Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Communication and learning across cultures is always a challenge during the development of educational internationalization. Higher education institutions worldwide are progressively under pressure to support and embrace multicultural student bodies and intercultural exchange. In recent years, some overseas universities have conducted opportunities for online pre-communication and interaction with local students and staff via telecollaboration tools for their incoming international students. It seems that telecollaboration can positively develop students’ multicultural communication skills based on appropriate online communication tools. However, we think it is important to consider students’ cultural contexts and individual preferences and needs to choose a suitable telecollaboration tool for online intercultural learning. This study explored Chinese international students’ (one of the largest mobile student groups worldwide at the tertiary level) uses and opinions regarding what online communication tool would be the most appropriate telecollaboration tool to support effective online intercultural learning. These participants’ uses for and views regarding the online telecollaboration tools were gathered through a mixed-method analysis of an online questionnaire’s responses and a focus group’s interview responses with a semi-structured questionnaire. The results indicated that although online communication tools, such as email and video chatting, were convenient for communicating and sharing information with others, these tools cannot entirely satisfy participants’ demands for an effective online intercultural learning experience. The results revealed that virtual environments have the features of meeting participants’ preferences for the desired telecollaboration tool and have a positive potential to deliver an effective online intercultural learning environment.

Keywords

online communication tools telecollaboration Chinese international students intercultural learning virtual environments

Introduction

The number of global international students in higher education has grown significantly from 4.78 million in 2015 to over 6.06 million in 2019 (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2022). Higher education institutions are witnessing a rapid increase in the cultural diversity of their student populations. However, issues such as language barriers and a lack of intercultural skills are frequently encountered by international students to a high degree during their overseas studying (J. Li et al., 2016; Spencer-Oatey et al., 2017; Yassin et al., 2020). Hence, opportunities for increasing the capability of intercultural skills among multicultural students in higher education are urgently needed. In recent years, some universities attempted to use online communication tools to support pre-communication and interaction for their multicultural students to improve incoming international students’ intercultural skills (Tüzün & Özdinç, 2016; Zhang, Goodman & Gu, 2022). Based on appropriate telecommunication tools, this type of online pre-orientation seems like a good way for multicultural university students to develop their intercultural skills in advance. However, how do higher education institutions identify appropriate online communication tools for their multicultural students to conduct an effective online intercultural learning environment?

To better pinpoint the most appropriate telecommunication tools for online intercultural learning, it is essential to understand the meaning and features of intercultural learning. Intercultural communicative skills (ICSs) are skills used to communicate with people who speak a different language and live in a different cultural context (Byram, 1997). A better ICS enables language learners to communicate more efficiently with others who are linguistically and culturally different (Deardorff, 2006, 2008). Intercultural learning is the process of acquiring ICSs (i.e., multicultural knowledge and communicative skills), which are necessary for appropriate and effective interaction with members from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds (O’Brien et al., 2019; M. Yang, 2017a; R. Yang, 2017b). As such, ICSs do not simply involve knowing another culture and its language; they also require an improved cross-cultural awareness to shape current university students’ cultural values and attitudes (Burns & Richards, 2018). Diversity in language, culture, learning strategies, and abilities among (online) study groups at universities impacts cross-cultural social awareness (Issa et al., 2014). Moreover, cross-cultural learning builds university students’ respect for other cultures, increasing these students’ perceptions of intercultural interactions (Bozdağ, 2018). Previous research has found that to develop students’ ICSs, each culture member must add his or her knowledge, skills, and attributes to the group and use their intercultural differences to create synergy (Kerimbayev et al., 2017). The sharing of experiences in intercultural activities implies understanding among representatives of different cultures (Corder & U-Mackey, 2015). Learning is a process of meaning construction in an active social and collaborative setting through a system of symbols (e.g., language) and tools (e.g., computers) as learners perform specific tasks (Lee, 2009). de Hei et al. (2020) found that collaborative learning in international higher education contributes to the development of ICS.

In addition, social (intercultural) interaction between learners enables them to exchange knowledge, skills, and experiences through discussion based on collaborative tasks (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Van Lier, 2000). Therefore, the solution to developing effective intercultural learning is to provide a space for students to learn about each other’s cultures and provide opportunities for intercultural interaction and collaboration (Chan et al., 2017). Therefore, the selected online communication tool must provide students with an effective intercultural learning environment and support them in recognizing and understanding other cultures and effectively interacting with people from these cultures (Khlaisang & Songkram, 2019; Machado et al., 2016). Moreover, to conduct effective online intercultural learning, telecommunication tools should provide multicultural students with the opportunity to access collaborative tasks (Chen et al., 2005; Shadiev & Sintawati, 2020).

