Introduction

Accommodation problems among international students in Canadian universities affect their academic achievements and overall health. These challenges could be noticeable at Thompson Rivers University (TRU) in Kamloops, a city recognized for its varied population. This research investigates potential challenges international students encounter at TRU, including rental prices, limited housing options, and exploitation by landlords. These problems, if present in Kamloops, are indicative of larger systemic issues in Canadian student housing industries. The accommodation challenges faced by international students can cause stress, negatively affecting their academic performance and mental well-being. Challenges like sudden hikes in rent, unfair behaviour from landlords, and poor living conditions are frequently encountered (Obeng-Odoom, 2012; Banjong, 2015). Homestay programs are now being seen as a viable solution to address these challenges. These initiatives provide a secure and cost-effective housing option that also promotes cultural interaction and assimilation, which are essential for improving the global student experience (Akbar et al., 2004). This paper will analyze these factors to assess how well TRU’s homestay program helps alleviate accommodation challenges for international students and suggest ways to enhance it.

Literature Review

International students frequently struggle with expensive living expenses, substandard housing, and feelings of social isolation. Obeng-Odoom (2012) points out the worldwide difficulty of offering appropriate housing for international students, stressing that neglecting these requirements can negatively impact their academic experiences and health. Similarly, Banjong (2015) discusses the economic and language barriers experienced by international students in the U.S., highlighting how these difficulties can result in feelings of isolation and missing home, ultimately affecting their academic performance. Yildirim (2014) highlights that challenges arise from unfamiliar academic cultures, further increasing stress and anxiety among students.

The homestay option is seen as a remedy that provides more than just accommodation. It offers a family-friendly atmosphere to help with adjusting to life in a different country. Homestays can reduce feelings of loneliness by immersing students in the host culture and providing them with direct support. This environment not only improves language abilities but also aids in grasping local traditions and academic standards, enhancing the overall student experience. Chennamsetti (2020) illustrates how homestay can help Indian students in the U.S. overcome academic and social hurdles by offering a supportive environment for their education. Homestay programs offer a budget-friendly option with a set price covering utilities and meals, making them a more economical choice than other accommodation options. This could greatly lessen the financial stress on international students, enabling them to concentrate more on their academics instead of on financial struggles. Akanwa (2015) backs this up by talking about how students’ academic performance can be enhanced when they are not as pressured by their living situations. Furthermore, the structured support within homestays can contribute positively to the academic performance and well-being of students, offering a conducive environment for study and cultural exchange.

Background Information

The main focus of TRU’s homestay program is to integrate international students into the Canadian lifestyle. This enhances their linguistic and cultural understanding. Under this program, the student would be paired with a local host family. The student would be receiving a private bedroom complete with necessary furniture along with three daily meals and snacks provided by the host family. In addition to these essentials, students have access to household amenities and receive guidance from their hosts on understanding local traditions. The student is required to pay the host family a monthly fee of $1,200 to participate in the program. This is to help pay for the cost of meals and accommodation. Students must also pay a $600 refundable security deposit to cover any potential damages, in addition to a $150 one-time, non-refundable placement charge for processing and administrative needs. Participation in the program requires the student to commit at least one semester to make sure that the student builds lasting relationships with host families for a meaningful cultural exchange. However, it must be noted that the student cannot directly choose the host family. The homestay supervisor will be selecting a family that aligns best with the preferences given by the student during the application process.

Methodology

This study used a mixed-method approach by integrating quantitative survey data collection with qualitative interviews to understand international students’ accommodation experiences at TRU. The main purpose was to investigate the challenges these students faced regarding housing, the exploitation they may encounter, and their perception of the homestay program as a potential solution. Existing works were reviewed to find out the common difficulties and exploitative practices affecting international student housing. The participants in this study were international students enrolled at TRU who voluntarily chose to participate in the survey. Additionally, the homestay supervisor of TRU was interviewed to gain more insights into the efficacy of this accommodation option.

