Content
About this brief
Quality Education- Reduced Inequality
- For policymakers
- United States of America
- Brief created: 2026
- Sign up
Welcome to America? International Student Perceptions of Discrimination
Brief about:
Journal Article (2007)
Written by:
Other researchers:
This study examines how 24 international graduate and undergraduate students from 15 countries perceived discrimination, unfairness, and cultural intolerance at a large public research university in the U.S. Southwest during spring 2004.
International student flows into the United States were under heightened scrutiny in the post-September 11 climate, when institutions reported the first absolute decline in international enrolments since 1971 and many research institutions saw falling graduate applications. At the same time, international students were widely valued for the tuition they paid, the diversity they added to campuses, and the economic benefit they brought to the United States, where education was described as the fifth largest export of services and international students were estimated to add approximately $12 billion to the economy.
Much of the existing discussion framed international student difficulty as a matter of adjustment, adaptation, or coping, while paying less attention to host-society practices that may make campuses unwelcoming. This research was set up against that gap: rather than treating dissatisfaction as a student problem alone, it used neo-racism to examine how cultural difference, nationality, language, and racialised belonging shaped acceptance after enrolment. It therefore focused on whether some serious difficulties were rooted in inadequacies within the host society rather than in the students themselves.
Key findings
- Experiences of discrimination differed sharply by race, language, and region of origin, with White English-speaking international students reporting little or no direct negative treatment and students from Asia, India, Latin America, and the Middle East reporting considerable discrimination.Evidence
The interviews involved 24 graduate and undergraduate students from 15 countries: 14 females and 10 males, including six from India, six from East Asia, four from Latin America, three from Europe, one from Africa, one from the Gulf Region, one from the Caribbean, one from Canada, and one from New Zealand. The analysis states that students from Asia, India, Latin America, and the Middle East reported considerable discrimination, while students from Europe, Canada, and New Zealand did not report direct negative experiences related to race or culture. A student from the Netherlands said, "I'm a White guy who speaks English. So that makes you less a target for discrimination."
What it meansIn this setting, nationality, race, and language shaped who experienced hostility and who felt accepted. Because this is a small case study from one university, it shows patterns in perceived treatment rather than prevalence across all international students.
- Some students experienced discrimination as cultural stereotyping and media-backed devaluation, which made them feel inferior or "second class" in the host society.Evidence
A Mexican woman said, "there are different degrees of racism" and later, "I feel like second class." A woman from the Gulf Region said, "The most difficult thing for me personally was the race issue. I wasn't that conscious of my race because of where I come from." She also said American students asked her why she "spoke like a White person." Another student described the power of public narratives by saying, "If you're going to get robbed it's going to be a Black guy, if you're going to be killed it's going to be a Black guy, because that's what's on television." The Mexican student also paraphrased hostile media language: "Listen how you got ripped off by the little Mexicans. They take your funding, your children, and your education."
What it meansCultural discrimination appeared through everyday talk, media portrayals, and casual stereotyping, not only through explicit slurs. For practitioners, that means campus climate work needs to address the wider social meanings attached to nationality, race, and language, not just isolated incidents.
- Subtle exclusion in daily campus life and classrooms often took the form of uneasy greetings, staring, being left out of study groups, and being made reluctant to speak in class.Evidence
A Vietnamese woman said, "Sometimes in the [campus] parking place, the people, the feeling from the people, you can tell... the way they greet [you] is different." A Chinese woman said, "They stare at you. They look at you with [some] kind of feeling." An Indian man said, "I'm uncomfortable with the [U.S.] culture here." In classrooms, a Chinese woman said, "if I ask questions the professor will say, 'I don't understand' and so that makes me very embarrassed. I don't ask questions anymore. I ask other students?I don't ask the professor?I just talk to other students." Another Chinese student said international students were "seldom invited" when classmates made plans after class.
What it meansBelonging and classroom participation were shaped by both cultural distance and perceived disrespect. In practice, this suggests that silence and withdrawal may reflect exclusion or embarrassment rather than lack of interest or ability.
