Skye Stephenson

CIEE Resident Director, Santiago,Chile

In the last decade, increasing numbers of students have chosen to study abroad. An underlying premise of many of these programs to “nontraditional destinations” is that exposure to these often quite different cultures and living conditions promotes a more positive understanding of the “other.” To date, however, there has been little analysis of the actual impact of the study abroad experience upon participants’ cultural perceptions and personal values. What aspects of values appear to change the most as a result of study abroad? How do interactions with host nationals affect the students’ views of both themselves and the “other”? Does the presence of foreign students affect members of the host society who have extended contact with them? Is the outcome of the exchange experience in terms of cross-cultural understanding any different for participants in study abroad programs located in countries with lower living standards than their home?

The purpose of this study is to examine the questions raised above in one specific setting—Santiago, Chile. It explores the effect that the study abroad experience has had upon three distinct groups’ cultural perceptions and personal values: the study abroad students themselves, their Chilean host families, and selected university professors. In 1988, all three groups were asked to fill out a questionnaire drafted by a bi-national group of researchers.¹ Follow-up interviews were conducted to gain greater specificity. While the author is fully aware of the difficulties in attempting to “measure” via questionnaires such complex areas as values and cultural views, it is her belief that it is precisely this complexity which makes such research—however flawed—valuable.

Three premises underlie this pilot study. The first involves the issue of value change. It is usually assumed that the study abroad experience necessarily leads to the promotion of more positive views of the “other.” While the experience is often a transcendental one for many young people, whether the sojourner returns home with a more positive, more negative or mixed view of the host culture depends upon a variety of factors. Such factors include, among others, the “fit” between the student’s personal attributes and the programmatic realities and cultural patterns of the study abroad destination. Perhaps it is naïve to assume that study abroad program participation necessarily leads to more positive views of the “other.”

The idealists regard it as self-evident that educational exchange must lead to improved international relations. They take it for granted that cross-cultural contact, particularly among young people, creates mutual understanding and when these students in the fullness of time assume positions of influence in their societies, this will be reflected in harmonious relations between their respective countries, and thus contribute to world peace. The evidence … indicates that the connection between inter-group contact and inter-group attitudes is very complex, such that contact may either increase or reduce mutual tolerance and understanding, depending on a very large matrix of interaction variables. Indeed, there have been instances where educational exchange has led to a worsening of cross-cultural attitudes.²

The second premise is that it is important to broaden the scope beyond that of the study abroad student himself/herself. While the sojourner naturally undergoes changes in value orientation and perceptions, it is not a one-way process. Members of the host society can be affected by the experience as well. As Adrian Furnham and Stephen Bochner put it, “all contact has two-way reciprocal consequences, although the extent to which each party is affected by the interaction depends on a variety of factors. To ascertain better the true impact of the exchange experience, it is necessary to consider both the exchange students themselves and the receiving groups in the host culture.”³

The last premise of this study is that there are country specific conditions that can affect the final outcome of the study abroad experience. Among such factors are the nation’s historical realities, economic conditions, openness to foreigners, the university environment, cultural practices and beliefs, etc. It is important to have a better understanding of these realities when setting up and running an overseas program. While there has been a proliferation of overseas programs in Chile in recent years, there has been no published research to date on Chilean culture and society and their influence on the educational experience of US students. The following two sections will highlight those aspects of Chilean reality most significant for the field of international education.

Chilean Culture: An Overview

Chileans are proud of noting that their country is “at the end of the world,” as they put it. Quite literally, this string bean of a nation is located at the very bottom of the South American peninsula. It is bordered on the north by the driest desert in the world, on the south by the Antarctic, on the east by the second-highest mountain range, and on the west by the largest ocean. In many ways, Chile resembles more an “island” than a continental appendage.

