Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) is often framed as an example of a broader practice known as Virtual Exchange (VE). The term Virtual Exchange has increasingly been used as an attempt to unify a fragmented field of Higher Education practice and is often used interchangeably with the term COIL. However, the design of COIL, with its strong focus on collaborative and intercultural learning, is often very different to other VE initiatives. Labelling all VE initiatives, including COIL, generally as VE, can lead to both educators and researchers having difficulty identifying and distinguishing COIL. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to provide a critical review of VE and define COIL and its key characteristics. This article also describes how theory can inform practice and explains why continued interchangeable use of the term COIL with the umbrella term Virtual Exchange is unhelpful for future research and practice.
DOCUMENT
At THUAS we focus on Collaborative Online lnternational Learning for virtual collaboration. This Is a shared syllabus approach, connecting groups of students and academics from THUAS to a group of students and academics at an international partner. Virtual Collaboration is seen as one of the approaches to integrate the concept of lnternationalization at home In the whole curriculum. With the wider aim focused on reaching all students and offering purposeful integration for the domestic learning environments. (Beelen, Jones, 2015 Redefining lnternationalization at Home.)
DOCUMENT
In November 2019, scholars and practitioners from ten higher education institutions celebrated the launch of the iKudu project. This project, co-funded by Erasmus [1], focuses on capacity development for curriculum transformation through internationalisation and development of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) virtual exchange. Detailed plans for 2020 were discussed including a series of site visits and face-to-face training. However, the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the plans in ways that could not have been foreseen and new ways of thinking and doing came to the fore. Writing from an insider perspective as project partners, in this paper we draw from appreciative inquiry, using a metaphor of a mosaic as our identity, to first provide the background on the iKudu project before sharing the impact of the pandemic on the project’s adapted approach. We then discuss how alongside the focus of iKudu in the delivery of an internationalised and transformed curriculum using COIL, we have, by our very approach as project partners, adopted the principles of COIL exchange. A positive impact of the pandemic was that COIL offered a consciousness raising activity, which we suggest could be used more broadly in order to help academics think about international research practice partnerships, and, as in our situation, how internationalised and decolonised curriculum practices might be approached. 1. KA2 Erasmus+ Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices (capacity building in the field of Higher Education)
DOCUMENT
In this study we measured the effect of COIL on intercultural competence development using a quasi-experimental design. Our sample consisted of 108 undergraduate students from two universities, one located in the Netherlands (NL) and one in the United States (US). Students’ self-reported intercultural competence was measured using a pre-post survey which included the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) and Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ). Qualitative data were collected to complement our quantitative findings and to give a deeper insight into the student experience. The data showed a significantly bigger increase in intercultural competence for the US experimental group compared to the US control group, supporting our hypothesis that COIL develops intercultural competence. This difference was not observed for the NL students, possibly due to the NL control group being exposed to other international input during the course.
DOCUMENT
This chapter revisits the concept of internationalisation at home in light of the COVID pandemic and also of experiences and ongoing discourses on internationalisation. These include how internationalisation at home relates to diversity, inclusion and decolonisation of curricula. It discusses how the COVID pandemic has led to increased attention to internationalisation at home but also that confusion about terminology and the desire for physical mobility to be available to students may lead us to return to pre-COVID practices, in which internationalisation is mainly understood as mobility for a small minority of students and internationalisation of the home curriculum is a poor second best. A component of this chapter is how Virtual Exchange and Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) have moved into the spotlight during the pandemic but were already in focus areas well before. This will be illustrated by some recent developments in internationalisation at home, mainly from non-Anglophone, European and particularly Dutch perspectives.
DOCUMENT
Internationalization and global citizenship are increasingly becoming the emerging focus of higher education worldwide as universities seek to incorporate global learning in their policies, curricula and strategies. Global engagement, international collaborations, strategic alliances and operations are all on the increase with the aim of delivering future-proof graduates with a global mindset and inter-cultural competences. Additionally, it can be noted that hybridity in education is acutely present through the digitalisation of delivery modes as well as the introduction of new mobility formats, such as faculty-led study abroad programmes and transnational education at branch campuses. So not only do we see more activity, but also more delivery modes of international education. While both digital delivery and new mobility structures transcend traditional boundaries of space and locality, it is precisely this point that can pose serious challenges to the success of international education. Both involve a “relocation” of education; however, when the physical locality, where the students and lecturers are rooted in certain value and beliefs systems, is not considered, the risk is that the educational experience remains one-sided despite the multidimensional context of which it should be a part. Locality is the key to successful and meaningful internationalisation. After presenting the case that locality is of paramount importance, this chapter will outline the conceptual model of intercultureality, which allows education programs to foster and nurture intercultural competence development of students in their own unique landscape from the ground up. Using the metaphor of a landscape, intercultureality provides tools to create an intercultural reality by utilising the unique hybrid of the physical locality, the disciplinary context, the dynamics of the (virtual) classroom as well as the infrastructures in place. The underlying idea is that programmes and institutions can grow any kind of landscape that works for their context, building on the soil of their own previously defined intercultural competence goals. This soil will be enriched by means of five features: the formal curriculum, the pedagogy, the student experience, the informal curriculum, and the organisational and strategic frameworks. The model is further elaborated upon and illustrated with examples of practices of The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS), where the authors work.
