Sociocultural adaptation and its triggers among international students in the context of Germany

Considering all stated above, it is possible to add that there are two frameworks of adaptation that correspond with sociocultural and psychological forms of adaptation - culture learning framework and stress and coping framework, respectively. Culture learning framework, which helps us better understand sociocultural adaptation, stems from social and experimental psychology, namely, Argyle's (1969) study concerned with interpersonal behaviors and social skills (Masgoret & Ward, 2006). It is possible to differentiate two trends in culture learning: the first one connected to the communication styles and competence, and the second one - cultural differences in communication styles (Masgoret & Ward, 2006). The core of the culture learning framework are social skills and interactions, therefore, cross-cultural incompatibilities appear from and inability of a person to cope with daily social interactions. Moreover, such aspects as verbal and nonverbal communication, norms, values and communication practices may vary from one culture to another, thus leading to misunderstandings between the representatives of different cultures.

Stress and coping framework that helps to identify psychological adaptation presumes that stress appears when additional pressure is put on an acculturating individual, which means that they have to deal and participate in both cultures - the mainstream culture and the heritage culture (Berry, 2006). The experiences that appear from an intercultural contact can be perceived in two manners: as a source of opportunity or as a source of difficulty limiting opportunities (Ward, 1996; Ward & Kennedy, 1993).

Sociocultural Adaptation: Elements and Measurement

Current Study will focus mainly on the sociocultural adaptation as it is usually assigned a significant role in the process of adaptation and its positive outcomes. Sociocultural adaptation involves such aspects as perceived discrimination, culture shock, acceptance of new cultural norms, behaviors, roles and culture fatigue. Moreover, Ward (1996) suggested that the results of sociocultural adaptation are influenced by certain variables such as host language proficiency, length of residence in the host culture, cultural knowledge and acculturation strategy selected by an individual.

Therefore, it is possible to conclude that sociocultural adaptation can be defined as one's ability to adapt in the new cultural environment and to maintain effective interactions with the representatives of a host culture. The type of adaptation in question refers to social and cultural communication skills that are necessary to manage everyday situations and to meet the “demands of the mainstream cultural context” (Sьmer, 2009, p. 15). Masgoret & Ward (2006) emphasize that for international students sociocultural adaptation does not necessarily involve the acceptance and adopting of host cultural norms, values, roles and behaviors, nevertheless, students should be aware of them and apply them appropriately.

Modern scholars proposed certain factors that might influence the process of sociocultural adjustment. It is suggested that social learning and an adaptive coping style may facilitate sociocultural adaptation (Furukawand & Shibayama, 1993; Ward & Kennedy, 1999). The predictors of this aspect of sociocultural adaptation are:

1) Openness to Experience, which means that an individual is actively searching for new experiences in the mainstream culture;

2) Neuroticism, which can be defined as “maladaptive coping responses” (Zhang et al., 2010, p. 513);

3) Conscientiousness, which is concerned with the ability to set goals and achieve them as well as impulse control (John, Naumann & Soto, 2008).

Another factor of facilitating sociocultural adaptation is building and maintaining relationships with the representatives of the mainstream culture and establishing social networks (Ward, Bochner & Furnham, 2001). In this framework two predictors were suggested: Agreeableness, which can be defined as “prosocial and communal orientation toward others” (Zhang et al., 2010, p. 513), and Extraversion, which is an open approach to the surrounding world and people (John et al., 2008). It is of a great importance to notice that the perception of all five predictors described above may vary from one culture to another. For example, it is suggested that Consciousness and Openness to Experience are significantly valued in both general living and academic aspects, while excessive Extraversion, from the perspective of cultural fit, might not be appropriate in the majority of social situations (House, et al., 2004; Hofstede, 2001; Zhang, et al., 2010).

The history of the measurement of sociocultural adaptation can be traced back to the work of Argyle and his colleagues connected to social competence (Argyle, 1969; Argyle, Furnham & Graham, 1981; Trower, Bryant & Argyle, 1978), where index of social skills was used to measure self-reported difficulty in adaptation. The index was employed in various situational categories, such as social occasions, interacting with strangers and assertiveness in social situations. Afterwards, Searle & Ward (1990) changed the way of measurement suggested by Argyle (1969) and created on its basis the Social Situation Competence Scale (Bryant & Trower, 1974) which gave a birth to the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale, or SCAS, that is one of the most well-known modern methods of measuring sociocultural adaptation. SCAS was composed of various categories measuring behavioral skills needed for negotiating life in a new culture, beginning with executing day-to-day tasks, such as shopping or navigating in the city, and ending with interpersonal communication, especially with the representatives of the mainstream culture (Wilson, 2013). Since the appearance of the SCAS, it has been used in more than 100 various studies by 2012 (Wilson, 2013) and in different fields of science: language acquisition, intercultural communication, organizational psychology, international business and management etc. (Kim, 2009; Lai, 2006; Townsend & Wan, 2007; Yu, 2010; Zhang, 2005). Basing on the SCAS, the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited, or SCAS-R, was devised by Wilson (2013) during his study of the SCAS and other means of measurement of sociocultural adaptation. The new version of the SCAS takes into consideration various domains of adaptation when traversing new cultures, therefore, it is suggested that SCAS-R allows for a more specific investigation of sociocultural adaptation (Wilson, 2013).