In cultural terms as well, Chileans demonstrate an “island mentality.” There tends to be a strong sense of what is “Chilean” in this relatively homogenous and centralized nation of less than 14 million people. Historical factors as well have tended to create a cohesive and integrated country. Chile was one of the least important parts of the Spanish Empire, as it had little natural wealth and was extremely difficult to get to. As a result, only the most adventurous—or perhaps the most foolhardy— arrived in Chile during the early period of Spanish colonization. Those few who did make it across the inhospitable Atacama desert and the lofty Andes mountains found themselves face-to-face with one of the fiercest groups of native peoples in the Americas—the Mapuches.

These indigenous peoples, the predominant group from the middle of Chile south, managed to fight off the European onslaught for nearly three hundred years. They were never formally defeated, but rather pacified in the 1880s with the signing of a peace treaty. During these centuries of frontier conflicts, there were not massive waves of European migration to Chile as occurred in some other nations of the hemisphere. Most of the Europeans who arrived in Chile were of Spanish or Portuguese descent.

With the pacification of the native peoples, much of the south of Chile was opened up for colonization. In an attempt to recruit “hardworking” stock, the Chilean government of the time actively encouraged German colonization of the Puerto Montt region. Germans, particularly from the largely Catholic areas in southern Germany, were offered attractive incentives to migrate to Chile. This group, while not numerically large, has had a significant role in twentieth-century Chile. In the Chilean dialect, certain German words can be noted such as “kuchen” for cake. More significant was the German role in the formation of the Chilean military, which continues to have a decidedly “Prussian” stamp even today.

Along the coast of Chile, in the port cities of Punta Arenas and Valparaiso, the impact of migration in the nineteenth century was also significant. Before the building of the Panama Canal, all the ships that journeyed from the Atlantic to the Pacific had to go through either the Drake passage or around the Cape of Horn. It was a hazardous trip, and ships usually stopped in Chilean ports to rest and stock up before continuing up the coast. Some sailors decided to stay in Chile. This was particularly true of the English in Valparaiso and the Croatians in Punta Arenas.

Notwithstanding the arrival of the aforementioned groups to Chile, this nation received much less immigration than did Argentina.⁴ Nor did Chile have large numbers of indigenous peoples, like its northern neighbors Peru and Bolivia. Chile did not even host many blacks, and those few that did arrive seem to have merged into the general Chilean populace.⁵

Consequently, most of the Chileans today are a mixture of the European colonists and the indigenous Mapuches. Although many, especially in the middle- to upper-classes, refuse to acknowledge the possibility of harboring Indian ancestry, recent scholarship has shown that Chile is primarily a nation of mixed ancestry.⁶ Nonetheless, compared to the Andean nations, one feels the Indian presence much less. According to census figures, less than 10% of Chileans are Indian.⁷

Due to these unique historical and geographical patterns, many Chileans have had little exposure to culturally and ethnically different people. This isolation was exacerbated during the 1973 to 1988 period when, due primarily to political factors, Chile was cut off from much international contact. While the return to democracy in 1988 has served to open the country to increasing foreign investment and “cross-cultural exchanges,” the legacy of the years of repression and censorship are still felt in Chilean society today.

There is a strong sense of “insider” versus “outsider,” with the term “gringo” frequently employed to describe non-Chileans, particularly those with a light complexion. The emphasis is often upon the group, rather than the individual, leading some to call it a “herd mentality.” Close-knit support groups follow most Chileans throughout their lifetime, starting with their extended nuclear family and often including school mates and work partners.

Chileans are known for being decidedly less verbal than their neighbors the Argentines; much of their communication is done non-verbally. There are certain cultural clues that all Chileans know, particularly ways to categorize social class, which is extremely important in Chile. Clothing, accent, even school can serve to “place” a Chilean in a certain social milieu. Chileans themselves frequently state that they are not racist, but they are classist.