Some researchers have pointed out that telecollaboration that is based on appropriated online communication tools can effectively develop students’ multicultural communication skills (Godwin-Jones, 2019; Luo & Gao, 2022; O’Dowd, 2018; Shadiev & Sintawati, 2020). Telecollaboration tools can bring students of different cultures together online for intercultural exchanges and collaboration (Godwin-Jones, 2019; O’Dowd, 2018; Shadiev & Sintawati, 2020). The term telecollaboration, which is also known as virtual exchange, refers to when student groups engage in online collaboration activities with people from other cultural backgrounds or geographically distant locations as an integrated part of their educational programs (O’Dowd, 2018). In addition, compared with the traditional study abroad approach, the online telecollaboration tool has been seen as a practical and cost-effective approach to offer international students an overseas studying experience “at home” (Luo & Gao, 2022; Vahed & Rodriguez, 2021). Telecollaboration requires the use of online communication tools to bring global multicultural students together to collaborate. Some researchers have found that online communication tools can support telecollaboration among distributed learning groups by providing an interactive learning environment to meet students’ learning demands while also satisfying their social needs (Kreijns et al., 2007, 2011). Based on these online tools, telecollaboration can be delivered in both synchronous ways (e.g., using video chat, Facebook, or virtual environments) and asynchronous ways (e.g., using email or Renren, a Chinese social tool similar to Facebook) (Richards & Burns, 2012). Previously, telecollaboration has traditionally been text-based and asynchronous, such as via email. Email has also been widely used in education, especially for language learning (Stockwell & Levy, 2001; Vinagre, 2005). However, advances in computer-mediated communication tools have meant that synchronous communication (as well as multimodal exchanges involving combinations of different media) is becoming more popular (Richards & Burns, 2012). Videoconferencing is increasingly being used to reduce the time spent traveling to meetings, and it also provides the capability to conduct online multipoint interactions with remote users (Mupepi, 2014). Some studies have argued that for synchronous telecollaboration, video conferencing is an effective vehicle for cross-cultural student collaboration (Lenkaitis et al., 2019). However, this modality has some drawbacks in multicultural university student collaboration. It appears to work best only when participants already know one another, and the actual effects of collaboration only occur when it involves a small group of participants (Franceschi et al., 2009). Franceschi et al. (2009) also argued that videoconferencing is generally organized with a fixed perspective and only a vague sense of the surrounding environment. As a type of videoconferencing, Skype can support video chat, voice calls, and document (e.g., images, files) transmission between internet-based devices and users (skype.com). However, research has found that although students are excited to use Skype for language learning and ICS development (Terhune, 2016), scientific evidence that it helps develop these skills remains sparse (Thome-Williams, 2016). Social media has gradually been applied as a telecollaboration tool in promoting cultural understanding and communication at the university level. Facebook is one example of such a social platform for cross-cultural collaboration (Wang, 2012), and it works as a supplementary communication tool for second language learning (Bailey et al., 2018). However, Shachaf and Hara (2007) suggested that if multicultural group members are not socially intimate with each other, informal channels for skills and knowledge exchange (e.g., discussion) should be excluded from their use. Moreover, compared to Facebook and Twitter, Renren (a Chinese social media platform) was more prevalent among Chinese international students as an online social tool for communicating with others in the United States (US; Saw et al., 2013). In addition, WeChat (a Chinese social media app) was more frequently used by Chinese international students as a tool to address communication barriers and study challenges within their university experience in the UK (Cowley et al., 2017).

In recent years, multimodal media, such as virtual environments (e.g., virtual worlds [VW] and virtual reality [VR]), have grown in their potential to deliver intercultural exchanges (Zhang, Robb, Eyerman & Goodman, 2017; Zhang, Robb, & Goodman, 2017); González-Yebra et al., 2019; Khlaisang & Songkram, 2019). These technologies allow students to collaborate and construct multicultural skills and knowledge outside of time and place constraints. Unlike other telecollaboration tools, virtual worlds are immersive digital environments, with rich three-dimensional (3D) graphics, games, and high-quality audio and video chatting, which enable individuals to interact with each other and work on the same activities with a strong sense of presence (Abdul Hamid et al., 2017; Machado et al., 2016). Within the context of multiple cultures, collaborative tasks in virtual rooms offer the potential for effective performance and promote intercultural understanding among students of different nations (Cagiltay et al., 2015; Chun, 2015; Shonfeld & Greenstein, 2021). For instance, anxiety in students who study abroad can be greatly reduced by visiting the host university through VR as a pre-departure activity (Brunotte & Hastings, 2019). In a 3D virtual learning environment, intercultural students can see and hear one another and manipulate virtual artifacts together (Dickey, 2003). Studies have shown that a realistic virtual environment is an effective technology tool that can be used to enhance students’ learning experiences in intercultural communication (C. Li et al., 2020). Virtual environments benefit the e-learning community because they increase participants’ sense of presence in the community and enhance social awareness and communication between participants in a safe way (Abdul Hamid et al., 2017; Machado et al., 2016).

Research Questions

In the past few decades, investigating the appropriate telecollaboration tools to support effective learning for cross-cultural student groups (both domestic and international) has been a crucial topic (Lenkaitis et al., 2019). As Witte (2011) argues, telecollaboration tools can develop multicultural students’ ICSs by engaging them in online social and collaborative activities. However, Chun (2015) warned researchers about some constraints for selecting practical telecollaboration tools for intercultural learning. Researchers have observed that learners from different cultural backgrounds may prefer different technologies for intercultural exchanges (Chun, 2015; Guo et al., 2008). Others have also found that a lack of understanding of online tools’ cultural characters, social forms, and functionalities will prevent university students from engaging in the ICS development process (Cagiltay et al., 2015; Hung et al., 2012). When multicultural groups use online communication tools with new cultural forms, their members may encounter difficulties understanding how to best use the new tools in the setting of their current cultural norms (Rice et al., 1998). In addition, cultural variety and social habits significantly impact the choice of online tools (Cagiltay et al., 2015). For instance, factors that influence international students’ preferences regarding communication tools may relate to the familiarity of some features, the native language settings, and their favorite functionalities (Kayan et al., 2006). Many studies claim that understanding university students’ perspectives on communication technology is key to finding or developing practical telecollaboration tools for ICSs in higher education (Guo et al., 2008; Kayan et al., 2006). Some researchers have also argued that developing an effective intercultural learning environment through telecollaboration is not easy (Canto et al., 2013; Wang, 2011), and it is necessary to investigate students’ preferences for using telecollaboration tools. Moreover, to maximize student engagement in online intercultural learning, it is important to consider learners’ contextual variables along with their individual preferences and needs when choosing telecollaboration (Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019).

