Embedding Critical Thinking in Global Virtual Exchange—Teaching Sociology Across National Borders in Virtual Classrooms

Abstract

Global virtual exchange is a mode of teaching that can reach classrooms beyond national borders and across disciplines. This paper utilizes students’ online conversations and learning projects as primary data to demonstrate experiential learning and critical thinking processes in a global virtual classroom between students in the U.S. and China. Findings reveal that guided weekly online conversations between American and Chinese students provided experiential learning about personal and familial experiences as well as deep insights into healthcare and pension policies affecting individuals and societies. Furthermore, collaborative learning projects on healthcare and pension systems among international students embedded critical thinking in the learning process. These learning projects are comparative and thought-provoking, offering students a chance to apply a critical and global lens to the understanding of social policies and services in different social and cultural contexts. The expansion of global virtual exchange may be a byproduct of COVID-19 distant learning; it may have opened new channels for breaking geographic boundaries of learning sociology in global and critical perspectives.

1. Introduction

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, online learning was estimated to be at 15.7% among all post-secondary degree-granting institutions (Kozimor 2020, p. 181). Within one month, in March of 2020, all face-to-face classes in most universities in the U.S. (and certainly at the university that this paper is based on) were converted to online remote teaching. Since then, online remote learning has created unprecedented challenges for faculty and students due to technological challenges, online access problems, child-care difficulties, and teaching mode change complications. Meanwhile, it has also created unintended consequences of rapid growth in various online technological innovations, such as online meeting rooms and learning platforms. When all travel was banned, international travel and study abroad programs were no longer possible. In such a context, how do students engage in global learning? This paper adds to the knowledge of global virtual learning for students and faculty across the globe who are sharing the same virtual classrooms across national borders. Specifically, we offer insights into experiential learning and critical thinking in global virtual classrooms through students’ online interaction and mutual learning projects. The findings will add to the literature on sociological teaching pedagogy for online classrooms, comparative understandings and critical thinking in students’ learning projects, and cross-cultural communications in higher education in general.

1.1. Background of Virtual and Experiential Learning

The origin of virtual exchange can be traced back to the end of the Cold War Communication between New York and Moscow; it was pioneered in the International Education and Resource Network (iEARN) in 1988 to enhance learning and exchange between students in New York and the Soviet Union (IEARN.org 2007). Eventually, it became a Computer-Assisted Communication (CAC) that enhanced foreign language learning and communication (O’Dowd 2017). During the COVID-19 era, virtual learning rapidly expanded (Stevens Initiative 2020; Vásquez 2022; Zak 2021) and replaced face-to-face classrooms for a period, ranging from one semester in some nations to one or more years in others.

By definition, virtual exchange is “a practice, supported by research, that consists of sustained, technology-enabled, people-to-people education programmes or activities in which constructive communication and interaction takes place between individuals or groups who are geographically separated and/or from different cultural backgrounds, with the support of educators or facilitators” (http://evolve-erasmus.eu/about-evolve/what-is-virtual-exchange/, accessed on 7 July 2025). Global virtual exchange is defined as “collaborative work among individuals, teams, and organizations that spread across countries and that is enabled by technology-mediated communication” (Froese et al. 2025, p. 2).

Global experiences are known to be beneficial for students’ learning experiences and outcome. Lee et al. (2022), using 12-year data tracking nearly 50,000 students who participated in global experiences, found that students’ participation in study abroad programs was positively related to their increase in grade-point-average (GPA) and graduation rate. But minorities were under-represented in study abroad programs. While African Americans represent 15% of the student population, only 5% of them participate in study abroad programs. Similarly, while Hispanic students account for 17% of the student population, only 9% participate in study abroad programs (Alami et al. 2022). Global virtual exchange provides first-generation college students with an affordable global experience. Studies have shown that “International Virtual Exchange leads to higher average GPA each successive semester after taking the course”, and it also increases participants’ graduation rates (Lee et al. 2022, p. 91). In addition, it reduces the inequality in the access of funds to travel abroad and exposes minority and less financially privileged students to an international or global learning experience (Commander et al. 2022).

One of the important features of a study abroad experience is experiential learning. Immersion in a culture during a study abroad experience is known to yield a high impact on students’ learning experiences and outcomes. When the entire world was under lockdown, how could students access experiential learning opportunities? This is when global virtual exchange came in to offer a contribution.

By definition, “experiential learning emphasizes the central role experience plays in the learning process and offers a holistic integrative perspective on learning that combines experience, perceptions, cognition, and behavior” (Soyer et al. 2023, p. 151). Global virtual exchange has the potential to share personal, familial, and community experiences in a virtual classroom. This experience, when well-integrated with learning objectives and processes, can potentially contribute to experiential learning as well as enhance conceptual understanding of learning objectives. This study will demonstrate how this experiential learning process unfolds and progresses to reach the learning objectives of critical thinking in sociological teaching.

