COMMUNICATIONS LANGUAGE:
Investigating Strategy and Consequences in Student Interaction & Integration
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CBS VS RUC
Roskilde University Project in Strategic Communication, Spring Semester 2018
Andreia Teixeira, Student number 61685 Carla Silveira, Student number 61915
1 Introduction 4 Pre-study assumptions and research biases 6 Literature Review 8 The Higher Education spectrum 8 CBS 8 RUC 9 The Danish & Global cases 10 English as a lingua franca: internationally and in Denmark 14 Cross-cultural communication and interactions in the student community 17 External factors: regulators & other influencing forces in Danish Higher Education 20 Final literature remarks 23 Philosophy of science 24 Methods 26 Document analysis 26 Semi-structured qualitative interview 27 Ethnography and participant observation 28 Web survey 29 Analysis & Discussion 31 Document Analysis 31 Semi-structured Interviews 34 RUC 34 Strategic Communication & Language Profile 34 Influences of External Factors 36 Perceptions about the Student Body 36 RUC vs Other Danish Universities 37 CBS 39 Strategic Communication & Language Profile 39 Influences of External Factors 40 Perceptions about the Student Body 41 CBS vs Other Danish Universities 42 Ethnography and Participant Observation: interaction among students & Integration 42 RUC 42 CBS 48 Surveys 51 RUC 51 CBS 58
2 Main Results: Comparative Analysis 64 Conclusion 66 Bibliography 69 Appendix 73
3 Introduction
This dissertation is concerned with the language choice of Higher Education institutions in Denmark. As international students ourselves, coming from countries where the Higher Education spectrum is far less multicultural than in Denmark and where the majority of the programmes are offered in the local language only - Brazil and Portugal -, we are aware and take advantage of the possibilities that Denmark offers for international students, which includes a large offer of English-taught programmes and academic information available in English. Adding to this, Denmark and Copenhagen are currently enjoying a reputation among the world’s most liveable countries and cities1, respectively, making them increasingly attractive for expats and international students.
Nonetheless, our experience and time spent in Denmark have helped us understand that there are discrepancies among Danish universities: some seem to be more ‘international’ than others - not only in terms of the size of the international student population, but also in its presence and communication in English. As students, currently enrolled in Danish Higher Education programme, we are interested in exploring these dimensional differences and raise the question:
To what extent does the language used by a university in its communications influence the diversity and interactions among students?
To address our problem definition, we chose to compare two Danish universities characterized, at a first glance, by a distinct language choice (English and Danish): Copenhagen Business School (CBS) and Roskilde University (RUC). With this comparative analysis, our goal is to investigate the strategy - or lack of it - behind the main language used by these two Higher Education institutions in their communication with students.
1 See reports: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf and https://www.smh.com.au/cqstatic/gxx1l4/LiveabilityReport2017.pdf
4 The purpose of this analysis is to determine if and how the language used in university communications exerts impact over the diversity and interactions among (international and Danish) students, while understanding how RUC and CBS decide in which language to deliver their communications materials. With this in mind, we have outlined the following research questions: 1. Is the universities’ language choice part of its communications strategy? 2. Is the universities’ language choice a cause or a consequence of its student diversity? 3. Do language barriers influence the level of interaction among Danish and International students?
Throughout this dissertation, we will seek to answer these questions by resorting to the information obtained from the Communications departments of CBS and RUC, to the materials found at the students’ disposal online and on campus, and last but not least, to the opinions, experience and behaviour of the students themselves.
In this spirit, we will explore the different dimensions and cultural aspects that can help to explain the universities’ choice of language when communicating with students. For instance, we will discuss the positioning of each of the universities, internationally and locally, the use of English in Denmark, as well as the role of English both as a teaching language in Higher Education and as the language of globalization and internationalization. We will also point out to external forces, such as legislation, Governments and market competition, which can plausibly play a role in chosen language of communication and the programme offer of CBS and RUC.
Similar studies have been done - also in Denmark - to discuss the use of English in Higher Education and its role in internationalization processes. Differently from those approaches, our research compares two distinct strategies - English vs Danish - and assess their impact, considering that they co-exist in the same globalized, developed area. Thus, we hope to contribute to the discussion about the use of English as a teaching language in non-native countries, adding an example of resistance to that trend, here represented by the primary use of Danish, the local language.
5 Pre-study assumptions and research biases
Why CBS and RUC? From its starting point - the problem formulation - and throughout the body of this study, we depart from an assumption that, our experience as international students at RUC, as residents in Denmark, and one of us as a former CBS course attendee, led us to believe: the two schools, CBS and RUC, seem to differ when it comes to their language choice; at a first glance, CBS presents most of its communications in English, while RUC more often chooses Danish in the same materials. This dichotomy is also reflected in the composition of the student community, with CBS having more international students and being considered an ‘international university’ and RUC less so. In fact, while collecting data for our analysis, we realised that there is an existing comparison between CBS and RUC among students in Denmark: we found a Facebook ‘community’ page named “RUC eller CBS?” (In English, RUC or CBS?), with over 7,500 likes; while explaining the object of our comparative research to a Danish student, the reaction heard was “such a cliché!”. This said, if and whenever this dichotomy is not verified or is contradicted in any section of our analysis, we will be careful to recognize it.
We will also take into consideration other aspects that separate these two Higher Education institutions and that may influence their level of internationalization and visibility. These include: the geographical aspect - CBS’ main buildings are located “close to the heart” (CBS Communications, 2015) of the country’s capital, while RUC’s campus is located in Trekroner, about 30 km away from the center of Copenhagen; the areas of study offered and educational approach - CBS, as the name indicates, is a Business school on Business, Management and Industry programmes, while RUC has a more extensive offer, with a reputation for its project-oriented approach and liberal educational model; the size of the universities - as of October 1, 2017, CBS counted with 14,758 total students, while RUC registered 8,142, (Danmarks Statistik, n.d.).
Why students? Our choice to focus on communication towards students, which can take place on campus or online, in the multiple online channels through which a university can communicate with its students, can be justified by the fact that we, as Communications and Master’s students at
6 RUC, have a particular interest and first-hand experience in what is communicated towards us. Moreover, we have been (and still are) challenged by the Danish language learning, as many of the international students in universities across the country, and have also sensed that it is an essential element of integration in the Danish society.
We must recognize, however, that this also constitutes a limitation, since our own proximity to the object of study can lead to biases in both our problem definition and analysis. On the other hand, our status as international students, Non-Danish language natives in Denmark, has led us to reflect upon the language challenges and opportunities found at Danish universities. As RUC students, we could also observe, to a certain extent, a separation between Danish and international students in situations such as group formation, group work and informal conversations on campus. Therefore, our experience was not only decisive when choosing the universities, but also when picking the target audience of the universities’ communications.
Furthermore, the fact that neither of us is an English language native - meaning that none of us comes from an English speaking country - has, inevitably, brought up comparisons between Denmark’s Higher Education spectrum and the equivalent back home, at the universities where, not so long ago, we were Bachelor’s students, learning in our native language. Thus, from a starting point, we do not wish to advocate for the use of one language over the other. Our comparative approach aims at finding the pros and the cons of using English and using Danish to communicate with the student community, considering that both Danish and International students have a preferred language in which they’d like to communicate and be communicated to. We hope that the findings of this study will contribute to a reflection about the language that each institution mainly uses.
7 Literature Review
The Higher Education spectrum
CBS
Copenhagen Business School (in Danish, Handelshøjskole) is a public Danish university geared towards Business, Management and Society studies. Established in 1917, it was integrated into the Danish education system as a higher education institution in 1965 (CBS Communications, 2015). CBS’s main campus is located in the municipality of Frederiksberg, an area within Greater Copenhagen and only a few stations away from the city center. Its academic portfolio includes programmes at undergraduate, graduate and PhD level, as well as executive and diploma programmes, MBA and short courses; besides its core offer in Economics and Business Administration, CBS also provides degrees in business studies combined with social sciences and the humanities, as well as in the areas of IT, philosophy, politics, language, sociology and communication.
Its latest published Facts & Figures (CBS Communications, 2017), dating from 2017, register a total of 21,703 students; however, according to Danmarks Statistik (n.d.), the total number of students currently enrolled at CBS is 14,758. The school employs over 1,500 full-time and part-time academic staff members, over 600 administrative staff members and almost 200 PhD students, making it one of the largest business schools in Europe (CBS Communications, 2015). In the same publication, the business school highlights its efforts in the areas of business in society and research, including its various research centers and publications. CBS’s activity benefits from over 300 cooperation agreements and 181.6 million Euros worth of funding.
Internationally, CBS and its programmes are often featured in European and worldwide university and business school rankings; the latest Times Higher Education’ World University Rankings (2018) places CBS in the 201-250 place category, with a score of 91.2 out of 100 in international outlook.
8 RUC
Roskilde University (in Danish, Roskilde Universitet) is a public Danish university founded in 1972, known for its research-based learning and problem-oriented approach. Its study offer contemplates a wide range of areas - from arts, social sciences and humanities to business, science and technology -, internally distributed across four research departments: Communication and Arts, People and Technology, Science and Environment and Social Sciences and Business; it awards degrees at undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate level. Many of RUC Master’s programmes consist of two major study subjects, conferring an interdisciplinary perspective to the students’ path.
RUC, as it is commonly known in Denmark, employs around 640 academic staff members and 400 technical and administrative staff, boasting an annual turnover of 785 million DKK (RUC, n.d.). As of 2017, its student population was composed of 8,142 students (Danmarks Statistik, n.d.), in addition to 570 researchers (Times Higher Education, 2018). The university campus is located in Trekroner, a newly developed district in the Municipality of Roskilde, about 30 km west of Copenhagen and a 30-minute train ride from the city’s center.
The university was originally founded to “challenge academic traditions and to experiment with new ways to create and acquire knowledge” (RUC, n.d.), as an alternative to the traditional Danish universities. In this sense, RUC introduced a new educational model at the time, which was characterized by a group work, problem-solving orientation, basic studies programmes and interdisciplinarity, which are, today, recognized academic methods in Denmark. RUC appeared for the first time in the Times Higher Education’ World University Rankings in 2016, where it is currently classified among the 401-500 best universities. In terms of international outlook, RUC scores 49.6 out of 100 in the 2018 ranking.
9 The Danish & Global cases
According to Danmarks Statistik, there are currently 148,928 students enrolled at Danish universities. Of those, 19,569 - 6.57% - are international students. When comparing the figures amongst eight Danish universities - CBS, RUC, University of Copenhagen, Aarhus University, Aalborg University, University of Southern Denmark, Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and the IT University of Copenhagen -, CBS is fifth in terms of total number of students, while RUC is the second smallest university, just before the IT University of Copenhagen (the University of Copenhagen is the largest in student figures).
When it comes to international students, CBS has the second largest population in Denmark (3,248 international students, represented in Figure 1 as ‘immigrants’) and, proportionally to the student population, registers the highest percentage among Danish universities - around 11.66% of the university’s total population is international. In comparison, RUC presents the second smallest population of international students (1,010 ‘immigrants’, represented in Figure 1) and the third lowest percentage of international students, 6.49%, just below the overall average, 6.87%. The overall percentage of students with Danish citizenship throughout the eight universities analyzed corresponds to 57% (Danmarks Statistik, n.d.).
Figure 1: Number of Danish and immigrant-origin students at Danish Universities, as of 1st October 2017
Source: Danmarks Statistik (n.d.)
In terms of teaching language, of all 64,700 students enrolled in graduate programmes in Denmark in 2017, 27,000 (43%) attended classes in English. Among all Danish universities
10 analyzed, CBS has the third highest percentage of graduate students studying in English, 68%, compared to only 15% at RUC, the lowest registered (Danmarks Statistik, n.d.). According to the programmes’ list available on their websites, a discrepancy between the two higher education institutions is also verified in terms of the educational offer: RUC offers the majority of its programmes in Danish, while CBS, with a smaller programme offer, has a higher percentage of English-language programmes. At RUC, out of 43 graduate programmes, 25 (58%) are taught in Danish, against 18 taught in English; at CBS, English seems to win again: out of 37 graduate programmes, 25 are taught in English - a total of 67%. As for undergraduate programmes, Danish is stronger in both universities: 65% of RUC’s Bachelor-level programmes and 55% of CBS’s use Danish as language of instruction.
These numbers reflect a trend in higher-education, which has been changing the way universities portray and promote themselves nationally and abroad: the increasing need for internationalization. Over the last century, the liberalization of markets and the new, open economies have set the grounds for the globalization of goods and services, as well as knowledge, and higher education institutions have also felt the pressure to expand and compete internationally. Student mobility is now facilitated by the development of educational credentials, new study fields have emerged to respond to the needs of globalized economies, and the rapid evolution of new communication technologies have enabled universities to offer a wider range of courses taught online (Stromquist, 2002). In the case of European universities, Maiworm & Wächter (2002) note, the European Union education and training programmes contributed to the expansion in the number of English-language taught programmes, and facilitated student and teacher mobility have been enhanced by the Bologna Process, which has harmonised degree structures and other processes.
In terms of study content, there is another trend in higher education that should be mentioned. Although, due to globalization, content and practices are now more easily shared and are becoming increasingly homogenized, there is also a need for differentiation of universities and their programme offer, which has resulted in the creation and expansion of specialized universities, e.g., business academies such as CBS. Competition among universities, combined with globalization and internationalization, has meant that universities now compete with each other not only at a local or national level, but also at an international level. Higher education institutions can now attract more international students by providing
11 English-language taught programmes that are valid worldwide, while still catering for the local students, increasingly proficient in English. Having an “international dimension” is now an essential part of most universities’ mission, and CBS and RUC are not exceptions, both stating international goals and identifying themselves as an “international university” (CBS, 2016; Roskilde University, 2017) in their strategy.
While discussing content and language integration in Higher Education, Zegers and Wilkinson (2008) reminded us of another important factor: the labour market and its own language requirements, which students will have to face after completing their study programmes. For most professions, once they start working, students will need to communicate effectively with the local population, whether they choose to work in their own country, in their country of study or abroad. Therefore, universities are influenced by and challenged by the need to prepare students in both the local language and other language with which they can potentially work in the future - while in fields such as Business, future specialists and managers have to be able to communicate in English with a multiplicity of markets, in fields such as Medicine, future doctors will need to communicate with their patients in their own language. In order to address this, the authors defend that universities need focus on the development of integrated programmes that stimulate students to simultaneously acquire content and language competences (Zegers & Wilkinson, 2008).