The survey served as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey consisted of questions that provided information on different aspects of the students, such as their demographics, employment status, current housing arrangements, and other challenges and concerns they faced. Further, it also examined their awareness and perceptions of the homestay program. Participant recruitment and survey distribution were facilitated via email to the international students with the help of International Student Advisors (ISA) at TRU. Given that all international students have contact with their assigned ISAs, this method provided a reliable means of reaching a wide audience. The research ethics board at TRU granted ethical permission for the study prior to data collection, guaranteeing that the work compiled would follow ethical norms and requirements. Confidentiality was guaranteed to participants, and informed consent was acquired.

Analysis

A total of 309 responses were collected from the survey, providing a robust dataset for evaluating the housing conditions of international students. The representativeness of the sample was determined by analyzing demographic data, specifically looking at gender and nationality. The gender distribution within the survey participants was nearly balanced among male and female respondents at 46.3% and 53%, respectively. The remaining 0.7% represented other genders, such as trans and non-binary. The demographic analysis also indicated a diverse international representation led by a significant proportion of Indian nationals and followed by varied nationalities, highlighting the global demographic makeup of the student body.

Monthly Income & Rent

Monthly income represents the total amount of money the student receives in a month from their part-time job. The mean monthly income of 110 students that reported was $1,460 with a 95% CI [1,187,1,733]. The mean monthly is the total amount of money paid for renting a housing unit per month. This is the full rental price of an apartment, house, or other living space type, regardless of how many people live there. The mean monthly rent of 168 students is $1,613 with a 95% CI [1,369,1857] and hence no different than the monthly income they earn; however, to make ends meet, most students share the rent in shared housing situations, where multiple tenants split the cost of the rent. The average cost of renting is now lower at $849 with a 95% CI [715,983]. Hence, the average shared rent captures 58% of the average monthly income of an international student. The monthly income and expenses suggest that a significant portion of students’ earnings is allocated towards housing, highlighting the lack of affordable housing options. Nearly 40% of students report spending above $1,200 on rent and living expenses, indicating a potential for cost savings should these students switch to homestay programs, which average $1,200 per month, including meals and utilities.

Table 1 summarizes the rent findings from the survey.

Table 1: Comparing Monthly Income vs. Monthly Rent vs. Share of Rent

Note. Data compiled from survey responses.

Housing Types

There are four types of housing available. First, the off-campus rental options are privately-owned housing options, such as apartments, houses, and shared residences located outside university grounds and managed independently from the educational institution. Second, the on-campus residences are the housing options managed by the university. This includes North Tower, McGill Residence, East Village, Coyote Den | Sk̓elepéllcw, and West Gate Dormitories. Third, homestay is a living arrangement where students reside with a host family, often including meals and a more integrated family experience. Finally, other types include housing arrangements such as living with family or relatives and staying in hotels or motels for short-term arrangements. Most international students, 61%, rent places off campus and share the rent, making it more affordable. The next most common accommodation is on-campus, with 31% of the respondents living on campus. Only 3% of the respondents live in a homestay type of accommodation.

Table 2 summarizes the housing type findings from the survey.

Table 2: Comparing Types of Housing

Note. Data compiled from survey responses.

On-Campus Housing

TRU offers a variety of on-campus housing options designed to accommodate the diverse needs of its student body (Thompson Rivers University, 2024). Each residence has unique characteristics that cater to different preferences and lifestyles.

• West Gate Dormitories — Economical, modular units providing private rooms, ideal for students seeking affordable, basic accommodations.
• North Tower — Private bedrooms within two-bedroom and four-bedroom suites. Suitable for students who prefer a blend of privacy and community living.
• McGill Residence — Four-bedroom units that share common areas. This residence fosters a strong sense of community and is great for students who enjoy social living environments.
• East Village — Targeting upper-year students, these apartment-style suites offer more amenities and greater independence.
• Coyote Den | Sk̓elepéllcw — Private suites with self-contained amenities. Suitable for students valuing privacy and independence, providing comforts similar to off-campus living.

Cost Breakdown

All the residences at Thompson Rivers University include a $100 application fee and a $60 non-refundable residence life activity fee (Thompson Rivers University, 2024). Additionally, a $250 security deposit is required, which is refundable upon moving out, provided the room is left clean and undamaged. Table 3 outlines the costs associated with each housing option for an eight-month academic year.

Table 3: TRU On-Campus Housing

Skip Table 3

Note. Data for Table 14A and 14B from Thompson Rivers University (2024).