1.2. Critical Thinking in Sociological Teaching

Critical thinking is “the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action” (Goldsmith 2013, p. 9). In this process of critical thinking, we are learning and experiencing three domains: knowledge, self, and world (Barnett 1997). In all higher educational institutions in the West, “critical thinking is often regarded as the hallmark of a good education” (Hammersley-Fletcher and Hanley 2016, p. 978). Yet, when students in the U.S. share a global virtual classroom with students from abroad who experience “knowledge, self, and world” completely differently from those of the West, how can critical thinking still play an educational role?

Some scholars raised the issue of “conceptual colonialism” (Biggs 1997) in which non-Western learning styles are marginalized and perceived as “lacking” or “in deficit” in “deep learning” (Egege and Kutieleh 2004). In their comparative study of Chinese and American students, Zhou et al. (2008) argue that “there are complexities in cultural synergy between groups” (p. 983), noting that American students are often viewed as independent thinkers able to challenge teachers or authority, while Chinese students are seen as obedient and conservative, accepting and respecting teachers’ views, whatever they are. In a virtual exchange classroom, where teaching is not face-to-face, “obedience” or “independence” are not easily observed. This paper, thus, adds to the literature on interactive learning by demonstrating how virtual environments can potentially foster critical thinking across global contexts, transcending the stereotypical cultural patterns entrenched in traditional face-to-face pedagogies.

Prior studies have shown that problem-based learning (PBL) in group collaboration represents a form of progressive active learning, enhancing students’ critical thinking and problem-solving competencies (Duch et al. 2001). Collaborative problem-solving is the “organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning” (Xu et al. 2023, p. 1). This pedagogical approach places students at the center of the learning and employs real-world situations as the foundation in the learning process (Liang et al. 2017).

Global and comparative studies have also provided insights into critical thinking within cultural contexts. Ito (2024) conducted a comparative analysis of treatments for psychosocial disabilities across countries in the Global North and Global South. The study contends that East Asian countries challenge the Global North/South dichotomy and advocates for discarding “binary thinking” (113). Applying global and comparative scope, Eseverri-Mayer (2024) examined Islamophobia in three major cities of Madrid, Paris, and London. To fight against Islamophobia, Muslim activists in London, Paris, and Madrid used similar “bonding” or “bridging” social capital but different techniques to organize social groups against Islamophobia because of the different social context in each mega city. How do educators go beyond the binary thinking of East vs. West or North vs. South to understand complex social, cultural, and political contexts in shaping deep learning and critical thinking? This study contributes to the literature on global virtual exchange by addressing this question, offering insights into how transcultural dialogues can foster nuanced understandings beyond simplistic geopolitical divides.

2. Research Context and Methods

The course “Global Aging and Families” is a senior-level undergraduate class cross-listed for sociology, gerontology, and public policy students at a university in the Southeast of the United States. The material addresses topics related to aging, including population aging, health and aging, healthcare system comparisons, work and retirement, pension system comparisons, and comparative long-term care practices and systems. While students are recommended to have completed introductory courses in sociology or gerontology, this recommendation is not a mandatory requirement. In prior traditional in-person teaching semesters, class enrollment typically ranged from 20 to 35 students. Following the shift to online instruction at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021, until now, enrollment in the online iteration of this course increased to 48, which was the maximum enrollment limit set by the university for senior-level undergraduate classes.

During COVID-19, the university launched a global virtual exchange initiative to encourage faculty with international connections to expand their classrooms virtually abroad. As part of this effort, a semester-long training course was provided for instructors who participated in this initiative. The senior faculty and an international partner from China participated in the training in the Spring of 2022. The global virtual exchange mode of this course was first launched in the Fall of 2022. There were 50 U.S. undergraduate students enrolled in this class; 10 first-year graduate students at an Eastern Chinese university participated in this program.

American and Chinese students shared the same textbook, syllabus, and class activities. The course was structured in three major components: 1. Knowledge acquisition through textbook readings, supplemented by weekly quizzes and two examinations. 2. Experiential learning by weekly cross-cultural dialogues through online discussions between U.S. and Chinese students. Each participant was required to pose one thought-provoking question and respond to two peers—one international and one domestic. 3. Learning projects involved both individual and group participation. Each student was required to select a country for their focused study and research; then, this country was grouped into different models of healthcare and retirement systems, such as Bismarck, Beveridge, National Insurance Systems, out-of-pocket, and mixed. The Bismarck model is represented by Germany, funded by employer/employee co-payment into a healthcare fund. It is pooled into a national “sickness fund” (Whittington et al. 2021, p. 162). The Beveridge model originated in the United Kingdom, in which the government is the single payer and single provider in the National Health Service (NHS) system (Ibid., p. 163). The National Health Insurance (NHI) model is represented by Canada, which pools funds like Germany, but the government is the single payer like in the U.K. (Ibid., pp. 164–65). With the acquisition of basic knowledge through textbook reading, students are expected to apply this knowledge to their understanding of other countries in their practices and operations of healthcare or pension systems.

