Participants

Of the twenty-five students in the English II (A2 level per the CEFR) course, seventeen students opted to participate in the collaboration with the us teacher enrolled in the ESL assessment course. Out of the seventeen EFL students who participated in the English language exchange with their peers from the us university, 10 agreed to participate in the follow up study. Those who participated in the questionnaire were 5 female and 5 male students aged between 19 and 24. They belonged to different schools in the university and were pursuing a range of professional degrees including Topographic Engineering, Forestry Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Systems Engineering, Elementary Education, Social Sciences, and Biology. Of those 10 participants who responded to the online questionnaire, four agreed to be interviewed. Below, we outline the timeline that the project followed.

The Courses

During the four weeks of the project, students from the two courses met once weekly. For the Colombian EFL students, this meeting time came during the last hour of their English class using a Google Meet that they created with their partner for this purpose. The partners had been organized in collaboration between the two instructors. Once Daniel had received word from the 17 students who agreed to participate in the project collaboration, he sent their names to Sarah with information about their interests from a project they had created for his course. Based on this information, she matched students’ backgrounds, majors, and interests to partner with her students. She shared the background information from the EFL students with their pre-service teachers partners so that they could use it to help prepare their materials and activities for their first meeting with their Colombian EFL student partners.

The content of the online sessions focused on using authentic assessments to promote the development of the four language domains while developing rapport and sociocultural exchange and learning between the partners. Prior to each session, Sarah guided her students in the creation of authentic language assessments that were based on the theories which they were learning. For the first meeting the pre-service teachers were asked to create interactive activities using a funds of knowledge (^{Moll & González, 1997}) lens for the to learn about their EFL student partner. During the next three sessions, the pre-service teachers created authentic oral language (listening/speaking), reading, and writing assessments (in that order) to both promote their partner’s use of English, and, in so doing, gather data on their partners’ language and literacy development to enable future instructional recommendations.

Data Collection and Analysis

At the end of the course, the EFL students received an invitation via email to participate in an online survey and to be interviewed to gather information about their experiences and insights about the online exchange. Data were collected through written questionnaires using a Google Form® (see Appendix A) sent by Daniel to all seventeen EFL students who had participated in the project. After the questionnaires were returned, both Sarah and Daniel analyzed the students’ responses to gain an initial and overall perspective of the students’ experiences and insights after the online pedagogical collaboration. Following the collection of questionnaire responses, Daniel sent invitations to request their participation in individual semi-structured interviews. Responses in the affirmative were received from four students and Daniel organized a schedule for interviews. These were then conducted in an online format.

The semi-structured interviews consisted of 13 different open-ended questions (see Appendix B) including general perspectives on the online exchanges with their us pre-service teacher partners, initial expectations, challenges, and benefits, and more. The interviews were carried out in Spanish via a Google Meet® online forum and lasted on average 30 minutes. Two of the interviews were conducted by Daniel, and two were conducted by Sarah. The interview data were transcribed and translated into English by Daniel and reviewed and analyzed by both researchers. Data were coded following a grounded theory approach; that is, building the analysis based on the patterns that emerged from the data (^{Glaser & Strauss, 1999}). Following the identification of recurrent patterns, the transcribed interview data were grouped into corresponding thematic categories for further analysis to respond to the initial research questions. In the following section, we elaborate on our findings and discuss our analysis.

Students’ Feelings Within the Project: From Apprehension to Success in the Language Practice

Our first research question sought to understand the EFL students’ feelings about themselves as language learners within this collaborative online project. Of the 10 survey respondents, eight of them shared that this experience was relevant for their objectives as language students, and the other two said that it was partially relevant. While the overwhelming sentiment of the study’s participants was of a positive nature, there were many nuances to their responses from the questionnaire and the interview data that we share below.

Several students disclosed that they began the project with a degree of anxiety and apprehension. The nature of this anxiety was varied but several themes emerged including the novelty of interacting in English with a non-Spanish speaking person as well as the anonymous nature of the first meeting. For instance, Solanyi shared that, “At the beginning it scared me a lot. It is like being paired with a person that we don’t know and who doesn’t speak Spanish. [I worried that] we will not understand each other” (Solanyi, Interview on February 19, 2021 Lines 2-5). Duván also ascribed his feelings of anxiety to the fact that prior to this project he had never interacted with someone who spoke only English and no Spanish, explaining that he “felt nervous since the first thing one wants to do is to be able to understand. […] In my personal case, I had never had the opportunity to talk to a native person of that language.” (Duván, Interview on February 18, 2021, Lines 2-5).