While these residences offer convenient proximity to academic facilities and a variety of living arrangements, there are some drawbacks to be considered. The structured payment plans requiring substantial upfront or bi-annual payments can be financially burdensome to the students. This challenge, coupled with the typical restrictions of on-campus housing, makes this option less attractive to students seeking flexibility and a more inclusive living experience.

Comparison With University of British Colmbia’s Model

In evaluating TRU’s on-campus housing, insightful comparisons can be drawn with the University of British Columbia (UBC), an institution whose student housing strategy offers several exemplary practices. UBC’s model, with a typical cost for a room and meal plan for new undergraduates ranging from $12,000 to $14,500 per year, includes not only comprehensive amenities but also meal plans essential for fostering student well-being and integration into university life (University of British Columbia, n.d.). However, the total fees can vary from $10,300 to just over $15,000 depending on the type of room and meal plan selected. This is critical in an area like Vancouver, where living costs are notably high. Moreover, UBC’s flexible payment plans for Year-Round residences, which allow for monthly payments rather than demanding the full semester’s fees upfront, significantly lessen the financial burden on students. This flexibility facilitates easier budget management and alleviates the stress of large upfront payments.

In contrast, TRU’s on-campus housing option costs an average of $7,574 per academic year, with the lowest and highest rent at $4,388 for a double room (shared) and 10,000 for a one-bedroom suite at the new Coyote Den (Thompson Rivers University, 2024). TRU’s on-campus housing options do not offer meal plans and require students to pay a larger lump-sum amount in one or two installments. When students were asked, “How much do you typically spend on living expenses other than rent (food, utilities, personal care items, and other necessities) per month?” the average amount was $564 per month or $4,512 per academic year, which is lower than the $6,960 obtained from EduCanada (2023). However, food and grocery expenses from EduCanada indicate an average of $2,880, with a lower end at $1,920 and an upper end at $3,840 per academic year.

Hence, adding rent with food and groceries brings the total average expenses at TRU to $10,454, with a lower end at $6,308 and an upper end at $13,840, making it compatible with UBC’s model of $10,000 to $12,000.

Even though the TRU plan is more economical, the rigid payment structure can create financial stress. Reflecting on UBC’s flexible payment option (i.e., monthly payments) would make housing fees more manageable, reflecting a more modern, student-centred approach to university housing. This enhancement would not only elevate the attractiveness of TRU’s housing but also align with the university’s broader goals of fostering an inclusive and supportive academic community. Enhancing student support services and amenities would further cultivate a supportive and engaging community environment at TRU, ensuring that the university offers more than just accommodation but a holistic environment that positively impacts students’ educational journeys and personal growth.

Personal Impacts of Housing

This section investigates the personal impacts of housing for international students at Thompson Rivers University, focusing on costs, student experiences, and the potential of homestay programs. Most of the surveyed students (74%) reported that their housing situation had negatively impacted their academic performance and personal well-being. Factors contributing to this include high rent, poor maintenance, and unstable living conditions. The psychological stress associated with these factors can detract significantly from academic focus and overall student health. Further examination of the survey uncovers specific challenges that amplify the general concerns:

• Unreasonable rent increases — Reported by 35% of students, highlighting financial instability that can distract from academic focus.
• Withholding of security deposits — Experienced by ~26% of students, reflecting potential unfair practices in rental agreements.
• Failure to provide necessary repairs or maintenance — The most reported issue at ~39%, indicating that poor living conditions are a significant concern.
• Discrimination Based on Nationality or Ethnicity — Affecting ~12% of students, potentially leading to a hostile living environment.
• Threats of Eviction or Lease Termination — Reported by 7% of students, contributing to insecurity and stress.
• Unauthorized Entry by Landlord/Property Manager — Reported by 21% of students, raising concerns about privacy and security.
• Other Issues — ~30% of students noted various other problems, suggesting there are additional unaddressed concerns.

The survey results offer an optimistic view of student engagement with the homestay program, highlighting a significant level of awareness and meaningful openness among students toward this accommodation option. The data reveal that a substantial ~68% of students (157 out of a total of 232 respondents) are aware of the homestay program. This figure indicates that information about the program is widely accessible and reaches a large portion of the student body. The extent of awareness demonstrates the program’s visibility on campus.