Studies have been made to assess the quality of education in this growingly globalized tertiary context, looking at factors such as content, student communities and research. Maiworm & Wächter (2002) studied the proliferation of English language-taught degree programmes in Europe - in which Denmark is one of the leading providers - and how other factors influence that availability. The authors concluded that the size of the institution seems to be correlated to the availability of English-taught programmes: bigger the institution, the higher the probability of offering them; the same goes for universities with a general disciplinary profile, which more often offer English-taught programmes than specialized institutions. This contrasts with the numbers from Danmarks Statistik and our comparison between CBS - a specialized university - and RUC - with a general subject offer -, which shows that CBS offers more English-taught programmes than RUC. On the other hand, CBS is larger than RUC in terms of student numbers, which confirms the first finding.
12 Talking about international students, another figure that Maiworm & Wächter (2002) verified in their study was that, at the time, no Nordic country reached the 5% mark of international students, even though they are often considered “leaders” in internationalization and Europeanisation of higher education. The latest figures from Danmarks Statistik, however, register a percentage of 6.57 of international students in 2017, which means that Denmark has managed to attract more international students over the last decade. That said, Denmark is still far from reaching the figures registered in terms of international students in the leading countries - Switzerland, Belgium, Germany or France -, even though Higher Education in Denmark is free for European students, something that those countries do not offer. The authors justify this surprising picture with the fact that Denmark, as the Nordic countries in general, has a linguistic disadvantage: Danish is a language that is not typically taught abroad and, thus, rarely spoken by international students, which means that universities are only able to attract students from abroad via their English-taught programmes - with the exception of, perhaps, Norwegian or Swedish students. Comparatively, in Germany, Spain or France, the possibility to recruit students to programmes taught in the local language is larger, as more people and regions speak the language worldwide.
The latest update to the study found that around 75% of all students enrolled in English- taught programmes in Nordic countries are foreigners, above the 54% average in Europe (Maiworm & Wächter, 2014). That is another surprising finding, considering that Denmark offers a wide range of English-taught programmes but has a low percentage of international students. Unsurprisingly, the majority of these students come from Western, Central and Eastern European countries. When questioned about their main goals in introducing English- taught programmes, most institutions - including the Danish institutions audited - mentioned that they wanted to attract foreign students and to make domestic students fit for global or international markets (Maiworm & Wächter, 2014). We will further discuss the role of English as a global language, its context in Denmark and in Higher Education, in the following section of this review.
13 English as a lingua franca: internationally and in Denmark
Danish is Denmark’s official language, which makes it the natural choice of teaching. But while local languages are the primary language of instruction in the early and mid-years of school, English has been taking over in higher-education.
Currently, English is the world’s second most widely spoken language, with 1.06 billion speaking it in total, of which 400 million are native speakers and 660 million speak it as their second language, according to Ethnologue (n.d.); one out of four people in the world’s entire population can, at a certain level, communicate in English. David Crystal, reputed English and language writer, has widely discussed the position of English as a lingua franca (Crystal, 1997) in different spheres. English has, over centuries, become a lingua franca through the power of the nations who natively speak it - the United States and the United Kingdom. Progress in science and technology and, with it, research and education - especially higher education - were highly regarded internationally. That intellectual power was mainly pushed by English- speaking nations, pioneers of the industrial revolution, cultural exportation and fast-growing and productive economies, giving English a ‘global status’. Over the last five decades, the English language has also established its dominance in education, pushed by globalization needs and the advent of the internet, as referred by Stromquist (2002), in her work concerning education in globalized contexts. For many countries, even those where English is not an official language, English is now a common language of instruction in higher education, and this is often the case with the Netherlands, Germany, and the Nordic countries.
To respond to those globalization needs, universities in non-English speaking countries are becoming more internationalized, providing a growing number of courses in English and creating communications campaigns targeting an international audience; distance learning, made possible by widely available online platforms, has become a new source of income for universities. English-taught programmes have, as previously stated, become increasingly necessary for universities worldwide, and communicating in English itself is a required feature for giving universities an international outlook. Today, most lecturers teaching in English at internationalized universities will encounter a multilingual student audience.
14 Likewise, research publications and other academic resources have also been increasingly influenced by Anglo-American models of thinking, also seeing a growing number of non- English native researchers writing in English rather than their mother tongue - in fact, 75% of all articles published in international periodicals are written in English (Hamel, 2007). Crystal highlights: “If most students are going to encounter English routinely in their monographs and periodicals [...] then it makes sense to teach advanced courses in that language, to better prepare them for that encounter” (Crystal, 1997, p. 112) which means that the force that English exerts in research has also influenced the universities’ academic language offer.
The fact that English seems to be a natural choice - as much as Danish - in higher education programmes in Denmark cannot be separated from the fact that Danes, themselves, speak fluent English. According to Education First’ English Proficiency Index (2017) Danes are the third best non-native English-speakers worldwide, and 86% of the population in Denmark speak English as their additional language. Furthermore, Denmark is an important technology player, home to large multinational companies that attract foreigners from all over the world. Considering the above, it is not difficult to understand why English has become the lingua franca in many universities in Europe, much less in Denmark, where Danish is, however, the only official language.
The authors Haberland, Lønsmann & Preisler (2013) are important references for our study: Hartmut Haberland is a Professor of German Language and the Sociolinguistics of Globalization at Roskilde University, and leader of the research group An Ethnography of Language Encounters: Language and Interaction in the Globalized Corporation (LINGCORP); Dorte Lønsmann is an Assistant Professor at Copenhagen Business School and also member of the LINGCORP research group; Bent Preisler is also a Professor at Roskilde University, teaching Emeritus of English Language and Sociolinguistics, and is the founder and former director of the international research center for the study of Cultural and Linguistic Practices in the International University (CALPIU). In their work, they discuss the growing trend of using English as a lingua franca in international tertiary education. The authors call our attention to the fact that a lingua franca, as its definition indicates, is only needed within multilingual settings, where communities of students that do not speak the same language need to find a common ground to communicate with each other.
15 Besides its communications function, especially important in international university settings, Haberland et al. (2013) identify other functions of English as a lingua franca, which can influence or be influenced by language policy in universities: identity and its construction, i.e., the way individuals see themselves, as well as the way they want to be seen by others, which will ultimately have an impact in their language choice; language ideologies - higher or lower acceptance of English as a lingua franca or of mixing languages; language proficiency or competence, which, comparatively to other non-English speaking countries, is very high in Denmark; and genre. All these dimensions are relevant for the present case, especially when thinking about the language choices of Danish students, who can either adopt a Danish-only posture in a multicultural environment or use English to define a more international identity. In addition to this, we’d like to highlight another function, to which we will come back later: the integration function, in which a common language plays an important role, either by promoting interaction among students from different backgrounds on campus, or by isolating Danish and International students in their own so-called ‘bubble’.
Haberland et al. (2013) go on to formulate three contextual levels on which these multilingual communities depend: the macro level - with respect to the linguistic ecology and language ideologies of the society where the community is placed -, the meso level - the language policies generated at an institutional level, for instance by Governments and other regulators - and the micro level - the linguistic resources and choices of each individual in the community. The present analysis, for that matter, looks at elements belonging to each of the three levels and seeks to understand to what extent they influence each other. In their three-level analysis, Denmark is not only one of the objects of study - more precisely, Danish tertiary education settings - but is also a recurrent example of a highly English-proficient country and early adopter of English and lingua franca in its universities. In Scandinavian countries, English is viewed and used more as a “virtual second language, which everyone learns and many use for personal and professional purposes at home and abroad” (McArthur apud Haberland et al. 2013), an idea that was also corroborated by Crystal (1997).
Another problem addressed in studies is the language ability of students in English-taught programmes. A study by Bolton & Kuteeva (2012) about the use of English as an academic language at a Swedish university highlights that, currently, universities tend to focus on two different fronts simultaneously: the improvement of their research profiles and international
16 rankings, which are assessed in the number of international citations, staff and students, and in ensuring local student’ access to their educational offer. Those students, the authors say, might be at a disadvantage against international students “by an over-emphasis on the use of English as a teaching medium” (Bolton & Kuteeva, 2012, p. 1). This is a factor that we will take into consideration in our own analysis, as Danish students, much like Swedish students, may find themselves to be forced to use English over their own native language at university, when studying in their own country. Even though most Danish students speak fluent English, they may not feel completely comfortable with in-depth topical discussion and learning at university. In the end, they are Danes living in Denmark, which means that they may not feel as pressured to use English during the majority of their time.
As for international students’ language ability, that could also be a concern, but the strict programmes’ requirements related to English-language proficiency are a way to ensure that most students are capacitated to express themselves in English at a high level. Maiworm & Wächter (2002) actually highlight that the biggest concern of tertiary institutions in terms of language abilities of their students is the problems that foreign students have with the local language; this confirms that the fact that an institution offers English-taught programs does not suppress the language barriers found in the host country. In some European countries, local-language training is provided in universities in order to tackle this issue; however, this is not the case in most Danish universities.
Cross-cultural communication and interactions in the student community Maiworm & Wächter (2002) also verified that, in most institutions, groups of students who share the same nationality and native language aggravate this issue, as they tend to interact only amongst themselves outside the classroom, “not progressing in their mastery of English” (Maiworm & Wächter, 2002, p. 97); we would also add, reducing the possibilities for interaction with other students, either international or local. Furthermore, the authors conclude that understanding the domestic language is necessary even though the classes are taught in English, as most academic services and other student activities function are mainly in the local language. “Students do not only live in the classroom, but in a wider institutional
17 environment often functioning exclusively in the domestic language, as well as the town and region, to which the same applies”, Maiworm & Wächter (2002, p. 94) state. This is one of our major points of concern in the present analysis. If some of the information provided by the institution to its students through online channels and on campus is in Danish and not in English, will international students still be and feel well informed? Will they feel that they are contemplated by the university communications and well integrated within the university environment?
In her work about Internationalisation and Teaching through English in Denmark, Carroll- Boegh (2005) reminds that, besides their language background, foreign students are characterized by other cultural aspects, which influence their motivations to study abroad. The author mentions that, for example, when foreign students come to Denmark to study, elements such as nationality, age, social class, gender and religion permeate their personal motivations and reactions.
Reflecting upon those cultural aspects, Hofstede (1986) developed the 4-D (four dimensions) model of cultural difference among society, in his work about Cultural Differences in Teaching and Learning. The model was originally applied to evaluate teacher-student interaction in over 50 countries; however, for the purpose of our analysis, it will be discussed to reflect upon Danish-International student interactions, as we believe that Hofstede’s cross-cultural dimensions and Denmark’s position in those aspects can help us to better understand the characteristics of the student community in Danish universities. Hofstede (1986) four dimensions are: Masculinity versus Femininity, Individualism versus Collectivism, large versus small Power Distance, strong versus weak Uncertainty Avoidance.
In the Feminine vs Masculine aspect, a country is more masculine when its society is oriented to competition, achievement and success. The aim to be “the best” or “the winner” is verified both at school and later, in professional life; if the country is more feminine, the concept of success is represented by other values such as solidarity and quality of life. According to the study, Denmark is considered a feminine society, where values such as equality and work-life balance are appreciated, and standing out from the crowd can have a negative connotation.
In the dichotomy Individualism/Collectivism, Individualism is verified when a society is composed by people who care primarily about their own and family interests, while
18 Collectivist society is composed by individuals who throughout their lives pertain to one or more groups which offer loyalty to those who protect their interests. The analysis showed that Denmark is an individualist society, i.e. it is loosely integrated having flexible social structures in which individuals cater more to themselves and their immediate circle of relationship (Hofstede Insights, n.d.).
The third cultural dimension - large vs small Power Distance - relates to the level of acceptance of inequality in power relations by people who, themselves, are in positions of power. As the study highlights, inequality is unfortunately found in any culture, but in some it is more tolerated than in others. When compared to other countries, Denmark, characterized by a very egalitarian, power-decentralised system, ranks very low in this dimension. Danes value autonomy and equal rights, and when it comes to management, they remain accessible but trust in their team’s work: “Danes do not lead, they coach” (Hofstede Insights, n.d.)
Last, but not least, weak vs strong Uncertainty Avoidance: a dimension that indicates to what extent individuals from a certain culture don’t feel comfortable when confronted with unstructured, unforeseen situations. Do those individuals try to avoid that type of situations? Do they prefer to follow structured codes of behaviour? If the answer is yes, then those cultures are more active, aggressive and emotional, constantly seeking security. In contrast, weak uncertainty avoidance is more characteristic of more tolerant and relaxed, less compulsive and abler to take risks. Denmark, after the study, has a weak uncertainty avoidance, which means that unpredictability, curiosity and lack of structure are commonly accepted.
Combining these four dimensions, Denmark is framed as a highly individualist, risk-taking, trust-based, curious society - a widely recognized reputation of a nation coined by innovation and creativity. This well defined cultural profile can contrast with other nation’s characteristics, for instance Southern-European, Latin America or even Asian countries, where structure and security are valued and power is very centralised. These distinct profiles can shock when international students, originating from those countries, find themselves in a Danish educational environment.
19 External factors: regulators & other influencing forces in Danish Higher Education
Besides the influence that Globalization and Internationalization trends exert on universities in Denmark and globally, there are factors imposed by international or local authorities that can further and forcedly impact their language policies. Danish Higher Education is regulated by the state, which means that universities are required to follow the regulations dictated either by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science or the Ministry of Culture. This also means that state-funded, tuition-free higher education is available to all Danish students, as well as to students from EU and EEA students.
Internationalization and Foreign students The Bologna Declaration, as previously mentioned, has changed the paradigm of European Higher Education since its signature in 1999. By proposing a European Higher Education Area, the goals of the Bologna Process included increasing European citizens’ employability within the borders of the European continent and of boosting the competitiveness of European higher education institutions, making them more appealing for foreign students (The Bologna Declaration, 1999). As expected, the process has been one of the driving forces of internationalization in Danish universities. However, a research study carried by Carroll- Boegh (2005) in Denmark, criticised the lack of an ‘internationalization manual’ or policy in Danish Higher Education concerning this topic, which has led to ad hoc decision-making. The author called for more policy concerning the increasing number of foreign students attending higher education programmes in Denmark, who “can no longer be ignored or simply immersed in the local system” (Carroll-Boegh, 2005, p. 20).
