Virtual exchange (VE) is an educational practice that involves the engagement of groups of learners in extended periods of online intercultural interaction and collaboration with international peers as an integrated part of their educational programs and under the guidance of educators and/or facilitators. Despite more than 20 years of research and recent large-scale initiatives such as Erasmus+ Virtual Exchange, this approach remains relatively unknown and often misunderstood in international education. Based on the qualitative and quantitative data of an Erasmus+ KA3 European Policy Experiment, which brought together practitioners, researchers, and ministerial policy makers from five European countries and autonomous regions, this article examines the challenges involved in implanting and upscaling an innovative practice such as VE in university internationalization practices. A case study from a Spanish regional autonomy, which took part in the project, is used to highlight barriers to take-up and integration at classroom, institutional, and policy levels. The data also provide a clear illustration of how an international practice such as VE can gain recognition and support though the coordination of bottom-up and top-down initiatives.
AshleyL. (2017). Case study research. In CoeR.WaringM.HedgesL.ArthurJ. (Eds.), Research methods & methodologies in education (pp. 114–121). SAGE.
2.
BeelenJ.JonesE. (2015). Redefining internationalisation at home. In CurajA.MateiL.PricopieR.SalmiJ.ScottP. (Eds.), The European higher education area: Between critical reflections and future policies (pp. 67–80). Springer.
3.
BrennanJ.BroekS.DurazziN.KamphuisB.RangaM.RyanS. (2014). Study on innovation in higher education: Final report. European Commission Directorate for Education and Training Study on Innovation in Higher Education, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
4.
BrewerE.LeaskB. (2012). Internationalization of the curriculum. In DeardorffD.de WitH.HeylJ.AdamsT. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of international higher education (pp. 245–265). SAGE.
5.
ChambersA.BaxS. (2006). Making CALL work: Towards normalisation. System, 34(4), 465–479.
6.
ChoJ. Y.LeeE. (2014). Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: Similarities and differences. The Qualitative Report, 19, 1–20. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol19/iss32/2
7.
CohenL.ManionL.MorrisonK. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge.
8.
DaviesP. (1999). What is evidence-based education?British Journal of Educational Studies, 47(2), 108–121.
9.
De WitH. (2016). Internationalisation and the role of online intercultural exchange. In O’DowdR.LewisT. (Eds.), Online intercultural exchange: Policy, pedagogy, practice (pp. 192−208). Routledge.
European Commission. (2013). European higher education in the world. Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2017). Support mechanisms for evidence-based policy-making in education [Eurydice report]. Publications Office of the European Union.
HsiehH.ShannonS. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
O’DowdR. (2016). Emerging trends and new directions in telecollaborative learning. CALICO Journal, 33(3), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v33i3.30747
23.
O’DowdR. (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://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1
24.
O’DowdR. (2019). A transnational model of virtual exchange for global citizenship education. Language Teaching, 53, 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000077
PaigeR.FryG.StallmanE.JosićJ.JonJ. (2009). Study abroad for global engagement: The long-term impact of mobility experiences. Intercultural Education, 20, 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980903370847
27.
PapatsibaV. (2005). Political and individual rationales of student mobility: A case-study of Erasmus and a French regional scheme for studies abroad. European Journal of Education, 40(2), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2004.00218.x
ReyF. (2017, May). Inaugural speech of the academic course of the Universities of Castilla y León by the Regional Minister for Education (2017-2018).
30.
RichardsonS. (2016). Cosmopolitan learning for a global era. Routledge.
31.
Schultheis MooreA.SimonS. (2015). Globally networked teaching in the humanities. Routledge.
32.
TarasV.CaprarD. V.RottigD.SaralaR. M.ZakariaN.ZhaoF.JiménezA.WankelC.WengS. L.MinorM.BryłaP.OrdeñanaX.BodeA.SchusterA. M.VaiginieneE.FroeseF. B.BathulaH.YajnikN.BaldeggerR.HuangV. Z. Y. (2013). A global classroom evaluating the effectiveness of global virtual collaboration as a teaching tool in management education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 12(3), 414–435.
33.
ZhangY.WildemuthB. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. In WildemuthB. M. (Ed.), Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science (pp. 1–12). Libraries Unlimited.