To limit the number of students within each group, three more groups were added based on geographic locality: African, Asian, and North/South American countries. All these readings, weekly interactions, and learning projects were designed to achieve the 6 learning objectives, simplified in 3 goals: 1. knowledge acquisition, 2. experiential learning, and 3. critical thinking. The central research question for this study is as follows: How does global virtual exchange enhance experiential learning and critical thinking? In this research, we will focus on the process and operationalization of experiential learning and critical thinking in global virtual exchange classrooms.

2.1. Data Sources

This paper utilized students’ 1. online weekly communication and 2. learning projects as primary qualitative data to generate understanding of the effectiveness of global virtual exchange classes in providing opportunities for experiential learning, comparative understanding, and critical thinking skills. Data was retrieved from weekly student exchanges or conversations posted on the Packback platform. Packback is an online learning tool that facilitates online classroom learning and exchange. It has the function of encouraging thought-provoking questions by setting a curiosity score of a certain level, such as 60. It also detects plagiarism as well as short or meaningless postings.

For the fall semester of 2022, a total of 472 contextual questions and 894 responses were included. Each contextual question and response ranged from 100 to 300 words. Using it as a database, we started with a few key word searches based on our central research questions about experiential learning and critical thinking. The first search was based on “COVID-19 experiences”; it generated 36 pages, 12,822 words of conversations. The second search was with key words such as “healthcare, medical insurance, hospital, doctor visit, medical cost.” It generated 69 pages of conversations and 18,985 words. The third search was on intergenerational relations, with key words such as “intergeneration” “grandparents”, “elder care”, “parental care”, “grandchildren”, and “long-term care.” It generated 64 pages, 17,874 words. To further narrow down the focus, we included only those conversations that involved both American and Chinese students in the question and response format.

Data from learning projects originated from two assignments: one focused on comparative healthcare and the other on comparative pension systems. To complete each learning project, students first selected a country for in-depth study, and all students were required to study the U.S.’s and China’s healthcare and pension systems. Based on the country they selected, students were grouped by healthcare models, such as Bismarck, Beveridge, etc. In the second step, students were expected to write a research paper to compare the three countries. In the third step, students were expected to write a comparative paper of all the countries in the model or group. In the fourth step, students in the same group were expected to have a group meeting and create a Power Point presentation to rank the countries in the group in various indicators, such as life expectancy, GDP per capita, number of doctors per capita, etc. Finally, students recorded their presentations in group audio or video and posted it on iCollege, an online app that facilitates mutual learning. All students were expected to peer-review the Power Point presentations of the group projects and rate them. The group that received the highest score would receive 10 extra points (2 percentage points) for each member. The group that received the second highest score would be rewarded with 5 extra points (one percentage point) for each member.

2.2. Data Analysis

Thematic analysis was conducted for the data with the assistance of Nvivo 14. Since weekly online conversations among students were theme-based, we downloaded conversations by weeks. Then, we used frequency search in Nvivo-14 for the first step of analysis and coding. The search result yielded the 100 most frequently used terms or concepts in students’ conversations. Among the top 10, for instance, COVID-19 had the highest hit of 190. Students discussed the impact of COVID-19 on their college life (15 hits), work opportunities (7), experience of COVID-19 (9), discrimination against COVID-19 patients (6), and mental illness during COVID-19 (10). The second most discussed topic was healthcare; it was mentioned 129 times. Breaking down “healthcare”, we understood that this code referred to healthcare during COVID-19 (22), the U.S. healthcare systems (12), healthcare experiences (11), healthcare in developed countries (9), and healthcare coverage (6 times). These contextual healthcare discussions became categories in coding. To make sense of these categories, a summary table is provided (see

Table 1. Summary table of key indicators and themes.