The advice didn’t go unheard. Ten years later, the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science issues a Code of Conduct, in a “joint effort to attract the best international students” (Ministry of Higher Education and Science, 2015) and to make Denmark a more appealing study destination for foreigners. The document establishes a new set of common guidelines for higher education institutions offering programmes to international students, holding related information about legislation, rights and opportunities aimed at foreign students, employees and partners.
20 The Code of Conduct begins by emphasising that international students choose to pursue higher education programmes in Denmark due to their high educational quality and international reputation, and that Danish higher education institutions aim to expand and strengthen their international cooperation. Among other guidelines, the document dictates that higher education institutions shall provide adequate information about their programmes to its international students, including about language of instruction and language requirements; students’ rights, obligations and any other relevant information communicated to them must be easily accessible and made available in English or in the programme’s language of instruction; institutions must also make sure that lecturers are qualified to teach in the language of instruction of the programme (Ministry of Higher Education and Science, 2015). Although, in the present study, we do not intend to verify if these guidelines are fully applied at CBS and RUC, we did come across documents targeting international students in our analysis - not to mention in other circumstances, as international students ourselves - where we could have assessed whether they were in English or in the correct programme’ language of instruction. We do recognize, however, that in an international setting such as CBS and RUC’s, where both Danish and International students circulate, most of the information found in the campus can be deemed relevant for everyone, and should then, be presented in a language accessible to all students.
English-taught programmes and language challenges Recently, the number of English-language programmes in Denmark was subject to cuts dictated by the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science. As a consequence, in 2017, admissions to those programmes were reduced by 25%, the equivalent to 1,600 fewer students, according to the Ministry's official numbers. The measure came after a Ministry’s analysis indicated that only one in five graduate students from English-language programmes at university colleges and business academies are working in Denmark two years after graduating (Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, 2017). The report also showed that many foreign students leave Denmark within two years after they have completed their programme, and many of those who stay in the country continue in further education. The decision from the Government to reduce English-language programmes and its discussion over the number of international students currently at Danish universities shows that there
21 is a preoccupation with the dominance of English in Danish higher education, as well as an economic interest in having international students in its institutions.
Haberland et al. (2013) draw on another idea, which we very much agree with: university language policies influence the language choice and language alternation among its publics. In most cases, the university establishes a language hierarchy, or reverses or balances out an existing one. On the regulators’ side, languages are often seen as “being in competition” (Haberland et al., 2013, p. xvi), in which a language, more widespread, can potentially be a threat to another, more endangered. It is therefore not surprising to see regulators dictating which languages are allowed or not for certain purposes, including in educational institutions. The Danish Language Council and the Danish Ministry of Culture (2003) have expressed their concern with ‘domain loss’ of the Danish language. They recognized that “in higher education, there is currently a significant level of English, and many university programmes are now in English” (original: “I de højere uddannelser undervises der i dag i betydeligt omfang på engelsk, og mange universitetsuddannelser er nu engelsksprogede” (Dansk Sprognævn, 2003, p. 3).
Thus, the Swedish-model of ‘Parallel language use’ (parallelsproglighed)2 was presented as a solution to fight the continuous replacement of the Danish language by English in various areas of society, an approach that aims at balancing the use of English and Danish. In higher education, the Danish Ministry’s goal was to ensure that, in subjects where English as a teaching language gains terrain, Danish-taught courses continue to exist (Kulturministeriet, 2003). Overall, it is worth emphasizing that Danish is still Denmark’s only official language and that, according to Article 29, no. 1, of the UNESCO Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (1998) “Everyone is entitled to receive an education in the language specific to the territory where s/he resides”.
2 The model was later presented by the ministers of Education and Culture in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden) in the Deklaration om Nordisk Språkpolitik/Declaration on a Nordic Language Policy (Bolton & Kuteeva, 2012).
22 Final literature remarks When we talk about language choice and language diversity at university, there is a tendency to look at the number of programmes taught in the local language versus in English or other foreign languages. That is objectively a determinant factor of student diversity, since it gives international applicants the chance to study abroad, in a language they can speak. However, the role of the language of communication on campus - and not just inside the class - and between students cannot be forgotten, and, as Haberland et al. (2013) state, the universities’ policies and practices can vary in this regard. Regulations, course information and other relevant content for students can either be offered in the local language only or in English only, or both. Verbally speaking, the ‘complementary language’ logic could be in use - this approach was proposed by Preisler (2009) and sees Danish and English as complementary languages: if not everyone in a certain context knows Danish, then English is the preferential language; if everyone ‘in the room’ is proficient in Danish, then that is the language that will be used. Haberland et al. (2013), is also in agreement with this approach, defending that language choice processes must consider the hybrid character of international higher education contexts, and that the question on whether to use one language or the other should depend on the context as means to “achieve an interactional, communicative or cognitive aim” (Haberland et al., 2013, p. xvii).
Overall, Denmark benefits from a favourable position internationally and within the European context, with one of the largest offers of English-taught programmes when compared to other European non-English speaking country. Over the last decades, it has registered a growing population of international students in its universities, it is considered leader when it comes to the internationalization of education; and competing and cooperating at an international level are goals often stated by Danish universities in their academic approaches. On the other hand, the Danish education spectrum still presents areas that need to be worked on, towards a truly international environment in Danish universities. Namely, language challenges related to the fact that Danish is not a language commonly spoken internationally, much less an easy and quick language to learn for international students.
23 Philosophy of science
The paradigm we have chosen to guide our research is Interpretivism, specifically the hermeneutic-phenomenological approach, since in terms of epistemology, we intended to gain knowledge inductively and through personal experiences by employing ethnography, participant observation and a web survey with students of CBS and RUC, as well as by interviewing the representatives of the communications department of both institutions. The hermeneutic-phenomenological approach allows the researcher to attain a deep understanding of phenomena and uncover the complex realities of the lifeworld (van Manen, 2006).
As our study is focused on the meaning of the interactions among Danish and international students and how the individuals interpret their own experiences, this approach fits our research purposes concerning ontology as well, once they are based on the reality of individuals experiencing a specific phenomenon: Danish and international students interactions while attending university in Denmark (RUC and CBS), having the language difference as background. Hudson and Ozanne (1988) argue that multiple realities exist because of different individual and group perspectives.
According to Schultz (apud Bryman, 2016), the thought objects constructed by the social scientist, in order to grasp the social reality of the beings living, acting, and thinking within it, have to be founded upon the thought objects constructed by the common-sense thinking of men (and women!), living their daily life within the social world. The quote is aligned to our research goals of understanding the meanings behind the Danish and international students’ acts, as well as interpret these actions and the students’ social world from their perspective.
“Phenomenological hermeneutics requires researchers to reflect on their pre-understanding, framework, and biases. This orientation requires a researcher to search for genuine openness to engage in a conversational relation with phenomena” (van Manen, 2006; van Manen & Adams, apud VanLeeuwen et al., 2017, p.5). Thereby, on account of our student status previously mentioned, we were aware of the risk of, and sought to avoid, asking probing questions as well as prompting when employing semi-structured interviews, ethnography and web survey.
24 In this study, we intended to explore the cross-cultural competence of hermeneutic research (VanLeeuwen et al., 2017) positioning ourselves both as “cultural insiders” (collecting data within one’s cultural community) and as “cultural outsiders” (collecting data outside of one’s cultural community). We can argue that living in Denmark, understanding and speaking the Danish language quite well, and studying at RUC has placed us as “cultural insiders”, while the fact that we come from different cultures (Brazilian and Portuguese), are not completely fluent in Danish and don’t belong to the student body of CBS has made us “cultural outsiders”.
Moules, McCaffrey, Field, & Lain (2015) underline the dialogic nature of the hermeneutic approach, which was of great benefit to our research due to its virtue of giving the researcher the ability to inquire about many-sided situations that are centered in language and the historical, emphasizing the context as a significant issue.
25 Methods
In this study, we have decided to employ mixed methods, combining document analysis, ethnography and participant observation, semi-structured interviews and a web survey. The mixed methods approach was chosen owing to our aim of analyzing different perspectives related to the language use (English or Danish) at RUC and CBS, e.g. the institutions’ communications strategy, which could have influence in the diversity and interactions among international and Danish students. This methodological approach has also allowed us to conduct a triangulation exercise, comparing our quantitative and qualitative findings in order to establish whether they corroborate each other (Bryman, 2016), potentially providing us a better understanding of the phenomenon studied.
Among the challenges we have faced when employing mixed methods research, we must recognize that it proved to be time-consuming, especially on account of the task of correlating the qualitative and quantitative findings.
Document analysis
Virtual documents of both universities were our initial source of data. As a starting point, we sought to investigate the predominance of English and Danish at CBS and RUC’s websites and social media pages (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn), and thus to obtain the institutions’ positioning overview in terms of the language of communication. Some of the official documents and materials, such as brochures of the Bachelors’ and Masters’ programmes, university strategy, advertising campaigns, study guides, posters, flyers and signs on campus were selected and analyzed with the same purpose. These data were collected on the campuses of CBS and RUC, where we had access to the library, canteen, classrooms, student hub and other common areas of the universities. On RUC and CBS’s campuses, respectively, a total of 33 and 30 materials were analyzed, besides the websites, as well as posts and descriptions on social media channels.
26 This said, is important to reiterate that we did not analyse the totality of materials or information found at the institutions’ online platforms or at the campus and specific areas within it. The data presented is based on a sample of the documents available in each area, which we collected at the beginning of our study and while applying the participant observation method.
Using document analysis is also a means of enhancing the validity of data, once the universities’ materials and platforms have not been created specifically for the purpose of our research (Bryman, 2016). Nevertheless, we were aware that the results of the document analysis might not be representative of a conscious and deliberate positioning by the institutions, as, as we will further discuss in our analysis, the choice of language in the publication of physical and online materials isn’t always made by the same department or part of a general communications strategy at the institutions.
Semi-structured qualitative interview
We have conducted semi-structured interviews with members of the communications department of CBS and RUC with the purpose of assessing their strategy - or lack of strategy - behind the language choice, their decision-making process and the influence of external factors (education legislation/regulations), as well as their perceptions about Danish and international students’ interactions and integration/inclusion within the university community. An interview guide with the questions and main topics to be addressed was employed as a support (see appendix).
Conducting this type of interview has provided us the flexibility we sought to this process, e.g. having the possibility to ask questions which are not included in the interview guide as we gather insights from interviewees’ replies, as well as covering key topics for our research. Applying semi-structured interviews has thereby enabled us to apprehend what the interviewees consider as important, i.e. how they frame and understand issues, events and forms of behaviour (Bryman, 2016). Thus, we also had the chance to capture the decision makers’ perceptions about the interactions between the Danish and international students and the impact of language difference in this context at CBS and RUC.
27 On the part of RUC, the participants of the interview were the Associate Professor and International Coordinator in Communication of the Department of Communication and Arts, David Mathieu; the International Recruitment and Critical Edge Alliance Officer of the International team, Ditte Meincke; and the Head of Section of the Communication and Rector’s Office, Victoria Vest. At CBS, our interview was conducted with the Associate Professor and Equal Opportunities Officer of the Department of Management, Society and Communication, Alex Klinge; the translator of CBS Communications, Katrine Andersen; and the Communications Advisor of CBS Communications, Marie Andersen.
A day before the interview, our interviewees informed us about CBS’s internal language awareness campaign, which made us realize that they were prepared to talk about language issues at the staff level. Therefore, it became necessary to explain our object of study (the student body), what we consider not to have affected the course of the interview, as the interviewees were able to answer all the questions and issues addressed to them.
Ethnography and participant observation
The ethnography and participant observation methods were employed with the student body on the campuses of both universities, as their approach would allow us to be involved in the social life of the Danish and international students, observing their behaviour, listening and engaging in conversations, and asking questions (Bryman, 2016). Through this methodology, we were able to develop an understanding of the students’ behaviour within the context of the academic culture having the language difference as a background.
The fact that we are already part of the student body of Roskilde University has facilitated our immersion in this social setting. However, it also meant that we had to constantly seek to distance ourselves from the object of study, being doubly alert regarding our own biases and personal experiences as international students, as well as the risk of over-report or under- report behaviours and attitudes. Furthermore, some of the students we have approached were also Communications students, which means that they were likely more aware and critical about their environment and the university communications as well.
28 On the campuses of CBS and RUC, in places such as the library, canteen and classroom, we conducted observations of interactions between Danish and international students followed by questions, in a conversational tone, about the composition of their classes (Danish and/or international students), the proficiency in Danish and/or English, the interaction between them, their understanding of the universities’ communications and so on.
At RUC, three groups were approached: the ‘Library group’ was formed by two international students; the ‘Student lounge group’, by two Danish students and one international; and the ‘Canteen group’, by three Danish students and one international. Whereas at CBS, two groups were approached: the ‘Class group’ was composed by one Danish and two international students; and the ‘Entrance hall group’, by two Danish students. It is worth mentioning that we faced difficulties in accessing the students at CBS, as some of them declined to engage in a conversation with us and as, some of them, were working individually and not in groups. Furthermore, it is also important to note that, at the time this method was employed, most Masters’ students had already completed their period of classes, which makes it more plausible that the majority of students at the campuses were Bachelor students.
Overall, employing this methodology has allowed us to gain authentic data from the students on the one hand, but on the other hand it was time-consuming and limited in terms of representativeness of the sample. Those limitations were known at the beginning of the project and have influenced our decision of conducting a web survey with students from both institutions as well. For ethical reasons, the students who have participated in the ethnography research will remain anonymous in this study and were informed about this status when approached.
Web survey An online social survey in the form of a questionnaire with 18 questions (see appendix) was released to students from CBS and RUC, being active to be answered for a period of 25 days. We have used the Survey Monkey platform and the prospective respondents were invited to participate through posts on Facebook, since it has a greater range and the advantage of being conveniently accessed via mobile phones.
29 Our goal with the web survey was to stimulate Danish and international students to reflect about the use of Danish and English languages in the academic setting. Thus, we could obtain their perceptions about the language used in the institutions’ communications and in various situations on campus, as well as the influence of the language in their integration and inclusion at the university. Moreover, we aimed at evaluating the impact of the language difference in the interpersonal relations between the two groups in the academic environment, by asking questions such as “how much do language barriers affect your level of interaction…?”.
