transition at Racine, Wisconsin.Brislin, R.W., & Van Buren, H. (1974) Can they go home again? InternationalEducational and Cultural Exchange, 9, 19-24.Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.Cajoleas, L. (1959). The american educated foreign students returns home. Teachers College Record, 60, 191-197.Cooley, C.H. (1924). Human nature and social order. New York: Scribner.6 0Corey, M.S., & Corey, G. (1987) Groups: process and practise 3rd ed., Pacific GroveCalifornia: Brooks/Cole.Church, A. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 540-572.Egbert. L. (1964). Reduction of postoperative pain by encouragement and instruction.New England Journal of Medicine, 270, 825-827.Erickson, E. (1960) The problem of ego identity. In Stein, Vidich, & White, (Eds.),Identity and Anxiety pp. 37. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Festigner, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.Festigner, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford UniversityPress.Fieg, J., Koester, J., Sarabaugh, L., & Wendinger, L. (1984). Dynamics of cross-cultural adjustment: from pre-arrival to re-entry. In S. Foust (Ed.), Learning Across Cultures (pp. 7-33). (Lexington: Lexington Books.)Foust, S. (1981). Dynamics of cross-cultural adjustment: from the pre-arrival to reentry.In G. Althen, (Ed.),  Learning across cultures, pp.7-29. Washington, DC:National Association for Foreign Student Affairs.Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments. New York: Methuen.Gamma, E.M.P., Pedersen, P. (1977). Readjustment problems of Brazilianreturnees from graduate studies in the United States. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 1(4), 46-59.Gibb, R.G. (1961). Defensive communication. The Journal of Communication, 11, 141-148.Gullahorn, J. I., Gullahorn, J. (1963). An extension of the U-curve hypothesis. Journal of Social Issues, 19, 33-47.Janis, I. L. (1958). Psychological Stress. New York: John Wiley.Heath, G.L. (1970). Foreign students attitudes at International House.Exchange, 5, 66-70.Hill, R. (1958). Generic features of families under stress. Social Casework, 49, 139-150.6 1Ishiyama, I. (1989). Understanding foreign adolescents' difficulties in cross-culturaladjustment: a self-validation model. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 4(2), 41-56.Janis, I.L. (1958). Psychological Stress: Psychoanalytic and behavioral studies ofsurgical patients. New York: Wiley.Janis, I. L. & Mann L. (1974). Decision Making: A Psychological analysis of conflict, choice and commitment. New York: Free press.Kendall, D.W. (1981). Repatriation: an ending and a beginning.  Business Horizons, November-December, 21-25.Koester, J. (1983). The intercultural reentry: a communication perspective. Paperpresented to the annual meeting of the Society for Intercultural CommunicationEducation, Training and Research, San Gimignanao, Italy.Kohls, L.R. (1979). Survival kit for overseas living. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.Lecky, P. (1968). The theory of self-consistency. In G. Gordon & K. Gergen Eds., Theself in social interaction pp. 105-109. New York: Wiley.Oberg, K. (1960) Cultural shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments. PracticalAnthropology, 7, 177-182.Mansell, M. (1981). Transcultural experience and expressive response.Communication Education, 30, 93-108.Marsh, H. (Ed.). (1976).  Reentry transition seminars: Report on the WingspreadColloquium. Washington, D.C.:NAFSAMarten, J.N. (1984). The Intercultural Reentry: conceptualization and directions for futureresearch. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 8, 115-134.Marten, J.N. (1986). Communications in the intercultural reentry: student sojourners'perception of change in reentry relationships. In J.N. Martin (Ed.),International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 2, New York: Pergamon Press.Mendenhall, M., Oddou, G., Stimpson, D.V., & Jackson, D. (1982). Enhancing traineesatisfaction with cross-cultural training programs via prior warning. InternationalJournal of Intercultural Relations, 6, 369-379.Metres, P.J. (1972). Reverse culture shock in returning Vietnam veterans.Masters Abstracts, 10(1), 137.6 2Meichenbaum, D. (1975). A self-instructional approach to stress management: Aproposal for stress inoculation training. In C.D. Spielberger & I.G. Sarason(Eds.), Stress and Anxiety I. Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere Publishing.Noer, D.M. (1974). Integrating foreign service employees to home organizations: thegodfather approach. Personnel Journal, January, 45-51.Pedersen, P.B. (1991). Counselling international students. The CounsellingPsychologist, 19, 10-58.Rhinesmith, S.H. (1975). Bringing home the world. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.Rhinesmith, S.H. (1981). A course in the re-entry/transitions of international students.Texas Technical University.Selby, H., Woods, C. (1968). Foreign students at a high pressure university. Sociologyof Education, 39, 138-154.Smith, M.B. (1955). Some features of foreign student adjustment. Journal  of HigherEducation, 26, 231-241.Smith, S.L. (1990). Returning U.S. Students: Maximizing a force for internationalawareness, Paper presented at the NASFA 43rd National Conference, BostonMassachusetts, May 26,1990.Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., & Luchene, R.E. (1970). Manual for the State-TraitAnxiety Inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, Consulting Psychologists.Sue, D.W. & Sue, D. (1990). Counselling the Culturally Different, Theory and Practise,2nd Edition, Toronto: Wiley Interscience.Tofler, A. (1970). Future Shock. New York: Random House.Trotzer, J.P. (1989). The Counsellor and the Group; Integrating Theory, Training, andPractise. 2nd. Edition, Accelerated Development Inc: Muncie, Indiana.Upobor, A.E. (1974). Intercultural adaptation: resocialization versus reacculturation. Paper presented to the Wingspread Colloquium. Washington,D.C.: NAFSA.Westwood, M. (1984). Re-turning Home: A Program for Persons assisting internationalstudents with the re-entry Process. Handbook for The Canadian Bureau forInternational Education. Ottawa, Canada.6 3Westwood, M. J., Lawrence W. S., & Paul, D. (1986). Preparing for re-entry; a programfor the sojourning student. International Journal for the Advancement ofCounselling, 9, 221-230.Westwood, M.J., Tillman, G. (1984). Returning home: a program for persons assistinginternational students with the re-entry process. Program presented at the annualmeeting of the National Association for Foreign Student Affairs, Snowmass, CO.Wolpe, J., Lang, P.J. (1964). A fear schedule for use in behaviour therapy.Behaviour, Research and Therapy,  2, 27-30.Zaharna, R.S. (1989). Self-shock: the double binding challenge of identity.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,  12, 501-525.Zempke, R., Zempke, S. (1984). 