DOCUMENT
To be able to ‘survive’ in a more and more globalising world, students of universities and universities of applied sciences must attain international competencies, in this study defined as respectively general personal, social competencies, intercultural competencies, a command of foreign languages and international academic and professional competencies. International competencies can be attained in different ways by students: internally (via foreign teachers and/or students) and/or externally (via internships and/or exchanges). The external attainment of competencies is far more successful when students are well prepared and when they receive proper supervision, both during and after their stay abroad. If this is not the case, students often tend to develop at a personal, social and (inter)cultural level, but significantly less at an academic and professional level (Stronkhorst, 2005). These students are also often unable to recognize and express which knowledge and skills they attained during their stay abroad (Orahood et al., 2004; CERI, 2008; Deardorff, 2009). With the preceding information as a starting point, the Social Work degree programme of Windesheim University of Applied Sciences in Zwolle started the minor ‘Social Work in Africa & Asia’ in the beginning of 2014. Students who participate firstly pass through a a six-week preparatory theoretical programma, followed by a three-month internship in Uganda or Vietnam. The minor concludes with a two-week postmortem programme. The practical component of the minor involves Eye4Africa, a Dutch internship supervision agency for internships in Uganda, Kenya and Vietnam. Eye4Africa arranges the internships, prepares the students for their stay abroad, both in the Netherlands and abroad, and then offers them support, coaching and intervision meetings. At the initiative of and in collaboration with Eye4Africa The Hague University of Applied Sciences carried out a qualitative study amongst eight female students of the Social Work degree programme of Windesheim University of Applied Sciences who followed the minor ‘Social Work in Africa & Asia’ during the academic year 2014-2015. The following was key to the research conducted: the question of the extent to which preparation for the Social Work in Africa & Asia minor at Windesheim University of Applied Sciences and the supervision that the Eye4Africa internship agency offers fourth-year Social Work students during their internships in Uganda in the autumn of 2014 had a positive impact on the attainment and further development of international competencies. The results have shown that the students found it very easy to recognise and express the knowledge and skills they gained during their internships. Secondly, the students mentioned clear professional, intercultural and personal, social growth. No growth or development in relation to academic competencies was observed in this study. However, this is not unusual, as the students were doing internships. Academic competencies are particularly attained when studying abroad, while professional competencies are particularly attained during internships (Hoven & Walenkamp, 2013; 2015). The main conclusion of this study is that the preparation and the supervision by Windesheim University of Applied Sciences and Eye4Africa within the framework of the minor ‘Social Work in Africa & Asia’ has aided students with regard to growth and the (further) development of international competencies. Some important short comments are that a relatively small, very one-sided sample has been interviewed and that there was no control group.
DOCUMENT
Collaborative learning is not a new teaching and learning approach; it has been around since the 1970s and is an evidence-based practice that has been proven to be effective time after time. Therefore, instead of reinventing the wheel or only relying on best practices or anecdotal evidence of what works and what doesn’t, especially when designing Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) environments, educators might find it useful to make use of existing collaborative learning instructional design elements. These elements have been scientifically proven to be effective and can be applied in both the physical and online international classroom.
LINK
This chapter discusses the following keywords for learning outcomes for Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL). 1. Clarity: Knowing what you want your students to achieve. 2. Shared: Designed together with your partner to match your course content. 3. Aligned: Linking different components (outcomes, assessment, and activities) of your COIL project together.
DOCUMENT
This paper is a case report of why and how CDIO became a shared framework for Community Service Engineering (CSE) education. CSE can be defined as the engineering of products, product-service combinations or services that fulfill well-being and health needs in the social domain, specifically for vulnerable groups in society. The vulnerable groups in society are growing, while fewer people work in health care. Finding technical, interdisciplinary solutions for their unmet needs is the territory of the Community Service Engineer. These unmet needs arise in local niche markets as well as in the global community, which makes it an interesting area for innovation and collaboration in an international setting. Therefore, five universities from Belgium, Portugal, the Netherlands, and Sweden decided to work together as hubs in local innovation networks to create international innovation power. The aim of the project is to develop education on undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate levels. The partners are not aiming at a joined degree or diploma, but offer a shared short track blended course (3EC), which each partner can supplement with their own courses or projects (up to 30EC). The blended curriculum in CSE is based on design thinking principles. Resources are shared and collaboration between students and staff is organized at different levels. CDIO was chosen as the common framework and the syllabus 2.0 was used as a blueprint for the CSE learning goals in each university. CSE projects are characterized by an interdisciplinary, human centered approach leading to inter-faculty collaboration. At the university of Porto, EUR-ACE was already used as the engineering education framework, so a translation table was used to facilitate common development. Even though Thomas More and KU Leuven are no CDIO partner, their choice for design thinking as the leading method in the post-Masters pilot course insured a good fit with the CDIO syllabus. At this point University West is applying for CDIO and they are yet to discover what the adaptation means for their programs and their emerging CSE initiatives. CDIO proved to fit well to in the authentic open innovation network context in which engineering students actively do CSE projects. CDIO became the common language and means to continuously improve the quality of the CSE curriculum.
DOCUMENT