There is a well-known saying that “Chileans are the English of Latin America.” While still exhibiting certain “Latin characteristics,” Chileans nonetheless are proud of not being so “tropical,” as they put it. After all, they recently selected the penguin as their national mascot to show that they are a “cool” nation. Most Chileans define themselves as hard-work-ing, family oriented, class-conscious and conservative. The enormous role that the Catholic Church has had in shaping values in contemporary Chile should not be overlooked. In fact, today Chile is the only nation in the western world that does not have a divorce law. Topics such as abortion and homosexuality are “taboo” for many sectors of the population.

In other ways, however, Chile is a modern and open society. It was the first Latin American nation to pursue neo-liberal economic policies beginning in the 1970s. The fruits of its economic success can be seen everywhere today. They are most notable in certain affluent neighborhoods, which in many ways seem much like California, complete with Pizza Hut, McDonald’s and big shopping malls.

One of the most difficult issues facing Chileans today concerns national identity. Many sense that there has been so much rapid change in recent years that something intrinsically Chilean has been lost in the process. When dealing with individuals from the United States, many Chileans seem ambivalent in how to judge the “cross-cultural interchange.” They often exhibit a combination of a sense of inferiority, noting the many positive aspects and consumer goods coming from the United States, while at the same time harboring a conviction that Chilean culture and lifestyle is “better” for them, particularly in the areas of family and social values.

For the overseas student in Chile, a different phenomenon often occurs. The initial impression is that Chile seems much more like the United States than the participant might have thought before arriving. The assumption is then made that the Chileans must be similar to the people from the United States. The student then acts upon this fallacious assumption, finding that behavioral patterns and values can be quite different. Particularly in the areas of political views, opinions on social and racial issues, and perceptions of class, the student often finds himself/her-self surprised that Chileans who seem so “normal” could have views that are so “politically incorrect.”

The Chilean University and International Educational Programs

Despite Chile’s insular history, this Andean nation has been the host to numerous foreign intellectuals and students over the centuries. Because of its political stability and reputation for hospitality, many foreigners, primarily Latin Americans fleeing persecution in their native land, found a warm reception in Chile. Two of the individuals instrumental in founding and consolidating the Universidad de Chile—the oldest and most important public university in Chile—were of foreign descent. One was Andres Bello, a Venezuelan, and the other was Domeyko, an immigrant of Polish descent.

The university system that was set up in Chile borrowed heavily from the French model of higher education. Numerous facultades were set up within the university, each one relatively autonomous in terms of student selection and training. Even today, the university is considered primarily a center for professional training, with a student entering a specific facultad as a freshman and remaining there throughout his/her university program. Attrition rates are high and degree requirements tend to be quite rigid, with little time allotted for electives.

The Universidad de Chile was founded in 1842 as a public university open to qualified individuals of all the social sectors. It replaced the Real Universidad de San Felipe that had existed during the colonial period. For several decades, it was the only university in Chile, and one of the best in South America. The list of graduates from this institution is extensive and impressive, and its role as a means for social mobility within a relatively hierarchical and class-oriented nation such as Chile has been crucial.

The Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile was founded several decades after the Universidad de Chile, in 1888. It was established for the purpose of providing a Catholic-oriented and private alternative for higher education. Its role in the formation of elites has also been crucial. Perhaps its most well-known contribution in recent years has been through the training of the so-called “Chicago boys.” These Católica economic students studied at the University of Chicago under the auspices of an exchange agreement. Some even were taught by Milton Friedman himself. Upon their return to Chile, several were instrumental during the Pinochet years in conceptualizing and implementing the neo-liberal economic reforms.

Despite the agreements that permitted Chileans to receive advanced training abroad,⁸ until this decade non-degree overseas students were practically non-existent in Chilean universities. Several concomitant phenomena coincided in the early 1990s to promote interest in starting up exchange programs at Chilean universities. The “pull factors” included the nation’s return to democracy, its stability and prosperity, and the solid reputations of both the Universidad de Chile and the Pontificia Universidad Católica.⁹ Among the “push factors” in the United States were the increasing interest in “non-traditional” destinations for study abroad, the burgeoning of ethnic and Latin American studies, and the recent emphasis at many institutions on the “internationalization of education.”

