The entire research project began in the summer of 2021 and concluded in the summer of 2022. It was designed to be a mixed-method project to explore students’ transitions from international high schools to higher education during the global pandemic, combining cross-sectional surveys and phenomenological interviews. The survey assessed how students’ overall remote college experiences were affected by factors at various life stages using UCLA’s Freshmen Survey 2021 edition (Higher Education Research Institute, 2021). Using a phenomenological approach, this paper specifically reports the findings from in-depth interviews to explore and explain the international transitioning experiences (Creswell and Poth, 2017). Semi-structured interview questions covered identities, personalities, aspirations, family influences, high school curriculum and environment, pre-college expectations, college choices, academics, social life, and daily routine. Interviews took place in the summer of 2021 and 2022 after students had completed their first year of university education.

The research population comprises students who fulfill the following criteria: graduated from international high schools in Asia; completed their first year of university in a country different from their passport country or high school country. As such, the participants could effectively reflect upon their transnational transition experiences as first-year university students from 2020 to 2021. Research participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015). This research was promoted by the Council of International Schools and the International Baccalaureate within their networks. A few school directors and principals in Asia responded to the call and sent emails to reach their alum base. Participants also recommended that their friends and classmates join the interview. Thirty interviewees participated in this study: 18 were fully online, and 12 were hybrid-learning students. They came from small-sized international high schools in Asia (China, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam) that graduated 21 to 150 students per academic year.

By design, the participants in this study cohort share many features with other Asian international high school students (Fraenkel et al., 2019). All of them demonstrated an exceptional command of the English language. Seventeen students self-identify as Third Culture Kids; many grew up and attended high schools outside of their passport countries. All interviewees are enrolled in world-class universities or highly selective liberal arts schools in Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and English-medium-instruction institutions in Europe, Hong Kong, Japan, and Malaysia. Many could not enter the host country due to international or host-nation-imposed travel restrictions. All have many previous international travel experiences, including moving to, attending, or visiting college campuses in other countries. Their families support their academic endeavors and pay for their tuition. Thus, although that half of the students held part-time jobs, they did not experience substantial financial stress at this time. After the first year of university, most students were overall satisfied with their academic achievements and accomplishments. Table 1 presents detailed information about each interview participant.²

Data collection began after obtaining Institutional Review Board approval from the researcher’s institution’s Office for Research Protections. After signing the consent forms, 10 students joined the individual interviews in the summer of 2021. A year later, in the summer of 2022, 30 students participated in the interviews. Among them, eight were participants from 2021 who decided to join for the second round of the interview. The data became robust with the longitudinal component, as these interviews substantiated and verified the findings. Because of the travel restrictions still imposed by different governments, all interviews were conducted online via Zoom. Interviews were conducted in English, recorded with consent, and transcribed verbatim. Each interview ranged from 60 min to 90 min.

The interview analysis used a deductive method to answer the research questions within the theoretical model. Interview data were coded and analyzed with two rounds of memo writing and coding in NVivo 12 and then MAXQDA, allowing chances for re-examination, synthesizing, and merging of the codes in additional cycles (Erickson, 2012; Saldaña, 2015). The first round of coding generation and analysis began with an analytic memo writing session after each interview (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015). These memos captured observations, reflections, and ideas for possible initial codes. Codes were refined iteratively to identify key themes in discussions and presentations with research center members.

Because the transition model stresses students’ evaluation and appraisal of the events, affective coding methods were applied to investigate the subjective qualities of participants’ experiences, which are “core motives for human action, reaction, and interaction” (Saldaña, 2015, p. 124). These codes include emotions (confusion/relief/doubt), values (attitudes/belief/motivation), versus (us/them, professor/me), and, very importantly, appraisal and evaluations (positive/negative).

The 30 in-depth interviews provided explanations for the survey findings, which identified an overall unfavorable to a neutral appraisal of students’ college experiences in hybrid and online contexts. In the survey, students evaluated programs relating to orientation, first-year integration, and counseling and well-being support as “not very satisfied.” In the interviews, students viewed their first year as crucial for establishing a new identity, forming new social ties, exploring via trial and error, and preparing for more advanced study. The contrast indicates the inadequate formation of institutional support in the students’ exosystems, which, in turn, affected the structure of their mesosystem and microsystem.