- Some students reported direct verbal mistreatment from faculty, peers, and local community members, including sexist comments, racial slurs, and statements telling them to leave the country.Evidence
A Japanese woman said some professors "don't respect women" and "talk about sex and ask me about my sexual experience and [it was] really inappropriate." A Canadian woman described an advisor who made "racial comments, also, some sexist comments" and "a comment about 'wiping out the whole Middle East.'" A woman from the Gulf Region reported that a truck driver shouted, "niggers go home." A Chinese man reported shoppers shouting, "go back to your country." Another student recalled an American man saying, "What, you're having fun with a foreigner?"
What it meansThese accounts point to overt hostility in both academic and public spaces, and they were experienced as cultural intolerance as well as racial abuse. Because they are self-reported experiences, they show harm as perceived by students but do not measure frequency across the wider campus.
- Work restrictions, funding decisions, and opaque departmental rules were experienced as direct discrimination and intensified students' financial vulnerability.Evidence
International students were described as being "only allowed to work twenty hours" on campus and "not allowed to work off-campus at all." One student said, "that's another restriction on internationals." Another said, "you have to know the rules of the game or you'll be killed." A student explained that after speaking up, "they immediately cut off my funding and they forced me to look for something else." Another said a supervisor "would not give him letters of recommendation" and was "pretty much maligning him for job interviews."
What it meansFor these students, employment and funding were not neutral administrative matters but part of the discrimination they faced. In practice, transparent explanations of work rules, funding decisions, and appeal routes matter for students who depend on assistantships and cannot easily replace lost income.
- Some students experienced physical intimidation and did not report it because they did not know their rights or did not trust that anyone would help them.Evidence
One Indian student said that while walking back home from campus, "people threw bottles at us." Another student said, "someone threw bottles at him." The discussion states that most discriminatory incidents were not reported to any authority on or off campus, and that some students were "not aware of their rights or of whom to turn towards for support," while others feared they "would be deported to their home country for stirring up trouble."
What it meansEven when students treated violence as "no big deal," the incidents contributed to fear and silence. This indicates a need for visible, trusted reporting and support routes, while also showing that the study cannot estimate how widespread such attacks were.
Proposed action
- Make members of the educational community aware that discrimination based on nation of origin exists and that they have a responsibility to reject national stereotypes.Step one
Make members of the educational community aware of this issue.
Emphasise their responsibility in creating intellectual environments that foster cross-national acceptance and learning.
Step twoReject the perpetuation of national stereotypes.
Address stereotypes in campus interactions and institutional practice rather than allowing them to shape the climate international students encounter.
- Articulate clear guidelines for teaching and working with international students so administrators and faculty understand how to provide a safe and welcoming environment.Step one
Articulate guidelines concerning teaching and working with international students.
Use the guidelines to make administrators and faculty aware of their responsibility in providing a safe and welcoming environment.
Step twoExplain differences in faculty-student expectations and authority.
Make clear that international students may have different perceptions of the faculty-student relationship, may respond differently than United States students, and may feel that authority figures are beyond reproach.
- Make international students aware of the intercultural issues they are likely to encounter and of the support and redress available to them.Step one
Make international students aware of intercultural issues they are likely to find.
Provide this information alongside clear guidance on the avenues of support and redress they can use if they encounter unfairness or threatening situations.
Step twoInform students about where to seek help.
Ensure that students are well informed of the offices and channels they can use when they need support.
- Future research should examine how socio-economic status, language fluency, and institutional attitudes shape perceptions of neo-racism among international students and visiting scholars.Step one
Investigate the attitudes of faculty, staff, and students towards international students.
Study how aware they are of the issues international students face on other college campuses in other countries.
Step twoExamine whether socio-economic status and English fluency affect perceptions of discriminatory treatment.
Compare international students from upper-class and lower-class backgrounds, and compare students who are fluent in English, students with foreign accents, and students with weaker English skills.
Step threeStudy visiting scholars.
