My Freshman (Ch. 4-6)

In chapter 4-6, Small (1997) briefly describes three aspects of freshman college life: 1) Life as a foreign student at AnyU 2) Freshmen’s attitude toward academics 3) Freshman’s college management (Time, Schedule, relationship with professors, and study). As a student, the author objectively observed in detail and presented the campus life of the freshmen. Unfortunately, in spite of vast experience and perspectives as a scholar, the author could not sufficiently understand the perspectives of students. In other words, Small observed freshmen life from the incomplete perspective of students and failed to fully understand freshmen’s “real life” and “real perspective.” Thus, this article identifies the limited perspectives of the author, even as an “undercover” student agent.

First, her limited views prevented a clear understanding of who the foreign students are. The author observed the life and experience as foreign students from interviews with them. The students from such countries as Somalia, England, Japan, Germany, China, Mexico, Spain, the United Arab Emirates, India, Malaysia, France, and Korea had many interesting opinions, which I found to be agreeable. For example, the author asserts that many foreign students experience “individualism” and “independence” on AnyU campus and that they consider American college campus culture confusing or peculiar (pp. 73-76). Their opinions are understandable considering widespread individualism and independence not just exclusive to American college culture, but also evident in the American society in general. However, it is inapt to use distinct cultures and perspectives of a few international students to evaluate American college culture and even define the college culture of other countries. For instance, concerning individualism and independence as the values of American college culture, a handful of foreign students commented, “friendship (with American students) is very surface-defined”(p. 75). Of course, the observation of American students by foreign students can be different. As for the consensus of the foreign students on such statement, it is rather uncertain. Today, individualism and independence are not just exclusively American values of college culture but are present in many countries. On another note, the author quoted a Chinese student who acknowledged American students’ limited understanding not only of China, but also of other cultures (p. 85). I think the Chinese student emphasized the “willingness” of learning other cultures. I personally believe foreign students are more willing to learn foreign cultures than do American students. However, I wonder how many foreign students are knowledgeable in or willing to learn about other cultures. Even I as a foreign student am limited in cultural knowledge of other countries and desire to learn. As much as I respect the author’s effort to learn about life and perspectives of foreign students on campus, I have to admit her limited view as a result of failure to take into account the perspective of students hinders understanding of who foreign students are and what their campus life is.

Second, her limited perspective as a student prevented an understanding of who freshmen are and what they want. The author stressed the students’ lack of enthusiasm in lectures and campus culture and also asked the question, “What is college for them?” (p. 101). With regard to this, the author assumes the perspectives of a mature professor or scholar. It may be unreasonable to pose a question of such magnitude to those adolescents who have been right out of high school and entered college. They may not even understand what college is, let alone what academics are. Ordinary students are likely to express more interest in such secularly appealing issues as sexuality than in weighty social issues and problems in life. The author’s limited perspective, mainly arising from her failure to understand the students’ views, puts a hindrance to gaining insights into the true life of students.