Indicators	Frequency	Context	Frequency	Themes, Categories	Critical Thinking
COVID-19	190	COVID-19 impacted college life	15	Social contexts	Comparative
		COVID-19 impacted opportunities	7	Contextual differences	Comparative
		Have had COVID-19	9	Mostly (all) Americans	Experiential
		COVID-19 affects view of life	5	Comparative	Experiential
		Discrimination against COVID-19 patients	6	Social contexts	Comparative
		COVID-19, vaccine, and healthcare	9	Comparative	Comparative
		COVID-19 and mental health	10	Personal, experiential	Experiential and comparative
		COVID-19 and technology use	9	Comparative	Experiential and comparative
Healthcare	139	During COVID-19	22	Healthcare context
		Compare U.S. healthcare systems to others (access and cost)	12	Healthcare systems	Comparative understanding
		Healthcare experiences (access, cost)	11	Healthcare experience	Experiential learning
		Healthcare in developed countries (insurance, access)	9	Compare systems	Comparative
		Healthcare coverage	6	Coverage	Comparative and experiential
		Universal healthcare	10	Access	Comparative and experiential
		Is healthcare price fair in the U.S.?	5	Pricing fairness	Comparative and experiential
		Healthcare is not fair (access)	4	Fairness	Comparative and experiential
		Healthcare is a human right (access)	4	Access	Comparative and experiential
		Avoid healthcare due to cost	5	Access	Comparative and experiential
Grandparents	97	Grandparents caring for grandchildren	16	Pros and cons	Cultural difference
		Skipped generation	8	Social contexts	Social contexts
		Grandparents’ pension	11	Social systems	Comparative understanding
		Take care of grandparents	13	Familial care	Cultural norms and expectations
		Love, providing love	12	Cross-cultural	Comparative experiential
Retirement	65	Retirement plans in America	10	Social systems	Experiential and comparative
		Retirement and eldercare	8	Familial and social care	Experiential and comparative
		Retirement and pension	7	Financial care	Experiential and comparative
		Retirement and quality of life	12	Financial securities	Experiential and comparative
		Retirement home	7	Familial and community	Personal, familial, community

).

The principal researcher read and re-read the codes and categories drawn from Packback online conversations and selected meaningful quotes that demonstrated a process of critical thinking through personal or familial experiences or through a process of comparative analysis and understanding. We acknowledge that the themes did not “emerge” fully from the selected data; rather, they were co-created by the researchers who actively worked to “capture implicit meanings beneath the data surface” (Clarke and Braun 2018, p. 108). From students’ weekly conversations, we came to understand that this type of experiential learning started with sharing of personal or familial experiences but went far beyond personal experiences. They showed cultural and social differences, such as intergenerational relations, as well as systemic differences in healthcare and pension systems. The discussions regarding grandparents and grandchildren generated 97 codes, the third highest word frequency after healthcare. Students shared familial experiences across borders. In critical thinking, these discussions exposed students to different cultural norms and social contexts. Because the teaching and learning process was originally not intended for publication, no permission was obtained from students for utilization of data. IRB approval was obtained (H25403) later for the purpose of research and publication. No students’ names, identifications, or characteristics are revealed. Data is reported at an aggregated scale to ensure confidentiality. The data set remains private and is not publicly accessible. For confidentiality purposes, the names of both American and Chinese universities involved are not disclosed.

3. Findings

3.1. Experiential Learning as a Process of Critical Thinking

3.1.1. Experiential Learning—Sharing COVID-19 Experiences

The online discussion about common experiences shared by both Chinese and American students highlighted the impact of COVID-19 on their college life and job opportunities and similar challenges they were facing, including social isolation, discrimination, and depression. These exchanges shortened social distance and reduced mutual animosity. Despite the prevailing “Chinese” pandemic stereotype in the U.S. (Davey 2020), students in the class engaged with Chinese classmates and recognized their experiences as equally valid human experiences. There was little abstract blaming; rather, experiential learning pulled students closer as they shared common experiences with similar social and psychological consequences. While shared experiences were explicit, cultural learning and understanding were implicit.

For instance, the guided topic in week 3 was “my experience of COVID-19.” One student raised the question: “What do you think the epidemic has affected your life?” While there were many responses, we include only a few to this question. One Chinese student said,

“The epidemic has had a lot of impact on our lives and changed many of our original living habits. For example… we learn to go to hospitals, courts, and various offices to avoid crowded queuing, and judges even hold online sessions during the epidemic prevention and control period.”

An American student responded,

“Much of the country was locked down, and the public began wearing masks and social distancing to protect ourselves from this new disease. But over time, COVID-19 culture became somewhat normal, as putting on a mask was like putting on a shirt.”

Relating to the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on mental health, an American student said:

“After about two weeks in, I had enough of watching Netflix, sleeping and sitting in my house. I felt tired all the time even though I was doing nothing. I lost my desire to do things and make plans because my situation felt hopeless.”

A Chinese student picked up the conversation and said,

“First, people infected with COVID-19 suffer from psychological problems caused by the strange eyes and rejection of those around them. Second, the closed space isolation measures taken to prevent COVID-19 make people isolated from the outside environment, depriving people of their sense of social existence and easily making people fall into depression.”