30 things we know for sure about adult learners. InS.D. Roueche (Ed.), Innovation Abstracts, 6, 8.64Appendix ADescription of each activity in detail.ACTIVITY 1INTRODUCTION:PURPOSETIMINGMATERIALSGREETINGS AND SETTING THE NORMTO SET A POSITIVE ATMOSPHERE FOR THE DAY'SACTIVIIIES15 MINUTESNAME TAGS, COLOURED PENSLeader's RoleLeader welcomes participants to the program:1)greets participants as they enter the room.2) introduces each participant to at least one other person.3) encourages participants to create their own name tags from the materialsprovided. Each name-tag should have the person's first name and if desired (formultinational groups), a drawing of their home country's national flag or symbol. Stressthat drawing skills are not important.Formal IntroductionLeader makes a formal introduction, which should include the following:1)Introduce yourself and welcome the participants to the program.2) Positively acknowledge their choice in participating.3) Outline (briefly) the reasons for the program.4) Give an overview of the day's activities (overhead provided)5)Make any "Housekeeping" Announcements• Parking • Lunch • Duration of the Program • Etc.6) To help counter the "Einstellung Effect" make a statement similar to thefollowing:"Researchers have suggested that some people tend to reactnegatively to training exercises like the ones I will shortly be giving you.Sometimes people think such training programs are stupid or a waste oftime or boring. This is a natural reaction to the unfamiliar and all of ushave probably felt like this before. What I would like to ask you to do is totry and be aware of these feelings should they arise during the course ofthe day. The potential benefits of a program like this may not beimmediately apparent. All that I ask is that you give this program a fairchance and as far as possible, approach it in a positive frame of mind."7) Conclude the introduction with a statement similar to the following:"You will be leaving with knowledge and skills that will assistyour re-entry to your home country."8) Ask for any questions or any clarifications.9) Establish the norm of confidentiality, that participants will not be identified inany way or their comments revealed without their written consent. The contents of anyquestionnaires will be kept strictly confidential.10)Assure participants that participation in all the activities of the day is entirelyvoluntary.ACTIVITY 2MY NAME MEANS: WARM-UP AND SHARING IN THE GROUPPURPOSE A SIMPLE AND PERSONAL INTRODUCTION TO THEGROUP FORMATTIMING^15 MINUTES (In randomly assigned pairs)MATERIALS^NONELeader's RoleName Exercise1)the leader makes a statement similar to the following:"To begin, I think it would be good to learn a little bit about eachperson here, and to make that easier, I would like you to find a partner andto ask your partner the following questions:a) What does your first name mean, or how did you receive thatname?(Leaders research your own name beforehand)For example my name is ^ and it means^or I was named after a famous person of the time.b) Where will you be living when you return to your home country?c) What are you hoping to learn here today?You will then be asked to introduce your partner to the group."6566ACTIVITY 3SELF REFLECTION: LOOKING BACK AT CHANGESPURPOSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE SELF CHANGES IN RESPONSE TO A NEWCULTURETIMING^30 MINUTES (Small Groups of four, including theirpartner from the introductory exercise)MATERIALS PENS AND SMALL CARDSLeader's Role1)The leader asks participants to form groups of four which include their originalpartner.2) The leader hands out small cards and pen for writing on.3)Participants are asked to record then discuss amongst themselves their firstimpressions of the host country, specifically:a) What were they initially confused or surprised about?To encourage and acknowledge negative experiences give an example such as,"Some international sojourners have expressed surprise at howHost nationals appear very friendly and helpful, and say that they will gettogether, but then it doesn't happen."or"Some people returning from the host country have told methat it can be very difficult to get anything done because of thebureaucracy, and they found this disturbing at first."b) What initial experiences in the host country did they value orappreciate most, but still surprised them?5) Encourage group discussion and then have each group spokesperson summarizeto the larger group, while the Leader records their responses on a whiteboard andacknowledge the range of experiences and/or common themes.6) Summarize this activity by stating (or equivalent):a) "Many of you experienced surprises when you came here,things that you did not expect. When you have too many new experiencesthat you are not prepared for, this can lead to "culture shock."b) "How many of you believe you experienced culture shock?"c) "To live here you have had to adapt to a new lifestyle,perhaps, and to some new customs. When you adapt, you change.Adaptation means change, and these changes in yourselves will be carriedback to your home country."67ACTIVITY 4REFLECTION ON LOSSES AND GAINS CROSSING CULTURESPURPOSE^TO ALLOW INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION ON WHAT WILL BELOST^AND GAINED UPON RETURNING HOMETIMING 30 MINUTESMATERIALS PENS AND SMALL CARDSLeader's Role1)The leader makes a statement similar to the following:"I would like you to shift your thoughts to the future now, andask you to perform a similar exercise."2) The leader asks participants to form new groups of four, and hands out pens andcards.3) They are then asked to record the answers to the following questions:a) What are they most looking forward to doing or having whenthey return back home?Give an example of two experiences that first come to mind. For example,someone might want to ride a favourite horse (doing) or buy some music from home(having).b) What are you not looking forward to experiencing when youget back home?For example, the weather, or living with my aunt, etc.c) What will you miss most about leaving this country?4) After recording their thoughts, in a small group discussion participants areencouraged to explain why they chose them.5) Ask someone from each group to summarize and present verbally to the othergroups the kinds of things that were recorded.6) Summarize with a statement similar to:"You have expressed a wide range of events that you are lookingforward to and some that you are not. You have also acknowledged somethings that you will be giving up when you return home. All of these thingsinvolve your expectations: when you look to the future you imagine whatthings will be like and, more than that, how you expect things to be. Theconcept of expectation is very important and we will come back to thatlater, but now I would like you to try another exercise that involvesimagining the way things will be."68ACTIVITY 5RELAXATION and VISUALIZATION OF RETURNING HOMEPURPOSE^TO REHEARSE AND ENCOURAGE AWARENESS OFFEELINGS ASSOCIATED WITH RETURNING HOMETIMING^30 MINUTES (individually in the large group)MATERIALS^SOFT, SLOW, INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC; COMFORTABLECHAIRS,^LOWERED LIGHTINGLeader's Role1)Make a statement similar to the following:"We would now like you to try to imagine what it will be likewhen you first return home. To assist you in this we will do a relaxationexercise to help you feel as comfortable as possible and then ask you toimagine your return home. I will help guide you through this exercise. Wewill also be lowering the lighting and playing some soft music to help makeyou more comfortable. I think it might help to also change the way we aresitting."2) Ask participants to;a) find the most comfortable chairs.b) form a large circle facing outwards (away from oneanother).c) feel free to close their eyes if that makes them morecomfortable.3) Conduct the Jacobsen Systematic Relaxation Exercise (see Appendix B)4) They are then asked to visualize themselves returning home. They will be askedthe following questions such as (see Appendix C):a) Imagine