Perceptions of university business students in relation to foreign-accented faculty.
Ewy, Annette ; Geringer, Susan D. ; Taylor, James 等
INTRODUCTION
Foreign-accented speech has been defined as "non-pathological
speech that differs in some noticeable respects from native speaker
pronunciation norms" (Munro & Derwing, 1995, p. 289). Accents
surround us constantly, and are inherent in the use of language itself.
Accents are universal. "Every human who speaks a language has an
accent, and every human who listens to others talk perceives an
accent" (Kavas & Kavas, 2008, p. 879), though a large number of
us may not be fully aware of it. This holds true both between and within
geographic regions. Accents are "language cues [and] are used to
make sense of others and to categorize them" (Rakic, Steffens,
& Mummendey, 2011, p. 25). The appearance of accents can regularly
be of abundance in our day-to-day lives. However, we are oftentimes
unaware of our perceptions of such accents, and as a consequence, of our
perceptions of those who employ accented speech.
Whether in a social or professional setting, our perceptions of
accent affect us, and can be reflected in our responses to and treatment
of others. Cultural differences, seen in accents, pose challenges to
effective communication between individuals in various aspects of daily
life. Two specific environments that will be discussed in the paper are
the classroom and the workplace. It is imperative for growth and
learning purposes that all individuals become more accepting of each
other; subsequently, individuals ideally must learn to work with each
other towards creating a better, healthier environment and future. This
study aims to aid in bridging these gaps. Similar studies have been
conducted in the past, but this study specifically targets students
enrolled in a 4-year university of business program. This may hopefully
provide further insight into practical application of the findings to
the business and workplace environments.
This study is designed to provide further insight into
undergraduate students' perceptions and attitudes towards
foreign-accented faculty. Pedagogical professions, such as professor or
TA, rely heavily on verbal communication. Individuals with foreign
accents can therefore quickly run into challenges on a daily basis.
Accents may pose a hindrance to both the foreign-accented professor, as
well as the students, and can potentially inhibit learning as a result.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
In studies conducted by Gluszek and Dividio (2010), it was found
that native listeners are often resistant to communications involving a
foreign nature, which results in impatience and prejudice with
non-native speakers; this can cause speakers to associate problems in
communications with bias. This resistance to communication translates
into further problems, which have been observed to cause a lower sense
of belonging in non-native speakers in the United States (Gluszek &
Dividio, 2010).
In 2001, foreign-born faculty accounted for 24% of those working in
colleges and universities; since then, those figures have been on the
incline (Marvasti, 2005). This can somewhat be attributed to a "low
rate of return in graduate education in foreign countries and attractive
job opportunities in the United States" (Nimohj, 2010, pg. 59).
Foreign-born faculty members contribute in unique ways to the classroom
setting in that they are able to provide diverse cultural perspectives
and ways of thinking. The importance of this type of exposure becomes
heavily evident when the increasingly diverse nature of the American
workplace is taken into account. "America is characterized by an
increasing number of acquaintanceships that involve communication
between people with different linguistic and cultural background,"
a phenomenon more casually referred to as the melting pot effect (Nimoh,
2010). Cultural differences, seen in accents, pose challenges to
effective communication between students and accented faculty. It is
imperative that both parties learn to become more accepting of each
other, and work with each other towards creating a better, healthier
environment and future in the classroom (Nimoh, 2010).
The same concepts can be applied to the workplace and have
managerial implications as well. As the world economy becomes more
globalized, there is a noticeable change in the makeup of the workplace
with diversity moving to the top of the agenda (Barak, 2013). These
changes present a multitude of opportunities for growth and learning. As
is with the classroom, such diversity will reel in various untapped
perspectives and ideas. Learning to work with coworkers of different
ethnicities with varying accents, as well as having to report to such
supervisors can present challenges in the workplace. For example,
certain accents may be perceived as being less credible. This could
cause a lack of respect for managerial employees, which in effect could
lead to lower productivity levels or tension within the workplace. This
study focuses on how people perceive others who have an accent differing
from their own, with the hope that these misunderstandings and gaps that
result due to accent can be bridged.
In addition, the significance of this study is its addition to the
body of knowledge in this field. Similar studies have been conducted in
the past, but this will be the first to target undergraduate students on
the West Coast of the United States, and will focus primarily on
perspectives of those pursuing a degree in Business Administration.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Student Perceptions of Foreign-Accented Faculty
Collins (2008) conducted a study that aimed to determine US
students' perceptions of their foreign-born professors. Out of a
total of 444 responses, it was found that "96 percent of 254
respondents reported positive experiences when English is not the
professor's first language, as compared with 98 percent of 190
respondents reporting positive experiences when English is the
professor's first language" (Collins, 2008, p. 184). Also, the
study demonstrated, through students' responses to the
questionnaire, that they perceived the experience of having a
foreign-born professor to be more positive than negative, despite what
many might have expected to be the outcome. Collins (2008) suggests that
this discrepancy between the expected and actual outcomes could possibly
be explained by students' understanding that what they may
initially consider to be a negative factor of foreign-born instruction
could, in the long run, come to have more positive implications. One
such example being that students noted that it was necessary for them to
be more attentive and listen more carefully, prompting them to "pay
more attention in class" (Collins, 2008, pg. 184).
