The Language Teacher

For part of this study, in the 11th month after their return, ten students were selected from the 30 students in the study group. They were asked a series of questions and completed a reentry map (a diagram summarizing their emotional state at varying stages after returning to Japan) with the researcher. These students were selected because they represented certain patterns that emerged from results of two questionnaires administered pre-reentry and post-reentry. Patterns included: gender; the number of times students returned to Japan during their stay in Canada; if they lived on or off campus; the degree to which they perceived they had changed as a result of their experiences in Canada; and the degree to which their responses changed from the first and second questionnaire. In addition, letters were sent to all students in the study group, informing them about the interviews and inviting those not selected to be interviewed.

The interview questions were generated by data collected from the two questionnaires and from the readings of other research. An interview question bank was created and then screened for appropriateness (see Appendix A). The questions allowed expansion on, and elicitation of, additional information about the reentry process. Students were asked to reflect on their experiences in Canada and their reentry process. Interviews took place with the researcher in English, a language many of the former students had not used for a long time. Additionally, the interviewer and interviewee created a reentry map to show how students felt during the initial 11 months back in Japan.

All of the interviews were audiotaped and took between 45 and 70 minutes; the longer interviews resulted from slower language production. After an introduction, the researcher followed the interview question bank with each student. The interview questions asked about their adjustment back into Japan; what they had learned about Canada, Japan, and themselves because of their experiences in Canada; how they were feeling now; how they were using now what they had learned in Canada; and what advice they had for future returnees.

Students had mixed feelings about being accustomed to Japanese society and belonging in Japan. They sometimes felt uncomfortable because they felt they could compare their society, values, and policies with those of other countries and wished that Japan could change in some ways. Although some students were not living at home, most of the students interviewed said they felt accustomed to their family after a number of months back in Japan. In the workplace, however, students reported they had yet to feel accustomed, mostly because they felt different from their co-workers. Students did not share their experiences with old friends because they felt their old friends were not interested. They also felt their way of thinking had changed from their old friends'.

Three patterns were discerned in how students felt they had changed. First, students reported change through global awareness, and in-depth cultural understanding. Second, students reported change through personal growth and realized the importance of life-long learning, and they clarified their world view during their four years in Canada. Third, students stated they became more individualistic and independent, more direct and able to state their opinions, and more achievement-oriented.

Appreciation of diversity, the importance of opinions, and open communication were topics commented on when asked what they learned while in Canada. On the other hand, the valuing of traditions, history, and family, and group way of thinking were topics associated with Japan. In evaluating what they learned about themselves, students reported they learned cooperation, the value of individualism and taking care of oneself, and the value of different ways of thinking. Students stated they were using a number of skills they learned in Canada: computer skills, presentation skills, and language skills. Most of them were continuing to study English either on their own or in their job but they rarely spoke with English speakers.

During the interview, the student and researcher created a reentry map. A blank map similar to the following charts was presented to the student and with a pencil the interviewer shaded how the student felt for each month back. The student was told to think about the past 11 months, specifically his or her feelings during that time. As he or she spoke, the researcher asked what caused those feelings, how long they lasted, and what caused them to change. The researcher simultaneously penciled in the degree of feeling from high to low. The student determined what was high, normal, and low. Questions to determine the intensity of the feelings were used in an attempt to quantify and compare the responses. The following charts show three examples, a favourable adjustment, a difficult adjustment, and a typical adjustment process of those students who were interviewed.

Reentry Map 1: Favourable adjustment; Ms A, a student who returned to Japan and continued to study.

In the first month back, Ms. A had mixed feelings about returning home. On one hand, she was happy to leave Canada to return home and continue studying Spanish, one of her goals. On the other hand, she was also sad because of leaving Canada and her boyfriend, a fellow student who would continue to study in Canada. Her first high point was realizing her dream of studying Spanish and also, becoming friends with her classmates. During her fourth month back in Japan, she did a two-week homestay in Ecuador and in the fifth month back in Japan her boyfriend visited from Canada. In the eighth and ninth months back, an Ecuadorian student stayed with her family (the first month being fine but cultural differences causing her feelings to decline in the next month). The tenth and eleventh months back in Japan were high points because she was excited about planning and preparing for a six-week trip to Canada.