yourself stepping off the plane/arriving home, what are you seeing?hearing? smelling? saying?b) Who will be there? What will they be saying to you?c) What will be the first things you will do upon arrival? What will you befeeling?5) After this activity and a slow, gentle return to the group focus, participants willbe asked to describe any positive and negative feelings that they were experiencing.69ACTIVITY 6EDUCATIONAL - DIDACTIC REVIEW OF RE-ENTRY RESEARCHPURPOSE TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE POTENTIAL MAGNITUDEOF RE-ENTRY SHOCKTIMING^30 MINUTES (Large Group presentation)MATERIALSOVERHEAD (OPTIONAL)Leader's RoleMake a statement similar to the following:"Before we break for lunch, I would like to share with you some researchfindings about what other international sojourners have reported about theirexperiences returning home."1)Using appropriate research findings and anecdotal information, the leader gives abrief presentation about common concerns associated with re-entry (see AppendixD).2) Discuss stress, common difficulties, lack of validation and feelings of loss andfrustration.3) If possible, have this followed by a brief testimonial by an individual who hasexperienced re-entry shock, preferably an international student or returned businesscolleague, which will enhance the validity of the presentation.4) A brief question and answer period to follow.5) Indicate that problem-solving strategies will be examined after the lunch break,thus encouraging participants to continue.Lunch BreakLunch 30 - 60 minutes as needed. An on-site, informal group lunch is recommended toencourage group interaction and discussion which will serve to enhance the groupdynamics for the afternoon session. This format should also serve to encourageparticipation in the afternoon session.Re-introduction1)Welcome participants back from lunch.2) Gauge individual energy levels (i.e., ask participants to rate themselves from 1 -100) and offer acknowledgment of their fatigue and encouragement.3) Shift the focus more from experiencing to problem-solving.70ACTIVITY 7"CRITICAL INCIDENTS" AFTER RETURNING HOMEPURPOSE TO EXPLORE AND GENERATE POTENTIAL COPINGSTRATEGIES BY EXAMINING COMMON RE-ENTRYSCENARIOSTIMING 60 MINUTESMATERIALS 4 HANDOUTSLeader's RolePart A1) Make a statement similar to the following:"Before lunch we learned about some common experiences ofpeople returning home. I'd now like to give you some common scenariosthat have occurred and ask you to try and come up with some solutions tothese problems."2) Assign participants into groups of 4 (e.g. count of) and have them arrangethemselves around the room, into working groups.3) Each small group is given a written copy of 1 of 4 typical re-entry "criticalincidents."4) They are then asked to discuss these incidents and to do an analysis of thesituation.5) They are asked to answer the following question:a) What happened?b) What caused this to happen?c) What might have been done differently to resolve it?6) This is then discussed in their small groups.7) A member of the group as a spokesperson, presents to the larger group, the"critical incident" and possible solutions generated.Part B (In the same small groups)1) Ask participants to first think of, then describe an incident that they are imaginingon their return home which might be stressful. The Leader invites them to comment onand to share (in depth):a) Why it is stressful?b) How are they planning to handle the situation?2) Each situation is discussed in the small group and each member of the group isinvited to provide any constructive feedback or insight into the situation, as well as sharingtheir own reactions to the situation (ie. Group discussion and Problem Solving).Part C (Optional)1) Make a statement similar to the following:"You have just finished discussing some situations that you areanticipating when you return home. As you know, you do your best whenyou have had a chance to practise what you want to do, so now you willhave an opportunity to re-enact one of the situations that you have beendiscussing and to practise what you want to say. I would like each group to7 1pick and re-enact one of your members' possible^scenarios, and ifwe have time we will do more re-enactments. Here is what I would likeyou to do^ 992) Form into groups of 8-12 people by joining together some of the small groups (ifnecessary).3) (If applicable) Move each half of the group to a room that is comfortable andprivate.4) The leader gives the following instructions;a) pick a scenario of re-entry that you feel comfortable re-^enacting.b) briefly describe the situation to the group.c) look around you and pick someone from the group who you think could belike a person in your scenario (if he or she agrees).d) ask that person to act like the person you have in mind, and show him/herhow to look and move and talk. Also tell him/her things that the person might or wouldlikely say. After everyone has their roles, act out a scenario.5) Ask "Does anyone have a scenario that they would feelcomfortable starting us off with?" If someone does, then proceed with the re-enactment. If no one does, after gentle encouragement, then proceed to (8)6) After the scenario is finished conduct a debriefmg.a) Debriefing: After the scenario is finished, allow the participants and theobservers to offer any insights into the scene.b) model this behaviour by:i) positively acknowledging the person for re-enacting thescenario.ii) offer any insight about what you saw in the reenactment.iii) summarize the nature of the difficulty, and acknowledge the difficulty ofthe situation.7) Proceed with as many re-enactments as possible.8) To get things started the leaders may have to re-enact a scenario. This willbetter give a sense of what is expected of the participants and should provide enoughencouragement for them to then try themselves. Choose one of the "critical incident"scenarios to re-enact or, better yet, re-enact a scenario that is shared by several of the groupmembers. Heighten the involvement by having individuals show you how the person mightbehave, and encourage them to take on the roles, as they are "So much better at it."The leader should try to involve as many other people in the auxiliary roles as possible.9) Other suggestions:a) Encourage the scenario to develop longer than a few minutes. If the scenebecomes stuck, then add in dialogue, as if you were one of the participants. This is bestdone by coming in slowly behind the person and gently touching them on the shoulder,before delivering your/their line of dialogue. This method of furthering the development ofthe scene may be so appropriate that it encourages the other members of the group tobecome involved.b) Group leaders may also assist the re-enactment by taking a role for thoseindividuals who do not feel comfortable doing so.72ACTIVITY 8RE-ENTRY PROBLEM-SOLVING and CONTRACTINGPURPOSE TO REDUCE RE-ENTRY SHOCK BY MAKING AN INDIVIDUALAND PUBLIC COMMITMENT TO ACTIONTIMING 60 MINUTESMATERIALS PENS AND CARDSLeader's Role(Large Group)1) Begin with a statement similar to:"We have had an opportunity to think about some of theadjustments that have to be made in going home. Some of the things thatwe have discussed today may have started you thinking about some of thesituations that you will experience when you return home. I'd like you tothink more about your individual situation and to answer the followingquestions^ 992) Ask participants to individually acknowledge three things that