Several other studies have indicated similar findings when
examining the perceptions and effectiveness of foreign, versus native,
teaching assistants' (TAs) accents. The findings indicated that
students did not perceive foreign TAs as having adverse effects on their
scholastic achievement, and that effectiveness levels were equal between
foreign and native TAs. A study conducted by Borjas (2000) indicated
contrary evidence in that foreign teaching assistants have had adverse
effects on students. However, Marvasti (2007) assessed the data
regression model used in Borjas' study and determined that the OLS
regression used catered itself to a biased and inefficient
"estimation of the grade function" (Marvasti, 2007, p. 61). He
then applied the maximum likelihood method to the same data set. While
the findings were somewhat parallel with those found by Borjas (2000),
Marvasti (2007) was able to dig deeper and provide more insight as to
why this might have occurred. He was able to suggest that these results
were not necessarily due to low language proficiency on the part of the
TAs; rather, the findings could have been attributed to factors such as
cultural gaps, teaching skill sets, and familiarity with the American
teaching system (Marvasti, 2007; Kavas & Kavas, 2008).
In addition, after partitioning the data set several ways, Marvasti
was able to identify that negative effects on student learning by
foreign-born TAs was "more pronounced on the American students than
on the foreign-born students" (Marvasti, 2007, p.69). Asians, for
example, were actually found to have better performance in classes
taught by a foreign-born TA (Marvasti, 2007). On a similar note, Rubin
(1992) conducted a study which indicated that undergraduate
students' perceptions of their instructor's accent weighted
heavily on teacher ratings. It was demonstrated that there was evidence
of a weak relationship between the perceived strength of the accent and
the actual strength, which was determined by linguists. Rubin found that
more ethnic difference between students and the instructor correlated
with student perception of a strong accent (Rubin, 1992); this was found
in even in cases where the "instructor, in fact, spoke standard
American English" (Alberts, 2008; p. 513).
A study conducted by de Oliveira et al. (2009) at a predominantly
White Midwestern private college in the United States focused on student
attitudes towards foreign-born instructors. The results showed that the
students who participated in the study had a higher preference for
domestic instructors versus foreign-born instructors, and felt more
inclined to study under them. These findings were reflective of the
ethnocentric mindset, which is the demonstration of preference for
one's own ethnic group, measuring "other cultures and groups
against one's own," considering one's own to be superior
(Winter, 1997: pg. 180; Hicks, 1980). While de Oliveira et al. (2009)
are careful to make clear that this kind of negative effect and trace of
ethnocentric bias tends to "[thrive] in social settings where
opportunities to appreciate diversity are limited," (pg. 120) such
as in the college of his study, the results are still important to note.
Furthermore, students demonstrated a "bipolar, dualistic
pattern" towards the two types of instructors, meaning that the
more preference that students showed towards one group, the less they
showed for the other (de Oliveira et al., 2009; pg. 120). With
classrooms and businesses pursuing an ever-increasing shift towards
global activity, it is imperative that students begin to receive more
international and multi-cultural exposure and experience. A decrease in
divide between student members of other cultures, and the fostering of a
new appreciation for their practices, thought processes, etc., will help
students "shift toward a more complex thinking and better regulated
emotion in college" (de Oliveira et al.: pg. 121).
Speaking Rates
A study was conducted by Anderson-Hsieh & Koehler (2006) to
monitor the effects of speaking rates on comprehension in
foreign-accented speech. In other words, the study sought to find out if
listening subjects found it more difficult to understand the accented
speech when the speaker is talking at a faster rate. Subjects included
224 Iowa State University undergraduate students whose native tongue was
American English. The study consisted of three native Chinese speakers
and one American English speaker who were asked to read English passages
onto a tape recorder at three different speaking rates: slow, regular,
and fast. Results of the study demonstrated that the degree of the
accent did not really have any effect when the speaking rate was slow.
However, the heavier the accent, the more cumbersome it became for the
listener to comprehend the material when moving from a regular speaking
rate to a fast rate.
