by HOLA@HAJINKIM.COM | May 8, 2025 | Global Impact Exchange, Spring 2023
Authors:
- Matthew Michael Wingfield, Post-Doctoral Fellow. Stellenbosch University
- Marco Adamovic, Coordinator, Learning and Community, Hart House, University of Toronto
- Mukisa Mujulizi, Director, Cape Town Design Nerds
- Bettina von Lieres, Assistant Professor, University of Toronto Scarborough
- Laurence Piper, Professor, Political Studies at University West, Sweden and University of the Western Cape, South Africa
- Jesi Carson, Director, Vancouver Design Nerds
(Re)formulating inclusionary learning design
Students are often framed as mere recipients of knowledge transfer (Freire, 1970), with staff and faculty at higher education institutions (HEIs) being solely responsible for conceptualizing and facilitating educational offerings (Boughey & McKenna, 2021). In virtual exchange environments, these existing exclusionary pedagogical and relational inequities can be further entrenched (Behari-Leak, 2020). While this pattern has a long history within HEIs across the world, the uni-directional nature of pedagogical formation and knowledge transfer has been pronounced with the burgeoning of such virtual offerings in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, as shown through a range of case studies engaged by Czerniewicz et al. (2020).
In late 2020 the authors of this paper, from various international HEIs, hosted a virtual exchange offering which brought students from the University of Toronto Scarborough (Canada) and Stellenbosch University (South Africa) together to engage around the theme of food security. Spurred on by positive feedback from the participants, we hosted a follow-up collaborative online feedback session in which students and facilitators from each institution provided feedback on the offering. In this forum, students put forward a range of suggestions, spanning from questions around the length of engagement to the potential of collaborative work between students from these two locations; this feedback became the bedrock on which the Global Classroom for Democracy Innovation (GCDI) was developed.
The GCDI comprises an intensive five-week process where students are split into globally diverse teams in which they are guided through the framework of design thinking (Constanza-Chock, 2020) to produce a project under a common theme. The themes covered in subsequent iterations of the GCDI have been climate change, sustainability, and democracy. While expecting students to co-design projects throughout this course, as the organizers of the broader project, we have been continually engaged in a process of prototyping and reformulating the project’s parameters.
In March 2021 we hosted our first cohort of students which, after engaging and being prompted by a guest speaker from the international non-governmental organization (NGO) 350.org, went through the ‘double diamond’ process of design thinking. Importantly, a student who joined as a participant in the initial pilot event was integrated into the coordinating team at this point. While their insights became essential in the development of the project as a whole, it also prompted the development of student facilitator roles, which would oversee and manage the progress made by each group over the duration of the project.
Moving toward inclusive, co-created pedagogy
An inescapable element of internationally connected virtual exchanges is the prevalence of multiple layers of power dynamics. In the conceptualisation of the GCDI, we remained cognizant of the ubiquity of extractive virtual exchanges and international projects (Boughey & McKenna, 2021; Hoon et al., 2022; Behari-Leak, 2020). Students from the Global South are disproportionately affected by this. Nested within this entrenchment of international power dynamics is the positioning of students as solely recipients of knowledge transfer.
The GCDI coordinating committee is accordingly composed of both academic staff and students from a range of international HEIs, along with critical pedagogy practitioners and partners from the Vancouver Design Nerds (VDN), a Vancouver-based organization working on design thinking in various forms and locales. The thematic framing of the various iterations of the GCDI has a strong connection with the curricular content taught at all partner institutions. However, critically reformulating the nature and expectations of knowledge transfer by including students in the formulation and implementation, in both the curricular and co-curricular spaces through the GCDI, we have aimed to intentionally reposition the role of students.
Baran & Correia (2009), writing even before COVID-19 had significantly impacted the prevalence of online learning spaces, considered the possibility of utilizing student-led facilitation as a tool to overcome “instructor-dominated facilitation” (Baran & Correia, 2009, p. 340). We found, as Baran and Correia rightly note, that leveraging student-led facilitation can significantly alter the pedagogical milieu. During each five-week iteration, there would be a weekly engagement where all students would join a two-hour session hosted on Zoom. In these sessions general framing and a short presentation on a certain element of the design process were covered by a member of the coordinating committee, after which students split up into their groups, with a student-facilitator, to practically engage with content in relation to their own project.