In 1990, the first group of students from a US university, Stanford, arrived to study at the Universidad Católica. Due to the trimester schedule at Stanford, they were not able to take the semester courses at the university, and instead took special courses at the campus. The State University of New York at Plattsburgh underwrote in 1991 the first group of students to take regular classes at a Chilean university. A short while later, the Council on International Educational Exchange also established a program at both the Universidad Católica and the Universidad de Chile.

For all three of these study abroad programs, Chilean academics based in the United States played a pivotal role in their establishment. For Stanford University, it was a Chilean sociologist—Edmundo Fuenzalida—who was instrumental in arranging the first ever agreement. At SUNY/Plattsburgh, a Latin American specialist—William Culvert, who had lived in Chile during the 1960s and was married to a Chilean— pushed through the first direct enrollment program. The Council on International Educational Exchange garnered help from a Chilean scholar at Georgetown University: Arturo Valenzuela.

An indication of the lack of experience on the part of the Chilean universities in receiving short-term, non-degree-seeking overseas students can be noted in the following anecdote: According to Francisco Lara, the current Coordinator of Foreign Students at the Universidad de Chile, when William Culvert of SUNY Plattsburgh began to inquire about setting up a study abroad program at the Universidad de Chile there was no one to receive him. Consequently, a new office had to be created.

Following the success of these programs, others soon followed.¹⁰ By 1992 both universities had well-run offices for international exchanges staffed with competent individuals well able to promote institutional interests. At the Universidad Católica, an extensive campaign to internationalize was carried out. One component involved the arranging of both bilateral and unilateral (for pay) exchanges. To give an idea of the expansion of foreign students, in 1990 there were two exchange programs from one sending nation—the United States. Thirty-seven students in total participated. Eight years later, over 460 students per year studied at the Universidad Católica in a “special status.” These students came from universities located in seventeen different nations. The total number of exchange students who studied at the Pontificia Universidad Católica from 1991 to 1998 is over 2,500.

The Universidad de Chile, while expanding enrollment of exchange students as well, has not had the growth of the Católica. From 1991 to 1998, over 1,860 non-degree students studied at the Universidad de Chile, about 80% coming from United States-based universities. The smaller number of exchange students at the Universidad de Chile is due to several factors. The first is of an institutional nature. The Universidad de Chile is government funded and controlled, giving it less autonomy and flexibility in setting up programs. During the many years of authoritarian rule, it was consciously underfunded by the government and thus, at present, offers less “amenities” (i.e., computers, e-mail, and good sports facilities) than the Católica. A second factor is the policy on the part of Universidad de Chile authorities not to overtax their services for international students by enrolling too many.

The Effect of the Study Abroad Experience upon the Students

Due to the author’s affiliation with the Council program, the research for this study was carried out with the Council student participants in Santiago, Chile. During the first semester of 1998, they were asked to fill out a questionnaire immediately upon their arrival and a second one shortly before their departure. There was a five-month time-span between these two periods. The purpose of the questionnaires was to find out: (1) in what ways, if any, the students’ initial expectations differed from their actual experiences; and (2) how their opinions of Chilean culture changed during their stay.

In total, 52 students completed the questionnaires. Due to the fact that Council is a consortium-program, the respondents came from colleges and universities located throughout the United States. The greatest numbers were from Georgetown University, followed by the University of Colorado. Other schools represented included Princeton University, Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania and Hope College, among others. As usual, there were more female than male participants in the program: 17 were male and 35 were female.

In terms of ethnic affiliation, 36 defined themselves as white, while the second largest group was the Hispanic, with eight students. There were two Black students, two Jewish students, two Asians and one Native American. One student was difficult to define ethnically—he was half-Chilean, a quarter Japanese and a quarter Caucasian. He had grown up in Tokyo, but went to school in the United States.

