research skills and online communication in higher education

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 09 January 2024

Online vs in-person learning in higher education: effects on student achievement and recommendations for leadership

• Bandar N. Alarifi 1 &
• Steve Song 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  86 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

7148 Accesses

2 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

This study is a comparative analysis of online distance learning and traditional in-person education at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia, with a focus on understanding how different educational modalities affect student achievement. The justification for this study lies in the rapid shift towards online learning, especially highlighted by the educational changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. By analyzing the final test scores of freshman students in five core courses over the 2020 (in-person) and 2021 (online) academic years, the research provides empirical insights into the efficacy of online versus traditional education. Initial observations suggested that students in online settings scored lower in most courses. However, after adjusting for variables like gender, class size, and admission scores using multiple linear regression, a more nuanced picture emerged. Three courses showed better performance in the 2021 online cohort, one favored the 2020 in-person group, and one was unaffected by the teaching format. The study emphasizes the crucial need for a nuanced, data-driven strategy in integrating online learning within higher education systems. It brings to light the fact that the success of educational methodologies is highly contingent on specific contextual factors. This finding advocates for educational administrators and policymakers to exercise careful and informed judgment when adopting online learning modalities. It encourages them to thoroughly evaluate how different subjects and instructional approaches might interact with online formats, considering the variable effects these might have on learning outcomes. This approach ensures that decisions about implementing online education are made with a comprehensive understanding of its diverse and context-specific impacts, aiming to optimize educational effectiveness and student success.

Similar content being viewed by others

Elementary school teachers’ perspectives about learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

Quality of a master’s degree in education in Ecuador

Impact of video-based learning in business statistics: a longitudinal study

Introduction.

The year 2020 marked an extraordinary period, characterized by the global disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Governments and institutions worldwide had to adapt to unforeseen challenges across various domains, including health, economy, and education. In response, many educational institutions quickly transitioned to distance teaching (also known as e-learning, online learning, or virtual classrooms) to ensure continued access to education for their students. However, despite this rapid and widespread shift to online learning, a comprehensive examination of its effects on student achievement in comparison to traditional in-person instruction remains largely unexplored.

In research examining student outcomes in the context of online learning, the prevailing trend is the consistent observation that online learners often achieve less favorable results when compared to their peers in traditional classroom settings (e.g., Fischer et al., 2020 ; Bettinger et al., 2017 ; Edvardsson and Oskarsson, 2008 ). However, it is important to note that a significant portion of research on online learning has primarily focused on its potential impact (Kuhfeld et al., 2020 ; Azevedo et al., 2020 ; Di Pietro et al., 2020 ) or explored various perspectives (Aucejo et al., 2020 ; Radha et al., 2020 ) concerning distance education. These studies have often omitted a comprehensive and nuanced examination of its concrete academic consequences, particularly in terms of test scores and grades.

Given the dearth of research on the academic impact of online learning, especially in light of Covid-19 in the educational arena, the present study aims to address that gap by assessing the effectiveness of distance learning compared to in-person teaching in five required freshmen-level courses at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. To accomplish this objective, the current study compared the final exam results of 8297 freshman students who were enrolled in the five courses in person in 2020 to their 8425 first-year counterparts who has taken the same courses at the same institution in 2021 but in an online format.

The final test results of the five courses (i.e., University Skills 101, Entrepreneurship 101, Computer Skills 101, Computer Skills 101, and Fitness and Health Culture 101) were examined, accounting for potential confounding factors such as gender, class size and admission scores, which have been cited in past research to be correlated with student achievement (e.g., Meinck and Brese, 2019 ; Jepsen, 2015 ) Additionally, as the preparatory year at King Saud University is divided into five tracks—health, nursing, science, business, and humanity, the study classified students based on their respective disciplines.

Motivation for the study

The rapid expansion of distance learning in higher education, particularly highlighted during the recent COVID-19 pandemic (Volk et al., 2020 ; Bettinger et al., 2017 ), underscores the need for alternative educational approaches during crises. Such disruptions can catalyze innovation and the adoption of distance learning as a contingency plan (Christensen et al., 2015 ). King Saud University, like many institutions worldwide, faced the challenge of transitioning abruptly to online learning in response to the pandemic.

E-learning has gained prominence in higher education due to technological advancements, offering institutions a competitive edge (Valverde-Berrocoso et al., 2020 ). Especially during conditions like the COVID-19 pandemic, electronic communication was utilized across the globe as a feasible means to overcome barriers and enhance interactions (Bozkurt, 2019 ).

Distance learning, characterized by flexibility, became crucial when traditional in-person classes are hindered by unforeseen circumstance such as the ones posed by COVID-19 (Arkorful and Abaidoo, 2015 ). Scholars argue that it allows students to learn at their own pace, often referred to as self-directed learning (Hiemstra, 1994 ) or self-education (Gadamer, 2001 ). Additional advantages include accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility (Sadeghi, 2019 ).

However, distance learning is not immune to its own set of challenges. Technical impediments, encompassing network issues, device limitations, and communication hiccups, represent formidable hurdles (Sadeghi, 2019 ). Furthermore, concerns about potential distractions in the online learning environment, fueled by the ubiquity of the internet and social media, have surfaced (Hall et al., 2020 ; Ravizza et al., 2017 ). The absence of traditional face-to-face interactions among students and between students and instructors is also viewed as a potential drawback (Sadeghi, 2019 ).

Given the evolving understanding of the pros and cons of distance learning, this study aims to contribute to the existing literature by assessing the effectiveness of distance learning, specifically in terms of student achievement, as compared to in-person classroom learning at King Saud University, one of Saudi Arabia’s largest higher education institutions.

Academic achievement: in-person vs online learning

The primary driving force behind the rapid integration of technology in education has been its emphasis on student performance (Lai and Bower, 2019 ). Over the past decade, numerous studies have undertaken comparisons of student academic achievement in online and in-person settings (e.g., Bettinger et al., 2017 ; Fischer et al., 2020 ; Iglesias-Pradas et al., 2021 ). This section offers a concise review of the disparities in academic achievement between college students engaged in in-person and online learning, as identified in existing research.

A number of studies point to the superiority of traditional in-person education over online learning in terms of academic outcomes. For example, Fischer et al. ( 2020 ) conducted a comprehensive study involving 72,000 university students across 433 subjects, revealing that online students tend to achieve slightly lower academic results than their in-class counterparts. Similarly, Bettinger et al. ( 2017 ) found that students at for-profit online universities generally underperformed when compared to their in-person peers. Supporting this trend, Figlio et al. ( 2013 ) indicated that in-person instruction consistently produced better results, particularly among specific subgroups like males, lower-performing students, and Hispanic learners. Additionally, Kaupp’s ( 2012 ) research in California community colleges demonstrated that online students faced lower completion and success rates compared to their traditional in-person counterparts (Fig. 1 ).

The figure compared student achievement in the final tests in the five courses by year, using independent-samples t-tests; the results show a statistically-significant drop in test scores from 2020 (in person) to 2021 (online) for all courses except CT_101.

In contrast, other studies present evidence of online students outperforming their in-person peers. For example, Iglesias-Pradas et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a comparative analysis of 43 bachelor courses at Telecommunication Engineering College in Malaysia, revealing that online students achieved higher academic outcomes than their in-person counterparts. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Gonzalez et al. ( 2020 ) found that students engaged in online learning performed better than those who had previously taken the same subjects in traditional in-class settings.

Expanding on this topic, several studies have reported mixed results when comparing the academic performance of online and in-person students, with various student and instructor factors emerging as influential variables. Chesser et al. ( 2020 ) noted that student traits such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, and extraversion play a substantial role in academic achievement, regardless of the learning environment—be it traditional in-person classrooms or online settings. Furthermore, Cacault et al. ( 2021 ) discovered that online students with higher academic proficiency tend to outperform those with lower academic capabilities, suggesting that differences in students’ academic abilities may impact their performance. In contrast, Bergstrand and Savage ( 2013 ) found that online classes received lower overall ratings and exhibited a less respectful learning environment when compared to in-person instruction. Nevertheless, they also observed that the teaching efficiency of both in-class and online courses varied significantly depending on the instructors’ backgrounds and approaches. These findings underscore the multifaceted nature of the online vs. in-person learning debate, highlighting the need for a nuanced understanding of the factors at play.

Theoretical framework

Constructivism is a well-established learning theory that places learners at the forefront of their educational experience, emphasizing their active role in constructing knowledge through interactions with their environment (Duffy and Jonassen, 2009 ). According to constructivist principles, learners build their understanding by assimilating new information into their existing cognitive frameworks (Vygotsky, 1978 ). This theory highlights the importance of context, active engagement, and the social nature of learning (Dewey, 1938 ). Constructivist approaches often involve hands-on activities, problem-solving tasks, and opportunities for collaborative exploration (Brooks and Brooks, 1999 ).

In the realm of education, subject-specific pedagogy emerges as a vital perspective that acknowledges the distinctive nature of different academic disciplines (Shulman, 1986 ). It suggests that teaching methods should be tailored to the specific characteristics of each subject, recognizing that subjects like mathematics, literature, or science require different approaches to facilitate effective learning (Shulman, 1987 ). Subject-specific pedagogy emphasizes that the methods of instruction should mirror the ways experts in a particular field think, reason, and engage with their subject matter (Cochran-Smith and Zeichner, 2005 ).

When applying these principles to the design of instruction for online and in-person learning environments, the significance of adapting methods becomes even more pronounced. Online learning often requires unique approaches due to its reliance on technology, asynchronous interactions, and potential for reduced social presence (Anderson, 2003 ). In-person learning, on the other hand, benefits from face-to-face interactions and immediate feedback (Allen and Seaman, 2016 ). Here, the interplay of constructivism and subject-specific pedagogy becomes evident.

Online learning. In an online environment, constructivist principles can be upheld by creating interactive online activities that promote exploration, reflection, and collaborative learning (Salmon, 2000 ). Discussion forums, virtual labs, and multimedia presentations can provide opportunities for students to actively engage with the subject matter (Harasim, 2017 ). By integrating subject-specific pedagogy, educators can design online content that mirrors the discipline’s methodologies while leveraging technology for authentic experiences (Koehler and Mishra, 2009 ). For instance, an online history course might incorporate virtual museum tours, primary source analysis, and collaborative timeline projects.

In-person learning. In a traditional brick-and-mortar classroom setting, constructivist methods can be implemented through group activities, problem-solving tasks, and in-depth discussions that encourage active participation (Jonassen et al., 2003 ). Subject-specific pedagogy complements this by shaping instructional methods to align with the inherent characteristics of the subject (Hattie, 2009). For instance, in a physics class, hands-on experiments and real-world applications can bring theoretical concepts to life (Hake, 1998 ).

In sum, the fusion of constructivism and subject-specific pedagogy offers a versatile approach to instructional design that adapts to different learning environments (Garrison, 2011 ). By incorporating the principles of both theories, educators can tailor their methods to suit the unique demands of online and in-person learning, ultimately providing students with engaging and effective learning experiences that align with the nature of the subject matter and the mode of instruction.