In the interview, Ms. A said that she didnﾕt feel adjusted back into Japanese society because she was still a student and wasnﾕt connected to the workforce. She felt closer to her family than her friends, which is different from how she felt before she left Japan to study in Canada. At the time of the interview, she stated that she had a different way of thinking compared to her friends, who were more interested in boyfriends and getting married rather than more global topics. She felt she had become more direct in her opinions, held more respect for her parents, and had become a life-long learner because of her four-year experience in Canada.

Reentry Map 2: Difficult adjustment; Mr. B, a student who returned to work in Japan and had a difficult reentry.

During the first few months back Mr. B missed many things about Canada and he couldn't get used to his work environment. He tried to see old friends, his family, and CIC friends but, because of his work schedule, he found this impossible. In the fourth month back, his sister got married. He thought he was adjusting back into Japanese society but in the later part of the fifth month he found himself in the hospital suffering from depression and stress. After that, another person his age and status joined his work place and he started to feel more adjusted. The high point in the ninth month was preparing for and attending parties with old friends and alumni. In the tenth and eleventh month back, he felt more successful in his job and could see his family more than before.

In the interview, this student said he hadn't felt good about Japan for a number of months because of his job expectations. His work life and personal life in Japan were very different from what his student life had been in Canada. He saw his relationship with his parents as different because he had matured, and he "looked at them with different eyes." He said the most important things he learned from his experiences in Canada were the confidence to speak his opinions, the development of a world view, and the meaning of volunteering.

Reentry Map 3: Typical adjustment; The reentry of typical students who returned to work in Japan.

These students were feeling happy and sad simultaneously to return in the first two months back: happy to be seeing family and friends, and sad to be leaving Canada. In the following few months, they had a difficult time adjusting to their jobs. Students said they felt different from their coworkers which sometimes worked to their benefit and sometimes didn't. After a few months, they felt more successful in their jobs and more adjusted back into Japanese society.

These students also had some difficulties in adjusting to their families. Some of them were given more responsible roles in the family. Most felt their parents saw them now as adults. With friends, students said they shared their Canadian experiences only with those who were interested, otherwise they felt that their friends would be jealous or think they were boasting. The high point after several of months back in Japan was either a holiday, successfully completing a task at work, or visiting with CIC alumni friends. Eleven months after reentry, most students felt as readjusted as they expected to ever be.

All of the interviews ended with students offering advice to future students returning to the workforce. Their comments fell into three categories. First, students wanted future students to recognize the reentry process, to be objective when thinking about it, not to give up, and to keep a sense of humour. Second, the impact of Canada was commented on with one student saying "four years in Canada had a stronger influence than 18 years before." Third, students stated that having goals and a purpose in Japan helps in the reentry process.

Discussion

From these interviews and reentry maps three points should be made. Firstly, students reported that they have changed and these changes influenced their reentry process. Smith (1991) states that changes from student sojourns can be categorized along three dimensions: the cognitive (knowledge about the host culture, cultural differences, and their impact on communications interactions), the affective (tolerance of ambiguity, empathy, and ability to suspend judgment) and the behavioral (ability to solve problems, form relationships and accomplish necessary tasks within an intercultural context). As mentioned earlier, students reported experiencing changes along these three dimensions.

These changes can be explored in terms of Kluckhohn and Strodbeck's value orientations chart (1961) following. Although all principles in each orientation can be found within a culture, one is identified as being dominant. Categorizing Japanese culture within Kluckhohn's model, Kohls (1984), places it in contrast with U.S. American culture. For the purposes of this review, Canadian culture is categorized similarly to U.S. culture.