they have found ofvalue in today's workshop and, based on this insight, what they will do to attempt toalleviate their own potential for re-entry stress. They are asked to record these items and arethen asked to share them with the group. Participants are encouraged to be as specific aspossible.4) To assist this process participants will be asked the following questions:a) What is the most important thing that I have learned today?b) What will I do about it?c) When will I do it?d) How will I do it?5) When this is done, each participant is asked to answer at least one set of thesequestions and to present this to the large group.6) As individuals are answering these questions, the leader may summarize andrecord the emergent themes on a flipchart etc.7) General discussion to follow. The group leader will summarize and add anyother strategies that may have been overlooked.Note, at this point some participants may be expecting you, asleader to provide them with quick solutions to their potential problems.However this is virtually impossible for you to accomplish and it defeatsthe program goals of having participants become aware and actively beginto engage in the process of anticipating future problems. This processshould not be cut short by providing advice, but rather general strategiesshould be put forward from which the participants may considerimplementing. A candid acknowledgment that you as leader do not have allthe answers, may serve to heighten individual action.73ACTIVITY 9CLOSURE: A SUMMATION OF THE DAYPURPOSE TO FORMALLY CLOSE THE GROUPTIMING 30 MINUTESMATERIALS SMALL GIFT E.G. HOST COUNTRY PIN, 1 EACHLeader's RolePart A1) The leader asks the participants to sit in a large circle, facing inwards.2) The leader verbally summarizes the day's activities and provides a sense ofclosure by discussing these (suggested) areas:a) Summary and appreciation of the day's activities and participation.b) Acknowledge the participants for actively engaging a difficult topic.c) Acknowledge the risk taking aspects.d) Discuss the program's goals as they relate to individual goals (from thebeginning of the day).e) Reinforce that re-entry is a process and that they have just begun to beaware of the implications in their own lives.f) Acknowledge that by participating they have taken a very proactive stepwhich will have numerous benefits in the future.g) Attempt to reframe re-entry as both a risk and an opportunity.3) The leader asks each member to share what they valued most about the day. Eachparticipant is provided with the opportunity and setting to add any acknowledgments orcomments that they feel comfortable with.4) (Optional) The participants are invited and encouraged to keep in contact with theleaders by providing a program evaluation or information for a follow-up study.Part B - Optional1)Make a statement similar to the following:"As a final event for the day I would like to acknowledged thatyou are now passing into a new stage of your journeys, by makingpreparation for your return home. We would like to symbolicallyacknowledge this journey and present you with a small gift that representsthe memories of your stay here, memories that will always be with you."2) Have two of the taller people present form an archway with their arms, and haveeach person come through individually (or use a doorway).3) As they come through, greet them warmly by shaking their hand and bywelcoming them to their new journey into their home country.4) Present their gift.5) Encourage applause etc. as each person passes through the "portal."(OPTIONAL: FILL-OUT QUESTIONNAIRE)74APPENDIX BJACOBSON RELAXATION TECHNIQUEABBREVIATED VERSION - Based on Helping People Change (Pg. 173).1) This technique should be conducted in a very quiet, soft, and pleasant voice.Each step should take about 10 seconds, with a 10 to 15 second pause between each step.The whole procedure should take 15 to 20 minutes.2) Before beginning the technique, participants should be advised that if they haveany medical problems or injuries to certain areas that they should simply not tense theseareas.3) Advise the participants this activity is strictly voluntary and that they should justrest comfortably if they choose not participate, or participate fully.4) Advise the participants that it is alright if they find their minds wandering toother topics but, when they can, to try to focus on the leader's voice.5) Begin by saying:"We are now going to do a relaxation exercise which has beenfound to help people feel relaxed and comfortable, then we are going to doa visualization exercise and ask you to think about your return home.During the relaxation exercise I am going to ask you to tense then releaseyour muscles. I would like you to concentrate on the sound of my voice asI guide you through the steps. If it is alright with you I would like to beginnow. Let's begin.First get as comfortable as you can in your chair, if you want,put both feet on the floor and let your arms rest naturally. You can closeyour eyes now if you want.Take a deep breath in, slowly, and hold it (10 seconds) now letit out slowly. (Repeat). Notice how you feel the air coming into yourlungs, and how good it feels. Let's do that one more time, so breathe inslowly, as much as you can, now hold it, now release and relax.Now starting at your feet I want you to tense the muscles in yourfeet and curl your toes and hold this (10 seconds) now relax. Feel thewarmth starting to come into this area. Let's do this again, tense your feetand curl your toes, now hold, now release and relax. (Repeat).Now let's move to your calf muscles on the back of your leg,tense them as hard as you can, and hold it (10 seconds) now relax and feelthe warmth starting to come to this areas. You're starting to feel more andmore relaxed and comfortable as you listen to my voice and as we do eachstep. (Repeat 2 more times).Now let's move to your upper leg muscles, and I want you totighten and hold this muscle (10 seconds) now release. Notice how you arenow much more aware of your muscles as we do each area. (Repeat 2 moretimes).(Using the above style, move to the following area's and repeat3^times, STOMACH, HANDS, FOREARM, UPPER ARM,SHOULDERS (SHRUG UPWARDS), FOREHEAD, JAW, FACE,(GRIMACE)).75Now starting at your feet make sure that all parts of your bodyare relaxed and feeling warm and comfortable. Stay like this for a fewmoments and enjoy the sense of being warm and comfortable. Continue tobreathe slowly and deeply and while you are doing this I want you toimagine what it will like when you first return home.VISUALIZATION COMPONENT:(In a slow even voice with pauses in between phrases)'Picture yourself as you first arrive in your home country, are youreturning by land, sea or air?•Picture that exact place where you will first arrive back to yourcountry.-Look around you and imagine what you will see.•Can you hear the sounds?•Be aware of your feelings as you look around you.-Who will be there to greet you, what will they look like, what willthey say to you?'What will be the first things you want to say to your friends andfamily?'Imagine yourself travelling to the place you will spend your firstnight home. Imagine the room and unpacking your belongings.'What are the first things you will do when you arrive?•How are you feeling as you are doing them?•Go to the window and look out, what do you see, and smell, andfeel?'What will you be thinking about?