Course description

The Self-Development Skills Department at King Saud University (KSU) offers five mandatory freshman-level courses. These courses aim to foster advanced thinking skills and cultivate scientific research abilities in students. They do so by imparting essential skills, identifying higher-level thinking patterns, and facilitating hands-on experience in scientific research. The design of these classes is centered around aiding students’ smooth transition into university life. Brief descriptions of these courses are as follows:

University Skills 101 (CI 101) is a three-hour credit course designed to nurture essential academic, communication, and personal skills among all preparatory year students at King Saud University. The primary goal of this course is to equip students with the practical abilities they need to excel in their academic pursuits and navigate their university lives effectively. CI 101 comprises 12 sessions and is an integral part of the curriculum for all incoming freshmen, ensuring a standardized foundation for skill development.

Fitness and Health 101 (FAJB 101) is a one-hour credit course. FAJB 101 focuses on the aspects of self-development skills in terms of health and physical, and the skills related to personal health, nutrition, sports, preventive, psychological, reproductive, and first aid. This course aims to motivate students’ learning process through entertainment, sports activities, and physical exercises to maintain their health. This course is required for all incoming freshmen students at King Saud University.

Entrepreneurship 101 (ENT 101) is a one-hour- credit course. ENT 101 aims to develop students’ skills related to entrepreneurship. The course provides students with knowledge and skills to generate and transform ideas and innovations into practical commercial projects in business settings. The entrepreneurship course consists of 14 sessions and is taught only to students in the business track.

Computer Skills 101 (CT 101) is a three-hour credit course. This provides students with the basic computer skills, e.g., components, operating systems, applications, and communication backup. The course explores data visualization, introductory level of modern programming with algorithms and information security. CT 101 course is taught for all tracks except those in the human track.

Computer Skills 102 (CT 102) is a three-hour credit course. It provides IT skills to the students to utilize computers with high efficiency, develop students’ research and scientific skills, and increase capability to design basic educational software. CT 102 course focuses on operating systems such as Microsoft Office. This course is only taught for students in the human track.

Structure and activities

These courses ranged from one to three hours. A one-hour credit means that students must take an hour of the class each week during the academic semester. The same arrangement would apply to two and three credit-hour courses. The types of activities in each course are shown in Table 1 .

At King Saud University, each semester spans 15 weeks in duration. The total number of semester hours allocated to each course serves as an indicator of its significance within the broader context of the academic program, including the diverse tracks available to students. Throughout the two years under study (i.e., 2020 and 2021), course placements (fall or spring), course content, and the organizational structure remained consistent and uniform.

Participants

The study’s data comes from test scores of a cohort of 16,722 first-year college students enrolled at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia over the span of two academic years: 2020 and 2021. Among these students, 8297 were engaged in traditional, in-person learning in 2020, while 8425 had transitioned to online instruction for the same courses in 2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2020, the student population consisted of 51.5% females and 48.5% males. However, in 2021, there was a reversal in these proportions, with female students accounting for 48.5% and male students comprising 51.5% of the total participants.

Regarding student enrollment in the five courses, Table 2 provides a detailed breakdown by average class size, admission scores, and the number of students enrolled in the courses during the two years covered by this study. While the total number of students in each course remained relatively consistent across the two years, there were noticeable fluctuations in average class sizes. Specifically, four out of the five courses experienced substantial increases in class size, with some nearly doubling in size (e.g., ENT_101 and CT_102), while one course (CT_101) showed a reduction in its average class size.

In this study, it must be noted that while some students enrolled in up to three different courses within the same academic year, none repeated the same exam in both years. Specifically, students who failed to pass their courses in 2020 were required to complete them in summer sessions and were consequently not included in this study’s dataset. To ensure clarity and precision in our analysis, the research focused exclusively on student test scores to evaluate and compare the academic effectiveness of online and traditional in-person learning methods. This approach was chosen to provide a clear, direct comparison of the educational impacts associated with each teaching format.

Descriptive analysis of the final exam scores for the two years (2020 and 2021) were conducted. Additionally, comparison of student outcomes in in-person classes in 2020 to their online platform peers in 2021 were conducted using an independent-samples t -test. Subsequently, in order to address potential disparities between the two groups arising from variables such as gender, class size, and admission scores (which serve as an indicator of students’ academic aptitude and pre-enrollment knowledge), multiple regression analyses were conducted. In these multivariate analyses, outcomes of both in-person and online cohorts were assessed within their respective tracks. By carefully considering essential aforementioned variables linked to student performance, the study aimed to ensure a comprehensive and equitable evaluation.

Study instrument

The study obtained students’ final exam scores for the years 2020 (in-person) and 2021 (online) from the school’s records office through their examination management system. In the preparatory year at King Saud University, final exams for all courses are developed by committees composed of faculty members from each department. To ensure valid comparisons, the final exam questions, crafted by departmental committees of professors, remained consistent and uniform for the two years under examination.

Table 3 provides a comprehensive assessment of the reliability of all five tests included in our analysis. These tests exhibit a strong degree of internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients spanning a range from 0.77 to 0.86. This robust and consistent internal consistency measurement underscores the dependable nature of these tests, affirming their reliability and suitability for the study’s objectives.

In terms of assessing test validity, content validity was ensured through a thorough review by university subject matter experts, resulting in test items that align well with the content domain and learning objectives. Additionally, criterion-related validity was established by correlating students’ admissions test scores with their final required freshman test scores in the five subject areas, showing a moderate and acceptable relationship (0.37 to 0.56) between the test scores and the external admissions test. Finally, construct validity was confirmed through reviews by experienced subject instructors, leading to improvements in test content. With guidance from university subject experts, construct validity was established, affirming the effectiveness of the final tests in assessing students’ subject knowledge at the end of their coursework.

Collectively, these validity and reliability measures affirm the soundness and integrity of the final subject tests, establishing their suitability as effective assessment tools for evaluating students’ knowledge in their five mandatory freshman courses at King Saud University.

After obtaining research approval from the Research Committee at King Saud University, the coordinators of the five courses (CI_101, ENT_101, CT_101, CT_102, and FAJB_101) supplied the researchers with the final exam scores of all first-year preparatory year students at King Saud University for the initial semester of the academic years 2020 and 2021. The sample encompassed all students who had completed these five courses during both years, resulting in a total of 16,722 students forming the final group of participants.

Limitations

Several limitations warrant acknowledgment in this study. First, the research was conducted within a well-resourced major public university. As such, the experiences with online classes at other types of institutions (e.g., community colleges, private institutions) may vary significantly. Additionally, the limited data pertaining to in-class teaching practices and the diversity of learning activities across different courses represents a gap that could have provided valuable insights for a more thorough interpretation and explanation of the study’s findings.

To compare student achievement in the final tests in the five courses by year, independent-samples t -tests were conducted. Table 4 shows a statistically-significant drop in test scores from 2020 (in person) to 2021 (online) for all courses except CT_101. The biggest decline was with CT_102 with 3.58 points, and the smallest decline was with CI_101 with 0.18 points.

However, such simple comparison of means between the two years (via t -tests) by subjects does not account for the differences in gender composition, class size, and admission scores between the two academic years, all of which have been associated with student outcomes (e.g., Ho and Kelman, 2014 ; De Paola et al., 2013 ). To account for such potential confounding variables, multiple regressions were conducted to compare the 2 years’ results while controlling for these three factors associated with student achievement.

Table 5 presents the regression results, illustrating the variation in final exam scores between 2020 and 2021, while controlling for gender, class size, and admission scores. Importantly, these results diverge significantly from the outcomes obtained through independent-sample t -test analyses.

Taking into consideration the variables mentioned earlier, students in the 2021 online cohort demonstrated superior performance compared to their 2020 in-person counterparts in CI_101, FAJB_101, and CT_101, with score advantages of 0.89, 0.56, and 5.28 points, respectively. Conversely, in the case of ENT_101, online students in 2021 scored 0.69 points lower than their 2020 in-person counterparts. With CT_102, there were no statistically significant differences in final exam scores between the two cohorts of students.

The study sought to assess the effectiveness of distance learning compared to in-person learning in the higher education setting in Saudi Arabia. We analyzed the final exam scores of 16,722 first-year college students in King Saud University in five required subjects (i.e., CI_101, ENT_101, CT_101, CT_102, and FAJB_101). The study initially performed a simple comparison of mean scores by tracks by year (via t -tests) and then a number of multiple regression analyses which controlled for class size, gender composition, and admission scores.

Overall, the study’s more in-depth findings using multiple regression painted a wholly different picture than the results obtained using t -tests. After controlling for class size, gender composition, and admissions scores, online students in 2021 performed better than their in-person instruction peers in 2020 in University Skills (CI_101), Fitness and Health (FAJB_101), and Computer Skills (CT_101), whereas in-person students outperformed their online peers in Entrepreneurship (ENT_101). There was no meaningful difference in outcomes for students in the Computer Skills (CT_102) course for the two years.

In light of these findings, it raises the question: why do we observe minimal differences (less than a one-point gain or loss) in student outcomes in courses like University Skills, Fitness and Health, Entrepreneurship, and Advanced Computer Skills based on the mode of instruction? Is it possible that when subjects are primarily at a basic or introductory level, as is the case with these courses, the mode of instruction may have a limited impact as long as the concepts are effectively communicated in a manner familiar and accessible to students?

In today’s digital age, one could argue that students in more developed countries, such as Saudi Arabia, generally possess the skills and capabilities to effectively engage with materials presented in both in-person and online formats. However, there is a notable exception in the Basic Computer Skills course, where the online cohort outperformed their in-person counterparts by more than 5 points. Insights from interviews with the instructors of this course suggest that this result may be attributed to the course’s basic and conceptual nature, coupled with the availability of instructional videos that students could revisit at their own pace.

Given that students enter this course with varying levels of computer skills, self-paced learning may have allowed them to cover course materials at their preferred speed, concentrating on less familiar topics while swiftly progressing through concepts they already understood. The advantages of such self-paced learning have been documented by scholars like Tullis and Benjamin ( 2011 ), who found that self-paced learners often outperform those who spend the same amount of time studying identical materials. This approach allows learners to allocate their time more effectively according to their individual learning pace, providing greater ownership and control over their learning experience. As such, in courses like introductory computer skills, it can be argued that becoming familiar with fundamental and conceptual topics may not require extensive in-class collaboration. Instead, it may be more about exposure to and digestion of materials in a format and at a pace tailored to students with diverse backgrounds, knowledge levels, and skill sets.

Further investigation is needed to more fully understand why some classes benefitted from online instruction while others did not, and vice versa. Perhaps, it could be posited that some content areas are more conducive to in-person (or online) format while others are not. Or it could be that the different results of the two modes of learning were driven by students of varying academic abilities and engagement, with low-achieving students being more vulnerable to the limitations of online learning (e.g., Kofoed et al., 2021 ). Whatever the reasons, the results of the current study can be enlightened by a more in-depth analysis of the various factors associated with such different forms of learning. Moreover, although not clear cut, what the current study does provide is additional evidence against any dire consequences to student learning (at least in the higher ed setting) as a result of sudden increase in online learning with possible benefits of its wider use being showcased.

Based on the findings of this study, we recommend that educational leaders adopt a measured approach to online learning—a stance that neither fully embraces nor outright denounces it. The impact on students’ experiences and engagement appears to vary depending on the subjects and methods of instruction, sometimes hindering, other times promoting effective learning, while some classes remain relatively unaffected.