Included in the questionnaire was a section on previous international experience. The author felt that there might be some relationship between a student’s earlier cross-cultural experiences and the ease/diffi-culty they might have in adjusting to life in Chile. It is also possible that the students of Latin descent, several of whom actually had lived in other Latin American nations previously, and all of whom spoke Spanish in their home, might find the quality of their experience different. Out of the 52 students, the Council program was a first cross-cultural experience for seven of them. Twenty had spent a month or less outside of the United States, while 20 others had spent from a month to a year abroad. Three had lived for more than one year in another country.

The students were asked to indicate the ease or difficulty they expected to experience (arrival) or had experienced (departure) in adapting to or accommodating a variety of situations and value orientations. Forty items were listed, with the scale being: 0=not applicable 1=very easy 2=easy 3=average 4=difficult 5=very difficult. The items were organized in clusters of five, representing a particular theme. The issues explored were life in Santiago, the host family situation, social activities, using the Spanish language, the university/classroom environment, cultural differences, and opinions/beliefs.

Table #1 shows all situations/value changes to which the students anticipated they would have an average to a difficult time adjusting. As can be noted, the two situations that the students thought would prove to be the most difficult involved language use—“understanding jokes, humor in Spanish” and “understanding Chilean professors.” Worry about academic issues were also noted in the high ranking given “registering for courses.” Also, they worried about making Chilean friendships. The only area regarding values/beliefs that they anticipated as being possibly difficult to adjust to concerned the question of race and ethnicity.

T able 1 Situations/value changes students anticipated would be average or above average in difficulty of adjustment

(Scale: 0=not applicable 1=very easy 2=easy 3-average 4-difficult 5-very difficult)

Average Score

When contrasted with Table #2, which shows all the situations/value changes that the students found to have been actually difficult to adjust to, one striking factor comes through. The experience seems to have been more stressful than anticipated, for the students upon departure listed 17 areas that they had either an average or high degree of difficulty in adjusting to. Not only striking is the increase in numbers of items, but also the areas cited as being most difficult. While upon arrival they seemed most concerned about their use of Spanish, upon departure only one of the 17 areas of difficulty was in language—that of understanding jokes in Spanish. Concern about understanding professors dropped off the chart.

The areas that emerge as most difficult to adjust to in Table #2 fell into three distinct groups—beliefs/values/cultural differences, social interactions and the university environment. A few items such as the pollution problem (rated as the most difficult of all) might be particular to the Chilean case.

Respecting/adjusting to Chilean opinions/beliefs regarding class issues, race issues, and gender/sexual orientation issues were all considered difficult to adjust to by the students. Also mentioned as stressful were adjusting to different uses of time and to the food.

T able 2 Situations/value changes students ranked upon departing as average or above average in difficulty of adjustment

(Scale: 0=not applicable 1=very easy 2=easy 3-average 4-difficult 5-very difficult)

Average Score

Appearing as a foreigner/standing out was ranked quite high in terms of degree of difficulty of adjustment. Despite the fact that some of the students blended into Chilean society relatively easily in terms of physical appearance, others felt uncomfortable with the attention they received due to their obvious “foreignness.” This illustrates, as some of the other characteristics noted above, the relatively insular nature of Chilean society. For many Chileans, seeing an “outsider” is still a rare occurrence. Even behaviors that some students exhibited such as using a certain brand of backpack and having numerous pierced earrings immediately marked them as a non-Chilean.

There seems to be both a gender and an ethnic component to how the students felt about standing out. Among the students who classified themselves as Hispanic, not one indicated experiencing either “difficulty” or “great difficulty” in being a foreigner in Chile. In examining the distribution of answers in terms of gender, an interesting pattern emerges. Among the males, 25% felt they had no difficulty, 37% felt they had little difficulty, 37% felt they had some difficulty and only 2% indicated feeling quite a bit of difficulty as a foreigner. For the women, the figures were quite different. Only one person (3%) said she felt no difficulty, while 27% had little difficulty and 35% experienced some difficulty. The remaining 35% of the female students had quite a bit of difficulty adjusting to standing out in Chile. Twenty-one percent felt that it was quite difficult and 14% found that it was extremely difficult. The two black participants, both females, indicated feeling extreme unease in Chile.