At the end of each five-week iteration, students were expected to prepare a short presentation on the project/intervention that they had developed. As a coordinating team, we remained hopeful that the students would have taken the prompts provided throughout the design process to creatively and critically develop a project. Coordinator and facilitator feedback sessions were largely underlined by overwhelming satisfaction in how students had first developed interesting and practical projects, and also by the positive impact that student facilitators had had on their peers’ work. In fact, by using student facilitators we illustrated that peer facilitation can be productively linked with the design thinking process, leading to critical and inclusive engagement between students (Baran & Correira, 2009).
Popularizing inclusive and co-created pedagogy
While the feedback from the two iterations of the GCDI presented in 2022 has been overwhelmingly positive from both qualitative and quantitative data received from students, questions still remain. Firstly, we have concluded that inclusion in virtual exchanges cannot be superficially addressed. A range of power dynamics must be intentionally addressed through the design of the educational offering. In line with this, we have intentionally positioned our work around the concept of ‘design justice’ (Constanza-Chock, 2020), by ensuring that educational institution or degree program did not influence a student’s chance of being employed as a student facilitator. By having student facilitators from a range of backgrounds, we argue that the GCDI has initiated the process of developing an inclusive educational offering.
Furthermore, a discernible shift has occurred in the field of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL), which critically focuses on the expectations and needs of students in the contemporary moment. By positioning students as co-creators of virtual exchanges, and thus democratizing the design process of both the larger offering as well as students’ projects (Manzini, 2015), a more engaging and inclusive offering can be developed; the parameters around what exactly this looks like, and the processes needed to bring it to fruition, remain contested.
In conclusion, the various iterations of the GCDI indicate that virtual exchanges, especially those with global ties, are both sites of possibility for the entrenchment of power dynamics, as well as inclusive and engaging pedagogy. While we have become increasingly aware of this dynamic within the GCDI project, and in that more capable of being able to address and navigate these issues, forming an educational offering with these concerns in focus initiates more inclusive and engaging virtual exchanges.
References
Baran, E., & Correira, E. (2009). Student-led facilitation strategies in online discussions. Distance Education, 30(3), 339–361. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910903236510
Behari-Leak, K. (2020). Towards a borderless, decolonized, socially just, and Inclusive Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 8(1), 4–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.1.2
Boughey, C. & McKenna, S. (2021). Interrogating the power dynamics in international projects. CriSTaL, 9(2), 64–82. https://dx.doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v9i2.448
Constanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. MIT Press.
Czerniewicz, L., Agherdien, N. Badenhorst, J., Belluigi, D., Chambers, T., Chili, M., de Villiers, M., Felxi, A., Cachago, D., Gokhale, C., Ivala, E., Kramm, N., Madiba, M., Mistri, G., Mgqwashu, E., Palitt, N., Prinsloo, P., Solomon, K., Strydom, S., Swanepoel, M., Waghid, F., & Wissing, G. (2020). A wake-up call: Equity, inequality and Covid-19 emergency remote teaching and learning. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 946–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00187-4
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin.
Hoon, C. H., Leibowitz, B., & Martensson, K. (2020). Leading change from different shores: The challenges of contextualizing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 8(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.1.3
Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press.
by HOLA@HAJINKIM.COM | May 8, 2025 | Global Impact Exchange, Spring 2023
Authors:
- David Estrada, Program Coordinator, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan
- Cody Gallagher, Project Manager, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan
- Amy Gillett, Vice President of Education, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan
The rise of virtual exchange programs (VEPs) has allowed students from different parts of the world to connect and learn from each other in ways that were previously not possible. These connections are particularly valuable for students in areas where travel and options to study abroad are limited due to political, economic, and safety concerns.
Since 2020 the William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan (WDI), with support from the Stevens Initiative, has facilitated Business & Culture (B&C)—a VEP among academic institutions in Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, and the United States. The program provides tools and frameworks for doing business across cultures and features eight 90-minute sessions in which students across the countries learn together in real time. Through an action-learning capstone project, students collaborate in cross-cultural teams on a written plan to internationalize a product. Participants gain the skills they need to communicate, problem solve, and collaborate in a global team environment.