Rather than taking a one-size-fits-all approach, educational leaders should be open to exploring the nuances behind these outcomes. This involves examining why certain courses thrived with online delivery, while others either experienced a decline in student achievement or remained largely unaffected. By exploring these differentiated outcomes associated with diverse instructional formats, leaders in higher education institutions and beyond can make informed decisions about resource allocation. For instance, resources could be channeled towards in-person learning for courses that benefit from it, while simultaneously expanding online access for courses that have demonstrated improved outcomes through its virtual format. This strategic approach not only optimizes resource allocation but could also open up additional revenue streams for the institution.

Considering the enduring presence of online learning, both before the pandemic and its accelerated adoption due to Covid-19, there is an increasing need for institutions of learning and scholars in higher education, as well as other fields, to prioritize the study of its effects and optimal utilization. This study, which compares student outcomes between two cohorts exposed to in-person and online instruction (before and during Covid-19) at the largest university in Saudi Arabia, represents a meaningful step in this direction.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Allen IE, Seaman J (2016) Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States . Babson Survey Group

Anderson T (2003) Getting the mix right again: an updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn , 4 (2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149

Arkorful V, Abaidoo N (2015) The role of e-learning, advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education. Int J Instruct Technol Distance Learn 12(1):29–42

Google Scholar  

Aucejo EM, French J, Araya MP, Zafar B (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on student experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey. Journal of Public Economics 191:104271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104271

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Azevedo JP, Hasan A, Goldemberg D, Iqbal SA, and Geven K (2020) Simulating the potential impacts of COVID-19 school closures on schooling and learning outcomes: a set of global estimates. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper

Bergstrand K, Savage SV (2013) The chalkboard versus the avatar: Comparing the effectiveness of online and in-class courses. Teach Sociol 41(3):294–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X13479949

Article   Google Scholar  

Bettinger EP, Fox L, Loeb S, Taylor ES (2017) Virtual classrooms: How online college courses affect student success. Am Econ Rev 107(9):2855–2875. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151193

Bozkurt A (2019) From distance education to open and distance learning: a holistic evaluation of history, definitions, and theories. Handbook of research on learning in the age of transhumanism , 252–273. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch016

Brooks JG, Brooks MG (1999) In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms . Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Cacault MP, Hildebrand C, Laurent-Lucchetti J, Pellizzari M (2021) Distance learning in higher education: evidence from a randomized experiment. J Eur Econ Assoc 19(4):2322–2372. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa060

Chesser S, Murrah W, Forbes SA (2020) Impact of personality on choice of instructional delivery and students’ performance. Am Distance Educ 34(3):211–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1705116

Christensen CM, Raynor M, McDonald R (2015) What is disruptive innovation? Harv Bus Rev 93(12):44–53

Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (2005) Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Choice Rev Online 43 (4). https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.43-2338

De Paola M, Ponzo M, Scoppa V (2013) Class size effects on student achievement: heterogeneity across abilities and fields. Educ Econ 21(2):135–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2010.511811

Dewey, J (1938) Experience and education . Simon & Schuster

Di Pietro G, Biagi F, Costa P, Karpinski Z, Mazza J (2020) The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

Duffy TM, Jonassen DH (2009) Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation . Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group

Edvardsson IR, Oskarsson GK (2008) Distance education and academic achievement in business administration: the case of the University of Akureyri. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn, 9 (3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i3.542

Figlio D, Rush M, Yin L (2013) Is it live or is it internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning. J Labor Econ 31(4):763–784. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16089

Fischer C, Xu D, Rodriguez F, Denaro K, Warschauer M (2020) Effects of course modality in summer session: enrollment patterns and student performance in face-to-face and online classes. Internet Higher Educ 45:100710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100710

Gadamer HG (2001) Education is self‐education. J Philos Educ 35(4):529–538

Garrison DR (2011) E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838761

Gonzalez T, de la Rubia MA, Hincz KP, Comas-Lopez M, Subirats L, Fort S, & Sacha GM (2020) Influence of COVID-19 confinement on students’ performance in higher education. PLOS One 15 (10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239490

Hake RR (1998) Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am J Phys 66(1):64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Hall ACG, Lineweaver TT, Hogan EE, O’Brien SW (2020) On or off task: the negative influence of laptops on neighboring students’ learning depends on how they are used. Comput Educ 153:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103901

Harasim L (2017) Learning theory and online technologies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203846933

Hiemstra R (1994) Self-directed learning. In WJ Rothwell & KJ Sensenig (Eds), The sourcebook for self-directed learning (pp 9–20). HRD Press

Ho DE, Kelman MG (2014) Does class size affect the gender gap? A natural experiment in law. J Legal Stud 43(2):291–321

Iglesias-Pradas S, Hernández-García Á, Chaparro-Peláez J, Prieto JL (2021) Emergency remote teaching and students’ academic performance in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study. Comput Hum Behav 119:106713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106713

Jepsen C (2015) Class size: does it matter for student achievement? IZA World of Labor . https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.190

Jonassen DH, Howland J, Moore J, & Marra RM (2003) Learning to solve problems with technology: a constructivist perspective (2nd ed). Columbus: Prentice Hall

Kaupp R (2012) Online penalty: the impact of online instruction on the Latino-White achievement gap. J Appli Res Community Coll 19(2):3–11. https://doi.org/10.46569/10211.3/99362

Koehler MJ, Mishra P (2009) What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ 9(1):60–70

Kofoed M, Gebhart L, Gilmore D, & Moschitto R (2021) Zooming to class?: Experimental evidence on college students’ online learning during COVID-19. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3846700

Kuhfeld M, Soland J, Tarasawa B, Johnson A, Ruzek E, Liu J (2020) Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educ Res 49(8):549–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x20965918

Lai JW, Bower M (2019) How is the use of technology in education evaluated? A systematic review. Comput Educ 133:27–42

Meinck S, Brese F (2019) Trends in gender gaps: using 20 years of evidence from TIMSS. Large-Scale Assess Educ 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-019-0076-3

Radha R, Mahalakshmi K, Kumar VS, Saravanakumar AR (2020) E-Learning during lockdown of COVID-19 pandemic: a global perspective. Int J Control Autom 13(4):1088–1099

Ravizza SM, Uitvlugt MG, Fenn KM (2017) Logged in and zoned out: How laptop Internet use relates to classroom learning. Psychol Sci 28(2):171–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679761667731

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sadeghi M (2019) A shift from classroom to distance learning: advantages and limitations. Int J Res Engl Educ 4(1):80–88

Salmon G (2000) E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203816684

Shulman LS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Edu Res 15(2):4–14

Shulman LS (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harv Educ Rev 57(1):1–22

Tullis JG, Benjamin AS (2011) On the effectiveness of self-paced learning. J Mem Lang 64(2):109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.11.002

Valverde-Berrocoso J, Garrido-Arroyo MDC, Burgos-Videla C, Morales-Cevallos MB (2020) Trends in educational research about e-learning: a systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability 12(12):5153

Volk F, Floyd CG, Shaler L, Ferguson L, Gavulic AM (2020) Active duty military learners and distance education: factors of persistence and attrition. Am J Distance Educ 34(3):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1708842

Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sports and Recreation Management, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Bandar N. Alarifi

Division of Research and Doctoral Studies, Concordia University Chicago, 7400 Augusta Street, River Forest, IL, 60305, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Bandar Alarifi collected and organized data for the five courses and wrote the manuscript. Dr. Steve Song analyzed and interpreted the data regarding student achievement and revised the manuscript. These authors jointly supervised this work and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bandar N. Alarifi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at King Saud University on 25 March 2021 (No. 4/4/255639). This research does not involve the collection or analysis of data that could be used to identify participants (including email addresses or other contact details). All information is anonymized and the submission does not include images that may identify the person. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Alarifi, B.N., Song, S. Online vs in-person learning in higher education: effects on student achievement and recommendations for leadership. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 86 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02590-1

Download citation

Received : 07 June 2023

Accepted : 21 December 2023

Published : 09 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02590-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Advertisement

Intercultural communicative competence in higher education through telecollaboration: typology and development

• Open access
• Published: 01 April 2023
• Volume 28 , pages 13885–13912, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3169-3404 1 , 2 &
• Maximiliano Ritacco-Real   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9907-1148 1  

3562 Accesses

3 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This study aims to analyse intercultural communicative competence, understood as the individual’s ability to effectively and appropriately develop communication and behaviour, when interacting in an intercultural context. In this study, the Behavioural, Affective and Cognitive Dimensions, and their sub–dimensions, are considered by using videoconferencing as a tool for telecollaboration in Higher Education. These sub–dimensions are observed according to their positive and negative orientation (facilitating or inhibiting). The objectives of the current study are to analyse the dimensions and sub–dimensions distribution, to assess the incidence of the typology of generic and specific topics, and to assess the over time communication evolution. Content analysis of communications between university peers was carried out and we undertook a percentage frequency index. The results show behavioural communications to be in the majority, followed by affective and, finally, cognitive communications. Communications with a negative aspect are almost absent from this study. MANOVA was performed to investigate differences between typologies of topics (generic/specific) in dimensions. This research founds statistically significant differences in Affective Dimension. ANOVAs were conducted to observe if there are differences in the development over time of Behavioural, Affective and Cognitive Dimensions of intercultural online communications. There was a significant effect over time in Affective and Behavioural Dimension. The present study finds expressions that show a positive attitude towards communication, as well as interest in and an effort to maintain it. We can conclude that, in Affective Dimension, where generic topics enhance communication, while educational topics inhibit it. However, a sustained evolution over time has not been found, rather a significant incidence depending on topic themes.

Similar content being viewed by others

Developing intercultural communicative competence by the means of telecollaboration

A Comparative Analysis of Two Online Videoconferencing Initiatives for Conversational Practice with Native Speakers

Researching Intercultural Communication in a UK Higher Education Context

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

One of the roles of Higher Education is to prepare students for interaction with people from other cultures in order to allow them to participate actively in a diverse society. In addition, the expansion of globalisation requires students to communicate appropriately and effectively (Akdere et al., 2021 ), since ‘all societies in our contemporary world are the result of intercultural communication’ (Deardoff, 2020, p. ix). Intercultural educational communication using telecollaboration offers opportunities to develop a wide range of competences, while allowing a reflection on the students’ own experiences. However, according to Avgousti ( 2018 ), more research is needed on the pedagogical uses of less studied Web 2.0 technologies.

The intercultural communicative competence (ICC) implies, on the one hand, the individual’s understanding of the norms of their own culture and other cultures. On the other hand, ICC implies an understanding of how to use that knowledge for successful communication with people who do not share the same cultural background and for the effective building of bridges in situations of cultural diversity (Akdere et al., 2021 ; Toscu & Erten, 2020 ). The development of this competence will surely influence feelings, identity and patterns of thinking. The latter may be different from one culture to another, understanding that these are the structures which organise ways of acting, interacting, values and personal imaginaries. Thus, Lantz–Deaton and Goluveba ( 2020 ) point out that, in intercultural exchange, each individual interprets reality through the lens of their own personality and their own cultural group. In addition, the relationship between cultural knowledge and communication competencies can be considered indissoluble, since culture marks the norms and conventions of communication (Avgousti, 2018 ).