Extend the inquiry beyond enrolled students to people who are likely confronted by similar problems in higher education and research settings.
Comments
You must log in to ask a question
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.
Already have an account? Log in
Discover more
Welcome to America? International Student Perceptions of Discrimination
Cite this brief: Txesting, One. 'Welcome to America? International Student Perceptions of Discrimination'. Acume. https://www.acume.org/r/welcome-to-america-international-student-perceptions-of-discrimination/
Brief created by: Dr One Txesting | Year brief made: 2026
Original research:
- Lee, J. J., Txesting, O., & Rice, C., (2007) ‘Welcome to America? International Student Perceptions of Discrimination’ 53(3), pp. 381–409 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-4508-3. – http://www.jstor.org/stable/29735060
Research brief:
This study examines how 24 international graduate and undergraduate students from 15 countries perceived discrimination, unfairness, and cultural intolerance at a large public research university in the U.S. Southwest during spring 2004.
International student flows into the United States were under heightened scrutiny in the post-September 11 climate, when institutions reported the first absolute decline in international enrolments since 1971 and many research institutions saw falling graduate applications. At the same time, international students were widely valued for the tuition they paid, the diversity they added to campuses, and the economic benefit they brought to the United States, where education was described as the fifth largest export of services and international students were estimated to add approximately $12 billion to the economy.
Much of the existing discussion framed international student difficulty as a matter of adjustment, adaptation, or coping, while paying less attention to host-society practices that may make campuses unwelcoming. This research was set up against that gap: rather than treating dissatisfaction as a student problem alone, it used neo-racism to examine how cultural difference, nationality, language, and racialised belonging shaped acceptance after enrolment. It therefore focused on whether some serious difficulties were rooted in inadequacies within the host society rather than in the students themselves.
Findings:
Experiences of discrimination differed sharply by race, language, and region of origin, with White English-speaking international students reporting little or no direct negative treatment and students from Asia, India, Latin America, and the Middle East reporting considerable discrimination.
The interviews involved 24 graduate and undergraduate students from 15 countries: 14 females and 10 males, including six from India, six from East Asia, four from Latin America, three from Europe, one from Africa, one from the Gulf Region, one from the Caribbean, one from Canada, and one from New Zealand. The analysis states that students from Asia, India, Latin America, and the Middle East reported considerable discrimination, while students from Europe, Canada, and New Zealand did not report direct negative experiences related to race or culture. A student from the Netherlands said, “I’m a White guy who speaks English. So that makes you less a target for discrimination.”
In this setting, nationality, race, and language shaped who experienced hostility and who felt accepted. Because this is a small case study from one university, it shows patterns in perceived treatment rather than prevalence across all international students.
Some students experienced discrimination as cultural stereotyping and media-backed devaluation, which made them feel inferior or “second class” in the host society.
A Mexican woman said, “there are different degrees of racism” and later, “I feel like second class.” A woman from the Gulf Region said, “The most difficult thing for me personally was the race issue. I wasn’t that conscious of my race because of where I come from.” She also said American students asked her why she “spoke like a White person.” Another student described the power of public narratives by saying, “If you’re going to get robbed it’s going to be a Black guy, if you’re going to be killed it’s going to be a Black guy, because that’s what’s on television.” The Mexican student also paraphrased hostile media language: “Listen how you got ripped off by the little Mexicans. They take your funding, your children, and your education.”
Cultural discrimination appeared through everyday talk, media portrayals, and casual stereotyping, not only through explicit slurs. For practitioners, that means campus climate work needs to address the wider social meanings attached to nationality, race, and language, not just isolated incidents.
Subtle exclusion in daily campus life and classrooms often took the form of uneasy greetings, staring, being left out of study groups, and being made reluctant to speak in class.