The survey was voluntary and posted in Facebook groups and pages used (in exclusive or not) by CBS and RUC students. Copenhagen Business School Connect (network for current students and Alumni), CBS Alumni, CBS Students, International students at Roskilde University, Cultural Encounters Roskilde University and RUC Virksomhedsstudier/Business Studies were some of the Facebook groups where the survey link was shared. Until the time of the submission of this study, we counted with 101 respondents - 56 from CBS and 45 from RUC -, and among the factors which likely influenced those numbers, we could mention the short period of the application of the web survey; the limited access to groups of students on social media (in the case of CBS); more proximity, integration with students and participation on RUC’s social media; and the fact that students were probably occupied conducting their own projects.
30 Analysis & Discussion
Document Analysis As we’ve been emphasising across this study, our initial assumptions were that most documents found at CBS were presented in English, while the documents available at RUC were more often shown in Danish. Overall, this trend was confirmed, although with some nuances that should be noted. Of the all the materials analyzed at CBS - including documents, social media pages and website -, more than half (51% - see Figure 2) were available in English, or when both English and Danish were found on the same material, English was the language in clear prevalence. In 35% of the materials, both languages were represented equally - for instance, the library rules displayed on the library’s walls were shown in English and Danish, as well as the food menus/labels, allergy information and opening hours at the school bar. In only 13% of the cases Danish was the only language displayed or the language prevalent.
Figure 2: Percentage of CBS materials available per prevalent language (as of 30th April 2018)
As for RUC, out of all the virtual and physical materials analyzed, 63% (see Figure 3) were available in Danish only, or Danish was the language in prevalence when compared to the use of English. 33% of those were equally distributed in Danish and English, as it was the case with the book sections’ labels in the library shelves, information and signs found in the school’s
31 bathroom and posters in the canteen’s murals. Only 5% of the information found was in shown in English only, or had English as the prevalent language.
Figure 3: Percentage of RUC materials available per prevalent language (as of 30th April 2018)
It was in terms of virtual information that the difference in terms of language choice between the two universities was more notorious. All CBS’s social media channels were handled in English, i.e., the descriptions and the majority of the posts were available in English. RUC, on its hand, published most content on its social media accounts in Danish, and English was only found in its LinkedIn page description. As expected, both universities present two language versions on their websites: English and Danish. However, while the content found in each language version was the same in the case of CBS, RUC presented different content from one version to the other (different structure, different images, among other aspects), although they shared the same website design and domain.
Another campus area where we could find significant differences was the cafeteria/canteen. At CBS, most of the information found at the cafeteria and surrounding area was available in both English and Danish, which was the case for food displays (see Figure 4, first picture) and allergen information, and in very few cases in English only. Here, we did not find any materials available in Danish only.
32 Figure 4: Overview of the materials found at CBS’s (first picture) and at RUC (second picture)
At RUC’s canteen and surrounding area, the picture was different: here, we found was that most of the information was available in Danish only - including allergen information and
33 opening hours (see Figure 4, second picture) -, with very few exceptions where it was in both Danish and English.
Semi-structured Interviews
RUC
Strategic Communication & Language Profile Based on our experience so far as international Master’s students at RUC, we have developed some assumptions about the language choice of the university in its communications, as well as about its profile in general. Firstly, we have noticed a predominance of Danish over English in several graphic materials and signs spread across campus; this predominance was confirmed in the document analysis. In terms of the academic offer, we have also verified a larger number of Danish-taught programmes also in the Master’s level compared to programmes taught in English, which probably explains the low percentage of international students enrolled at the university.
In its strategy document for 2015-2020, “Strategy New RUC”, also available in Danish, the university indicates the common themes of its strategy as being “external cooperation, internationalization and RUC as an attractive workplace”. The university refers to itself as an international institution, which aims at increasing this profile through research, partnerships, becoming attractive to international students and faculty, among others. The abovementioned strategy seems to figure as a general one, that is, not specifically as a communication strategy which englobes instructions about the use of the Danish and the English languages.
According to the Head of Section of the Communication and Rector’s Office, Victoria Vest, currently the university does not have an official language policy regarding the translation of the totality of the materials in Danish to English, likely for resource reasons. However, a recent rector’s measure established that the entire Danish study regulation should be translated into English as well. “We have the most [materials] in English we have ever had, as far as I know in the time I've been here, but I know that it's not enough”.
34 When asked about the decision-making process in the communication to students, Victoria explained that, different from the past, RUC has recently developed a new organizational model which has centralized the communication to students and the recruitment of new ones into two departments. Thus, the university presently has a big communications department and an international team.
An example was mentioned regarding the communication involved in the recruitment process of RUC: the Open House for prospective students of Bachelor’s and Master’s levels was previously held only in Danish as, according to the university, the event was visited only by people speaking the language and due to resource limitations. However, the institution changed its language approach in recent years. “We have found out that there are actually some international students attending our Open House and, therefore, last year and the year before, we worked with all our material in English...with the exception of the Danish study programmes that are only taught in Danish”, explained Victoria Vest.
It is also possible to reflect upon RUC’s approach from the perspective of Henry Mintzberg’s 5 P’s of Strategic Communication: strategy as plan, ploy, pattern, position and perspective. The Canadian professor defines strategy “as streams of decisions made over time” and understand it “as both intended, deliberate decisions and emergent, haphazard actions”, which will constitute the “realized strategy” (Gulbrandsen & Just, 2016). The author believes that the majority of the organizations possibly undergo strategy processes which combine both purposive decisions and emergent actions.
Generally, we could argue that RUC adopts strategic communication as position in Mintzberg’s 5 P’s: although the university does not have a strategy as such concerning the language use, it seems that RUC undergoes a process of adaptation owing to changes in the institution’s environment on account of the increase in the number of international students, as well as prospective students. Thus, the university responds to this new circumstances, for instance, translating materials and creating content in English, what could be considered as a strategy that emerges “as a result of the organization trying to meet challenges posed by its ‘outside’” (Gulbrandsen & Just, 2016).
35 Influences of External Factors
When asked about whether there were any educational legislation and regulations regarding programmes and students which the university had to comply with, the International Recruitment and Critical Edge Alliance Officer of the International team, Ditte Meincke, clarified that the institution is waiting for the government resolutions on the dimensioning of the programmes, and in relation to students it is uncertain. “We don’t know, but most probably it will put a limit on how many international students we can accept”. Yet, the dimensioning to be released by the government does not concern language policies, but the relevance of some programmes in terms of job market opportunities, which means that those measures would affect both Danish and international students.
Apparently, if confirmed, the government’s decision will considerably impact RUC’s internationalization strategy, weakening the university’s aim at employing it “as a driving force for quality development through clearer labelling of education programmes and qualifications, strengthening of intercultural competencies, and increased use of international advertising and application processes” (RUC, n.d.).
Perceptions about the Student Body Regarding interactions among Danish and international students, RUC is aware that it is an issue which has been discussed for a long time, and attributes the lack of interaction to factors such as language, culture and project work skills. The Associate Professor and International Coordinator in Communication, David Mathieu, argued: “I think it's now better somehow, but I don't think there have been any initiatives or policy or something to sort of make sure that the students mix well. I think sometimes the challenge is obviously the differences in academic culture, which can be in the way when students do project work.”
After David, Danish students are more accustomed to project work and might perceive working with foreigners as a risk, “because international students are not necessarily familiar with this aspect of education”. However, the Associate Professor recognized that this attitude does not apply to the totality of cases, mentioning the example of a module in the Bachelor’s level constituted by half Danish and half international students:
36 “That works really well and it has to do with the pedagogy that is being used there, where the students who work in workshops have a lot of opportunities to learn from each other… it's more of a problem when you start the semester with a lot of new students and you don't know anybody in the class, and then you start forming groups; there can be a tendency [of the Danish students] to be more conservative”.
During our participant observation, some international students from RUC reported difficulties with respect to the communication with Danish students in the class, who, according to them, speak Danish among each other, what restricts the participation of the foreigners in the discussion. In relation to this matter, the interviewees acknowledged the scarcity of actions on the part of the university. Reflecting upon this scenario, the Associate Professor argued that it possibly demonstrates a “lack of policy or clear framework on how to manage this [language in classes] and how to create interaction”. In this way, this behaviour tends to remain unchanged “until it's being taken seriously”.
Referring to communication actions which could be developed to stimulate the interactions between Danish and international students in class, Victoria Vest observed: “Maybe we are not good enough at remembering this target [Danish students studying in English-taught programmes]; maybe they are the ones that should be worked with and talked to in terms of campaigning, how to do the study programs and project work.”
Inside and outside of the classroom setting, those interactions seem to be influenced by a range of factors, going beyond the language difference. David Mathieu perceived, based on his experience, that both Danish and international students live in their ‘bubbles’. Furthermore, in his opinion, international students have more tendency to form an ‘international bubble’, if compared to the Danish ones: “Again, I think it has to do with the fact that they [Danish students] know each other beforehand and, when you come as an international student here, you tend to identify, relate and being put in contact with other international students… In that way, it doesn't create a lot of [possibilities for] interactions [with Danes].”
RUC vs Other Danish Universities As previously indicated, RUC also positions itself as an “international university”, according to its strategy and mission statement. However, as RUC students, we do not always sense an
37 international environment at the university campus and, according to the conclusions of our document analysis, most of the materials found on campus and online are presented in Danish only.
We confronted the university’s communications representatives with this reality and asked how they portray the institution - locally and internationally. Victoria Vest stated that RUC perceives itself as distinct from other universities on the basis of three components: the interdisciplinary aspect, the problem-oriented learning aspect and the research-based aspect. In this way, the interdisciplinary aspect lies in the belief that “in order to get a good academic education, in order to be able to make a difference in the world, in your job, do any job, you need to view things from different disciplines”, while CBS is a business school and focus on economics and society disciplines. The problem-oriented learning aspect is based on the idea that it is necessary to cooperate in order to work together - Aalborg University, another Danish university located in the northwest part of Denmark, also centers on a problem-based learning (PBL) approach, but Vest stresses that RUC differs because, on the latter, “you [students] are told to formulate the problem yourselves, you have to figure out the problem yourselves because that's part of the academic process”. The last aspect, the research-based component of study programmes and education, allow the students to be “close to researchers all throughout your [the students’] study programme… the projects you [students] deliver are actually works of research”.
This is in line with the university’s vision and overall positioning, which we have already presented. David Mathieu also raised the question about RUC’s critical thinking aspect, to which Vest promptly added to her list: “The ‘socially engaged’ aspect is very important [and] that goes through all three [elements] I mentioned. This is the ‘why’ to the ‘what’; in order to be socially engaged and committed to society you have to work in this interdisciplinary problem-oriented way. But also to be a very critical university.” When asked if this was also the image that RUC was passing abroad, Ditte Meincke responded positively, agreeing with Vest’s points.
38 CBS
Strategic Communication & Language Profile As previously mentioned, at a first glance, CBS seems to have a more international approach to communications by using more often English than Danish. Through our document analysis of CBS communications materials and platforms, we were able to confirm this tendency: the majority of the physical and virtual documents are in English, followed by materials available in both languages. The materials in which the language in dominance was Danish were related to Bachelor-level programmes, as well as magazines, flyers and postcards distributed in the school, many of them not issued by CBS but by external companies.
In terms of organizational strategy, CBS identifies itself as an international business university (CBS, 2016). In the document “CBS Strategy”, which is only available in English, the institution states its international goal of becoming a world-leading business university by maintaining a high level of internationalization. Overall, CBS’s aims are clearly stated as to be achieved both at home and abroad. However, we must be aware that this document does not refer specifically to the institution’s communications strategy, but to an overall strategy which the university can achieve through teaching, academic research and business cooperation.
When asked about CBS’s communication strategy and if there was a defined language policy within it, Marie Andersen, Communications Advisor at CBS, referred to the general ‘business strategy’ (mentioned supra), affirming that the university does not have a ‘written communications strategy’; when it comes to choosing which language to use when communicating with students, “the choice of language depends on the channel and on the nature of the communication [content]”; crucial information, such as notices about a possible lockout - a recently and widely discussed topic in Denmark, which, if verified, could have had consequences to both institutions and students -, would be both in Danish and in English. We asked why some information is in Danish only - more specifically, Bachelor programme brochures, the answer was that, at a Bachelor level, the majority of students attending those programmes are Danish, even though there are programmes taught in English: “If you take our marketing efforts made to attract bachelor students, of course if a program is offered in Danish then it doesn't really make any sense to promote it to a group of potential students that don't speak Danish because they wouldn't be able to complete the program.”
39 In that sense, the course descriptions of Danish-taught programmes will be delivered in Danish, while the course description of the programmes taught in English will be delivered in English.
Furthermore, we have concluded that CBS’s communication strategy is situated between Pattern and Position in Mintzberg’s 5 P’s of Strategic Communication (Gulbrandsen & Just, 2016): despite the fact that CBS does not have a communications nor language strategy, its communications department does reflect over which language to use in each occasion, according to the target group - Danish-taught programme students or English-taught programme students. This type of strategy is, on one hand, the result of the actions taken, and not what dictates them, creating - in CBS’s case - an unintended but consistent pattern of action, which translates into the use of English or Danish whenever suitable; on the other hand, the environment in which the institution is inserted - Danish society, characterized by a high level of English language proficiency, where English is used as a lingua franca in many organizations; the language requirements of highly international character of the Business, Management and Industry sectors, in which CBS specializes; along with the relatively large number (20%) of international students attending CBS’s programmes -, does reflect in the communicative position adopted by the university.
Influences of External Factors Concerning the Danish scenario in terms of educational legislation, regulations and language policies previously mentioned in this study, CBS has reported a strong political pressure and questioning about its high number of programmes taught in English and of admissions of international students who, according to some politicians, leave Denmark after graduating and hence don’t contribute with taxes. This position is “all part of the nationalism trend growing all over DK, but CBS is fighting that”, argued the Associate Professor Alex Klinge. After him, one cannot calculate the benefits of having an international student population solely on the bases of taxation: “For example, Danish students from CBS will be from day one in an international environment so, once they hit the labor market, they will be already attuned to the intercultural communication. So how do we calculate that?”.
40 Klinge has also recognized the difficulty of calculating the benefit of investing in non-Danish students, as well as of the benefit gained when foreigner students leave Denmark to work in the international labor market. Though, he raises an optimistic possibility of having those former students as ‘ambassadors’ for the country around the world, since they would know a lot about Denmark. Nonetheless, in order to avoid political problems, the university does not have the intention of expanding its international student population further.