When considering social interactions, making Chilean friends did emerge as difficult, just as anticipated. Other social situations that were also stressful for many of the students during their stay in Chile were interacting with Chilean students on campus, adjusting to different patterns of male/female dating behavior, and adjusting to different patterns of male/female friendship behavior. In the host family situation, the only area ranked as being difficult was that of the student communicating his/her needs to the host family.

The great differences between the United States and the Chilean university systems can be noted in the fact that understanding the Chilean university system, registering for courses, and adjusting to the Chilean teaching/learning styles were all considered difficult by the students. This is not surprising given the different structures and “cultures” of the university systems of the two nations. Not only do the Chilean universities not have the kind of campuses and student support that most United States universities do, but in addition many of the professors are part-time and often come only sporadically to the university. The United States students tended to find many of their Chilean classes too “unstructured,” and with more emphasis upon memorization and less upon creativity than they were used to.

The gap between the students’ initial expectations and their perception of the actual experience is shown in Tables #3 and #4. These charts corroborate the evidence presented above. Upon arrival, the students’ most immediate concern was using the Spanish language. However, as the exchange experience transpired and they lived in the Chilean culture, they found that cultural and value orientation differences to be more difficult to adjust to. Table #3 shows the only three areas where there was an actual drop in the degree of difficulty assigned by the students between their arrival and their departure. As can be seen, all three listed—understand-ing Chilean professors, using Spanish in the classroom and using Spanish in a non-academic setting—deal with language use.

T able 3 Areas that students found less difficlut to adjust to than anticipated

Decrease

Table #4 lists the nine situations/value orientations in which there was the biggest increase between the students’ initial expectations of the degree of difficulty and the actual degree of difficulty that they found in adjusting. Discarding the smog/pollution issue, all the others clearly deal with opinions and cultural differences. “Keeping an open mind about Chilean culture” was considered much more difficult by the students then they had expected, as was “maintaining a clear concept of your personal beliefs” and “changing personal beliefs as a result of your experience.” Views concerning social class came through again as significant—showing the very different nature of social class between United States and Chilean societies. Other areas that the students found were more difficult then they had anticipated were “use of time,” “food,” and “standing out.”

Several of the same patterns emerged in the students’ responses to ten open questions included in the questionnaire. They were asked what they expected to find (arrival) or had found (departure) in such areas as culture/values, the host family, academics, language, life in Santiago, friendship and views of Chileans. In the data analysis, the emphasis was placed on the difference between the students’ initial ideas upon arrival and their perspectives upon departure.

T able 4 Top nine areas that students found more difficult to adjust to than anticipated

(Number in column indicates difference between arrival and departure averages)

Increase

In response to the question, “I expect that my greatest challenge to the Chilean culture/lifestyle will be …,” six students indicated the language barrier. However, upon departure not one student said that it had been their greatest challenge. The areas that were most frequently mentioned were living in a big city (transportation, noise, etc.) and cultur-al/value issues such as lack of organization/schedules, machismo/sexism, and the Chilean perspective on social class.

Some of the students’ responses on the departure questionnaire were as follows: “My greatest challenge has been dealing with the lack of ethnic diversity.” “I find it hard to deal with indirectness; Chileans just can’t come out and say things like I and other Americans do.” “It has been hard dealing with the different economic levels and with what is appropriate or not compared to the US.” “I do not feel the same about being a woman in Chile because I really don’t know what that means here.”

Another question explored a related theme, which was that of respecting Chilean beliefs. The exact wording was as follows: “I expect (have found) that my greatest challenge to respecting Chilean beliefs will be (has been)… .” Upon arrival the students ranked sexism, being open-minded and religious differences the highest. Upon departure, the religious issue was not mentioned by anyone, being replaced by the class orientation of Chilean society.