This study has an innovative character since it is carried out through the interrelated analysis between the topics dealt with in the videoconferences (VC)—generic (food, politic, holidays, …) or specific (educational)—and the use of the communications themselves, not through self–reports, of the intercultural meetings between students in pairs. This interrelationship has not been analysed by previous research and may facilitate understanding of how ICC evolves. This study focuses on analysing communications between culturally diverse pairs of students developed through VC as a tool for telecollaboration. Specifically, it examines the issue by posing the following questions:

How intercultural communication is distributed considering behavioural, affective and cognitive dimensions?

What typologies of intercultural online educational communications can be observed among university peers?

How do intercultural online educational communications develop over time?

2 Background

2.1 intercultural communicative competence.

Since the second half of the 20th century various models for understanding ICC have arisen which complement each other and broaden the view that we currently have of this competence. Likewise, there is a long history of intercultural competence (IC) assessment in a variety of contexts, including higher education institutions (Iseminger et al., 2020 ). In the scientific literature, conceptual diversity is observed in the relationship between the terms ICC and IC. For some authors, this relationship is established by considering IC as the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations (Akdere et al., 2021 ; Chen & Gabrenya, 2021 ; Deardorff, 2020 ). Here, the IC is properly communication: ‘the intercultural competence or intercultural communicative competence typically include the attitudes, skills and knowledge required in appropriate communications when interacting across difference’ (Deardorff, 2020 , p. 5). Also in this sense, the proposal of Swartz and Shrivastava ( 2021 ) can be placed, pointing out that the ICC involves the cognitive, affective and behavioural attributes to communicate effectively across various cultures. Another trend in the conceptualisation of the relationship between ICC and IC is that proposed by Lantz–Deaton and Golubeva ( 2020 ). These authors argue that the ICC implies communication between people; that is, the IC is a broader term in which the ICC could be placed as a component. The ICC is considered by these authors as an overly specific term, since it suggests a focus only on communication between people from different linguistic backgrounds. For Lantz-Deaton and Golubeva ( 2020 ), the base of IC is developed through ICC, which makes it possible to identify the development of IC through communications. In this case, the ICC is the tool to develop the IC. Assuming one or another conceptual trend, it can be considered, as Deardoff (2020) points out, that the ways of developing IC involve communication skills. This is because, in the end, communication and behaviour are at the centre of intercultural competencies. Starting from the definitions proposed by Chen and Young ( 2012 ) and Deardoff (2020), in this research, ICC is defined as the individual skill required to develop in an effective and appropriate way a communication and behaviour when interacting in an intercultural context.

Moreover, the ICC is a multidimensional construction (Griffith et al., 2016 ; Lanz–Deaton & Golubeva, 2020 ) that includes, following the proposals of Akdere et al. ( 2021 ) and Lee and Song ( 2019 ), some combination of attitude and affect, knowledge/cognition, and skills/behaviour. The multidimensional aspects of the ICC show the complexity of its structure. These three dimensions—attitude, affect and behaviour—are the object of analysis in this study.

Following Heggernes ( 2021 ) and Deardorff ( 2020 ), the intercultural communication is essentially developed through a dialogue requiring a respectful atmosphere and sincere interest in the perspectives of others. Similarly, it can be considered that the ‘interpersonal interaction—conversational, institutional, task-based, digital, and so on—is situated; that is, it takes place in a particular sociocultural setting and therefore inherently involves issues of face’ (Van Der Zwaard & Bannink, 2020 , p. 59). In addition, the IC is a set of related competencies that can be improved over time and as a result of experience. This is opposed to the idea of a collection of static personality traits; that is, intercultural competence is eminently learnable (Akdere et al., 2021 ).

Furthermore, the organisation of the underlying dimensions in the ICC under attitudes, behaviours and cognition is a structure used in previous research. In this way, the questionnaires analysed by Chen and Gabrenya ( 2021 )—SCAS (Sociocultural Adaptation Scale, Ward & Kennedy, 1999 ); CCAI (Cross-Cultural Adaptation Inventory, Kelley & Meyers, 1995 ); MPQ (Multicultural Personality Questionnaire, Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000 ); ISS (Intercultural Sensitivity Scale, Chen & Starosta, 2000 ); CQS (Cultural Intelligence Scales, Ang et al., 2007 )—to examine the ICC match this structure (see Chen & Gabrenya, 2021 , Fig.  1 , p. 38). Their research suggests that, empirically, these instruments represent fewer dimensions than those originally stated by their developers, although all of them, among other dimensions, coincide in the three indicated above (attitudes, behaviours and cognition).

Model of intercultural communication competence (Chen & Young, 2012 , p. 177).

This model is split into three elements which make up ICC: behavioural (intercultural adroitness), affective (intercultural sensitivity) and cognitive (intercultural awareness) (Fig.  1 ).

Lee and Song ( 2019 ) point out that so far behavioural elements constitute the least researched dimension, and define this element ‘as students’ willingness to learn about the target culture or their directed efforts to engage in behavior aimed at intercultural understanding’ (p. 180). According to Chen and Young ( 2012 ), intercultural adroitness ‘refers to the ability to achieve one’s communication goals in intercultural interaction through behavioural performance’ (p. 179). Verbal and non-verbal communication skills enable the individual to be successful, and productive, when engaged in the communication process.

With regard to behavioural elements, a number of skills are necessary for successful communication (Akdere et al., 2021 ; Chen & Young, 2012 ; Lee & Song, 2019 ; Swartz & Shrivastava, 2021 ; Toscu & Erten, 2020 ). They are as follows:

Message skills: ability to employ verbal and nonverbal behaviours. Adaptation of behaviour to facilitate a successful interaction.

Interaction management: ability to initiate, take turns, terminate a conversation.

Behavioural flexibility: ability to take note of various information and to use appropriate communication strategies.

Identity management: ability to maintain the personal and cultural identities of the partner.

Conation: personal energy that has both direction (positive/negative) and magnitude (greater/lesser), connected to the will that indicates a behaviour.

The affective elements (Chen & Starosta, 2000 ) include intercultural sensitivity, which refers to the promotion of positive feelings and emotions during intercultural communication. According to Chen and Starosta ( 1997 ), these affective elements include ‘willingness or motivation to understand, acknowledge, respect, and even accept differences of the two cultural beings or groups’ (p. 231). Affective elements, according to Akdere et al. ( 2021 ), Chen and Starosta ( 2000 ), Griffith et al. ( 2016 ), Lee and Song ( 2019 ) and Toscu and Erten ( 2020 ) refer to:

Cultural self-efficacy: when an individual develops close relationships with people from other cultures.

Positive cultural orientation: cosmopolitanism (reduced ethnocentrism), open-mindedness, inquisitiveness and curiosity, which are complementary skills, willingness to learn from other cultures. Mutual respect for others also figures here (extent to which participants understand, accept and respect cultural differences). Individuals with this ability respect the differences between people from other cultures.

Tolerance of ambiguity: intercultural interactions are, by nature, ambiguous. Individuals who tolerate ambiguity can continue to function/communicate despite the fact that the behaviours they observe differ from their own. Individuals with this ability have a high level of tolerance to stress.

Interaction confidence: degree of trust felt by interlocutors during intercultural communication.

Interaction enjoyment: level of pleasure that the interlocutors obtain from the communication.

Interactional attentiveness: ability to respond observantly in communicative situations.

Finally, cognitive elements indicate intercultural awareness. These elements relate to understanding the characteristics of the target culture, its beliefs and values as well as the ways in which people from different cultures think (Chen & Starosta, 1997 ; Lee & Song, 2019 ). Following the arguments of Chen and Young ( 2012 ), on the one hand, it is necessary to reduce ambiguity and uncertainty (discomfort, confusion, anxiety) in order to develop the cognitive elements. These elements are also related to the appreciation of the differences between an individual’s culture of origin and other cultures (Lee & Song, 2019 ).

Other aspects of the cognitive elements are (Chen & Young, 2012 ; Toscu & Erten, 2020 ):

Social monitoring: the ability to infer social norms, hierarchies and networks of interpersonal relationships.

Suspending judgement and perspective taking: complementary skills which facilitate understanding situations without using strong personal bias, stereotypes or generalisations; skills of interpreting and relating.

Cultural knowledge application: this skill refers to the use of cultural information in assessing and making decisions on how to act. Cultural information can include cultural values, specific cultural norms (for example how to greet others), historical and geopolitical information (e.g., trends of power and privilege), knowledge of one’s own culture.

2.2 Educational videoconferences as tools for telecollaboration

Telecollaboration is understood as an online intercultural exchange between people from different cultural backgrounds and is established through structured tasks in an institutional context (Godwin–Jones, 2019 ). For a more nuanced understanding of cultural influences, and following the work of this author, it would be useful to see each telecollaborative project as a manifestation of culture itself, a small culture, a project based on a common purpose, a shared environment, and an open form of communication. On the other hand, in virtual environments, learning about culture is experiential (Lee & Song, 2019 ); it is also subjective and not factual or objective (Avgousti, 2018 ). This conception defines culture as fluid and negotiated, rather than fixed and inherited (Liu & Shirley, 2021 ; Auvgousti, 2018). Lee and Song ( 2019 ) compared different learning scenarios and found that the group of learners who studied through telecollaboration, showed a significant improvement in all three main dimensions of ICC (affective, cognitive and behavioural). Toscu and Erten’s ( 2020 ) study also concludes that, in the group that used telecollaboration, the participants’ enthusiasm for learning about other cultures also improved. This did not occur in the other group. Chen and Yang ( 2016 ) report that telecollaboration helps participants to improve their affective states, including showing interest, curiosity and intrinsic motivation.

A tool used for telecollaboration is VC. Direct, visual and auditory contact between interlocutors can be highly motivating and allows learners to connect easily through their mobile devices or home computers. Recent evidence suggests that, due to its interactive and collaborative nature, VC is suitable for a more dynamic and responsive form of reflection, instilling trust and closeness, as well as greater depth and breadth in thinking (Dai, 2019 ; Lenkaitis et al., 2019 ), as long as the participants have enough bandwidth and video quality. In this sense, the findings of the study by Eren ( 2021 ) also suggest that VCs had a significant impact on the critical intercultural development of students. Specifically, the interaction with different cultural perspectives dismantled prejudices and stereotypes, facilitated the recognition of diversity, the negotiation of meaning, the creation of awareness about the relativity of cultural beliefs and the development of a pragmatic cultural stance.

Lee and Song ( 2019 ), using voice calls together with text messages and mixed methodology for their analysis, measured cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects. The results indicate that, over time, the group significantly improved in the cognitive, affective (engagement and trust), and behavioural aspects of ICC. On the other hand, Dai’s (2019) study concludes that videoconferencing can facilitate a deep level of cultural knowledge depending on the instructional design, thus creating a glocal learning experience. The study by Gómez-García, Gutiérrez-Santiuste and Moreno–López ( 2021 ) analyses intercultural communication under the model of Community of Inquiry, finding a large amount of social communication, above cognitive and teaching communications.

Traditionally, VC was considered a tool that did not facilitate student reflection due to its synchronous nature, since it generated pressure by having to offer an immediate response. Van der Zwaard and Bannink ( 2019 ) find that video exchanges sometimes hinder task performance because the presence of a webcam proves to be face-threatening. Videoconferencing can be demanding for participants as they must pay attention to, and interpret, the meaning of verbal expressions, as well as paralanguage, facial expressions and gestures. In addition, VC requires thinking and responding quickly as well as articulating effectively. Several studies have analysed negative stereotypes relating to the target culture. While some studies point to the reinforcement of cultural stereotypes (Flowers et al., 2019 ), other studies indicate the reverse (Eren, 2021 ), modifying attitudes and preconceptions shaped by the media. Furthermore, as pointed out by Custer ( 2017 ), there are potential dangers to learning curves because of the use of unfamiliar technology, and a learning management system that is known to one group of students but not to the other, or from technical or connection problems, particularly during synchronous exchanges.