Regarding academic learning, the effectiveness of remote instruction received the lowest rating in the survey. However, interviewees clarified that it was not about professors’ or lecturers’ teaching and pedagogical styles. Instead, they interpreted the ineffectiveness as a result of three interrelated factors: lack of engagement and contact, fatigue, and distraction. All student interviewees stressed the issues of Zoom and online fatigue and boredom. Such issues caused behaviors relating to procrastination and distraction after a lengthy period spent online. Students frequently browsed web pages while attempting to do homework assignments, which was a major source of distraction. ST5 (Female, learning in Thailand) openly admitted,

The lack of connection with professors and classmates was the most mentioned problem because students could not see or interact with each other effectively in real time. ST19, a very outgoing and active student leader in high school, also actively sought help in university. Nevertheless, she found the circumstance challenging because “I could not look to peers or walk up to the front desk for support or any interactive measures to help us learn.” ST3 (Female, learning in China) illustrated her feeling of helplessness,

Other cognitive problems, such as depression and anxiety, were intensified for students in online learning, as compared to hybrid learning. Students discussed how learning on Zoom did not feel natural and made it difficult to be engaged and present. Even when online support sessions were offered, “the reality is that people are not looking for online interaction anymore” (ST23, Female, learning in Hong Kong). More introverted students like ST2 (Female, learning in China) sadly confessed that learning and interacting on Zoom amplified their conditions of anxieties when speaking in public,

Hybrid-learning students faced issues and challenges common to their developmental stages, such as seeking independence, connections and belongingness, while contemplating the best options for their future career choices. It is critical to use students’ appraisal of the situation to understand their perspectives (Anderson et al., 2011). During analysis, student responses were coded into different appraisal themes under the main ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ codes (Figure 2). In response to assessing positive and negative dimensions and changes in college, students’ positive evaluations fell in three categories: improving work ethics, establishing new connections in new environments, and gaining independence, together with 37 sub-code coverages. The negative evaluations were regarding learning online, missed opportunities, time zone differences, and building relationships, with 67 sub-code coverages. All positive evaluations on independence and handling the basic life tasks were reported by students who moved to campus and had on-campus interactions.

Moving into a new environment contributed to young adults’ maturity and growth. Participants shared how they learned the basic tactics in a new country to “deal with the bank, health, healthcare, the paperwork” (ST 28, Male, in Canada). This process added to their sense of achievement as independent adults. ST22 (Male, in the United States) described his growth after arriving on campus,

Students viewed their first year of college as essential to building the foundation for academics and social development. Due to the pandemic restrictions, they constructed a limited on-campus support system, primarily with by roommates, classmates, and friendship groups as their microsystems. Peers were their important microsystem and source of support during difficult times. These students were overall pleased and satisfied with their first-year experiences: “I was still able to make friends and be social. I felt like it was a successful year because I was learning in my classes, and socially I formed good relationships” (ST24, Female, in the United Kingdom). ST21 (Female, in the United States) appreciated how peers played a role in supporting her in forming a new identity,

Similarly, ST19 (Female, in the United Kingdom) stated, “I think it was good for me to move to this new country, even though my learning was online. I could access the facilities and know what my university looks like, rather than just seeing it on the screen.”

The transition experiences were more negative for students studying abroad at home in Asia, in particular for those learning in a different time zone. Although appreciated the fact that they were being taken care of at home in a supportive and familiar environment, fully online students all faced physical and mental struggles. Issues and symptoms of worry, anxiety, and depression were associated with lack of sleep, lack of immediate institutional communication, and lack of regular social engagement.