Through the five offerings of the program to date, the WDI team has observed the impact a VEP can have on students with limited access to quality education and international connections. With additional grant support from the Stevens Initiative, WDI conducted research and drew on learnings from the past offerings of B&C to develop a marketing strategy aimed at recruiting additional students from marginalized communities in Libya. Through this process, we discovered many benefits that this kind of program can provide for similar communities, while uncovering barriers limiting access to students with diverse backgrounds.
Improved educational access and cross-cultural competencies in Libya
We discovered that B&C has provided improved accessibility to high-quality education in Libya for a wider range of students, according to both educators and participants in the program.
“Access to quality educational institutions in Libya is a common obstacle for students from remote areas and even bigger urban cities,” said Younes Nagem, CEO of the Benghazi Youth for Technology & Entrepreneurship (BYTE), which facilitates B&C in Libya. “Schools and educational buildings have been damaged or destroyed in some areas because of the war and conflicts over the past 10 years. Across Libya, security remains the major fear for all Libyan families, and many refuse to send their children to school. VEPs allow more people to get a better and safer educational experience.”
We also found that B&C has improved cross-cultural competencies for students in Libya. In addition to difficulties accessing quality education, young people in Libya rarely have opportunities to interact with peers from outside their own communities. For Esra Elmhdewi, a participant from Benghazi majoring in industrial engineering and manufacturing systems, the program has provided unique opportunities for cross-cultural learning. “My teammates [in the group assignment] from Egypt and the United States were my first interactions with people who weren’t Libyan,” she said, pointing to the exposure to different cultures offered by the program.
Barriers to accessing VEPs in Libya
While VEPs help to bridge obstacles to quality education, having the technology necessary to participate remains a challenge. In Libya access to a computer and a reliable internet connection, particularly in rural and remote areas, is far from guaranteed. To improve accessibility of B&C in Libya, BYTE provides a meeting space in Benghazi for students to attend the virtual connected sessions and complete assignments. BYTE also has made arrangements with co-working spaces in Benghazi and more remote areas of Libya like Sirte and the Jufra District for students to join the sessions there.
Cross-cultural team assignments were also challenging for students from Libya. “Libyan students have faced barriers in collaborating with other international students for some assignments where they have different academic backgrounds. Their lack of experience with international students and educational opportunities makes some students feel shy at the beginning. It takes some time for them to connect with other students and start learning from the experience,” said BYTE’s Younes Nagem.
Hasan Elshawaihdi, a current participant from Benghazi majoring in engineering, confirmed that the most challenging part of the program has been keeping up with his peers on the academic content. “I haven’t been exposed to key terminology or concepts, and haven’t had much experience or people to really discuss these terms and concepts with.”
While the specific benefits and barriers of VEPs for underserved populations may differ outside of Libya, we believe that the larger trends we identified can be useful in our future programs and those of others. At WDI we look forward to building upon our work with Business & Culture to make VEPs accessible to students from all backgrounds.
by HOLA@HAJINKIM.COM | May 8, 2025 | Global Impact Exchange, Spring 2023
Authors:
- NHassan Ibrahim, The Stevens Initiative – Alumni Fellowship Program
“I believe in a universe that doesn’t care and people who do”
are words uttered in the game Night in the Woods that resonated with me but I was unable to relate to. Being queer in an anti-queer community has not allowed me to care for myself or reach out to people around me.
As someone who has not had the opportunity to be abroad, the only exposure to a more accepting community was the available media: a noninteractive distant look at a supportive community. That all changed with my first exposure to virtual exchange. In the midst of the Covid era, participating in the Global Solutions Sustainability Challenge, GSSC, a virtual exchange program, connected two different, yet similar, communities together. Throughout this program, all participants were trained on diversity, equity, and inclusion topics, and developed an inclusive and accessible project. When our two communities met, the first thing one of the community members said was “Hey, guys!” which they apologized for immediately after for using the term “guys.” This was my first exposure to a non-binary person. The support that person received from my local teammates and facilitator was surprising as no one displayed any sort of unsupportive behavior towards them. Our facilitator set up an entire optional session explaining why it’s important to not only accept but also support those around us. This acted as a catalyst to a journey of self-acceptance and eventually coming out and speaking out.
My safe space was created because someone else felt safe to share.