Interestingly, while both Solanyi and Duván expressed their apprehension in relation to the newness of the experience, they also both explained their concern as being centered around the importance of being able to understand and be understood. They also both singled out the novelty of speaking in English with someone who was a “native speaker” (^{Holliday, 2006}) and who did not also speak Spanish. On the other hand, some students, such as Nicolás, asserted that his initial reaction to the project was one of excitement about the possibility of engaging in a collaborative online learning practice with a peer from the us university. He explained his initial reaction this way:

When you mentioned the idea in class, at first, I felt quite excited […] because it is an opportunity that […] I have always wanted. One acquires certain knowledge of the language and so, but they don’t really matter if one doesn’t have anyone whom we can practice or talk. (Nicolás, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 2-6).

Nicolás’ excitement seemed to stem from his interest in putting into practice previously learned classroom knowledge in a more authentic manner particularly highlighting the opportunity to practice. Of note is his sentiment that the knowledge acquired in the classroom doesn’t “really matter” without the prospect of additional practice or authentic conversation. The data support a view of learning as a dialectical form of change based on learners’ appropriation of new forms through mediated tasks (^{Poehner, 2016}).

Those students who noted that they were concerned about their ability to understand what was being said in their first interactions also explained that their fears diminished as they gained experience with their us student partners. For example, Manuel described the ways that his us partner supported his English usage:

At the beginning it was very difficult but with the passing of the sessions he also helped me how to say some things and the meaning of some words. In fact, he sent me texts in English for us to read in the sessions. That really helped me a lot. He was way understanding with me since at the beginning I […] didn’t know how to say some things in English, but he understood me, and he told me the meanings. […] He gave me some examples and that really helped. (Manuel, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 42-49)

According to Manuel, his anxiety and sense of challenge was allayed by the way that his partner interacted with him to build meaningful interactions and rapport between them. Sebastián’s quotation similarly suggests that the interactions were constructed in a way that supported his learning and diminished his anxiety.

I liked the kindness, willingness and empathy of the students from [the US]. From the first session they were patient. They corrected us. They knew that we were learning English...but despite the fear, there were nice talks in which we could share our likes, interests, plans […], and everything was done at our pace and in English. (Sebastián, Questionnaire submitted on February 16, 2021, Question 7)

The quotations shared from Sebastián, Manuel and Solanyi support the idea that while anxiety can be present in EFL students partaking in such online exchanges, their fears can be mitigated by effectively guided interactions. These findings align with the research reported by ^{García et al. (2017)} who found that students in their study increased their level of participation in English due to the interactive nature of the online learning exchanges.

From Theory to Practice: Students’ (Self-) Perceptions of English Language Learning and of Themselves as Language Learners

Our second research question sought to learn what shifts the EFL students experienced in relation to themselves as English learners based on their online interactions with the ESL teacher candidates. In the EFL students’ accounts of their experiences, there were clear references to a differentiation between theory and practice in relation to language learning. Several of the students described this online collaboration as an opportunity to transition from theory to practice in their learning of the English language. Interview data revealed that students’ represented theory and practice as dichotomous aspects of English language learning, indicating that their prior experience in language classes had felt like a theoretical language learning experience compared to their one-on-one interactions with their us partner. For example, Manuel shared, “(…) I had to put my English into practice. And I was thrilled with the experience since I could use English. One oftentimes learns it but only in the notebook and one doesn’t practice it.” (Manuel, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 50-53). Sebastián’s comments also indicated his sense of a distinction between theory and practice in his characterization of the benefits of this project “If you don’t practice, all the theory is worthless. I could correct lacks that I had, I improved in different aspects, and I even made a friend” (Sebastián, Questionnaire submitted on February 17, 2021, Question 6).

For these students then, this online collaboration served as an opportunity to move from theoretical and decontextualized linguistic knowledge that may remain in their notebooks to a praxis in which language had specific communicative and social purposes. Their comments also illustrate the dialectical nature of their learning in a mediated context with their more expert peers (^{Vygotsky, 1986}). Take, for example, Devi’s assertion.

