For Peer Review Only: Artefact Co-Construction in Virtual Exchange: Youth Entrepreneurship For Society'

Computer Assisted Language Learning
Fo
rP
Artefact co-construction in virtual exchange: ‘Youth
Entrepreneurship for Society’
ee
Journal: Computer Assisted Language Learning
Manuscript ID Draft
rR
Manuscript Type: Original Article
artefact construction, English for Specific Purposes, 21st Century

Keywords:
Competences, Critical CALL, Constructionism, virtual exchange
ev
iew
On
ly
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

Page 1 of 33 Computer Assisted Language Learning
1
2
3
4 Artefact co-construction in virtual exchange: ‘Youth
5
6
Entrepreneurship for Society’
7
8 Authors
9
10 Abstract
11 This paper presents the results of a study around the co-construction and sharing of authentic
12
and meaningful artefacts between classes of foreign language learners within the ‘Youth
13
14 Entrepreneurship for Society’ virtual exchange project. The assigned project tasks, completed
15 during a semester by participants from Cypriot and Spanish institutions, were informed by the
16 constructionist theory (Papert, 1980). Thus, they supported collaboration and the co-
17 construction and sharing of authentic and meaningful artefacts, in an effort to promote social
18
Fo
inclusion (Warschauer, 2003) and tackle problems of discrimination, marginalisation, and

19 inequality (Andrejevic, 2002; 2007; Menezes de Souza, 2015). The project revolved around
20
21
social entrepreneurship in English for Specific Purposes contexts, aiming to connect the
rP
22 classroom with the outside world through the involvement of local organisations, while
23 fostering students' 21st century competences: intercultural, linguistic, digital and teamwork
24 (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2009) as well as social entrepreneurial mindset.
ee
25
26 Keywords: artefact construction; English for Specific Purposes; 21st Century Competences;
27
Critical CALL; Constructionism; virtual exchange
28
rR
29
30 1. Introduction
31
ev
32 Foreign language virtual exchange or telecollaboration refers to virtual intercultural

33 interaction and exchange projects between classes of foreign language learners in
34 geographically distant locations (O’Dowd, 2011). This paper deals with the co-construction
iew
35
and sharing of authentic and meaningful artefacts between classes of foreign language
36
37 learners in Cyprus and Spain within the ‘Youth Entrepreneurship for Society’ (YES)1 virtual
38 exchange project. The project was carried out between the Cyprus University of Technology
39 (CUT, Cyprus) and the Universitat de València (UV, Spain) with students enrolled in
40 Business Communication courses. It aimed to foster Social Entrepreneurship in English for
On
41 Specific Purposes (ESP) contexts, while promoting the development of 21st century
42 competences: linguistic, intercultural, digital and teamwork (Partnership for 21st Century
43
44
Skills, 2009) as well as social entrepreneurial mindset. Thanks to sustained foreign language
ly
45 virtual exchange and the involvement of different local organisations, students could work on
46 making collective and socially-engaged artefacts regardless of time-space constraints.
47
48 The project’s tasks followed O'Dowd and Ware's (2009) typology and thus they comprised
49 Information Exchange, Comparison and Analysis, as well as Collaboration tasks, in the form
50
of interactions on the Google+ Community to discuss and complete activities about
51
52
53 1 Acknowledgements are due to FUNDING AGENCY for funding this project.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

Computer Assisted Language Learning Page 2 of 33
1
2 2
3
4 stereotypes, experiences communicating in the L2, the creation of a digital story and the
5 delivery of an oral presentation about an innovative product or technology aimed at
6
addressing any of the social challenges currently being faced by the mentor organisations
7
8
(AUTHORS, 2018).
9
10 Salmon’s model for online learning (2000) was adopted in the structuring of tasks and
11 activities. Salmon’s model is a five-stage model that can be used for structuring online
12 activities. The five stages comprising the model are: Access and Motivation, Online
13 Socialisation, Information Exchange, Knowledge Construction, and Development. The
14
specific model was used to inform the structuring of tasks and activities of the project as
15
16 according to Muirhead (2002, p. 1), “Salmon’s model reflects a positive progression in the
17 quality and intensity of interaction between students and between students and their teachers”.
18 The table below presents an overview of the tasks and activities. Samples of these tasks as
Fo
19 well as information about suggested assessment criteria, recommended tools, resources, and
20 notes for the teacher can be found in AUTHORS (2019). Furthermore, learning was taken
21 beyond the classroom’s four walls by connecting the topics dealt with in class with the
rP
22
23
outside world. This was done in an effort to raise students' awareness about different societal
24 issues while fostering the development of the aforementioned 21st century competences
(Authors, 2018).
ee
25
26
27 Table 1. Stages and tasks of the YES project, based on Salmon's model for online learning
28
rR
(2000). Source: the authors.

29
30
31
In order to achieve the project’s main goals, a Critical CALL perspective was adopted and the
ev
32 project was grounded under the theoretical framework of constructionism. This framework
33 was deemed the most appropriate theory of learning, teaching, and design because of its
34 alignment with the demands and expectations of computational culture, as well as its
iew
35 emphasis on building, creating and making shared and meaningful artefacts for knowledge
36 acquisition (Papert, 1980; 1993).
37
38
39 The variables under investigation were: motivation (coded as MOT), intercultural competence
40 and awareness (AWA), linguistic competence (LING), teamwork (TEA), digital competence
On
41 (DIG), and level of anxiety (ANX). The specific research questions that guided the study are
42 displayed below. To the authors’ knowledge, no previous studies have ever attempted to
43 address these questions and thus the impact of artefact co-construction in the development of
44
ly
21st century competences within virtual exchange projects revolving around social
45
46
entrepreneurship remains widely unexplored. Even though content-based virtual exchange
47 projects are gradually beginning to be reported in the literature, studies on virtual exchange
48 that concentrate on entrepreneurship are scarce. One such study refers to a genre-based
49 telecollaboration for content and language learning (Cunningham, 2019). This project was
50 implemented in a university-level business German course and required students to interact
51 synchronously with entrepreneurs in Berlin in order to develop their knowledge of German
52
business culture. With regard to artefact co-construction and the development of 21st century
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 3
3
4 skills such as intercultural citizenship, two interesting studies have been reported. One was an
5 initiative by Porto and Byram (2015) which connected students in Argentina and Britain. The
6
project focused on human rights violations during the football World Cup that took place in
7
8
Argentina in 1978 and involved discussions using Skype and collaborative work towards the
9 creation of awareness-raising leaflets intended to have an impact in the local community. The
10 particular project was an effort to combine foreign language education and education for
11 citizenship aiming at helping learners become actively involved in the community. A similar
12 initiative reported by Porto and Yulita (2016) revolved around the Malvinas war, which was
13 fought between Argentina and Britain over the Malvinas Islands in 1982. The project
14
connected foreign language students in Argentina and Britain who were involved in online
15
16 intercultural dialogue using English and Spanish as foreign languages and English as a lingua
17 franca. In this project, students were engaged in the co-creation of bilingual leaflets for peace
18 addressed to their local communities.
Fo
19
20 The present study adopted a critical CALL and constructionist design by including
21 community engagement tasks that required the co-construction of meaningful artefacts in an
rP
22
23
effort to develop the learners’ critical 21st century competences, while building their
24 developing a social entrepreneurial mindset within ESP learning. With this in mind, the study
was guided by the following research questions:
ee
25
26
27 1. How does the implementation of artefact-based tasks in English for Specific Purposes
28
rR
contexts contribute to the development of 21st century competences?

