blog

In November 2021, we celebrated one year since the launch of the University of Tsukuba Gateway on F1000Research. Today, we hear from Murod Ismailov, the author of a recent Opinion Article published in the Gateway. Keep reading to discover a new means of enhancing the future of cross-cultural communication.

Meet the author

I am originally from Central Asia and have worked in Japan since 2010. Currently, I am an assistant professor of learning sciences at the University of Tsukuba. I also teach political and social sciences at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. My research interests are interdisciplinary and include substantive and methodological areas, such as technology-enhanced learning, learner engagement and motivation, sustainability and resilience education, self-determination, intercultural communication, and virtual exchange.

Why did you choose to publish your research openly on the University of Tsukuba Gateway? 

First, there was pure curiosity. You never know unless you try. I was intrigued by this relatively new publishing model. Plus, I believe that the research published in 2021 is different from what happened two decades ago. Innovation in this area will be slow but will ultimately bring fairness and equity to disseminating research.

Secondly, I was frustrated with the way traditional journals are run. It takes years for papers to be reviewed and published because the editors do not have enough time and resources. In many cases, papers are rejected not because of poor quality but because the editors do not have reviewers to review them. Alternatively, they use their subjective criteria to decide whether to publish in some cases. 

I think Gateways are more efficient, more productive, and above all, more transparent and fairer. Plus, Gateways are better for both writers and readers for more equitable knowledge sharing. For example, look at how many publishers have decided to publish COVID-19 related papers and how productive they have been in helping us understand what the virus is and how to deal with it.

Why is it important for the humanities and social sciences to adopt open research practices?

Like many of my colleagues, research and publication are an essential part of my day-to-day activities in addition to teaching courses. However, unlike researchers in science departments who work on large projects with large groups of people, those of us in the humanities and social sciences tend to work less collaboratively and publish less frequently. This is also relative, though. I believe that this situation is gradually changing in Japanese universities. 

Moreover, I think encouraging early career researchers in the humanities and social sciences to publish openly on platforms such as F1000Research is a wise move taken by some of our departments. Encouraging them to publish in more transparent and efficient ways removes a psychological barrier and gives them the confidence they need. Rejections from traditional journals are healthy and often necessary. However, after eight months of silence, it is difficult for even mature researchers to maintain their confidence when rejected without proper feedback.     

Tell us about your research. What inspired you to explore how to build effective cross-cultural communication?

As a foreigner who has lived in Japan and several other countries for a long time, I experience cross-cultural communication with my colleagues and students daily. Often, I am asked questions about my country, the language I speak, and the culture I practice. To my surprise, it is not that easy to answer some of those questions. So, I wondered if students doing online cross-cultural exchanges with friends from other countries face the same problem. In other words, we must help our students objectively answer the questions about their own culture and language, which some tend to answer subjectively and without deeper thinking.   

What do you propose as a solution?

My research attempts to empirically test the use of inquiry-based learning during an online exchange and assess their impact on nurturing students’ intra-cultural learning. This is to enhance the quality of future intercultural communication.

Furthermore, my research employs a classroom-based approach. There are many variations proposed as a model for inquiry-based teaching. For my classroom activities, I prefer to use the 5E Inquiry Model. The model has five phases, which begin with the letter “e”:

• engagement
• exploration
• explanation
• elaboration
• evaluation

Consequently, this approach is helpful for inquiry-based telecollaborative design because it provides a format for online exchange that builds on what learners already know. The 5E Inquiry Model helps them revisit that knowledge from other angles to find new patterns and relationships.

What would be the impact of implementing this framework?

Firstly, the goal is to model and encourage deeper reflection, with both teachers and learners provided with ongoing and experiential reflective opportunities. My study itself is not the inquiry-based model; what I present is a study on the model and its effects on students’ intracultural learning and possible future intercultural communication.

Moreover, the inquiry methods, especially those related to observation, problem identification, question formulation, data collection, and analysis, provide a framework for constructing intra-cultural knowledge and elevating learners’ self-reflection and self-awareness skills. 

Furthermore, some recent related studies also pointed to the possibility of broader application of such learning models in face-to-face classrooms and virtual teamwork environments. Such socially interactive activities could enhance students’ intercultural learning and communication and improve their learning engagement and motivation. 

Future development of this model will help to dispel the image of inquiry-based learning as a method mainly used in science laboratories and popularize it as a practical and effective learning method in the social sciences and humanities.

What are the barriers to implementing the model?

Despite its relatively straightforward design, some questions still need to be answered when implementing the proposed telecollaboration model in practice. I see these challenges play out at four different levels. 

• The individual level: Learners’ attitudes and motivations during the “exploration” and “online exchange” phases

• The classroom level: How exploration and exchange were organized and implemented in both classes. What distance collaboration tasks could be effectively incorporated into the exploration model

• The social organization level: Access to technology levels. Challenges in designing explorations and experiments. Organizational attitudes toward online learning

• Interactional levels: The quality and outcomes of cross-cultural communication among exchange partners

What’s next for this area of research? 

Though I have recently completed this project, I plan to continue researching the role of technology in motivating students to learn from each other and across countries. One new topic I am currently exploring is how technology-mediated education could help raise students’ awareness of sustainability and climate change. I hope one day I can contribute to F1000Reserach again with my findings. 

Read the full Opinion Article today on F1000Research and explore other research published in the University of Tsukuba Gateway.