2. Methodology

In the following chapter of our Paper we would like to, firstly, present the hypotheses that were established before conducting the survey and interviews. Secondly, a detailed description of the survey that was applied in the framework of the Study will be presented, including such aspects as sample, main survey instrument, mode of data collection and research design. Thirdly, the qualitative method of interview and its main aspects will be described.

In my empirical Research the quantitative method of online survey was applied. It is necessary to clarify that our Study is fundamental-particularistic because it does not, in contrast to applied research, offer proposals for the improvement of the observed status quo. However, our Study can be called universalistic because our research field is general, with its focus not on a particular culture, nationality or country, but on representatives of all cultures who study or have ever studied in German universities.

2.1 Hypotheses

Below are the hypotheses that we established before carrying out our research and deducing conclusions. The results of the Study, which will be stated and discussed in the further chapters of the Paper, will either prove the hypotheses, either argue them to a certain extent:

Hypothesis 1: The process and factors of sociocultural adaptation in Germany considerably vary among students from different countries and cultures, and there might be a significant discrepancy between the adaptation of Western, Eastern, Latin American and African students. Hypothesis 2: Such variables as German Language Proficiency, Contact with the Native Germans, Acculturation Strategy and Residency Plan (Omonishi et al., 2008) are the main factors of sociocultural adaptation of international students in Germany.



2.2 Survey Sample

In the framework of the Research the sample population was identified in order to analyze the possible factors of sociocultural adaptation of international students of German universities. In our Research we used simple random survey sampling in order to allow an equal chance for every member of population to participate in the survey and find crucial relationships and patterns. To improve the internal validity of our Research, sample groups were randomized by aiming at reaching a cross-generational, multinational group of participants and by using different channels of outreach, such as social networks, telephone calling and personal talks. In order to identify the target sample certain criteria were established for the survey respondents:

* Nationality and Location: there is no specific criteria for nationality or home country in order to participate in the survey respondents.

* Special Knowledge: respondents do not have to possess of any special knowledge concerning the notions of adaptation, acculturation or any other theoretical aspects.

* Gender: respondents of any gender were involved in the survey sample.

• Age: the target age of participant was not specified; however, it was supposed that the majority of respondents would be from 18 to 25 years old as the survey was aimed at university students.

• Education: the respondents must be university students or graduates, long-term language courses for university students or volitional studying were also accepted; no specific education degree was required to participate in the survey.

• Location of Educational Institution: the respondents must study in one of the Germany universities, either state or private ones.

• Residence Duration: there are no specific requirements for the duration of stay in Germany by the time when the survey is completed by the respondents.



2.3 Description of the Main Survey Instrument

Objectives of the Survey

The survey instrument was primarily designed around two main objectives. Firstly, our goal was to establish factors of sociocultural adaptation of international students in Germany. Secondly, the survey aimed at comparing the established factors among students from different world regions.

Instrument Format and Branching

The main tool for the survey was a questionnaire that consisted of 13 questions of both closed-ended and open-ended types (see Appendix A). Therefore, the respondents were supposed to choose one of the various responses proposed by the researcher, or to type in their own answer, as it was in the questions “Which country are you from?” Or “Which German city do/did you study in?” Generally, the survey is one of the key methods in our Research as it provides empirical first-hand evidence from the immediate individuals who are going through the process of adaptation in Germany, or have ever gone through.

Certain questions were based on the Likert Scale, a rating system that is used to describe and measure people's opinions or attitudes. Therefore, the respondents were to choose between different responses that might precisely reflect their opinion, attitude or behaviors on a certain question or statement. For example, in order to measure one's desire to stay in Germany for permanent residence the respondents were offered answers “not at all interested (1)”, “not likely (2)”, “still thinking (3)”, “likely (4)” and “will definitely stay/already moved (5)” as replies to the question “How would you evaluate your desire to stay in Germany after your exchange program/studies are finished?” Another example is the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited that was used as a part of the questionnaire. The respondent were suggested to choose from (1) “Not at all competent” to 5 “Extremely competent” when evaluating their competence in certain social skills and behaviors (see Table 1).

The questions of the questionnaire were separated into three sections: (1) Demographic questionnaire; (2) Self-Reported Level of Adaptation; (3) Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited (SCAS-R) (see Table 1). The enlisted sections will be further discussed in detail.

Table 1. Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited as used in the survey. Adapted from Wilson (2013).