29
2. In what ways can the implementation of artefact-based telecollaborative tasks foster social
30
31
entrepreneurship in English for Specific Purposes contexts?
ev
32
33
34 2. Connecting Constructionism and Critical Computer-Assisted Language Learning
iew
35 through a virtual exchange project

36
37
Constructionism is an epistemology and a theory of design and learning which combines two
38
39 aspects of the theory of science education: on the one hand, learning is viewed as a
40 reconstruction rather than as a transmission of knowledge; on the other hand, learning is
On
41 considered to be "most effective when part of an activity the learner experiences as

42 constructing a meaningful product" (Papert, 1986). Therefore, central to the constructionist
43 view of learning is the idea that learning is more effective and meaningful when students are
44
ly
involved in actively making tangible objects -known as artefacts- in the real world. This in
45
46
turn highlights the importance of tools, media, and context in human development
47 (Ackermann, 2001) in the process of transcending the foreign language classroom so as to
48 achieve the ultimate objective of school education, which is to learn for life rather than for
49 school (Kohn & Hoffstaedter, 2017).
50
51 As a result of this learning-by-doing emphasis, constructionism can be said to address
52
“constructivist learning in individual and social environments where bricolage with digital
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 4
3
4 expressive media plays an important role” (Kynigos & Futschek, 2015). The constructionist
5 experiential and project-based view of learning derives from Piaget's (Cakir, 2008) and
6
Vygotsky’s (1978) epistemological and psychological theories of constructivism and socio-
7
8
constructivism. However, while constructivist approaches tend to focus on the connection
9 between previous knowledge and newly-acquired knowledge by means of a step-by-step
10 guidance as well as the interactions with the outside world for the internalisation of concepts,
11 constructionism emphasises the role of the facilitator or coach in a process of using already-
12 known information to acquire new knowledge (Alesandrini & Larson, 2002). In both
13 constructivism and constructionism the interaction with the world and its objects is conducive
14
to learning, but constructivism places more emphasis in the importance of construction rather
15
16 than simple internalisation.
17
18 As for Critical Computer-Assisted Language Learning (Critical CALL), its origins can be
Fo
19 traced back to the broader field of Critical Applied Linguistics and the work of scholars such
20 as Pennycook (2001), who questions “the role ELT plays as a form of service industry to
21 globalization” (2016, p. 27). Furthermore, Helm (2015, p. 4) points out that Critical CALL is
rP
22
23
concerned with “the relationship between the macro and the micro, an engagement with issues
24 of power and inequality and an understanding of how our classrooms and conversations are
related to broader social, cultural and political relations”.
ee
25
26
27 Critical CALL is also intimately related to the Critical Pedagogy framework, which
28
rR
understands being a critical individual as being empowered to seek justice and emancipation.
29
Burbules & Berk (1999) distinguish between the "Critical Thinking" tradition and the
30
31
"Critical Pedagogy" movement, arguing that practitioners of the latter are not necessarily
ev
32 concerned with finding an objective, dispassionate truth; but rather, they take the side of
33 people who are disenfranchised from social, economic, and political opportunities. Within the
34 Critical Pedagogy framework, pedagogy is seen as a powerful tool which can foster dialogue
iew
35 and activism (Giroux, 2006), as it "makes clear that schools and other educational spheres
36 cannot be viewed merely as instructional sites, but must be seen as places where culture,
37
power, and knowledge come together to produce particular identities, narratives, and social
38
39 practices" (Giroux, 2006, p. 4). In addition, the development of a critical consciousness is an
40 essential tool to achieve freedom, as social critique is the way to achieve social justice (Freire,
On
41 1981, 2003). According to Freire (1973, 1987), the emancipation process begins by
42 acknowledging that we are immersed in a system of oppressive relations and by becoming
43 aware of our place within that oppressive system. This gaining of consciousness helps us
44
ly
develop a liberating praxis. Therefore, education is a key element in fostering this

45
46
emancipating practice and thus, a social and educational view of justice and equality should
47 be the basis for any kind of didactic initiative, the ultimate goal being the liberation from
48 oppression and human-caused injustices and suffering.
49
50 As Ackermann (2001) pointed out, there are many points in which Piaget's constructivism
51 (1936; 1945; 1957), Papert's constructionism (1980; 1983; 1993) and Freire's Critical
52
Pedagogy (1973; 1987) converge:
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 5
3
4
5 Psychologists and pedagogues like Piaget, Papert but also Dewey, Freinet, Freire
6
and others from the Open School movement can give us insights into: 1- How to
7
8
rethink education, 2-imagine new environments, and 3- put new tools, media, and
9 technologies at the service of the growing child. They remind us that learning,
10 especially today, is much less about acquiring information or submitting to other
11 people’s ideas or values, than it is about putting one’s own words to the world, or
12 finding one’s own voice, and exchanging our ideas with others. (Ackermann,
13 2001).
14
15
16 In line with this view, adopting a Constructionist Critical CALL approach involves
17 encouraging students' critical analysis of reality and the current challenges society faces with
18 a view to achieving equality, social justice and awareness about the different issues dealt with.
Fo
19 In the 'YES' project, this was done through the completion of different iterative cycles which
20 comprised theory, practice, evaluation and reflection (Freire, 2003) and by bringing in
21 different social organisations and NGOs from the civil society which provided students with
rP
22
23
information about their mission and main activities. These organisations also guided students
24 when finding and developing their ideas for the main artefacts they co-constructed: digital
stories and oral presentations (Authors, 2020; 2017). The following tables identify those
ee
25
26 organisations from Spain and Cyprus and their respective missions:
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 6
3
4
5 Table 2. Spanish organisations' names and missions
6
7
8
Table 3. Cypriot organisations' names and missions
9
10
11 3. Methodology
12
13 A mixed-methods approach was adopted, involving data collection from various sources: pre-
14
and post-intervention questionnaires, focus group interviews and written reflections with
15
16 participants and organisations, field journals and in-class observation, as well as the analysis
17 of the artefacts produced.
18
Fo
19 The quantitative data obtained by means of the pre- and post- intervention questionnaires
20 constituted the basis for the present study. A student's t-test was conducted on SPSS in order
21 to measure whether the means of the participants’ perceptions had varied upon completion of
rP
22
23
the project. This quantitative analysis was supported by qualitative data from the participants’
24 comments about their perceptions of different aspects of the exchanges in both the open-
ended questions of the post-questionnaire, the focus group interviews and written reflections,
ee
25
26 as well as an analysis of the alignment of the students’ artefacts and the SDGs. Furthermore,
27 feedback from the interviews with representatives of the organisations involved in the project
28
rR
was received. The different sections of the post-questionnaire and the questions from the
29
focus group interviews with both students and the organisations' representatives will be
30
31
discussed in the “Data gathering” subsection.
ev
32
33 3.1 Settings and Participants
34 42 (N=42) students from UV and CUT took part in the 'YES' project and completed both the
iew
35 pre- and post-questionnaires. In addition, they participated in the focus group interviews.
36 They were aged between 18 and 25 and they were enrolled in Business Communication
37
courses in their respective institutions: 27 from CUT and 15 from UV. Out of the 27 CUT
38
39 participants, 25 were Cypriot and 2 were Greek. Meanwhile, 11 of the UV participants were
40 Spanish, 2 were German and 2 were Russian and Austrian respectively. Since this was an L2
On
41 virtual exchange, participants interacted in English at a B2 level according to the Common