Chinese international students are one of the largest mobile student groups worldwide at the tertiary level (UNESCO, 2021); therefore, we chose two groups of Chinese international students from a European university as the study participants. This study attempted to examine Chinese international students’ uses and opinions of what online communication tool would be the most appropriate telecollaboration method for developing effective online intercultural learning. Our research questions were as follows:

What were the experiences of Chinese international students in using online communication tools to connect with people at the university they will be attending?

What were the perspectives of Chinese international students regarding using online communication tools to support effective online intercultural learning?

Methodology

To investigate Chinese international students’ experiences and perspectives on using online communication tools for telecollaboration, this study recruited two groups of newly arrived Chinese students at a European university as the study participants. These students must frequently request information about various matters and aspects of the new culture they will soon be immersed in before reaching the host university, so these newly arrived international students still hold fresh memories about the online communication tools they used to connect with people overseas. To gain a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of participants’ experiences and perspectives on using online communication tools, this study applied a mixed-method approach; both quantitative data in the form of an online questionnaire completed by the newly arrived Chinese international students and qualitative data in the form of a focus group’s interview with a semi-structured questionnaire were analyzed. Although the analysis focused on a small group of Chinese students in Europe, the strength of this exploratory study lies not in the number of analyzed participants but instead in the detailed analysis of their first-hand experiences studying in a new culture and the adaptation processes for online technologies in their current cultural forms. Before completing the surveys, written informed consent was collected from all participants through an online link. Full ethical approval for the study was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the institution at which this research study was carried out.

In addition, the results of the subsequent studies all involve the answers to the research questions about the experiences and perspectives of Chinese international students on using online communication tools to interact with overseas locals.

Study 1

Participants

Study 1 was conducted at a European public university in the spring of 2017. The participants were a group of Chinese students who were new arrivals at the European university. A total of 66 students (average age = 21.55 years, SD = 3.17 years; 44 females, 22 males), including doctoral, postgraduate, and undergraduate students, participated and satisfactorily completed an online and anonymous questionnaire through the university’s International Office system. The participants had a variety of backgrounds in education, business, computer science, and engineering.

Instrument

The questionnaire consisted of six questions (see Table 1) that were intended to investigate the participants’ communication experiences with staff from the host university (Q1–Q4), their experiences with using online communication tools (Q5), and their perspectives on the features of these telecollaboration tools (Q6). The questionnaire items were judged and modified according to suggestions from telecollaboration experts. Items Q1, Q4, and Q5 were designed as closed questions that used a nominal scale for their responses. Items Q2–Q3 and the seven options of Q6 were used to create a single answer, two-point agreement Likert-type scale. The data were analyzed using International Business Machines’ Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 26.0. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated to test the consistency of the items within the questionnaires. The internal consistency values were 0.71 for Q2 and Q3 and 0.78 for the seven options of Q6. These results indicated that the questionnaire had good internal consistency (Fraenkel & Norman, 2003).

Table 1.

Questions From the Online Questionnaire (Six Items).

Number	Questions
Q1	What form(s) of communication tool did you use to connect with the locals from the host university?
Q2	Did you find these forms of online communication convenient?
Q3	Did you find these forms of online communication effective?
Q4	On average, how timely were the responses you received to your queries to and communications with the host university?
Q5	Which online communication tools would you choose to communicate with local students and friends during the overseas study?
Q6	Which of the following functionalities do you think should be included in a virtual telecollaboration platform for intercultural exchange?

Results

Experiences on Contacting the Host University. Most (93.9%, n = 64) of the students in this sample contacted the host university by email. Table 2 shows that over half of the respondents (53%, n = 35) received a response from the university within 2 days, while only 4.5% (n = 3) said that they heard back from the university immediately.

Table 2.

Time Until First Response From the Host University.

Timelines	Participant n (%)
Immediately	3 (4.5)
<2 days	35 (53.0)
>2 days to < 1 week	24 (36.5)
>1 week to < 1 month	3(4.5)
No reply received	1 (1.5)
Total	66 (100.0)

The students were asked whether they felt that the method they used to contact the university was convenient and effective. Over half of the sample (69.7%, n = 46) stated that the method used (i.e., email, for most) was convenient. However, 54.5% (n = 36) expressed that it was ineffective. The researchers conducted a Fisher’s exact test to investigate whether there was a relationship between using email to contact the university and how the students rated their communications with the university. The results showed a statistically significant association between using email to contact the university and the belief that this form of communication was convenient (p = .007, p < .05). However, no significant association was found between using email to contact the host university and believing that the communication method was effective.