After the GSSC experience, that not only provided me with professional skills but also put me on a self-accepting journey, I was eager to further explore these programs and find a lasting safe space. For someone with financial restrictions, virtual exchange was the most convenient source to find these spaces. In each virtual exchange that I participated in, coming out and telling fellow participants became easier; coming out was always after discussing a topic that focused on diversity and inclusion and the way the facilitator conveyed those ideologies. Facilitators, and even participants at times, discussed queer, whether directly or it was simply insinuated, which created room for discussion and freedom to express views, regardless of the response from the participants. As of all the virtual exchange programs that I have participated in, there has been a very supportive queer community within each program across all of Iraq.
One of the spaces where I felt most safe was in the Stevens Initiative’s Alumni Fellowship program, where in a short amount of time, I was able to freely express myself, befriend all the fellows, and have supportive facilitators. To my surprise, sharing my “he/they” pronouns without much introduction or insinuation to my sexual orientation and gender identity was very casual and not discussed among any of the participants, but it did result in multiple participants directly reaching out to me and discuss their sexuality and how they felt much safer discussing it, or at least not worry about hiding it.
This is my narrative and it is a privileged one. Through these virtual exchange programs, I have found multiple safe spaces with queer people and allies, locally and internationally. All because I was lucky enough to know the language the programs were being conducted in. Developing a framework that will actively ensure the inclusion of all parties would be a more sustainable solution to achieve a lasting impact.
As a Kurdish person in Iraq, which is a minority in and of itself, having the privilege of being familiar with the English language, exchange programs become easily accessible without any obstacles. These programs not only created a safe space for me, but they also offered me the opportunity to explore other cultures and their views on queer issues, which has put me on a journey of self-acceptance and an avid human rights advocate. With the English language being a requirement for most of these programs, the opportunity is limited and cannot be accessed by the entire Middle Eastern community, especially queer members in developing countries. This lack of accessibility limits the inclusion and reach of the program goals. With only a select number having this accessibility, not much change will be done within the community.
The required English skills to partake in these programs has limited community members’ exposure to partake in such programs, which allows them to be exposed to other cultures, engage with a supportive community, and experience a transformative and healing journey. Overcoming the language barriers is a hard task with how global the English language is. Developing a framework with more language-inclusive programming will allow for a more sustainable program with a larger impact.
Starting with a virtual national exchange program can pave the way for better impact. Conducting a regional program led by experts and local program alumni can allow for a better reach and influence a larger number of the target groups that don’t experience such programs.
In addition to that, translation services can be provided in the local language to promote programs and their activities within the regions. This will raise awareness towards activities and encourage participants to develop the required skills to engage with said programs.
These programs have played a major part of my self-acceptance journey. They have made me feel safe to come out, advocate for human rights, and create safe spaces. Because of the people who participated in these programs, I was able to sense their compassion and empathy. They made me feel safe. That is something I aim to create to other community members who may not have the privilege to partake in such programs.
by HOLA@HAJINKIM.COM | May 8, 2025 | Global Impact Exchange, Spring 2023
Authors:
- Dr. Daniel Otieno, Department of Educational Management Policy and Curriculum Studies, Kenyatta University
The precepts of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) continue to maintain center stage in global conversations as technology accelerates the globalization process. The voice of African academia in these conversations is heard, albeit faintly. Post-colonial emancipation and changing technological realities present valuable opportunities for African educators to explore ways of achieving impact and retaining relevance in the world arena. One avenue for achieving this is through virtual exchange. This article provides a narrative of personal and professional experiences as an educator and virtual exchange practitioner. As a facilitator with Soliya and Sharing Perspectives, I have derived invaluable experiences in virtual exchange which have informed my perspectives and practice as an educator. The discussion will focus on the design and implementation of virtual exchange programs involving faculty from several universities in Africa, the United States, and Europe. The exchange programs focused on decolonization of higher education and professional development for history education teachers. In this article I will share my experiences in the design of the programs and as a facilitator. The main questions that the article will address are: What works for virtual exchange in Africa? How does virtual exchange promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in Africa? What are the challenges in design and implementation of virtual exchange in third countries? What are the lessons that can be drawn from these experiences?
