International graduate students and the spread of English

VICKI R. MUNRO*

ABSTRACT: Because international graduate students often return to their native countries as educators,
politicians, and business people, they have the potential t o influence the spread of English, both directly
and indirectly. Thus arises the question of whether they will be knowledgeable enough about language
issues to make informed language policy decisions. Although the spread of English as an international
language has generated much research, little has been done to consider the role these graduate students will
play in such future policy making. or the role indirectly played by the universities they attend in forming
these policies. This paper reports and interprets the results of an exploratory survey designed t o discover
how international graduate students think about and use English. In particular, the following aspects were
considered: the functions and varieties of English, the worldwide role of English, and attitudes and changes
in attitudes toward English. The research suggests that students tend to emphasize the instrumental role of
English, to lack an awareness of issues such as the nativization of English, to support English as a world
language largely because of inertia. and to hold more positive attitudes toward (American) English over
time.

INTRODUCTION'
With the spread of English as an international language, much concern has arisen over the
appropriate models and norms to use in teaching it as a second language (see Kachru,
1992a; Strevens, 1992). The initial question centers on a simple dichotomy: native versus
nativized varieties (e.g., British English (BE) and American English (AE), versus, e.g.,
Indian English and Nigerian English (see Kachru, 1990)). The native-versus-nativized
question is most compelling in countries with official language policies which specify
particular roles for English, whether as a neutral link language (as in India) or as one
language among many (as in the European Community; see Berns, 1992, 1995; Gorlach
and Schroder, 1985). In other cases, governments may have no stated policy, leaving the
spread and use of English to the elite who have access to such advantageous knowledge.
In the midst of this discussion, one crucial factor has yet to be examined: many of the
future educators, politicians, and business people of countries around the world receive
part of their education in the USA. Although they come ostensibly to gain academic
knowledge and professional skills, living in the USA requires that these international
graduate students (over 190,000 according to the 1992-93 edition of Open Doors,
Zikopoulos et al., 1993) use English daily. Even after returning to their home countries,
they may have to continue using English in their professions. Despite the attitudes toward
English which they may bring to the USA, proximity to the American variety, a desire or
need to fit in with their co-workers in labs and other peer groups, and a lack of exposure to
other varieties may lead to reinforcement or transfer of iinguistic allegiances, changes
which may eventually affect the spread of English worldwide.
In the careers they follow upon returning to their native countries, current international
graduate students in the USA will presumably influence language policy, either directly or
indirectly. In a government committee, for example, they may consider the question 'which
variety of English,' or even whether to take an official stance on the issue. In education, their

*Department of English, Purdue University, 1356 Heavilon Hall, West Lafayette, IN. 47907-1 356, USA.

0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. l Y Y & I O X Cowley Road, Oxfurd OX4 IJF. UK and 35(1 Main Street, Malden. MA (I2 148, USA.
338 Vicki R. Munro

influence may be more subtle: which variety do they purport to teach, and what norms do
they require of their students? Their years as graduate students in the USA may result in
positive attitudes toward A E and in inadvertent use and acceptance of Americanisms, both
at the expense of BE and of nativized varieties. Thus international graduate students
currently studying at American universities may play key roles in the spread of English
worldwide and in attitude changes toward its role as a world language.
A survey of 30 international graduate students at a large midwestern university (with an
international graduate student population of 1,862) provides an initial look at the language
usage and attitudes of such students (see Table 1). The students were contacted through
their presence in classes (e.g., English composition) or lab groups. Their lengths of stay in
the USA prior to their participation in the study ranged from six months to eight years.
Sixty-three percent of them planned to return to their home countries upon graduation.

Table 1. Personal data on student respondents

Average
Average years
Gender Average years studying Return home
Country M F age in USA English Yes No

China 9 6 29 2.5 11 6 6
Germany 2 0 28.5 1.5 11 2 0
Greece 0 1 28 8.0 11 I 0
India 2 0 24.5 2.75 19 2 0
Italy 1 0 31 1.5 9 1 0
Jordan 1 0 24 0.75 9 1 0
Puerto Rico 1 0 23 0.75 13 1 0
Sierra Leone 1 0 26 1.5 19 1 0
Spain 1 0 24 5.0 5 1 0
Sudan 1 0 23 0.5 11 1 0
Taiwan 1 0 24 0.5 7 1 0
Thailand 1 0 30 0.75 10 1 0
Turkey 1 0 24 2.0 11 1 0
Totalsh 22 7 28 2.4 I1 20 6