Perspectives on Using Online Communication Tools. Figure 1 shows that QQ, one of the most popular social instant messaging tools in China, obtained the most attention (34.9%, n = 23) from participants when they were asked which online communication tools they preferred to use to communicate with local students and peers during their overseas study. This ranking was followed by Renren (24.2%, n = 16), email (22.7%, n = 15), Skype (9.1%, n = 6), and Facebook (9.1%, n = 6).

Figure 1.

Preferred online communication tools.

When asked about what features should be added to a virtual telecollaboration platform to support intercultural learning for international students, the participants provided the suggestions shown in Figure 2. The option of a campus map proved popular, with 72.7% (n = 48) of the respondents requesting it and 59.1% (n = 39) asking for synchronous question and answer (Q&A) services. In addition, 57.5% (n = 38) supported using video chat in the platform, and 56.1% (n = 37) expected access to a virtual “room,” where they could practice language skills. There was also a perceived need for a virtual campus guide and virtual lectures according to 53% (n = 35) and 50% (n = 33) of respondents, respectively. In addition, document transfer capabilities (56.1%, n = 37) and free downloads of course videos (45.5%, n = 30) were also selected. The results of the open-ended questions revealed that an online interactive space was expected to be developed to allow multicultural students to participate in synchronous intercultural exchanges.

Figure 2.

Preferred functionalities for a virtual telecollaboration platform.

Study 2

Participants

Study 2 was conducted in collaboration with the Clinical Research Center at the same public university in Europe and the Department of Medicine at a Chinese university. Before they arrived in Europe, 14 Chinese postgraduate students participated in a remote videoconferencing orientation in China with the local staff and students from the European university. These 14 students (average age = 22.29 years, SD = 1.07 year; nine females, five males) participated in this study as a focus group once they arrived at the host university in the autumn of 2017. The focus group students were interviewed individually using a semi-structured questionnaire. The aims of Study 2 were (1) to further discover how the focus group was satisfied with the online communication tool they used and (2) to gather their perspectives about using virtual platforms for telecollaboration.

Instrument

The researchers based the questionnaire on the scenarios presented during the videoconferencing orientation and also considered the findings of a prior study related to evaluating the method of online cross-cultural learning (J. Yang et al., 2014). The semi-structured questionnaire involved five open-ended questions (Table 3). These questionnaire items were modified according to feedback from related experts regarding the questions’ accuracy before they were sent to the students.

Table 3.

The Semi-Structured Questionnaire Items.

Number	Questions
Q1	Do you think the information about the host university provided during the videoconferencing is useful for you?
Q2	Do you think videoconferencing is helpful for preparing your intercultural learning?
Q3	Would you find it helpful to have an opportunity to collaborate with Western students online before the intercultural learning?
Q4	Do you think a telecollaboration platform where you could log on to meet and communicate with cross-cultural students would be helpful for intercultural learning?
Q5	If using an online “virtual room” (see Figure 3) for intercultural exchange, what comments would you like to give about it?

Results

The names presented with the transcripts and responses from the interviews and discussions are all pseudonyms. These names were also used to code participants’ quotes. Almost all responses to Q1 showed that Chinese international students were satisfied with the information provided by the overseas host university via videoconferencing. However, some students pointed out that the materials presented during the videoconferencing were too basic and would not solve their real concerns, such as language barriers and intercultural interactions. For instance, Pan argued that the amount and the form of the materials shared during the videoconferencing were limited, and these materials could not simulate an intercultural learning environment and present the tutors’ teaching style. In addition, Lin expressed that language barriers made him feel nervous before going abroad, yet he believed that pre-collaboration with his future international peers using online platforms would make him familiar with a new culture.

According to Q2, 64% (n = 9) of respondents agreed that videoconferencing was a convenient way for them to talk directly to the university staff. However, Ari expressed that videoconferencing was limited in offering interactive activities with other university students. With Q3, all students showed a strong interest in communicating and collaborating with their future classmates in advance. For instance, Ari further stated that the more chances they had to communicate with native students, the better language skills they would obtain, thereby becoming more familiar with peers from different cultures. In addition, some other participants also provided similar comments (shown below) that expressed the desire to join an online intercultural learning environment before studying abroad.

Lin:

Surely, we will find it hard to study in a new culture at first, but communicating and collaborating with students from other countries is the meaning of internationalization. Pre-interaction with multicultural students will help us learn the knowledge and skills of how to study in a multicultural environment.

Yilin:

Yes, it will be very helpful, as communicating with local students in advance means they can share information with us on many aspects of the intercultural learning environment

Lys:

Yes, and this would be a very effective way for us to prepare to study overseas, as we can familiarize ourselves with their learning styles and practice our English. We can also have a private QQ group to talk more when we know each other better.

When asked about creating a telecollaboration platform for intercultural exchanges (Q4), many students gave valuable thoughts that reiterated the significance of telecollaboration among multicultural students. For instance, YanPei believed that the telecollaboration platform was helpful and useful for international students to interact with future international peers to practice English and share their respective cultures before actually traveling overseas. In addition, Wanzhen suggested that more resources about the university should be included in the telecollaboration platform, which can be widely accessed and used around the world. Furthermore, Eagle pointed out that some collaborative tasks should be integrated into the telecollaboration platform to encourage Chinese students and Western students to collaborate with each other. Xiaolong argued that both the techniques and organization of the telecollaboration platform are important for intercultural learning since incentives may be needed to encourage Western students to engage and collaborate with Chinese students.