Introduction
The concepts of equity, diversity, and inclusion have remained a central theme in mainstream emancipatory discourse. The triple concepts of EDI are gaining prominence in Africa, which for a very long time suffered under the yoke of traditional cultural practices that have inhibited the participation of a large segment of its population from development and progressive activities. Most of the African countries have recovered from the debilitating effects of colonialism and have chartered their own ways in terms of drafting their development plans, resource mobilization, and implementation of visionary development agendas. However, there is still much that needs to be done in terms of leveling the ground for key development players. Women and girls in Africa have for a long time been denied equal opportunities under the pretextual banner of religion and culture. The unheard voices of the minorities and the underrepresented have been stifled by the dominant voices of those who hold power based on gender identity, resource accessibility, and demographic factors. While educational institutions have provided a momentous push towards the achievement of equality and equity in education, there are still avenues that have not been navigated fully. Virtual exchange is one way the benefits of education as an equalizer can be leveraged to provide a platform for diverse voices to be heard in an environment that is open and free from prejudice. This article presents an educator’s experience as a virtual exchange facilitator and the lessons drawn from facilitating several exchange programmes.
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Kenyan Education System
The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 has made it a commitment for countries to provide all children with inclusive and equitable education, with a further commitment to lifelong learning for all (Abuya, n.d). Kenya has made efforts along this line, but more needs to be done in terms of accelerating the pace of inclusion. An equity analysis of the newly implemented curriculum revealed gaps in teacher-pupil ratios and access to educational resources including ICT. Globally, there are different conceptualisations of the concept of diversity. Many in Africa consider it in terms of tolerance for differences of opinion, ethnic tolerance, and respect for religious and cultural opinions and practices. However, these are limited points of view regarding the terms EDI. It is in this light that virtual exchange has been a suitable complementary pedagogy for educators to explore issues around diversity and inclusion from a global context and relate their local context with others around the globe. Globally, there are different conceptualisations of the concept of diversity. In Kenya diversity is seen largely in terms of ethnic divides (Kabiri, 2014).
Curriculum Reforms and EDI
The newly implemented Kenyan curriculum places tremendously high value on the concepts of equity, diversity, and inclusion. The vision of the basic education curriculum reforms does not directly mention the terms EDI; however, they are entrenched in the mission which seeks to enable every Kenyan to become an engaged, empowered, and ethical citizen. The Basic Education Curriculum Framework states that this will be achieved by providing every Kenyan learner with world-class standards in the skills and knowledge that they deserve and which they need in order to thrive in the 21st century (KICD, 2017). The growth of virtual exchange as a global standard for enhanced development of 21st century skills is therefore an innovative approach educators in Africa must learn to use in their work and make their courses have an international component.
Virtual Exchange Pedagogical Pathways to Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Virtual exchange provides an alternative pedagogical pathway to enhance the values of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Through online engagement with participants from different parts of the world, participants learn the intercultural competencies and learn to appreciate different and multiple perspectives regarding local and global issues. The advantage of global learning is that participants do not need to travel across several countries to experience intercultural diversity that exists across multiple cultures. They experience this from their own computers or other digital devices.
Design/Methods
The approval in design, development, and implementation of the virtual exchange programmes were comparatively the same. The design of the VE was done in three phases. Phase 1: pre-session, Phase 2: implementation, Phase 3: post/evaluation.
Pre-session. During this phase the collaborating faculty met to discuss the structure and activities for the program. These involved the activities for both synchronous and asynchronous phases.
In Session. The activities were based on four focus areas depending on the theme of the exchange. Participants were required to conduct activities around these areas. The activities included required readings, comparative video analysis, peer interviews, and discussions.
Post-session. In the final phase of the program, the participants wrote a one-page reflection of their experiences.
Major Findings/Experiences
The major experiences from the perspective of an African virtual exchange practitioner are summarized as follows:
- The voices of African scholars in the virtual exchange sub-discipline are remotely heard and this needs to be amplified.
- Most of the exchanges have been in the teaching of languages and business studies. However, there is opportunity to develop more VE projects in education and other disciplines. Universities in Africa can begin developing exchanges between themselves and incorporating at least one global partner.
- African educators have a tremendous opportunity to incorporate VE in their work the same way it is happening in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and North America.
- The use of translingual approaches in virtual exchanges provides an opportunity for educators and students to experience new languages, which is a key element in fostering global understanding.