#	Behavior	1	2	3	4	5
1	Building and maintaining relationships with locals.	1	2	3	4	5
2	Managing my academic responsibilities.	1	2	3	4	5
3	Interacting with Germans at social events.	1	2	3	4	5
4	Maintaining my hobbies and interests.	1	2	3	4	5
5	Adapting to my neighborhood.	1	2	3	4	5
6	Accurately interpreting and responding to German people's gestures and facial expressions.	1	2	3	4	5
7	Working effectively together with German students.	1	2	3	4	5
8	Obtaining community service I need.	1	2	3	4	5
9	Adapting to the population density in my city.	1	2	3	4	5
10	Understanding and speaking in German.	1	2	3	4	5
11	Varying the rate of my speaking and accent, trying to imitate the manner native Germans speak.	1	2	3	4	5
12	Accurately interpreting and responding to German people's emotions.	1	2	3	4	5
13	Attending or participating community activities with German students/friends.	1	2	3	4	5
14	Navigating in the city.	1	2	3	4	5
15	Interacting with German people of the opposite/different sex.	1	2	3	4	5
16	Expressing my ideas to my German peer students in a culturally appropriate manner.	1	2	3	4	5
17	Dealing with the German bureaucracy.	1	2	3	4	5
18	Adapting to the pace of life in your city.	1	2	3	4	5
19	Reading and writing in German.	1	2	3	4	5
20	Changing my behavior to suit social norms, rules, attitudes, believes and customs accepted in the German society.	1	2	3	4	5



(1) Demographic Questionnaire

In the first section of the survey the questions were focused on clarifying the respondents' identity. The respondents were asked to indicate their age group (under 18; 18-22; 23-26; 27-30; 31 and over). The selection of these age intervals can be explained by the typical age of going to the university to receive Bachelor's (as a rule, 17-22 years old) or Master's (23-30 years old) degree. Moreover, the respondents were to indicate their gender, home country and world region. Among more specific and topic-related questions were the number of semesters a respondent has already studied in a German university, German city of studying and residence, purpose of visiting Germany (exchange program / receiving full Bachelor's or Master degree) and the current level of education.

(2) Self-Reported Level of Adaptation

The second section of the survey was devoted to the self-evaluation of the level of adaptation in Germany. This part of the survey included four questions, each identifying a specific aspect of sociocultural adaptation:

• How would you evaluate your desire to stay in Germany after your exchange program / studies are finished? This question is aimed at finding out the Residency Plan (Omonishi et al., 2008) of the respondents, or their intention to stay in Germany on a permanent basis after university is finished.

• How are / were you generally satisfied with your stay in Germany? The question is focused on identifying the level of satisfaction of international students which might further become one of the factors of sociocultural adaptation.

• How well are you adapted in the German society? This question enables us to evaluate a general adaptation level of the respondents, which helped us to stratify the respondents into “generally adapted” and “not adapted” strata.

All of the three questions stated above were evaluated using the Likert Scale with possible values from 1 to 5.

• Please select an option that would describe you the best:

1. I am fully involved into the German culture, and my home culture is not anymore my priority;

2. I am trying to maintain a balance between the German culture and my native culture;

3. I feel uncomfortable in the German culture and prefer to stay fully involved into my home culture even when I'm in Germany'

4. I don't feel anymore connection to neither German culture, nor my home culture.

5. Other

The last question of the Adaptation Self-Evaluation section is aimed at identifying respondents' acculturation strategy. Each of the answers to the question corresponds with a certain acculturation strategy in the following way: 1 - Assimilation; 2 - Integration; 3 - Segregation; 4 - Marginalization.

(3) Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited (SCAS-R)

The third section of my survey was based on the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited (Wilson, 2013) that was based on its previous version SCAS created by Searle & Ward (1990). Both versions, SCAS and SCAS-R were discussed in Chapter 3 “Acculturation and Adaptation” of our Thesis. The SCAS-R was adapted to the audience and to the situational aspects of our Study, which provoked us to modify or remove certain statements from the scale (see Table 1 above).

The SCAS-R used in the current survey included 5 factors that were established in the following manner:

Factor 1: Interpersonal Communication (statements № 1, 3, 6, 11, 12, 15, 20). This factor is mainly focused on the efficiency of the communication between international students and their German peer students or generally German people.

Factor 2: Academic Performance (statements № 2, 7, 16). Factor 2 involves the degree to which international students successfully deal with their academic responsibilities in German universities.

Factor 3: Personal Interests and Community Involvement (statements № 4, 8, 13, 17). This factor identifies if international students in Germany have an opportunity to maintain their hobbies and customs as well as to receive necessary services from the city or state (visa, residency permit, registration and other official issues).

Factor 4: Ecological Adaptation (statements № 5, 9, 14, 18). Ecological adaptation can be defined as the adaptation to the neighborhood and city, its density, infrastructure, transportation system and pace of life.

Factor 5: Language Proficiency (statements № 10, 19). This last factor is concerned with the level of the German language possessed by the international students in German universities.