ST7 (Female, learning in China) performed exceptionally well in an elite high school, but acknowledged frankly that she faced “a hardcore, difficult transitioning to university.” ST14 (Female, learning in Vietnam), who received an Australian world-class university’s merit scholarship, explained how the COVID-19 lockdown created a challenging environment to live and study,

ST5 (Female, learning in Thailand) stated, “the situation is so bad because you are always on a computer and your head just hurts all the time.” ST1 (Male, learning in China), a student who exuded confidence and optimism, quietly admitted: “I need a lot more assistance from friends and family to push me, [otherwise] I would be too tired and be in bed all day.” The participants in Thailand and China illuminated their struggles and confusion in more details.

In contrast with the hybrid-learning students, fully online students remarked that their friend circle had narrowed during their first year in university. While they could communicate with more people on the phone or computer, they became less motivated. Many mentioned that they did not make any new friend online (ST13; ST15), and “I guess we were all burned out and did not care about socializing anymore” (ST17). Students needed to make trade-offs and decisions about whether and how to form relationships in a new environment: “building friendships with other kids – I had to actively give that up because I needed to get that sleep in that time” (ST2). “For me and a lot of people, the close friend circles became smaller, rather than broadened, which is a sad thing” (ST1). In Bronfenbrenner’s terminology, such experiences indicated that students’ microsystems, composed of the most immediate supporting relationships to their development, were not properly formed.

Students’ strategies fall into two categories: sticking to a strict schedule and reaching out to friends or mentors. All interviewees stressed the importance of finding a routine and maintaining a schedule to keep life on track during the chaotic time; “otherwise, many of my friends just break down” (ST1).

For interviewees studying at home in different time zones, it also meant trying to schedule designated times to be part of the local society for in-person interaction. Possible ways include connecting with friends in the same geographic area for day trips, shopping, partying, and meeting over coffee. This was an important strategy to “force yourself back into normal society and making you talk to more people” (ST3) so that students could feel connected with other human beings.

In the survey, 27% of the student participants experienced monthly “lonely and isolated” feelings, 27% reported such feelings weekly, and 20% daily. The questions on constructing relationships were explored in-depth during the interviews. On the interview transcripts, the most frequently mentioned microsystem relationship codes were peers/friends (44 references), faculty (30 references), and social media (24 references). Less frequently mentioned codes were institutions (department) (16 references), family (12 references), and college staff (7 references; Figure 3).

As to where and how they established their microsystem support, it became evident that for students who were studying abroad at home, various social media platforms played an indispensable role in helping them to form social relationships and share information. Facebook class groups and group chats, Instagram posts and WhatsApp groups, and even Zoom messages became valuable channels for students to share their lives, reach out to friends, and establish new virtual friendships in universities. Friendship formation in their microsystems was key to their identity and social development.

International student is a broad definition, and we need to acknowledge the complexity of international student population (de Wit, 2008). In this study, the defined population are students who transitioned from international high schools in Asia to anglophone higher education institutions. This research thus faces a limitation in the small participant size, as the international high schools tend to be very small in scale. It has been consistently identified as an issue by scholars studying international schools and the International Baccalaureate population (e.g., Dickson et al., 2018; Jaafar et al., 2021). While the study purposefully sampled students of different nationalities and enrolled in different types of institutions in different host countries, circumstances would not be covered.

It remains unclear whether self-identifying as Third Culture Kids was conducive to student transitions, as predicted by early scholars (Schlossberg, 1981; Hayden, 2006; Pollock and Van Reken, 2006; Grimshaw and Sears, 2008). One potential reason behind this is in this research, identity was over-shadowed by other prominent influences, including pandemic-related environment changes, time differences, and place constraints. Whether and how being Third Culture Kids affects Asian students’ university transitions could be explored more in future research.

As suggested by literature, this specific group of international students seem to differ from the general international student pool. Due to their previous international school education, participants were highly proficient in the instruction language and did not experience the linguistic and cultural challenges identified by education and psychology researchers (Andrade, 2006; de Araujo, 2011; Smith and Khawaja, 2011; Ammigan and Jones, 2018). Many of them hold foreign passports in the host nations, thus are international students in the universities. This suggests that conducting large-scale surveys on international students and without accounting for their previous high school and living experiences may lead to misleading results and interpretations. The linguistic fluency and cultural familiarity could be the confounding factors influence students’ perceptions and evaluations of the circumstances. Many students perceived themselves as privileged, because they perceived facing fewer financial or digital strains than their under-resourced peers. In another words, the difficulties these participants encountered would be exacerbated for other international students studying at a distance.