This indicated that "speaking rate is more critical for the
comprehension of heavily accented speech" (Anderson-Hsieh &
Koehler, 2006, p.561). This could be of potential use to universities,
and both current and prospective foreign-accented faculty. Potentially,
if instructors who are perceived to have heavy accents reduce speaking
rate when they are lecturing, students may be able to better understand
and communicate with them. The findings of this study suggest that
minimalistic tweaking could potentially ease tensions and foster a more
positive perception of foreign-accented faculty in the classroom.
A recent study conducted by Fuertes, Gottdiener, Martin, Gilbert,
and Giles (2012) evaluated speakers' accent effects on social
evaluations across three domains: solidarity, status, and dynamism.
Solidarity involved how the speaker related to the listener in terms of
to what degree they were perceived to be benevolent and trustworthy.
Status included perceived levels of the speaker's
"intelligence, competence, ambition, education, and social
class" (Fuertes et al., 2012, p. 121). Dynamism referred to the
degree of active or lively nature of the speaker. Fuertes et al (2012)
found the effects of the status and dynamism constructs to be strong,
with scores ranging from - 0.99 to d - 0.86. In these last two areas,
any detection of accented speech acted as a trigger for the listeners to
give the speakers with a non-standard accent a lower score. The area of
solidarity received a score of d - 0.52, which, although a more mild
result, still points to those with native accents receiving more
positive ratings in terms of benevolence and trustworthiness.
These findings were "inconsistent with some of the theoretical
and empirical literature that has posited and found an effect favoring
non-standard-accented speakers on the dimension of solidarity"
(Fuertes et al., 2012, p.128). Choo and Tan (2013) also tested the
effects of accent on the degree of trustworthiness. They recorded audio
clips of instructors' HALs (heavily accented lecture) and made them
available to students via an online learning system. They found that
listeners were wearier of the trustworthiness of speech, the heavier the
accent.
Mere Exposure Effect
Mere exposure is defined as "a condition which just makes the
given stimulus accessible to the individual's perception"
(Zajonc, 1968; p. 1). Essentially, it is the theory that the more an
individual is exposed to something, the more his/her attitude towards it
is enhanced in a positive manner. Zajonc (1968) was able to demonstrate
this in his study, in which he exposed his subjects to three groups of
stimuli at different frequencies. These stimuli included nonsense words,
Chinese characters, and yearbook photos. Zajonc acknowledged and tried
to eliminate possible effects of a learning factor. Regardless, the
study found that the more the subjects were exposed to the stimuli, the
more positivity there was towards it.
The mere exposure effect was then further supported in a study
conducted by Zebrowitz, White, and Wieneke (2008). Their study consisted
of two segments, both of which involved voluntary participation from
undergraduate students from Brandeis University in Waltham,
Massachusetts. In the first segment, by Zebrowitz, White, and Wieneke
(2008), one of two exposure conditions was presented: Korean or White
faces. The participants were presented with 10 50-millisecond
repetitions of 20 unique pictures of persons representing the exposed
race. Participants from both conditions were then presented with
pictures of 14 Korean and 14 White faces (4 of each had been shown
during the previous segment of the experiment). They were then asked to
rate these faces in terms of likability and familiarity. The results
demonstrated that own-race likability remained the same, but other-race
likability increased in a direct relationship with the amount of
exposure to the race. In the second segment, conducted by Zebrowitz,
White and Wieneke (2008), there were three conditions: own-race
conditions, other-race conditions, and no exposure conditions (which
were pictures of white and gray dots instead of faces used to control
color contrast). This time, participants were exposed to 24 pictures,
and exposure time was reduced to 10 17-millisecond repetitions of either
Black or White faces. They were then again asked to rate the faces based
on likability and familiarity. The results found in the first study were
repeated in that likability for own-race did not change, but increased
for other-race; the more exposure there was to that race, the more
likeable and friendly members of that race were perceived to be
(Zebrowitz et al., 2008).
OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESES
The objective of this study is to explore the possible influence of
mere exposure on attitudes and perceptions of students towards
foreign-accented faculty. Knowledge gained through this study concerning
patterns of increased positivity in students toward foreign-accented
faculty may provide insight on how to enhance the learning experience.
It may then be possible to suggest future methods for academic
institutions to employ in order to improve upon current situations.
Students may be able to become more easily acclimated to, and accepting
of, foreign accents, while foreign-accented faculty may come to
communicate more easily with students.
Based on the insight of the literature review the objective of this
study and the students' most recent experience with
foreign-accented faculty, the following hypotheses have been developed:
[H.sub.1]: Students tend to prefer same-race faculty (based solely
on name) and will feel more inclined to study under them.
[H.sub.2]: Students are more critical of speaking rate, when the
speech is perceived to be more heavily-accented.
H3a: The more international exposure a student has had, the less
likely a foreign accent will pose as a perceived barrier of oral
communication and/or language ability.