•Do you feel like being alone or with people tonight?'Now imagine yourself after you have been back home for awhile,you have been very busy all day, doing what you need to do. Butnow you have a moment of quiet time, and you start to think aboutwhat has happened in the last month.•How are you feeling at that moment, happy, sad, worried?•Have things been going the way that you had hoped?'You ask yourself what have I learned while I have been away?•How do you feel as you answer that?'How have you changed while you have been away?•Are you the same person you were before you left, what might bedifferent?•You let your mind drift back to your host country and some of thememories of your stay there, come back into your mind.-How are you feeling as you look back?-When you're ready, I would like you to bring your focus back tothis room. Open your eyes, stretch if you want to. This concludesthis part of the exercise.•(Pause, then Debrief).7 6DebriefingThe purpose of the debriefmg session is to allow participants to integrate and shareany insights that may have occurred to them while they were doing the previous exercise.Allow sufficient time for all participants to psychologically return to the present tense. Thiscan be gauged by asking them how they are feeling and if they need more time before theyare asked to respond. It is generally advisable to keep the pace very slow and calm initially.This can be reflected in your voice and the amount of time that is used. Once you sense thatthe majority of participants are ready, you can begin the discussion by asking the group"How was that for you?" "Would anyone like to start us off by talkingabout their experiences just now? The goal is to encourage but not force participantsto share their experiences. This allows the reinforcement of the experience by not onlysharing the experience with others, but by listening to the uniqueness and commonalities ofthe experiences of others. This is one of the fundamental benefits of the group process.77APPENDIX - CHANDOUTS FOR ACTIVITY 7:"CRITICAL INCIDENTS"BASED ON BRISLIN ET AL. INTERCULTURAL INTERACTIONS - APRACTICAL GUIDE, SAGE 1986, LONDON.The following materials may be used as handouts to stimulate discussion on criticalincidents. In an attempt to be gender fair, both genders are represented in the scenarios.The (A) versions have an academic slant while the (B) versions have a businessorientation. Because the underlying concerns are of a psychological nature, there is much incommon in these versions.These are based on some of the most common concerns expressed by returningsojourners. However feel free to prepare your own "critical incidents" based on yourunique understanding of potential problem areas that your group participants may befacing. You may find using both your own and these prepared examples beneficial.This activity can be very engaging to the participants. It is expected that theparticipants will attempt to generate their own solutions to these problems. It is their activeengagement with the problem that is of benefit. The suggested answers provided are for thegroup leader's benefit: they help you to organize the responses from the participants, andallow you to fill in any gaps in the participant-generated responses. But the value in thisexercise is in the struggle of the participants to generate their own solutions. Therefore, itis suggested that you do not to shortchange this activity by providing quick solutions.78CRITICAL INCIDENT lA"WARM WELCOME GOES COOL"Jan Bishop had just checked out the last of her luggage from the airport. It wasfilled with many papers and mementos of her two year stay abroad. She had done researchat a major university and, as well as upgrading her education, she had found the time totake many small trips around the area. Her suitcase bulged with things that she had foundand brought back. She had enjoyed her time in the host country and learned has many newcustoms and modes of doing things. She was anxious to communicate these new insightsto her friends and colleagues. Upon her arrival home she had been greeted by her familyand several close friends. They had all rushed in to greet her and overwhelmed her withquestions. Then they whisked her off and began filling her in on all that had taken place athome in the last two years. After the first few hours, however, no one asked her anyquestions about her experiences abroad. Even later when several of her friends dropped byfor drinks, Jan felt uncomfortable and lost in the conversation about goings-on in the localcommunity. When they occasionally asked about her sojourn, Jan noticed that no one paidmuch attention to her answers and that they often changed the subject. She felt miserableand wished she had not returned home.CRITICAL INCIDENT 2A"COMING BACK HOME"Becky had been back home for two months now, and she often found herselfthinking of her time abroad, and wishing she were there. This confused her, because whenshe has been abroad, she had longed to return home. She had hated the weather anddreamed of her home climate. She also found typical foreign foods strange. She had oftenyearned for food from her homeland and imagined just how it should be prepared. Therewere also numerous little things that had annoyed her about the way things were done inthe host country. But now that she was home, the things that had irritated her about thehost country did not seem so important. Also the things that she had missed at home werenot as good as she remembered. What's more, she felt odd and out of place somehow andlonged for some of the things that she had become familiar with abroad.CRITICAL INCIDENT 3A"NOT BELONGING"Terry had recently returned home after spending three years abroad at a foreignuniversity/college. After returning home she continued her studies. Initially she had beenvery pleased to be back home. She had always been fascinated by foreign cultures, but wasalways conscious that she never really belonged there. At home, after a few weeks back atuniversity/college, she began to have doubts about her return. The only classes she enjoyedwere languages (because of her new-found fluency), but the professor never asked herquestions or asked her to read in class. Also her classmates seemed cold and not easy tobefriend. They ridiculed her foreign clothes, mannerisms and accent (which she didn't'think she had). She was often unable to join in on conversations as they talked about topicsunfamiliar to her. After a while she became more and more withdrawn, and professorscomplained about her lack of attention and dedication to her work.79CRITICAL INCIDENT 4A"TROUBLES AT WORK"Mr. Parre had spent several years abroad on a scholarship conducting research at aimportant national institute. His work was prestigious and had wide internationalrecognition. He was looking forward to returning home and dreamed of being offeredseveral new positions by the organization he worked for in his home country. He thoughtoften of the advantages this would bring himself and his family. His supervisors abroadhad been very supportive and had made many positive comments about his work.Upon his return home, however, he experienced disappointment from the verybeginning. Several of his old acquaintances, who he felt lacked his experience, nowoccupied positions above him. Furthermore, his requests seemed to be ignored or "lost" inthe paperwork. His colleagues, while apparently concerned, did not seem to offer anypractical advice. He began to have doubts about himself and seriously considered resigninghis post.Please answer the following