One Chinese respondent left the gender question blank, one left the return home question blank and three
wrote in not sure for that question

Total averages were figured from the original data, not the columns

The survey gathered personal data, information about the use of English in the students
home countries, and information on the students personal uses of English. The questions
required choosing from among three or four possible answers or ranking several choices
according to preference or perceived importance. Four of the questions asked for brief
prose answers. The questions relating to personal English use required the students to
consider two different time periods: the first few months after their arrival in the USA
(initially) and the present (currently).
The respondents were allowed to take the survey home and to return it at a later time. The
investigator explained that the survey was intended to examine their attitudes toward
0 Blackwell Puhlirhers L I ~ I996
.
 International graduate students and the spread of English 339

English and how those attitudes might have changed over time from when they first arrived
in the USA until the present. The information collected was then analyzed in three broad
categories: functions and varieties of English, the worldwide role of English, and attitudes
toward English. The first category largely determines the degree of language versatility that
English speakers will possess in any given country or language context; however, the func-
tions allowed or enforced depend at least partially on a countrys understanding of the role
English plays in the world. As students attitudes change, their understanding of this role
may also change, with implications for how and why English is used around the world.

FUNCTIONS AND VARIETIES OF ENGLISH

In dividing countries into Inner, Outer, and Expanding Circles, Kachrus concentric
circles model for the spread of English takes into account the functional allocation of
English (Kachru, 1992b: 356). Users of English in countries in the Expanding Circle, such
as China, use English for a more limited range of functions than d o users in the Outer Circle
(e.g., Malaysia) or Inner Circle (e.g., Canada). The range of functions in a country affects the
status of English (as second or foreign language), which in turn affects its intranational uses
as well as its international usefulness. The wider the range of functions, the more versatile
the language will be in various potential contexts and situations; however, such a widening
of functional range also carries the threat that English will overpower the native languages
entirely (see Phillipson, 1992). Function thus becomes a prominent concern, whether
implicit or explicit, in language policies.
One of the first questions in language policy decision making is, then: should English play
an instrumental, integrative, or innovative role in the non-native context? The third option
- innovation - can be left aside for the moment: until English has attained the first two func-
tions, any discussion of its innovative function is virtually pointless. Among the inter-
national graduate students surveyed for this study, there seemed to be an overwhelming
preference for an instrumental role for English. In the contexts of the students home
countries, English was reportedly used mainly for education, technology, and business.
Student preferences while in the USA followed this tendency, though every category,
including the integrative function, was rated at a greater degree of preference in the USA
than in the native country, no doubt because of the students current residence in the USA.
Perhaps most interesting are the students rankings of the relative importance of various
areas of English use. Education received the highest ranking, with technology a close
second and business a distant third. The integrative functions - use of English with family
and friends, and in religion - received barely any notice. Such responses coincide with the
foreign- or second-language status of English. As a tool, English fills certain needs and
performs certain necessary functions (e.g., in travel, international trade, and research-
sharing).
Students such as the survey respondents may someday be in a position to make conscious
decisions about both functional allocation and norms of English. The ability to make
informed and effective decisions requires some basic level of knowledge and awareness
about the current status of English, about the repercussions of the current policy, and about
the possibilities for change. Currently, however, it seems that few students pay much atten-
tion to language as such. Among the survey respondents, for example, over a third (37
percent) had no idea whether their country had an official language policy, and those who
thought that it did tended to cite required English coursework in school curricula as the
8 Blackwull Puhlirhrr\ Ltd. IYYh
340 Vicki R.Munro