Human Nature	Evil	Mixture of Good and Evil	Good
Man Nature	Subjugation-to-Nature	Harmony-with-Nature	Mastery-over-Nature
Time	Past	Present	Future
Activity	Being	Being-in-Doing*	Doing**
Relational	Lineality*	Collaterality*	Individualism**

* Japan ** United States Adapted from Kluckhohn et al. (1961)

The Relational orientation defines "man's relation to other men" (Kluckhohn, p. 17). Kohls places Japanese culture in Authoritarian (Lineality) and Group Oriented (Collaterality), which means the society stresses group thinking and maintains a hierarchy. U. S. American culture, on the other hand, is placed in Individualism (p. 26). Students in this study reported they had become more individualistic and more achievement oriented. Brislin (1981) asserts that sojourners develop internal control during the sojourn; they "usually cannot depend on others but, rather, must take responsibility themselves" (p.295). Success in taking responsibility creates "greater feelings of self-reliance" (p. 295). This stronger sense of internal control gives students more control over their lives, an individualistic characteristic. These factors support a more individualistic orientation. In terms of reentry, after having become more individualistic, students were re-entering a more authoritarian and group-oriented society.

The second point emerging from the interviews and reentry maps is that the students feel that in some ways they have not readjusted to Japanese society. This student sojourn group could be what researchers (Goodman, 1990; Miyamoto, 1994; Mori, 1994; White, 1988) are referring to when they say Japan wants to create internationalists who maintain a Japanese identity. Japan has a desire to protect its culture yet it also has a desire to participate in the world economy. This paradox becomes a burden for returning students if their ostensible "internationalism" marginalizes them from the mainstream society. As observed in the interviews, students feel the greatest sense of marginalization in the workplace.

The third point from examining these interviews and reentry maps is that these students follow a similar reentry process. All students interviewed indicated a "low" time between four and six months after returning to Japan. This tends to support the curves of other readjustment research (Gullahorn & Gullahorn, 1963) although further investigation is needed.

Reentry stress is a reality and programs to assist students before and during the reentry process are essential to any overseas program. Most reentry programs have been designed in the United States with the most effective ones beginning while the students are still overseas (Adler, Hawes, Kealey, & Theoret, 1979; Blohm & Mercil, 1982; CIDA, 1981; Denney 1987; Grove, 1989). A number of factors influence the reentry process and it should be remembered that programs should be tailored to the specific needs of the returning group. Following are two suggestions when thinking about reentry programs.

First, pre-reentry programs relevant to the concerns of returning students should be designed and implemented to help these students examine their own concerns. These programs should begin a number of months before students return to Japan. Students should take time to reflect on how they have changed because of the experiences abroad, understand the process of reentry, and develop goals for their initial time back in Japan. A focus on developing effective coping strategies during the first year of the reentry would benefit students in preparing for and working through their reentry adjustment.

The second suggestion concerns post-reentry programs. Seminars during the initial stages of reentry in Japan would help students reflect upon their readjustment. A reentry map similar to the one used in this study could also provide a resource for self-reflection. Seminars or reunions during the "low" time would provide students with opportunities to talk about their reentry experiences and hear the experiences of others; this could help alleviate the stress and isolation students feel during this time.

All study abroad programs should include a reentry component. Institutions planning study abroad programs must remember that the cycles of adjustment in an intercultural experience begin at predeparture and do not end at reentry. The return home involves two unique elements, which are not part of the initial cultural adjustment. First, sojourners tend to have an idealized view of "home," and second, a taken-for-granted familiarity with the home culture which fosters the illusion that neither home nor the sojourner has changed during the time abroad (LaBrack, 1994). As this study attempts to show, change does occur and steps must be taken to help students adjust to these changes.

References

Adler, N. (1976). Growthful re-entry theory: A pilot test on returned Peace Corps volunteers. Unpublished Manuscript. Graduate School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles.

Adler, N., Hawes, F., Kealey, D., & Theoret, R. (1979). Re-entry: A guide for returning home. Hull, Quebec: Public Affairs Division of the Communications Branch, Canadian International Development Agency.

Blohm, J.M., & Mercil, M.C. (1982). Planning and conducting reentry orientations. Washington, DC: Youth for Understanding, Educational Services.

Brislin, R.W. (1981). Cross cultural encounters: Face to face interaction. NY: Allyn and Bacon.

CIDA (1981). What is reentry? Canadian International Development Agency.

Denney, M. (1987). Going home: A workbook for reentry and professional integration. Washington DC: NAFSA.

Gama, E. M. P. & Pedersen, P. (1977). Readjustment problems of Brazilian returnees from graduate study in the United States. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,1, 46-57.

