Keywords

Introduction

Many higher education institutions around the world have internationalization high on their strategic agenda. A key objective of internationalization is the provision of international experiences to students – traditionally, through opportunities to study abroad for a period of time. However, physical mobility remains a privilege for a minority. Despite low-threshold and short-term programs (Erasmus+, summer schools, etc.), most students will not have experienced international learning mobility by the time they graduate. This is certainly true for open and distance universities (with their generally nontraditional clientele), but also for campus-based institutions. In the European Union, for example, the proportion of students with study-related international experiences in 2019 was estimated at between 13.5% (European Commission, 2020a) and 20% (Hauschildt, Gwosć, Schirmer, & Cras, 2020). Digitalization has also changed international activities in higher education and promoted “distant” forms of internationalization. Subsequently, virtual collaboration practices from online and distance education (ODE) have been introduced in campus-based international education. In addition, Open Educational Resources (OER) and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have opened up transnational education: Teaching and learning materials and entire courses have become available to anyone, anywhere at a global scale.

The concept of Virtual Internationalization (VI) has been developed to systematize the impact of digitalization and information and communications technology (ICT) on higher education internationalization (Bruhn, 2020). It is embedded in the internationalization discourse, which has become more complex in recent years. Initially focusing on physical student mobility and international partnerships, new aspects have emerged. The Internationalization at Home (IaH) movement (Crowther et al., 2000) in particular has left its mark, and today internationalization is often seen as a transversal concept that encompasses the different organizational levels of higher education. In the model of Comprehensive Internationalization (Helms & Brajkovic, 2017; Hudzik, 2011), this transversality is articulated particularly clearly.

Digitalization has had a massive impact on higher education, including in the area of internationalization. The advent of the Covid-19 pandemic has been a catalyst in reinforcing respective developments, with virtual forms of mobility having gone from niche to mainstream (Hudzik, 2020; IAU, 2020). The shift to (emergency) remote teaching and massive constraints on physical mobility have promoted virtual, hybrid, and blended study abroad. Such arrangements imply that students participate in classes from their host institution remotely – either as a complete substitute for physical mobility (= virtual), as an optional alternative to on-campus classes (= hybrid), or in combination with physical participation in classes (= blended) (Gaebel, Zhang, Stoeber, & Morrisroe, 2021). The crisis also boosted other distant forms of internationalization, including collaborative online international learning (COIL) or virtual exchange, in which classes from different countries collaborate remotely on a given project or topic (IAU, 2020; O’Dowd, 2021). Online conferences and virtual staff exchanges were offered, and international partnerships were used to pool resources for remote teaching and learning (European Commission, 2020b; IAU, 2020); ODE moved to the center stage of internationalization (de Wit, 2020; Kanwar & Carr, 2020).

Traditionally, higher education delivered entirely online or at a distance has not played a major role in the internationalization discourse. The only aspect that has been commonly studied is virtual transnational education (TNE) (François, Avoseh, & Griswold, 2016; Knight, 2016). The classification of Comprehensive Internationalization (Helms & Brajkovic, 2017) places ODE in the category of collaboration and partnerships – as part of “other offshore programs.” While it is true that online TNE can be offered in collaboration with local partners (“locally supported distance education,” Knight, 2016, p. 39), it can also be delivered independently of foreign partner institutions (“foreign sending provider operates without any formalized academic collaboration with local [institutions],” Knight, 2016, p. 39). A classification in the category collaboration and partnerships would therefore hide an important aspect of international delivery of ODE. Moreover, ODE is often not directed at an international clientele, but at a domestic one. Given the fact that this mode of study is becoming increasingly important around the world (e.g., Qayyum & Zawacki-Richter, 2018), IaH elements in ODE expand access to international experiences to a growing clientele. As a result, ODE degrees with a domestic focus may find international students enrolling in them.

Due to the complexity described above, in the VI concept, ODE is systematically included in the conceptualization of internationalization of higher education for the first time. The concept allows scholars and practitioners to systematize the entire spectrum of applications of ICT in higher education international contexts. It also offers possibilities for connection to open education (e.g., via transnational OER and MOOCs) and to other educational subsectors (e.g., secondary schools, technical and vocational education).

This chapter exploring VI in ODE begins by providing a definition, followed by a brief overview of the literature. Next, the two dimensions and typical means and measures are explained before the six parallel pillars of VI are presented in detail. This is followed by a discussion of the implications of the concept for the broader internationalization and ODE discourses. The relevance of the concept for research, as well as for campus-based and ODE institutions, is then discussed. Opportunities and limitations of the concept are then summarized.