sole exponent of the policy. This lack of awareness was reflected in other questions pertain-
ing to language use. For instance, 7 3 percent of the respondents claimed that English influ-
enced their first language, yet 80 percent reported that English did not threaten, and 50
percent that it did not enrich.
One of the most interesting apparent contradictions in the students responses was their
lack of awareness of their own and their countries use of a (nativized) variety of English
combined with a self-reported current ability to recognize another speakers country of
origin on the basis of accent. Only 23 percent of the respondents stated that people in
their country spoke a nativized variety of English, yet 57 percent claimed the ability to
recognize an English speakers country of origin based on accent. Further evidence of
unawareness of varieties is the fact that respondents generally claimed they spoke AE
while their fellow countrymen spoke BE, the variety they also claimed was taught in their
countrys schools.
Several possible reasons exist for the respondents claims that they speak a native variety
of English. In general, dialects are looked on unfavorably; native speakers (NS) accept a
standard English as correctand believe they speak it. Non-native users of English follow
this trend, especially when, as students, they are continually told that they are learning BE
or AE (Kachru touches on this schizophrenia between the perceived model and actual
linguistic behavior in his Fallacy 3 (Kachru, 1992b: 358)). A NS model in the classroom
often implies that the non-native variety is a sub-standard dialect rather than a legitimate
version of English (see Nelson, 1992, for a discussion of attitude and the legitimacy of
varieties). This belief is further encouraged by the preponderance of AE and BE products -
books, movies, textbooks, music - which subtly proclaim this is correct English.
Besides the lack of non-native speaker (NNS) models in the classroom, some students
also may lack any awareness of varieties of English, simply believing, for example, that they
speak AE because they currently reside in the USA, or that they speak BE because it was
taught in their schools. This lack of understanding combines with the educational system
which encourages NS models and norms and with the view that English is best used for
instrumental functions to produce English speakers who know little about their own
language use, and who are thus not well prepared to form realistic language policies.
The NS norm and model myth is likely to be perpetuated as current students return home
to positions of governmental or educational influence. Two significant changes, however,
may occur: if a large number of such students attend US institutions, then AE is likely to be
reinforced or to replace BE as the preferred model, given that most of the students believed
they spoke AE and that their attitudes toward English inclined more favorably toward AE
than BE; and the respondents interactions with fellow students will most likely nudge their
use of English at least slightly beyond the instrumental. If they someday help their children
learn English by speaking it with them and by sending them to English-medium schools and
to universities in English-speaking countries, they subtly encourage the integrative func-
tions of English. Though international graduate students arrive in the USA with preconcep-
tions about the role of English in their lives and in their countries, living in the USA may
broaden their beliefs. They return home, then, with a wider concept of English than they
possessed when they left. Of course, this does not imply a sudden and complete change
from instrumental to integrative functions or a quick move from Expanding to Outer Circle
status. It does, however, suggest that over time, given the numbers of students studying
overseas, the role of English will change worldwide.

8 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996

 International graduate students and the spread of English 34 1

THE WORLDWIDE ROLE OF ENGLISH

Choice of both function and model depend to a large degree on the worldwide role
assigned to English by policymakers and individuals. The belief that another language
would be better suited to the role would tend to limit the place English holds in any given
country to the small necessary sphere of international communication, thus limiting its
intranational functions, as well as specifying its norms.
Few of the international students surveyed expressed a belief that some other language
would make a better world language than English. Despite the variety of native countries
represented, English received the most votes: 44 percent initially, 48 percent currently.
Among the survey respondents, only two other languages - Chinese (20 percent) and
Italian (3 percent) - were offered as best choice for a world language. The high ranking
received by English may not, however, indicate the overwhelmingly positive attitude it may
appear to support.
The respondents attitudes toward the role of English as a world language may best be
characterized as a sort of inertia. Those who felt English made the best world language con-
sidered it easyand cited its existing status as world language. Similarly, the students gener-
ally considered it important that people learn English and that countries have a language
policy: 47 percent of the students either asserted that current policy was good or that it was
a step in the right direction and should be carried further. Even those who chose a different
best world language than English tended to consider it very (57 percent of the 14 who
chose a different language) to somewhat (43 percent) important that people learn English.
Of the 14 students who considered English the best world language, 64 percent felt it was
very important and 36 percent felt it was somewhat important for people to learn English.
This emphasis on learning English supports the notion of inertia: regardless of personal
linguistic preference, respondents would encourage learning English because it is currently
a world language. A 39-year-old Chinese female, for example, wrote: No one is the suitable
world language. English. . . may be the one which can be used in the range of the world since
they can be understood by most of people.
This acceptance of the way things are seems related to the position which the students
are in. They already know English themselves, so there is little incentive to support some
other language as a world language. Their current situation - studying overseas - reinforces
the instrumental function of the language. In addition, once they return home, their native
language will most likely take precedence over English, so the question of which language
should be a world language may seem irrelevant to them. As one student wrote:
Each region in Earth has a set of characteristics, different from the rest of the world. . . . Any
attempt to establish a world language would end in multiple variations of that language all over
the world. These variations would cause the birth of new languages. We would end where we
started. . . . (23-year-old Puerto Rican male)

