logo

Articles

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2023): Teaching practices in times of digital transformation

Virtual exchanges in Israel: Faculty experiences of implementing a transformative pedagogy

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.4530bc4d
Submitted
11 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

Virtual exchanges (VEs) have become a tool for internationalization at home (IaH) policies in higher education, including Israel. Faculty are key in translating IaH policies by developing VEs. However, little research has been conducted on faculty’s perspectives and experiences in VEs. In this small-scale qualitative survey study, using an activity theory framework, I examine Israeli faculty’s experiences and perspectives while designing and implementing VEs. The findings highlight the significance of institutional support and equitable partnerships in creating successful VEs and the impact of Covid-19.

References

  1. Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3-4), 290-305.
  2. Alvarez, L., & Steiner, M. (2019). Collaborative online international learning: from a systematic review of literature about barriers to an implementation plan. In ASEM Education in a digital world: bridging the continents-connecting the people.
  3. Antoniadou, V. (2011). Using Activity Theory to understand the contradictions in an online transatlantic collaboration between student-teachers of English as a Foreign Language. ReCALL, 23(3), 233-251. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000164
  4. Barbosa, B., Santos, C. A., & Prado-Meza, C. M. (2020). There is no one way to internationalization at home: Virtual mobility and student engagement through formal and informal approaches to curricula. Revista Lusófona de Educação, 47(47).
  5. Basharina, O. K. (2007). An activity theory perspective on student-reported contradictions in international telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 11(2), 82-103.
  6. Beelen, J. (2017). The missing link in internationalisation: Developing the skills of lecturers. Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung, 133-150.
  7. Beelen, J., & Jones, E. (2015). Redefining Internationalization at Home. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, & P. Scott (Eds.), The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies (pp. 59-72). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20877-0_5
  8. Bligh, B., & Flood, M. (2017). Activity theory in empirical higher education research: choices, uses and values. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(2), 125-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1284258
  9. Blin, F. (2012). Introducing cultural historical activity theory for researching CMC in foreign language education. In Researching online foreign language interaction and exchange: Theories, methods and challenges (pp. 79-106).
  10. Chun, D. M. (2015). Language and culture learning in higher education via telecollaboration. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 10(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2014.999775
  11. Çiftçi, E. Y., & Savaş, P. (2018). The role of telecollaboration in language and intercultural learning: A synthesis of studies published between 2010 and 2015. ReCALL, 30(3), 278-298. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344017000313
  12. Clavel-Arroitia, B., & Pennock-Speck, B. (2015). Analysis of Teacher Roles in Telecollaboration in the Context of a European Funded project (TILA Project). In English and American Studies in Spain: New Developments and Trends (p. 189).
  13. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Routledge.
  14. Cousin, G. (2008). Researching Learning in Higher Education: An Introduction to Contemporary Methods and Approaches. Taylor & Francis Group.
  15. Czerniewicz, L., Trotter, H., & Haupt, G. (2019). Online teaching in response to student protests and campus shutdowns: academics’ perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0170-1
  16. De Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2021). Internationalization in higher education: global trends and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 5(1), 28-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2020.1820898
  17. Deardorff, de Wit, H., Heyl, J. D., & Adams, T. (2012). The SAGE Handbook of International Higher Education. SAGE Publications.
  18. Denscombe, M. (2010). Good Research Guide : For small-scale social research projects. McGraw-Hill Education.
  19. Dooly, M. (2017). Telecollaboration. In S. S. Carol A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 169-183). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch12
  20. Education, C. f. H. (2018). קידום הבינלאומיות בהשכלה גבוהה – מודל הקצאת התקצוב לפיתוח הנושא במוסדות להשכלה גבוהה המתוקצבים ע”י ות”ת. Council for Higher Education. Retrieved 13/11/20 from https://che.org.il/?decision=%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9D-%D7%94%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%94%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%9C%D7%94-%D7%92%D7%91%D7%95%D7%94%D7%94-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%93%D7%9C-%D7%94
  21. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding. Cambridge University Press.
  22. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
  23. ERASMUS+ Virtual Exchange (2018). Retrieved April 4 2022 from https://europa.eu/youth/erasmusvirtual/frequently-asked-questions_en
  24. Finardi, K. R., & Guimaraes, F. F. (2020). Internationalization and the Covid-19 Pandemic: Challenges and Opportunities for the Global South. Journal of Education, Teaching and Social Studies, 2(4), 1-15.