Goodman, R. (1990). Japan's international youth: The emergence of a new class of schoolchildren. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grove, C. (1989). Orientation handbook for youth exchange programs. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Gullahorn, J. T. & Gullahorn, J.E. (1963). An extension of the u-curve hypothesis. Journal of Social Issues, 14, 33-47.

Kitsuse, J.I., Murase, A.E. & Yamamura, Y. (1984). Kikokushijo: The emergence and institutionalization of an educational problem in Japan. In J.W. Schneider and J.I. Kitsuse (Eds.) Studies in the sociology of social problems. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Kluckhohn, F. & Strodtbeck, F. (1961). Variations in value orientations. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.

Kohls, L.R. (1984). Survival kit for overseas living. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

La Brack, B. (1985).State of the art research on reentry: An essay on directions for the future. Twenty Sixth Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Washington, DC.

LaBrack, B. (1994) Course material. Summer Institute of Intercultural Communication. OR.

Martin, J. N. (1986). Orientation for the reentry experience: Conceptual overview and implications for researchers and practitioners. In R. Michael Paige (Ed), Cross-cultural orientation: New Conceptualizations and Applications. Lanaham, MD: University Press of America.

Miyamoto, M. (1994). Straightjacket society. Tokyo: Kodansha.

Mori, S. (1994). The social problems of students returning to Japan from sojourns overseas: A social constructionist study. University of California. Dissertation Abstracts International. (UMI No. 9500543).

Murase, A. E. (1985). Higher education and life style aspirations of Japanese returnee and nonreturnee students. Sophia University Faculty of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 19, 195-229.

Rogers, J. (1991). Re-entry and cross-cultural transitions: variables related to socio-cultural and psychological maladjustment. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Christchurch, N.Z.

Rogers, J. & Ward, C. (1993). Expectation - Experience discrepancies and psychological adjustment during cross-cultural reentry. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 17,185-196.

Smith, S. (1991). Returning US students: Maximizing a force for international awareness. Paper presented at the NAFSA 43rd National Conference, Boston, Massachusetts.

Uehara, A. (1986). The nature of American student reentry adjustment and perceptions of the sojourner experience. International Journal of Intercultural Relations: 10, 415-438.

White, M. (1988). The Japanese overseas: Can they go home again? New York: The Free Press.

Appendix A: Interview Question Bank

• How much time did it take for you to feel accustomed to Japanese society again?
• How much time did it take for you to feel accustomed to being with your family? Is your relationship with your family better, same or worse than before? Why?
• How much time did it take for you to feel accustomed to your work place?
• Can you speak to friends about the depth of your experiences in Canada? Is your relationship with old friends better, same or worse, than before. Why?
• What, if anything, passed you by because you were not in your own culture?
• Did anything actually change while you were away-housing, home-life, friends, etc.?
• Can you map your adjustment process?
• Could you say that you went through a series of stages of reentry? If yes, can you describe them? Can you describe your first month back? The next few months? These past few months? Do you feel that you are now completely adjusted back? Why/Why not?
• Did you expect to change while were in Canada, that means before you left Japan at the very beginning?
• Do you feel that you belong in Japan? Are you comfortable here? Are you happy being a Japanese?
• At this time, what do you think is the most important thing you learned about Canada during your four years there? (cognitively, affectively)
• At this time, what do you think is the most important thing you learned about Japan during your four years in Canada? (cognitively, affectively)
• At this time, what do you think is the most important thing you learned about yourself during your four years in Canada? (cognitively, affectively)
• At this time, what do you think is the most important thing you learned about the reentry experience? (cognitively, affectively)
• Is there anything about Japan that you don't like or that frustrates you now that you have been back for 11 months?
• Explain how you have changed as a result of four years in Canada.
• Are you maintaining your English language at all?
• Do you use any of your learning at CIC in your job?
• Do you have any foreign friends? How much contact do you have with CIC friends? How much contact do you have with people in Canada? How much of your free time in Canada did you spend with CIC friends/ Canadian friends?
• How satisfied are you about your time in Canada?
• Looking at their questionnaire responses--ask questions about how they feel now?
• What advice would you give to next yearﾕs returnees?
• Is there anything else you think would be important for me to know about your reentry process?