TO THE
FROM THE CLASSROOM
WORLD: INTEGRATING VIRTUAL EXCHANGES IN THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM
#virtualexchanges
#telecollaboration
#e-tandem
ABSTRACT
Technology has had an undeniable impact on the teaching and learning of languages. Among the many uses of technology by language educators, virtual exchanges stand out as a way to offer transformative learning experiences. Some of the benefits of virtual exchanges to language learners include the development of students’ intercultural, interpersonal, and linguistic competencies, as well as an increase in selfconfidence and motivation to continue using the language.
In this chapter, we first explore the reasons why virtual exchanges should be an integral component of language programs. We then clarify the differences between possible models of implementation, along with the advantages and shortcomings of each one. To illustrate how virtual exchanges could be integrated in language courses, we describe two examples: a project involving synchronous video conferencing, and an idea for asynchronous telecollaboration. To conclude, we address some of the challenges educators face when incorporating virtual exchanges into their classes.
CONTEXTUALIZATION
Over the past decades, our daily experiences have been revolutionized by technology due to its widespread global reach as well as the proliferation of tools, resources, and access to information. These events have had a significant impact on teaching as a whole, but the learning of languages has especially benefited from the strengthened connections
between language communities in the digital world. At first glance, the possibilities may seem infinite and exciting, however, understanding how to most effectively navigate these flourishing technologies can also seem daunting.
Puentedura (2013) proposed the SAMR model as a way to classify the role and impact of technological tools on learning (see Figure 1. SAMR model of the impact of technological tools on learning). In this model, four categories are presented in the order of their transformative power: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. “Substitution” implies direct equivalency without any enhancements; “Augmentation” involves some improvements to the experience thanks to technology; and “Modification” occurs when technology not only enhances the activity but allows for it to be redesigned. The fourth category, “Redefinition,” implies that the learning experience is fundamentally transformed by technology,
to the point that the task would not have been possible without it. The quintessential example of the “Redefinition” level is virtual exchanges, which is the focus of this chapter. Although there are many possible ways to connect students with target-language speakers, we will only discuss virtual exchanges where the participants are from different countries, as opposed to connecting students with other learners of the same target language.
Exposure to various dialects
One of the potential benefits of virtual exchanges between participants from different countries is the exposure to various dialects. As a result, learners may heighten their awareness of regional pronunciations, words, and expressions, and, in doing so, gain respect and appreciation for language variation. In the past, creating opportunities for learners to regularly interact with speakers from different regions would have been impossible for many educators, especially when there was limited access to speakers of the target language in local communities, but this is now feasible with the use of virtual exchanges. Although full-immersion study abroad opportunities may be argued as one of the most ideal ways to expose learners to the target language and culture, enrollment may be limited by students’ personal circumstances or financial constraints, and, thus, virtual exchanges may be the only possible and cost effective option to meet this end.
Improving intercultural competence
Previous studies have also shown that virtual exchanges can prompt gains in learners’ intercultural competence (Tecedor & Vasseur, 2020; Warner-Ault, 2020), which is defined by Deardorff (2004) as “the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes” (p. 194). Virtual exchanges tend to serve as a great source for cultural knowledge, which is one aspect of intercultural competence. When virtual exchanges are designed well, discussions revolve directly or indirectly around the cultural products, practices, and perspectives familiar to each of the interlocutors. Unlike the limited, hand-selected cultural points
included in textbooks, which tend to be described from a third-person point of view, students have access to a first-person account of cultural experiences and views. In essence, the information is personalized and more readily absorbed because the learners actively participated in its transmission.
Promoting respect, openness and curiousity
In addition to cultural knowledge, an important aspect of virtual exchanges is how the experiences shape the learners’ attitudes, which is another key component of intercultural competence. According to Deardorff (2006), some of the attitudes that need to be present at the personal level to develop intercultural competence are respect, openness, curiosity and discovery. Respect implies valuing the other culture and its cultural diversity; openness signifies receptiveness to intercultural learning and withholding judgment; curiosity and discovery entail tolerance to uncertainty and ambiguity. In virtual exchanges, students do not merely interpret the target language, but rather engage with an individual who tells stories, describes personal experiences, and gives perspectives that may differ substantially from their own. In this way, the student is given insight into what life has been like for this person and can perhaps begin to understand what the other person has gone through. Indeed, empathy is not only about understanding what a person has experienced because it is relatable to us, but also about validating someone else’s experiences even if they are very different from our own.
