Global Virtual Exchange (GVE) offers significant potential for Internationalization at Home (IaH). However, its effectiveness is hindered by challenges such as student disengagement, limited university support, and faculty resistance. Despite the importance of GVE administration, especially for postgraduate students, there is a lack of research on the experiences and challenges faced by administrators. This study investigates the motivations, challenges, and strategies of GVE administrators at various levels, including headquarters, university/department, and course. Our findings not only reveal a desire to expand student opportunities and empower faculty but also highlight challenges in student engagement, faculty buy-in, and leadership support. To address these issues, administrators could employ strategies like resource sharing, training programs, and policy advocacy. These interventions provide valuable insights for future GVE practices, emphasizing the importance of strong student-faculty relationships, innovation, and institutional support.
Ala-KortesmaaSMuñozC (2023) Challenges in virtual team communication in the context of virtual exchange experience. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning25(1): 49–61. DOI: 10.2478/eurodl-2023-0004.
2.
BeelenJJonesE (2015) Redefining internationalization at home. In: The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies. Berlin: Springer., 59–72.
BoschmaR (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional Studies39(1): 61–74.
5.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
6.
BroekelTBoschmaR (2012) Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: the proximity paradox. Journal of Economic Geography12(2): 409–433.
7.
BruhnE (2017) Towards a framework for virtual internationalization. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education32(1): 1–9. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1159898.pdf.
8.
ChengYEYeohBYangP (2023) Virtual student mobility on Zoom: digital platforms and differentiated experiences of international education and (im) mobilities in a time of pandemic. Mobilities18(5): 839–854.
9.
GuestGBunceAJohnsonL (2006) How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods18(1): 59–82.
10.
HampelRPeti-StantićStanojevićA (2014) Making meaning online: computer-mediated communication for language learning. In: Language as Information. Proceedings from the CALS Conference 2012. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 89–106.
11.
HelmFVan der VeldenB (2019) Erasmus+ virtual exchange: intercultural learning experiences: 2018 impact report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. Available at: https://erasmus-plus.org.jo/Portals/0/EVE_impact_study.pdf.
12.
HendersonCFinkelsteinNBeachA (2010) Beyond dissemination in college science teaching: an introduction to four core change strategies. Journal of College Science Teaching39(5): 18–25.
13.
HumphriesSAubreySKingJ (2023) Fluctuations in Japanese English majors’ capacity to speak before, during and after studying abroad. System113: 103001.
14.
KezarALesterJ (2009) Organizing Higher Education for Collaboration: A Guide for Campus Leaders. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
15.
KnightJ (2004) Internationalization remodeled: definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education8(1): 5–31.
16.
LewisTO’DowdR (2016) Online intercultural exchange and foreign language learning: a systematic review. In: LewisTO'DowdR (eds) Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice. New York: Routledge, 21–66.
17.
LorancBHillikerSMLenkaitisCA (2021) Virtual exchanges in language teacher education: facilitating reflection on teaching practice through the use of video. TESOL Journal12(2): e580.
18.
LuoHYangC (2022) Pedagogical benefits of Chinese-American virtual exchange: a study of student perceptions. ReCALL34(1): 37–50. DOI: 10.1017/S0958344021000203.
19.
Magen-NagarNShonfeldM (2018) The impact of an online collaborative learning program on students’ attitude towards technology. Interactive Learning Environments26(5): 621–637.
20.
Morrison-SmithSRuizJ (2020) Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review. SN Applied Sciences2: 1096. DOI: 10.1007/s42452-020-2801-5.
O’DowdR (2018) From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: state-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange1: 1–23, Available at: https://10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1.
23.
O’DowdR (2021) Virtual exchange: moving forward into the next decade. Computer Assisted Language Learning34(3): 209–224, Available at: https://10.1080/09588221.2021.1902201.
24.
O’DowdRO’RourkeB (2019) New developments in virtual exchange for foreign language education. Language, Learning and Technology23(3): 1–7, Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/44690 (Accessed 30 June 2024).
25.
SherblomJ (2020) Computer-mediated communication: approaches and perspectives. Solana Beach, CA: Cognella.
WoicolescoVGCassol-SilvaCCMorosiniM (2022) Internationalization at home and virtual: a sustainable model for Brazilian higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education26(2): 222–239. DOI: 10.1177/10283153221076898.
29.
WoodEACollinsSLMuellerS, et al. (2022) Transforming perspectives through virtual exchange: a US-Egypt partnership part 1. Frontiers in Public Health10: 877547.
30.
ZhangY (2018) Study on teaching strategy of local internationalization course in higher education in China. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University19: 98–107.