Learning really occurs when speaking with a person that doesn’t speak Spanish because that forces you to study and to maintain a fluid conversation. It is frustrating when the [other] person doesn’t speak Spanish, but I could learn because oftentimes during the conversation there are many repeated words, and then you start thinking in English and saying words in English as an obligation. It was good for me because it was such a challenge. (Devi, Questionnaire submitted on February 16, 2021, Question 6)

In addition to comments from Devi and Manuel drawing a perceived distinction between theory and practice in their English use in the online exchange versus their university language classes, they also indicated that they found themselves obligated to speak English with their teacher candidate partners. Within their accounts, English language learning was made possible when they had the imperative to interact with their teacher candidate partners. Therefore, this collaborative online experience provided the EFL students with a situation that required their output (^{Swain, 1993}) with a partner with whom they felt pushed to use their English language even when there were initial anxieties. This project therefore created a more authentic scenario in which language was used as a social and mediating tool (^{Vygotsky, 1978}), enabling the EFL students to put into practice previously acquired theoretical insights about language. Sebastián shared the following:

It was quite important. It was the first time that I was going to have a conversation with a native and I could take the advantage of those chats to continue learning and practicing which is the most important thing. (Sebastián, Questionnaire submitted on February 16, 2021, Question 6).

However, in his discussion about the interaction, Sebastián also brings up the notion of an idealized “native” speaker (e.g., ^{Davies, 2004}). For Sebastián, this opportunity was more meaningful to him because he could interact for the first time with a person who was a “native” English speaker which he asserted would help him improve and correct his self-perceived inaccuracies in the English language. Nicolás also referenced the importance of practicing with an English “native speaker” explaining that, “Speaking with a native student made me realize and self-assess my own level, my strengths, and drawbacks when listening to and speaking with a native.” (Nicolás, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 67-69). Solanyi touched on this issue with a slightly different perspective commenting that neither she nor her partner spoke the dominant language of the other which gave her some comfort about the interaction:

I realized I could do it. Sometimes one has the fear that it is impossible, or that doesn’t know, and nobody is going to understand you and it is going to sound bad. […] But I guess the exercise was about to leave those fears and prejudices behind. I also realized that she didn’t understand Spanish either. We were both at the same level and at an exercise to mutually learn. She [her peer] as a teacher and I as a student. (Solanyi, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 24-29)

Several themes emerge from those data, including the perception of native vs non-native speakerism as a binary for some of the students as well as the mutually beneficial nature of the online exchange that served to offset some of the anxiety for the EFL students. For Nicolás and Devi, they saw the interaction with a native speaker as an advantage to help further their English learning. While Solanyi initially positioned herself in a deficit stance, her perspective shifted to a recognition that this was an opportunity to leaving “fears and prejudices behind.” While all 3 of these students seem to fall into a binary vision of native vs non-native speakerism, their comments also suggest the positive nature of an online exchange such as this one to benefit from the different strengths that each group of students bring with them. For Nicolás and Devi, that meant being in a situation where they could gain more insight into their strengths and weaknesses in English and push their language development further. While much research has pointed to the devaluation or demotivation that can occur because of the native vs (non)native construction (e.g., ^{Arboleda & Castro, 2012}; ^{Mariño, 2011}; ^{Viáfara, 2016}), these findings suggest that some students may take the opportunity as a factor that motivates them in their learning. Additionally, Solanyi’s comments showed us that by virtue of an exchange that is deliberately constructed to be mutually beneficial it is possible reach beyond binaries such as those of native vs. non-native speaker of teacher vs. student and theory vs. practice.

Linguistic and Sociocultural Learning from the Online Collaboration

Our third research question asked how the online collaboration contributed to the students’ experiences of language learning. We were specifically interested in how the EFL students interacted with their us peers to negotiate their learning and what they thought about this collaborative exchange. participants’ language learning. From the questionnaire data, we learned that one student had asked questions of their us student partner regarding their desire to be a teacher explaining the value she felt by connecting with someone who was passionate about supporting their future bilingual students. For this EFL student, learning went beyond solely the development of English skills to sharing in the educational goals of their us student partner. In his interview, Nicolás shared, “I could work on the four [language] skills (…). However, the one that I think I worked on the most […] was the one that I wanted to work on, speaking and listening.” (Nicolás, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 60-63). While he specified that he worked on speaking and listening the most, Nicolás also said that these were the language domains that he wanted to focus on the most. In his interview, Duván also cited that the language domains of speaking and listening were those most impacted in the online exchanges.

Definitely, speaking and listening. Speaking because that’s when we are forced to think about what and how to say it. It’s like thinking about all of those classes that I have had and to see that they’re worthy and put it into practice. (Duván, Interview on February 18, 2021, Lines 53-56).

These participants’ comments point to the role that motivation plays in student learning (^{Canals, 2020}); although the collaboration was intended to promote the four language domains, the EFL learners expressed their agency in making the experience one which reflected their own needs and interests. These data also indicate the ways that a collaborative exchange such as this one can promote negotiation of meaning through the interactive learning context (^{Mayo & Pica, 2000}).