2.4 Mode of Data Collection

The Survey was created on the platform UmfrageOnline.com, which is one of the leading tools on the German online-polling market. The platform enables to not only create online polls and questionnaires and collect the data, but also to analyze the collected information in an efficient manner with graphical support.

The type of the questionnaire was self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) hosted on the Internet as the notifications about the survey were sent out to the target sample population by the researchers themselves (Roberts, 2007). The outreach channels that were used are Emailing to the target audience, public posting in respective online communities, private messaging to target sample audience on social media sites and platforms (Facebook, Vkontakte, WhatsApp and Instagram) and telephone calling with the target audience.

In the notification message about the survey that was sent out to the sample population, the objectives and the main topic were indicated in a brief and familiarizing manner so as to avoid an increased degree of subjectivity and bias in the survey results. Besides, such characteristics as the anonymity, voluntary participation in the survey as well as the privacy of personal information were stated in the messages or group posts.

The timeframe allocated for the data collection process was 14 calendar days from the day of sending out the last notification message. It is important to notice that the notification messages and posts were distributed in a step-by-step manner: (1) distributing mass Email to target sample audience through corporate university network; (2) sending messages to group chats on social media platforms, including WhatsApp; (3) creating public posts in online communities and researcher's own news feed on such social media as Facebook, Vkontakte and Instagram; (4) sending private messages to target sample population.

The process of the survey design, data collection and analysis are illustrated in Fig. 1. As we can see from the scheme, after stating the problem (What are the factors of sociocultural adaptation of international students and Germany and what are the intercultural differences in adaptation?) and defining the population of the survey (the larger set of individuals, potential respondents (Rea & Parker, 2005): people who study in German universities on any program and receiving any degree and who are not German natives).

Figure 1. The Process of the Survey Design. Adapted from Groves et al. (2009).

Afterwards, two parallel processes were executed: sample-related and survey instrument-related. As for the survey instrument processes, we first designed the survey instrument by creating relevant questions, defining the number of questions and time needed to complete the questionnaire as well as separating the questionnaire into smaller sections. Then the procedures connected to the survey completion were specified, such as the voluntary participation, anonymity, necessary instructions for the respondents (as in the question connected with the world regions or instructions before every section) and privacy of personal information.

Regarding sample procedures, we first selected the type of sampling which was simple random sampling, or in other words a a type of probability sampling that draws a subset of individuals who are randomly subtracted from a larger population. As a next step, the sampling frame, or the source material that was used to draw the sample was defined (Sa?rndal, Swensson & Wretman, 2013, pp. 9-12). In our case, the sampling frame included all international students studying in German universities, and especially students from Karlshochschule International University as the Research will be further directed to this private university with over 40% rate of international students as an aid in designing a new Orientation Program for newcoming foreigners. Finally, the sample was selected by establishing the criteria for potential respondents (the list of criteria was indicated in the beginning of the current chapter) and targeting the audience that meets the enlisted criteria. As a final stage of the survey design, the questionnaire was distributed among the sample through various channels of outreach, such as social media sites, platforms, Email and telephone calls. Next, the necessary data was collected, processed and further analyzed. The report with the survey results and findings is presented in the next chapter of our Research Paper.

2.5 Sample Size and Response Rate

The sample size that was estimated before the questionnaire distribution was approximately 66.600 respondents who were contacted (directly via private messages or indirectly via public posting) and invited to take part in the online questionnaire. The sample included the members of the target online communities (e.g. Studying in Germany; Russkaya Germaniya), the students of Karlshochschule International University, whose Email addresses were included in the list of mass Emailing, researcher's acquaintances from the exchange program and the users who `follow' the researcher's profile on Facebook and Instagram. After the time allocated for data collection expired, 110 responses were received, among whom there were representatives of all world regions.

Therefore, it is possible to calculate the response rate of the questionnaire: 0.17%. Such a relatively low response rate can be explained by the methods and outreach channels used for questionnaire distribution. Although the enlisted online groups and communities possessed of a large number of members, only a small percentage actually saw and reacted to the post with the questionnaire notification and information and thus participated in it.

2.6 Qualitative Research Method: Interview

In our Research, apart from the quantitative method of online survey, a qualitative method of interview was applied. The preparation and application of this method was effectuated through the following stages:

1) Thematizing. In the framework of this stage the goals of the interview as well as the main topic were formulated. Thus, the goal of conducting interviews as a method in our Study is to acquire an in-depth understanding of sociocultural adaptation of international students in Germany. The main focus of the interview was on the challenges that students faced upon their arrival in Germany as well as all throughout their studies in the country. Another important aspect that was central for the interviews was the ways of coping with the challenges in order to gain the understanding of factors that triggered sociocultural adaptation of incoming foreign students.

2) Designing. On this step we decided upon the type of interview and formulated the questions. The type of the interviews that were conducted in the framework of our Research is semi-structured interviews, which means that the questions designed for the interviews are not the final version of the interview and can be modified depending on the interviewee and the ongoing flow of the interview. The approximate questions that were asked on interviews can be found in Appendix B. It was suggested that only open-ended questions are used in interviews in order to acquire extensive answers from the interviewees.