In addition, following Eren ( 2021 ) and Godwin–Jones ( 2019 ), ‘safe’ or generic topics, such as food, music and travel, are valid starting points for an intercultural learning proposal, but they do not reflect a critical introspection of culture. According to Yasin ( 2016 ), VC is a tool which is used in digital–based intercultural learning with average frequency, although the Covid–19 pandemic has exponentially increased its use in education (Brooks, 2021 ; Farnell et al., 2021 ; Toscu & Erten, 2020 ) observed its positive influence on fluency and overcoming apprehension in intercultural communications, although they saw no effect on the attitudinal dimension of the participants. In this sense, our proposal is based on the students’ own communications and covers cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects taking, as a theoretical basis, Chen and Young’s ( 2012 ) proposal (intercultural awareness, intercultural sensitivity and intercultural behaviour).

On the other hand, Griffith et al. ( 2016 ) and Chen and Gabrenya ( 2021 ) note that there is little consensus on the measurement of ICC. Studies have relied too heavily on self–report methods which do not adequately cover the full spectrum of the construct. According to Chen and Gabrenya ( 2021 , p. 51) ‘a problem shared [… by] self–reported instruments is reliance on knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors, providing evidence for test–takers’ self-perceptions instead of their actual competence or performance’. Specifically, existing measures often exploit self-reference to cognitive aspects without adequately capturing the affective and behavioural aspects inherent in intercultural interactions. Tuscu and Erten (2020) have developed their research using mixed methods, concluding that videoconferencing is useful for the development of ICC.

In light of the literature analysed, it is considered that there is a gap in the knowledge of the evolution over time of synchronous communications through VCs; specifically, depending on the topics covered (whether generic or specific), in carrying out analysis of VCs through the communications themselves and not through self–reports.

3 Methodology

The methodology of this study, content analysis, has been designed with the aim of analysing and interpreting the virtual communications between students from different places and cultures. The information has additionally been structured in order to obtain frequencies (counts and percentages). The use of VCs for the development of interculturality has been analysed from different methodological perspectives. An example of quantitative analysis is the study of Flowers et al. ( 2019 ). The most frequent analyses are those of mixed methodology. Among them, the study by Eren ( 2021 ) uses the questionnaire and the constant comparative method based on the Grounded Theory. Among the qualitative studies are those of Van Der Zwaard ( 2020 ), which uses content analysis; the study by Dai ( 2019 ), which is based on discourse analysis with an ethnographic approach; and the study by Lee and Song ( 2019 ), which, through qualitative methodology, analyses interviews, essays, and reflective writing.

Figure  2 shows the design and process used in this study.

Experimental design.

3.1 Pedagogical context of the experience

This study analyses VCs exchanges between Spanish and American university students which took place over a period of six months. The contents of these VCs were organised on the basis of the learning objectives of two subjects:

For the American students, the subject was Spanish language, which was taught five hours per week and involved three face–to–face and two compulsory online lessons.

For the Spanish students, the subject was educational systems in primary education, which involved four face–to–face and two online hours of learning. For both groups, the VCs accounted for 25% of their final mark.

Due to the fact that the initial group of Spanish students was larger than the American group, two activities were chosen, one of them being the VCs. The first 12 students who expressed an interest in this activity formed the VCs group.

Some guidelines for all students were established beforehand. Their aim was: to create an individual online profile and share it with their peers on an educational platform; to allow each pair of students to choose their preferred communication tool in order to develop the VCs; to prioritise the use of the Spanish language but, if necessary, to allow the use of English; to prioritise the pre–established topics of conversation (Table  1 ), with the possibility of addressing other emerging topics of interest; to record the VC in both audio and video. In the event of technical problems an audio recording would be sufficient, for each couple to set their own schedule of meetings, each lasting approximately one hour.

VCs 2, 3, 5 and 7 deal with the education systems in primary education in each country. Students had to prepare the topics in advance. The remaining VCs (1, 4, 6 and 8) did not have to be prepared, as their content was of a general nature (Table  1 ).

3.2 Sample of participants

The educational experience started with 12 couples. Subsequently, due to lack of data, the sample was reduced to 10 couples. The couples shared the same gender and were always the same throughout the educational experience. They were established by taking into account mutually convenient schedules and possible contingencies, in addition to compatibility of tastes and preferences. Although a certain homogeneity of the pairs could be a handicap in terms of intercultural analysis, other factors that could influence the learning objectives (facilitating empathy, avoiding clashes between people in the dyads and facilitating greater communication by sharing tastes and preferences) were also assessed. Therefore, the researchers observed advantages in distributing couples with some homogeneity—with common interests— to facilitate communication.

The sample’s socio–demographic data were: average age (18.8),  SD of age (2.6); women (70%), men (30%), Caucasian racial origin (91.3%), African American (4.3%), Afro-Caribbean (4.3%).

3.3 Data structuring and analysis procedure

The analysis was split into two phases: (1) establishing the system of categories to be used and (2) analysing the VCs on the basis of the established system of categories.

In phase 1 the researchers constructed a system of categories based on the Affective, Cognitive and Behavioural Dimensions outlined by Chen and Gabrenya ( 2021 ), Chen & Young, ( 2012 ), Griffith et al. ( 2016 ) and Lee and Song ( 2019 ) and organised into various sub–dimensions (Table  2 ). In each of the sub–dimensions, a positive (+) orientation, facilitating effective communication, and a negative (–) orientation, inhibiting communication, were envisaged. The students were coded according to their nationality and gender (e.g., spa/w, usa/m).

The Affective Dimension includes emotional responses in addition to the management of emotions which may impair the intercultural communicative process. The Cognitive Dimension includes knowledge, understanding and awareness of all cultural and communicative elements which promote effective intercultural communication, including one’s own and that of others. The Behavioural Dimension focuses on the set of verbal and non–verbal skills which show an adaptation of behaviour which promotes effective intercultural communication.

Since the analysis was to be carried out by two researchers, it was necessary to agree on the following: the meaning of a thematic unit, establishing an operational definition for each dimension and sub–dimension, and the specific tracking indicators for each sub–dimension.

Phase 2—the analysis of the communications—consisted of assigning each thematic unit to each sub–dimension, thus converting each fragment of communication into recording units (RU). Throughout this process we worked inductively and deductively. This involved a constant crossover between the theoretical precepts of the research and the communications developed. The transcriptions of the 73 VCs include the spoken word and gestures (nodding acceptance/denial, smiles, etc.). The VCs of two couples were cancelled because they did not have a minimum of 60% of the VCs completed. Nvivo12 software was used to process and structure the information. Content analysis was used as a tool (Krippendorff, 1990 , p. 28) and as a research technique (Berelson, 1952 ).

Inter–coder reliability was performed in order to ensure a degree of conformity and concordance in the assignment of each RU to the given sub–dimensions. Three VCs were randomly selected and a first coding was independently carried out by the two researchers. Following Neuendorf ( 2002 , p. 159), ‘the appropriate sample size should not be less than 50 units’. In rare cases, it needs to be greater than 300 units. In order to analyse inter–coder reliability in this study, we worked with 300 thematic units obtained from 297 interventions. This was done by performing Krippendorff’s alpha. According to Lombard et al. ( 2002 ) and Macnamara ( 2018 ), Krippendorff’s alpha allows any number of coders, admits nominal variables, considers random agreement and the using of equal marginal proportions for the coders. RUs which were to be assigned to more than one code (i.e., co–occurrences), were not used to obtain Krippendorff’s alpha.

Three rounds of the coding/review were then carried out. In view of the large discrepancies observed in the first coding/review round \(\alpha =0.55\) , it was decided to revise the operational definitions and tracking indicators. The disagreements were essentially due to different interpretations of the operational definitions (there were overlaps when delimiting attributes and characteristics in each of them). As the RUs were revised, these issues became clearer. In the second round of coding/review, \(\alpha =0.66\) was obtained. In a third round, after a further review of the tracking indicators, \(\alpha =0.77\) was obtained. Through this iterative process of reiterating the operational definitions among the coders and the subsequent analysis through Krippendorff’s alpha the validation of the Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Dimension and their sub–dimensions was ensured. The RUs were counted and a percentage frequency index was established for each dimension and sub–dimension. A validation of the results was made by the researchers through re–coding. This validation was carried out with 228 RUs, finding a coincidence between the two rounds of coding of 97.36%. Therefore, it is considered that the assignment of the RUs was correct.

Twelve missing VCs involving several couples could not be analysed, so the mean value (the average of the VCs from the other pairs) was given so as not to distort the results.

After review process 45,532 RUs were analysed.

4.1 How intercultural communication is distributed considering behavioural, affective and cognitive dimensions?

The results show that the Behavioural Dimension is widely used in communications (Table  3 ).

The Behavioural Dimension includes expressions which reflect a positive attitude to communication. This is evidenced by the degree of interest shown by the students in addition to effort, willingness to learn, participate, understand and adapt during communication (e.g., initiating, taking turns, paying attention, showing reciprocity, ending a conversation, etc.). The Affective Dimension deals with intercultural sensitivity, evidenced through positive feelings and emotions. These are communicative expressions which reflect ways of feeling, or states of mind, which facilitate communication (e.g., respect, acceptance, empathy, curiosity, tolerance, resilience, etc.). The Cognitive Dimension refers to communications characterising both intercultural awareness and self-awareness through understanding, cognition and learning about the other culture (e.g., recognising, integrating and applying norms, hierarchies and social-cultural networks, adopting a perspective using cultural information, etc.).

In the independent analysis of each dimension, Table  4 (Behavioural Dimension), 5 (Affective Dimension) and 6 (Cognitive Dimension), show an asymmetric distribution between the different sub-dimensions.

The following excerpt exemplify communication related to the Behavioural Dimension:

Couple 3–VC6 spa/w: Of course, don’t worry. If you know, you tell me, and if you don’t, nothing happens. Don’t worry, I’ll explain it to you . [Beh/Eff+]

usa/w: Yes.

spa/w: Let’s learn a little bit and that’s it. Do you want me to tell you a little bit about what it’s like in Spain? [Beh/Eff+]

Positive behaviour with the purpose of allowing communication to develop, is evident in the RUs (in italics). Expressions that show interest, effort, willingness to learn, participate, understand and adapt during communication are in italics (Table 5 ).

Excerpt which exemplify the Affective Dimension include the following:

Couple7–VC8 spa/w: And what was I going to say, ah, did you like the Skype experience?

spa/w: I’m also enjoyed talking to you these days [Aff/Fee+], because I’ve felt very comfortable [Aff/Fee+] and I like your way of thinking. [Aff/Fee+]

The examples shown above highlight expressions of respect, acceptance, empathy and tolerance denoting positive feelings and emotions (intercultural sensitivity) and facilitating intercultural communication.

In the Cognitive Dimension the sub–dimensions observed are as shown in Table  6 .