Reflecting upon CBS’ perspective, it has become clear that the institution is not in accordance with restrictive governmental measures towards English-taught programmes and international students, as such measures would directly affect the university’s diversity in terms of research, teaching, culture and so forth, and hence its strategy and image of an international business school.
Perceptions about the Student Body Language seems to play a significant, yet not crucial, role in the academic life of CBS’ students, according to the perceptions of the interviewees. Indeed, they observe a tendency for the division of students into two different communities, a Danish and a non-Danish, in situations such as group formation and also in informal settings. However, CBS highlights that usually its international students join the university at the Master’s level, while many of the Danish students at this level come from Bachelor’s level (constituted mostly by Danes), what contributes to this propensity to teaming up with their peers as they know each other in advance.
The type of programme which students are enrolled in was another variable mentioned by CBS. Marie Andersen argued that some of them, for instance the International Business Programme and the International Business and Politics Programme, are composed of “a mixed bag of students” and, owing to the configuration of those courses - with various subprograms and agreements with universities in other countries -, some students travel to different locations as a group, “which forces them to mix” independent of the nationality: “I think it has to do with the composition of students who are on a given programme, and also in terms of group work, because then you are sometimes forced to go outside of your own background.”
41 Besides the language issue, the gender aspect was also cited as a factor influencing the way students mingle. After CBS’ perception, they usually cluster with students with the same gender, and this behaviour is verified when is necessary to photograph mixed groups of students (boys and girls) on campus for promotion purposes, what becomes a difficult task.
CBS vs Other Danish Universities CBS perceives itself as the most international university in Denmark and “the only survivor national business school”, the Associate Professor Alex Klinge highlighted. Whereas RUC is a broad university with a regional aspect. “It is not as broad as Aarhus University and University of Copenhagen, but I think that probably part of the political-strategic rationale behind RUC is position itself, to some extent, as the Zealand university, just like University of Southern Denmark, as KU is the national [university].”
When it comes to the recruitment of students, according to Marie Andersen, currently CBS does not demand an effort to attract them, different from other universities in the country. On the contrary, they exceed the required number of applicants, having to reject a large number of applications. In relation to marketing strategy, the Communications Advisor believes CBS is a benchmark to other Danish universities and does not see the necessity of changing its approach due to competition.
Ethnography and Participant Observation: interaction among students & Integration
RUC
Being RUC students, taking an English-taught Masters in Communication Studies, and considering that most of our classes are composed by both Danish and international students, we decided to apply Participant Observation during one of our semester classes. In addition, we interacted with three groups of students in three distinct spaces at RUC's campus: the library, the student lounge and the canteen.
42 ● Class
Since this was one of the last classes of the semester, most students already knew or had seen each other previously. We sat on the back of the cinema-style classroom; although the room has a large capacity, it was less than half-full. The teacher, presumably of Danish origin but with very good command of English, presented slides that included examples of online activity by public authorities. Out of 30 slides presented in class, we counted 16 slides fully or partially displayed in Danish, shown as the teacher translated them to the students. Most of the content had been produced by Danish public authorities, constituting screenshots of online pages, so we can assume that the teacher did not write the content in Danish her/himself, but did not feel the need to write its translation to English on the slides.
On the students’ side, during the class, during breaks and even when the class ended, we heard people chatting both in Danish and in English; a group of Nepalese students sitting not far from us was heard speaking Nepali (presumably, as we don’t speak the language), not to forget that we, ourselves, were likely speaking Portuguese between each other. It is also important to note that, at the end of the class, some students approached the teacher in private: in these student-teacher interactions, Danish students used Danish to communicate with the teacher, while international students used English.
When it came to group exercises, we clearly heard some groups of students discussing the topic in Danish, while others interacted in English; unfortunately, we couldn’t hear what language our Nepalese colleagues were using; we, having remained just the two of us in the group, were using Portuguese with leaps of English in our discussion.
In terms of class participation, all exchanges were registered in English. However, on a few occasions, some Danish students used Danish terms while expressing their opinions in the class setting: “I don’t remember how to say… I’ll say it in Danish”, we heard from a student, before switching to Danish and then quickly jumping back to English to conclude the thought.
● Library group
In the library, we talked with two students who were speaking English with each other. The reason why we approached them was because they were having lunch and didn’t seem to be
43 studying at that moment, differently from other groups who were immersed in work discussions or silently working on their computers, who we didn’t want to disturb. The two were international students, both taking an English-taught Master’s programme; according to them, most of their classes are mixed - half Danish students and half international in their composition. In order to differentiate them, we will call them “Student 1” and “Student 2” hereafter.
We wondered how they encountered RUC, as we only learnt about it while already residing in Denmark. Student 1 mentioned s/he had heard of it while living in the Faroe Islands, while Student 2 said that, back in her/his country of origin, a Danish exchange student had convinced her/him to come to Denmark and study at RUC. In terms of Danish language proficiency, both mentioned that they could understand Danish at some level, although Student 2 didn’t pay much attention to it.
We also wanted to know if they interacted with Danish students at RUC. After a moment of reflection, their answer was unanimous: coincidence or not, they only interact with Danish students who are not ‘fully Danish’ (for instance, mixed nationality students, or German students who can be regarded as Danish), or Danes who are “more international” and have lived abroad.
Half-way through our conversation, we approached a controversial topic, based on situations that we had experienced ourselves: are course materials always available in your study language, i.e., in English? They shared their experiences: “We were once given a paper about literary analysis in Swedish, with just a little summary in English, because the teacher just assumed that the Danish Students would understand”, referred Student 1. Student 2 added: “I used to have a class where the Danish teacher would just answer questions in Danish when students asked the question in Danish, and I asked why because I did not understand what they were saying.” Hearing this, Student 1 quickly recalled similar situations in class during her/his Bachelor programme at RUC, where, besides that, the programme guidelines and descriptions were in Danish, even though the classes were taught in English, something that s/he struggled with. However, Student 2 stressed that the fact that some materials are in Danish isn’t the most important, as s/he is more concerned with the content of the course, which is sometimes not as good as s/he would like. “There was a clear separation between
44 Danish and International people”, Student 1 mentioned, while talking about the classes in her/his Bachelor programme.
While discussing the language used in the university’s communication, we talked about the understanding issues it can carry. Student 1 said that the fact that some information is available in Danish only has made her/his studies more difficult. We told them that we often receive emails from the administration in Danish only, for instance, a recent email about the threat of a strike in the public sector. Student 1 agreed that s/he has also received some emails addressed to international students in Danish. “If I wasn't studying in an international programme, I wouldn't expect it to be in English, but it is”, they both concluded.
● Lounge
Located in the same building where we find RUC’s canteen is the “Student lounge”. Here, we met three students talking to each other in English. We immediately noticed, however, that two of them were Danish (hereafter, Student 1 and 2) ; the third one (hereafter, “exchange student”) was an exchange student. They are currently studying a Master’s programme, taught in English. They weren’t sure about the composition of their classes, mentioning that it very much depends on the course, but agreed that there may be fewer Danes than international students.
The exchange student doesn’t speak Danish and thinks it’s not really worth learning, given that s/he will only be in Denmark for one semester. We asked the two Danish students whether they feel comfortable speaking in English at university; Student 2 said that s/he now feels comfortable with it, but it took some time to get used to it as it was hard to switch from Danish; Student 1 was more assertive: “Not at all. I made an active choice to study in English and I don't think it would be right to speak Danish instead.” Then, both Student 2 and Student 1 affirmed that they chose an English-taught programme because they actually wanted to improve their English and meet other students besides Danes. “Language is part of the cultural environment of the university”, they stated.
Student 2 then went on to declare that s/he was once an exchange student abroad too: “I know the feeling of not being able to understand what other people speak around you.” Thus,
45 s/he tries not to speak English all the time. It was obvious that the two Danes interacted with international students, since they were chatting with the exchange student before we arrived; nonetheless, we wanted to know if, in general, they interact more with Danes or with international students at RUC. Student 1 said that “the frames of interaction are not really set” and that, for that reason, s/he doesn’t feel the need to interact with anyone else besides the people in the class; “In class, it depends who is sitting next to me”, the Danes agreed. S/he said that there is already a recognizable separation between Danish and international students in their international programme and s/he doesn’t want to contribute to that.
Another controversial topic followed: does it feel like RUC really is an international university? After some time for reflection, the exchange student started: at the Foundation Course, s/he was impressed and thought "Wow, this is really international" but, now, seeing the signs in the canteen and other information only available in Danish, s/he doesn’t think RUC is that international anymore. Is that a problem?, we questioned, as we wonder if international students feel excluded or may miss information that is in Danish only. The exchange student seems to have gotten used to it: if something is in Danish s/he will assume it’s not directed at her/him and doesn’t need to understand it. Student 1 thinks it’s too difficult to answer the question: the only thing s/he knew RUC for was the group work reputation. Then s/he goes on to recognize that s/he sees RUC as an international place, however “my friends who study in Danish probably don't really see it that way”, concluding that it very much depends on the context surrounding each student.
We ended our conversation talking about the feeling of belonging to RUC’s community. Student 1 doesn’t really feel part of it, but it’s more due to the way the courses are structured than to the language: “You don't get to actually be here and be part of the student environment.” In fact, we all concurred that not having a fixed class, where you have time to get to know your classmates, is part of the problem. The exchange student had something else to highlight: s/he doesn’t spend much time at university and feels that s/he misses a lot of the events happening there, events that are often promoted in Danish only; “My roommates know about parties and events at RUC because they are Danish and they spend more time at the university, but I never know about it.”, s/he completed.
46 ● Canteen
In the canteen, we talked with a group of four students who did not seem to be working on a project or similar, only chatting. In the group, three of the students were Danish (hereafter, Students 1, 2 and 3), studying their Bachelor in Danish-taught courses, and one was an international (Student 4), studying her/his Bachelor in English. At the beginning of the conversation, Student 4 told us that has been living in Denmark for about three years, understands and speaks Danish to some extent, having heard on RUC through an interview of a professor of the university on the (Danish) radio, which sparked his/her interest. Regarding the composition of their classes, Students 1, 2 and 3 agreed that there are mainly Danish students and a few Germans; Student 4 answered that 70% are Danes in her/his classes. When questioned whether they felt comfortable speaking in English, Student 1 declared to be pretty comfortable with it because was used to practice outside of class and have contact with international people, while Student 2 confessed not feeling the same about the language: “I still struggle to make my point in English, it doesn't come out as naturally as in Danish, but in class we don’t have to use it, so…”.
Talking about interactions, Student 3 declared that s/he only speaks with international students in situations when they approach him/her to ask, for instance, directions in the campus, and Student 1 mentioned that, when the interaction occurs, it is at a very superficial level. From Student 4’s point of view, the interactions with Danish students happen due to the fact that most of the students in his/her classes are Danes, however it is limited to the classroom: “In the end, I don’t really work with them directly or talk to them out of class. There are some exceptions, like you [Student 2] and a few others, but not really in my class… It’s sad that some Danes always stick together, so people like me always feel excluded; it gets in your head when you hear them speaking Danish and always clustering for three years of education (BA), in private conversations, or among them and even in class sometimes…”.
The perceptions of the group about the level of internationalization of the university varied according to the context. For Student 1, RUC is probably far less international compared to University of Copenhagen (KU), where s/he used to study before, pointing out that “it’s hard for RUC to be that international, because it's a very young university”; for Student 2, RUC is
47 seen as more international in terms of environment (people speaking other languages) but less international in terms of academic texts. “For example, I have friends from other countries at RUC, in this way we can consider it international”, reflected the international student (Student 4) and added: “RUC has far more potential to accept international students, I wouldn't study in a university that clearly reflects a political agenda; RUC is far more progressive than KU, which has no Bachelor’s programmes in English”.
Overall, the group agreed that their perceptions about this matter were deeply influenced by the subject they were studying. The university’s communications were also a topic discussed in the conversation with the group. In the administrative level, Student 4 said s/he had good experiences so far and does not feel excluded or miss any information; though Student 2 reported dissatisfaction with regards to the search for it: “it's very difficult to find some information, even though it’s in Danish. I don’t think it’s a language problem, but communication is really bad in general”.
Finally, we approached the integration subject about which Student 2 was frank in pointing out that s/he feels integrated into her/his own group: “but when I'm in a different group I feel like I’m in this bubble… I don’t attend most workshops or event that are sent out”. Additionally, Student 1 also recognized that most of the times, when students are divided into groups, the tendency is for it to become their ‘bubble’; Student 4 highlighted the fact that class attendance is not obligatory in some courses, an issue that aggravates the low students’ integration: “How do you integrate yourself when you're not physically present here? How do you get to know a person if you don’t see her/him… It affects a lot of things, because when students finally show up, that will determine who they will work with. But I think the class is a different problem. But outside, I do feel integrated, I have friends.”
CBS
At CBS, we have conducted Ethnography and Participant Observation on two different campuses in Frederiksberg (Solbjerg Plads and Dalgas Have) by attending a class of a Bachelor programme and talking to students. Our first impression, as well as our assumptions, when ‘exploring’ the institution’s main complex at Solbjerg Plads was that of an international environment with a wide diversity in terms of students.
48 ● Class In order to observe the class environment, we have chosen an English-taught class of the International Business and Politics programme, where the probability of contemplating Danish and international students’ interactions would be higher, since those classes’ profile are usually mixed. As the period of classes in the Master’s level had already ended, we attended one discipline in the Bachelor’s level. Thus, we have asked permission to the teacher to watch it and positioned ourselves at the back of the classroom, in the last row. From there, our aim was to observe the use of Danish and/or English in the following: teacher’s slides, students chatting, class participation, group exercises and student-teacher interactions in the breaks. It is worth mentioning that the teacher was of German nationality and seemed to speak Danish fluently. Furthermore, we were told that the class of approximately 50 students was composed mainly of Danes, around 70%.
The PowerPoint used by the teacher was 100% in English, and so was her oral presentation and the participation of students in the class, asking and answering questions. In the conversational aspect, we could observe a high level of interaction among students, mostly in English, which made it difficult to verify whether there were Danish students chatting in a group of international students. Whereas during the group exercises it was possible to listen to more (at least four) groups discussing the tasks in Danish. During the intervals, English was the language used between the students and the teacher, for example, to clarify doubts.