3) Sampling. On this stage the candidates for the interview were selected. In contrast to the outreach methods used for our online survey, the potential candidates were contacted privately via social networks. In general, eight candidates were contacted with a suggestion to participate in the interview, out of which five candidates agreed and were further interviewed. This results in the response rate of 71% which can be considered as a relatively high rate. The interviewees were students both studying on exchange programs or receiving their full Bachelor's or Master's degree in Germany. The students were from Norway, Russia, Kenya and the USA.

4) Interviewing. The date and time of the interview were pre-arranged with the students personally. The interviews were effectuated through online video conference platform Skype and recorded using the in-built tools. The interviews had a duration of approximately 12 to 22 minutes.

5) Transcribing. The interviews were precisely transcribed by the researcher, using the original grammar and lexis used by the interviewees. The transcripts can be found in Appendix C.

6) Analyzing. On this stage the interviews were analyzed using coding procedures. Main topics and patterns were identified in each of the interviews, and necessary comparisons and conclusions were drawn out of the coding results.

7) Reporting. The conclusions based on the analysis of the interviews were reported with a further discussion on the findings.



3. Results and Findings

The following chapter is to discuss the Results and Findings of the survey carried out in the framework of our Research. The statistical data received from the questionnaire will be presented and crucial trends, patterns and correlations will be thus indicated.

As it was stated above, the applied type of sampling was simple random sampling, where `random' stands for the equal opportunity of every member of the population to be selected for the survey. As a next step, specific sub-groups were identified, which enabled to carry out the analysis from different perspectives. First, five sub-groups were identified according to self-reported level of adaptation. The groups were distinguished basing on the question “How would you evaluate your level of adaptation in the German society?”, which was placed in the second section of the survey, and the answers given to it, from 1 being the lowest level of self-reported adaptation, and 5 being the highest one. Second, next five sub-groups were selected according to the world region of respondents: Asia, Europe, North America and Oceania, Latin America and Africa.

3.1 Results of Demographic Questionnaire and Self-Reported Level of Adaptation

The main aim of this section of the survey was to provide general information about the respondents in order to create a basic demographic image of our survey respondents and further analyze them by separating into sub-groups basing on world region. As it can be observed from the data that the survey displayed, the number of responses from male and female sample was not equal, with 63% being female, 36% - male, and 1% preferred not to share this information with us.

Fig. 2 indicates the proportion of the respondents of different age groups. As it can be observed from the pie chart, the majority of the respondents (88%) is from 18 to 26 years old, as it was expected when criteria for target respondents were stated.

Figure 2. The Age of Survey Respondents.

As a next step it is suggested to examine the world regions of the survey respondents. As per Fig. 3, almost a third of participants is from Eastern Europe, which can be explained by the fact that the Research included a large proportion of Russian and Ukrainian natives studying in German universities.

Figure 3. World Regions of Survey Respondents.



As for other aspects of the demographic composition of survey respondents, more than a half (55%) of participants have studied only one or two semesters in Germany, which means that they are either first-year students, or study in the framework of an international academic mobility program. A significant proportion of students studied in Karlsruhe; other universities were located in Munich, Dьsseldorf, Leipzig, Bonn, Bochum and other German cities that are known for their universities.

In the framework of our survey we collected an almost equal number of responses from exchange students, or Bildungsauslдnder (48%), and students receiving their full Bachelor's or Master's degree, or Bildungsinlдnder (45%). Almost a half of respondents have already received their Bachelor's diploma, while 35% of respondents are undergraduate, which means they are currently studying Bachelor's; 15% of respondents already have a Master's degree.

The general Residency Plan of all respondents can be evaluated as 3,50, with exactly a third of students who claimed that they are likely to stay in Germany after their studies (score 4 on Likert Scale. The evaluation on the scale from 1 to 5 will be further used in the Study to evaluate levels and attitudes of respondents). The satisfaction rate of students can be evaluated as 3,96, which means that the majority of respondents (77,8%) are generally satisfied (4) or very satisfied (5) of their stay in Germany. The overall level of self-reported adaptation is 3,56, which means that the majority of participants (80%) believe that they are either somehow adapted (3) or generally adapted (4). The ratio of students who feel as fully adapted is significantly low; only 9 respondents, or 8,3% evaluated their adaptation on score 5. The most preferred acculturation strategy applied by respondents is integration (71%); however, the other three strategies can also be noticed: separation (10%), assimilation (8,3%) and marginalization (5%). The rest of the students suggested their own answers to this question.



Table 2. Self-Reported Sociocultural Adaptation Level Results.

