Reflecting on stereotypes of international students and conceptual framings

Written by Tang T. Heng and Nannan Lu (National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)

This post is a summary of the authors’ chapter in the book Research with International Students (Chapter 4).

Stereotyping occurs when individuals attribute traits — whether positive or negative— to a group based on preconceived notions that often lack a factual basis. This chapter examines the stereotypes surrounding international students and how research frameworks can unintentionally perpetuate them. It challenges scholars to reconsider how we frame our studies, urging us to remain mindful of our biases and take responsibility in confronting these harmful stereotypes.

Common stereotypes of international students and their impacts

International students are subjected to different stereotypes. They are often discussed as a homogeneous group in research, with their nationality, socio-economic status, gender, and academic field being overlooked. Next, they tend to be portrayed through a deficit framing, where their ways of thinking and acting are considered in need of fixing or inferior to that of host countries. This narrative, although less overt today, still persists in academic discussions.

Chinese international students are especially vulnerable to this kind of stereotyping due to their large numbers globally. They are often viewed as struggling with critical thinking, overly dependent on teacher-centred learning, or prone to plagiarism. Moreover, they are stereotyped as wealthy “cash cows” or even as potential spies. These perceptions, whether reinforced through media portrayals or academic literature, are harmful not only to Chinese students but to all international students, as they foster an environment of prejudice.

The role of conceptual frameworks in stereotype formation

One of the important contributions of the chapter is its exploration of the role conceptual frameworks play in shaping research. Conceptual frameworks refer to the network of theories, assumptions, and ideas that underpin research. They guide what questions are asked, what methods are chosen, and how data is interpreted. The authors argue that these frameworks often embed researchers’ biases, consciously or unconsciously, influencing the portrayal of international students in research.

When these frameworks are rooted in outdated or narrow perspectives, they can inadvertently perpetuate stereotypes. For example, many studies on international students employ assimilationist frameworks, which place the burden of adjustment on the students and ignore their strengths, focusing instead on their “maladjustments.” This narrow framing overlooks the complexities and strengths of international students, leading to their “Othering.” This is particularly troubling when international students are seen as fundamentally different, or “foreign,” from their host community, reducing them to their status as “international” rather than recognising their full humanity and diverse experiences.

Researchers’ positionalities and their impact

Another important aspect of the chapter is the discussion on researchers’ positionalities—their social, cultural, and political backgrounds—and how these influence their research. Scholars based in the Global North, for instance, have been found to portray international students, particularly those from the Global South, in a way that reflects colonial mentalities and a superiority complex. This bias shapes the portrayal of international students in literature, emphasising their struggles over their contributions.

The chapter also highlights how Chinese-language literature offers different perspectives on Chinese international students compared to English-language literature. While Chinese scholars tend to focus on the historical and cultural contributions of these students, English-language studies often reduce them to their pedagogical needs or economic impact, further stereotyping them.

The relationship between framing and research outcomes

The chapter presents a case study of Chinese international students to illustrate how conceptual framing shapes research outcomes. A literature review by Heng (2020) found that most studies on Chinese students focused on their struggles, while fewer studies examined their agency or how they navigate their academic journeys. Studies that used sociocultural frameworks tended to adopt a more positive, asset-based perspective, highlighting students’ adaptability and growth. In contrast, studies using acculturation frameworks often focused on students’ problems, reinforcing negative stereotypes.

The authors argue that the choice of frameworks not only affects the questions researchers ask but also the methods they use. For instance, few studies used reflective journals or methods that give students more control over the research process, favouring surveys and interviews that are researcher-driven. This methodological limitation further perpetuates a one-sided understanding of international students’ experiences.

Moving forward: Recommendations for researchers

In conclusion, the chapter calls for researchers to reflect on their own biases and assumptions and to diversify the conceptual frameworks they use. By embracing alternative paradigms, such as feminist or intersectional perspectives, and by involving international students in the research process, researchers can begin to dismantle harmful stereotypes. The authors also advocate for more inclusive and equitable relationships between researchers and international students, where the latter are seen as equal partners rather than subjects of study.