Negotiating meaning
Prior to the introduction of technological tools, individualization in language learning was nearly impossible to achieve in institutionalized settings given the relatively large number of students enrolled in each course section. In the case of virtual exchanges, not only is the content guided by the learner’s interests, but the discussions occur at the learner’s pace. That is, if a misunderstanding arises or help is needed, the one-onone nature of the language contact allows for negotiations of meaning and the correction of communication breakdowns. These processes
are fundamental for the development of interpersonal skills, cultural and linguistic competencies, and conversational strategies that can be subsequently applied to new contexts beyond the structured curriculum and walls of the classroom.
KEY TERMS AND POSSIBLE MISCONCEPTIONS
According to O’Dowd (2018), over the past thirty years, approaches to virtual exchanges have proliferated in different educational contexts and they vary in their pedagogical objectives and practices. For this reason, what is referred to here as virtual exchanges may also be known as e-tandem, telecollaboration, service-provider videoconferencing, or online exchanges. Given that these terms have been used somewhat inconsistently, it is important to clarify what these approaches entail. In accordance with O’Dowd (2018), the umbrella term to describe all of them is virtual exchanges. Although an exchange tends to imply some reciprocity of benefits, we are using this term to refer to an exchange of information. In this section, we distinguish between two-way exchanges, with even benefits to both interlocutors, and one-way exchanges, where only the learner benefits from interacting with a guest speaker or paid conversation partner.
Two-way virtual exchanges
In language education, the first model to reach prominence was e-tandem, which consists of pairing two speakers of different languages who interact in written and/or oral mode over a period of equally divided time in each language. In this context, the benefits are reciprocated because each partner has the same amount of time to interact in their target language. The exchange can either be carried out synchronously in real-time videoconferencing, voice-chat, or messaging, or asynchronously through recorded video messages or emails to be viewed at the convenience of the learner. In the 1990s, this model quickly gained visibility because it centered on the development of learner autonomy and the continued use of the target language beyond the classroom (O’Dowd, 2018). Indeed, e-tandems are grounded in the principles of autonomy and reciprocity
where learners are expected to act as peer tutors, leveraging their content and linguistic knowledge to make the most of the interaction while also providing their partner with feedback when appropriate. In e-tandems, the involvement of the teacher is typically minimal as the learners are usually responsible for preparing the conversation topics and carrying out post-conversation reflections or journaling.
Taking a slightly different approach, and appearing a few years later, is the model of telecollaboration, which typically involves class-to-class partnerships that engage in two-way projects and tasks (O’Dowd, 2018). This type of virtual exchange is distinct because it is more thoroughly integrated into classroom activities and places more emphasis on the learning of intercultural aspects. An example of a popular telecollaborative task is the analysis of parallel texts, which are described by Belz (2005) as “linguistically different renditions of a particular story or topic in which culturally-conditioned varying representations of that story or topic are presented” (n.p.). To illustrate this, Belz (2005) points to the fairy tale Cinderella , which in German
is the Brothers Grimm Aschenputtel . In a German-English exchange, students would collaborate to understand the linguistic and cultural significance of each text, which, in this case, diverge greatly in character development, plot, and conclusion. On the whole, provided that the exploration of intercultural aspects is a central objective of telecollaborative tasks, this type of virtual exchange naturally facilitates the discussion of cultural products and practices, with cultural perspectives having added significance given that they are understood through the personal opinions and underlying values expressed by each partner. Similar to e-tandems, telecollaborative interaction can be realized synchronously or asynchronously depending on the goals of the tasks and projects set forth by the instructor. In actuality, the terms e-tandem and telecollaboration have been used almost interchangeably, and, thus, the definitions provided here are aimed to illuminate, but not restrict, the application of these labels.