Lessons and Recommendations
Virtual exchange is a pedagogic alternative that has multiple advantages and can be used to address many of the global problems like climate change, conflicts, and racial issues (Oenbring & Gokcora, 2022). It can be used to foster global understanding and citizenship. The voices of marginalized women and girls in rural communities can be amplified through virtual exchange activities that highlight community problems and seek wider understanding.
References
Abuya, B. (n.d). Equity and Inclusion: Towards an accelerated action to enhance learning in East Africa. Regional Education Learning Institute (RELI). www.reliafrica.org
Kabiri, N. (2014). Ethnic diversity and development in Kenya: Limitations of ethnicity as a category of analysis. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 52(4), 513–534.
Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development. (2017). Basic Education Curriculum Framework. Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development, Ministry of Education. https://kicd.ac.ke/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CURRICULUMFRAMEWORK.pdf
Oenbring, R., & Gokcora, D. (2022). COILing diverse islands: A virtual exchange between the University of the Bahamas and the Borough of Manhattan Community College. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 5, 20–30.
by HOLA@HAJINKIM.COM | May 8, 2025 | Global Impact Exchange, Spring 2023
Authors:
- Yali Zhao, PhD, Virtual Exchange Faculty Associate, Office of International Initiatives, Georgia State University
- Hongmei Zhang, PhD, Virtual Exchange Faculty Fellow, Office of International Initiatives, Georgia State University
- Nannette Commander, PhD, Professor Emerita, Educational Psychology, Georgia State University
ABSTRACT:
This article describes Georgia State University’s (GSU) effective strategies for expanding virtual exchange (VE), an initiative that provides global education for a large group of students and promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). VE aims to benefit all students by developing 21st century workplace skills, including teamwork, digital literacy, and intercultural competency. Over the past three years, the GSU VE program has served over 4,000 students from various disciplines. Two major collaborative efforts to expand VE at GSU are the Scaling Access to Virtual Exchange (SAVE) Grant Program and tagging VE Signature Courses. These strategies not only ensure the growth and sustainability of VE but also enable students from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds to experience high-impact international learning opportunities. This article may provide guidance for other universities to create similar programs to expand VE and support DEI on their campuses.
Virtual exchange (VE) is an innovative form of global education that uses internet-based tools and online pedagogies to connect students from different cultures to collaborate on academic projects. VE brings the world to the classroom without the financial barriers of study abroad programs and offers the same benefits of enhancing global knowledge and cross-cultural awareness. VE is also recognized as a high-impact practice contributing to engaged learning and student success in higher education (Commander et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2022; O’Dowd, 2018; Rienties et al., 2020). Importantly, VE supports diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) through widening access to international learning for students who have historically been underrepresented in global learning activities. Research indicates first-generation college students, Black and African American students, Hispanic students, and financially disadvantaged students tend to see the largest improvements in academic outcomes upon participating in VE (Lee et al., 2022). The Stevens Initiative, an international leader in VE, suggests in its 2022 Survey of the Virtual Exchange Field that VE largely expanded due to the pandemic, but “it remains to be seen whether this rapid expansion will be sustained and whether providers will continue to invest in virtual exchange” (Stevens Initiative, 2022, p.4). Since VE promotes DEI and provides numerous benefits to students, it is important to consider how universities can grow and sustain such initiatives
Virtual Exchange at Georgia State University (GSU)
GSU is recognized as one of the most diverse universities in the United States, according to U.S. News’s diversity index. With a student body of over 54,000 students from more than 130 countries, GSU includes a minority enrollment rate with 42% identifying as Black, 15% as Asian, 14% as Hispanic, and 6% as two or more races. GSU seeks to become a national leader in DEI through different initiatives, including the VE initiative. The GSU VE initiative has successfully supported students across disciplines to develop intercultural skills and global competency over the past three years with an increase of 480% from Fall 2019 to Fall 2022. Two of our campus-wide collaborative efforts have significantly contributed to the expansion and sustainability of the VE initiative to benefit a broader student population with diverse backgrounds and support DEI: The Scaling Access to Virtual Exchange (SAVE) Grant Program and tagging VE Signature Courses.
