CHAPTER FOUR INTRODUCTION

Chapter IV presents the results of this qualitative study in four sections, each of which identifies themes derived from participant comments as they correlate to the four research questions this study sought to explore. Participant demographics are visually charted to provide a brief background of each student. Participant comments and reflections are provided to give voice to their lived experiences and analyses.

Organization of the Study’s Findings

The purpose of this study is to investigate how students from India describe both their socialized culture of learning and their perceived culture of learning in a United States-based online learning context. Moreover, participants will detail utilized strategies of acculturation, if any, that assist in the negotiation between their socialized culture of learning and their perceived culture of learning. Finally, the researcher will examine whether the interaction of cultures of learning results in the production of novel or distinct cybercultures.

The qualitative analysis presented in this chapter are divided into four major sections. The four sections represent each of the four research questions this study sought to explore. Within each section, emerging themes are identified and explored with quotes serving as an emic representation of participant responses.

Methodology Summary

This qualitative study began in Fall of 2015 and concluded in Spring of 2016 with a purposeful sampling of 12 graduate level international students from India concurrently enrolled in at least one asynchronous or synchronous online learning course. The study

occurred in three phases and relied on interviews and focus groups for data collection. Data were collected in three phases, hereafter labeled as Phase 1, Phase II, and Phase III. Each phase sequentially built on the previous to collect rich data capable of capturing any potential cultural patterns housed within the emic perspectives of participants. Phase I consisted of thirty-minute, one-on-one interviews with each participant. Phase II involved two focus group sessions. Phase III involved a final individual interview with each participant. Approached from a naturalist-constructivist paradigm, the data

generated its own classification scheme. The researcher maintained a reflexive journal throughout the data collection process, as well as observational and analytical memos at the conclusion of each interview. A hired transcription company converted interview audio data into documents within a week of the interview date. In Vivo and Axial Coding were utilized to gain an emic perspective of the sociocultural experiences of the participants. Dominant codes were identified by looking for saturation and then mapped as a tree diagram to provide a visual representation of the participants’ perspectives.

Population, Sample, and Participants

This study was conducted at a single, Carnegie Research Extensive University (High Research Activity) in the MidAtlantic region of the United States. This institution was selected due to its diverse student population and large distance learning operation. The university has also launched its distance learning operation in international locations, including South Asia.

Purposeful sampling was utilized to identify and select Indian graduate students participating in synchronous online courses in computer science and engineering. A nominative process that involved professors, department chairs, the Dean of the College

of Sciences, and the Associate Vice President of Distance Learning was employed. Identified and selected students were emailed to solicit consent. Student selection was further based on voluntary consent to participate in a semester-long educational

ethnography that explored their interpretations of the cultural variations and negotiations that occur within an online environment. Though the researcher desired 32 participants, 12 were attained for this study. See Table 4.1 on the next page for a description of the participants.

Table 4.1

Description of Participant Demographics Participant’s

Selected Name

Gender Hometown Field of Study

Su Female rural village Master’s in Engineering Management

Chinnu Male Southern India Master’s in Computer Science Zoyi Male Hyderabad and Madhya

Pradesh, large metropolitan city

Master’s in Engineering Management

Paul Male Master’s in Engineering Management

Shreya Female Kerala, Southern India Schooled in the Middle East at an Indian school in Bahrain

Master’s in Engineering Management

Uthara Female Undisclosed Master’s in Computer Science Eragon Male Calcutta, Eastern India,

large metropolitan city

Master’s in Computer Science Akshay Male Mumbai, large

metropolitan city

Master’s in Electrical and Computer Engineering Kedar Male Mumbai, large

metropolitan city

Master’s in Computer Science Kitty Female Father was military, so

moved a great deal including, but not limited to New Delhi and Delhi, large metropolitan cities

Ph.D. in Public Administration

Rocklee Male Haridwar, Southern India, large

metropolitan city

Master’s in Aerospace Engineering

Niki Female Alberta in the state of Gujarat, Western India, medium metropolitan city

Master’s in Business Administration

Table 4.2

Overview of Findings for Research Questions

Research Question #1 How do students from India

describe their socialized culture of learning?

Findings

* Parental Pressure for Academic Success * National Perspective Emphasizes Educational Excellence

* Competition for First Rank * Strictness in the Classroom

* Appreciation for Pressure to Succeed

Research Question #2 How do Indians describe the perceived culture of learning in a United States-based online

learning context?

Findings

* Social Influences as a Determining Factor * Deep Divers versus Jack-of-all-Trades * Variations in American student motivation * Memorization versus Practical Application * Positive Relationships with Faculty

* American Independence and Work-Life Balance

* Racism in American Education * Isolation and Fakeness

* Little Interaction in Online Classes * Lack of Culture in Online Classes

Research Question #3 What strategies do participants employ to acculturate the perceived similarities and dissimilarities

between the two contexts of socialized culture and perceived culture of learning in an online learning context?

Findings

* The Self and Integration

* Participants Employ Varied Acculturation Strategies

* Acculturation Strategies Change * The Self in an Online Environment * Acculturation in Teaching and Learning

Research Question #4 How does the interactivity of

variant cultures of learning produce or fail to produce

cybercultures?

Findings

* Culture is Ever-Present

* Culture Depends on Levels of Interaction * Culture Determined by Professor

* Culture Determined by Students * Production of Cyberculture * Failure to Produce Cyberculture * Culture Matters

FINDINGS