As shown, class interactions on the topic of COVID-19 between students in China and the U.S. are concrete human experiences of social isolation as well as psychological and emotional experiences of depression and hopelessness. There was little to no “blaming” for the cause of the disease as was going on in the U.S. and or Chinese media (Davey 2020). The sharing of this human experience offered students from both sides of the Pacific the opportunity to understand COVID-19 as a human experience, rather than a political trauma as portrayed in the media in the U.S.

3.1.2. Experiential Learning—Comparing Healthcare Systems

Healthcare insurance and access to healthcare services were the most heated topics after sharing conversations about COVID-19 experiences. There were 139 separate codes on the topic of healthcare that covered broad interests and responses among students. These conversations among students touched upon nearly every aspect of healthcare: access, cost, wait-time, drug cost, reimbursement rate, dental insurance, hospitalization, healthcare as a human right, etc. After coding and re-coding and making connections among the codes, we filtered through the data and identified two central themes most frequently shared among students: access and cost.

One Chinese student raised the following question in the weekly conversation: “Does health insurance play a big role in your and your family’s visit to the hospital?” Seven students responded to this question. An American student responded, “Yes, it does play a significant role in our visits,” and provided detailed information.

A Chinese student told a story about his/her grandfather who had a serious illness and was in the hospital ICU for a long time. But because he had health insurance, 70% of the cost was reimbursed. So, the student affirmed that “health insurance played a big role in my grandfather’s medical care.”

An American student shared a story about her mother’s surgery. “My mom recently had a surgery and had to pay out of pocket.” She completed payment plans, and “my grandma helped her by taking out a loan.”

On the topic of healthcare cost, one American student shared that the co-pay is USD 20-USD 35 per visit, and there is a USD 3000 deductible even though he/she purchased health insurance. This is a big amount for a student.

An international student from Thailand studying in the U.S. shared her family’s healthcare experience. Because her parents worked for the government in Thailand, the father’s healthcare cost is reimbursed by 90%. An emergency vehicle to the hospital costs only USD 10 in Thailand, quite affordable even by the local standard.

Students also brought in their newly gained knowledge about healthcare practices in different countries into the discussions. Students compared healthcare in Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, the U.S., and China. Bringing in the textbook reading material to real-life learning, students were very interactive and responsive to each other’s questions.

An overwhelming number of students, both American and Chinese, joined the discussion about the topic of “how to improve American health care system” in many rounds of conversations. One American student commented that “For-profit is what drives our economy…the medical communities are raking in record profits, yet some of our citizens cannot afford to visit the local hospitals in fear of cost.” Another American student pointed out that “U.S. is known to be a ‘developed’ country with no universal healthcare” in which “the country is more focused on the marketing and competitive in ‘selling’ the insurance than the people themselves.”

When a Chinese student shared that he or they paid CNY 90 (USD 15) per year for student health insurance, an American student shared that he paid USD 230/month for his healthcare; considering that he was young and healthy, it was “insane”, in his words. Many American students shared about their current healthcare insurance through their parents and expressed concerns about their future health insurance cost. One American student said that she had health insurance, but when she had her blood work performed, she was “slammed with a $300+ bill due to my insurance rejecting the lab work…people purchase health insurance and don’t use it because of the high costs of being seen. What can you do if you cannot afford to be seen”. Five other American students responded that they avoided or delayed doctor’s visit or treatment because of cost or lack of insurance coverage. One student lamented, “why can the Chinese government take care of its 1.4 billion people while our government refuses to take care our own people and provide universal healthcare?” Questions and comments like these reduce the cultural and social distance among students and provide an experiential learning opportunity to understand daily challenges in different social contexts. Most importantly, experiential learning provided detailed examples in comparative understanding of healthcare systems. Consequently, students gained a critical lens through comparative understanding, both by real-life situations and knowledge acquisition. This critical thinking is embedded in the process of learning, through knowledge, self-reflection, and comparative understanding of the world.

3.1.3. Experiential Learning—Comparative Pension Systems

During the weeks that students were reading the textbook on comparative pension systems, they also shared pension practices as known in each other’s families. There were 65 codes related to pension and retirement, covering financial, social, and communal aspects of retirement. Discussions about financial security in retirement included 29 different conversations on the aspects of pension and financial security of parents, grandparents, and oneself. One Chinese student said:

“My parents’ pension includes basic pension, personal account pension, commercial pension insurance and personal savings. They have joined the government’s public pension plan, which allows citizens who have retired and contributed for 15 years to receive monthly pensions.”