The Scaling Access to Virtual Exchange (SAVE) Grant
Despite the significant growth of VE at GSU, providing international learning opportunities for a large number of students remains a challenge. The SAVE Grant Program, sponsored by GSU’s Office of International Initiatives (OII) and the Atlanta Global Studies Center, provides funding and various support for academic departments to integrate VE into all sections of a required course for a major and thus ensures that all graduates in that program take part in at least one VE experience. This has promoted the expansion of the VE into the curriculum of required courses across disciplines, especially disciplines that have limited resources and access to international components, such as Biology, Kinesiology & Health, and Occupational Therapy, thus highlighting VE as a campus-wide program.
Funded instructors work together to create VE templates that can be customized to fit the content of the required course for the major. The SAVE Grant Program is designed to integrate VE into the curriculum through three phases: The VE templates and materials are piloted in one section of the required course in one semester (usually Spring semester) and then refined and revised during the summer based on student and faculty feedback. These materials are then used to integrate VE into all sections of the required course in the following Fall semester, allowing all students taking this required course to have VE experience. This is especially crucial and beneficial to historically underrepresented students and financially disadvantaged students.
The development of VE templates allows any GSU faculty teaching the course in future semesters to modify the projects, deliverables, and timelines based on student learning outcomes and the needs of international partners. In addition to funding, the OII is available to assist as needed in identifying international faculty to partner with Georgia State instructors, collaborate on designing VE projects and templates, and introduce technology tools that are best suited to VE activities.
Tagging Virtual Exchange Signature Courses
At GSU, courses with VE components are recognized as one type of signature course that provides students with experiential learning experiences. The tagging of VE integrated courses by the Office of the Registrar with a VE icon in the schedule of classes allows students to identify courses that offer global learning opportunities. Students can then intentionally select courses where they communicate and collaborate with international peers on meaningful academic projects that foster development of cross-cultural awareness and global competency. Tagging VE signature courses also helps the university to conduct retrospective research on the impact of the VE on student success, including studies on how the VE promotes DEI. Faculty members who teach VE-tagged signature courses receive support from OII, a university-wide VE Faculty Teaching and Learning Community that meets monthly, and their departments to ensure the success and sustainability of VE courses. Tagging a VE signature course allows all students across disciplines to register for the course and participate in a few weeks or even a semester-long thoughtfully designed international learning activity. This works particularly well with courses for undergraduate students, many of whom are first-generation, historically underrepresented, and/or financially disadvantaged.
Conclusion
Recently, GSU won the prestigious 2023 Senator Paul Simon Award for Outstanding Campus Internationalization, one of the four universities in the nation that received this annual award (NAFSA, 2023). One important factor in garnering this award was GSU’s successful VE partnerships with many countries that allow thousands of students, especially minority students, access to international learning opportunities to develop intercultural skills, global competency, and technology skills highly needed for 21st century careers. The SAVE Grant Program and tagging VE Signature Courses represent effective methods for preparing students to work in diverse cultural contexts, a cornerstone of DEI. GSU’s efforts in promoting and expanding VE opportunities to a large number of students could inspire other universities and institutions seeking to promote DEI through VE.
References
Commander, N. E., Schloer, W. F., & Cushing, S. T. (2022). Virtual exchange: A promising high-impact practice for developing intercultural effectiveness across disciplines. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 5, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.21827/jve.5.37329
Lee, J., Leibowitz, J, Rezek, J, Millea, M., & Saffo, G. (2022). The impact of international virtual exchange on student success. Journal of International Students, 12(3), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v12iS3.4593
NAFSA. (2023). Senator Paul Simon Award for Outstanding Campus Internationalization. https://www.nafsa.org/about/about-nafsa/senator-paul-simon-award-campus-internationalization
O’Dowd, R. (2018). From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: State-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 1, 1–23. https://journal.unicollaboration.org/article/view/35567
Rienties, B., Lewis, T., O’Dowd, R., Rets, I., & Rogaten, J. (2020). The impact of virtual exchange on TPACK and foreign language competence: reviewing a large-scale implementation across 23 virtual exchanges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(1), 1–27.
Stevens Initiative. (2022). 2022 Survey of the Virtual Exchange Field Report. https://www.stevensinitiative.org/resource/2022-survey-of-the-virtual-exchange-field-report/
U.S. New Index. Georgia State University. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/georgia-state-university-1574