42 European Framework of Reference for languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001). Their
43 interactions took place in a Google+ Community named CUT-UV 2017 Telecollaboration
44
ly
while collaborative task completion took place using collaborative tools, such as Google
45
46
Drive (Google Docs and Google Slides).
47
48 Participants worked in international groups of 4 and interacted both synchronously and
49 asynchronously using English as a Lingua Franca over the course of one semester (15 weeks,
50 from September to December). They completed a range of tasks which involved getting in
51 touch with the 22 aforementioned local associations and Non-Governmental Organisations
52
(NGOs) from Spain and Cyprus (11 Cypriot and 11 Spanish), identifying the main challenges
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 7
3
4 faced by those institutions, discussing and providing solutions linked to their local
5 communities' social issues through virtual exchange, and presenting their own initiatives in
6
the form of a digital story and an oral presentation which were delivered at the end of the
7
8
semester in a fictitious Social Entrepreneurship fair.
9
10 The YES project was informed by the principles of Education for Sustainable
11 Development (ESD, UNICEF, 1993), which has been promoted by the United Nations since
12 1992 as a means to empower individuals to: a) "reflect on their own actions, taking into
13 account their current and future social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts, from a
14
local and a global perspective"; and b) "act in complex situations in a sustainable manner,
15
16 which may require them to strike out in new directions; and to participate in socio-political
17 processes, moving their societies towards sustainable development" (UNESCO, 2017).
18 Therefore, critical attitudes and values such as solidarity, equality and respect were fostered,
Fo
19 bearing in mind that “as ELT professionals, we are never just teaching something called
20 English but rather are involved in economic and social change, cultural renewal, people’s
21 dreams and desires” (Pennycook, 2016, p. 30).
rP
22
23
24 In line with the view which considers critical learning as “teaching for social justice, in ways
that support the development of active engaged citizens” (Crookes, 2013, p. 9), participants
ee
25
26 were encouraged to become active "change champions" and thus they were empowered and
27 made aware of both their capability and responsibility to promote positive change at both the
28
rR
local and institutional levels. In other words, participants became social entrepreneurs, that is,
29
entrepreneurs concerned with developing, funding and implementing solutions to social,
30
31
cultural, or environmental issues (Bornstein, 2007). Therefore, the project supported
ev
32 collaboration and the co-construction of artefacts, within an authentic, meaningful, learner-

33 centred, engaging and challenging knowledge-application and construction process. In this
34 way, the affordances of technology-based initiatives for the promotion of "social inclusion"
iew
35 (Warschauer, 2003, p. 8) and their usefulness for addressing problems related to

36 discrimination, marginalisation, and inequality (Andrejevic, 2007; Menezes de Souza, 2012)
37
were explored.
38
39
40 Throughout the 'YES' project, the topics dealt with and the artefacts to be constructed aimed
On
41 to promote equality, social justice and “engaged learning”, understood as applying concepts
42 and ideas from the classroom to out-of-class cognition and action. Therefore, they were
43 aligned with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (2015). These
44
ly
belong to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and comprise a set of 17 "Global
45
46
Goals" with 169 targets among them (UNESCO, 2005). The 2030 Agenda establishes the
47 targets and steps to be taken so as to stimulate action over the next fifteen years in the
48 following critical areas: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, People and Partnership (UNESCO,
49 2015). As shown in the chart below (Figure 1), the SDGs include a varied range of goals,
50 from poverty reduction to peace and justice, and international commitment and cooperation
51 towards achieving these same goals:
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 8
3
4
5 Figure 1. The 17 UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goals2
6
7
8
9 3.2 Data gathering
10 In order to address a) the first research question (RQ1), regarding how the implementation
11 of artefact-based tasks in ESP contexts contributed to students' development of 21st century
12 competences; and b) the second research question (RQ2), concerning the ways in which the
13 implementation of artefact-based telecollaborative tasks could foster social entrepreneurship
14
in ESP contexts; the target competences were identified and the pre- and post-questionnaire
15
16 were designed accordingly. These pre-and post-questionnaires thus included questions about
17 intercultural, linguistic, digital and interpersonal (teamwork) competences to address RQ1 and
18 social entrepreneurship to address RQ2. The questionnaires were completed by participants at
Fo
19 the beginning and at the end of the project and included 60 open-ended and close questions
20 through which both quantitative (in 7-point Likert-scale responses) and qualitative (open
21 responses) were gathered. They comprised 6 different sections: A) Demographics and internet
rP
22
23
and social media use; B) Motivation and level of anxiety; C) Language and communication;
24 D) Teamwork; E) Intercultural awareness; and F) Social Entrepreneurship and overall opinion
about different aspects of the project.
ee
25
26
27 Section A of the questionnaires included 8 closed questions which aimed to gather both
28
rR
demographic data and data about participants' media and Internet usage. As for the questions
29
included in Section B, these were 11 closed questions which revolved around aspects
30
31
concerning the participants' level of motivation before and after co-constructing and sharing
ev
32 their artefacts, as well as how their levels of anxiety were affected by the different tasks they
33 were asked to complete. Regarding Section C, it comprised 5 closed questions which had to
34 do with their linguistic and communicative competence. In the case of Section E, the
iew
35 questions enquiring about the participants' intercultural awareness were also closed and their
36 total number was 12. Finally, the questions from section D were open-ended: each of them
37
provided a prompt which respondents had to complete, concerning social entrepreneurship
38
39 and their opinions about the process of becoming social entrepreneurs responsible for
40 constructing and sharing the different artefacts with their mentor organisations. The following
On
41 table summarises the different items included in each section of the questionnaire:
42
43
44
ly
Table 4. Questions from the Pre- and Post- intervention questionnaires.