Definition

Based on the longstanding definition of internationalization by Jane Knight (2003), VI is defined as “the process of introducing an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the delivery, purpose or functions of higher education with the help of information and communications technology (ICT)” (Bruhn, 2017, p. 2). This definition captures the connection between ICT and internationalization in a comprehensive sense, by including ICT-supported measures and processes at different organizational levels. Filling this definition with life, the VI concept is based on the model of Comprehensive Internationalization (Helms & Brajkovic, 2017) and integrates all six categories (see Fig. 1). Aside from physical student mobility, it also includes collaboration and partnerships, as well as IaH measures in the (home) curriculum, co-curriculum, and learning outcomes. In addition, administrative leadership, structure, and staffing form part of the comprehensive approach towards internationalization, and so do faculty policies and practices. Strategies and articulated institutional commitment is conceptualized as transversal to all VI. Beyond this, ODE is added as a seventh category. This addition is made in order to facilitate the identification of the different affordances of distance-only vis-à-vis primarily face-to-face education. VI thus encompasses the two traditional categories of Internationalization Abroad (mobility of people, programs, providers, projects/services, and policies) and IaH (curriculum, extracurricular activities, research, etc.) (Knight, 2012).

Fig. 1
figure 1

The six parallel pillars and one transversal category of Virtual Internationalization. Note: From “Virtual Internationalization to Support Comprehensive Internationalization in Higher Education” by E. Bruhn-Zass, 2021, Journal of Studies in International Education. (Reprinted with permission)

Full size image

Literature on the Topic

VI, as a comprehensive concept, was first mentioned in Bruhn (2017) and conceptualized in more detail in Bruhn (2020). Prior to that, terms including “Virtual Internationalization,” “digital internationalization,” “e-internationalization,” and “online internationalization” had been used inconsistently. As no clear-cut distinction could be determined between the terms, they are treated as synonyms in this cursory literature review. Two distinct concepts were identified:

  1. 1.

    VI as a curricular concept. Terms like virtual, digital, or online internationalization are often used to designate forms of virtual study abroad or collaborative online exchanges, in which students obtain an international experience without physically leaving their home. As early as 1999, Blight, Davis, and Olsen argued that “new technologies may allow a Virtual Internationalisation of the form of the curriculum” (p. 27). Further sources to be cited here include Fugate and Jefferson (2001), Wächter (2002), Ghasempoor, Liaghatdar, and Jafari (2011), Mavridis, Leftheris, Tsiatsos, and Kudryavtseva (2012), EICL Project (2013), Middlemas and Peat (2015), and Thorne (2016).

  2. 2.

    VI in transnational education (TNE) and global “virtual universities.” In this perspective, VI is conceptualized as virtual TNE which “encompasses the utilization of ICT to dispense transnational education programs and courses to students” (Alqahtani, 2018, p. 4) or as a means to recruit international students into domestic online or distance programs (Lorenz, Wittke, Steinert, & Muschal, 2016). Additional sources that follow this approach are van Damme (2001) and Samoilenko (2013).

A broader conception is implicit in Teichler and Cavalli (2015), who propose “any type of Virtual Internationalization or globalization” (p. S114), yet without further specifying the term. For Knight (2014), virtual aspects of internationalization figure in the “program and provider mobility” (“second generation”) category of her classification of three generations of crossborder higher education (p. 45). They include both the “virtual university” and “online/distance” program mobility.

Among the more comprehensive approaches to internationalization with ICT is Leask (2004). She discusses a variety of ways in which higher education institutions can “use ICTs to assist in achieving internationalisation outcomes” (p. 340). Examples given relate to curricula, as well as to international faculty connections and research. A still broader conceptualization can be found in Hénard, Diamond, and Roseveare (2012). The authors describe ways in which ICT can support internationalization: helping institutions collaborate and compete, overcoming countries’ regulatory policies (such as immigration policies), fostering partnerships for joint programs, recruiting foreign experts, offering virtual mobility options, and democratizing access to international learning experiences (Hénard et al., 2012, p. 28). It was not until Bruhn (2017) that a comprehensive approach appeared, which other scholars have since supported (e.g., Bedenlier & Marín, 2020; de Lima, Bastos, & Varvakis, 2020; Hartzell, 2019; Nascimbeni, Burgos, Spina, & Simonette, 2020; Tjulin et al., 2021).