Comfort With the Homestay Program

Importantly, more than a third of the students surveyed (79 out of 224 respondents) view the homestay program as an affordable and suitable option. This level of comfort is particularly noteworthy, reflecting a readiness among a significant segment of the student population to engage with the homestay program. It indicates that a considerable number of students recognize the potential advantages of homestay living, such as cost savings, a nurturing environment, and the chance for cultural exchange. These findings reflect a positive scenario for the homestay program at TRU. With two-thirds of the students informed about the program and a substantial portion considering it a viable and attractive living arrangement, there is a clear indication of potential growth for homestay participation. This suggests that as students become more familiar with the benefits and practicalities of homestay, the program could see increased interest and engagement, enriching the university experience for many.

Difficulty in Finding Suitable Housing

The process of securing accommodation was also highlighted as a challenge, with the survey indicating that finding housing was rated as difficult (out of 248 responses), with a weighted average rating of 3.6 out of 5 (see Figure 1). This difficulty level signifies the competitive nature of the housing market in Kamloops.

Homestay Supervisor Interview

Interviews with the homestay supervisor provided valuable insights into the operational dynamics and student engagement with the homestay program at TRU. The homestay supervisor indicated that enrolment in the program typically ranges between 150 to 200 students, though these numbers are subject to significant variability for each semester (Homestay Supervisor, personal communication, March 4, 2024). Predominantly, the program attracts English as a Second Language (ESL) students, suggesting its pivotal role in providing linguistic support. This demographic inclination highlights that the homestay option is particularly favoured by those seeking to enhance their language skills rather than by the broader international student community.

While the homestay program is effectively supporting ESL students in their linguistic and cultural integration, it appears that there is a broader misconception among the international student community regarding the nature of homestay accommodations. Many perceive these arrangements as less independent and temporary solutions for initial settlement. Many international students initially choose homestays due to the challenges associated with securing on-campus or off-campus housing upon their arrival (Homestay Supervisor, personal communication, March 4, 2024). The homestay program offers a quick, reliable solution during this transitional phase when other accommodations may not be immediately available. However, as students settle into their new surroundings, their needs and preferences often evolve. Over time, the desire for greater privacy and independence leads many to seek alternatives that offer more autonomy than homestay arrangements. This view often overlooks the substantial cost savings that homestays can offer compared to other housing options.

Addressing these misconceptions is vital for encouraging a more diverse group of international students to consider homestays as a viable long-term housing option. Enhancing awareness about the financial and supportive benefits of homestays could significantly influence student housing choices, fostering a deeper appreciation for the unique advantages of this accommodation type.

Cost Savings Potential Through Homestay

Considering the economic analysis, transitioning to homestay could provide significant savings for students, particularly those currently burdened by high rental costs. Homestay programs, offering a fixed cost that includes utilities and meals, present an economically viable option for many students struggling with the financial demands of independent housing. The average off-campus rent is depicted at $1,613; this cost is significantly higher than the $1,200 monthly fee for the homestay program, which includes not just accommodation but also meals and utilities. Even the average shared rent captures 58% of the average monthly income, as indicated previously. This difference clearly points to the immediate financial relief that the homestay program can offer. It is crucial to note that the true savings could be even more substantial when considering additional expenses that off-campus students incur, such as utilities and groceries, which are absorbed within the homestay fee. However, the economic benefits outlined before also bring into question why the homestay program sees such low enrolment despite its apparent advantages. There are other factors at play — perhaps psychological or cultural — that deter students from opting for this seemingly beneficial arrangement. These might include students’ preferences for independence, privacy, or possibly misconceptions about what life in a homestay entails.

Recommendations for Homestay Program

To optimize the effectiveness of homestay programs and enhance the housing experience for international students at TRU, the university should focus on some targeted strategies. TRU World should intensify its promotional activities by clearly communicating the financial and cultural benefits of the homestay program. This should include detailed information sessions, updated web content, and engaging social media posts that outline the cost benefits and immersive cultural experiences available through the homestay. They can also amplify the visibility of positive outcomes by sharing testimonials and case studies from both students and host families who have had rewarding experiences. This could be showcased in university newsletters, during orientation events, and on the university’s housing portal.

