Author: angela rodriguez

My peers and I were assigned to analyze the UBC webpage for a program called “Work Learn International Undergraduate” through the lens of an international student. We defined an international student as a student who is attending UBC but is from a country outside of Canada and is paying international fees. An international student might also have language and culture barriers with extremities varying between each person. Upon exploring the degree to which this webpage is accessible to international students, I have concluded that its inaccessibility can serve as an example as to why opportunities to get involved on campus are NOT equal. From my perspective, it is not a matter of whether or not there are opportunities for everyone, but rather an issue of whether these opportunities are effectively presented in a way that is welcoming and accepting of our diverse student population.

Being domestic students was a clear barrier for my group. This is why it is extremely important for us, and for these programs, to adopt Mead’s concept of “taking the role of the other.” By taking the role of the other, we are able to get insight on what it is like to be in the shoes of an international student which helps us understand how they might be perceiving these opportunities that are presented to them. For instance, since this is a program for international students, it should be written in a way that reaches out and tends to the needs of international students, eliminating as much of the barriers as possible. Thus, in order to achieve equality, such webpages should be especially accommodating to international students in the same way any other program would be easily accessible to domestic students. For example, due to potential language barriers, my group decided that the simplicity and clarity of language and sentence structure were the most important criteria for assessing accessibility. If international students do not understand certain portions of the information presented to them, not only will they feel confused and frustrated, but they might also feel intimidated and discouraged, causing them to hesitate about applying for these opportunities. Additionally, if they continue to feel alienated because of their language barrier, they may be less inclined to explore other opportunities on campus.

Furthermore, I believe that in order for opportunities on campus to be equal, programs should consider the diversity of students, specifically their individual experiences. For example, attending a post-secondary institution in a different country requires international students to experience socialization, in which they must learn the norms, attitudes and values of our culture. More specifically, getting involved on campus requires anticipatory socialization, which is the process of learning to take on the values and standards of groups and organizations that one aspires to join. On the webpage of our program, my group noticed that a lot of assumptions were being made and certain information, that international students may not be familiar with simply because they are not from Canada, was being skimmed over or skipped altogether. It is unfair for programs to expect international students to understand everything they mention since they are clearly still being socialized into our culture. Therefore, it is important for UBC to approach this with more awareness and consideration, providing as much clarity as possible.

Overall, I do not believe there are equal opportunities on campus to get involved. In my opinion, it is the small details, which begin to accumulate, that makes students doubt their competence and their role as a valued member of UBC, leading them to alienation and ultimately preventing them from exploring opportunities on campus.

Upon analyzing my personal network, I discovered that school, as an institution, has a great impact on us as individuals. When comparing E-I indexes with my group, we established that context and education were measurements of high homophily. We agreed that most of the people in our networks were those who we met in school and university. For me specifically, most of the people in my network were from high school. Because we spend a significant amount of time in these institutions, we often rely on them as the foundation for our relationships. When comparing gender E-I indexes with my group, I noticed that mine had almost complete homophily. I realized that the reason for this may be due to the fact that I went to an all-girls high school. However, I knew that other girls had friends outside of school who were boys, as where I did not. I reflected upon this and decided that this might be due to my personality. In realizing this, I also discovered that the person who I am today was largely shaped by my high school years. In high school, being constantly surrounded by girls gave me a sense of comfort, familiarity and security. I liked all of my friends and I felt safe. Because of this, I felt like I did not need to expand my social network and look for friends outside of school. This clearly influenced the amount of social interaction I had during my adolescent years. Not only did I not have that much interaction with people outside of school, but I also lacked a significant amount of interaction with the opposite gender. As a result, I became reserved and shy when it came to making new friends. I began to find myself being more comfortable around girls as that was what I was used to for the past five years. When reflecting back at the friends I had in my co-ed elementary school, the gender was more balanced. This justifies that the fact the type of institution has a strong influence on who you become as a person, and who you unconsciously choose to associate yourself with.

Furthermore, I attended a private high school where the norm was that everyone goes to university after graduation. In my network, all of my friends went to a post-secondary institution. In my perspective, I believe that the quality of education affects the mindset of the community which then influences you and your aspirations. Although it was each of our individual choices to attend university, it was actually our society, our networks and our institutions that made the decision for us. For me, it seemed as though university was a given and that attending post-secondary is the instinctive next step in our lives. As seen in my network, all of my friends attended post-secondary so I did not hesitate to make the same decision as well. In addition, preparing for university was all my high school talked about. Based on this observation, I believe that not being able to attend university is not just a personal trouble, but a public issue based on the quality of education an individual receives. If students are not encouraged and motivated by their teachers and peers to attend university, they will not see it as a “norm.” It can also lower their standards, their confidence and affect the goals they wish to pursue in life. Clearly, our education, as well as the people around us, shape the decisions we make and the mentality we have towards our future and our aspirations.