The advent of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 has intensified the discourse on virtual forms of internationalization. The idea of the shift to online education as a “catalyst for a new normal” in internationalization (Hudzik, 2020, p. 1) has become widespread. Li and Haupt (2021) argue that distance TNE could become a growth area post-Covid-19, with Ogden (2021) adding that education abroad may have to be re-defined due to the increasing nonphysicality of international experiences. Ogden, Streitwieser, and van Mol (2020) suggest that the shift to online teaching and learning caused by Covid-19 can accelerate looming opportunities for international higher education by challenging the primacy of physical mobility and other “traditional” forms. Hunter and Sparnon (2020) equally see an “opportunity in crisis,” namely, to embrace the full potential of online education and collaboration for internationalization. By making continued use of ICT for internationalization, White and Lee (2020) argue, deficiencies of mobility can be circumvented. These deficiencies include high cost (and as a result: unequal access), brain drain, and environmental issues – in particular, CO2 emissions generated by travel (cf. also Bruhn-Zass, 2021).

These sources share the view that universities will have to diversify their understanding and practice of internationalization by incorporating ICT and approaches from the ODE field, not only as an emergency response, but also strategically, in the mid- and long term (cf. also Zhou, 2021). The extent to which this is going to be the case is highly contested – ranging from scenarios of a “postmobility world” (White & Lee, 2020) to a by-and-large return to the prepandemic status quo (Altbach & de Wit, 2020), with most scholars settling for something in the middle.

A related concept to VI is that of Internationalization at a Distance (Mittelmeier, Rienties, Gunter, & Raghuram, 2020; Mittelmeier, Rienties, Rogaten, Gunter, & Raghuram, 2019). It takes into account “all forms of education across borders where students, their respective staff, and institutional provisions are separated by geographical distance and supported by technology” (Mittelmeier et al., 2019, p. 2). The concept adds a complementary perspective on ICT-supported internationalization: While VI addresses the transversal role of ICT for internationalization and thus encompasses the areas of IaH and Internationalization Abroad, Internationalization at a Distance is developed as a parallel category that focuses exclusively on remote experiences.

In summary, recent years have seen scholars and practitioners discuss ICT use in various international contexts. The Covid-19 pandemic and questions around a postpandemic “new normal” have intensified this discussion. The concept of VI represents a more comprehensive approach towards ICT-supported internationalization of higher education than other concepts in the literature.

Dimensions of VI

Two dimensions of VI are distinguished (see Fig. 2):

  1. 1.

    ICT and internationalization describes, in a narrower understanding of internationalization, how ICT is used to internationalize or to meet the challenges of internationalized contexts (intercultural diversity, geographical distance, etc.). Respective aims or functions include the development of intercultural, international, and global competencies, the enhancement of the experience of international students (including online and TNE students), improvement of the experience abroad, access to an international experience, and the export of higher education.

  2. 2.

    ICT and an international dimension for broader aims contain more general objectives that are to be achieved by combining ICT with an international aspect. These include broader skills, competencies and knowledge, innovation in teaching and learning, the enhancement of staff and faculty training/development, capacity building, and quality enhancement.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Seven categories and two dimensions of Virtual Internationalization. Note: From “Virtual Internationalization to Support Comprehensive Internationalization in Higher Education” by E. Bruhn-Zass, 2021, Journal of Studies in International Education. (Reprinted with permission)

Full size image

This distinction of two dimensions is made for analytical purposes. It has limited relevance for practice, since the goals of internationalization are usually formulated on both levels from the outset: Intercultural competencies, for example, go hand in hand with skills in dealing with diversity, and an expansion into foreign markets generally has the aim to create high-quality educational offerings (capacity development) (cf. Tait & O’Rourke, 2014, p. 45). In fact, as scholars have emphasized, internationalization and its broader functions are inextricably linked (Brandenburg, de Wit, Jones, & Leask, 2019; de Wit, Egron-Polak, Howard, & Hunter, 2015, p. 29).

Means and Practices in VI

Digital technologies commonly used in higher education can also be employed in international contexts. These include different kinds of online media and e-learning platforms, as well as social media and virtual communities. Websites play a role, especially for transnational marketing and information on exchange programs. MOOCs are often employed as an international marketing tool, while they can also enrich the (flipped) classroom. OER can be used transnationally, and games/gamification can be introduced in learning environments to engage international learners. M-learning can help access content with mobile devices anytime, anywhere, and virtual and augmented reality can create impressions of distant places.