The findings from this research indicate a few important and interconnected theoretical issues in education and psychology. One is the multiple transition complications, and another is the space–time displacement. Although the transition theory has been widely applied in college student development, especially among the US veteran, transfer, and community college students, the international and cross-cultural dimensions received less attention (Tovar and Simon, 2006; Griffin and Gilbert, 2015; Ivins et al., 2017). Some researchers studied international students’ transitions; nonetheless, they focused explicitly on factors relating to English as the second language and cultural unfamiliarity (Heggins and Jackson, 2003; Zhang, 2016).

This study raises the issue concerning “multiple transitions.” It refers to the simultaneous and overlapping changes that these first-year university students experienced: (1) transition to university, (2) transition to a foreign education environment, and (3) transition to online learning amid a global pandemic. All were complex processes that entailed challenges and adjustments. As the theoretical transition model predicted, students’ relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles during the transnational university transition all altered to adapt to the new circumstances.

The first two transitions were anticipated changes, so some students might be able to utilize their psychological resources to prepare in advance (Anderson et al., 2011). However, the third transition was an unexpected change precipitated by the pandemic. Due to minimal in-person contact, these students perceived their “moving in” process to be unduly ongoing and prolonged, which exacerbated the transition complications. Being in different physical locations and scenarios influenced these interactions, routines, and responsibilities, as the microsystems students formed and the resources they amassed are significantly influenced by their locations. As a result, the relationships were not properly formed, and the routines are predicated to change once they enter university in person. It means they will undergo the “moving in” and “moving through” stages a second time when they move into university in person.

The place and time dislocation or displacement emerged as a critical factor influencing the participants, ultimately revealing the differentiated experiences between the 12 hybrid-learning and 18 fully online students. The place-related concept has captured the interests of environmental psychology and mobility researchers (e.g., Chow and Healey, 2008). Students were attached to the home and formed new place identities after entering university. This research shows that the ones studying in situ were limited in forming a new identity and developing social skills in a new cross-cultural environment.

Wang B. (2022) research on Chinese international graduate students studying at home for a shorter period also identified the distorted time zone issue. This study echoes the finding that studying abroad at home presents a peculiar condition. Students took classes and socialized in distorted time zones to compensate for place and opportunity losses. But first-year college students who are newly entering adulthood require more robust support for their development and psychological well-being (Nelson and Padilla-Walker, 2013; Katsumoto and Bowman, 2021). As a direct consequence, the individuals who took part in this research encountered a greater degree of cognitive and behavioral challenges and difficulties.

The global higher education sector has tried to focus institutional efforts to incorporate the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but the pandemic may lead to a shift in priorities during rapid digitalization and emergency remote teaching and learning practices (Crawford and Cifuentes-Faura, 2022). The Global Survey show that all higher education institutions were affected by COVID-19, and two-thirds replaced classroom teaching with distance teaching and learning (Marinoni et al., 2020). In such a context, many individuals, higher education institutions, and even international organizations believe that virtual mobility would present new international education opportunities (UNESCO, 2021). Nevertheless, the consequences and impacts of such a mode remain debatable, particularly across time zones and in the absence of in-person interaction.

While showing the challenges rising from time zone distortion, this study echoes recent quantitative empirical research on higher education students’ experiences worldwide. Studies have found that students could adapt to new learning and teaching practices, but the sense of isolation and loneliness negatively impacted their well-being, behavior, and learning (Cifuentes-Faura et al., 2021). In confined environments at home, students faced difficulties following the course online, spent more hours studying, and achieved lower academic performance (Faura-Martínez et al., 2022). The described hurdles and difficulties may explain why studying abroad in situ was not optimal and 79% of students, according to a global survey, desired to study abroad on campus (Nuthall, 2021).

On the other hand, this study highlights how changes in a student’s environment could either facilitate or impede their transitions and well-being, which offer implications for the future of online education in a sustainable manner.