The participants also gave some positive responses regarding the use of a virtual room (see Figure 3) to simulate an intercultural learning environment and achieve cross-cultural collaboration (Q5). For instance, Ming expressed that the virtual room presented in the picture looked interesting. He even imaged that he could “walk” around in the virtual room and meet his peers who [are] from the West; then they could start to share each other’s cultural experiences. Moreover, Han expected that it would be interesting if she could “meet” and talk with future international peers and share representative images of different cultures in the virtual room. In addition, Yilin believed that virtual environments would allow Chinese international students to access the “real” Western culture and interact with local native learners through a virtual identity whenever and wherever they are. Therefore, based on these responses, the participants believed that virtual environments have the potential to help multicultural students to create a “real” intercultural learning environment.

Figure 3.

An example of a virtual room (Source: Terf^®) Version 2.0.10 of Terf [Computer software] (2015).

Discussion

With the attempt of universities to use online communication tools to support pre-communication and interaction between international students and overseas locals, it seems that telecollaboration can positively develop students’ multicultural communication skills. Hence, this study aimed to investigate which online communication tool would be the most appropriate telecollaboration tool for online intercultural learning. We conducted two surveys with two groups of newly arrived Chinese students who were studying at a European university. The studies explored these participants’ experiences of using online communication tools to contact the host universities and compile their perspectives regarding what features an online tool should have to support effective intercultural learning. The results of Study 1 indicated that, although most participants contacted the university by email and thought it was a convenient communication method, they did not see it as necessarily effective. This finding implies that intercultural communication skills at contemporary universities are still influenced and limited by the habit of using email to communicate with international students (Bozdağ, 2018). In addition, 50% of the participants received responses from their host university after more than 2 days (see Table 2). Hence, although students enjoyed the asynchronous tools (e.g., email), they found them ineffective for intercultural exchanges (Richards & Burns, 2012). Figure 2 shows that the functionalities, such as real-time Q&A, video chat, and a virtual language practice room, were considered significant features for a virtual telecollaboration platform for multicultural collaboration. These findings further support the evidence that international (Chinese) students preferred using synchronous tools yet actually used asynchronous tools (e.g., email) to access intercultural communication with the local university officials (Richards & Burns, 2012).

Synchronous tools are suggested when interacting with intercultural peers because they offer instant feedback and communication (Avgousti, 2018). Our findings showed that the participants preferred to use QQ and Renren over Facebook and Skype to communicate with local students and friends during their overseas study experience. Other studies have also suggested that Renren, a social tool commonly used to communicate with local students, is more acceptable than Facebook and Twitter among Chinese students in the US (Saw et al., 2013). This finding could be explained by the fact that Chinese participants preferred to use more familiar software to communicate in a multicultural environment. This result also illustrates that an online communication tool that is popular in one culture may not necessarily be as understood, functional, or easy to use in another culture (Guo et al., 2008). Moreover, the finding of Study 2 implied that although the focus group participants were satisfied with their real-time interactions with locals via video conferencing, this tool was limited in offering collaborative activities for cross-cultural learning. Therefore, for establishing intercultural connections, videoconferencing cannot automatically transform intercultural students’ ICSs. Instead, the factors that influence international students’ preferences regarding online telecollaboration tools for intercultural learning are more closely related to their familiarity with the tool’s features and software functionalities (Hung et al., 2012; Kayan et al., 2006).

First, an analysis of the interview transcripts showed that all the focus group participants agreed that prior to their overseas study, the opportunity to collaborate in advance with the host university’s local students online would be helpful for international students to develop their ICSs. This result is similar to past researchers’ argument that intercultural collaboration can heighten domestic student sensitivities to international students’ language and communication needs (Luo & Gao, 2022; Vahed & Rodriguez, 2021). Second, Study 1 indicated that the respondents thought the virtual telecollaboration tools should possess the functionalities of a virtual campus guide and a virtual chatting room to enhance cross-cultural language learning. These two virtual environments allow students to speak with other participants who also exist in the same space and to practice language and exchange knowledge together. When they communicate with other students from different cultures in the same “room,” these participants feel a strong sense of being in the same “place” (Franceschi et al., 2009). Compared to when two-dimensional online communication technologies (e.g., email, Facebook) are used in telecollaboration, virtual environments (e.g., VW, VR) have been proven to have a more significant impact on enhancing intercultural learners’ learning outcomes and group engagement (Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019; C. Li et al., 2020; Pellas & Kazanidis, 2015). For instance, one overseas university implemented a customized virtual environment to conduct orientation to boost its international students’ conceptual and spatial knowledge of the university prior to beginning their intercultural learning experience (Tüzün & Özdinç, 2016). Virtual environments can offer an identified reality where students can synchronously share experiences with others and engage in “real” interactions, which can effectively facilitate distance education with online teaching and learning (González-Yebra et al., 2019).

Furthermore, the participants seemed to welcome the idea of using virtual worlds to build an online telecollaboration platform for multicultural learning between Chinese international students and local students (Study 2). They used phrases like “walking” in the virtual room, finding Western partners, meeting and talking with others, seeing “real” Western countries, and using virtual identities to describe their desired ways of online intercultural communication. In the 3D space, the students can see and hear one another and manipulate virtual artifacts together. These benefits can provide a strong sense of group presence for multicultural students, which leads to more group learning interactions and enhanced social awareness (Abdul Hamid et al., 2017; Machado et al., 2016).