Internationalization-specific means and practices prominently include virtual mobility – in the form of COIL/virtual exchange or other formats such as online internships and study abroad at a distance. They furthermore include virtual TNE, in which students from abroad enroll in online or distance degrees. ICT can also be utilized to engage learners in interculturally diverse courses, or for standardizing processes and reducing bureaucracy across borders (supporting enrollment via data portability, recognition of credits, etc.). Moreover, ICT can be used in staff/faculty development, in transnational e-mentoring or e-tutoring, or to facilitate collaboration at a distance among staff/faculty in different countries.

The Six Pillars of VI

In the following, the six parallel pillars of VI are presented, with a particular focus on the different aims and functions that may be addressed.

Administrative Leadership, Structure, and Staffing

Higher education administration and management have been identified in Bruhn (2020) as key stakeholders for tapping the potential of ICT for internationalization. They are largely responsible for the development of strategies and articulated institutional commitment (as in the transversal category of VI, see Fig. 1), and they also directly promote ICT-based internationalization activities, for example, in the form of financial or structural support for virtual exchange. International office staff play a key role for introducing and supporting VI activities (as displayed in the other pillars of VI). Hiring and developing administrative staff is important in order to build up the necessary competencies for using ICT in international contexts (and beyond). This may include targeted staffing, formalized training, or nonformal support services (networks, software tools, etc.). ICT-supported staff development is also used in international contexts for broader aims of increasing access, capacity, or quality (at home and abroad), for instance, by developing and promoting global standards.

Curriculum, Co-curriculum, and Learning Outcomes

In the curriculum, various ICT-based measures can be used to integrate an international experience. These include virtual mobility, which Bruhn (2020) uses as an umbrella term for virtual forms of study abroad, exchange, field trips, transnational labs, or expert mobility. ICT-supported internationalization of curricula and co-curricula also includes “nonmobility” forms such as the use of teaching/learning materials from abroad.

A frequent aim of internationalization is the promotion of intercultural, international, and global competencies. This includes the enhancement of intercultural understanding and language skills. Improved access to the acquisition of such competencies beyond the “mobile few” is a frequently cited argument for the use of ICT in IaH. Forms of virtual mobility commonly serve these purposes.

In addition, ICT can expand opportunities for connecting international and domestic students within the same institution or program: Virtual platforms allow both groups to get in touch and collaborate with each other, whether they are on the local campus or abroad. ICT is also used for the broader aims of enhancing the quality of curricula, access to education, and capacity building. Examples include the transnational provision of OER or MOOCs to institutions in developing countries, or the application of gamified learning to engage international students enrolled domestically.

Employability and preparing students for the living and working conditions of the twenty-first century – twenty-first-century skills – are broader aims of the use of ICT in international curricular contexts. For example, virtual exchange can be used to create collaborative and transversal competencies and to train students in dealing with diversity. Broader aims also include the enhancement of discipline-specific knowledge and skills. For example, virtual exchange in a design, art, or architecture course can serve to broaden students’ horizons with approaches from other cultures.

Finally, VI can involve innovation in teaching and learning – for instance, when international MOOCs are used to create flipped classroom experiences.

Faculty Policies and Practices

Academic and teaching staff are vital for implementing VI. They engage in remote international research collaboration, implement IaH in curricula, and provide education and academic support for international (online) students (Bond, Marín, & Bedenlier, 2021).

Institutional policies can address both domestic and international staff and concern their recruitment and professional development. Among the measures are online training that coaches domestic faculty in conducting successful international exchanges and transnational cooperation or in dealing with international students. Other training is aimed at international lecturers and researchers, for example, to help them navigate the domestic higher education system.

Among the broader aims addressed in this category is again innovation in teaching and learning – for example, when social media is used for transnational professional exchange on teaching practices. Other aspects are broader skills and competencies obtained in transnational cooperation – beyond intercultural and international competencies.

Physical Student Mobility

To support physical student mobility, ICT is used for both domestic students studying abroad and for international students on campus. For both groups, ICT can also be used during periods when students cannot be easily reached by other means – in a sense, anytime, anywhere. This includes the before (predeparture) and after (alumni) phases for international students and the during (study abroad) phase for domestic students. By embedding physical mobility in virtual offerings, ICT also facilitates seamless transitions from one phase to the next, for example, when orientations are begun prior to the actual stay.

ICT diversifies the possibilities for advising and for enhancing the overall experience for mobile students – by adding chat, webinars, tutorials, predeparture online language courses, or automated data transfer between institutions (as with Erasmus Without Paper (n.d.)). Blockchain is sometimes considered a promising technology for supporting data and credit transfer.

