coil initiatives across university education: learning to learn from each other

COIL is clearly thefuture…

Telecollaboration is clearly the future…

Virtual Exchange is clearly the future…

Virtual Mobility is clearly the future…

COIL initiatives across university education: Learning to learn from each other

The European COIL Conference2 December 201609.15-10.00

My plan for this morning…

• Carry out a short overview of the different fields of “COIL” practice and research

• Identify where there appears to be consensus in good practice

• Look to the future: How can this field of learning continue to develop and have a greater impact on university education?

What exactly are we talking about?

Looking for least common denominators….

The engagement of groups of students

in online intercultural interaction and

collaboration…

…with students/ peers from other

cultural contexts or geographical

locations….

…as an integrated part of course

work….

…and under the guidance of educators

and/or expert facilitators.

•What do all these names/monikers have in common?

•COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning)

•Telecollaboration

•OIE (Online Intercultural Exchange)

•Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education (Belz & Thorne)

•Virtual Exchange –(Soliya / EU)

•eTandem (Europe)/ Teletandem (Brazil)

•eTwinning / ePals(secondary education)

COIL is clearly thefuture…

Telecollaboration is clearly the future…

Virtual Exchange is clearly the future…

Virtual Mobility is clearly the future…

The danger of having “un diálogo de sordos”

• My personal conclusion…

• Let’s use Virtual Exchange as an umbrella term

• Why?

• Increase mutual comprehension across disciplines (How many here today knew the term telecollaboration?)

• It’s transparent and self-explanatory: It will facilitate our activity’s promotion among a wider academic public (although it ignores the intercultural/international element).

• It’s increasingly being used by our sources of funding such as foundations, governmental and inter-governmental bodies such as the Stevens Inititiative (http://stevensinitiative.org/), the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs in the USA (http://eca.state.gov/gallery/virtual-exchange) and the European Commission.

Let’s look briefly at

Differing Approaches to Virtual Exchange …

Models of Virtual Exchange in UniversityEducation

Shared Syllabus Approaches (e.g.

COIL )

Facilitator-led Models (e.g.

Soliya & Sharing

Perspectives)

‘Integrated’ Virtual

Exchange Initiatives

Telecollaborative Foreign Language

Models

9

Differing Approaches to Virtual Exchange

(1) Foreign Language Learning Models

Telecollaborative Foreign Language Learning Models

• Well known examples: e-Tandem, teleTandem, Cultura

• Main goals: – Provide opportunities for authentic foreign language practice with native speakers /

speakers of other languages

– Provide experience in intercultural communication and collaboration in digital environments

• Main characteristics:– Task themes are often personal or cultural in nature (not based on ‘curricular content’)

– Interaction is often organised in pairs or small groups to encourage interaction

– Usually a practitioner-initiated practice (‘bottom-up’ approach)

• Research findings:– Great potential for awareness raising of cultural differences in communicative practices

– different genres, pragmatic competence etc. Partners = ‘people who matter’ .

– The key is to combine online interaction with reflective reviews and discussions of online interaction.

Simultaneous teletandem sessions between Georgetown University, USA; Universidad Autonoma de Mexico (Mexico) and Universidade Estadual Paulista (Brazil)

2: The Cultura Modelhttp://cultura.mit.edu/

UNICollaboration.eu: A virtual hub for finding partners, tasks and resources

Differing Approaches to Virtual Exchange

(2) Shared Syllabus Models

Shared Syllabus Models to Virtual Exchange

• Well known examples: COIL, XCulture

• Main goals: – To give students intercultural experiences based on online collaboration about shared

curricular content

– To provide different cultural perspectives on curricular content

• Main characteristics:– Collaborative tasks are based on shared syllabus

– Usually introduced into universities from the top-down (initiative of senior management)

• Research findings:– COIL interactions make abstracts subjects more real and tangible for students

– Potential for overcoming student stereotypes

– The importance of task design – “Tasks must be designed so that students depend on one another to complete the task” (Guth and Robin, 2015).