Some of the student comments underlined the learning process that they had gone through as a result of the study abroad experience. One student had this to say: “my greatest challenge was just learning that it is hard to change ideas of groups of people when they don’t have experience with other cultures.” Another said, “it was hard to understand and tolerate the discrimination and prejudice of Chilean culture. Most outstanding being ideas of humor—racial and sexual.” Yet another questioned her own acceptance when she responded, “my greatest challenge has been that I am not sure yet if I can respect Chilean beliefs.”

The greater understanding and knowledge of Chilean culture that the students acquired as a result of the study abroad experience affected their views of Chileans in general. While their initial expectations were that Chileans would be open, friendly and sociable (35 used these words) but also a bit shy and conservative, upon leaving the majority still found Chileans to be very warm and hospitable (34 students). However, other descriptions of Chileans were also included that were not always so positive. Among some of the characteristics most frequently cited were, “poorly informed, little knowledge of the other, close-minded,” “nationalistic and ethnocentric,” “not friendly, cold” and “rude.”

Several students pointed out how difficult it was to answer this question. One said, “Chileans tend to be just as diverse, complicated, simple, loving, selfish, brilliant, ignorant, shy, loud, and fascinating as any other group of people.” Another person said, “Chileans are like everyone else in the world. They vary and I don’t see a lot of generalizations worth making.”

The Effect of the Study Abroad Experience upon Host Families

Host families were asked to fill out a questionnaire in May 1998 that explored the impact of hosting a US student. Several dimensions were examined, including the effect upon the household in general, relations among family members, and changes in their own personal values/beliefs.

The fact that the Council Study Center staff administered the questionnaire could have partially biased the results; it is possible that some host families might have presented an excessively positive view of the host experience in order to give a “good impression” rather than a “realistic one.” Not withstanding this caveat, it is the contention of the author that some valuable information—especially in the area of value change—was gained through the survey.

Fifty-six individuals responded to the survey, a nearly total response rate. Of those who responded, almost all were the “host mothers.” Their composite profile is as follows: 65% had a university degree or beyond, over half were engaged in some type of work outside the house, and about 20% had lived outside of Chile at some point in their life.

In the questionnaire, the families were asked to list three advantages and three disadvantages of hosting study abroad students. Their responses can be seen in tables #5 and #6. Concerning the advantages of hosting foreign students (Table #5), the most common advantage given (44% of the total responses) was “cultural reasons.” Other advantages mentioned were “promoting cultural understanding and exchange,” “learning English,” “teaching the student more about Chile and Chilean culture,” and “gaining a better understanding of US culture.”

The next most important category indicated by the respondents were “social reasons” (31%), including companionship, friendship, “having another ‘child,’ ” and other social reasons. This category was followed by economic factors (10%), and family reasons (6%). About 9% indicated other reasons for serving as a host family, such as improving communication, learning from the student, and contact with the student’s family. Only 2% out of the total gave a broad view of the experience—indi-cating its importance in promoting pluralism and humanitarianism.

T able 5 Advantages of Hosting Exchange Student for Host Family

(Based on open answer format—156 total responses)

Percent (%)

Many less indicated the disadvantages of hosting students. Of those who did respond, the following pattern emerged: about one quarter mentioned the extra work and responsibility involved, and the same amount talked about the loss of privacy and independence. Other disadvantages listed were worrying about when they came home, food issues, telephone use and uncooperative student attitudes.

Interestingly, while cultural reasons were the number one factor given for hosting foreign students, only 10% indicated cultural differences as a disadvantage. In another question along a similar vein, the families were asked whether they had felt at any time that their study abroad student did not share the same values they did. Again, about 10% answered in the affirmative. Among the factors most cited were religious differences and different concepts of family and independence. Thus it seems, at least from the families’ perspective, that the cultural differences between them and the study abroad students do not create, for the most part, difficulties. Rather, for many of the hosts, the cultural differences are the strongest advantage cited for having a study abroad student.