The following is an example regarding the Cognitive Dimension:

Couple 9–VC5b spa/w: So children are learning, they are playing, but they don’t realise that they are learning at the same time. Thus, I think that the iPads article in your country that you told me about is very interesting, because children are playing, but in reality they are learning. [Cog/Lea+]

spa/w: Then I think new technologies are super important. [Cog/Lea+]

usa/w: And it is the way to make it fun, for learning new things and for many students. [Cog/Lea+]

The RUs shown above demonstrate intercultural understanding and learning. They also convey a sense of gaining perspective of a participant’s personal context through information from the participant of the other culture. Thus, new information is recognised and integrated and even new inferences are made.

4.2 What typologies of intercultural educational online communications are observed among university peers?

A one–way between–groups multivariate analysis of variance was performed to investigate typologies of topics (generic/specific) in different dimensions on intercultural communicative competence through videoconferences in Higher Education. Three dependent variables were used: Behavioural, Affective and Cognitive Dimension. The independent variable was typology. Preliminary assumption testing was conducted to check with no serious violations noted (Pallant, 2007 ; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2018 ):

Normality: Aff y Beh ( \(p>.05)\) , Cog ( \(p<.05)\)

Univariate and multivariate outliers: Aff, 2; Beh, 1.

Homogeneity of variance–covariance matrices: ( \(p>.05)\)

Multivariate normality: Mahalanobis distance, one case (ID = 24) exceeds the critical value of 16.27.

Homogeneity of variances: Aff, Cog and Beh ( \(p>.05)\)

Multicollinearity: correlation, Aff/Beh ( \(r=.72, p=.00)\) , Aff/Cog \(r=.52, p=.00)\) , Beh/Cog \((r=.67, p=.00)\)

\(\left(r=.67,p=.00\right)\) . A high correlation between the three dimensions has been found, however up to \(r=.8\) is reasonable to accept for the MANOVA test (Pallant, p. 282).

Linearity: scatterplot (Fig.  3 ).

Scatterplot. Typology (1: generic; 2: specific) and Affective, Cognitive, Behavioural Dimensions.

There was a statistically significant difference between typologies of topics on the combined dependent variables, \(F \left(\text{3,76}\right)=6.32, p=.001\) , Wilks’ Lambda = 0.80; partial eta squared = 0.20, following Tabachnick and Fidell ( 2018 , p. 55) is small size. When the results for the dependent variables were considered separately, the only difference to reach statistical significance, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.017, was Affective Dimension \(F \left(\text{1,78}\right)=3.63, p=.001\) , partial eta square = 0.13. A follow-up inspection of the mean scores indicated that Affective Dimension reported a statistically significative difference between generic topic VCs \(\left(M=162, SD=86\right)\) and specific topic VCs \((M=106, SD=60)\) .

4.3 How do intercultural educational online communications develop over time?

One–way repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted to observe if there are significant differences in the development of Behavioural, Affective and Cognitive Dimensions of intercultural online communications over time (VCE1 to VCE8). Preliminary assumption testing was conducted (Table  7 ), with no serious violations noted. The mean and standard deviation are presented in Table 8 .

In the Behavioural Dimension, Mauchly’s test indicates that there is a violation of the assumption of sphericity \({(\chi }^{2}\left(27\right)=37.15, p=.14)\) , therefore, the degrees of freedom have been corrected with the Huynh–Feldt sphericity (Huynh & Feldt, 1976 ) estimate due to the sample is small \(\left(\epsilon =0.74\right)\) . There was significant effect for time, Wilks’ Lambda = 0.03, \(F\left(\text{7,3}\right)=14.37, p=.02\) , multivariate partial eta squared = 0.97. According to the results obtained in pairwise comparisons, there are no statistically significant differences in the behavioural dimension ( \(p>.05)\) except in VCE6/VCE7 \((p=.05)\) . The effect size is very high ( \(p>.05\) , partial eta squared = 0.97). The difference between groups in terms of standard deviation units is Cohen’s d = 0.87. The mean and SD of these VCs are shown in Table  8 .

In the Affective Dimension, the Mauchly’s test indicates that there is a violation of the assumption of sphericity \(({\chi }^{2}\left(27\right)=43.57, p=.04\) , therefore the degrees of freedom have been corrected with the Huynt–Feldt estimate of sphericity due the sample is small \((\epsilon =0.64)\) . There was a significant effect over time, Wilks’ Lambda = 0.05, \(F\left(\text{7,3}\right)=8.38, p=.05\) , multivariate partial eta squared = 0.95.

Regarding pairwise comparisons, there are no statistically significant differences over time in the Affective Dimension ( \(p>.05)\) except for VCE03 (specific topic: Organisation of teachers, students and students’ families in schools) with VC1, VC4 and VC8, with a very large effect size \((p>.05)\) , partial eta squared = 0.95). The difference between groups in terms of standard deviation units is Cohen’s d = 1.06 (VC3–VC1), Cohen’s d = 0.82 (VC3–VC4) and Cohen’s d  = 1.19 (VC3–VC8).

In Cognitive Dimension, Mauchly’s test shows that assumption of sphericity is not violated \(\left({\chi }^{2}\left(27\right)=0.01, p=56\right)\) . No significant effects over time were observed (Wilks’ Lambda = 0.14, \(F\left(\text{7,3}\right)=2.6, p=.23)\) . This statement is also supported by the results of pairwise comparisons where \(p>.05\) is observed.

Figure  4 shows that generic topics are the most frequently discussed in Affective and Behavioural dimensions communications (VC8: Farewell, VC6: Politics in the USA and Spain). However, the VCs whose contents deal with specific educational aspects (red) have a lower incidence (VC3: Organization of teachers, Students and students’ families in schools; VC7: Educational laws in the USA and Spain).

Evolution of communications over time. Specific topic (red), generic topic (green). 45,532 RU = 100%.

Figure  5 shows the RUs that are linked to attitude and effort. Neither sub–dimension is represented in the communications in a negative way. Communications with positive content we found, in particular, expressions of interest and effort to initiate or keep communication going.

Percentage of communications of the Behavioural Sub–dimensions over time. Specific topic (red), generic topic (green). 45,532 RU = 100%.

However, it could be due to the fact that they enter into personal opinions on issues with ideological and topical content (VC6, politic). In the case of Beh/Att+, participants use expressions (postscripts, affirmations, restatements, reiterations and so on) which, mostly, allow the continuity of their partner’s discourse. They also use other expressions that show facilitating behaviours. All this enriches the communicative exchange (kindness, politeness, courtesy and respect). In relation to Beh/Eff + these expressions were recorded when new lines of argument, conversation, enquiry and deepening that exceed from the main topic of the VC were introduced.

On the other hand, in the Affective Dimension (Fig.  6 ) Aff/Fee + is the Sub-dimension with the highest number of RUs, reflecting the prevalence of positive moods which facilitate intercultural communication. Its highest records are observed in those VCs that developed generic topics, although with prominence at the beginning and at the end of the educational experience (VC1, let’s meet, and VC8, farewell). However, a large part of the Aff/Fee + is registered in relation to trust, openness and sincerity between participants, while the Aff/Moo + register expressions of optimism, good mood, joy and humour.

Percentage of communications of the Affective Sub–dimensions over time. Specific topic (red), generic topic (green). 45,532 RU = 100%.

In the Cognitive Dimension, the most prolific RUs are those that refer to own culture critical self–perception, or those which establish common meanings, learning from each other’s differences and inferring social norms (Cog/Lea+).

The ANOVA test indicated that wasn’t significantly different from VC1 to VC8, however, we observe in Fig.  7 that the largest number of RUs in Cog/Lea + is produced in two VCs that develop specific themes (VC1 and VC3). However, they were also registered when complementary resources were used in order to move the communication forward (second language, use of technology, lateral examples, comparatives).

Percentage of communication of Cognitive Sub–dimensions over time (45,532 RU = 100%).

In the communications analysed, the Cog/Kno + Sub–dimension was used by Spanish students when information or data relating to where the partner comes from was known, remembered or used. It was also used when a word (in the partner’s language), or a piece of information, was integrated into the dialogue in order to improve communication. Cog/Und + was used when a cultural element, information, fact or concept was understood, and this understanding was explained or when an explanation, reiteration or answer in the form of a question was requested (mainly with regard to the Americans).

5 Conclusions

This paper analyses online communications between pairs of culturally diverse university students. The analysis focuses on the development of Behavioural, Affective and Cognitive Dimensions, and their sub–dimensions, with the aim of exploring the typology and development of their communications.

Our research has found, as Deardorff ( 2020 ) and Heggernes ( 2021 ) point out, a respectful and dialogue-based intercultural communication. On the other hand, in this study it has been observed, in line with Griffith et al. ( 2016 ), that ICC is an interactive process and not so much a static construct. Fluent communication was found and no difficulties in cultural exchanges through videoconferencing were observed. Contrary to what Van der Zwaard & Bannink ( 2019 ) argue, in this research no communications were found concerning the barrier produced by having to respond quickly in this online environment.

The most frequently found communications are related to the Behavioural Dimension, the present study finds expressions that show a positive attitude towards communication, as well as interest in and an effort to maintain it. Participants try to obtain, or provide, information which enables smooth communication. They also make deductions, highlight subtle differences and overcome different communication scenarios. The large number of URs registered relating to Beh/Eff + demonstrate the ability to use the verbal, and non–verbal, behaviours of their partner as noted by Chen and Young ( 2012 ). In addition, both partners demonstrate the ability to initiate a conversation, take turns in speaking and finally end the conversation. The participants’ interest in developing the communication is observed when information that has been given goes beyond to a closed answer or to the VC script, when a deeper explanation has been requested and when complementary resources have been used (using the second language, given examples, …) to clarify the information given. The use of communication strategies, and the ability to take an interest in the partner’s personal and cultural identity, are also evident. Other actions found were, when participants were attentive to the conversation thread allowing the partner’s discourse continuity, also using expressions of social competence (kindness, courtesy, politeness, politeness rules, respect). The negative communications registered are anecdotal, which shows the positive predisposition of the participants to keep communication going.

This study found that Affective Dimension reflects expressions of positive emotions and ways of feeling. Here the communications demonstrate trust between peers, showing them as both relaxed and receptive. In addition, they enjoy their interaction by expressing joy, humour or optimism, although to a lesser extent. As in Toscu and Erten’s study (2020), a clear enthusiasm for learning about other cultures was found, showing a great deal of affective communication, including displays of interest and curiosity. They also showed signs of closeness and trust, in line with the studies of Dai ( 2019 ) and Lenkaitis et al. ( 2019 ). Furthermore, communications showing a marked open–mindedness in relation to the other culture can be observed as well as a respect for the differences participants find with respect to their own culture. When faced with ambiguity, tolerance is also seen in all the VCs, as well as ways of overcoming difficulties, whether due to discomfort, confusion or anxiety. Therefore, the educational experience, in our case the VCs, has become a way of creating social relationships between participants, as held by Griffith et al. ( 2016 ). However, in a very small percentage, there are negative records in this dimension. Aff/Moo– is found in communications relating to the present time, when pessimism, discouragement, sadness or a sense of failure is expressed about a particular issue or current situation. Negative feelings are expressed when technical problems arise, and these are seen to bias the communication, in line with the conclusion of Custer ( 2017 ). These problems were related to the internet connection. According to Godwin–Jones ( 2019 ) this can lead to ‘devoting all their [students’] attention to the technology itself, at the expense of a deeper negotiation of social and cultural meanings, let alone worldviews’ (p. 175). However, it was not observed that these technical problems had an impact on the development of the VCs, beyond minor losses of time and a small increase in RUs related to Aff/Moo–.