H3b: The more exposure a student has had to classes taught by
foreign-accented faculty, the less likely a foreign accent with pose as
a perceived barrier of oral communication and/or language ability.
METHODOLOGY
Procedure
A written paper and pencil survey, which was administered at the
beginning of select class periods within the school of business.
Participation in this study was completely voluntary. However, depending
on the instructor, certain classes may have been offered extra credit as
incentive to participate in the study. Students were asked about their
most recent experience with a foreign-accented professor. The
questionnaire consisted of measures of perception relating to accent,
attitudes held towards accents being carried over into the classroom,
the effect of accent on overall perceived impression, effect of language
ability, effect of international or mere exposure on accent perception,
as well as other demographic information.
The makeup of the questionnaire consisted of closed-ended
questions, with possible answers presented on a seven-point Likert
scale, as well as yes/no questions. In order to participate, students
had to have previous or concurrent experience with a foreign-accented
faculty during their time as a university student.
Research Instrument
The questionnaire used in this study mirrored one from a similar
study conducted by Trentin (2008), which was aimed at evaluating the
influence of culture on student perceptions of their foreign faculty;
questions 1, 2, 4, 15, and sections of 24 were omitted because they did
not seem relevant to this particular study. In addition, questions were
added to address various topics discussed earlier in the literature
review portion of this paper; questions 47-50, 53, 57-59, and 61 were
added. After further analysis of the survey, various questions were
omitted due to a lack of relevance to the targeted study at hand.
Sample and Data Collection
Data for this study were collected from a sample consisting of 306
undergraduate Business Administration students attending a large, public
university located in the Western United States. After prior contact
with professors in the School of Business, the surveys were distributed
to a total of 8 courses, all of which were either Business
Administration core courses or upper division Marketing courses.
There were 306 respondents to the survey. Of those, 245 surveys
were used. The other 61 questionnaires were dropped if there was
substantial incompletion of the survey, the respondents' experience
did not relate to the survey, or if the respondent indicated that he/she
was either not enrolled in the School of Business or not of
undergraduate standing. Participants of the survey were specifically
instructed to refer only to their most recent experience with a
foreign-accented faculty, not to mesh all of their experiences into one.
RESULTS
The surveys collected were checked to make sure that certain
criteria were met. The participant had to a) have had
previous/concurrent experience with at least one foreign-accented
faculty b) be an undergraduate student and c) be a Business major.
Surveys that were significantly incomplete were also filtered out. Once
the initial 306 surveys were distilled, 245 viable surveys remained.
These surveys were then analyzed using SPSS 22.
Factor analysis was used to determine if the numerous variables
included throughout the survey could be combined into latent variables,
or common factors. These new factor sets represent some commonality
between the set of observed variables, which can thus be used to analyze
further commonalities and links within the study. Factor analysis allows
for trends and relations that may previously have been ignored or
unrecognized to be acknowledged (Taylor, 2004). In this study, factor
analysis revealed that there were three apparent latent variables:
Factor 1) Student perception of professor's awareness of, and
effort to, transcend his/her own limitations related to his/her accent
Factor 2) Perception of student reaction in the form of
experiential prejudices
Factor 3) Student perception of foreign-professor's mastery of
oral communication and language ability.
Hypotheses Testing
The first hypothesis was rejected. It was found that students did
not tend to prefer same-race faculty (based solely on name) and feel
more inclined to study under them (reflected in cross-tabulation of
Q47-Q50). The most significance was found in that 35.8% of students
reported that they would avoid a class if the professor's name for
that class appeared to be foreign. It was found also that although not
significant in its own right, males showed a slightly higher preference
for same-race (p value of 0.131; p>0.05). Also, it was found that
international exposure had an impact on preference for same-race.
Students tended to have less preference for same-race if they had more
international exposure. Those who were considered international students
cared less (p value of 0.906), and those who had merely travelled cared
more (p value of 0.129), comparatively speaking.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The second hypothesis was accepted. This was found to have
incredibly high significance. Students were found to be more critical of
speaking rate when the speech is perceived to be more heavily-accented
(p value of 0.000; p<0.05).
The third hypothesis (part a) was accepted. The more international
exposure a student had, the less likely a foreign accent was to pose as
a perceived barrier of oral communication and/or language ability. Also,
it is notable that students' degree of international exposure
carried significance. Those who were international students were much
less likely perceive an accent as a communication barrier. Significance
fell slightly for those who had lived abroad for 6+ months, and then
dropped for those who had merely travelled abroad (p values of 0.001
(p<0.05), 0.101, and 0.626, respectively).