When it came to the students’ grandparents, though, a Chinese student shared, “my grandparents only received basic pension insurance, only a few hundred yuan a month, and no other pension from the workplace. This amount of money was very small, not enough to cover their living expenses, so they relied heavily on their children’s support and help financially.”

Responding to the Chinese student, an American student commented:

“I find that my grandparents also receive the most basic pension due to their tax contributions were not up to the amount required, they also came to America at the older age and work almost illegally for quite sometime before they are qualified for citizenship. Causing them to lose years of Tax report and pushed them into the most basic pension for elders. For my parents, since they are the second generation, they are able to get a better pension and investment in both private and public ones.”

Furthering the conversation about the relationship between occupation and pension systems, one Chinese student said:

“I find that the amount of pension received by people of different occupations in China will vary greatly. Civil servants receive good pensions. They often live a rich life and can enjoy retirement without the pressure of life. However, pensions of many occupations are still not guaranteed. For example, some temporary employees and some low-income occupational units pay very little pensions, which makes their lives insecure.”

Concurring with the Chinese student, an American student responded:

“Great post! My father worked for the state government for over 35 years and is going to get a great pension… In addition to receiving a pension from the government, which will be about 90% of his highest paycheck until death, my father will also receive social security. My mother is retired from CNN and has a 401 k that the company has helped match throughout the duration of her employment…”

Whether in China or the U.S., students see more similarities than differences. Their familial experiences in different social and cultural contexts added a contextualized understanding of different pensions systems based on location, employment length, and occupational differences. Immigrant experiences in America added another layer of understanding for both American and Chinese students sharing the virtual classroom. While textbook reading provided basic knowledge acquisition about retirement and pension systems, sharing familial experiences in China and the U.S. provided experiential learning about how pension and financial security differ in generations, occupations, and length of employment in both China and the U.S.

3.1.4. Experiential Learning—Cross-Cultural Differences in Intergenerational Relations

Discussions about intergenerational relations showed the third highest frequency among students’ weekly conversations. There were 97 codes dealing with five major aspects of intergenerational relations: grandparents raising grandchildren, skipped-generation families, grandparents’ pensions, taking care of grandparents, and topics of love and providing love between generations. With limited space, we will only focus on the most frequently discussed topic under this theme, grandparents caring for grandchildren. One Chinese student asked, “How do you feel about grandparents taking care of their grandchildren?” This student described such a scenario: In China, grandparents taking care of grandchildren is a cultural norm and common practice. With large numbers of rural youth migrating to urban China, grandparents often follow their adult children to cities to take care of their grandchildren. Because of social isolation in urban areas, older adults tend to be unhappy. In addition, the older parents and adult children do not always agree on the techniques of educating the children. Intergenerational conflicts arise between generations. So, the Chinese student asked, “How do you think about these things?”

An American student responded to this scenario adamantly:

“To simply put it, the grandchildren are not their children! We cannot expect grandparents to bear that responsibility. There are some cases in which this is applicable and okay, but it ultimately depends on the grandparents and their wishes. Sometimes that can be challenging as the age gap is too much, and how can we expect an older person who has needs of their own to take care of children? Also, the grandchildren might not be able to receive the full care and attention they need. As we age, we face barriers, and our life expectancy shortens. The timespan to raise a child is long and so that might be tough to think about.”

Following the same conversation, another Chinese student picked up the conversation and added the advantages and disadvantages of grandparents raising grandchildren:

“… The advantage is that it can reduce the cost of hiring a nanny for the family, relieve the financial pressure of the adult children and allow them to focus on their work. Meanwhile, taking care of the grandchildren can also give the grandparents a sense of social value and happiness. The disadvantage is that the grandparents will feel tired in the process of taking care of their grandchildren, which will affect their health. In addition, the phenomenon of overindulgence of grandchildren is also relatively common, which is not conducive to the healthy growth of children. These issues require families to find a balanced point.”

These on-going conversations between Chinese and American students clearly displayed cultural difference in rearing grandchildren, social norms and expectations for grandparents, and familial experiences in different social contexts. In these conversations, American students had the opportunity to put themselves into the cultural context of Chinese students. In the meantime, Chinese students had a fresh look into the mind-sets of their peers in the U.S. This comparative understanding of different cultural norms about grandchild rearing offered a critical lens to both Chinese and American students and gave them an opportunity to understand each other in their own social contexts.

3.2. Embedded Critical Thinking in Learning Projects—Global and Comparative Lens

Students in global virtual exchange were provided opportunities to work together towards a group learning project to gain a comparative and critical lens. To accomplish this goal, we set up a four-step process for two learning projects about comparative healthcare and pension systems (see Appendix A for assignment details). Step one: all students must sign up for a country to focus their study on both healthcare and pension systems.