Regarding to Cognitive Dimension, communications pertaining to intercultural knowledge, reflecting understanding of the other culture or demonstrating intercultural learning, is the dimension least frequently encountered. Here, communication demonstrating learning is seen to be the most conspicuous (for example critical self–perception, establishing common socio–cultural meanings, inferring social norms). However, in the negative dimension (for example displays of ignorance and lack of understanding of the other culture), we find communications which could be a barrier to communication. In line with Cheng and Joung ( 2012 ), a certain ability to infer social norms, the non–use of personal biases or stereotypes was observed although, in some cases, generalisations were found. In addition, some communications were found to refer to a partner’s historical and geopolitical background. Further inferences are possible just by comparing the Cognitive Dimension with the Behavioural and Affective Dimensions. This is because the negative Cognitive Sub–dimensions (although significantly fewer in number than the positive ones) have reached a higher level compared with the other dimensions. It can be seen how, in all VCs, in Cog/Kno y Cog/Und the number of RUs the negative sub–dimension higher than positive sub–dimension. This is proof of the difficulty of videoconferencing when there is a lack of cultural information and knowledge of the partner’s language.

In this study, differences were found in the generic/specific communications related to the Affective Dimension. This agree with the results of Eren ( 2021 ) and Godwin–Jones ( 2019 ), in that ‘safe’ topics have proven to be useful in increasing communications as opposed to specific topics. A higher number of RUs has been observed in those VCs where generic topics are addressed, and a lower number of them in those developing specific educational topics. In this way, we can see how the greater or lesser complexity and specificity of the topic is capable of inhibiting or enhancing communication between videoconferencing participants in intercultural environments. In the Affective Dimension, where generic topics enhance communication, while educational topics inhibit it.

The suggestion in previous studies that ICC can be enhanced by online intercultural experience (Akdere et al., 2021 ; Lee & Song, 2019 ) has not been fully demonstrated in our study. An analysis of the communications over time indicates that the topic addressed is a factor with implications for the development of Behavioural and Affective Dimensions but this is not happening in Cognitive Dimension.

In the Behavioural Dimension, a statistically significant evolution has been found between VC6 (generic topic) and VC7 (specific topic), which are the highest and lowest UR found in this dimension. According to this study, expressing opinions related to politic makes possible a higher level of development of the conversation allowing, especially, opening new lines of conversation, inquiring about opinions or asking explanations and, to a lesser extent, giving continuity to the partner’s discourse, which shows effort, involvement and interest. On the other hand, conversation on a very specific topic (education laws in both countries), which students needed to have prepared in advance, did not arouse their interest in developing the Behavioural Dimension, but rather they observed a compliance with the conversation script in order to end the conversation quickly. There was a high degree of trust between videoconferencing participants, also over time progression was found on Affective Dimension. In line with the proposals of Griffith et al. ( 2016 ), close relationships forged with people from different cultural backgrounds demonstrate cultural self–efficacy. Through the analysis over time, it has been observed that VC3 (specific topic, with the lowest mean of its dimension) has statistically significant differences with three previous and subsequent VCs with generic topic (VC1, VC4 and VC8). The topic of VC3 (Organization of the teaching staff, families and student, participation, rights and duties) did not facilitate the development of the Affective Dimension in neither of the two components analysed (Aff/Moo + and Aff/Fee+: confidence, openness in responding, truthfulness, freedom to respond, optimism in conversation, motivation to the partner, expressions of enjoyment, positive wishes to the partner). However, these expressions were especially found at the beginning and at the end of the educational experience. This situation can be explained in VC1 (presentation, description of students’ situation and first contact through VC) by the high expectations that the students had at the beginning of the experience, and in VC8 (future plans, recapitulation of the experience) by the fact that it was an enjoyable experience for them. Also, in VC8 the high rate of affective elements can be explained by the fact that the couples know each other and, over time, a climate of trust has been created.

Thus, the eminently social character of these topics and the fact that VC participants do not have to respond to the requirements of an educational topics seem to reduce the complexity of communication and to develop learning, understanding and knowledge processes. On the other hand, a significant difference was also found between VC3 and VC4 (My hobbies). The topic, in this case, has also been able to establish the incidence of the Affective Dimension. In the analysis of the Affective Dimension over time, it is observed that sub–dimensions Aff/Fee + and Aff/Moo + increase the number of RUs in those VC that develop generic topics with a social and affective character. Such regularity suggests a relationship between communications involving positive emotions although, in some cases, there is no statistically significant difference. The appearance of a positive emotion on the part of one participant gives rise to the appearance of another positive emotion in his or her partner.

In the analysis over time of the Cognitive Dimension no statistically significant differences were found between the VCs. Furthermore, contrary to the study of Eren ( 2021 ), no increase in the critical intercultural development of the participants was observed. Neither a reinforcement nor a decrease in negative stereotypes was found. Therefore, this study cannot conclude anything in relation to the study by Flowers et al. ( 2019 ), which reports reinforcement, nor to the study by Eren ( 2021 ), which reports a decrease in negative stereotypes. On the other hand, Cog/Lea + appears as the sub–dimension with the most records, especially in those VCs with educational topics. It is possible to infer that, when it comes to VCs with educational topics, the expression of personal opinion about what has been discussed, the expression of a critical self–perception about what has been discussed, comparisons with the partner’s context and the expression of common meanings are facilitated.

6 Limitations, implications and future perspective

As for the limitations of the study, we point to the distribution of the sample regarding gender (women, 70%; men, 30%). Another limitation has to do with the selection of the sample of subjects, since it is not based on statistical criteria that are representative of the population, but rather seeks to combine minimum heterogeneity within a framework of homogeneity. In this way, our intention was to establish certain common and relevant attributes (gender, tastes and preferences). However, this may have had an impact on the RU records, especially in the lower proportion of negative communications in relation to positive ones, since greater homogeneity in the sample could inhibit the emergence of negative communications and enhance positive ones. Nevertheless, in the Cognitive Dimension a greater number of negative communication RUs was observed, so it could be that homogeneous pairing had a minor influence on this dimension. In addition, 50% of our sample experienced a language barrier, as the VCs were developed with an L2, which might have contributed to misinterpreting answers. Finally, this research may find a limitation in its validity and reliability because of its reliance on content analysis for data extraction. A careful procedure has been followed to avoid, as far as possible, this situation.

Our findings have implications which should develop a more internationalised, and interculturally sensitive, environment for higher education institutions. The study also has implications for teachers because it highlights the implementation of useful, technology–based methodologies for the development of ICC. Finally, in our opinion, students would benefit from a fully functional methodology in order to practice intercultural competencies in a technified and globalised world.

As no statistically significant differences were found in the overtime evolution of the Cognitive Dimension, the authors consider the possibility that this may be due to the experience instructional design. For instance, a greater monitoring by the teachers (more exhaustive conversation guide, intermediate seminars, etc.) could have facilitated the development of this dimension. The answer to this question we purpose as a prospect for future research. Taking into account on the one hand, Lee and Song’s ( 2019 ) view that the Behavioural Dimension is the least studied with regard to ICC and, on the other, that this dimension is the most prominent in the current research, the authors believe that a future line of enquiry should focus on Behavioural Dimension and thus contribute to the further study of online intercultural communication.

Availability of data and materials

This study is guided by the Code of Good Practice in Research of University of Granada, Spain. Vice-Rectorate for Research and Knowledge Transfer.

Akdere, M., Acheson, K., & Jiang, Y. (2021). An examination of the effectiveness of virtual reality technology for intercultural competence development. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 82 , 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.03.009 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance. Management and Organization Review , 3 (3), 335–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2007.00082.x .

Avgousti, M. (2018). Intercultural communicative competence and online exchanges: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 31 (8), 819–853. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1455713 .

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research . Glencoe Ili: Free Press.

Google Scholar  

Brooks, C. (2021). Student experiences learning with technology in the Pandemic . Educause. https://www.educause.edu/ecar/research-publications/2021/student-experiences-learning-with-technology-in-the-pandemic/introduction-and-key-findings , from https://www.educause.edu/ecar/research-publications/2021/student-experiences-learning-with-technology-in-the-pandemic/introduction-and-key-findings

Chen, X., & Gabrenya, W. K. (2021). In search of cross-cultural competence: A comprehensive review of five measurement instruments. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 82 , 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.02.003 .

Chen, J. J., & Yang, S. C. (2016). Promoting cross-cultural understanding and language use in research oriented internet-mediated intercultural exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 29 (2), 262–288.

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1997). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication , 1 , 1–16.

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural sensitivity scale. Human Communication , 3 , 3–14.

Chen, G. M., & Young, P. (2012). Intercultural communication competence. In A. K. Goodboy, & K. Shultz (Eds.), Intercultural communication (pp. 175–188). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Custer, L., & Touminen, A. (2017). Bringing “Internationalization at Home” Opportunities to Community Colleges: Design and Assessment of an Online Exchange activity between U.S. and japanese students. Teaching Sociology , 45 (4), 347–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X16679488 .

Dai, Y. (2019). Situating videoconferencing in a connected class toward intercultural knowledge development: A comparative reflection approach. The Internet and Higher Education , 41 , 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.11.001 .

Deardorff, D. (2020). Manual for developing intercultural competencies. Story Circles . London: Routledge and Unesco Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429244612 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Eren, O. (2021). Raising critical cultural awareness through telecollaboration: Insights for pre-service teacher education. Computer Assited Language Learning . https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1916538 .

Farnell, T., Skledar, A., & Šćukanec, N. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education: A review of emerging evidence, NESET report . Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/069216 .

Flowers, S., Kelsen, B., & Cvitkovic, B. (2019). Learner autonomy versus guided reflection: How different methodologies affect intercultural development in online intercultural exchange. ReCALL FirstView , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000016 .

Godwin-Jones, R. (2019). Telecollaboration as an approach to developing intercultural communication competence. Language Learning & Technology, 23 (3), 8–28, from http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44691

Gómez-García, L., Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E. & Moreno–López, I. (2021). La videoconferencia: Recurso educativo para promover la comunicación intercultural entre los estudiantes. Profesorado , 25 (2), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v25i2.8265 .

Griffith, R. L., Wolfeld, L., Armon, B. K., Rios, J., & Liu, O. L. (2016). Assessing intercultural competence in higher education: Existing research and future directions (Research Report No. RR-16–25). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12112

Iseminger, S., Morris, P., Acheson, K., & Kelly, C. (2020). The effects of social identities on student learning outcome attainment. International Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning , 14 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140112 .

Heggernes, S. L. (2021). A critical review of the role of texts in fostering intercultural communicative competence in the English Language classroom. Educational Research Review , 33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100390 .

Huynh, H., & Feldt, L. S. (1976). Estimation of the Box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational Statistics , 1 (1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164736 .

Kelley, C., & Meyers, J. (1995). CCAI cross cultural adaptability inventory manual . Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems Inc.

Krippendorff, K. (1990). Metodología de análisis de contenido. Teoría y práctica . Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.