Along the second break, inside the classroom, we had the chance to approach one group of students sitting in front of us, which was formed by one Danish and two internationals, who we will call here, respectively, Student 1, Student 2 and Student 3. Firstly, we introduced ourselves and informed our status of RUC students conducting a comparative research project about the use of Danish and English languages at CBS and RUC. Thereafter, we engaged in a conversation concerning their experience and perceptions on language use and interactions; they were very open talking to us. We were informed that, in general, the teachers orientate the students to speak English in class as a means of integrating and including everybody in the discussions. Additionally, the Student 1 described as “very natural and fun to practice English all the time” and recognized the importance of learning in English; the student also mentioned that most of her/his friends at the university are international, what was not the case when at the beginning of her/his studies at CBS. In turn, both Students 2 and 3 have agreed that
49 there is a separation of the class into two groups (Danish and internationals) as “most Danes gather and do group exercises together”.
● Entrance hall
The second group we have talked to was located in the entrance hall of the university and was composed by two Danish Masters’ students (Student 1 and Student 2), who attend Danish-taught courses in the majority of the programme, having only two disciplines in English. The same procedure mentioned above was adopted when we approached the group, which was somewhat resistant restricting the duration of the conversation. Despite this, we started the talk about the subject and were told that their classes were constituted mostly by Danes, with the exceptions of a few Norwegian and Swedish students. In relation to the use of literature in English, the Student 1 revealed us their point of view: "We absolutely hate when something is in English, because we have to think twice, but it is also beneficial because we get to expand our vocabulary and it is useful for our future”.
When speaking of interactions with international students, both students proved to be quite closed to interrelations and integration in general. “We don't interact with many people at all, I think just with each other. I don’t need to expand my network”, stated Student 1, with whom the Student 2 agreed.
As already mentioned, besides the two groups, we have endeavoured to speak with more students at CBS’s campus, what has become a challenging task as most of them have shown a repelling attitude when approached, even though we have tried to reach students who did not seem to be occupied with project work or essays. Nevertheless, the data collected on both CBS’s campuses by the employment of the method was rather significant to our analysis to the extent that it has provided us an overview of the language choice in terms of communications to students, as well of their interactions in the academic settings.
50 Surveys
RUC
Out of the 101 respondents who participated in our survey, 45 indicated that they were from RUC. Of those, 64% marked themselves as Master students, while 31% (14) said that they were taking a Bachelor programme; 2 students chose the option “Other”: one mentioned to be in prerequisite studies, while the other said to had finished his/her Bachelor programme already, meaning that s/he was currently not a RUC student anymore.
The majority (60%) of the RUC respondents marked themselves as “International student[s]”, 35.5% indicated they were “Danish student[s]”, and two students (4%) chose “Other”: one student said “I am German but belong officially to the Danish minority in Germany, as I went to a Danish school”, and other student wrote “Not Danish, but I’ve been in Denmark for 7 years - so, not international either”. Since those two students did could not identify their status, which is normally defined in university applications, we will not take their answers into account when comparing Danish and international students. Ideally, we would have wanted to have an equal percentage of Danish and international students responding our survey, so we could better compare their opinions, needs and behaviour. However, we weren’t surprised by this result, as our survey posts certainly reached more visibility in Facebook groups which we were part of (where the majority are international students), even though we also shared the survey in groups and pages dominated by Danish students (or which used Danish as the main language of communication). Furthermore, when we look at the answers to the question “In which language are your university classes taught?”, we can conclude that the majority of our RUC respondents (84%) studies in English-taught programmes, and that only around 5% study in Danish; 5 respondents (around 12%) chose “It depends on the course”, an option that we deliberately added thinking about RUC students, who, as we know, can take elective courses taught in a language different from their main language of study.
When asked how they would define their class in terms of students, 40% of the RUC respondents chose “Mostly international students”, 29% chose “Mostly Danish students” and 31% said that “It depends on the course”. These numbers were, in fact, surprising to us, as only around 6% of all the students, just over 1,000, are international at RUC, which means that either they are concentrated in certain programmes (which our respondents attend) or
51 the students really have a feeling that there are more internationals than Danes in the classroom. Then, the next question in our survey asked students whether they use more English or Danish at university, to which the majority, 86%, responded ‘English’. Unsurprisingly, most of those who identified as ‘International students’ responded ‘English’; on the Danish students’ side, more than half, 71%, said they use English the most, compared to 29% who answered ‘Danish’.
The following questions focused on the student’s perceptions and experience about language use at RUC, in different aspects of student life. Firstly, we asked students to indicate which language - English, Danish or both equally - is used the most in seven categories. Based on the student’s answers, English is the most used language - around 70% of times - in only the first category (Interaction in class) which is not surprising considering most of the survey respondents study in English and said that there are more international than Danish students in the class; in the following four categories (People chatting on campus/Events/Murals, posters and flyers/Directions, signs and security info), Danish is the language regarded as to be in prevalence; in the last two categories (Administration emails/Course and Exam information), over 60% of the students indicated that both languages were used equally at RUC; it is worth mentioning that 33% and 26% of the international students indicated that they received information in Danish regarding those last two categories, respectively. We also questioned students whether they think that the language choice of their university reflects its student community, to which almost 49% responded ‘Yes’, 28% said ‘No’ and 23% ‘I don’t know’. Therefore, we can attempt to infer that most students think that Danish, the most prominent language used at RUC, is coherent with its Danish-majority student population.
Using similar categories, we also questioned students if they had experienced difficulties understanding academic content due to the language (Danish/English) used in them. Generally, the option “always understand” was the most chosen in all categories. In terms of Class materials, most students (72%) responded that they “always understand”, and no student said “rarely” or “never understand”; similar results were obtained for the category “Course and exam information”. The only categories where students manifested with more significance to “rarely understand” or “never understand” was in terms of Events (7% and 2%, respectively), Murals, posters and flyers (16% and 5%) and Directions, signs and security info (11% and 2%).
52 Taking into account our document analysis, most materials found at the RUC’s campus - including posters, canteen information and library signs - are in Danish. We looked at the answers from international students only: here, the results were slightly different. We especially highlight the fact that the majority of our international respondents marked that they only “sometimes understand” Events communications, that they “sometimes understand” or “rarely understand” (equal score) the language in Murals, posters and flyers and only “usually understand” Directions, signs and security info; less than half of the international students said that they “always understand” the content of Administration emails. This means that some of the students who answered our survey might have experienced situations, such as the ones we testified and heard from students in our participant observation, where not all materials presented or given away in or about class were in their language of study. In fact, it is worth mentioning that one of the survey respondents commented that “the most frustrating thing was an exam info only handed out in Danish in a class taught in English. Even when I commented on it at midterm already, it was not translated.”
In relation to events, another student pointed out at the end of the survey that “many events are either only held in Danish or have less time dedicated to the English correspondent, which makes it unfair”, adding that, although s/he understands Danish, at certain events, “where people spend hours speaking, it can be a challenge [to understand] so it would be great to have everything in English”. A comment left by another student also highlighted the poor quality of the “English version” of the events, when compared to the ones held in Danish.
We also wanted to know the student’s language preference at university. 88% said that, if they had to choose one language for all university communications, they would prefer English. Predictably, of the 9% who chose Danish, the majority were Danes and only one student was international. One student chose the third option “Other”, writing that “I would not want to choose one. I think it is important to include the international students but I also think it would be a shame for the Danish language if RUC would abandon Danish completely.”
Then we entered the field of student interactions and integration in the academic community. Asked to indicate how much they interact with Danish students, International students, Professors and Administrative staff, we found out that most (34%) international respondents
53 interact only “slightly” with Danish students, while 65% of those said that they interact “a great deal” with other fellow international students. The responses from the Danish students didn’t coincide, as 46% of the respondents actually said that they interact “a great deal” with international students, even more than with Danish students (38%). The results about interaction with Professors and Administrative Staff were mixed, but mostly on the negative side (of low interaction). We wanted to know if language had anything to do with their level of interaction with other people at school. Most international students (34%) responded “moderately”, followed by 23% who said it affects ‘a great deal’ their interaction with Danish students; as for Danish students themselves, a crushing majority (85%) said that language doesn’t interfere with their interaction with international students ‘at all’. From either side, not many students seem to think that language impacts their interaction with Professors and Administrative Staff.
Next, we asked students to what extent they think RUC contributes towards their integration within the student environment. The opinions were divided: 29% of respondents said “slightly”, 22% answered “moderately” and another 22% “considerably”. Speaking of that, one student left a comment on the open question available at the end of our survey to remark that RUC “is doing a great job with integrating people and make people interact on the bachelor's”, however “they aren't doing anything on the masters”. Considering that there are more English-taught programmes at a Master’s level than at a Bachelor’s, which means that, presumably, the majority of international students at RUC are found in Master’s programmes, we were surprised by this declaration.
We went on to assess whether our respondents feel part of the student community at RUC or not. Most students (35%) said “sometimes” and the remaining opinions were divided as well. Analysing the answers from international students only, the trend was even more accentuated: 48% of the foreign students said they “sometimes” feel part of the community, 12% “never” feel integrated and only 4% “always” feel integrated. Although the main focus of the present is in language and how it influences levels of interaction and integration within the student community, we must recognize that there are other factors that can have an impact on it, such as the course structure or the amount of time that students spend at university. For instance, while conducting participant observation at RUC, a student stressed that the interdisciplinary character of RUC’s programmes, in which students can combine
54 different courses from diverse subject ranges, makes it less likely to have a fixed class, where you can actually develop a long-term engagement with colleagues. Another aspect could also be the fact that Master’s students - the majority of our respondents - normally have a lower class workload than Bachelor students, which could mean that they have fewer opportunities to interact with other students. At the end of the survey, one student also highlighted that “the main problem is the exact same courses are offered both in English and Danish, which ends up segregating Danish students from internationals” adding that “Very few Danish students choose to study in English in my course. It makes it hard to create a network of Danish classmates and puts barriers to integration”. A different student also left a comment highlighting the exact same points.
Recognizing all these factors, we still wished to find out what impact does the language used at the university have on the student’s engagement in university life. We asked students to reflect. “Negative” and “Neutral” received the highest and equal number of responses: 39% the students think that Danish - the main language used at RUC - does prevent them from participating in university activities and another 39% thinks it doesn’t have any impact, neither negative nor positive. When we compare the answers of Danish and international students, it is clear that the opinions differ: while most Danes say it has a “positive” impact, most internationals indicate that it has a “negative” impact (see Figure 5).
Figure 5 - Distinct opinions between Danish (graph above) and international students (graph below) when asked the question “What impact does it [the main language used at RUC] have in your level of engagement in university activities?”
55
The last two questions on the survey concerned the international profile of the university, more precisely about how students perceived it and if they would prefer it to be different. On the first question - based on your perception, how international is your university? - most RUC respondents answered “considerably”. The responses averaged similarly between Danish and international students, which means that, balancing the number of international students, the use of English and other aspects that contribute to a university’s international profile - such as the number of international agreements and international research publications -, RUC may feel like an international university from within. However, and as mentioned during our participant observation analysis, some activities such as the Foundation course (targeting newly-arrived international students) have the potential to give RUC a more international outlook, while details such as food menus and other information at the canteen - mostly available in Danish only - can very much diminish it.
After all, are students satisfied with the level of internationalization of their university or not? According to the responses to the last close-ended question of the survey, nearly 80% of the students said they would prefer if it was “more international”, around 18% expressed “it’s ok the way it is” and only 3% said “less international”. A student noted that RUC “claims to be international, and yet most of the communication from RUC is in Danish. That is absurd”, concluding that s/he knows students who struggle with both languages, however the university “doesn't seem geared to support them, either way”.
Finally, we left an open field at the end of our survey and encouraged students to “add any comments about your university and its language choice”. An exciting total of 12 comments
56 was left in total - some of which have already been referred to above -, which demonstrated that students did feel engaged in the topic of our survey and wanted to express their opinions about it. Among those comments, we highlight some of them: two students manifested their wish for more courses and programmes offered in English at RUC; a Master’s student, who wrote a comment in Danish, recalled that during her/his Bachelor programme there was a “massive difference” between Danes and international students, among which the interactions were nearly non-existent; another student expressed that s/he wished to learn more about student activism and the student union and be more engaged in internal and external issues, which is however “very exclusive as it is in Danish”. As to feeling part of the community, the same student mentioned that “socially, it was difficult to feel included at times without speaking Danish - one is limited in who they speak to because it feels intimidating joining Danish circles when you don't speak the language” adding that probably “the most frustrating thing about language at RUC is that the choice of courses offered in English is extremely limited”, something that not all students are aware of before enrolling in the university.
Definitely, the main lesson to learn from this survey is that interactions between Danish and international students are considered weak or low, and many students blame it on the fact that some programmes run simultaneously in English and in Danish. A student mentioned ‘segregation’ between Danes and international students, another agreed it is “really bad that the same courses are sometimes offered both in English and Danish” which “limits our interaction with Danish students”, as most of them will take the courses in Danish. One could argue that, if some courses were offered in English only, students would be more prone to interact if they shared a classroom. Another comment proposed ways to engage and bring students together, by having more information and events available in English and trying to change the habits of Danish students, remarking that “Danish students should be better at communicating with internationals”.
Poorly managed information from the administration, staff and professors also seems to be an issue referred by several students, which can affect the way information is understood by its target, the students. As already discussed during our participant observation, the perception among some students is that the university has “no system” or “when it did, it was in Danish” and so “I had to translate everything”.
57 CBS
From 101 respondents, 56 students from CBS have answered the web survey. Respectively, 71% and 27% study at Bachelor’s and Master’s levels at CBS. Most of the respondents of the university (78%) were, surprisingly, Danish students, while 21% indicated the status of international students.
In terms of diversity of students in the classes at CBS, the majority (80%) defined it as composed mostly by Danish students, 12% answered “Mostly international students” and 7% chose the option “It depends on the course”. Although, according to Danmark Statistik, CBS has the highest population of international students among Danish universities (3,248 out of 14,758 students), these numbers can be considered low if compared to other European countries, as previously mentioned. This corroborates with the answers collected in the survey about the diversity topic and contradicts a general perception ‘from outside’ about CBS’s profile as constituted by a highly international student body. The study programmes which the respondents are enrolled in could also have influenced the outcome in this subject, especially if the survey was answered by a large number of students attending a specific course.