After selecting a country, each student must conduct online and library research to answer a list of questions. These questions are related to a comparative understanding of the selected country in relation to the U.S.’s and China’s healthcare and pension systems (see Appendix A). At the end of step one, students should fill out a table comparing key variables—such as life expectancy, GDP per capita, doctors per 100 people, and whether universal healthcare exists—for their selected country, the U.S., and China (see Appendix A for details).

In the second step, students are automatically grouped, based on the country they selected, into a model or continent. Students from the same group are encouraged to read all papers of classmates but are required to read four classmates’ papers about four other countries’ healthcare and pension systems. They must retrieve information from classmates’ papers to complete the comparative table (see Appendix A for details).

At the end of the comparative project, each student must write reflective comments about what they have learned from conducting this comparative project. Every student, after a group comparison, commented on how the group project helped them learn how the U.S. was the only country to have targeted healthcare compared to the countries following the Bismarck, Beveridge, or National Health Insurance models. Because they were required to answer questions about funding sources for healthcare and pension systems, students understood that they could not just say “the government should pay”; instead, their answers became more specific, such as, “The U.S. should use a percentage from citizen’s taxes to pay for the healthcare and give the option to opt in or out of private insurance.” Most students commented that “America should steer away from being for-profit by capping on medical procedures and medication.” These critical insights clearly came out of a comparative lens and deeper understanding about healthcare funding models and differences.

In the third step, students were expected to hold an online meeting, using whatever media they chose, to create a Power Point presentation and to record this presentation with each group member talking about the countries they studied. This presentation resulted in some excellent and effective visual learning results (see Figure 1). Unfortunately, the Chinese students did not feel comfortable joining American students in group activities, partially due to the difficulty of managing the 12 h time difference in group-activity coordination, partially due to discomfort of direct communication in English with American students. They ended up choosing 10 different countries in Asia as a group.

Finally, all students were expected to vote for the best presentation. Based on the highest score, the group that won first place (out of six groups) received 10 extra points for each group member (roughly two percentage points). The group that won second place received five extra points (one percentage point) for each group member. Students were provided with a rubric for rating each other’s Power Point slides (see Appendix B). The students’ involvement in evaluation energized the class. Students who won the first and second prizes were happy to receive higher returns in their grades.

These learning projects were built on online research, textbook learning and reflection, mutual learning of each other’s research, comparative understanding of several countries’ healthcare and pension systems, and an overall critical understanding of strengths and weaknesses in different healthcare/pension systems and services. From step 1 to step 4 of the learning projects, students started with “what” healthcare or pensions systems are alike; followed by comparative understandings of “how” countries differ and then culminating in “why” they differ. A critical and comparative stand was shaped in the process of this learning through combined activities, including student exchange through weekly Packback conversations with classmates from different countries and completing the learning projects by oneself and with one’s groupmates through comparing countries and models in healthcare and pension systems.

At the end of this class, in the final week of online discussion, several students commented on the strength of online communication and conversation. One comment said, “Loved the zoom meetings, and getting to interact with international students was really cool.” Another said, “I like doing the weekly Packbacks, we were asked to respond to one Chinese student and one American student.” Students also commented on learning projects; one said, “I liked the learning projects. They helped me to critically evaluate the themes of the course” Students enjoyed the online communication and sharing of opinions and experiences: “I liked how she encouraged us to share our opinions and things we noticed”. “The communication part was a strength.”

4. Discussions

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual exchange has expanded dramatically to encompass global classrooms beyond national borders and geographic distance and time zones. This paper adds to the specific knowledge of the extent to which global virtual exchange can be effective in sociological teaching to encourage critical thinking and global and comparative understanding.

First, global and asynchronous classrooms can be effective in experiential learning. Having the benefit of conducting online conversations at students’ convenience of time and space, students are more likely to feel comfortable sharing their personal experiences about COVID-19, healthcare, family relationships, etc. These conversations are seemingly “personal” and “familial”; they reveal cultural and structural differences in practices of healthcare, retirement financial security, and intergenerational relations. Students gain insights into the social and cultural contexts of these issues and systems. This experiential learning was enriched by mutual sharing of experiences, without having to go into a foreign country or conduct an interview with a foreign student. This forum is one of the benefits of global virtual exchange (Liu et al. 2022; Commander et al. 2022), especially for minority students with limited travel funds (Luo and Jamieson Drake 2015; Zak 2021). In this university, participation in study abroad programs involved only 2% of the student population. Global virtual exchange is an economic way of gaining global experience without high expenditure of going abroad.