Lantz-Deaton, C., & Goluveba, I. (2020). How Do We Define Intercultural Competence? In C. Lantz-Deaton and I. Golubeva, Intercultural Competence for College and University Students, Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57446-8_4

Lee, J., & Song, J. (2019). Developing intercultural competence through study abroad, telecollaboration, and on-campus language study. Language Learning & Technology , 23 (3), 178–198. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44702 .

Lenkaitis, C. A., Calo, S., & Venegas-Escobar, S. (2019). Exploring the intersection of language and culture via telecollaboration: Utilizing videoconferencing for intercultural competence development. International Multilingual Research Journal , 13 (2), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2019.1570772 .

Liu, Y., & Shirley, T. (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), 182–119. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i1.2471 .

Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Campanella, C. (2002). Content analysis in Mass Communication Assessment and Reporting of Intercoder Reliability. Human Communication Research , 28 (4), 587–604.

Macnamara, J. (2018). Content analysis. In P. M. Napoli (Ed.) Mediated Communication, 7 Series Handbooks of Communication Science. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110481129

Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS. Survival manual (2nd ed.). London, UK: McGraw–Hill.

Swartz, S., & Shrivastava, A. (2021). Stepping up the game-meeting the needs of global business through virtual team projects. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 2042–3896. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-02-2021-0037

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2018). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Uttar Pradesh, India: Pearson.

Toscu, S., & Erten, I., H (2020). Developing intercultural communicative competence by the means of telecollaboration. Education and Information Technologies , 25 , 4517–4534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10174-8 .

Van der Zwaard, R., & Bannink, A. (2019). Towards a comprehensive model of negotiated interaction in computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 23 (3), 116–135 from http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44699

Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2000). The multicultural personality questionnaire: A multidimensional instrument of multicultural effectiveness. European Journal of Personality , 14 (4), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0984(200007/08)14:4%3C291 . ::AID-PER377%3E3.0.CO;2-6.

Van Der Zwaard, R., & Bannink, A. (2020). Negotiation of meaning in digital L2 learning interaction: Task design versus task performance. Tesol Quarterly , 54 (1), https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.537 .

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 23 (4), 659–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00014-0 .

Yasin, E. (2016). A review of research on intercultural learning through computer-based digital technologies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 19 (2), 313–327.

Note: The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Isabel Moreno-Lopez (Goucher College, USA) for her collaboration in obtaining the data analyzed in this research.

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Funding for open access publishing: Universidad de Granada/CBUA

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Pedagogy, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste & Maximiliano Ritacco-Real

Granada, Spain

Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste, and Maximiliano Ritacco-Real. The first draft of the manuscript was written Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste and all authors commented and completed on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste .

Ethics declarations

Financial interests.

The authors declare they have no financial interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E., Ritacco-Real, M. Intercultural communicative competence in higher education through telecollaboration: typology and development. Educ Inf Technol 28 , 13885–13912 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11751-3

Download citation

Received : 20 December 2021

Accepted : 20 March 2023

Published : 01 April 2023

Issue Date : November 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11751-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Intercultural communicative competence
• Higher education
• Telecollaboration
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

The Importance Of Online Communication In Higher Education

• Author & abstract
• 1 Citations
• Related works & more

Corrections

(Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania)

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Shaping the Future of Online Learning

Published may 22, 2024.

If you’ve been enrolled in any educational course or postsecondary educational program since 2020, chances are you’ve witnessed the rise in online learning firsthand .

The COVID-19 global pandemic shuttered storefronts, theaters, and classrooms alike, causing major disruptions in how goods and services were delivered. As consumers adopted Instacart for their grocery needs and streamed new blockbuster movies from the comfort of their living rooms, students needed an innovative way to bring their classes home. A year into the pandemic over 60% of all undergraduate students were enrolled in at least one online course , with 28% exclusively enrolled in online courses, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

There are other reasons for the widespread adoption, including accessibility. Rural and international students who may be far removed from traditional educational institutions can now attend Harvard classes anywhere there’s an internet connection. Or, consider working adults seeking to progress or switch careers. Life doesn’t stop for a class, and attending one in-person can be prohibitive. While still challenging, logging into a virtual classroom is far more manageable. Online education is for everyone.

Technological and pedagogical developments have helped online learning progress beyond the days of discussion boards and essay uploads. Now, students can enjoy a multimedia educational experience that is rooted in the latest research, all while participating in the community of their “virtual campus”.

If you’re one of the millions of learners who have experienced online education, you might be interested to learn where it’s going next. At Harvard Online, the question, “what is the future of online learning?” guides an ongoing conversation that drives us everyday.

In this blog, we sat down with Catherine Breen , Managing Director of Harvard Online. With more than two decades of senior executive leadership at Harvard University and oversight of Harvard Online, Breen has an invaluable perspective on the future of online learning, and the exciting role Harvard Online is playing in bringing the future into the present. 

Catherine Breen, Managing Director of Harvard Online, in a team meeting.

Harvard Online (HO): How has the online learning landscape evolved in recent years? 

Catherine Breen (CB): At the beginning of the COVID-19 lockdown, there was a massive escalation in demand for online learning. Demand began to recede slowly as the months wore on and by late 2022, it started to level out. But we observed two big changes: Internally, the demand for Harvard Online content was still almost three times higher than pre-pandemic. Externally, in reaction to the demand surge, there was significant and rapid growth of new online course offerings and companies that purveyed varying types of digital products.    

HO: What is shaping the future of online learning today? 

CB: Because of the rapid and massive shift to online that occurred around the globe in the spring of 2020, the landscape changed permanently. There are many things shaping the future but here are just a few that I can see from my perspective:

• Increased adoption of online learning across all ages and levels of education: Everyone expanded their online course catalogs; new companies and offerings sprung up everywhere.
• Greater tech investment across organizations and industries: Organizations are investing more time, money, and effort into technology infrastructure, tools, and platforms to support online learning and participants in these courses.
• New pedagogical methods to bridge the gap between traditional and novel learning methods: Instructors have adapted their teaching methods for online, hybrid, and blended environments.
• Enhanced accessibility to quality education and learning experiences: Efforts have been made to improve access for students of all types, abilities, geographies, and backgrounds so that everyone can participate effectively.    

HO: What are the remaining challenges that online learning faces? 

CB: While these changes have improved the online learning experience, challenges remain, including addressing the digital divide, maximizing student engagement, and refining the quality of online courses.

The pandemic accelerated the adoption of online learning and its impact will likely continue to shape higher education for many years to come.  

HO: How does online learning contribute to Harvard's mission of promoting accessibility and inclusion in education, especially for learners who may not have traditional access to higher education?

CB: Online learning levels the playing field for learners in many ways.

Most students think that a Harvard-quality education is out of reach, for a variety of reasons. With online courses, however, learners from around the country and the world can take courses with Harvard instructors at their own pace at a more affordable price point.

Our online courses also typically incorporate a range of multimedia elements, allowing students with different learning styles to flourish. We also ensure that our online learning experiences are accessible to all learners, including those with disabilities. This commitment to inclusivity aligns with the broader goals of promoting equitable access to education.

Lastly, our online courses often include discussion forums and virtual communities where learners can connect and collaborate. This allows for interactions among students from diverse backgrounds and experiences, fostering a sense of belonging and inclusion.  

It’s clear that online learning has a lot to offer everyone, and it’s only getting better. In our next blog in this series, we’ll hear more from Cathy on how institutions can implement online learning modalities effectively. 

If you missed the first blog in this series detailing the future of online learning, you can check out the first blog here . To learn more about Harvard Online, explore our fully online course catalog here .

Related Blog Posts

Uniref brings harvard courses on web programming to syrian refugees.

Harvard Online is proud to provide access to education and experiences that help communities thrive.

Harvard Online in Your Workplace: Elevate Your Team's Professional Development

At Harvard Online we understand the value of an educated and skilled workforce.

A Decade of Innovation: Online Learning at Harvard

We are always asking, “What does the future look like for teaching and learning?”

• Facts & Figures
• Accreditations
• Maps and Directions
• Faculty Distinctions, Awards and Honors
• Engineering Honors
• Computer Engineering
• Global Programs
• Student Organizations
• Peer Teachers
• Fast Track: Optimizing the transition from Undergraduate to Graduate Studies
• Admissions and Aid
• Entry to a Major Process
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Research Areas
• Undergraduate Research
• Seminars and Distinguished Lectures
• Industry Capstone Program
• Industrial Affiliates Program

Online Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Certificate

Gain a competitive edge with our graduate-level Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Certificate. This program equips both novices and seasoned professionals with the essential skills to harness the power of modern Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in their domain. Upon completion, participants will master statistical analysis and machine learning techniques, enabling them to dissect complex data sets. Armed with the ability to synthesize and evaluate AI models, graduates will confidently tackle real-world challenges, leveraging cutting-edge tools to derive actionable insights and drive innovation in their respective fields.

I'm ready to apply!   Request more information

Certificate Overview

The Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning certificate is a 12-credit program that equips novices and seasoned professionals with the essential skills to harness the power of modern Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in their respective fields of operation.

Technical Qualifications

To be successful in this program, prospective students must demonstrate an understanding of core concepts in computer science or equivalent covered in the categories below:

• Program Design and Concepts : programming proficiency through problem-solving with a high-level programming language, emphasizing computational thinking, data types, object-oriented design, dynamic memory management, and error handling for robust program development.
• Data Structures : implementing essential abstract data types and algorithms covering stacks, queues, sorting, searching, graphs, and hashing; examining performance trade-offs, analyzing runtime and memory usage.
• Algorithms : computer algorithms for numeric and non-numeric problems; design paradigms; analysis of time and space requirements of algorithms; correctness of algorithms.
• Discrete Structures for Computing : foundations from discrete mathematics for algorithm analysis, focusing on correctness and performance; introducing models like finite state machines and Turing machines.
• Mathematical Foundations : Calculus, Probability, and Linear Algebra.

Students must take four out of five possible courses to complete this certificate. See course information below.

Information

To qualify for this certificate, you must complete 12 semester credit hours (SCH) of coursework from the following list of courses. All courses must be completed with a grade of C or above. Each course is linked to its course description within the catalog.

Courses (12 credits):

Select four of the following:*

• CSCE 625 - Artificial Intelligence
• CSCE 633 - Machine Learning
• CSCE 635 - AI Robotics
• CSCE 636 - Deep Learning
• CSCE 642 - Deep Reinforcement Learning

* Additional courses are available with the consultation of an academic advisor.

For more information, please see the course catalog .

Why choose Engineering Online

Advance your career with our Engineering Online program! Backed by the university's esteemed reputation and national recognition in engineering education, you'll engage directly with industry leaders and a rigorous curriculum. Beyond graduation, tap into the extensive Aggie Alumni Network, offering invaluable connections to propel your career forward.

Engineering Online Benefits

Certificate Highlights

Related academics.

Online Master of Computer Science

Online Master of Engineering in Computer Engineering

Frequently asked questions.

Discover answers to frequently asked questions tailored to assist you in making informed decisions regarding your education with Engineering Online.

Graduate Admissions

Use EngineeringCAS to apply for the distance education version of the certificate. Follow the provided instructions, as they may differ from certificate to certificate.

Graduate Tuition Calculator

To calculate cost, select the semester you’ll start, choose “Engineering” from the drop-down menu, and slide “Hours” to how many you’ll take each semester. Your total cost is Tuition and Required Fees + Engineering Program Fee (Remote).

Questions? Email [email protected] !