ICT is also widely used in international marketing and the promotion of study-abroad – with social media marketing in particular. International exchange programs can also become more attractive through virtual IaH: Students who have been introduced to international experiences at home may be more inclined to pursue a stay abroad. Possibilities to blend shorter physical mobility stays with virtual elements can also improve access to international experiences for those students who are unable to spend a longer period abroad.

Employability is a central theme among the broader aims of ICT use in physical mobility. For example, e-portfolios are used to make professional skills acquired abroad visible.

Collaboration and Partnerships

ICT can foster and support international partnerships at departmental or institutional level. Examples of applications include digital communication channels and intrainstitutional collaboration platforms (for e-learning, MOOCs, or OER).

ICT diversifies transnational education through blended or hybrid learning options and can thus be used to support the presence of universities abroad. Such diversification can serve to enhance the experience of international students at a branch campus. This is done, for example, through the flexible provision of educational services and the ability to address intercultural challenges between home institution and branch campus – be it with interculturally sensitive online elements, e-mentoring, or with social media tools that create a sense of community.

In terms of the broader aims of ICT use in international collaborations and partnerships, access to higher education and capacity building are key issues – in TNE and other forms of collaboration, such as dual degree programs. Finally, innovation in teaching and learning is an issue in this category. The focus here is on aspects such as improving teaching in TNE or supporting international double-degree programs. ICT facilitates transitions for students from one institution to another and fosters curricular innovation at all participating institutions.

Online and Distance Education

Looking at domestic ODE, ICT-based interventions are often the only way for students to gain study-related international experience – instead of an alternative or supplement of physical mobility, like is the case in campus-based internationalization. This is also due to the enrollment structure inherent to distance education, that is, learners tend to be older and have family and/or job commitments (e.g., Dolch & Zawacki-Richter, 2018). Virtual exchanges and the enrollment in courses from a partner institution (virtual study abroad) are examples. Where international students are enrolled, taking advantage of this diversity can contribute to the internationalization of the study experience.

A broader aim of integrating international aspects into domestic online and distance learning is to tap into knowledge and expertise from abroad, aided by the location-independence of study. The barrier to inviting international experts into the classroom is lower, as neither they nor the students have to physically travel. Looking at transnational delivery, distance, and even online offerings were early forms of TNE (François et al., 2016, p. 7). Via virtual TNE, ODE can provide an international education for students in another country who would not be able to travel abroad nor have access to “physical TNE” in the form of a branch campus (Li & Haupt, 2021). This increases access to an international experience. Hand in hand with this are the broader aims of increasing access to higher education, as well as capacity development and quality enhancement of education. This applies to developing and emerging economies, but can also serve to counteract regional disparities in industrialized nations. Virtual TNE can also be used to address particular student groups such as expatriate or military learners.

Implications and Insights from the Concept of VI for the Higher Education Internationalization and ODE Discourses

The concept of VI sheds light on the diversity of possible uses of ICT in higher education international contexts. It helps to examine how ICT can be used in the sense of Comprehensive Internationalization. Unlike concepts such as COIL or virtual exchange, VI is not limited to the curriculum. It concerns the university in its entirety – be it administrative, academic and teaching staff, physical student mobility, international partnerships, or other forms of collaborations and TNE. The combination of physical and virtual elements leads to a hybridization of internationalization.

In the VI concept, ODE is systematically included in the conceptualization of higher education internationalization for the first time. Study programs that are offered entirely online or at a distance – and which have been increasing worldwide for years (e.g., Qayyum & Zawacki-Richter, 2018) – thus step out of the blind spot of internationalization. In fact, for students enrolled, VI may be the only accessible form of internationalization. This applies to domestic students who are unable to physically travel abroad and to international students who are either enrolled in virtual TNE or in primarily domestic higher education. It should be noted that distance learning institutions and open universities differ from campus-based institutions especially in the area of the curriculum and (partly) in that of partnerships, while the other pillars of VI apply to them in the same way as to (majority) campus-based higher education institutions.

Virtual forms of internationalization are not easily described with the vocabulary traditionally used in the internationalization discourse. In particular, the dichotomy of “at home” vs. “abroad” (Knight, 2012) loses its coerciveness. Students may seamlessly mix domestic with international experiences regardless of their current location, orientations for international students may begin even before arrival on campus, and credentials for joint degrees may be obtained entirely online. The conceptualization of a third category, Internationalization at a Distance (Mittelmeier et al., 2020), has been offered to integrate hybrid as well as fully distant and online education into internationalization theory. The VI concept does not contradict this approach. It merely takes a different perspective by focusing on the permeation of both IaH and Internationalization Abroad with ICT, while integrating the roles of strategic management, administration, and faculty in a comprehensive sense.