45
46
47 In addition, students' feedback was gathered from focus group interviews and written
48 reflections. The questions included a description of the students' experience and the fulfilment
49 of their expectations; an analysis of their learning process and gains, as well as the issues
50
51
52 2 Source: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/03/un-statistical-commission-endorses-global-
53 indicator-framework/
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 9
3
4 encountered and how they were dealt with; a discussion of the communication strategies used;
5 the project’s impact on their view and experience of other cultures or ethnicities; their
6
perceptions regarding the development of different 21st century competences (linguistic,
7
8
teamwork, digital, intercultural and social entrepreneurial); technology affordances;
9 acquisition of specific lexis and knowledge connected to their field of specialisation, and their
10 suggestions for improvement.
11
12 Furthermore, an interview with representatives from the organisations involved in the project
13 was conducted in order to cross-validate the collected insights. This brief interview included
14
questions regarding the positive and negative aspects about their collaboration with the
15
16 different groups of students, their willingness to continue participating in the project in future
17 iterations, and their overall opinion about the project.
18
Fo
19
20 3.3 Data analysis
21 The quantitative data gathered by means of pre- and post-questionnaires were analysed with
rP
22
23
the IBM SPSS Statistics software, version 24. A t-test was conducted with matched pairs in
24 order to check the individual differences in pre- and post- intervention responses concerning
participants’ perceptions of how the implementation of telecollaborative artefact-based tasks
ee
25
26 in English for Specific Purposes contexts contributes to the development of 21st century
27 competences. The variables analysed were coded as: motivation (MOT), intercultural
28
rR
competence and awareness (AWA), linguistic competence (LING), teamwork (TEA), digital
29
competence (DIG), and level of anxiety (ANX).
30
31
ev
32 As for the qualitative data, it was analysed using the NVIVO software, version 11, to identify
33 specific emerging themes by analysing the content and the sentence structure first and then
34 assigning significance to some themes over others based on how frequently each of them
iew
35 occurred. To ensure inter-coder reliability, checks were conducted on the coding of the
36 emerging themes. Two coders reached an inter-coder agreement of above 80%, and
37
disagreement was resolved through discussion. The analysis shed additional light on the
38
39 participants’ perceptions of different aspects of the exchanges thanks to their open-ended
40 questionnaire responses and the focus group interviews in which feedback from both students
On
41 and the organisations' representatives was obtained. Furthermore, the artefacts produced by
42 participants were analysed and categorised according to their alignment with the UNESCO's
43 SDGs. In this way, the question of how the implementation of artefact-based telecollaborative
44
ly
tasks fostered social entrepreneurship in English for Specific Purposes contexts was
45
46
addressed.
47
48 3. Results and discussion
49
50 Before conducting the analysis, the internal consistent reliability of the latent variables
51 included in the study was tested by means of Cronbach's alpha (Ferreras-Méndez, Fernández-
52
Mesa & Alegre, 2019; Nunnaly & Bernstein, 1994). The value obtained for each of the
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 10
3
4 variables studies was higher than 0.7. Therefore, reliability was ensured. Furthermore, to
5 ensure content validity, items from the literature which have already been tested were used
6
(Authors, 2018).
7
8
9 The sample description of the pre- and post-intervention paired-sample t-test associated with
10 the perceived contribution of artefact-based tasks to the development of 21st century
11 competences in the YES project is reported on Table 5 below.
12
13 Table 5. Pre- and Post- intervention questionnaires whole-group Mean paired-sample t-test
14
results
15
16
17 As can be observed, the whole-group (N=42) t-test analysis results revealed significant
18 differences in two of the six variables under investigation. The variable in which a statistically
Fo
19 significant mean increase was observed was linguistic competence (scoring 5.03 in the post-
20 questionnaire). Meanwhile, the variable in which a statistically significant mean decrease was
21 observed was anxiety (4.28). As for the rest of variables, an increase was observed in
rP
22
23
motivation (scoring 4.93), intercultural competence (scoring 4.78), while a slight mean
24 decrease was observed in teamwork (scoring 5.07 in the post-questionnaire) and digital
competence (5.28). The relevant differences found in linguistic competence and anxiety can
ee
25
26 be interpreted as evidence that the 'YES' project was perceived as useful in terms of the
27 participants' linguistic development and the reduction of their initial anxiety. The positive
28
rR
scores awarded to motivation and intercultural awareness indicate, first of all, that participants
29
found the ‘YES’ initiative motivating and engaging, since the students’ level of motivation
30
31
remained high from the beginning to the end of the project and even increased slightly
ev
32 towards the end. Seemingly, participants awarded a high score to the variable concerning the
33 development of their intercultural communication and awareness, and the initially high scores
34 granted to this variable not only remained stable but also increased towards the end of the
iew
35 project. As for the rest of the variables, although there were minor variations between the pre-
36 and post- questionnaire results, the fact that the scores remained around 4.5 (in a 7-point
37
Likert scale) and above indicates that overall students were satisfied and found that the project
38
39 had helped them develop the different competences under investigation. Seemingly,
40 participants reported having felt comfortable in the new role as social entrepreneurs, and their
On
41 c-constructed artefacts were aligned with several SDGs each. This was also corroborated by
42 the analysis of the students’ open-ended responses which will be discussed subsequently.
43
44
ly
The students' qualitative responses further illustrate their perceptions with regard to their
45
46
development of the 21st century skills under investigation. As far as the participants' levels of
47 motivation and overall fulfilment of expectations regarding the project are concerned, the
48 feedback received was highly positive, as shown in the statements from students below. These
49 statements, which often overlapped, were organised around different main themes.
50
51 The first theme was "Usefulness and relevance to the participants' contexts". In this theme,
52
students highlighted the relevance of the project to their social and academic contexts, current
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 11
3
4 studies and future career around international business management, stressing, on the one
5 hand, the project's usefulness as preparation to work in an international context or to become
6
entrepreneurs; and on the other hand, the project's potential to address pressing social issues
7
8
from the participants' respective local contexts:
9
10 Theme 1: Usefulness and relevance to their contexts
11 “The benefits [of this project] are countless. Thanks to the project, we are able to realise how
12 extremely useful the English language is in an international context. This is an activity that
13 should be experienced at least once in our life”, Spanish UV female student
14
15
16 “Social entrepreneurship was the most creative part (...) Also getting to think and develop out
17 a new innovative idea got us into the game of business for real showing us the path for
18 actually being an entrepreneur”, Cypriot CUT male student
Fo
19
20 “We are both excited about the NGO’s project because the members of the organization were
21 very friendly with us and helpful. We helped them because they were trying to solve some of
rP
22
23
the existing problems and they were struggling for it”, Cypriot CUT male student
24
A recurrent theme was "intercultural learning". In this theme, students' stressed the positive
ee
25
26 impact of their collaboration in terms of their learning about different countries, cultures,
27 lifestyles, views and how this learning process had enabled them to increase their
28
rR
understanding of their virtual exchange partners' cultures. This theme overlapped with other
29
themes, such as the development of digital competence:
30
31
ev
32 Theme 2: Intercultural learning:

33 “…what we enjoyed the most about this project is the chance to collaborate with people from
34 other countries. This gave us the opportunity to learn about other countries, different
iew
35 cultures, lifestyles too. Also, we communicated about different projects and we exchanged our
36 views about the app that we created”, Cypriot CUT female student
37
38
39 “The best things about the project are seeing the world with different eyes and increasing
40 our level of understanding, communicating with people from another country, learning
On
41 something new e.g. how to make a video, and trying to be more creative”, Austrian UV
42 female student
43
44
ly
“I enjoyed the project a lot and I am grateful to have collaborated with such nice Cypriot
45
46
girls. I've never been to Cyprus before and don't have any friends from there, so it was really
47 interesting to listen to first-hand information when they were talking about their culture and
48 customs. Participating in the project was an amazing experience we will always remember”,
49 German UV female student
50
51 Another theme that was frequently referred to in the students' interviews and written
52
reflections was the project's contributions to the development of their linguistic and
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 12
3
4 communicative competences. This theme frequently overlapped with the themes of
5 intercultural learning and relevance to the participants' context.
6
7
8
Theme 3: Linguistic and communicative competences:
9 “…the telecollaboration project made me realize that there are a lot of ways of working and
10 thinking. My overall opinion about this project is that it helps you discover and learn about
11 other cultures, meet new people and advance your communication skills”, Cypriot CUT male
12 student
13
14
“This project is a good and different way to learn English and improve some communication
15
16 skills but it also requires a lot of time. […] Despite the fact of the time required, I am very
17 satisfied and happy to have had the opportunity to participate in this international project.
18 What is more, I think that it benefits all the students from UV because we are studying
Fo
19 International Business so probably, in the future, we will have to face similar situations”,
20 Spanish UV female student
21
rP
22
23
"We have had opportunities to speak in English and learn new words and enrich our
24 knowledge", Cypriot CUT female student
ee
25
26 "... I feel really grateful and proud to have been close to people from other cultures. I
27 improved my English communication skills, mainly my pronunciation", Spanish UV female
28
rR
student
29
30
31
The theme of "Digital competence" was also stressed by students, who considered that the
ev
32 project required being technologically-savvy and that thanks to this requirement they had
33 developed their digital competence.
34
iew
35 Theme 4: Digital competence:

36 "[In this project] you need lot of technology skills", Cypriot CUT male student
37
"The most beneficial aspects were talking with partners while practicing English and
38
39 developing technological skills", Spanish UV male student
40 "I have improved my skills developing a digital product", Cypriot CUT male student
On
41
42 The theme of "Social Entrepreneurship" was also mentioned by students in their interviews
43 and written reflections who appear to have been inspired by the project to pursue a career as
44
ly
entrepreneurs or social entrepreneurs.

45
46
47 Theme 5: Social Entrepreneurship
48 "I would consider becoming an entrepreneur in the future because I like to deal with the
49 financial transactions and management of a company and I found it very interesting dealing
50 with the various problems a business has", Cypriot CUT male student
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 13
3
4 "It is one of my dreams to become a social entrepreneur, a person who can make a
5 difference", Spanish UV male student
6
7
8
"If I find a good innovative idea maybe I will start my own business", Cypriot CUT male
9 student
10
11 "Being an entrepreneur is a good way to pursue your dreams", Cypriot CUT male student
12
13 Finally, the students’ comments in their interviews and written reflections point to their
14
increased motivation levels to learn English at university. Students described their
15
16 participation in the project as a unique and enjoyable experience which helped them acquire
17 various skills.
18
Fo
19 Theme 6: Motivation and overall perceptions:

20 "You are able to learn with happiness and [that] gives you more motivation!", Cypriot CUT
21 male student
rP
22
23
24 "I have had only one opportunity to study English in a multicultural and diverse setting and it
was thanks to this project. It has been an amazing experience in which I have learned a lot
ee
25
26 from Cyprus and its culture. In addition, I have improved my English skills", Spanish UV
27 female student
28
rR
29
"I hadn't had the opportunity to study English in a multicultural setting before. This was the
30
31
first time I had the chance to practice my skills talking with other students [from abroad]",
ev
32 Cypriot CUT female student

33
34 "This was a great opportunity to get to know people from so many different countries and
iew
35 cultures", Austrian female UV student