questions:1) What exactly is the nature of the difficulty, or describe the problem?2) What factors are responsible for these difficulties?3) What could have been done to prevent these difficulties?SUGGESTED ANSWERS FOR #3CRITICAL INCIDENTS 1 — 41) Become more aware about re-entry problems in general.2) Become more aware that this was a common reaction.3) Lower expectations about what returning home was going to be like.4) Seek out other nationals who had also re-entered the home culture to discussthese feelings.5) Seek counselling6) Seek to validate themselves by re-discovering the pleasures of home, as a brandnew experience.7) Seek to retain what is of value from the host country and attempt to re-create thatexperience at home.8) Maintain ties with the home country to prepare yourself for "topics of moment"on your return.9) Give yourself the kindness of time to allow yourself to re-adjust.10)Do not attempt to force re-adjustment but attempt to deal with issues as theyappear.80APPENDIX DHAND-OUTAREAS OF POTENTIAL STRESS IN RE-ENTRYThe following list adapted from Asuncion-Lande, N. (1976) is meant toindicate potential areas of concern. These are common problem areas, in this case reportedprimarily by returning international students.It must be noted that not everyone experiences these types of stresses. This ismore of a catalogue of experiences reported by people who have returned home after livingand or working overseas.However these types of stresses are reported with such frequency that allsojourners should make themselves aware of these factors and make active plans to helplessen the potential for negative impact upon their lives.It may be helpful while reviewing these areas to attempt to personalize eachitem and consider how relevant it may be to your own re-entry.Finally note that these areas have not been called "problem areas," becausethey only become problems when adequate adjustment has not been made. Let's call them"opportunities for growth."81A) CULTURAL  ADJUSTMENTS• CHANGES IN LIFESTYLE;• FAMILY AND COMMUNITY PRESSURE TO PERFORM;• MORE (OR LESS) STEREOTYPED MALE AND FEMALE ROLES;• DIMINISHED (OR INCREASED) PERSONAL PRIVACY.B) SOCIAL ADJUSTMENTS• CHANGE FROM THE INDIVIDUALISM OF THE HOST COUNTRY TO THE FAMILY-CENTRED LIFESTYLE OF THE HOME COUNTRY, OR VICE VERSA;• FEELINGS OF SUPERIORITY DUE TO INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCEAND 'TRAVEL;• LACK OF AMENITIES WHICH ARE PART OF HOST COUNTRY LIVING, OR RETURN TOAMENITIES  WHICH ARE CRITICALLY LACKING INHOST COUNTRY (E.G. DRINKING WATER, ELECTRICITY...);• DISSATISFACTION WITH THE RITUALIZED PATTERNS OF SOCIALINTERACTIONS;• FRUSTRATION AS A RESULT OF CONFLICTING ATTITUDES AND VALUES.C) LINGUISTIC BARRIERS• ADOPTION OF VERBAL AND/OR NON-VERBAL CODES NOT FAMILIAR TOFELLOW NATIONALS;• COLLEAGUES WHO DO NOT SPEAK IN THE SAME MANNER AS THERETURNEE;• UNFAMILIARITY WITH NEW FORMS OF COMMUNICATION ANDEXPRESSION.D) NATIONAL AND POLITICAL ADJUSTMENTS• CHANGES IN POLITICAL CONDITIONS;• ADOPTION OF NEW POLITICAL VIEWS;• POLITICAL CLIMATE NOT CONDUCIVE TO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY ORADVANCEMENT;• DISSATISFACTION WITH THE POLITICAL SITUATION;• CHANGES IN BUREAUCRATIC LEADERSHIP;• OBSERVED LACK OF NATIONAL GOALS.E) EDUCATION ADJUSTMENTS• INABILITY TO RECONCILE ASPECTS OF HOST COUNTRY EDUCATIONTO EDUCATION IN THE HOME COUNTRY.• IRRELEVANCE OF EDUCATION TO THE HOME SITUATION.• ABSENCE OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS TO KEEP UPWITH NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND KNOWLEDGE.F) PROFESSIONAL ADJUSTMENTS• INABILITY TO FIND WORK IN THE CHOSEN FIELD;• PLACEMENT IN AN INAPPROPRIATE FIELD, A SATURATED JOB MARKET;• INABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED;• RESISTANCE TO CHANGE BY CO-WORKERS;• FEELINGS OF SUPERIORITY DUE TO FOREIGN TRAINING;• ENVY OF COLLEAGUES, HIGH EXPECTATIONS;• CONCERN ABOUT QUICK MATERIAL SUCCESS;• BEING PERCEIVED AS A THREAT BY SUPERVISORS AND WORKERS.82Appendix EMeasurement InstrumentsGoing Home; a 1 day group program for International students returning to their home culture_ This project is being conducted by Dr. M. Westwood, AssociateProfessor, and Allan Greenwood of the Department of CounsellingPsychology. This project forms part of Allan Greenwood's Mastersthesis.International sojourners have reported that re-entry to the homeculture after an extended stay abroad, can be as much or morestressful than the initial adjustment to living overseas. This programis designed to provide you with the opportunity to learn strategies toreduce the impact of re-entry and to better prepare you for social andcareer adaptation upon your return. You will be provided withinformation about the re-entry process as well as the opportunity toparticipate in a group discussion about re-entry.You have the right to refuse participation as well as to withdrawat any time without jeopardy.If you choose to participate you will be asked to fill out somequestionnaires about your experiences here in Canada. We would alsoseek your permission to contact you after you return home, to see ifyou would be willing to answer questions about this program, you mayof course choose not to participate at that time. The total time tocomplete all phases of the project is expected to be less than 6hours.All information that you provide will be kept confidential. Yourreponses on the questionnaire will only be used for this research, toimprove the effectiveness of this program.If you would like to participate please provide your currentname, address and phone number as well as an address and phone numberwhere you may be contacted once you return to your home country.Any question or comments can be directed to Allan Greenwood atthe counselling psychology department 228-5259 (or 439-7377).Thank you for your time.I agree to take part in this program and research;Signature ^Please Print  ClearlyIn Canada^ In Home countryPhone number?^ Phone number?Current address (until when?)^Address where we may contact you?Please print your name.THANK YOU83INSTRUCTIONS:Your Name:^Please answer the following questions as openly as possible.There are no "right" or "wrong" answers. Read each statement thencircle the number that best describes your feeling. Do not spend toomuch time on any one statement but give the answer which seems todescribe your feelings best.Answer all questions in terms of how you are thinking and feelingabout returning home right now.84Thanks again for your participation. 851. I felt calm^ 1 2 3 42. I felt secure 1 2 3 43. I was tense ^ 1 2 3 44. I was regretful 1 2 3 45. I felt at ease ^ 1 2 3 46. I was upset 1 2 3 47. I was worrying over possible misfortunes ^ 1 2 3 48. I felt rested ^ 1 2 3 49. I felt anxious 1 2 3 410. I felt comfortable ^ 1 2 3 411. I felt self-confident 1 2 3 412. I felt nervous ^ 1 2 3 413. I was jittery 1 2 3 414. I felt "high strung" ^ 1 2 3 415. I was relaxed ^ 1 2 3 416. I felt content 1 2 3 417. I was worried ^ 1 2 3 418. I felt over-excited and "rattled" ^ 1 2 3 419. I felt joyful ^ 1 2 3 420. I felt pleasant 1 2 3 48621. I feel pleasant ^ 1 2 3 422. I tire quickly 1 2 3 423. I feel like crying ^ 1 2 3 424. I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be ^ 1 2 3 425. I am losing out on things because I can't make up my mindsoon enough ^ 1 2 3 426. I feel rested 1 2 3 427. I em "calm, cool, and collected" ^ 1 2 3 428. I feel that difficulties are piling up so that I cannotovercome them ^ 1 2 3 429. I worry too much over something that really doesn't matter 1 2 3 430. I am happy ^ 1 2 3 431. I am inclined to take things hard ^ 1 2 3 432. I lack self—confidence ^ 1 2 3 433. I feel secure ^ 1 2 3 434. I try to avoid facing a crisis or difficulty ^ 1 2 3 435. I feel blue ^ 1 2 3 436. I am content 1 2 3 437. Some unimportant thought runs through my mind andbothers me ^ 1 2 3 438. I take disappointments so keenly that I can't put themout of my mind ^ 1 2 3 439. I am a steady person ^ 1 2 3 440. I get in a state of tension or turmoil as I think overmy recent concerns and interests^ 1 2 3 4Now think about returning home and answer the following questions.I. In this first section, we are interested in knowing how you feel/felt aboutseeing your family after your return home.1. Do you want your family to be interested in hearing all about your experienceabroad?