Virtual International Exchange as a High-Impact Learning Tool for More Inclusive, Equitable and Diverse Classrooms

Galina Siergiejczyk 1
  • 1 GRAP, University of Colorado at Boulder, , N 201, Arnett Residence Hall 406 UCB, Boulder, United States of America


While technology-assisted learning has become commonplace in education, its applications are rarely examined along geopolitical and cultural perspectives that reveal certain shared and vastly distinct localized practices in evolving pedagogy and cultural dynamics. For developing countries such as Uzbekistan, collaborating virtually with a university in the U.S. may represent both a technological and socio-cultural challenge. Conducting a virtual international project, nonetheless, offers a unique chance to experience another culture in real time through its people, exposing reductionist perceptions of other cultures and humanizing that other through community-generated dialogue. Virtual intercultural exchanges advance intercultural communicative competency and constitute an effective format for high-impact learning practices that advance students’ understanding and appreciation of diversity, equity and inclusion in traditional and online classrooms. This surveys student evaluations of a pilot Virtual International Exchange (VIE) completed between U.S. and Uzbek students in 2018, and underpins a theoretical framework for the benefits of concurring cognitive dissonance for the benefit of open, equitable and inclusive pedagogical models.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Avci, H., & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A case study on mobile-blended collaborative learning in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Context. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 18(7), 45–58. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i7.3261

  • 2. Barhoumi, C. (2017). Analysis of technological, individual and community factors influencing the use of popular Web 2.0 tools in LIS education. Electronic Library, 35(5), 977–993. doi: 10.1108/EL-03-2016-0069

  • 3. Belz, J. A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 68-117.

  • 4. Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(2), 179-95.

  • 5. Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

  • 6. Bélisle, C. (2007, May). eLearning and intercultural dimensions of learning theories and teaching models. Paper presented at the Framework for eContent Evaluation. Retrieved from

  • 7. Block, D. (2014). Becoming multilingual and being multilingual: Some thoughts. In J. Cenoz & D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education: Between language learning and translanguaging. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • 8. Bohinski, C. A., & Leventhal, Y. (2015). Rethinking the ICC Framework: Transformation and Telecollaboration. Foreign Language Annals, 48(3), 521–534.

  • 9. Bowman, C., & Yamauchi, T. (2017). Processing emotions in sounds: cross-domain aftereffects of vocal utterances and musical sounds. Cognition & Emotion, 31(8), 1610–1626. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2016.1255588

  • 10. Byram, M. (2000). Assessing intercultural competence in language teaching. Sprogforum, 18(6), 8-13.

  • 11. Byram, M., Nichols, A. & Stevens, D. (2001). Developing Intercultural competence in practice. Languages for Intercultural Communication and Education. Multilingual Matters.

  • 12. Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columba University Press.

  • 13. Chomsky, N., Mukherji, N., Patnaik, B. N., & Agnihotri, R. K. (2000). The architecture of language. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

  • 14. Chomsky, N., Özsoy, A. S., & Nakipoğlu, M. (2009). Noam Chomsky on language and cognition. München: LINCOM Europa.

  • 15. Delmas, P. (2017). Using VoiceThread to create community in online learning. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 61(6), 595–602. doi: 10.1007/s11528-017-0195-z

  • 16. Dysthe, O. (1996). The multivoiced classroom: interaction of writing and classroom discourse. Written Communication, 13(3), 385-425.

  • 17. Elboubekri, A. (2017). The Intercultural Communicative Competence and Digital Education: The Case of Moroccan University Students of English in Oujda. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 45(4), 520–545.

  • 18. European Commission (2017). Study on the feasibility of an Erasmus + virtual exchange initiative: Final report. Retrieved from

  • 19. Fantini, A. E. (1991). Becoming better global citizens: the promise of intercultural competence. Adult Learning, 2, 15–19.