The third hypothesis (part b) was rejected. The more exposure a
student had to classes taught by foreign-accented faculty did not seem
to affect whether or not they perceived oral communication and/or
language ability as a barrier (p value of 0.203; p>0.05).
Additionally, it was found that there was very high significance
when Factor 1 and friendliness were cross-tabulated. A positive student
perception of the professor's awareness of, and effort to,
transcend limitations related to his/her accent led to higher ratings of
friendliness for that professor (p value of 0.000; p<0.05).
DISCUSSION
International exposure carries significant weight in determining
student perceptions of foreign-accented faculty. The more exposure a
student had, the more likely they were able to overcome communication
barriers, not even see an accent as a barrier at all, or adjust more
easily to the difference and simply carry on. Many schools have several
opportunities for students to travel abroad or permanently relocate to
finish their degree. This information could be useful to such
institutions in drawing students to take advantage of these programs and
grant themselves more international experience, and in turn, a higher
adjustment rate to those from difference cultures and with different
accents. This can easily be seen as a long-term investment as well, with
such skills being valuable in the classroom, but more importantly in the
workforce.
Student perceptions were found to become more positive towards
faculty if they were perceived to be making a conscious effort to
improve channels of communication and transcend barriers relating to
oral communication. Conversely, it would be interesting to see if
faculty perceptions of students become more positive if they feel that
students are making an effort to made adjustments in order to overcome
the accent barrier. The same can be applied to the workplace.
Perceptions of, and respect for managers, could potentially be enhanced
if employees perceive that an effort to overcome the barrier is being
made. Real life is give and take. Both sides must learn to communicate,
consider the situation from the others' perspective, and then take
positive, pro-active changes to make the best of the situation at hand.
As previously discussed, foreign faculty have so much to offer in terms
of differing perspectives and ways of thinking. It is imperative that
students learn to take advantage of this and treat it as an opportunity,
rather than a burden.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
There were multiple limitations in this study. First, a convenience
sample was taken, restricting the authenticity of a truly random survey
and study. Results are not truly reflective of a widespread sample and
responses, then, may have been slightly skewed. Perhaps in the future,
studies should be done at a multitude of universities with varying
demographics and across different majors. Conversely, however, this
limitation allowed for a more focused study on a more specific group:
undergraduate Business majors.
Secondly, an overwhelming majority of the survey was distributed to
Marketing classes. Again, this distilled the sample even further, taking
away from truly random responses. Respondents were predominantly of the
Marketing option, making it very difficult to examine any existing
trends or differences across the different Business options.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
A suggestion for future research is to examine whether or not there
is a tangible effect of foreign accent on student performance in terms
of grades, attendance, etc. Perceptions are only measurable so long as
respondents are able to provide un-biased answers, which is difficult
because most of these answers would be self-reported. An analysis of
actual impact on students and their actual student experience would be
of great interest to educational institutions, their faculty, as well as
students in search of an enhanced learning experience.
CONCLUSION
Challenges are posed to individuals in the classroom and workplace
settings by foreign accents. Previous studies have indicated a findings
in disagreement with each other concerning the openness of university
students in relation to their foreign-accented faculty.
The current study found that students indicated no preference for
same-race faculty, although a significant number of students stated that
they would avoid a class if the professor's name appeared to be
foreign and males indicated a slight preference for same-race faculty.
Those students with international exposure indicated to have less
preference for same-race faculty. This finding adds to the body of
knowledge, as a perusal of the literature did not indicate that this
factor was investigated in previous studies.
Students in the current study were also found to be highly critical
of faculty speaking rates, if the speech was perceived to be
heavily-accented. In addition, students who felt their foreign-accent
faculty had awareness of, and made an effort to transcend limitations in
relation to their speech received a higher rate of friendliness. It is
hoped that the findings of this study will aid administrators in faculty
hiring and will help bridge the gaps in classrooms between foreign
accented faculty and their students.
REFERENCES
Alberts, H. C. (2008). The Challenges and Opportunities of
Foreign-born Instructors in the Classroom. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 32(2), 189-203. doi:10.1080/03098260701731306.
Anderson-Hsieh, J., & Koehler, K. (1988). The Effect of Foreign
Accent and Speaking Rate on Native Speaker Comprehension. Language
Learning, 38(4), 561-613.
Barak,M.E. Mor. Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive
workplace. Sage, 2013.
Choo, F., & Tan, K. B. (2013). Effect of Audio Clips of Heavily
Accented Lecture on Teacher Evaluations. Issues in Accounting Education,
28(3), 487-501. doi:10.2308/iace-50438.