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all2. Is it difficult to interest your family in listening to your experiences?Very difficult^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all difficult3. Do you have ideas on how to make your family interested in your experiences?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas4. Do you want to talk about your experience in the U.S. with your family?Want to talk^5^4^3^2^1^Do not want tovery much talk at all5. Did you expect your family to listen to you describe your experiences inthe U.S.?Expected them^5^4^3^2^1^I did not expectto listen them to listen6. Do you want your family to look at your photographs and other souvenirs ofyour experience abroad?Want very much^5^4^3^2^1^Do not want at all7. Is it a problem when your family does not want to look at your photographsand other souvenirs of your trip abroad?Very big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem at all8. Do you have any ideas to make your family interested in looking at yoursouvenirs?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas9. Did you expect your family to look at your souvenirs and mementos of yourvisit abroad?Expected very much^5^4^3^2^1^Did not expect at all87Do these questions make you think about other things you have wanted to do withyour family or talk about with your family now that you have returned home? Arethere any changes in yourself or your family that are problematic?If your parents are not living or you expect no contact with them after yourreturn home, go to question /14.10. Do you want to have a close relationship with your parents now that youhave returned home?Desire very much^5^4^3^2^1^Do not desire at all11. How difficult is it to have a close relationship with your parents now thatyou have returned?Very difficult^' 5^4^3^2^1^Not at all difficult12. Do you have ideas for solving any problems you have with your parents now?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas13. Did you expect changes in your relationship with your parents when youreturned?Many changes^5^4^3^2^1^No changesIf you have no hustand/wife, go on to question :24.14. Did your husband/wife participate in many work/social activities outsidethe home while abroad?Many^5^4^3^2^1^None15. Do you want your husband/wife to be able to participate in the same orsimilar activities outside the home now that you have returned?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all16. Is it difficult for your wife/husband to participate now in the sameactivities s/he did while abroad?Very difficult^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all difficult8817. Do you have ideas for finding the same or similar activities for yourwife/husband to participate in now that you have returned?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas18. Did you expect changes in the types of activities my wife/husband would beable to participate in after your return?Many changes^5^4^3^2^1^No changes19. Did you participate in many social/work activities outside the home whileyou were abroad?Many^5^4^3^2^1^None20. Do you want to participate in the same/similar activities now that you havereturned home?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all21. Is it difficult for you to participate in the same/similar activities herethat you did while abroad?Very difficult^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all difficult22. Do you have ideas for finding the same/similar activities now that you havereturned?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas23. Did you expect changes in the types of activities you will participate inwhen you return?Many changes^5^4^3^2^1^No changesDo these questions make you think about other concerns you might have about yourwife or husband's return home? Are there any changes in your wife or husband thatyou have noticed since your return home?89II. In this section, we are interested in knowing how you feel about being withyour friends after you return home.If you did not go back to old friends when you returned home, go to question#32.24. Do you want your old friends at home to hear about your experiences abroad?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all25. Is it be a problem if your old friends do not want to hear about yourexperiences?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem26. Do you have any ideas to make your friends listen to descriptions of yourexperiences abroad?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas27. Did you expect your friends to listen to your descriptions of your expe-riences abroad?Yes, I expect^ No, I did notthem to^5^4^3^2^1^expect them to28. Do you want your friends to talk with you about international issues?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all29. Is it a problem if your friends do not want to talk with you about inter-national issues?It is a^ It isbig problem^5^4^3^2^1^no problem30. Do you have ideas for making your friends interested in talking aboutinternational issues?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas31. Did you expect old friends to be interested in talking about internationalissues?I did expect^5^4^3^2^1^I did not expect90III. In this section we are interested in knowing how you feel about changes inyour daily life when you return home.32. Do you want to readjust to the food at home?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all33. Is it a problem readjusting to the food at home?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem34. Do you have ideas about how to readjust to the food when you return?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas35. Did you expect to have difficulty adjusting to the food when you returned?Yes, a lot of difficulty^5^4^3^2^1^no difficulty36. Do you know the current "slang" terms in English?Yes, very well^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all37. Is not knowing current slang terms a problem for you?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problemI38. Do you have ideas about how to learn the new slang terms?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas39. Did you want to know the current slang terms in your own language?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all40. Do you want to have enough money to live comfortably at home?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all41. Is it a problem -- not having enough money to live comfortably at home?Yes, a big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem at all42. Do you have ideas of how to earn enough money to live comfortably here?