In Study 2, participant Eagle highlighted the significance of using collaborative tasks that are set into the online telecollaboration tool to encourage intercultural collaboration. Xiaolong also stated that apart from the telecollaboration tool itself (technology), the incentives (organization) should also be considered vital to engaging in intercultural learning. The participants understood that by working together to solve the same tasks in a virtual space, they could develop a sense of group presentation, leading to more engaging intercultural interactions (Zhang, Goodman & Gu, 2022; Machado et al., 2016). Some researchers have also suggested that collaborative tasks and tools should be set in a telecollaboration environment to encourage cross-cultural exchange (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Van Lier, 2000). Therefore, when developing an online telecollaboration tool to support effective intercultural learning, designers should consider relevant cultural factors, essential functionalities, and collaborative tasks. Our findings on participants’ preferences for a desired online telecollaboration tool demonstrate the potential of using virtual environments to build an online educational platform that can be used for multicultural study groups (González-Yebra et al., 2019; Khlaisang & Songkram, 2019). The use of collaborative tasks in virtual environments (e.g., VW, VR) can lead to effective student and group performance and also promote intercultural exchange among students (Cagiltay et al., 2015; Liu & Shirley, 2021; Shonfeld & Greenstein, 2021). The learning communities that are created in virtual environments may collaborate to acquire experiential knowledge and enhance intercultural learning in borderless and global campuses; other online media cannot satisfy this requirement (Cagiltay et al., 2015; C. Li et al., 2020; Mupepi, 2014). Hence, with the attempt of using online communication tools to support pre-communication and interaction between international students and overseas locals, higher education institutions should consider using virtual environments (e.g., VW, VR) as a practical telecollaboration tool to create an effective online learning environment.

Limitations

Although this study offers several practical implications, some limitations must be considered. (1) The size of the focus group was limited. However, these Chinese international students provided their first-hand experiences of using videoconferencing for the context of online cross-cultural communication with local students from the host university. (2) The researchers developed the online questionnaire used in Study 1 in accordance with the study’s goal. However, the results showed that the consistency of the items within the questionnaire was good. (3) No actual experiments happened in a specific virtual environment. This study aimed to investigate international students’ perceptions of and demands for a telecollaboration tool; the results showed that virtual environments can meet participants’ requirements. Therefore, all participant feedback was essential for investigating an appropriate online telecollaboration tool for intercultural learning.

Conclusion and Future Study

The results revealed that most participants desired to communicate and collaborate with local students from the host university in advance via an appropriate telecollaboration tool. This finding shows that although online communication tools (such as email, video chatting, and Facebook) are convenient to communicate and share information with others, these tools cannot entirely satisfy participants’ demands for effective intercultural learning. The participants’ preferences for an ideal online telecollaboration tool demonstrate the potential of using virtual environments for intercultural learning. Virtual environments (e.g., VW, VR) can provide an effective intercultural learning platform with a customizable “real” environment, video conferencing, document transfer, messages, collaborative tasks, and other functionalities (Corder & U-Mackey, 2015; Liu & Shirley, 2021; C. Li et al., 2020; Machado et al., 2016; Wood & Gregory, 2018).

In addition, since 2020, the pandemic named COVID-19 has forced global universities into a crisis response using a variety of online learning platforms (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2023). VR technology has also been used as a successful online learning platform for cultural exchange during the COVID-19 pandemic (Liu & Shirley, 2021). Hopefully, the findings of this study could provide some clues for higher education institutions to identify appropriate telecollaboration tools to support effective online intercultural learning. Hence, based on the findings of this study, further research should focus on using a virtual environment (e.g., VW, VR) to develop an efficient telecollaboration tool for enhancing multicultural students’ ICSs.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Associate Professor Nigel Robb and Associate Professor A.Y.M. Atiquil Islam for their valuable suggestion and guidance for this paper.

Author Contributions

BZ designed the study, collected the data, performed the statistical analyzes and wrote the manuscript. LG contributed to the idea inform and the study design, and was involved in the manuscript’s drafting. XG contributed to the idea inform, was involved in the drafting and proofreading the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The quantitative data collected for this study can be accessed by request, by contacting Author. The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was sponsored by Education Youth Program of Shanghai Philosophy and Social Science Planning Project under grant B2021001.

Ethics Statement

Prior to beginning the study, ethics approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committee in University College Dublin under approval number: HS-14-69-Zhang-Goodman (certificate provided below).

ORCID iDs

Bo Zhang

Xiaoqing Gu

References

Abdul Hamid

H. H.

Sherjawi

Z. A.

Omar

Phon-Amnuaisuk

. (2017). Student acceptance and attitude towards using 3D virtual learning spaces. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 532, 107–118.

Adedoyin

O. B.

Soykan

(2023). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 31, 863–875.

Avgousti

M. I.

(2018). Intercultural communicative competence and online exchanges: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 819–853.

Bailey

Park

Haji

S. A.

(2018). An investigation of facebook for language learning: Better understanding perceptions and participation. CALL-EJ, 18(2), 14–30.

Bozdağ. (2018). Intercultural learning in schools through telecollaboration? A critical case study of eTwinning between Turkey and Germany. International Communication Gazette, 80(7), 677–694.

Brunotte

Hastings

(2019). Reducing study abroad anxiety through smartphone virtual reality: An investigative pilot study. Ryugaku: Explorations in Study Abroad, 12(1), 2–24.