If any world language will result in new languages, individuals need not worry about the
issue. Instead, the respondents were willing to accept English for world communication,
perhaps secure in the knowledge that they need only worry about their own immediate
future.
This laissez-faire acceptance of English as a world language has implications for the
spread of English. If the respondents are ever in a position to d o so, they may very well
support in their country an official language policy which encourages the inclusion of
0 Blackwell Puhlishers Lld. IYY6
342 Vicki R. Munro

English (and specifically AE), whether as a second or preferred foreign language. In any
case, assuming that they consider their education in US universities to have been valuable,
many may wish their children to learn English, continuing the itsa world language already
attitude.

ATTITUDES AND ATTITUDE CHANGE

Because English enables its speakers in many parts of the world to attain economic
success, and because of the inertia described above, it is not surprising to find professed
positive attitudes (90 percent) toward the language. Perhaps more surprising is the fact that
respondents consistently marked AE higher than BE in terms of understandability, accept-
ability, and preferability as a model for their native countries (see Table 2).

Table 2. Comparison of British English and American English

Easiest to Understands Most Should

understand you most acceptable be taught
Then Now Then Now Then Now Then Now

BE 33/10 13/4 23/7 10/3 27/8 20/6 40/12 27/8

AE 53/16 70/21 43/13 53/16 50/15 57/17 40/12 57/17
Other 7/2 3/ 1 10/3 10/3 3/ 1 7/2 13/4 13/4

In Tables 2 and 3, the first number is the percentage; the second is the number of respondents. In both Tables
the percentages were calculated from a total of 30 respondents

This emphasis on AE at the expense of BE may again be due to the current residence of
the respondents in the USA. Responding to a survey about English administered by an AE
speaker in the USA, some students may not have wished to offend or to create conflict. A
more likely explanation, however, is the prominence of the USA in the world scene -
politically, economically, and technologically. As long as the USA enjoys political and
economic ascendancy, AE gains prestige, importance, and popularity. Attitude toward
English thus seems to be a function of some prescription for success.
Another factor which may affect attitude is the respondents perceived levels of profi-
ciency in the language. Greater proficiency would presumably lead to a more positive
attitude, following the adage you like what you are good at. In self-rating their English abi-
lities in speaking, listening, reading, and writing, the respondents reported overall improve-
ment over time to varying degrees. Thus, regardless of actual objective improvement, the
students believed they were improving, and could even specify the agencies causing the
improvement - the media and American friends (choices at odds with the stated preference
for an instrumental role for English) receiving the highest rankings (see Table 3). While
none of the choices received an overwhelming majority - even the media received only 30
percent for improvement in ability and 27 percent for change in feelings - it is significant to
note that English classes received a very low score (7 percent). While this may cause dis-
comfort for educators, the finding may be due to the high language proficiency required to
study in the USA.
8 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. I9Yh
 International graduate students and the spread of English 343

Table 3. Factors causing change in ability and attitude

Improvement Change in
in ability feelings

Department course work 13/4 17/5

English classes 7/2 7/2
American friends 20/6 23/7
International friends 7/2 0
Media 30/9 27/8
Daily routine 13/4 7/2
Other 10/3 10/3

In contrast to the sample as a whole, the Chinese students tended to self-report their
English abilities toward the negative end of the scale; a smaller number of Chinese students
considered their English abilities good or rather good. One possible explanation for this is
the relatively large number of Chinese speakers at this university (380 from the Peoples
Republic of China and 256 from Taiwan): any Chinese student is likely to have fellow
Chinese students in classes or in lab groups, so that a Chinese-speaking support network is
in place academically as well as socially, thus encouraging more use of Chinese and less use
of English even in classes and labs. The move toward integrative functions may thus be
hindered for at least this language group.
That the Chinese subgroup was not completely representative of the entire sample leads
to the conclusion that other factors besides the classification non-native may affect atti-
tude change. Thirty-one percent of the Chinese respondents were female (compared to 23
percent of the entire sample). Fifty percent of the Chinese respondents (compared to 27
percent of the entire sample) were either not returning to their home country or were
unsure whether they would. Both of these factors may affect attitudes toward English and,
in particular, toward AE, since students planning to remain in the USA can expect to use
English more consistently over a longer period of time. While this look at the Chinese
students as a subgroup within the larger sample is cursory at best, it does raise some
interesting issues for future study. If nationality affects both attitude toward and self-
reported ability in English, then grouping all international students under the label interna-
tional seems uninformative.
For the survey respondents, attitude and attitude change can be considered the result of a
cluster of factors: desire for economic success, current location, and perceived level of
proficiency. International graduate students, by virtue of attending school in the USA,
stand a good chance of possessing the characteristics which would lead to the positive atti-
tude the respondents professed to have. Although indications of attitude change must not
automatically be presumed to be true changes of preference - due, in some cases, merely to
location and thus not necessarily permanent - it seems likely that positive attitudes toward
AE would increase over time as the students form friendships with Americans and gain
proficiency and familiarity with the language. This chance to gain an inside look at AE and
American culture may cause students to support a change of model in their home countries
(from BE to AE), should the issue arise. The friendships international students form with
American students also may encourage the integrative function of English, thus potentially
0 Blackwell Puhli*hcr\ Ltd I YYh
344 Vicki R. Munro