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas9143. Did you expect to have problems having enough money here at home?Yes, expect^ no, expectmany problems^5^4^3^2^1^no problems44. Compared to your time abroad, do you feel more or less able to express yourown ideas or opinions on any issue when you return home?More able^5^4^3^2^1^Less able45. Is it a problem if you express many of your personal ideas or opinions inthe U.S.?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem at all46. Do you have ideas of how you may express your personal ideas or opinionson issues here at home?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas47. Did you expect to feel more or less able to express your personal opinionsabout any issue?More able^5^4^3^2^1^Less ableIV. In this section we are interested in knowing how you feel about returningto work in your home country.If you did go to work when you returned, go to question $60.48. Is it a problem if a person who used to work for you is now your superior(or boss)?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem49. Would you like a person who used to work for you to be your boss?Would like^ Would notvery much 5^4^3^2^1^like at all50. If a person who used to work for you is your boss, do you have ideas ofhow to handle the new relationship?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas9251. Did you expect someone who used to work for you to no be your boss?Yes, I^ No, I did notexpected that^5^4^3^2^1^expect that52. Do you want people at work to accept and appreciate your overseas expe-rience?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all53. Is it a problem if people you work with are jealous of your overseasexperience?A serious problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem at all54. Do you have ideas of how to handle the situation if people you work withare jealous of your experience abroad?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas55. Did you expect the people you used to work with to be jealous of your expe-rience abroad?Very jealous^5^4^3^2^1^Not jealous at all56. Do you want your overseas experience to help you move up in the company?Very much^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all57. Is it a problem if your overseas experience does not help you move up inthe company?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem58. Do you have ideas to make your overseas experience help you move up in thecompany?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas59. Did you expect that your overseas experience would help you move up in thecompany?Very much^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all60. Do you want to be able to use the specific skills you learned abroad inyour job at home?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all9361. Is it a problem if you cannot use the specific skills you learned abroad?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem62. Do you have any ideas to help you use the specific skills you learnedabroad?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas63. Did you expect to use the specific skills you learned abroad?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all64. Do you want people you work with to think you are too foreign?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all65. Is it a problem if the people you work with think you are too foreign?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem66. Do you have any ideas how to handle the relationship with young co-workersif they think you are too foreign?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas67. Do you expect the people you work with to think you are too foreign?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at allIDo you have any other questions or concerns about returning to work? Have therebeen changes you might be concerned about?V.^In this section we are interested in knowing how you feel about returningto school here at home.If you did not return to school, go to question /80.68. Do you want the people you go to school with to think you are too foreignbecause you have been abroad?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all69. Is it a problem if the people you go to school with think you are tooforeign because of your overseas experience?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem9470. Do you have ideas of how you will handle the relationship with your class-mates if they think you are too foreign?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas71. Did you expect the people you go to school with to think you are tooforeign?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all72. Do you want your classmates to accept and appreciate your overseas expe-rience?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all73. Is it a problem if your classmates are jealous of your overseas expe-rience?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem74, Do you have ideas of how to handle the relationship with your classmatesif they are jealous of your overseas experience?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas75. Did you expect your classmates to be jealous of your overseas experience?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all76. Do you want to be able to use specific information you learned abroad inyour home university?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all77. Is it a problem if you cannot use specific information you learned abroadin your home university?A big problem^5^4^3^2^1^No problem78. Do you have any ideas on how to use specific information you learned abroadin your home university?Many ideas^5^4^3^2^1^No ideas79. Did you expect to use specific information you learned abroad in your homeuniversity?Yes, very much^5^4^3^2^1^No, not at all95Do you have any other concerns about returning to school? Are there any changesthat you can identify?Please give us some information about yourself. Circle the appropriate answeror give the appropriate answer.80. Are you male [1] female (21?81. What is your age?82. How long did you live abroad?(1] less than six months[2] 6-12 months[3] more than 12 months83. Had you ever traveled abroad before?(1] No, I had never traveled abroad before.(2] Yes, I lived abroad for less than 6 months.[ 3 ] Yes, I lived abroad for more than 6 months.84. What was the primary purpose of your trip abroad?[1] tourism[2] work[3] study[4] other (be specific) ^85. When did you return home?[1] I returned less than 1 month ago[2] I returned 1-3 months ago[3] I returned 3-6 months ago(4] I returned 6 or more months ago86. In which country did you spend the majority of your time abroad?87. Which of the following best describes your living arrangement the majorityof the time you were abroad?[1] Lived with other members of own culture (in dorm, apartment or house)[2] Lived with members of host culture (in dorm, apartment or house)[3] Lived alone in dorm, apartment or house[4] Lived with host family88. In general, how satisfied are you with your experience abroad?Very satisfied^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all satisfied9690. In general, how satisfied are you with your life here at home?Very satisfied^5^4^3^2^1^Not at all satisfied97Thank you very much for completing this questionnaire.Appendix FParticipant ProfilesParticipants Age Gender Home1 37 M KOREA2 24 F IRELAND3 24 M SCOTLAND4 28 M DENMARK5 35 M CHINA6 28 M INDONESIA7 25 F GERMANY8 24 M ENGLAND9 21 F JAPAN10 "middle" F CHINA11 46 F CHINA98


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items