Exploring U.S. students’ takeaways from a cross-Pacific COIL project

Xuan Jiang
{"title":"Exploring U.S. students’ takeaways from a cross-Pacific COIL project","authors":"Xuan Jiang","doi":"10.21827/jve.5.36443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"English imperialism has helped form the dominance of one-way communication from Native English Speakers (NESs) to English learners, resembled in the existing literature of international education and exchange education (i.e. study abroad programs). Such unbalanced foci in the ongoing scholarship of exchange programs, including Virtual Exchange (VE), do not equally represent the whole participating parties of collaboration and furthermore overlook the learning needs and achievements from NESs. Noticing such a gap in the scholarship, the author intended to explore what NESs and native speakers of more than English have taken away from a Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) project between a university in China and a Hispanic-Serving Institution in the U.S. Twenty-one U.S. students in a writing-as-processes course were asynchronously collaborated with 20 students in a reading-writing course in China over ten weeks. The COIL data of this case study was from U.S. students’ reflections on the peer review giving and given and their COIL reflections. The qualitative findings revealed that Peer Feedback (PF) via COIL broadened participants’ insight about contrastive rhetoric, English as pluralistic, and cross-cultural communication. The COIL project also offered multi-dimensional enrichment and promoted 21st century skills in general. The participants expected some form of continuous VE projects, similar to the current COIL project, in the subsequent semesters. Those findings implied practical considerations of how to further develop COIL – synchronous or/and asynchronous modes, multi-layered collaborations, individual and collective communication, and a balance among students’ autonomy, technology support, and instructors’ affordability of additional arrangements for details. The significance of the study lies in the fact that the findings would help mitigate and balance scholarly attention to students’ takeaways from both participating parties.","PeriodicalId":107205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Virtual Exchange","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Virtual Exchange","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21827/jve.5.36443","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

English imperialism has helped form the dominance of one-way communication from Native English Speakers (NESs) to English learners, resembled in the existing literature of international education and exchange education (i.e. study abroad programs). Such unbalanced foci in the ongoing scholarship of exchange programs, including Virtual Exchange (VE), do not equally represent the whole participating parties of collaboration and furthermore overlook the learning needs and achievements from NESs. Noticing such a gap in the scholarship, the author intended to explore what NESs and native speakers of more than English have taken away from a Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) project between a university in China and a Hispanic-Serving Institution in the U.S. Twenty-one U.S. students in a writing-as-processes course were asynchronously collaborated with 20 students in a reading-writing course in China over ten weeks. The COIL data of this case study was from U.S. students’ reflections on the peer review giving and given and their COIL reflections. The qualitative findings revealed that Peer Feedback (PF) via COIL broadened participants’ insight about contrastive rhetoric, English as pluralistic, and cross-cultural communication. The COIL project also offered multi-dimensional enrichment and promoted 21st century skills in general. The participants expected some form of continuous VE projects, similar to the current COIL project, in the subsequent semesters. Those findings implied practical considerations of how to further develop COIL – synchronous or/and asynchronous modes, multi-layered collaborations, individual and collective communication, and a balance among students’ autonomy, technology support, and instructors’ affordability of additional arrangements for details. The significance of the study lies in the fact that the findings would help mitigate and balance scholarly attention to students’ takeaways from both participating parties.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索美国学生从跨太平洋线圈项目的收获
英语帝国主义帮助形成了从英语母语者(NESs)到英语学习者的单向交流的主导地位,类似于现有的国际教育和交流教育(即留学计划)。在包括虚拟交换(Virtual exchange, VE)在内的交流项目中,这种不平衡的重点并不能平等地代表合作的所有参与方,也忽视了尼斯大学的学习需求和成就。注意到奖学金的这种差距,作者打算探讨尼斯和英语以外的母语人士从中国一所大学和美国一所西班牙裔服务机构之间的合作在线国际学习(COIL)项目中得到了什么。21名参加写作过程课程的美国学生与20名参加阅读-写作课程的中国学生在十周内进行了异步合作。本案例研究的COIL数据来源于美国学生对同行评议给予和给予的反思以及他们的COIL反思。定性研究结果显示,通过COIL进行的同伴反馈(PF)拓宽了参与者对对比修辞、英语作为多元文化和跨文化交际的见解。COIL项目还提供了多维度的丰富,并在总体上提升了21世纪的技能。参与者期望在随后的学期中有某种形式的连续VE项目,类似于当前的COIL项目。这些发现暗示了如何进一步发展COIL的实际考虑-同步或/和异步模式,多层协作,个人和集体沟通,以及学生自主权,技术支持和教师对额外细节安排的负担能力之间的平衡。这项研究的意义在于,这些发现将有助于减轻和平衡学术界对学生从参与双方获得的收获的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Combining virtual exchange with challenge-based learning: the experience of the “Virtual Environmental Challenge” Developing transferable skills in virtual exchange Identity, racial cognizance, and intercultural competence: Students’ collective identities in the virtual literary classroom Implementation of COIL in mental health education: Outcomes of a collaboration between Spain and the United States nursing students Pedagogical mentoring in virtual exchange: Developing students’ videoconferencing skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1