  • 20. Fennes, H., & Otten, H. (2008). Quality in non-formal education and training in the field of European youth work. Bonn, Brussels and Strasbourg: Salto T&C RC and Youth Partnership. Retrieved from

  • 21. Frühholz, S., Trost, W., & Kotz, S. A. (2016). The sound of emotions—Towards a unifying neural network perspective of affective sound processing. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 68, 96–110. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.05.002

  • 22. Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the silent language of culture: the CULTURA project. Language Learning and Technology Journal, 5.

  • 23. Gillingham, M. G., & Topper, A. (1999). Technology in teacher preparation: preparing teachers for the future. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 7(4), 303-321.

  • 24. Hasanova, D., & Shadieva, T. (2008). Implementing Communicative Language Teaching in Uzbekistan. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 138–143. doi: 10.2307/40264433

  • 25. Hilgard, E. R. (1948). Theories of learning. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

  • 26. Johnson, M. (2004). A philosophy of second language acquisition. New Haven; London: Yale University Press. Retrieved from

  • 27. Kirby, E. G., & Hulan, N. (2016). Student perceptions of self and community within an online environment: The use of VoiceThread to foster community. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 5(1), 87-99. doi: 10.14434/jolt.v5n1.19411.

  • 28. Koricich, A. (2013). Technology review: Multimedia discussions through VoiceThread. The Community College Enterprise, 19(1), 76–79.

  • 29. Koshy, V. (2010). Action research for Improving Educational Practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

  • 30. Kramsch, C. (2014). Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization: introduction. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 296–311.

  • 31. Lai, K. W., Khaddage, F., & Knezek, G. (2013). Blending student technology experiences in formal and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 414-425.

  • 32. Liaw, M. (2006). E-Learning and the development of intercultural competency. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 49-64.

  • 33. Marchis, L., Ciascai, L., & Saial J. (2008). Developing intercultural competencies using activities with different media. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 1(1), 1-47.

  • 34. O’Dowd, R. (Ed.) (2007). Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers (Vol. 15). Multilingual Matters.

  • 35. O’Dowd, R., & Ritter, M. (2006). Understanding and working with ‘failed communication’ in telecollaborative exchanges. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 1-20.

  • 36. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • 37. Pert, C. B., & Chopra, D. (1997). Molecules of emotion: Why you feel the way you feel. New York: Scribner.

  • 38. Price, M. A. (1991). Designing video classrooms. Adult Learning, 2(4), 15–19.

  • 39. Rankin, W. (1997). Increasing the communicative competence of foreign language students through the FL chatroom. Foreign Language Annals, 30(4), 542–546.

  • 40. Rudnick, P. (2018, October 9). The Danger of Live Theater. TEDxBoulder [Video file]. Retrieved from

  • 41. Schumann, J. H. (1994). Where is cognition? emotion and cognition in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 231-242.

  • 42. Shah, S. (2004). The Researcher/Inter-Telecollaboration for intercultural learning: An overview of projects involving Uzbekistan, Nathaniel Carney Kwansei Gakuin University, Uzbekistan.

  • 43. Taylor, E. W. (1994). A learning model for becoming interculturally competent. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(39), 389-408.

  • 44. The Politics of Learning Writing Collective (2017). The learning sciences in a new era of U.S. nationalism, cognition and instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 35(2), 91-102. doi: 10.1080/07370008.2017.1282486

  • 45. Verstegen, D. M. L., Dailey-Hebert, A., Fonteijn, H. T. H., Clarebout, G., & Spruijt, A. (2018). How do virtual teams collaborate in online learning tasks in a MOOC? International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 19(4), 39–55. Retrieved from

  • 46. Warschauer, M. (1998). Electronic literacies: Language, culture and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • 47. Winnicki, W. (1991). Intercultural Education: A Meeting of Souls. Adult Learning, 2(5), 5–6.

  • 48. de Wit, H. (2013 June 1). COIL – Virtual mobility without commercialisation. University World News [Blog post]. Retrieved from


Journal + Issues