influencing how the survey respondents will view the place of English in their home
countries once they return.

CONCLUSION
The results of this research suggest two things. First, current international graduate
students tend towards the status quo in matters of language usage. They prefer, not surpris-
ingly, an instrumental role for English, a language that they are willing to tolerate as part of
the necessary evil of needing to study abroad and of learning a language in which to do it.
They show little knowledge of processes of linguistic nativization and little awareness of
language issues, such as official language policies, Second, this inertia does not tell the
whole story about the respondents language use. These same students acknowledged that
their time in the USA affected their language use and their attitudes toward English.
Although the students reported comparatively little attitudinal change, it is significant that
most of that reported change was from positive to more positive and from BE to AE,
responses which signal potential change in the world situation of English.
In moving beyond the exploratory stage of this research, several adjustments could prove
beneficial. First, the current survey does not take into account the students real level of
English vis-a-vis some objective measure. Second, giving the survey in a sit-down setting
would enable the students to ask questions and might also encourage them to take the
survey more seriously, insuring that all the questions are answered fully. Third, the survey
itself should be condensed, and should include two measurement times, rather than asking
for recall of attitudes. Lastly, a large sample size would allow more variables (e.g., gender,
continent of origin, number of years in the USA) to be considered. The fact that many inter-
national students are attending US universities creates great potential for an impact upon
the spread of English via influences upon the graduate students themelves. Future research
might consider the question of the universitys role in the spread of English.

NOTES
1. I would like to thank Margie Berns for her suggestions on revising the questionnaire and her several helpful
reviews of drafts of the paper itself. I also wish to thank the international graduate students in the English,
Chemistry, and Engineering departments at Purdue University who served as willing survey respondents.
2. A copy of the survey is available from the author upon request.

REFERENCES
Berns, Margie (1 992) Sociolinguistics and the teaching of English in Europe beyond the 1990s. World Englishes,
11.3-14.
Berns, Margie (1995) English in Europe: whose language, which culture? International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 5,21-31.
Gorlach. Manfred and Schroder, Konrad ( 1 985) Good usagein an EFL context. In The English Language Today:
Public Attitudes Toward the English Language. Edited by S. Greenbaum. Oxford: Pergamon Press. pp. 227-
233.
Kachru, Braj B. (1990) The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions, and Models of Non-native Englishes.
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, Braj B. (1992a) Models for non-native Englishes. In The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. 2nd
edition. Edited by B. Kachru. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. pp. 48-74.
Kachru, Braj B. (1992b) Teaching world Englishes. In The Other Tongue: English across Culrures. 2nd edition.
Edited by B. Kachru. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. pp. 356-365.

0 Blackwell Publisher\ Ltd. 1996

 International graduate students and the spread of English 345

Nelson, Cecil L. (1 992) My language, your culture: whose communicative competence? In The Other Tongue:
English across Cultures. 2nd edition. Edited by B. Kachru. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. pp. 327-
339.
Phillipson, Robert (1 992) Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Strevens, Peter (1 992) English as an international language: directions in the 1990s. In The OfherTongue:English
across Cultures. 2nd edition. Edited by B. Kachru. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. pp. 27-47.
Zikopoulos, Marianthi, Sutton, Elizabeth, and Julian, Alfred (eds.) (1993) Open doors 1992-93: Report on Inter-
national Educational Exchange. New York: Institute of International Education.

(Received 6 October 1995.)

8 Alackwrll Puhlisherr LtJ. 1YYh