Differing Approaches to Virtual Exchange

(3) Facilitator-led Models

Facilitator–led Models to Virtual Exchange

• Well known examples: Soliya, Sharing Perspectives

• Main goals: – To develop students’ intercultural understanding and tolerance

– To develop students’ 21st century skills – critical thinking, media literacy

• Main characteristics:– Projects use specially designed synchronous communication tools and platforms

– Interaction is facilitated and led by trained intercultural facilitators

– Interaction is based around a syllabus designed by the organisation

– Universities usually ‘sign up’ cohorts of students to participate

• Research findings:– “The critical role of being heard” – Developing positive attitudes to other cultural groups

through dialogue (Bruneau & Saxe, 2012)

– Development of 21st century skills such as critical thinking, cross-cultural collaboration skills (van der Heijden & Ploss, 2014)

The Soliya Model – East-West Negotiations

• Soliya connects over 200 students from over 30 different universities in the US, Europe and the predominantly Arab and/or Muslim worlds.

• Students are placed into small groups of 8-10 students and guided through a 9-week, English language dialogue program by pairs of trained facilitators.

http://www.soliya.net/

Differing Approaches to Virtual Exchange

(4) Intregrated Approaches

Integrated Models of Virtual Exchange

• Well known examples: VE combined with physical-mobility, MOOC’s, workplacements

• Main goals: – To enhance existing educational programmes

– To increase fluidity between ‘class work’ and ‘field work’

• Main characteristics:– Virtual Exchange is one part of a larger educational programme, course or initiative

– Online interaction is considered an ‘add-on’ to main activity

• Research findings:– The online interaction facilitates greater reflection on what students are doing in their

‘fieldwork’ (e.g. physical mobility, work placements) (Vriens & Van Petegem, 2012; Kinginger, 2009)

– Virtual connections allows non-mobile students to benefit from those who are mobile or from people in distant locations (Huber, 2015)

There is so much going on….

Is there anything we can all agree on?

1. Simply achieving “Contact” between students is not sufficient

Richardson: “…the espoused benefits from mobility do not derive from the act of crossing borders but instead from two other factors. First, the encounters that students have. And second, the influence on their psychological make-upof responding to these encounters” (Cosmopolitan Learning for a Global Era, 2016, p.54).

Task Design

Tasks should enable students to go beyond simply exchanging information and to actually engage in genuine intercultural collaboration and then to reflect on that interaction.

Allport (1979!!!): “The nub of the matter seems to be that contact must reach below the surface in order to be effective in altering prejudice. Only the type of contact that leads people to do things together is likely to result in changed attitudes.”

2. Students need a gradual immersion into online intercultural interaction

Richardson: “[Virtual Exchange] activities need to ensure that students are given a gradual introduction to online learning and are allowed to engage in relatively low-risk …activities before they are called on to engage with peers on a deeper basis” (Cosmopolitan Learning for a Global Era, 2016, p.124).

Tasks should introduce learners to online intercultural interaction step by step:

Sharing Perspectives follow similar steps…

3. Students need support through facilitation or pedagogical ‘interventions’Reid & Spencer-Oatey: To be most effective, intercultural activity also needs to be located in a context of experiential learning where the participants are properly prepared and where they have the opportunity to reflect on their experiences and consciously develop new knowledge and skills. (Towards the Global Citizen, 2012, P126)

Pedagogical Interventions in Telecollaboration:

Cunningham & Vyatkina (2012), Cunningham (2016) : Interaction between German and American FL learners combined with instructional interventions focusing on pragmatic competence

The role of the teacher in COIL courses:

Guth & Rubin (2014): “The partner teachers will play a fundamental role in helping students interpret and understand not only the origins of their peers’ responses to a given task but the cultural assumptions behind their own responses” (p.38).

We all have something to learn from each other:• Telecollaboration: A large body of practitioner-based research

to provide evidence of Virtual Exchange’s value

• COIL: An institutional ‘top-down’ approach to promoting and introducing Virtual Exchange across universities

• Soliya/ Sharing Perspectives: Importance of on-line intercultural facilitation

• Physical mobility organisations: Integration of virtual and physical exchange

UNICollaboration.org : An academic organisation to supportresearchers and practitioners through publications, training and research initiatives

Thank you for listening!

• Contact:

robert.odowd@unileon.es

– Publications: http://unileon.academia.edu/RobertODowd

– See this presentation again:

http://www.slideshare.net/dfmro

– Join UNICollaboration:

www.unicollaboration.eu

• All the links and resources you see here todaycan be found in this Google Collection:

• https://goo.gl/XLhP7k