As they can be relatively similar in nature, there are numerous shared advantages of e-tandems and telecollaborations. First, apart from the technology needed to carry out the exchange such as computers, microphones, internet access, etc. these types of exchanges can be done with the use of free video-conferencing platforms, and therefore eliminate the issue of cost associated with some of the one-way exchanges. In terms of safety, all of the individuals that participate in the exchanges are students enrolled in one of the two classrooms monitored by the two instructors, thereby ensuring a low-risk environment. As for challenges, major discrepancies in terms of target-language proficiency levels can lead to one partner dominating the interaction, thus falling short of true reciprocity. This can be overcome through effective teacher guidance. At the individual level, the teacher could guide more proficient learners so that they understand the benefits of helping peers who may have a lower proficiency level. The teacher should also actively monitor the exchanges and consider switching partners as necessary.
The majority of two-way exchanges are planned and coordinated by the instructors themselves. In addition to establishing connections via social media or at professional conferences, a few websites facilitate
these types of teacher collaborations. For example, UNICollaboration is a Europe-based website that provides a space for higher education faculty to find international partnerships or post requests for collaboration, as well as sample tasks and projects. Another option is The Mixxer, which is hosted by Dickinson College and was created to facilitate reciprocal exchanges between speakers of different languages. On this website, teachers can work with the facilitator at Dickinson College who coordinates times to set up the exchange either through video conferencing or written posts.
One-way virtual exchanges
In contrast to two-way exchanges where both participants reciprocally benefit from the interaction, in one-way exchanges the learner is positioned as the sole beneficiary. Specifically, one-way exchanges may involve the use of paid platforms where students are paired with conversation partners with whom they set up individual appointments and video chat for a specific period of time, typically ranging from fifteen to thirty minutes. A few of the most widely used platforms for this purpose are Boomalang, LinguaMeeting, and Talk Abroad. On many of these platforms, communication tools allow the instructor to inform the conversation partner of course objectives and share any necessary materials so that the discussions are closely tied to the content of the course. Unlike what is the case with free apps or sites (e.g., HelloTalk , Speaky, etc.), the experience is safer, more reliable, and more productive. Free apps are available to anyone online, and therefore there is no way to guarantee what the experience will be like. Students might encounter people who are more interested in dating than improving their language skills, for instance. On the other hand, conversation partners on paid platforms are essentially employees of these companies, and their employment is contingent upon students’ reviews; therefore, one of their priorities is to ensure a very positive experience on the part of the learners.
During the conversations, the learners are faced with an important challenge, which is the interpretation and communication of meaning entirely on their own, pushing them to develop skills that need more
focused attention. Opportunities such as these, in which spontaneous conversational skills are developed, differ from those in the traditional classroom setting, which has shown to be less than conducive for the fostering of these abilities (Guillén & Blake, 2017; Wilson & Starkey, 2009). Other benefits have been found for video chatting on serviceprovider platforms, such as the fostering of intercultural competence (Tecedor & Vasseur, 2020; Warner-Ault, 2020), learner autonomy (Sama & Wu, 2019), vocabulary and content noticing (Kessler, Loewen, & Trego, 2020), second language confidence (Hetrovicz, 2021), interest in continuing language study (Lang-Rigal & Galarreta-Aima, 2019), and communication skills (Cuervo-Carruthers, 2017).
Nevertheless, paid language exchange platforms have some drawbacks. First, the availability of languages is limited, and they rarely include many less commonly taught languages. Another major obstacle that keeps these unique experiences out of the reach of many students is their cost. In general, the average cost for a 30-minute conversation on most of these platforms is $12–$15. On a related note, it should be acknowledged that the use of these platforms may be better suited for post-secondary students who have access to all the necessary technology and have enough available time outside of their courses to schedule conversations. Furthermore, faculty and administrators may have concerns surrounding the fact that students are speaking with a stranger, albeit a trained and paid conversation partner. Regarding the training that conversation partners receive, scarce information is given by the companies on what it entails. For example, there is no guarantee that the conversation partner will be able to successfully modify their language to be understood by a novice-level speaker, which could result in a frustrating experience for the student. In some cases, the interaction between conversation partners and novice-level students may turn into a tutoring session with the main goal of practicing language structures and words covered in the course, as opposed to fulfilling many of the benefits of intercultural communication outlined before.