In the following question, we asked the respondents to indicate which language they used the most in the university. The majority of CBS’s Danish students (88%) have answered “Danish”, despite the fact that 74% of the Danish students have indicated that they attend classes taught both in Danish and English, marking the option “It depends on the course”. As most of the Danish respondents study in the Bachelor’s level (84%), it could help to explain the little use of English, for example, for reasons of proficiency. As expected, most of the international students indicated English as the language they use most, as well as the language which their classes are taught; only one international student has marked “It depends on the course”. With this, we could verify that the fact that most of the respondents attend classes taught in Danish and in English, it does not mean a high number of international students in the latter.
In order to apprehend the students’ perceptions about the use of the language in the university, we have utilized seven categories. In the first, “Interaction in class”, most of CBS’s students (61%) indicated Danish as the main language used, as well as in the category “People
58 chatting on campus” (59%). Concerning “Events”, the perceptions differed significantly: 33% chose Danish, 35% marked English and 33%, “Both equally”. In the next category, “Murals, posters and flyers”, English was chosen as the predominant language by more than a half of the students, followed by the option “Both equally”. In the last categories - “Directions, signs and security information”, “Administration emails” and “Course and exam information” - the majority of the students indicated that Danish and English are equally used. Furthermore, based in the answers of the totality of international students, who did not mark Danish in these last two categories, we could infer that CBS has a very segmented communication towards students, choosing the language and transmitting the information according to the students’ status (Danish or international).
When asked whether the language used by the university reflected its student community, the answer was “Yes” for 80% of the students, “I don’t know” for 11% and “No” for 9%. Even though the majority of CBS’s student body is Danish and, according to the survey, this is the language spoken the most, the results suggest that the university is perceived as international, likely owing to the range of courses offered in English, language which also prevails in the communication materials on campus.
The understanding of CBS’s communications by the students in terms of language (English or Danish) was also a topic of the survey. Once again, we have chosen some categories, similar to the ones above. They were “Class materials”; “Events”; “Murals, posters and flyers”; “Directions, signs and security information”; “Administration emails”; and “Course and exam information”. The majority of CBS’s respondents (around 78%) informed that they “Always understand” what is being communicated to them in those materials, 29% marked that “Usually understand” it. 17% of the students answered the same for “Events”, “Directions, signs and security information” and “Course and exam information”; what also applied for around 14% of the respondents in relation to “Murals, posters and flyers” and “Administration emails”. Only international students have marked the option “Sometimes understand” for the categories “Murals, posters and flyers” (27%) and “Events” (18%), as well as for “Directions, signs and security information” (9%), “Administration emails” (9%) and “Course and exam information” (9%). Neither Danish nor international students have marked “Rarely understand” and “Never understand” in any of the categories. Thus, we could imply that having its materials mostly in English, or both in English and Danish, could be the
59 explanation for the high level of comprehension of what the university communicates to the student community.
In the question “If you had to choose one language for all your university communications, which one would you prefer?”, predictably, 100% of the international students answered English, while the Danish students were divided - 50% would prefer their native language and 50% would prefer English. The option “Other” was chosen by one student who wrote: “I don’t care really. I’m Danish, so Danish is obviously easier for me to understand but my entire course is in English, so everything I do here is in English anyway so…”.
Concerning interactions with the academic community, we have asked the students to use a scale from 1 to 5 (with 1 being ‘not at all’ and 5 being ‘a great deal’) to show us the frequency of their contact with “Danish students”, “International students”, “Professors” and “Administrative staff”. From the part of the Danes, in relation to international students, the answer of the majority (31%) was “Moderately”, followed by “Slightly” and “Not at all” (both 23%); and regarding the students with the same nationality, unsurprisingly, it was “A great deal” (80%). The result is coherent with the international students’ answers, which show that they interact “Moderately” (40%) and “Slightly” (40%) with Danes; and “A great deal” (70%) with other international students. In relation to Professors and administrative staff, the answers of CBS’s students were concentrated in the middle to the lower numbers of the scale, indicating a moderate to low interaction. Nonetheless, it is necessary to take into account the fact that some courses, such as Law, are taught mainly in Danish and hence the classes are composed mostly by Danes, what reduces the chance of interaction with international students.
Language barriers was the next topic addressed to the students. Using the same scale, our aim was to grasp how much this issue affected their level of interaction. 69% and 18% of the Danish students marked, respectively, “Not at all” and “Slightly” referring to the impact of language barriers in the interactions with international students, who in turn indicated that this is also an issue when it comes to communication with Danish students: 80% of the international students have concentrated their answers among the options “Moderately”, “Considerably” and “A great deal”. Yet, for the majority of Danish and international students,
60 this matter does not seem to interfere in the interactions with Professors and Administrative staff.
In the next subject, regarding the contribution of the university for the integration of students in the academic environment, most of the students considered that CBS plays an important role. 40% answered that the institution contributes “Considerably”, 33% marked “Moderately” and 19%, “A great deal”. In average, Danish students found that the institution contributes “Considerably” to students’ interactions, while international students considered it moderate. With regards to the same subject, a student wrote a comment at the end of the survey: “The university tries really hard. Danish students do not care at all to involve international students, even if they claim they do. Especially through student organizations.” Thus, the international student’s comment, we could argue, reflects the results showed so far, i.e., the presence of a significant effort to integrate the students from the part of the university, but a low level of communication between the two groups (Danish and internationals).
Remaining in the integration topic, we asked whether the respondents felt they were part of the student community. The majority of the students (38%) answered “Usually”, followed by “Sometimes” (29%) and “Always” (20%). Analyzing the answers separately, 40% of the international students marked “Usually”, the same percentage selected “Sometimes” and 20% answered that they “Rarely” felt integrated; while most of the Danish students answered “Usually” (39%), followed by “Always” (25%) and “Sometimes” (25%).
Afterwards, we wanted to stimulate the students to reflect on the impact that the main language used at the university exerted in their level of engagement in academic activities; the options given were: “Very Positive”, “Positive”, “Neutral”, “Negative” and “Very negative”. Most of CBS’s respondents (45%) selected the option “Neutral”, followed by “Positive” (33%) and “Very positive” (20%). It is worth highlighting that the option ‘Very positive’ received the second higher number of responses from international students (30%). Overall, the results indicate a good level of satisfaction of Danish and international students with the language used most by the university, which likely facilitates the participation of the student body as a whole in academic activities through the adoption of English.
61 About the final topic (international profile), in which our goal was to cognize the perceptions of the students about the international profile of the university, as well as their preference towards it, we have asked their opinion, firstly, about how international the institution was. Most of CBS’s respondents answered “A great deal” (51%) and “Considerably” (37%); comparing the answers of Danish and international students, the average of the responses was concentrated in the option “Considerably”. Although the majority of respondents were Danish students and they represent also 78% of CBS’s student body, we can observe that students perceive a high degree of internationalization in the institution, what could be explained, presumably, not only by the presence of international students on campus, but also by the vast use of English in the classes and materials, as well as its international agreements and partnerships with universities around the world (allowing students’ mobility), international faculty and research.
Secondly, in the last close-ended question, we asked whether the students preferred their university was “More international”, “Less international” or “None. It’s ok the way it is”. Nearly 80% of CBS’s students marked the last option “None. It is ok the way it is” and around 19% wished it was more international. Most Danish and international students answered that they are satisfied with the current level of internationalization of CBS, however, a relatively high number of internationals (40%) preferred it to be more international.
Lastly, in the open field left for comments of the participants of the survey concerning their university and its language choice, the contribution of CBS’s students was quite low. Analyzing the few comments left, with the exception of two respondents, we could sense that, unfortunately, the students were not engaged in giving constructive opinions and hence contribute to the research. One of the relevant comments was already mentioned above, while the other was a relevant observation by a student who thought we should also have asked our respondents what is their programme or area of study, as this can influence the amount of English used at the university. This is a variable that we have already discussed in our literature review and which we believe should be approached in our analysis. The decision to leave this question out was deliberate, for a few reasons: we know what courses are offered at each university, and are aware that CBS has a more business-oriented offer when compared to RUC’s wide range of study areas; we can differentiate students who use more or less English due to their language of study through the question “In what language is your
62 programme taught?”; other questions, such as the one relating to class composition, can also give an indication of the environment (more or less international) in which the students are inserted. This said, we do recognize that certain study areas such as Law, Medicine and or Nursing, which require the acquisition of skills geared towards the local market and prepare students to work closely with local communities, ultimately coerce students to study in their native or local language.
63 Main Results: Comparative Analysis
CBS RUC
Language No defined strategy in relation to language use: Actions are taken in response to the strategy Strategy as Pattern and Position circumstances of its (internal and external) environment: Strategy as Position
Decision Communications department handles Communications department handles all student -making communication with International, Danish and communications; International Prospect students recruitment/communication handled by a separate department
Administrative Language segmentation in communications: Non-segmented communication: information is information Danish students receive information in Danish; sometimes sent out in Danish and sometimes in and study International students receive information in English to the whole student body; information English; General important information Students complain about lack of structure in provided in both Danish and English communications and functioning of administration
Events and Mostly held/available in English or in both Majority held/available in Danish only; when other Danish and English events are held in both languages (separately), information on the English version has reduced time and campus content
Online Mostly available in English, except information Mostly available in Danish, except in cases documents concerning Danish-taught Bachelor students where it concerns international students or and social (available in Danish) general university presentation (ex. Strategy and media profile)
Use of English - Only English is used in-class for English-taught - Danish students sometimes mix Danish with at university programmes, except for breaks English language in their class interactions - In group work in class, most groups work in - Clear division between students discussing in English and some Danes speak in Danish English and others discussing in Danish in class - International students are satisfied with the group exercises language used at university, recognizing it - In English-taught programmes, class materials positively affects their school engagement are sometimes made available in Danish only - Danish students divide their preference - programmes simultaneously offered in English between Danish and English language and Danish enhances “segregation” between - distinct subject offer in Danish and English Danes and Internationals - students wish their university was more international
Interactions Perceptions of Communications department Perceptions of Communications department and between and Professor interviewed: Professor interviewed: Danish and - Division between Danish and international - Danish students are used to group work and international communities is observed may see working with internationals as a risk
64 students - Danish students who come from Bachelor - Danish students have established long-term programmes to Master’s have already a set relationships, while international students are group of peers and less openness to new more prone to mingle with each other upon the interactions programme start - In certain international programmes, group - tendency to create an “international bubble” activities force students to interact and mix Students’ perceptions: Students’ perceptions: - international students only interact with more - separation of the classes into 2 groups “international” Danes (Danish and international) - clear separation seen between Danish and - Danish students admitting not to need to International students’ groups in and out of class expand network or interact with more people - constant class-switching reduces possibility for - Moderate level of interaction between Danes long-term interaction with class colleagues and international students - Danish students claim to have a high level of - International students recognize that interaction with internationals, although the language barriers affect interaction with Danes latter consider it to be low - internationals see language as a barrier to interaction with Danes
Student Students’ perceptions: Students’ perceptions: integration in - Teachers orientate students towards an - Students recognize that they don’t engage the academic English-only environment as means of student much in academic life due to the programme environment integration structure and workload - Students recognize effort by the university to - Language in which activities are promoted promote integration negatively affects participation of international - Danish students feel more integrated into students, and positively affects engagement of academic life than international students Danish students
65 Conclusion
Combining different research methods allowed us to collect different perspectives from within the academic community, both deliberate and spontaneous. Through the opinions of professors and students, the observation of activities on campus and the insights provided by the communications departments, we are now able to reflect about the three research question proposed at the beginning of this study.
Firstly, we can affirm that language does not hold a special place within CBS’s and RUC’s communications strategy. In fact, both institutions admitted that they do not have a written strategy that sets which language to use in the communications channels and situations in campus - those decisions are made by different people depending on the circumstances and target group.
Secondly, however, CBS seems to have a deliberate intention to communicate in primarily in English or in both English and Danish simultaneously, in order to promote an international reputation nationally and abroad, thus, attracting talented foreign students but also more international faculty and overseas cooperation agreements. RUC, in its turn, communicates mainly in Danish as a response to the environment in which it is inserted, where the majority of the Danish students are the priority, and only then international students are regarded; we also found out that there is an intention to put in place a new internationalization strategy at RUC, aware of the fact that its international student population is growing. Therefore, we can conclude that CBS’s language choice is a cause of its student diversity, while RUC’s use of Danish, added to its will to adopt English in its communications, is both a consequence and a cause of its student population.
Thirdly, we can also conclude that language does constitute a barrier when it comes to interacting with students who natively speak a different language at university: international students are part of an ‘international bubble’, while Danes conveniently prefer to speak Danish, as they are in their country. However, we came across other aspects, mainly cultural ones, which can impact the interaction between Danish and international students, as well as the student’s feeling of belonging in the university environment. Denmark, as assessed in Hofstede (1986) 4-D cultural study, is characterized for an individualistic society, in which small talk is not a common practice, as Danes do not feel the need to create relationships with
66 those who surround them - at work and school - and keep their circle more or less closed to newcomers. In fact, we note that Denmark has been named one of the hardest countries for making local friends (InterNations, 2017), in which expats described Danes as “distant”. We can also observe this behaviour among students, as some Danes expressed that they did not need to expand their school connections. Furthermore, aspects such as the flexibility of the programmes’ structure, the availability of the same study subjects in both Danish and English - particularly notorious at RUC -, and the local-oriented profile of certain study subjects minimize the possibilities for Danish and international students to meet and interact in the academic setting.
The fact that Danes have a high-level command of the English language could facilitate their engagement with other non-Danish speakers. On the other hand, it can also be a justification for the lack of interest in blending with foreigners: if my English is already good, I don’t really need to practice it. This attitude could also be related to those circumstances in which lecturers and the school administration provide international students with materials and presentations fully or partially in Danish: high acceptance of a lack of structure and unpredictability are also features of Denmark’s society (Hofstede, 1986). Therefore, presenting slides with Danish-language content in English-taught classes may not be considered a problem for some Danish faculty, as lecturers are able to improvise and may expect the same level of uncertainty acceptance by the students.
Overall, we encountered several challenges to language adoption and student integration and interaction, which we believe could be worked on in the future, not only by the two universities assessed in this study but also by other higher education institutions in Denmark.
