Many colleges and universities in the United States aim to promote intercultural competence in their students. However, most research on this outcome has focused on the content of educational programs (what educators offer) rather than on how students experience intercultural learning. This qualitative inquiry from the Wabash National Study analyzed 207 intercultural experiences from 161 college students on 6 campuses to identify contexts, characteristics, and key features of how they experience intercultural learning. Using grounded theory approaches, we summarized student interviews over 2 years, conducted open and axial coding to identify themes, and evaluated the themes over time. Using this approach, we identified three major themes: (a) that intercultural learning occurred when students directly encountered others' experiences; (b) that feeling safe enough to explore cultural differences was a key dimension of intercultural learning; and (c) that students used a variety of approaches that led to intercultural learning (from simply listening or watching to exploring how one's personal identity related to intercultural understanding) and that these varied in degree of complexity and agency. Implications for practice are offered to help educators make decisions about how to promote intercultural effectiveness in collegiate settings.

To better prepare graduate students to address societal problems, scholars have asserted the need to foster students' abilities to engage across differences in social identities, values, and beliefs. Yet few studies have examined whether and how graduate students learn about equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) during their training. Acknowledging this void, our critical constructivist comparative case study explored how 44 graduate students in an array of disciplines and fields at 2 institutions were socialized to EDI across their experiences. Our findings indicate that academic departments rarely discuss EDI, and when they do, they highlight the need for increased compositional diversity. Participants' experiences with faculty, in courses, in departmental gatherings, and in lab/research settings communicated the relevance or lack thereof of EDI to students' disciplines and fields. Because EDI was often omitted from discussions in students' departments, multiple participants with minoritized identities expressed feeling marginalized and tokenized, if not overtly targeted, based on their identities. To supplement their learning about EDI and to find additional sources of support, many students participated in programs/courses through their graduate college or engaged with identity-centered student organizations. Our research illuminates the need for academic departments to consistently provide intentional opportunities for individuals to learn about EDI in their disciplines and fields if we are to create inclusive learning environments and prepare graduate students to contribute to a complex and interdependent global society.

No abstract

Prior research exploring professional socialization in student affairs has been grounded in models that do not fully capture the distinct features of the field. Moreover, these studies have primarily focused on the transition into full-time work positions, and they have captured what happens to new professionals rather than how individuals understand their socialization experiences. With these gaps in mind, this conceptual paper presents a new model of professional socialization in student affairs graduate preparation programs that draws upon literature in the helping professions (i.e., nursing, social work), research on doctoral students and pre-tenure faculty, and the theoretical frameworks of sensemaking and self-authorship to highlight the dynamic relationship between individuals and organizations during the socialization process. Specifically, this model attempts to illuminate the cognitive mechanisms that undergird how individuals interpret their professional socialization. In doing so, the model proposes different ways individuals may make sense of their student affairs graduate training experiences based on (a) whether or not they encounter discrepancies and (b) their developmental capacity for self-authorship. The conceptual model presented here has implications for shaping graduate level coursework and fieldwork within student affairs preparation programs.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore how graduate students demonstrated agency after having oppressive or invalidating experiences based on their socially constructed identities during graduate school and the effects of leveraging agency. Design/methodology/approach This study used critical constructivist qualitative methods (i.e. interviews and visual methods) to explore how 44 graduate students across an array of disciplines and fields at two public research institutions in the USA demonstrated agency after having oppressive or invalidating experiences targeting one or more of their socially constructed identities. Findings In response to oppressive or invalidating experiences related to their socially constructed identity, participants engaged in self-advocacy, sought/created support via community, conserved their psychological and emotional energy and constructed space for identity-conscious scholarship and practice. Although participants leveraged their agency, the strategies they used were often geared toward surviving environments that were not designed to affirm their identities or support their success. Research limitations/implications This study highlights the need for additional research to complicate educators’ understandings of how graduate students respond to oppressive or invalidating experiences and the nature of bi-directional socialization processes. Practical implications The findings of this study reinforce the need to foster equitable and inclusive graduate education experiences where students may use their agency to thrive rather than to survive. Originality/value Few studies examine graduate students’ agency during their socialization to their disciplines and fields. This study adds complexity to researchers’ understandings of bi-directional socialization processes in the context of graduate education.