Another way that a one-way language exchange can be conducted is by hosting a guest speaker to synchronously converse with the entire
language class. To facilitate these connections, the Happy World Foundation works to match teachers with guest speakers from a list of over 1,000 Global Connect1 volunteers at no cost.
Also, companies like Lingua Meeting offer low-cost online events called “Experiences,” which are held live via Zoom and consist of cooking classes, virtual tours, and other cultural presentations. Although these options are much more cost-effective, the learning experience is not individualized, and students are less likely to actively engage in expressing or negotiating meaning since they are meant to be group experiences. Despite some shortcomings, having guest speakers or including virtual experiences into a language curriculum could still increase motivation and offer a wealth of linguistic and cultural information.
1. Global Connect (GC) allows teachers to open up their classrooms, meet new people, talk to experts, share ideas and create global learning experiences via virtual platforms.
DEMONSTRATIONS
In this section, we provide two examples of virtual exchanges to illustrate their step-by-step implementation. It is important to clarify that even though the examples provided here involve projects that span over the duration of a course, virtual exchanges could also involve just a few email exchanges or written discussion forum posts. In fact, it is advisable to start small and pilot ideas and platforms before setting up a larger project, then, at a later date, longer timelines and more extensive collaborations could be planned for the future.
Example 1: Asynchronous telecollaboration
This example offers a way to overcome some of the constraints usually involved with using paid sites such as Talk Abroad. First, it can be done with freely available platforms; second, it can be a suitable alternative for less commonly taught languages; third, it can be adapted more easily for lower-level courses; fourth, it eliminates the need to coordinate schedules across time zones to set up appointments. Another important advantage, especially when working with younger learners, is that, since the video responses are asynchronous (i.e., recorded and posted ahead of time), they can be vetted by the teacher to ensure all content is appropriate.
This exchange involves two groups of students, one in each country. Each student records videos and posts them on Flipgrid or a discussion forum that both groups can access. Prior to the exchange, the two teachers need to agree on the logistical aspects of the activity, including, the number of posts, the deadlines for the initial posts and replies, and the topics.
During the first half of the course, the exchange can focus on input more than output by having the students post videos in the language that the other group is learning. For example, in the case of an exchange between students learning Spanish in the US and students learning English in Argentina, the first few videos by the US students would be in English, and the videos by the Argentinean students would be in Spanish. Then, in the second half of the course, they would start posting in the target language.
Students record short videos with their phones showing and describing what they do on a typical day, what their school looks like, what they do in their free time, what their favorite place in their community is, etc. Each video should last no more than five minutes and conclude with a question for the other group of students to answer. The teacher could pair up students to be each other’s partners for the entire exchange, or each student could be asked to respond to a different person for each topic. The responses can be done as subsequent video recordings, or the students could respond to each other’s questions via email, thus making it a mixed-media exchange.
Once the exchange is complete, students can prepare a report similar to the one suggested in the first example. However, unlike with the Talk Abroad project, the instructor can play a more active role in helping students understand the video responses and engage in some intercultural reflection. Another difference with the Talk Abroad project, which is designed to foment student autonomy and self-directed learning, this asynchronous e-tandem example lends itself to be a collective experience. Not only are the videos available for all students to see, but also their relatively short length makes it easier to incorporate them into in-class activities and discussions.
Example 2: Synchronous videoconferencing
In this example, the platform used is Talk Abroad, which is currently available for high school and university students enrolled in Arabic, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, or Spanish courses. The project described here takes place over a semester, and it is meant for students of Spanish who are at least within the intermediate-level range. Learners complete four 30-minute conversations with speakers from at least two different countries. The students can choose to speak with the same person more than once or they can talk to four different conversation partners. Since one of the goals of the project is to compare perspectives, it is important that they do not talk with the same person for all conversations.
The first two parts of the project consist of preparation. One of the activities in the first part involves listening comprehension questions based on the recorded conversation between a former student and her
Talk Abroad partner, which helps students be more aware of what to expect and gain confidence in their abilities to understand their future conversation partners.