Burns

Richards

J. C.

(Eds.) (2018). The Cambridge guide to learning English as a second language. Cambridge University Press.

Byram

(1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.

Cagiltay

Bichelmeyer

Kaplan Akilli

(2015). Working with multicultural virtual teams: critical factors for facilitation, satisfaction and success. Smart Learning Environments, 2(1), 11–16.

10.

Canto

Jauregi

van Den Bergh

(2013). Integrating cross-cultural interaction through video-communication and virtual worlds in foreign language teaching programs: Is there an added value? ReCALL, 25(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344012000274

11.

Chan

E. A.

Lai

Wong

Chan

Stenberg

Carlson

(2017). Nursing students intercultural learning via internationalization at home: A qualitative descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 52, 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.02.003

12.

Chen

S. J.

Hsu

Caropreso

(2005). Cross-cultural collaborative online learning: When the west meets the east [Conference session]. E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1931–1941). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

13.

Chun

D. M.

(2015). Language and culture learning in higher education via telecollaboration. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 10(1), 5–21.

14.

Corder

U-Mackey

(2015). Encountering and dealing with difference: Second life and intercultural competence. Intercultural Education, 26(5), 409–424.

15.

Cowley

Sun

Smith

(2017). Enhancing International Students’ Engagement Via Social Media–A Case Study of Wechat And Chinese Students At A Uk University. INTED2017 Proceedings (pp. 7047–7057). IATED

16.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241–266.

17.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2008). Intercultural competence: A definition, model and implications for education abroad. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 32–52). Stylus Publishing.

18.

de Hei

Tabacaru

Sjoer

Rippe

Walenkamp

. (2020). Developing intercultural competence through collaborative learning in international higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(2), 190–211.

19.

Dickey

M. D.

(2003). Teaching in 3D: Pedagogical affordances and constraints of 3D virtual worlds for synchronous distance learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 105–121.

20.

Dugartsyrenova

V. A.

Sardegna

V. G.

(2019). Raising intercultural awareness through voice-based telecollaboration: Perceptions, uses, and recommendations. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(3), 205–220.

21.

Fraenkel

J. R.

Norman

E. W.

(2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th ed.). Mc. GrawHill.

22.

Franceschi

Lee

R. M.

Zanakis

S. H.

Hinds

(2009). Engaging group e-learning in virtual worlds. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(1), 73–100.

23.

Godwin-Jones

(2019). Telecollaboration as an approach to developing intercultural communication competence. Language Learning & Technology.

24.

González-Yebra

Ó.

Aguilar

Lucas

. (2019). Co-design of a 3D virtual campus for synchronous distance teaching based on student satisfaction: Experience at the University of Almería (Spain). Education Sciences, 9(1), 121–216.

25.

Guo

Tan

F. B.

Turner

(2008). An exploratory investigation into instant messaging preferences in two distinct cultures. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(4), 396–415.

26.

Hung

S. Y.

Kang

T. C.

Yen

Huang

Chen

(2012). A cross-cultural analysis of communication tools and communication outcomes. Journal of Global Information Management, 20(3), 55–83.

27.

Issa

Isaias

Kommers

(2014). Multicultural Awareness and Technology in Higher Education: Global Perspectives. IGI Global

28.

Kayan

Fussell

S. R.

Setlock

L. D.

(2006). Cultural differences in the use of instant messaging in Asia and North America [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 525–528). ACM.

29.

Kerimbayev

Kultan

Abdykarimova

Akramova

(2017). LMS moodle: Distance international education in cooperation of higher education institutions of different countries. Information Technologies in Education, 22(5), 2125–2139.

30.

Khlaisang

Songkram

(2019). Designing a virtual learning environment system for teaching twenty-first century skills to higher education students in ASEAN. Technology Knowledge and Learning, 24(1), 41–63.

31.

Kreijns

Kirschner

P. A.

Jochems

van Buuren

(2007). Measuring perceived sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 49(2), 176–192.

32.

Kreijns

Kirschner

P. A.

Jochems

van Buuren

(2011). Measuring perceived social presence in distributed learning groups. Information Technologies in Education, 16(4), 365–381.

33.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation (Vol. 521423740). Cambridge university press.

34.

Lee

(2009). Promoting intercultural exchanges with blogs and podcasting: A study of Spanish–American telecollaboration. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(5), 425–443.

35.

Lenkaitis

C. A.

Calo

Venegas Escobar

(2019). Exploring the intersection of language and culture via telecollaboration: Utilizing videoconferencing for intercultural competence development. International Multilingual Research Journal, 13(2), 102–115.

36.

H. H. S.

Wong

Y. M.

Lam

W. S.

(2020). An empirical study on using virtual reality for enhancing the youth’s intercultural sensitivity in Hong Kong. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36, 625–635.

37.

Marbley

A. F.

Bradley

L. J.

Lan

(2016). Attitudes toward seeking professional counseling services among Chinese international students: Acculturation, ethnic identity, and English proficiency. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 44(1), 65–76.

38.

Liu

Shirley

(2021). Without crossing a border: Exploring the impact of shifting study abroad online on students’ Learning and Intercultural Competence Development during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Online Learning, 25(1), 182–194.

39.

Luo

Gao

(2022). Intercultural learning through Chinese-American telecollaboration: Results of a song sharing project. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2026405

40.