36
37
Furthermore, the feedback obtained from the representatives from the different organisations
38
39 which participated in the project corroborates the positive perceptions and the willingness to
40 continue collaborating in the future:
On
41
42 Feedback from the Cypriot organisations:
43 “If this idea materialized, the foundation could use it in collaboration with psychologists and
44
ly
therapists. The application is therapeutic and entertaining and would be a good idea”,
45
46
Cypriot NGO dealing with children and mental health
47
48 “The video is very useful for informing the public about the operation of the shelter, its use
49 but especially for the promotion of the adoption of animals... It is an excellent program with a
50 flawless, touching, original and creative video, the students managed to "talk" to the heart of
51 those who would spend 3 minutes to watch the video”, Cypriot NGO dealing with the
52
adoption of stray dogs
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 14
3
4
5 “We realized through the film that the students have really understood the Foundation's
6
deepest message of creating a solidarity chain. It is very important to be able to inspire each
7
8
other for a common good. We see that this has been done with complete creativity and social
9 sensitivity”, Cypriot NGO dealing with autistic children
10
11 Feedback from the Spanish organisations:
12 “We are grateful for the possibility of transmitting our message in a clear, personal and calm
13 manner […] They [the students] have understood the importance of sustainable development
14
as well as the preservation of the environment”, Spanish artists collective dealing with
15
16 environmental preservation
17
18 “The most positive aspect […] is the contact with students and to be able to raise their
Fo
19 awareness about gender equality, especially among the youngest ones. Hearing about their
20 views on gender issues is very important to us in our Gender Equality Unit”, Spanish
21 organisation dealing with gender equality
rP
22
23
24 “The contact and experience have been outstanding. There are very few initiatives like this
one in the Academia”, Spanish NGO dealing with migrant training and employment
ee
25
26
27 “What we’ve liked the most about the project is to be in touch with young people who can
28
rR
help promote our social work within the university. […] We need as much support as we can
29
get so we welcome these kinds of collaborations. It is a matter of principle: we lead by
30
31
example”, Spanish NGO dealing with Cooperation for development and the promotion of
ev
32 reading
33
34 Overall, as discussed above, the quantitative results obtained indicate that the project was
iew
35 perceived by the whole group as having positively contributed to their motivation and the
36 development of the different competences, especially linguistic, as well as intercultural skills,
37
motivation and social entrepreneurial mindset. Participants' positive perceptions were
38
39 expressed both numerically, with scores around or above 4.45 in a 7-point Likert scale and
40 qualitatively, with the positive feedback provided by participants in their written reflections
On
41 and focus-group interviews.

42 Upon completion of the project, the students’ co-created artefacts were analysed and
43 categorised according to their alignment with the UNESCO's SDGs. The tables below display
44
ly
some examples of the topics dealt with by each of the Cypriot and Spanish organisations
45
46
which guided students in the process, as well as how those align with the UNESCO's SDGs.
47 Students came up with the different ideas after they had conducted a preliminary interview
48 with one organisation, and the subsequent discussion and analysis, as well as brainstorming
49 sessions. The analysis and brainstorming sessions were carried out in the Google+
50 Communities by means of a discussion among the students and their foreign partners in their
51 respective virtual exchange groups. Following that, the different team's proposed solutions
52
were then presented in the form of digital stories. Digital storytelling can be defined as the
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 15
3
4 blend of the longstanding art of telling stories and the 21st century practice of putting together
5 a variety of available multimedia tools, including graphics, audio, video, animation, and web
6
publishing (Lambert, 2002; Robin, 2009; Robin & McNeil, 2012). This practice has been
7
8
used in telecollaborative environments by authors such as Priego & Liaw (2017), who focused
9 on how an intercultural, telecollaborative digital storytelling project could reveal the degrees
10 of group functionality and the underlying reasons for tensions or contradictions emerging
11 among groups as a result of their co-construction of multilingual digital stories. In the case of
12 the digital artefacts produced in this project, the focus was the co-construction and sharing of
13 authentic and meaningful artefacts for the promotion of social inclusion. Therefore, each of
14
the digital stories students produced addressed the different SDGs tackled by their mentors
15
16 from the organisations, as shown in the following tables:
17
18 Table 6. UV's digital stories and their alignment with the SDGs tackled by each Spanish
Fo
19 organisation
20
21 Table 7. CUT's digital stories and their alignment with the SDGs tackled by each Cypriot
rP
22
23
organisation
24
The 'YES' project's tasks allowed for the adoption of a critical CALL perspective grounded in
ee
25
26 constructionism. Thus, the 'YES' tasks promoted equality, social justice and awareness about
27 the different issues dealt with while supporting the construction of artefacts that were
28
rR
meaningful to their constructors. Furthermore, as shown in the tables above, those issues and
29
their corresponding artefacts were connected with the following UNESCO's SDGs:
30
31
ev
32 SDG 1: No poverty: the digital stories that dealt with this goal were “Play and help” (CUT),
33 which was inspired by the interview with the NGO Funraising; “Child Dash” (CUT), a digital
34 story resulting from the interview with the Dancing Queen Foundation; “Visa-Kid” (CUT),
iew
35 which drew inspiration from the interview with Parents Association Lanitio Primary School;
36 and “Mitro app” (CUT), which connected with the issues dealt by the organisation
37
interviewed, Polydynamo Kentro - IERA MHTROPOLIS LEMESOU.
38
39 SDG2: No hunger: the digital story that addressed this SDG was “Child Dash” (CUT).
40 SDG 3: Good health and well-being: this goal was dealt with by the digital story “Cool Car”
On
41 (CUT), resulting from the interview with KEPAKY: The Centre for the Provision of Social
42 Services Andreas Sofocleous; by the digital story “SpeakUp” (CUT), which in turn was
43 inspired by the interview with AEQUITAS; and by “Myportablediary” (CUT), based on the
44
ly
work of Center for Preventive Paediatrics.