In the second part, students explore the Talk Abroad platform and select their conversation partners. Then, they do some research about their countries of origin, especially as it pertains to the topic they have chosen, which can be related to any of the major themes covered in the course. Learners also write down a few questions that they plan to ask all their conversation partners. Preparing questions ahead of time not only relieves students’ concerns about awkward silences during the conversation, but perhaps more importantly, it allows learners to receive feedback and suggestions on things to keep in mind. After receiving feedback from their instructor on their topic and questions, students are ready to have their conversations.
Students complete one conversation and submit a preliminary report, where they can get further guidance, if needed, before proceeding with the rest of the conversations. The last day of classes, students share their
experiences with each other during the lesson, noting similarities and differences not only with respect to the information they learned, but also in terms of personal successes and challenges. In their final report, students summarize what they have learned, and reflect on the experience in relation to their own academic and personal goals. Two key parts of the report are the inclusion of relevant media (images, videos, graphics, etc.) illustrating what the student has learned, as well as direct quotes from their conversations. Asking students to transcribe portions of the recorded conversations helps students strengthen their listening and spelling skills by making a direct connection between oral and written language. The report can be done in a variety of formats, including blog posts, videos, infographic, or documents with multimedia.
SUGGESTIONS
Whether you are a newcomer or a veteran to the use of technological tools in language learning, all educators may face similar challenges at the different phases of preparation, implementation, and assessment.
Planning
First, prior to initiating a virtual exchange, careful planning will be needed to ensure that the students feel supported in the new virtual environment. Part of the planning involves the technology side of the exchange in order to prevent and minimize frustration due to technical difficulties that may negatively impact the experience. Ideally, instructors should familiarize themselves with the platform by using it as if they were students. Doing so will help them understand exactly what the students will need to do, anticipate potential issues, and be better prepared to troubleshoot. Most paid platforms provide ready-made tutorial videos and documents; nonetheless, it is important that the instructor demonstrate the features of the selected online platform and allow students to explore the platform and ask questions well ahead of their first conversation or exchange. If needed, additional documents or videos with step-by-step demonstrations should also be posted on the course website.
Preparing students
Another important part of planning has to do with preparing students for the task itself. Preparation activities should help students understand the goals of the exchange, as well as anticipate language and content, similar to the activities one would do as pre-listening preparation. It is also important to acknowledge and address how students feel about the experience. For many of them, video-chatting with someone they have not met before may be cause for apprehension. Therefore, some of the pre-exchange activities could include small group discussions in class, where students can express their concerns and brainstorm ways of overcoming potential challenges. Another way of validating how they feel is through a discussion of former students’ testimonials and reflections, which should only be shared with permission.
Guiding cultural comparisons
A common concern related to virtual exchanges has to do with students staying at surface-level cultural comparisons and possibly reinforcing stereotypical generalizations. An effective strategy to mitigate this potential is by guiding students to frame their questions as something a person could answer from their own perspective and avoid eliciting generalizations to the extent possible. For example, instead of asking “What do people do for Christmas in your country?”, students should consider asking “Which holidays are important for you?” Having students answer their own questions, as if they were conversation partners for someone else, is one way to help them reflect on the type of information that their question may yield. Alternatively, students could ask their classmates the questions they formulated, which is also a good way for them to realize when a question might assume certain knowledge or life experiences on the part of the speaker. Even with adequate preparation, it is somewhat inevitable for the final reports to include some generalizations, which is why students should ideally submit a preliminary draft, receive feedback from the instructor, and then revise as needed.
Assessment issues
A dilemma that instructors often face when implementing virtual exchanges is whether to assess the interaction, and if so, how. There are different approaches, each with its own pros and cons. At the very least, it is important to make sure that students do not perceive the exchanges as a test of their language skills. The exchange of information should be seen primarily as a learning experience meant to expand the students’ cultural and linguistic knowledge and increase their confidence. Therefore, one approach is to only grade the final report, as opposed to the exchanges themselves. At the same time, it is possible that some students may not be motivated to make a sincere effort to communicate with their partners if they know their interactions are not graded in any way.