  25. Guimarães, F. F., Mendes, A. R. M., Rodrigues, L. M., dos Santos Paiva, R. S., & Finardi, K. R. (2019). Internationalization at Home, COIL and Intercomprehension. SFU Educational Review, 12(3), 90-109.
  26. Harrison, N. (2015). Practice, problems and power in ‘internationalisation at home’: critical reflections on recent research evidence. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 412-430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1022147
  27. Helm, F. (2020). EMI, internationalisation, and the digital. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(3), 314-325. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1643823
  28. Helm, F., & Acconcia, G. (2019). Interculturality and language in Erasmus+ Virtual Exchange. European Journal of Language Policy, 11(2), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.3828/ejlp.2019.13
  29. Jansen, H. (2010). The logic of qualitative survey research and its position in the field of social research methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research.
  30. Kim, T.-Y. (2010). Reductionism, activity theory, and L2 motivation research: Toward new concepts and definitions. SNU Journal of Education Research, 19.
  31. Knight, J. (2003). Updated definition of internationalization. International higher education (33).
  32. Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and Rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315303260832
  33. Kollias, V., Mamalougos, N., Vamvakoussi, X., Lakkala, M., & Vosniadou, S. (2005). Teachers’ attitudes to and beliefs about web-based Collaborative Learning Environments in the context of an international implementation. Computers & Education, 45(3), 295-315. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.012
  34. Leask, B. (2015). Internationalizing curriculum and learning for all students. In E. Jones, Coelen, R., Beelen, J., & De Wit, H. (Ed.), Global and local internationalization (pp. 49-54). Springer.
  35. Luo, H., & Yang, C. (2018). Twenty years of telecollaborative practice: implications for teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5-6), 546-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1420083
  36. Madyarov, I., & Taef, A. (2012). Contradictions in a distance course for a marginalized population at a Middle Eastern university. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 77-100. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i2.1180
  37. Marcillo-Gómez, M., & Desilus, B. (2016). Collaborative online international learning experience in practice opportunities and challenges. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 11(1), 30-35.
  38. Marinoni, G. (2019). IAU The 5th Global Internationalization of higher education: An evolving landscape, locally and globally. https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_5th_global_survey_executive_summary.pdf
  39. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  40. Mudiamu, S. S. (2020). Faculty Use of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) for Internationalization at Home.
  41. Németh, T., & Csongor, A. (2018). Internationalisation at Home: The Case of Non-Mobile Medical Students in Hungary. Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies/Sodobna Pedagogika, 69(2).
  42. Nishio, T., & Nakatsugawa, M. (2018). Value Orientations and Off-Topic Interactions: Contradictions in American-Japanese Intercultural Telecollaboration. Calico Journal, 35(3).
  43. O'Dowd, R. (2015). Supporting in-service language educators in learning to telecollaborate. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 63-82.
  44. O’Dowd, R. (2016). Emerging trends and new directions in telecollaborative learning [Review]. CALICO Journal, 33(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v33i3.30747
  45. Rubin, J. (2015). Nautical Musings on Local and Global Innovation and Change: The Disruptive Pedagogy of Coil. In E. Jones, Coelen, R., Beelen, J., & De Wit, H. (Ed.), Global and local internationalization (pp. 75-82). Springer.
  46. Ryder, L., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2014). Understanding Tensions: Activity Systems Analysis of Transpacific Collaboration. Calico Journal, 31(2), 201-220. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/stable/calicojournal.31.2.201
  47. Soria, K. M., & Troisi, J. (2014). Internationalization at Home Alternatives to Study Abroad:Implications for Students’ Development of Global, International, and Intercultural Competencies. Journal of Studies in International Education, 18(3), 261-280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315313496572
  48. Stornaiuolo, A. (2016). Teaching in global collaborations: Navigating challenging conversations through cosmopolitan activity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 503-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.001
  49. Swartz, S., Luck, S., Barbosa, B., & Crawford, I. (2019). Professional learning experience through COIL: a faculty perspective.
  50. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246.
  51. Unangst, L., & Barone, N. (2019). Operationalizing “internationalization” in the community college sector: Textual analysis of institutional internationalization Plans. Journal for the Study of Postsecondary and Tertiary Education, 4, 177-196.
  52. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2010). Activity Systems Analysis Methods : Understanding Complex Learning Environments : Understanding Complex Learning Environments. Springer.
  53. Yemini, M. (2017). Internationalization under intractable conflict: The influence of national conflict on Israeli higher education institutions’ internationalization efforts. European Education, 49(4), 293-303.