45
46
SDG 4: Quality education: This goal was dealt with in “Meet your Foreign Friend” (UV), the
47 idea of which was inspired by the organisation CEPAIM; “University Fair” (UV), which drew
48 their inspiration from Jovesolides; “Child Dash” (CUT); and “Learn Greek” (CUT),
49 connected to the interview with Migrant Information Center (Mihub).
50 SDG 6: Clean water and sanitation: This goal appeared in the “Marmak, the Water Bubble”
51 (UV) digital story and oral presentation, which in turn were inspired by the students' interview
52
and collaboration with the local organisation DESEEA.
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 16
3
4 SDG 7: Affordable and clean energy: This goal was addressed in “SmartArt” (UV), resulting
5 from the interview and collaboration with the "Art and Environment Research Centre"; and
6
"Umbrella Standry” (UV), which related to the collaboration with AESCO.
7
8
SDG 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure: This goal was mentioned in "SmartArt", and
9 “Charger Bag” (UV), which resulted from the collaboration with the Malva Community
10 Radio Station and "Umbrella StanDry”.
11 SDG 10: Reduced inequalities: this goal was borne in mind in "Meet your Foreign Friend"
12 (UV), Play and help” (CUT); “Child Dash” (CUT); “Mitro app” (CUT); and “Learn Greek
13 (CUT)”.
14
SDG 11: Sustainable cities and communities: This goal was addressed in "SmartArt" and
15
16 "Umbrella StanDry" (UV); and “Mitro app” (CUT).
17 SDG 14: Life below water (Environment protection): This goal also appeared in the
18 “Marmak, the Water Bubble” (UV).
Fo
19 SDG 15: Life on land (Environment protection): this SDG was borne in mind by the creators
20 of “ECO-APP” (CUT), whose idea was inspired by the NGO Friends of the Earth Cyprus; by
21 the creators of “Dognder” (CUT), who drew their inspiration from their interview with Dog
rP
22
23
Valley Rescue Center; by the digital story “EasyPaws” (CUT), which resulted from the
24 interview with Friends of the Earth Cyprus; and by “Pet.Finder” (CUT), which connected
with the issues dealt with by Pets2Adopt.
ee
25
26 SDG 16: Peace, justice and strong institutions: this goal was addressed by both "Meet your
27 foreign friend" (UV); "University Fair" (UV); and “Learn Greek” (CUT).
28
rR
29
30
31
Concluding remarks
ev
32 The ‘Youth Entrepreneurship for Society’ virtual exchange project was a technology-
33 mediated project designed with a constructionist critical CALL perspective which encouraged
34 the co-creation and sharing of meaningful artefacts. Students were significantly engaged in
iew
35 the learning process using social technologies that supported the creation of an artefact
36 (Parmaxi, Zaphiris & Ioannou, 2016). The results from the study conducted with 42 Cypriot
37
and Spanish 'YES' project participants indicate that it was perceived by the whole group as
38
39 having positively contributed to their motivation and the development of different
40 competences, especially linguistic as well intercultural competences, and social
On
41 entrepreneurial mindset, while reducing their anxiety. The students' positive perceptions were
42 expressed both numerically, with all the variables scoring above 4.5 in a 7-point Likert scale;
43 and qualitatively, in the form of satisfactory open-ended feedback from questionnaire
44
ly
responses, interviews and written reflections. Similarly, the feedback obtained from the
45
46
organisations was extremely positive. Overall the project was successful in achieving its main
47 goals of connecting the classroom with the outside world through the involvement of local
48 organisations, while fostering students' 21st century competences: intercultural, linguistic,
49 digital, teamwork and social entrepreneurial mindset.
50
51 The constructionist, Critical CALL perspective adopted realised its full motivational and
52
transformational potential by encouraging students to become social entrepreneurs whose
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 17
3
4 work would entail making a positive change in their local contexts. The analysis of the
5 artefacts participants produced revealed the project's positive social impact: thanks to the
6
completion of the different tasks with the guidance of representatives from different local
7
8
organisations, the students became more aware of the different societal issues faced in their
9 respective contexts. These issues in turn were linked to both the organisations' missions and
10 the SDGs. Because the SDGs and a Critical Pedagogy perspective were adopted and targeted
11 in the project, participants took these goals into account when developing their ideas and
12 when producing their artefacts. Thus, the following SDGs were tackled: no poverty, no
13 hunger, good health and well-being, quality education, clean water and sanitation, affordable
14
and clean energy, industry and innovation/infrastructure, reduced inequalities, sustainable
15
16 cities and communities, life below water, life on land, peace and justice.
17
18 The involvement of local organisations from the civil society, though challenging at first, also
Fo
19 helped give the project its social, critical focus which in turn rendered the artefacts
20 constructed more meaningful to their constructors. Moreover, the participation of those
21 organisations also contributed to increasing the participants' interest and degree of confidence
rP
22
23
when interacting with their foreign counterparts: rather than worrying about whether their
24 linguistic level was good enough, their main concern became to find creative, innovative
solutions to the different challenges the local organisations were facing. In this way, students
ee
25
26 could transcend the classroom's four walls (and the overarching goal of improving their
27 linguistic level) when trying to address real-world issues by becoming social entrepreneurs
28
rR
who constructed socially-oriented artefacts in collaboration with their foreign peers.

29
30
31
Another positive aspect regarding the collaboration with different local organisations was that
ev
32 there was a knowledge gap which derived from the fact that each participant only had access
33 to the information related to the kinds of challenges that the local organisations were facing.
34 This meant that students had to communicate with their foreign counterparts in order to find
iew
35 out about those same challenges in the foreign country and then come up with possible
36 solutions by looking at the way the same issues were dealt with in other countries and
37
contexts. Therefore, even students with a lower linguistic proficiency level were given the
38
39 chance to become the most-able peer in the exchange, as he/she had a valuable piece of
40 information that their foreign partners did not have. By sharing this knowledge, they were
On
41 becoming empowered when constructing their artefacts, as this process involved their
42 collaboration and co-production of mutual objectives and shared learning (Sadler & Dooly,
43 2016).
44
ly
45
46
As for the limitations of the study, they have to do with the small size of the sample (42
47 participants) and the lack of a comparison or control group. These limit the study’s
48 generalisability and therefore results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies might
49 be conducted with a higher name of participants and the pre- and post-treatments results
50 might be compared with the results obtained by a control group.
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 18
3
4 'YES' is the culmination of a virtual exchange project which has been carried out between
5 CUT and UV for the last three years. Year after year, feedback has been collected, the
6
different aspects of the project have been analysed and improvements have been made in a
7
8
cyclical process which has brought together theory, practice, evaluation and reflection (Freire,
9 2003). The adoption of a constructionist, Critical CALL perspective favoured the integration
10 of social entrepreneurship in the ESP Curriculum within the Business Communication courses
11 participants were enrolled in. Overall, the ‘YES’ project's goals were achieved and the
12 students’ needs and expectations were met.
13
14
In our current context of liquid modernity (Bauman, 1998; 2005; 2007), of constant mobility
15
16 and changes in relationships and identities within our highly complex societies, and of
17 globalisation and massive migratory movements across the globe, initiatives such as the 'YES'
18 project can be seen as attempts to cross global boundaries by promoting mutual understanding
Fo
19 and critical values. The implication for practice is that it is indeed possible and necessary to
20 go beyond the syllabus and the classroom's four walls in order to foster solidarity, equality
21 and respect in the broader social context. This in turn would empower students and
rP
22
23
practitioners while equipping them with the tools needed to tackle problems of discrimination,
24 marginalisation, and inequality (Andrejevic, 2002; 2007; Menezes de Souza, 2015), both in
the classroom and in society. Furthermore, it is hoped that similar projects will be conducted
ee
25
26 so as to continue exploring ways to encourage participants to become active "change
27 champions" by raising their awareness of the value of advocacy and social entrepreneurship in
28
rR
promoting social change.

29
30
31
ev
32 Acknowledgements
33 Acknowledgements are due to FUNDING AGENCIES.
34
iew
35 Ethical statement
36 I hereby declare that:
37
38
39 1) this material has not been published in whole or in part elsewhere;
40 2) the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication in another journal;
On
41 3) the authors have been personally and actively involved in substantive work leading to
42 the manuscript, and will hold herself individually responsible for its content.
43 .
44
ly
45
46
References
47 AUTHORS, 2020
48 AUTHORS, 2019
49 AUTHORS, 2018
50 AUTHORS, 2017
51 Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget's constructivism, Papert's constructionism: What's the
52
difference. Future of learning group publication, 5(3): 438.
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 19
3
4 Alesandrini, K. & Larson, L. (2002). Teachers bridge to constructivism. The Clearing House,
5 119-121.
6
Andrejevic, M. (2002). The work of being watched: Interactive media and the exploitation of
7
8
self-disclosure. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19(2): 230–248.
9 Andrejevic, M. (2007). Surveillance in the digital enclosure. The Communication Review,
10 10(4): 295–317.
11 Bauman Z. (2007). Consuming life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
12 Bauman Z. (2005). Liquid life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
13 Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization, The human consequences. New York: Columbia
14
University Press.
15
16 Bornstein, D. (2007). How to Change the World. New York: Oxford University Press.
17 Burbules, N. & Berk, R. (1999). Critical Thinking and Critical Pedagogy: Relations,
18 Differences, and Limits. In T. Popkewitz and L. Fendler (eds.), Critical Theories in
Fo
19 Education: Changing Terrains of Knowledge and Politics. New York Routledge, 45-65.
20 Cakir, M. (2008). Constructivist Approaches to Learning in Science and their Implications for
21 Science Pedagogy: A Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental &
rP
22
23
Science Education, 3(4): 193-206.
24 Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ee
25
26 Crookes, G. (2013). Critical ELT in action: Foundations, promises, praxis. New York:
27 Routledge.
28
rR
Cunningham, D. J. (2019). Telecollaboration for content and language learning: A Genre-