Collins, J. M. (2008). Coming to America: Challenges for Faculty
Coming to United States' Universities. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 32(2), 179-188. doi:10.1080/03098260701731215.
de Oliveira, E. A., Braun, J. L., Carlson, T. L., & de
Oliveira, S. G. (2009). Students' attitudes toward foreign-born and
domestic instructors. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2(2),
113-125. doi:10.1037/a0015746.
Fuertes, J. N., Gottdiener, W. H., Martin, H., Gilbert, T. C.,
& Giles, H. (2012). A meta-analysis of the effects of speakers'
accents on interpersonal evaluations. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 42(1), 120-133. doi:10.1002/ejsp.862.
Gluszek, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (2010). Speaking with a nonnative
accent: Perceptions of bias, communication difficulties, and belonging
in the United States. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(2),
224-234.
Gluszek, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (2010). The way they speak: A
social psychological perspective on the stigma of nonnative accents in
communication. Personality Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 214-237.
Hicks, D. (1980). Images of the world: An introduction to bias in
teaching materials. University of London, Institute of Education.
Kavas, A., & Kavas, A. (2008). An exploratory study of
undergraduate college students' perceptions and attitudes toward
foreign accented faculty. College Student Journal, 42(3), 879-890.
Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B. (2010). Why don't we believe
non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 1093-1096.
Marvasti, A. (2005). U.S. Academic Institutions and Perceived
Effectiveness of Foreign-Born Faculty. Journal of Economic Issues
(Association for Evolutionary Economics), 39(1), 151176.
Marvasti, A. (2007). Foreign-born teaching assistants and student
achievement: An ordered orbit analysis. American Economist, 51(2),
61-71.
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Processing Time, Accent,
and Comprehensibility in the Perception of Native and Foreign-Accented
Speech. Language & Speech, 35(3), 289-306.
Nimoh, P. (2010). Communication challenges faced by foreign-born
faculty. Creative Nursing, 16(2), 59-62.
Rakic, T., Steffens, M. C., & Mummendey, A. (2011). Blinded by
the accent! The minor role of looks in ethnic categorization. Journal of
Personality Social Psychology, 100(1), 16-29. doi:10.1037/a0021522.
Rubin, D. L. (1992) Nonlanguage factors affecting
undergraduates' judgments of non-native English speaking teaching
assistants, Research in Higher Education, 33, pp. 511-531.
Taylor, A. (2004, March 20). A Brief Introduction to Factor
Analysis. Macquarie University: Department of Psychology.
Trentn, A. (2008). A world of education: The influence of culture
on instructional style and perceived teacher effectiveness (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California, 2008).
Tsalikis, J., DeShields, Oscar W., Jr, & LaTour, M. S. (1991).
The role of accent on the credibility and effectiveness of the
salesperson. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,
11(1), 31.
Winter, C.(1997). "Ethnocentric bias in geography
textbooks." Teaching and learning geography: Issue 180.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. 1.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9 (2, pt. 2).
Zebrowitz, L. A., White, B., & Wieneke, K. (2008). Mere
exposure and racial prejudice: Exposure to other-race faces increases
liking for strangers of that race. Social Cognition, 26(3), 259-275.
Annette Ewy
Susan D. Geringer
James Taylor
California State University, Fresno
Annette Ewy is a recent graduate from the Craig School of Business
at California State University, Fresno; her major option was in
International Business. She is currently employed in the travel
industry.
Susan D. Geringer is an associate professor and the chairperson of
the Department of Marketing and Logistics in the Craig School of
Business at California State University, Fresno. She enjoys researching
in numerous areas of Marketing, particularly in the field of Consumer
Behavior.
James Taylor is a lecturer in the Department of Information Systems
and Decision Sciences at California State University, Fresno. He has
previously conducted research in the pharmaceutical development
industry. His interests include statistics education and the history of
probability and statistics.
Appendices
Survey
Thank you for participating in this study conducted by CSB Honors
student, Annette Ewy, and Dr. Susan Geringer. When answering the
relevant questions, please reflect on the last time you were
enrolled in a course taught by a faculty with a foreign accent.
There are no right or wrong answers. Please answer the questions
honestly. Your identity and answers will remain completely
anonymous.
To each of the following questions, please circle the one answer
that most clearly relates to your opinion.
1. Have you ever enrolled in a course taught by a foreign-accented
professor?
_Yes (Please continue.) _No (Thank you. Please return survey.)
2. How strong was your foreign professor's accent?
Very Somewhat Moderate Some Accent No accent at all
strong strong
5 4 3 2 1
3. How well did you understand him/her when they spoke?
Always Most of the time Sometimes Once in a while Not at all
5 4 3 2 1
4. How distracting was your foreign professor's accent to your
ability to understand what he/she said?