Second, critical thinking with a global and comparative lens can be achieved from global virtual classroom learning, if learning projects are set as a step-by-step progressive learning process. As shown earlier, students started with a manageable learning project about healthcare and pension systems of the U.S., China, and a third country of their choice. Then, their scope was expanded to a group comparative study of the same model, and finally, it was a class summary of group presentations that all students must evaluate. This step-by-step learning process increased students’ learning, country by country, group by group, and finally they gained a global comparative understanding of major social policies of healthcare, pension systems, and long-term care. The process itself was gradual enhanced learning with progressive practice of critical thinking.

Third, global virtual exchange, as shown in earlier research, gave American students the opportunity to have online communications with Chinese students (Zhang et al. 2025; Wright et al. 2024). This direct contact reduced animosity, which had been prevalent since the beginning of the COVID-19 during the first Trump administration. In addition, when students were engaging in one-on-one online conversations, Chinese students were less likely to be treated as the “deficient” other, as was observed in prior research about classroom learning (Egege and Kutieleh 2004; Zhou et al. 2008). Different from the face-to-face classroom setting, normally “shy” and “quiet” students in online classrooms can have their voice heard with little competition or feeling of embarrassment. Consequently, online virtual classrooms can increase participation rate if virtual interactions are properly set and guided.

At the end of the class, American students made mostly positive comments about this international learning experience. Students whom the instructor never met face-to-face later reached out to request a reference; their first sentence was: “I was your student in the global virtual exchange class with Chinese student…” Evidently, this is an experience that stood out for most students, who rarely had experience traveling abroad. A global virtual exchange closely simulates direct contact with foreign students in a classroom setting.

Limitations

Global virtual exchange has its limitations too. The first major limitation is the misalignment of academic schedules between China and the U.S. The semester starts at the end of August in the U.S., while in China, the fall semester does not start until mid-September. The first month of the semester, which is a very important part of setting the stage, ended up being delayed until the second month into the semester for American students.

Secondly, the language barrier can be problematic. Even though the participants in China are graduate students, their spoken English proficiency remained constrained. While they engaged effectively in weekly online conversations, delivering individual oral presentations on comparative healthcare appeared to pose substantial challenges. To mitigate these issues, all Chinese students opted to form a single group focusing on healthcare and pension systems among Asian countries. Although this approach facilitated group-project completion, the lack of sustained interaction between Chinese and American group members diminished the quality of cross-cultural dialogue and undermined the educational objectives of global engagement.

Furthermore, the time difference was challenging. With a 13 h time difference between the two regions, scheduling presentations required coordination between the evening of the Eastern Time Zone (ET) and the morning of Beijing Time (BT). Students were sometimes unable to deliver effective project presentations due to late-night fatigue in the U.S. or daytime ambient noise disruptions in China. The time difference is commonly noted in other global virtual exchange programs (Wright et al. 2024; Zhang et al. 2025). Therefore, integrating asynchronous learning activities could serve as a viable solution to mitigate such logistic barriers in future implementations.

As a research study of teaching pedagogy in sociology, this paper is limited in its methodological design. Because this global virtual exchange class was offered toward the end of COVID-19, the researchers did not intend or plan to conduct a survey, pre- or post- test, about the mode of teaching and its effectiveness. The researchers completely relied on the actual students’ online conversations and learning projects as primary data. Consequently, there were no research questions or research measures going into the research. After teaching this course for several years, the instructors, who are also researchers for this paper, generated research questions in a reflective teaching process. Despite this limitation, this process of sharing and learning is hopefully insightful for other sociologists, educators, or communicators, in their teaching, reflection, and implementation of global virtual exchange, for work or future research.

5. Conclusions

As discussed above, global virtual exchange has a lot to offer. Using advanced online communication technologies, such as iCollege, Packback, zoom meetings, and Webex meetings, students from different countries can come together to share the same virtual classroom, experience the same learning process, and reach a learning outcome that may go beyond normal expectations. When properly guided, online discussions and interactions can offer experiential learning for students in different social and cultural backgrounds residing in different countries. Furthermore, when learning projects are designed as individual and group activities, students are encouraged to learn from each other and draw critical conclusions toward the end of the learning process in the project. This process of learning encourages students to acquire knowledge, reflect upon one’s own experience, and compare one’s own experience with others from different social and cultural backgrounds. Ultimately, this learning and reflective process enhances students’ critical thinking and analytical ability by bringing together three domains of the critical thinking process: knowledge, self, and the world (Barnett 1997). Critical thinking is embedded into students’ weekly interactions and four-step learning projects. Students draw insights and critical conclusions based on their experiential learning, comparative understanding, and critical thinking processes. Online classrooms may not be suitable for all students or all classes. But this mode of teaching can achieve its goals of teaching critical thinking in sociological classes in higher education.