Machado

Klein

A. Z.

Freitas

Schlemmer

Pedron

C. D.

(2016). The use of virtual worlds for developing intercultural competences. International Journal of Information and Communication Technologies in Education, 12(3), 51–64.

41.

Mupepi

(2014). A schematic description of the nature of video-conferencing and Internet exchange: Enhancing global understanding. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 9(1), 33–40.

42.

O’Brien

Tuohy

Fahy

Markey

. (2019). Home students’ experiences of intercultural learning: A qualitative descriptive design. Nurse Education Today, 74, 25–30.

43.

O’Dowd

. (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.

44.

Pellas

Kazanidis

(2015). On the value of Second Life for students’ engagement in blended and online courses: A comparative study from the Higher Education in Greece. Information Technologies in Education, 20, 445–466.

45.

Rice

R. E.

D’Ambra

(1998). Cross-cultural comparison of organizational media evaluation and choice. Journal of Communication, 48(3), 3–26.

46.

Richards

J. C.

Burns

(2012). The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

47.

Saw

Abbott

Donaghey

McDonald

(2013). Social media for international students – It’s not all about Facebook. Library Management, 34(3), 156–174.

48.

Shachaf

Hara

(2007). Behavioral complexity theory of media selection: A proposed theory for global virtual teams. Journal of Information Science, 33(1), 63–75.

49.

Shadiev

Sintawati

(2020). A review of research on intercultural learning supported by technology. Review of Educational Research, 31, 100338.

50.

Shonfeld

Greenstein

(2021). Factors promoting the use of virtual worlds in educational settings. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 214–234.

51.

Spencer-Oatey

Dauber

Jing

Lifei

(2017). Chinese students’ social integration into the university community: Hearing the students’ voices. Higher Education, 74(5), 739–756.

52.

Stockwell

Levy

(2001). Sustainability of e-mail interactions between native speakers and nonnative speakers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(5), 419–442.

53.

Terf [Computer software]. (2015). http://terf.3dicc.com/client/

54.

Terhune

N. M.

(2016). Language learning going global: Linking teachers and learners via commercial Skype-based CMC. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(6), 1071–1089.

55.

Thome-Williams

A. C.

(2016). Developing intercultural communicative competence in Portuguese through Skype and Facebook. Intercultural Communication Studies, 25(1), 213–233.

56.

Tüzün

Özdinç

(2016). The effects of 3D multi-user virtual environments on freshmen university students’ conceptual and spatial learning and presence in departmental orientation. Computers & Education, 94, 228–240.

57.

UNESCO. (2021). Global flow of tertiary-level students. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Pages/international-student-flow-viz.aspx.

58.

UNESCO. (2022). International student mobility in tertiary education. Retrieved January 04, 2022, from http://data.uis.unesco.org/.

59.

Vahed

Rodriguez

(2021). Enriching students’ engaged learning experiences through the collaborative online international learning project. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58, 596–605.

60.

Van Lier

. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In Lantolf

J. P.

(Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–259). Oxford University Press.

61.

Vinagre

(2005). Fostering language learning via email: An English – Spanish exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 369–388.

62.

Wang

C. M.

(2011). Instructional design for cross-cultural online collaboration: Grouping strategies and assignment design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 243–258.

63.

Wang

C. M.

(2012). Using Facebook for cross-cultural collaboration: The experience of students from Taiwan. Educational Media International, 49(1), 63–76.

64.

Witte

(2011). On the teachability and learnability of intercultural competence: Developing facets of the ‘inter. In Witte

Harden

(Eds.), Intercultural Competence: Concepts, Challenges, evaluations (Vol. 10, pp. 89–107). Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers.

65.

Wood

Gregory

(2018). The affordances of virtual worlds as authentic, culturally diverse learning environments. In Gregory

Wood

(Eds.), Authentic virtual world education (pp. 1–7). Springer.

66.

Yang

Huiju

Cen

S. J.

Huang

(2014). Strategies for smooth and effective cross-cultural online collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 17(3), 208–221.

67.

Yang

(2017a). Intercultural experiential learning. The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication, 2, 1–11.

68.

Yang

(2017b). The use of questions in a synchronous intercultural online exchange project. European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning (ReCALL), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S09583440170002102009.

69.

Yassin

A. A.

Abdul Razak

Qasem

Y. A. M.

Saeed Mohammed

M. A.

(2020). Intercultural learning challenges affecting international students’ sustainable learning in Malaysian higher education institutions. Sustainability, 12(18), 7490.

70.

Zhang

Goodman

(2022). Novel 3D contextual interactive games on a gamified virtual environment support cultural learning through collaboration among intercultural students. SAGE Open, 12(2).

71.

Zhang

Robb

Eyerman

Goodman

(2017). Virtual worlds and gamification to increase integration of international students in higher education: An inclusive design approach. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 32(2).

72.

Zhang

Robb

Goodman

(2017). Emerging educational technologies for cross-cultural collaboration: Current perspectives and future directions. In Proceedings of the 10th EAI International Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques (pp. 98–102), ACM.

Telecollaboration Tool Preferences for Online Intercultural Learning in Higher Education: Perspectives of Chinese International Students

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Research Questions

Methodology

Study 1

Participants

Instrument

Results

Study 2

Participants

Instrument

Results

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusion and Future Study

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Author Contributions

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Ethics Statement

ORCID iDs

References