Additionally, the university should implement a straightforward financial incentive for host families to effectively enhance the homestay program. Offering a fixed compensation would help cover the extra costs incurred from hosting a student, such as increased utility bills and food expenses. This direct financial support ensures that host families are adequately compensated for their contributions and encourages more local families to participate in the program, improving the availability of quality accommodations for international students.

Comparison of Different Housing Arrangements

In summary, the lowest cost is tied between the TRU homestay program and TRU’s off-campus housing shared rental (with an assumed two-person occupancy). TRU’s on-campus housing is third, although there is variation within TRU’s offerings. For example, Coyote Den’s double room (shared) costs $4,388 to rent for a total of $7,268, making it the cheapest option for students (Thompson Rivers University, 2024). UBC’s and TRU’s off-campus housing without sharing are the most expensive accommodations. Table 4 compares the costs of different housing arrangements in detail.

Table 4: Costs of Different Housing Arrangements

Note. Data for Table 15 is from the survey, Thompson Rivers University (2024) and University of British Columbia (2024)

Conclusion

This research has brought attention to important obstacles experienced by international students at Thompson Rivers University when trying to find appropriate accommodation that promotes their academic and personal health. The results show that most students choose off-campus rentals because they cannot find their preferred options on campus; however, these rentals can be costly and do not offer a good environment for academic success. Although not fully utilized, homestay programs provide a promising option that can offer economic assistance and create a supportive environment for cultural integration and academic help. Nonetheless, in order for homestay programs to gain greater acceptance, TRU must confront the current gaps in understanding and attitudes toward these arrangements.

The Canadian government’s recent budgetary announcements for 2024 positive signs and present strategic opportunities for TRU to capitalize on. The removal of GST on new student housing and the introduction of the Apartment Construction Loan program are pivotal initiatives that align with the housing challenges underscored in this study (Department of Finance Canada, 2024). TRU can leverage these initiatives to strengthen its housing infrastructure, particularly enhancing the homestay program, thereby rendering it a more viable and attractive proposition for students.

The recommendations offered are intended to improve the housing system at TRU by focusing on enhancing the quality, accessibility, and student satisfaction of both homestay and off-campus housing choices. Executing these plans will need a collaborative approach from university officials, nearby housing landlords, and the wider community to guarantee the accommodation requirements of every international student are fulfilled, ultimately improving their educational journey and achievements at TRU.

Media Attributions

Figure 1: “Responses to difficulty finding accommodation survey” by the author is under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Figure 2: “Kris’s poster presentation at the 19th TRU undergraduate research conference during March 2024” by the author is under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

References

Akanwa, E. E. (2015). International students in western developed countries: History, challenges, and prospects. Journal of International Students, 5(3), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v5i3.421

Akbar, H., Van Bael, T., Hassan, Y., & Baguley, G. (2004). Evaluating the QUT Homestay Program: Lessons learnt in providing quality services to international students. Proceedings of the 15th ISANA International Education Conference, Australia, 1–13. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/56926/

Banjong, D. N. (2015). International students’ enhanced academic performance: Effects of campus resources. Journal of International Students, 5(2), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v5i2.430

Chennamsetti, P. (2020). Challenges faced by Indian international students in the US. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 9(2), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.32674/jise.v9i2.2345

Department of Finance Canada. (2024, April 16). Chapter 1: More affordable homes. Government of Canada. https://www.budget.canada.ca/2024/report-rapport/chap1-en.html

EduCanada. (2023, December 28). Prepare your budget to study in Canada. Government of Canada. https://www.educanada.ca/live-work-vivre-travailler/prepare-budget-preparer.aspx?lang=eng

Obeng-Odoom, F. (2012). Far away from home: The housing question and international students in Australia. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2012.662744

Thompson Rivers University. (2024). Residences. https://www.tru.ca/future/housing/residences.html

University of British Columbia. (n.d.). Living in residence. https://you.ubc.ca/ubc-life/vancouver/residence

Yildirim, O. (2014). Adjustment problems of international students studying in the U.S.A: The effects of English language and academic culture. International Journal of Global Education, 3(4). http://ijge.net/index.php/ijge/article/view/38