AL	RP	SR	Acc. Strategy	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5
1	1,50	2,00	Int./Assim.	2,88	3,83	2,63	3,13	2,50
2	3,00	3,18	Int./Sep.	2,70	3,30	2,64	3,28	2,50
3	3,48	3,76	Int.	2,86	3,33	3,00	3,44	3,25
4	3,64	4,25	Int.	3,67	4,05	3,48	4,14	3,21
5	4,00	4,56	Int.	4,21	4,38	3,75	4,44	3,75
Range	2,50	2,56	-	1,33	0,81	1,12	1,31	1,25

3.2 Results of Self-Reported Sociocultural Adaptation Level

In order to systematize the answers received in the survey, a table with all significant data was created. The results are presented in Table 2.

Notes: AL - Adaptation Level; RP - Residency Plan; SR - Satisfaction Rate; Acc. Strategy - Acculturation Strategy (Int. - Integration; Assim. - Assimilation; Sep. - Separation); F1 - Factor 1 (Interpersonal Communication); F2 - Factor 2 (Academic Performance); F3 - Factor 3 (Personal Interests and Community Involvement); F4 - Factor 4 (Ecological Adaptation); F5 - Factor 5 (Language Proficiency).

The table was constructed in the following way. Firstly, the respondents were divided into five groups according to their level of self-reported adaptation: starting from 1, being the lowest score, and ending with 5 - the highest score of sociocultural adaptation. Secondly, the mean values of all aspects of sociocultural adaptation, namely Residency Plan, Satisfaction Rate, Interpersonal Communication (Factor 1), Academic Performance (Factor 2), Personal Interests and Community Involvement (Factor 3), Ecological Adaptation (Factor 4) and Language Proficiency (Factor 5), were calculated. Thirdly, the dominating acculturation strategy was defined for each of the five groups. Finally, the range, or the difference between the values of the lowest (1) and highest (5) groups, was counted for each of the aspects listed above in order to identify a correlation and the most significant factors.

As it is possible to observe from Table 2, Satisfaction Rate and Residency Plan are the most significant aspects of sociocultural adaptation as their range (2,56 and 2,50, respectively - highlighted with green) is the highest among other figures. As for Factors 1-5, Interpersonal Communication (F1), Ecological Adaptation (F4) and Language Proficiency (F5) (highlights with green) appeared to be the most influential ones. Nevertheless, other factors (Academic Performance and Personal Interests and Community Involvement - highlighted with red) also show a positive dynamics, but their range is significantly lower that of the other aspects indicated above.

3.3 Results Based on Respondents' World Regions

In order to collect and compare the received data of the survey, a table with the results for all home world regions of respondents was created. The results can be observed in Table 3.

Table 3. Results of the Survey According to World Regions of Respondents.

WR	n=	RP	SR	AL	Acc. Strategy	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5
Asia	20	3,55	3,70	3,45	Int.	3,26	3,85	3,11	3,66	2,72
Europe	57	3,36	4,02	3,56	Int. (69%) /Sep. (13%)	3,39	3,72	3,25	3,70	3,35
Africa	7	3,33	3,83	3,33	Int. (50%)/ Assim.(33%)	3,25	3,60	3,05	3,90	3,00
Latin Am.	14	3,93	4,29	3,71	Int.	3,19	3,83	3,20	3,84	2,79
North Am.	13	3,62	3,85	3,62	Int. (62%)/ Sep. (23%)	3,70	4,00	3,67	4,17	3,66

Notes: n= - number of respondents in a certain group; RP - Residency Plan; SR - Satisfaction Rate; AL - Adaptation Level; Acc. Strategy - Acculturation Strategy (Int. - Integration; Assim. - Assimilation; Sep. - Separation); F1 - Factor 1 (Interpersonal Communication); F2 - Factor 2 (Academic Performance); F3 - Factor 3 (Personal Interests and Community Involvement); F4 - Factor 4 (Ecological Adaptation); F5 - Factor 5 (Language Proficiency).

The procedures of creating the table and separating the respondents into sub-groups according to their home region are identical to the process of self-reported adaptation level table described in the section 4.2. However, the range was not calculated in this case due to the absence of scale-based sub-groups. It is possible to observe crucial results and patterns that can be found basing on Table 3. It is suggested that the most significant findings are described for every world region separately.

1) Latin America and the Caribbean: the respondents from this world region have the highest level of self-reported sociocultural adaptation among other respondent from different world regions. Moreover, these participants scored the highest on Residency Plan and Satisfaction Rate aspects. Nevertheless, the Latin American and Caribbean respondents' answers led to the conclusion that their Language Performance (Factor 5) and Interpersonal Communication (Factor 1) levels are the lowest among all participants. To be more particular, the German language acquisition level is below satisfactory level. As far as other factors are concerned, they are relatively average, and thus do not show crucial patterns.

2) Northern America and Oceania: the respondents from this world region have one of the highest rates of Adaptation Level. Moreover, their intention to stay in Germany after their studies or exchange program (Residency Plan) is also on a high level. The most important pattern that can be found in this sub-group is the fact that North American and Oceanic participant have the highest scores on all five factors. However, it is possible to notice that a significant percentage of the respondents (23%) selected “Separation” as their preferred acculturation strategy, regardless of their high adaptation level and scores on all factors.