A Vietnamese woman said, “Sometimes in the [campus] parking place, the people, the feeling from the people, you can tell… the way they greet [you] is different.” A Chinese woman said, “They stare at you. They look at you with [some] kind of feeling.” An Indian man said, “I’m uncomfortable with the [U.S.] culture here.” In classrooms, a Chinese woman said, “if I ask questions the professor will say, ‘I don’t understand’ and so that makes me very embarrassed. I don’t ask questions anymore. I ask other students?I don’t ask the professor?I just talk to other students.” Another Chinese student said international students were “seldom invited” when classmates made plans after class.
Belonging and classroom participation were shaped by both cultural distance and perceived disrespect. In practice, this suggests that silence and withdrawal may reflect exclusion or embarrassment rather than lack of interest or ability.
Some students reported direct verbal mistreatment from faculty, peers, and local community members, including sexist comments, racial slurs, and statements telling them to leave the country.
A Japanese woman said some professors “don’t respect women” and “talk about sex and ask me about my sexual experience and [it was] really inappropriate.” A Canadian woman described an advisor who made “racial comments, also, some sexist comments” and “a comment about ‘wiping out the whole Middle East.'” A woman from the Gulf Region reported that a truck driver shouted, “niggers go home.” A Chinese man reported shoppers shouting, “go back to your country.” Another student recalled an American man saying, “What, you’re having fun with a foreigner?”
These accounts point to overt hostility in both academic and public spaces, and they were experienced as cultural intolerance as well as racial abuse. Because they are self-reported experiences, they show harm as perceived by students but do not measure frequency across the wider campus.
Work restrictions, funding decisions, and opaque departmental rules were experienced as direct discrimination and intensified students’ financial vulnerability.
International students were described as being “only allowed to work twenty hours” on campus and “not allowed to work off-campus at all.” One student said, “that’s another restriction on internationals.” Another said, “you have to know the rules of the game or you’ll be killed.” A student explained that after speaking up, “they immediately cut off my funding and they forced me to look for something else.” Another said a supervisor “would not give him letters of recommendation” and was “pretty much maligning him for job interviews.”
For these students, employment and funding were not neutral administrative matters but part of the discrimination they faced. In practice, transparent explanations of work rules, funding decisions, and appeal routes matter for students who depend on assistantships and cannot easily replace lost income.
Some students experienced physical intimidation and did not report it because they did not know their rights or did not trust that anyone would help them.
One Indian student said that while walking back home from campus, “people threw bottles at us.” Another student said, “someone threw bottles at him.” The discussion states that most discriminatory incidents were not reported to any authority on or off campus, and that some students were “not aware of their rights or of whom to turn towards for support,” while others feared they “would be deported to their home country for stirring up trouble.”
Even when students treated violence as “no big deal,” the incidents contributed to fear and silence. This indicates a need for visible, trusted reporting and support routes, while also showing that the study cannot estimate how widespread such attacks were.
Advice:
Make members of the educational community aware that discrimination based on nation of origin exists and that they have a responsibility to reject national stereotypes.
- Emphasise their responsibility in creating intellectual environments that foster cross-national acceptance and learning.
- Address stereotypes in campus interactions and institutional practice rather than allowing them to shape the climate international students encounter.
Articulate clear guidelines for teaching and working with international students so administrators and faculty understand how to provide a safe and welcoming environment.
- Use the guidelines to make administrators and faculty aware of their responsibility in providing a safe and welcoming environment.
- Make clear that international students may have different perceptions of the faculty-student relationship, may respond differently than United States students, and may feel that authority figures are beyond reproach.
Make international students aware of the intercultural issues they are likely to encounter and of the support and redress available to them.
- Provide this information alongside clear guidance on the avenues of support and redress they can use if they encounter unfairness or threatening situations.
- Ensure that students are well informed of the offices and channels they can use when they need support.
Future research should examine how socio-economic status, language fluency, and institutional attitudes shape perceptions of neo-racism among international students and visiting scholars.
- Study how aware they are of the issues international students face on other college campuses in other countries.
- Compare international students from upper-class and lower-class backgrounds, and compare students who are fluent in English, students with foreign accents, and students with weaker English skills.
- Extend the inquiry beyond enrolled students to people who are likely confronted by similar problems in higher education and research settings.