Completely Very Neutral Somewhat Not distracting
distracting distracting kkkkjkjkjkj distracting at all
5 4 3 2 1
5. How often did your foreign professor make grammatical mistakes?
All the time Sometimes Once in a while Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
6. How often did your foreign professor use words or phrases that
did not seem to fit into his/her sentence(s)?
All the time Sometimes Once in a while Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
7. How distracting was your foreign professor's use of grammar on
your ability to understand what he/she said?
Completely Very Neutral Somewhat Not distracting
distracting distracting kkkkjkjkjkj distracting at all
5 4 3 2 1
8. How often did your foreign professor accurately use American
slang?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
9. How often did your foreign professor speak at a speed that was
easy to understand?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
10. How well did you understand your foreign professor when he/she
spoke?
Extremely well Quite well Neutral Not very well Not at all
5 4 3 2 1
11. My foreign professor's language ability was ______when he/she
presented a lecture and/or explained a problem.
Strong Good Adequate A bit weak Weak
5 4 3 2 1
12. My foreign professor's language ability when he/she interacted
with the class was:
Strong Good Adequate A bit weak Weak
5 4 3 2 1
13. Were lectures organized in a manner that you could follow
easily?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
14. Were important points clearly emphasized?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
15. Did your foreign professor normally stay on topic?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
16. Was the material presented in each class challenging enough for
you?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
17. How often did your foreign professor use relevant examples to
clarify main points?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
18. Did your foreign professor use concepts you already knew to
help you understand new ones?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
19. Was it clear that the material you were learning was relevant
to the course objectives?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
20. How often did your foreign professor use visuals? (i.e.
Blackboard, PowerPoint, handouts, etc.)
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
21. Were these visuals easy to follow?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
22. How helpful was it to you for your foreign professor to use the
visuals mentioned above?
Extremely Very much Somewhat Not very Not at all
5 4 3 2 1
23. How often did your foreign professor look directly at students
when presenting a lecture/discussion?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
24. How often did your foreign professor use facial expressions or
gestures that you didn't understand?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
25. How often did your foreign professor use facial expressions or
gestures that offended you?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
26. Did your foreign professor know when students did not
understand a concept without someone specifically saying that
he/she didn't understand?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
27. Did your foreign professor address confusion when they were
aware it had occurred?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
28. Did your foreign professor make sure students understood a
concept or lesson before moving on to the next one?
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
5 4 3 2 1
29. How comfortable were you asking your foreign professor
questions in class?
Completely Very Comfortable Somewhat Not
comfortable comfortable ddfdfd comfortable comfortable
at all
4dfdfd
5 3 2 1
30. How comfortable were you asking your foreign professor
questions during office hours?
Completely Very Comfortable Somewhat Not
comfortable comfortable ddfdfd comfortable comfortable
at all
4dfdfd
5 dfdfd 3 2 1
31. How comfortable do you think your foreign professor was
acknowledging students' opinions?
Completely Very comfortable Comfortable Somewhat Not comfortable
Completely Very Comfortable Somewhat Not
comfortable comfortable ddfdfd comfortable comfortable
dfdfd at all
5 4 3 2 1
32. How friendly was your foreign professor?
Extremely Very Friendly Somewhat Not friendly at
friendly friendly sddfsdfsdf friendly all sdfsdfsdf
sdfsdfsdf sdfsdfsdf
5 4 3 2 1
33. How much did you like the way your foreign professor managed
the classroom?
Extremely Very much Liked it Somewhat Not at all
5 4 3 2 1
34. How much respect did you have for this particular foreign
professor?
Extremely Quite a bit Neutral Very little None
5 4 3 2 1
35. How aware do you think your foreign professor was of your
needs?
Always aware Very aware Aware Somewhat aware Not aware at all
5 4 3 2 1
36. How often do you think your foreign professor did not
understand what you said in class?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
37. How often do you think your foreign professor did not
understand what you said when you met with him/her during office
hours?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
38. How often did your foreign professor ask students to repeat
their questions or comments in class?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
39. How comfortable do you think your foreign professor was asking
for clarification?
Completely Very Comfortable Somewhat Not
comfortable comfortable dfddfd comfortable comfortable
4dfdfd at all
5 3 2 1
40. Did your foreign professor invite students to ask questions?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
41. Did students generally feel satisfied with your foreign
professor's responses to questions?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
42. Did your foreign professor repeat, rephrase, or elaborate when
students still didn't understand his/her answer to a question?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
43. Were your foreign professor's answers to student questions
direct and to the point?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
44. Were your foreign professor's answers to student questions
complete and thorough?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
45. Did you leave class with more questions than before you
arrived?
Always Very often Sometimes Almost never Never
5 4 3 2 1
46. Overall, the quality of my experience with my foreign professor
was:
Outstanding Good Fair Poor Unacceptable
5 4 3 2 1
47. When choosing classes, does the appearance of a foreign name
carry weight in your decision to take that class?