Data further revealed that participants’ experiences of the project collaborations came to be about more than language learning to include social connections and the development of crosscultural understandings (^{Davin, 2016}). Results from both questionnaire and interview data suggest students gained additional supports from their teacher candidate partners by engaging in other dimensions of life in their language meetings. Solanyi shared the following:

It was like an exchange of what she was living in the pandemic. (…) We both shared that because of being inside all the time, sometimes we were bored, and it was suffocating (…), but it was like talking to someone who was experiencing the same thing. Interacting was better because it was not only a person far away who was talking to me, but like a friend. It was like making a friend in another part of the world. (Solanyi, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 43-49)

Solanyi’s experience highlights that this project created a space in which students could engage in more socially and contextually embedded dialogue regarding the global pandemic. The language learners could move beyond decontextualized practices of language learning and acknowledge the sociohistorical and political conditions that they and their us partners were experiencing. Solanyi’s quotation also noted that this exchange allowed her to learn about another culture and gain respect for the time and care that her partner took in creating the activities for practicing English. Manuel also commented on the social dimensions that permeated through the online sessions:

Beyond learning English, we could create good empathy between us because he asked me how I was, how things were going in Colombia, how everything was going, and how I felt during the lockdown. (Manuel, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 31-33)

Manuel and Solyani’s words remind us that language learning does not occur in a vacuum; our own subjectivities and backgrounds shape our learning experiences and the inextricable nature of the sociocultural context in which learning occurs is highlighted. Being asked by their partner to discuss their lives during COVID-19 indicates the power of being listened to as a learner as well as the ability of the partners to identify with each other’s lives due to the common experience of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Students’ Experiences Regarding Online Learning: Benefits and Challenges Within Remote Learning

Our last research question asked how this collaboration changed the experience of learning in the pandemic-imposed online university language classroom. The data discussed in this section focuses on the medium and the structure of this project. Data indicate that the online project carried both advantages and disadvantages for the EFL participants. Through the questionnaire data, we found that while all respondents had a positive reaction to the online project, 3 respondents were critical of having had only 4 sessions in which to interact with their us student partners, and 1 respondent expressed a wish for the sessions to have lasted longer than they did. In response to the questionnaire, another participant shared that this project gave her a new outlook about online classes, showing her that online classes could be personalized in contrast with all her other online courses included no interaction with peers or instructors. Another student, Ximena, shared that this experience made her change her mind about online learning.

It changed my perspective, since I considered that online education was not good. However, with this experience I realized that it can bring many benefits such as communicating and interacting with people who are long distances away. (Ximena, Questionnaire submitted on February 17, 2021, Question 12)

As in her questionnaire responses, Leidi explained the benefits of the collaboration saying, “It gave me the opportunity to talk to people who are not nearby and this supported my learning” (Leidi, Questionnaire submitted on February 16, 2021, Question 12). While the use of the Internet fostered meaningful learning interactions for Ximena and Leidi, the online collaboration had complications for others. Manuel explained, “It was hard. I had to stay here at home with all my family while speaking in English, a language that I do not control.” (Manuel, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 86-87).

Manuel’s comments remind us that this project was not just a fun online exchange; it took place in the context of a global pandemic requiring that students be in their homes (typically their family homes) with other family members and activities going on around them during class time. In addition to the potential disruptions and/or lack of a private space for the Colombian students during their meetings, for many the technical aspect of using the Internet for video classes and meetings caused significant and repeated issues. Solanyi’s underscored this:

“The biggest hindrance was the [Internet] connection because I had a quite unstable connection. There were some moments when the Internet shut down and the [video]call was off. (…) There was another time when there was no electricity here at home.” (Solanyi, Interview on February 19, 2021, Lines 55-58)

Aspects such as connectivity problems and the transformation and adaptation of students’ homes to serve as their classroom space created obstacles for some students during this project. At the same time, the type of rapport that students reported from their online exchanges may have been created in part because of the home-bound nature of their online work, especially since students from both countries were familiar with these same challenges. For example, Solanyi shared that she could hold her dog during her and her partners’ meeting times, something not possible during non-COVID and in-person learning times. And although each student’s experience was different and challenges varied from student to student and from country to country, they all had in common that they were living through a global pandemic, that their learning contexts had shifted dramatically from in-person to online due to the pandemic, and the vulnerabilities that the pandemic had created on a personal and societal level.