Relevance for Research

VI is designed as transversal to the comprehensive internationalization of higher education. The concept broadens the perspective of ICT use in these contexts by providing a framework for examining the impact of ICT on higher education internationalization in all its complexity.

Future research may further explore areas of VI that have so far not been studied in depth. These include curricular aspects other than virtual exchange, the impact of ICT on partnerships and international relations, as well as the role played by strategies, administration, and academic and teaching staff. Influences from outside of individual institutions, including sectoral policies, trends and crises, may also come into focus. A particular blind spot so far has been the international side of ODE. The ways in which ODE is internationalized – and how ODE permeates international education – may be further researched.

Future research may also study VI in open education and other education subsectors, including in their online and distance delivery formats. The impact of digitalization on international operations of primary and secondary schools and technical and vocational education has yet to be studied in depth. Furthermore, in order to provide guidance for practitioners, it would be advisable not only to focus on the opportunities that ICT opens up, but also to consider their limitations, as well as success factors.

Relevance for Primarily Campus-Based Institutions

Digitalization has had an impact on higher education internationalization for years. Hybrid and blended offerings have proliferated, and virtual exchange (COIL, or related concepts) has obtained a prominent place in IaH activities. The comprehensive concept of VI broadens the perspective beyond such collaborative experiences, shows how ICT can be integrated in curricula in other ways, and promotes the internationalization of institutions beyond the classroom. What is more, the Covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated that resilient internationalization practice should include virtual elements to sustain international relations and maintain international experiences during times when physical mobility – and potentially, campus operations in general – are compromised.

Aspects of sustainability also challenge the primacy of physical mobility. The carbon footprint may be reduced by moving project-related meetings online, thus limiting (air) travel and contributing to climate action, the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13. Other sustainability aspects may come into play as well. Exemplary opportunities of VI lie in promoting quality education (SDG 4), reducing inequalities (SDG 10), and improving gender equality (SDG 5), for example, by increasing access to international higher education for disadvantaged populations through virtual TNE.

Relevance for ODE Providers

Rationales for ODE providers to consider comprehensive internationalization, including the ODE-specific approaches provided in the VI concept, include the following.

  1. 1.

    ODE has gained in importance in higher education in recent years and is likely going to play a larger role in years to come. This development encourages the consideration of how international experiences and institutional internationalization can be integrated to serve all students, not just those enrolled in on-campus education.

  2. 2.

    ODE has a role in educational delivery to nontraditional learners. Access to an international experience to this student group is essential to ensure equitable opportunities.

  3. 3.

    As ODE also serves students from abroad (intentionally or unintentionally), it is important to recognize and accommodate their needs.

Conclusion

By taking a comprehensive look at the possibilities of using ICT for internationalization, the VI concept can help higher education leaders and internationalization practitioners to systematically integrate virtual elements into strategies and activities. The broad portfolio of VI, with its claim to comprehensiveness, can open up new avenues for internationalization. The VI concept invites ODE practitioners to fully participate in the internationalization discourse. ODE is included in VI in two perspectives:

  1. 1.

    Education that primarily targets a domestic clientele (whether or not international students are enrolled)

  2. 2.

    Education that targets students abroad (virtual TNE)

It should be emphasized that other areas of comprehensive internationalization (strategies, administration, faculty, and partnerships) apply to ODE institutions just as they do to all other institutions. A particular area of opportunity is the combination of expertise and experience from on-campus education with that from the ODE field.

VI is a concept developed for higher education, but other educational subsectors may also integrate its principles. International experiences and intercultural competencies are not only relevant for higher education, but for society as a whole. ICT and digitalization have massively impacted other educational subsectors as well. Following this development, collaborative virtual exchange has been implemented in secondary schools (Chia & Pritchard, 2014), and other formats such as virtual internships or expert mobility may be considered in technical and vocational education in particular. In these subsectors, too, it may be advisable to broaden the perspective beyond curricular forms of VI.

It is important to acknowledge limitations of VI. A lack in digital literacy or in technical infrastructure, for instance, can counteract well-intended efforts. Therefore, VI should be weighed against other (physical) measures in different contexts. Success factors and obstacles must be analyzed and taken into account. For a successful implementation of VI, research and practice must go hand in hand.