Finding a language policy that suits both its international and local audiences, where English and Danish can coexist in the same international environment could lessen the gap between the two ‘bubbles’ of the student community. For instance, it could be achieved through the complementary language approach suggested by Preisler (2009). This could also help to address the Government’s preoccupations with the students’ permanence in Denmark after completing their studies, as networking with locals and foreigners is an essential part of a job search in Denmark. Mainly at RUC, where Danish language use is more prominent, but also at CBS, where there is still a clear separation between Danes and internationals, creating conditions for foreigners to engage in the academic activities and for all students to get to
67 meet each other is necessary. For instance, offering more high-quality, attractive events, academic activities and clubs in English, while providing side information in Danish, could bring Danes and international students together in the same space, speaking the same language. Also, when possible, avoid having the same programmes or courses available in Danish and English simultaneously, creating conditions for the two groups to attend the same classes and decrease separation.
68 Bibliography
Bühmann, D., & Trudell, B. (2008). Mother Tongue Matters: Local Language as a Key to Effective Learning. UNESCO. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Bolton, K., & Kuteeva, M. (2012). English as an academic language at a Swedish university: parallel language use and the ‘threat’ of English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(5), 429-447.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods (5th ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
Carroll-Boegh, A. (2005). Internationalisation and Teaching through English: A Danish Perspective. Educate~:The Journal of Doctoral Research in Education, 5(2).
CBS. (2016). CBS Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.cbs.dk/files/cbs.dk/call_to_action/cbs_strategy_2017.pdf
CBS Communications. (2015). About CBS: CBS Figures. Retrieved 05 12, 2018, from cbs.dk: https://www.cbs.dk/en/about-cbs/profile/cbs-facts
CBS Communications. (2017). Facts & Figures 2017. Retrieved 05 19, 2018, from https://www.cbs.dk/files/cbs.dk/call_to_action/factsfigures_2017_0.pdf
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language (Second ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Danmarks Statistik. (n.d.). EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AT UNIVERSITIES BY STATUS, INSTITUTION, EDUCATION, ANCESTRY, SEX AND AGE. Retrieved 05 10, 2018, from Danmarks Statistik: https://www.statbank.dk/INST20
Dansk Sprognævn. (2003). Dansk Sprognævns forslag til retningslinjer for en dansk sprogpolitik. Retrieved 05 19, 2018, from Dansk Sprognævn: https://dsn.dk/nyt/nyt- fra-sprognaevnet/numre/argang-2000-2004/juni-2003-pdf
Education First. (2017). EF EPI - English Proficiency Index 2017. Retrieved 03 20, 2018, from EF: https://www.ef-danmark.dk/epi/
Ethnologue. (n.d.). Summary by world area. Retrieved 05 2018, 10, from Ethnologue: https://www.ethnologue.com/statistics
Follow-up Comittee. (1998). UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS: Barcelona Declaration. Institut d'Edicions de la Diputaci—ó de Barcelona.
Gulbrandsen, I. T., & Just, S. N. (2016). Strategizing Communication - Theory and Practice (1 ed.). Copenhagen: Samfundsliteratur.
69 Haberland, H., Lønsmann, D., & Preisler, B. (2013). Language Alternation, Language Choice and Language Encounter in International Tertiary Education. Multilingual Education, 5. Retrieved from https://link-springer- com.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-94-007-6476-7.pdf
Hamel, R. (2007). The dominance of English in the international scientific periodical literature and the future of language use in science. AILA Review, 20(1), 53-71.
Hofstede Insights. (n.d.). Country Comparison. Retrieved 05 22, 2018, from Hofstede Insights: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/denmark/
Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(3), 301-320.
Hudson, L. A., & Ozanne, J. L. (1988). Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 508-521.
InterNations. (2017). Expat Insider 2017. Retrieved 05 28, 2018, from InterNations: https://www.internations.org/expat-insider/
Kulturministeriet. (2003). Sprog på spil – ET UDSPIL TIL EN DANSK SPROGPOLITIK. Retrieved 15 05, 2018, from https://kum.dk/uploads/tx_templavoila/Sprog%20paa%20spil.pdf
Maiworm, F., & Wächter, B. (. (2014). English-Taught Programmes in European Higher Education: The State of Play in 2014. ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education.
Maiworm, F., & Wächter, B. (2002). English-Language-Taught Degree Programmes in European Higher Education – Trends and Success Factors. ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education.
Ministry of Higher Education and Science. (2015). Joint effort to attract the best international students - Code of Conduct. Retrieved 05 23, 2018, from Ministry of Higher Education and Science: https://ufm.dk/en/newsroom/press- releases/2015/joint-effort-to-attract-the-best-international-students
Moules, N. J., McCaffrey, G., Field, J. C., & Laing, C. M. (2015). Conducting Hermeneutic Research: From Philosophy to Practice. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Preisler, B. (2009). Complementary Languages: The national language and English as working languages in European universities. Angles on the English-Speaking World, 9, 10-28.
Ritzau/The Local. (2017, 11 07). Denmark cuts students on English-language programmes. Retrieved 03 21, 2018, from The Local: https://www.thelocal.dk/20171107/denmark-cuts-students-on-english-language- programmes
70 Roskilde University. (2017). Strategy New RUC.
RUC. (n.d.). About Roskilde University. Retrieved 05 10, 2018, from ruc.dk: https://ruc.dk/en/about-roskilde-university
Simons, G. F., & Fennig , C. D. (2018). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. (Twenty-first). Dallas, Texas. Retrieved from Ethnologue: Languages of the World: https://www.ethnologue.com/statistics/size
Stromquist, N. P. (2002). The University as the Spearhead of Globalization. In Education in a Globalized World: The connectivity of economic power, technology, and knowledge (Vol. 2002, pp. 103-132). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Retrieved from http://lst-iiep.iiep-unesco.org/cgi- bin/wwwi32.exe/[in=epidoc1.in]/?t2000=020107/(100).
The Bologna Declaration. (1999). Retrieved 05 10, 2018, from OBSERVATORY MAGNA CHARTA UNIVERSITATUM: http://www.magna- charta.org/resources/files/BOLOGNA_DECLARATION.pdf
The Economist Intelligence Unit . (2017). The Global Liveability Report 2017: A free overview. The Economist. The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. Retrieved from The Economist: https://www.smh.com.au/cqstatic/gxx1l4/LiveabilityReport2017.pdf
Times Higher Education. (2018). Copenhagen Business School. (Times Higher Education) Retrieved 04 10, 2018, from Times Higher Education - World University Rankings: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/copenhagen- business-school
Times Higher Education. (2018). Roskilde University. (Times Higher Education) Retrieved 04 15, 2018, from Times Higher Education - World University Rankings: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/roskilde- university
Times Higher Education. (2018). World University Rankings 2018. Retrieved 03 20, 2018, from Times Higher Education: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world- university-rankings/2018/world- ranking#!/page/0/length/25/locations/DK/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats
Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet. (2017). Opbremsning i optaget af studerende på engelsksprogede uddannelser. Retrieved 21 2018, 2018, from Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet: https://ufm.dk/aktuelt/pressemeddelelser/2017/opbremsning-i-optaget-af- studerende-pa-engelsksprogede-uddannelser
UNDP. (2016). Human Development Report 2016 - Human Development for Everyone. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Retrieved 05 09, 2018, from
71 undp.org: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf van Manen, M. (2006). Writing qualitatively, or the demands of writing. Qualitative Health Research, 16(5), 713–722.
VanLeeuwen, C. A., Guo-Brennan, L., & Weeks, L. E. (2017). Conducting hermeneutic research in international settings: Philosophical, practical, and ethical considerations. Journal of Applied Hermeneutics.
Zegers, V., & Wilkinson, R. (2008). Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education. Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht University Language Centre.
72 Appendix
Interview guide – CBS
Participants: Alex Klinge, Associate Professor, Department of Management, Society and Communication Katrine Rask Andersen, Translator, CBS Communications Marie Pade Andersen, Communications Advisor, CBS Communications
1. Based on our document analysis/observation, CBS seems to use more English than Danish in its social media and promotional materials. Why?
However, your posts about bachelor programmes and your bachelor brochure are in DA. Why? (is there a target differentiation?)
2. According to THE (2018), 23% of all CBS students are international. It’s one of highest percentages among Danish universities. (Do you confirm these numbers?) How much does this influence your choice of language in your communications?
Is there a concern with integration of international students from the part of CBS when the university plans its communication for the campus (posters, flyers etc.)?
And what about Danish students: does using English in your communications affect the way you reach them? (is there a risk that they may feel excluded?)
3. (speaking of that…) We are going to employ participant observation here at CBS to find out how international and Danish students interact with each other. However, we would like to know your perception. How do you see them interacting? Do you think that using English in your comms have an impact on their interaction?
Now, we would like to know more about the decision-making process... 4. In your communications strategy, do you pre-define English as the preferential language for all channels and materials? Or is that decided in particular to each campaign/channel/material?
5. How is that decision made, and by whom: (1) the comms manager (2) the person in charge for the campaign admin or the (3) whole department?
73 6. Are there any education legislation/regulation that you need to comply with or other factors that you have to take into account when choosing you communications language? For example, student quotas (for international and Danish students), programme quotas, etc.
7. We are aware that there has been a cut on English-taught programmes in the last year, dictated by the Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Did this affect CBS as well?
8. However, according to Danmarks Statistik, CBS has the third highest percentage of students in English-taught programmes in Denmark. Is there a deliberate effort to promote English-taught programmes at CBS more than Danish-taught programmes?
9. How does CBS perceive itself compared to other universities in Denmark: more or less international? And compared to RUC?
Interview guide – RUC
Participants: Interviewees RUC:
David Mathieu, Associate Professor, International Coordinator in Communication, Department of Communication and Arts Victoria Vest, Head of Section, Communication and Rector’s Office Ditte Meincke, International Recruitment and Critical Edge Alliance Officer, International team
1. We are aware that RUC has recently released a big advertising campaign (Konkurrent eller kolleger; Genstart eller game over - Vælg universitetet i virkeligheden) to promote some its programmes. From what we saw, it was in Danish only. Was it also released in English?
If not, why? Is there an attempt to attract/focus on local students rather than foreign students?
Why not targeting also expats living in Denmark (who may not speak Danish)? We suppose that RUC is aware that some (or many) international students don’t understand the Danish language, and we notice that, in the beginning of the semester, the university Open House was advertised on campus only in Danish (Åbent Hus). When planning the event, has this issue been considered?
74
2. Do you have any campaigns in place that use English as primary language targeting RUC students?
3. According to Danmarks Statistik and THE, RUC has one of the lowest percentage of international students (around 9%). How much does this influence your choice of language in your communications?
4. Now, we would like to know more about the decision-making process… In your communications strategy, do you pre-define Danish as the preferential language for all channels and materials? Or is that decided in particular to each campaign/channel/material?
How is that decision made, and by whom: (1) the comms manager (2) the person in charge for the campaign admin or the (3) whole department ?
5. Are there any education legislation/regulation that you need to comply with or other factors that you have to take into account when choosing you communications language? For example, student quotas (for international and Danish students), programme quotas, etc.
6. Is there a concern with integration of international students from the part of RUC when the university plans its communication for the campus (posters, flyers etc.)?
7. (speaking of that…) We are currently employing participant observation here at RUC to find out how international and Danish students interact with each other. However, we would like to know your perception. Do you see them interacting? Do you think that using Danish in your comms have an impact in the way they interact with each other?
8. However, according to Danmarks Statistik, RUC has the lowest percentage of students in English-taught graduate programmes in Denmark (15%). Is there a deliberate effort to promote Danish-taught programmes at RUC more than English-taught programmes?
9. How does RUC perceive itself compared to other universities in Denmark: more or less international? And compared to CBS?
75 Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
Welcome!
This anonymous survey takes 5 minutes to be completed and is part of a research project that aims to compare the use of language (Danish vs English) at Copenhagen Business School (CBS) and Roskilde University (RUC) . Our goal is to encourage you to reflect about the language choice of your university and assess your level of awareness and satisfaction with it. Your contribution is very important. Thank you for your time in advance!
Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
About you
* 1. Indicate in which university you're currently studying:
CBS
RUC
2. What is the level of your study programme?
Bachelor
Master
Other (please specify)
1 * 3. Indicate your student status:
Danish Student
International Student
Other (please specify)
* 4. How would you define your class in terms of students?
Mostly Danish students
Mostly International students
It depends on the course
Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
Language & communication at university
* 5. Overall, which language do you use the most at university?
Danish
English
Other (please specify)
* 6. In which language are your university classes taught?
Danish
English
It depends on the course
2 * 7. Based on your experience so far, select which language is most used at your university, in terms of...
Danish English Both equally
Interaction in class
People chatting on campus
Events
Murals, posters and flyers
Directions, signs and security info
Administration emails
Course and exam information
8. Do you think that the language choice of your university reflects its student community?
Yes
No
I don't know
* 9. Have you ever NOT understood any communications from your university because of the language (English/Danish) used?
Sometimes
Always Understand Usually Understand Understand Rarely Understand Never Understand
Class materials
Events
Murals, posters and flyers
Directions, signs and security info
Administration emails
Course and exam information
3 * 10. If you had to choose one language for all your university communications, which one would you prefer?
English
Danish
Other
If "Other", please indicate which.
Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
Student engagement on campus (in and outside of class)
* 11. On a scale from 1 to 5 (with 1 being ‘not at all’ and 5 being ‘a great deal’), how much do you interact with...
1 2 3 4 5
Danish Students
International students
Professors
Administrative staff
4 12. On a scale from 1 to 5 (with 1 being 'not at all' and 5 being 'a great deal'), how much do language barriers affect your level of interaction with...
1 2 3 4 5
Danish Students
International Students
Professors
Administrative Staff
* 13. On a scale from 1 to 5 (1 being ‘not at all’ and 5 being ‘a great deal’), how much do you think your university contributes to your integration in the student environment?
1 3 5
14. Do you feel part of the student community at your university?
Always Rarely
Usually Never
Sometimes
* 15. Think again about the main language used at your university. What impact does it have in your level of engagement in university activities?
Very positive Negative
Positive Very negative
Neutral
5 Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
Your University
* 16. In a scale from 1 to 5 (1 being ‘not at all’ and 5 being ‘a great deal’), based on your own perception, how international is your university?
1 3 5
17. Would you prefer if your university was...
More international
Less international
None. It's ok the way it is.
18. If you'd like to add any comments about your university and its language choice, please leave it here:
Student Survey: assessing the language choice of CBS & RUC
End of the Survey
Thank you for your contribution!
6