2) Europe: European respondents have a relatively low Adaptation Level, as well as a significantly low Residency Plan score. Nevertheless, the respondents are highly satisfied of their stay and studies at a German university. As for the five factors of sociocultural adaptation, the respondents from Europe achieved average results on all of the factors, which means that no crucial correlations can be drawn.

3) Asia: the respondents from this world region tend to display a significantly low Adaptation Level and the lowest Satisfaction Rate. Identically, Asian students do not generally manage to fulfill their personal interests and community involvement needs in Germany. Besides, it is possible to notice that respondents from Asian countries have the lowest scores of Ecological Adaptation (Factor 4) and German Language Proficiency (Factor 5).

4) Africa: overall, the respondents from African countries marked the lowest scores of Adaptation Level and Residency Plan among all survey respondents. Moreover, almost a third of African participants indicated that they prefer plunge into the mainstream culture (the German culture) and have a distance with the heritage culture, which means that their preferred acculturation strategy is assimilation. In addition, the responses of the African participants display that they have the lowest scores of Academic Performance (Factor 2) as well as Personal Interests and Community Involvement (Factor 3). Nevertheless, it is important to say that the respondents from the world region in question possess of one of the highest scores of Ecological Adaptation in the city and neighborhood (Factor 4), and their German language skills are on a relatively high level.

3.4 Results of the Interview Coding

As soon as the interviews were transcribed (see Appendix C) the process of coding was carried out. First, major categories were identified that partly corresponded to the variables of the survey. Second, sub-categories were distinguished in the majority of categories in order to present the varied nature of the phenomenon. Third, relevant citations were found in the interviews transcripts. Finally, the results of the coding were presented in the form of a table that can be observed in Appendix D.

To begin with, it is necessary to indicate that five persons were interviewed in the framework of the Research. These individuals were chosen for the Research because they studied together with the researcher, and thus agreed to participate in the interviews. In Table 4 are the profiles of the individuals who gave interviews for our Study.

Table 4. Profile of Interviewees.

Name	Age	Home country	Ed.	City	Uni	Study program	Purpose of visit
Milena	21	Russia	Und.	KA	KIU	MCD	Exch.
Anya	20	Russia	Und.	KA	KIU	M	Full
Vincent	26	Kenya	Und.	KA	KIU	IB	Full
Liam	29	Norway	BA	KA	KIU	CPM	Exch.
Angie	22	USA	BA	KA	KIU	IR	Full

Notes: Ed. - Current level of education; Und. - Undergraduate; BA - Bachelor's degree; City - City of studying in Germany; Uni - University in Germany; KIU - Karlshochschule International University; Prog. - Study Program; MCD - Media Communication and Design; M - Marketing; IB - International Business; CPM - Culture Project Management; IR - International Relations; Purpose - Purpose of staying in Germany; Exch. - Exchange Program; Full - Receiving Full Bachelor's Degree.

Generally, eleven different major categories were identified through the process of coding: Interpersonal communication, Reasons of moving, Residency Plan, Adaptation level, Ecological adaptation, Language proficiency, Academic Performance, Bureaucracy, Psychological adaptation, Acculturation strategy, and Discrimination. In the following chapter we will dwell upon each of the categories in detail.

In Interpersonal communication category certain sub-categories were identified. Some of the interviewees indicated that maintaining contact with their friends and family in the country was crucial for them while staying in Germany, as it was for Milena, Liam and Anya. In this category another tendency can be found: many participants claimed that they felt more involved in the international community of their university and city than to the German society in general. For instance, Milena said that the German culture “was not obvious” for her as she was fully involved in the community of international students, thus she did not gain an understanding of what German culture is. As for communication in interviewees with native Germans during their studies, most of them noticed that there were difficulties with building the contact with native Germans. Vincent pointed out that outside of the university it was complicated for him to make friends. Anya stresses more on the cultural differences between her native culture and the German one, and she admits that she still cannot accept certain values and norms of the German society. Nevertheless, Milena and Liam found out that there were no difficulty for them in building contacts with native Germans as the level of English proficiency is relatively high in Germany, therefore, they did not experience the language barrier. In a general sense, the majority of respondents agreed that the role of social interactions in the process of adaptation is highly significant.

As far as the interviewee's reasons of moving to Germany are concerned, two main pre-conditions were background, which comprises previous language knowledge, as it was for Milena, or family history that can be traced back to Germany, as it was with Liam; and personal connections, which means that a respondent had family, friends or acquaintances living or studying in Germany, as it was for all five participants. Therefore, the choice of Germany as a destination for studies was well-reasoned and mainly based on connections and background knowledge about Germany. Among other reasons personal preference of Germany and academic ground (high-quality education, matching educational programs) can be enlisted.