Absolutely Quite a bit Somewhat Not very much Never
5 4 3 2 1
48. When registering for classes, how likely are you to avoid a
class if the professor's name appears to be foreign?
Very likely Somewhat Doesn't Somewhat not Not likely
sddfsf likely make a likely sdfsf sdfdsfsdfdf
sddfsf difference
5 4 3 2 1
49. In reference to the previous question, would you change the
course even if the alternative class was during an inconvenient
time slot?
_Yes _No
50. How much more likely are you to take a class online (rather
than in a physical classroom) if you know that the professor is
foreign-accented?
Very likely Somewhat Doesn't Somewhat not Not likely
sddfsf likely make a likely sdfsf sdfdsfsdfdf
sddfsf difference
5 4 3 2 1
51. In your college career, how many foreign-accented professors
have you had?
4 or more 3 2 1 0
Tell us about yourself!:
52. Are you a graduate or undergraduate student?
Graduate Undergraduate Other (please specify) __
53. How long have you been at Fresno State in your current
degree program?
This is my This is my second One year Two years Three years
first term term
54. Are you an international student?
__Yes __No
55. Were you born in the United States?
__Yes __No
56. Were both of your parents born in the United States?
__Yes __No
57. Have you ever travelled to a foreign country?
_Yes _No
58. Have you ever lived in a foreign country for more than 6 months?
__Yes __No
59. Please indicate your gender.
__Male __Female
60. What ONE ethnicity do you identify with most? (Check only one)
__American __Black/ __Asian American __Latino/Hispanic/Chicano/
Indian/Alaskan African Latin American
Native American
__Middle Eastern __Pacific __White/Caucasian __Other(please
Islander specify):
61. What is your Business option?
__Accounting __Finance __Marketing __Management
__Entrepreneurship __IS/DS __International __Other(please
Business specify):
Thank you so much for your help with this survey and study!
Stop
Figure 1
Factor Analysis
1 2 3
Q.31 How comfortable do you think your foreign .822 -.105 .090
professor was acknowledging students'
opinions?
Q.42 Did your foreign professor repeat, .811 -.040 .070
rephrase, or elaborate when students still
didn't understand his/her answer to a
question?
Q.40 Did your foreign professor invite .804 0.97 .057
students to ask questions?
Q.44 Were your foreign professor's answers to .797 -.056 -.033
student questions complete and thorough?
Q.43 Were your foreign professor's answers to .754 -.007 .011
student questions direct and to the point?
Q.35. How aware do you think your foreign .736 -.053 -.012
professor was of your needs?
Q. 28 Did your foreign professor make sure .729 -.035 -.098
students understood a concept or lesson before
moving on to the next one?
Q. 29 How comfortable were you asking your .713 -.050 -.140
foreign professor questions in class?
Q. 27 Did your foreign professor address .636 -.057 .099
confusion when they were aware it had
occurred?
Q. 39 How comfortable do you think your .592 -.111 .080
foreign professor was asking for
clarification?
Q. 12 My foreign professor's language ability .541 .071 -.503
when he/she interacted with the class was:
Q. 26 Did your foreign professor know when .533 .038 -.105
students did not understand a concept without
someone specifically saying that he/she didn't
understand?
Q. 36 How often do you think your foreign -.416 .133 .041
professor did not understand what you said in
class?
Q. 9 How often did your foreign professor .403 -.097 -.301
speak at a speed that was easy to understand?
Q. 37 How often do you think your foreign -.375 .136 -.004
professor did not understand what you said
when you met with him/her during office hours?
Q. 8 How often did your foreign professor .148 -.050 -.064
accurately use American slang?
Q. 48 When registering for classes, how likely .009 .836 .204
are you to avoid a class if the professor's
name appears to be foreign?
Q. 47 When choosing classes, does the .060 .832 .255
appearance of a foreign name carry weight in
your decision to take that class?
Q. 50 How much more likely are you to take a -.203 .473 .091
class online (rather than in a physical
classroom) if you know that the professor is
foreign-accented.
Q. 49 In reference to the previous question .176 -.313 -.279
(Q. 48), would you change the course even if
the alternative class was during an
inconvenient time slot?
Q. 4 How distracting was your foreign -.291 .107 .504
professor's accent to your ability to
understand what he/she said?
Q. 7 How distracting was your foreign -.374 .048 .463
professor's use of grammar on your ability to
understand what he/she said?
Q. 5 How often did your foreign professor make -.248 .043 .387
grammatical mistakes?
Q. 6 How often did your foreign professor use -.349 .057 .358
words or phrases that did not seem to fit into
his/her sentence(s)?