A compromise, then, is to assign a low-stakes grade to the conversations as a way to reward active and respectful engagement with their partners. That being said, the best way to motivate students to communicate is by setting up a well-scaffolded task where they can learn about what they genuinely want to know. Clear instructions for the conversation partners is also paramount. For instance, if the instructor wants to maximize the use of the target language during the interaction, conversation partners should be explicitly told to encourage circumlocution and avoid frequent translations.
To conclude, we would like to highlight the considerations that should accompany the decision of incorporating video exchanges into a language course in Table 1. Dos and Don'ts.
Do… Don’t…
• … integrate it within the course; the virtual exchange project should be designed in a way that it directly and explicitly contributes to meet course goals.
• … provide guidance and support while making room for student choice; we want to set students up for success and setting too many restrictions and conditions will diminish the chances of that.
• … choose and pilot the platform(s) keeping in mind your instructional context; asking colleagues for recommendations is also a good idea, but you know your students and course goals better than anyone else.
• … assume students know how to use the platforms simply because they seem to be tech-savvy. Using Snapchat or Instagram is not the same as using Talk Abroad.
• … assume students understand why they will be completing a virtual exchange or why you require them to use a specific platform, particularly if it is a paid service.
• … use virtual exchanges as high-stakes summative assessments. Students should focus on communicating and learning from their exchange partners, and not the grade they will receive on their performance.
REFERENCES
Belz, J. (2005). Telecollaborative language study: A personal overview of praxis and research. Selected papers from the 2004 NFLRC Symposium: Distance Education, Distributed Learning, and Language Instruction. Retrieved 6/1/2022 from http://www.nflrc.hawaii. edu/networks/nw44/belz.htm
Cuervo-Carruthers, H. (2017). Students’ experiences during cross-cultural video chat interactions. In Foss, J. (Ed.), Performance + Proficiency = Possibilities (pp. 53–67). Richmond, VA: Robert M. Terry.
Deardorff, D. K. (2004). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization at institutions of higher education in the United States. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), pp. 241–266.
Guillén, G. A., & Blake, R. J. (2017). Can you repeat, please? L2 complexity, awareness, and fluency development in the hybrid "classroom". I. Sanz-Sánchez, I., S. V. RiveraMills & R. Morin (Eds.), Online language teaching research: Pedagogical, academic and institutional issues (pp. 55–77). Trysting Tree Books.
Hetrovicz, L. (2021). The effect of NNS-NNS and NNS-NS videoconferencing on the development of second language confidence. Foreign Language Annals, 52(4), pp. 1257–1277. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12592
Kessler, M., Loewen, S., & Trego, D. (2020). Synchronous VCMC with TalkAbroad: Exploring noticing, transcription, and learner perceptions in Spanish foreign-language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820954456
Lang-Rigal, J., & Galarreta-Aima, D. (2019). Improving student’s confidence in speaking a second language: Using TalkAbroad [videoconference with native speakers] in Spanish courses. ICERI2019 Proceedings, pp. 1744–1753.
O’Dowd, R. (2018). From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: state-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 1, pp. 1–23.
Puentedura, R. R. (2013, May 29). SAMR: Moving from enhancement to transformation [Web log post]. Retrieved 6/1/2022 from http://www.hippasus. com/rrpweblog/archives/000095.html
Sama, C. M., & Wu, Y. (2019). Integrating “Talk Abroad” into an intermediate foreign language course: building learner autonomy and engagement through video conversations with native speakers. In M. L. Carrió-Pastor (Ed.), Teaching language and teaching literature in virtual environments (pp. 73–94). Springer Nature.
Tecedor, M. & Vasseur, R. (2020). Videoconferencing and the development of intercultural competence: Insights from students' self-reflections. Foreign Language Annals, 53(4), pp. 761–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12495
Warner-Ault, A. (2020). Promoting intercultural learning through synchronous video exchange: A Talk Abroad case study. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), pp. 1–14.
Wilson, L., & Starkey, L. (2009). Scaffolding conversational skills: Why students worry about talking spontaneously and what to do about this. The New Zealand Language Teacher, 35, pp. 8–12. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.129835525341158