Speaking about the Residency Plan of the interviewees, only a few of them pointed out that their intention to stay in Germany is high. For Angie, for example, the Residency Plan is very low as she experienced discrimination in various parts of the country. At the same time, Vincent also indicated that he felt discriminated; nevertheless, his intention to stay in Germany for “at least three years” is significantly high. Anya sees only pragmatic reasons in staying in Germany as she is aimed at receiving a working permit in Europe in order to have “this window to Europe”. As for the self-reported adaptation level, the participants indicated their positive progress only. However, it is important to say that most of them adapted well in Germany only after some time.

Ecological adaptation appeared to be one of the most significant categories of adaptation. The participants pointed out both challenges they faced in this regard and positive aspects of ecological adaptation. The main challenges were navigation in the city and its surroundings, especially in terms of transportation system, and shopping, as it was for Liam who was “terrified going to the grocery stores”. The positive aspects were the architecture and “urban image” of the city, as Milena pointed out, and general comfort and an ability of “getting what I want”, according to Vincent.

The German language was also among major categories in the framework of interview coding results. It was divided into three sub-categories which are everyday usage, language learning and challenges that respondents face. Liam pointed out that due to the proximity and plentiful similarities between his native Norwegian language and the German language, it was possible to understand and use basic German in the everyday life, but language usage in more official situations as well as understanding dialects and fluent speech was complicated. In contrast, Milena indicated that she did not experience problems with the usage of German in her everyday life as she had no necessity to use German because of the international community she was plunged into. Other respondents expressed severe problems that they experienced or are experiencing because of an insufficient German language proficiency. For instance, Vincent believes that for him it is difficult to find a prestigious job and to properly express himself due to his low German language skills. As for the Academic Performance category, Angie claims that for there were significant cultural differences between the schooling system in the US and Germany. Therefore, she faced certain problems and had to get used to certain discrepancies. Other respondents indicated no difficulties with the academic aspects of their life in Germany.

Another crucial category that was often touched upon by the interviewees was psychological adaptation. Although psychological adaptation is another type of adaptation and is not in the scope of the current Research, it is necessary to mention it as well. Some interviewees indicated that for them coming to a new country was a step out of their comfort zone. Moreover, Angie and Vincent pointed out that they experienced a culture shock when they came to Germany for their studies as the German culture was different to their heritage culture. At the same time, Milena experienced acculturative stress in her first weeks of her stay in Germany as she was afraid of not being accepted to the German society. She also mentioned certain means of coping with stress. Anya, in her turn, indicated another aspect of psychological adaptation which is the feeling of independence that mostly helps her to adapt better in Germany.

Finally, the respondents showed various acculturation strategies while adapting in the German society. Three interviewees preferred the strategy of separation - Milena, who “felt at home” even while staying in a different country, Angie, who “did her best to stay American” and Anya, who has a deep disagreement with the German cultural values and norms and highly appreciates her Russian-Ukrainian identity. Liam and Vincent, at the same time, displayed that they selected integration strategy as they tried to keep a balance between their heritage culture and the mainstream culture, and also the international culture of their university.



4. Discussion and Limitations

A number of conclusions can be drawn from the results and findings presented in the previous chapter of the Paper. In the following part of the Research the conclusions as well as the possible explanations of the identified patterns, trends and relationships will be presented. Furthermore, we will find out whether the Research may present new findings, reinforce existing knowledge or demonstrate contradicting evidence. Finally, possible limitations of the Study will be introduced.

4.1 Discussion on Survey Results

One of the most important findings derived from the results of the survey is the fact that all Factors of sociocultural adaptation, presented in the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale Revisited (Wilson, 2013), proved to have a correlation with the level of adaptation as the more adapted a respondent feels, the higher the scores of all five factors are, or reverse. Moreover, other aspects of sociocultural adaptation, such as Residency Plan and Satisfaction Rate also appeared to be even more significant values of adaptation. However, certain Factors, such as Academic Performance (Factor 3) and Personal Interests and Community Involvement (Factor 4) showed a less significant influence of the Adaptation Level. As far as acculturation strategies are concerned, it is possible to notice that individuals with a significantly low Adaptation Level (1-2) prefer other strategies than integration: assimilation and separation, respectively. The former choice can be explained by a suggestion that students, who do not feel well adapted in the country, attempt to assimilate in the German society by giving up their heritage culture traditions and habits with the purpose to increase their adaptation level and general comfort of living in the mainstream culture. As for the latter strategy, separation, the preference of this acculturation strategy can be explained by the fact that after attempting to integrate or assimilate in the mainstream culture, the respondents become disappointed with the results and tend to stay in their heritage culture by building connections with other compatriots and/or having more frequent contact with friends and family in the home country. These conclusions were drawn from the interviews with the international students in Germany carried out in the framework of the Research as well as from the personal experience of the researcher in the role of an exchange student in a German university Karlshochschule International University.