29
based approach.
30
31
Ferreras-Méndez, J. L., Fernández-Mesa, A. & Alegre, J. (2019). Export Performance in
ev
32 SMEs: The Importance of External Knowledge Search Strategies and Absorptive Capacity.
33 Management International Review, 59(3): 413-437.
34 Freire, P. (2003). Política e Educação (7th ed.). São Paulo: Cortez.
iew
35 Freire, P. (1987). Pedagogia do oprimido (17th ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.
36 Freire, P. (1981). Ação cultural para a liberdade (5th ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.
37
Freire, P. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Seabury.
38
39 Giroux H. A. (2006) Henry Giroux on Critical Pedagogy and the Responsibilities of the
40 Public Intellectual. In: America on the Edge. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
On
41 Helm, F. (2015). The practices and challenges of telecollaboration in higher education in

42 Europe. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2): 197–217.
43 http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2015/helm.pdf
44
ly
Kohn, K. & Hoffstaedter, P. (2017) Learner agency and non-native speaker identity in
45
46
pedagogical lingua franca conversations: insights from intercultural telecollaboration in
47 foreign language education, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(5): 351-367. DOI:
48 10.1080/09588221.2017.1304966
49 Kynigos, C. & Futschek, G. (2015). Re-situating constructionism. Constructivist Foundations,
50 10(3): 281-284.
51 Lambert, J. (2002). Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community. Berkeley:
52
Digital Diner.
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 20
3
4 Menezes de Souza, L. M. (2012). Engaging the global by resituating the local. In: V. O.
5 Andreotti, L. M. Menezes de Souza (Eds.). Postcolonial perspectives on global citizenship
6
education. New York & London: Routledge.
7
8
Muirhead, B. (2002). E-tivities: The key to active online learning.
9 Nunnaly, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. Sydney: McGraw-Hill.
10 O'Dowd, R. (2011). Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the
11 core of foreign language education? Language Teaching, 44 (3): 368-380.
12 O'Dowd, R., & Waire, P. (2009). Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer
13 Assisted Language Learning, 22(2): 173-188.
14
Papert, S. (1993). The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer.
15
16 New York: Basic Books.
17 Papert, S. (1986). Constructionism: A new opportunity for elementary science education.
18 Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Cambridge: MIT Media Laboratory.
Fo
19 Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic
20 Books.
21 Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P., & Ioannou, A. (2016). Enacting artifact-based activities for social
rP
22
23
technologies in language learning using a design-based research approach. Computers in
24 Human Behavior, 63: 556-567.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2009). P21's Framework for 21st Century Learning.
ee
25
26 http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework
27 Pennycook, A. (2016). Politics, power relationships and ELT. In: G. Hall (Ed.): The
28
rR
Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. Routledge Handbooks Online.

29
Abingdon: Routledge.
30
31
Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ:
ev
32 Lawrence Erlbaum.
33 Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
34 Piaget, J. (1945). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. London: Heinemann.
iew
35 Piaget, J. (1957). Construction of reality in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
36 Porto, M., & Byram, M. (2015). A curriculum for action in the community and intercultural
37
citizenship in higher education. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(3), 226-242.
38
39 Porto, M., & Yulita, L. (2016). Language and intercultural citizenship education for a culture
40 of peace: The Malvinas/Falklands Project.
On
41 Priego, S. & Liaw, M. L. (2017). Understanding different levels of group functionality:

42 activity systems analysis of an intercultural telecollaborative multilingual digital
43 storytelling project, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(5): 368-389. DOI:
44
ly
10.1080/09588221.2017.1306567
45
46
Robin, B. (2009). Digital Storytelling: A Powerful Technology Tool for the 21st Century
47 Classroom. Journal Theory into Practice, 47 (3): 220-228.
48 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405840802153916
49 Robin, B. & McNeil, S. (2012). What educators should know about teaching digital
50 storytelling. Digital Education Review, 22: 37-51.
51 http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/11294
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 21
3
4 Sadler, R., & Dooly, M. (2016). Twelve years of telecollaboration: what we have learnt. ELT
5 Journal; early access, doi: 10.1093/elt/ccw041.
6
Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. Routledge.
7
8
UNESCO (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Paris:
9 UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247444e.pdf
10 UNESCO (2015). Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
11 United Nations Sustainable Development knowledge platform. General Assembly Distr.:
12 General 21 October 2015, Seventieth session, Agenda items 15 and 116 Resolution
13 adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015.
14
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication
15
16 UNESCO (2005). UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005 – 2014: The
17 DESD at a glance. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from:
18 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001416/141629e.pdf
Fo
19 UNICEF (1993). UNICEF Annual Report 1993. New York: UNICEF.

20 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
21 In: Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S. & Souberman, E. (eds.). Cambridge, MA:
rP
22
23
Harvard University Press.
24 Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
About the author(s)
ev
32 Author #1 biographical statement

33 Author #2 biographical statement
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Fo
19
20
21
rP
22 Figure 1. The 17 UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goals1

23
24
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59 1 Source: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/03/un-statistical-commission-endorses-
60
global-indicator-framework/

1
2
3 Table 1. Stages and tasks of the YES project, based on Salmon's model for online learning
4
(2000). Source: the authors.
5
6
7
8 Stages Tasks and Activities
9
10
11
12 Stage 1: Access · Becoming familiar with the virtual exchange project and with
13 and Motivation the technologies to be used:
14
15
16
· Pre-intervention questionnaire
17
18 · Diagnostic test
Fo
19
20 · Digital profile on Google+ Community
21
rP
22 · Ice-breaking questions
23
24 · Selection of NGO
ee
25
26
27
28 Stage 2: Online · Building the online community:
rR
29 Socialisation
30 · Responses to ice-breaking questions
31
ev
32 · Kahoot! Game
33
34
· Group formation
iew
35
36
37 · Introductory videos on Google+
38
39 · 1st synchronous exchange
40
On
41 · Design of interview with NGO representatives

42
43 · Written reflective essay about 1st synchronous exchange
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 2
3
4
5
6
Stage 3: · Exploring and sharing cultural and linguistic knowledge:
7 Information
8 Exchange · Language experiences
9
10 · ‘The DNA Journey’ video questions and answers
11
12 · ‘The DNA Journey’ video feedback exchange
13
14 · Interview with NGO representatives
15
16
17
18
Fo
Stage 4.1: · Knowledge construction: Social entrepreneurship and

19 Knowledge community engagement
20
Construction
21
· Brainstorming, exchange of ideas and advice for social problem
rP
22
23
24
· 2nd synchronous exchange
ee
25
26 · Written reflective essay about 2nd synchronous exchange
27
28
rR
29
30 Stage 4.2: · Developing a business innovation (product/service/app)
31 Collaborative addressing a social problem and presenting it in a digital story:
ev
32 Artefact
33 Construction 1 · Script of digital story
34
iew
35 · Creating the digital stories

36
37 · Uploading & sharing digital stories on Google+ Community
38
39
· Assessing digital stories
40
On
41
42
43
Stage 4.3: · Presenting the business innovation for a social problem in an
44
ly
45 Collaborative elevator pitch:

46 Artefact
47 Construction 2 · Preparing elevator pitches
48
49 · Delivering elevator pitches
50
51 · Participating in fictitious Business Fair
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2 3
3
4
5
6
Stage 5.1: · Reflections and evaluation:
7 Development
8 · Peer feedback exchange on digital stories and feedback from
9 NGOs
10
11 · Peer assessment sheets
12
13 · Voting poll
14
15 · 3rd synchronous exchange
16
17
· Written comparative reflections paper about 3rd synchronous
18
Fo
19 exchange
20
21 · Post-intervention questionnaire
rP
22
23 · Awards
24
ee
25 · Focus group interviews

26
27
28
rR
29 Stage 5.2: · Making and exchanging farewell videos:

30 Wrapping-up
31 · Farewell video exchange
ev
32
33 · Farewell video session
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 Table 2. Cypriot organisations' names and missions
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Fo
19
20
21
rP
22
23
24
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
3 Table 3. Pre- and Post- intervention whole-group Mean paired-sample t-test results
4
5
6
7 Paired-sample Statistics
8 Pair
9 Standard standard
10 Variables Mean deviation Pair Mean deviation t- value p-value
11 MOT 4.69 0.88
12 Pair 1 -.24 1.01 -1.54 .13
MOTP 4.93 1.09
13 AWA 4.74 0.86
14 Pair 2 -.041 .45 -.59 .55
AWAP 4.78 0.83
15
16 LING 4.42 1.27
17 Pair 3 .611 1.51 2.61 .01
LINGP 5.03 1.17
18
Fo
TEA 5.20 0.89

19 Pair 4 .12 .91 .89 .37
TEAP 5.07 1.06
20
21 DIG 5.35 1.25
rP
22 Pair 5 .06 1.42 .29 .77

DIGP 5.28 1.20
23 ANX 5.39 1.04
Pair 6 -1.10 1.24 -5.78 .00
24
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
4
organisation
5
6 DIGITAL STORIES Organisations SDGs
7
8 interviewed
9
10 “Marmak, the Water Bubble” DESEEA 6: Clean water and sanitation
11
12 14: Life below water (Environment protection)
13
14 “SmartArt” Art and 7: Affordable and clean energy
15 Environment
16 Research Centre 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure
17
18 11: Sustainable cities and communities
Fo
19
20 “Meet your Foreign Friend” CEPAIM 4: Quality education
21
rP
22 10: Reduced inequalities

23
24 16: Peace, justice and strong institutions
ee
25
26 “Charger Bag” Malva 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure
27 Community Radio
28 Station
rR
29
30 “Umbrella StanDry” AESCO 7: Affordable and clean energy
31
ev
32 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure

33
iew
35
36 “University Fair” Jovesolides 4: Quality education
37
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
4
organisation
5
7
8 interviewed
9
10 “Play and help” Funraising 1: No poverty
11
12 10: Reduced inequalities (children rights)
13
14 “Child Dash” Dancing Queen 1 & 2: No poverty and no hunger
15 Foundation
16 4: Quality education,
17
Fo
19
20 “ECO-APP” Friends of the Earth 15: Life on land (Environment protection)
21 Cyprus
rP
22
23 “Cool Car” The Centre for the 3: Good health and well-being
24 Provision of Social
ee
25 Services Andreas 4: Quality education

26 Sofocleous Κεπάκυ
28
rR
29 “SpeakUp” AEQUITAS 3: Good health and well-being

30
31 “Dognder” Dog Valley Rescue 15: Life on land (Animal rights)
ev
32 Center
33
34 “Visa-Kid” Parents Association 1: No poverty
iew
35 Lanitio Primary School

36 4: Quality education
37
39
40 “EasyPaws” Friends of the Earth 15: Life on land (Environmental protection and
On
41 Cyprus Animal rights)

42
43 “Mitro app” Polydynamo Kentro, 1: No poverty
44
ly
IERA MHTROPOLIS
46 LEMESOU
48
49 “Myportablediary” Center for Preventive 3: Good health and well-being
50
Paediatrics
51
52
“Learn Greek” Migrant Information 4: Quality education
53
54 Center (Mihub)
10: Reduced inequalities
55
56
16: Peace, justice and strong institutions
57
58
“Pet Finder” Pets2Adopt 16: Life on land (Animal rights)
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Fo
19
20
21
rP
22
23
24
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
4
organisation
5
7
8 interviewed
9
10 “Marmak, the Water Bubble” DESEEA 6: Clean water and sanitation
11
12 14: Life below water (Environment protection)
13
14 “SmartArt” Art and 7: Affordable and clean energy
15 Environment
16 Research Centre 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure
17
Fo
19
20 “Meet your Foreign Friend” CEPAIM 4: Quality education
21
rP

23
ee
25
26 “Charger Bag” Malva 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure
27 Community Radio
28 Station
rR
29
30 “Umbrella StanDry” AESCO 7: Affordable and clean energy
31
ev
32 9: Industry, innovation, infrastructure

33
iew
35
36 “University Fair” Jovesolides 4: Quality education
37
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

1
2
4
organisation
5
7
8 interviewed
9
10 “Play and help” Funraising 1: No poverty
11
13
14 “Child Dash” Dancing Queen 1 & 2: No poverty and no hunger
15 Foundation
16 4: Quality education,
17
Fo
19
20 “ECO-APP” Friends of the Earth 15: Life on land (Environment protection)
21 Cyprus
rP
22
23 “Cool Car” The Centre for the 3: Good health and well-being
24 Provision of Social
ee
25 Services Andreas 4: Quality education

26 Sofocleous Κεπάκυ
28
rR
29 “SpeakUp” AEQUITAS 3: Good health and well-being

30
31 “Dognder” Dog Valley Rescue 15: Life on land (Animal rights)
ev
32 Center
33
34 “Visa-Kid” Parents Association 1: No poverty
iew
35 Lanitio Primary School

36 4: Quality education
37
39
40 “EasyPaws” Friends of the Earth 15: Life on land (Environmental protection and
On
41 Cyprus Animal rights)

42
43 “Mitro app” Polydynamo Kentro, 1: No poverty
44
ly
IERA MHTROPOLIS
46 LEMESOU
48
49 “Myportablediary” Center for Preventive 3: Good health and well-being
50
Paediatrics
51
52
“Learn Greek” Migrant Information 4: Quality education
53
54 Center (Mihub)
10: Reduced inequalities
55
56
16: Peace, justice and strong institutions
57
58
“Pet Finder” Pets2Adopt 16: Life on land (Animal rights)
59
60

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Fo
19
20
21
rP
22
23
24
ee
25
26
27
28
rR
29
30
31
ev
32
33
34
iew
35
36
37
38
39
40
On
41
42
43
44
ly
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

For Peer Review Only: Artefact Co-Construction in Virtual Exchange: Youth Entrepreneurship For Society'

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

For Peer Review Only: Artefact Co-Construction in Virtual Exchange: Youth Entrepreneurship For Society'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Journal: Computer Assisted Language Learning

Manuscript Type: Original Article

artefact construction, English for Specific Purposes, 21st Century

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

inclusion (Warschauer, 2003) and tackle problems of discrimination, marginalisation, and

32 Foreign language virtual exchange or telecollaboration refers to virtual intercultural

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

(2000). Source: the authors.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

contexts contribute to the development of 21st century competences?

35 through a virtual exchange project

41 considered to be "most effective when part of an activity the learner experiences as

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

develop a liberating praxis. Therefore, education is a key element in fostering this

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

41 virtual exchange, participants interacted in English at a B2 level according to the Common

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

32 collaboration and the co-construction of artefacts, within an authentic, meaningful, learner-

35 (Warschauer, 2003, p. 8) and their usefulness for addressing problems related to

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

Table 4. Questions from the Pre- and Post- intervention questionnaires.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

32 Theme 2: Intercultural learning:

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

35 Theme 4: Digital competence:

entrepreneurs or social entrepreneurs.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

19 Theme 6: Motivation and overall perceptions:

32 Cypriot CUT female student

35 cultures", Austrian female UV student

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

41 and focus-group interviews.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

work of Center for Preventive Paediatrics.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

who constructed socially-oriented artefacts in collaboration with their foreign peers.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

promoting social change.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

Cunningham, D. J. (2019). Telecollaboration for content and language learning: A Genre-

41 Helm, F. (2015). The practices and challenges of telecollaboration in higher education in

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. Routledge Handbooks Online.

41 Priego, S. & Liaw, M. L. (2017). Understanding different levels of group functionality:

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

19 UNICEF (1993). UNICEF Annual Report 1993. New York: UNICEF.

32 Author #1 biographical statement

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

22 Figure 1. The 17 UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goals1

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

41 · Design of interview with NGO representatives

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

Stage 4.1: · Knowledge construction: Social entrepreneurship and

35 · Creating the digital stories

45 Collaborative elevator pitch:

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ncal Email: NCAL-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk

25 · Focus group interviews

29 Stage 5.2: · Making and exchanging farewell videos: