




































Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

5 
 

The Effect of Cross-Cultural Videoconferencing 
on EFL Learners’ English Production 

 
Mariko Eguchi 

 
University of Shimane, Japan 

 
Abstract 

 
Unlike English as a second language (ESL) learners, English as a foreign 
language (EFL) learners do not have genuine interaction in English with 
native English speakers in their daily lives. This environment prevents them 
from receiving comprehensible input and output, often leading to poor 
English proficiency among EFL learners. As a way to improve the situation, 
EFL researchers are eyeing the benefits of videoconferencing as it can 
bring English speakers into the classroom. However, previous literature on 
videoconferencing in the EFL context has not investigated the role of 
information gap as a motivator for students to engage in active English 
discussion. The present study investigated whether cross-cultural 
videoconferencing is more effective for EFL learners’ English production 
than uni-cultural videoconferencing by comparing a cross-cultural 
videoconferencing discussion between Japanese and Mexican students 
with a uni-cultural videoconferencing discussion between two groups of 
Japanese students. The results indicated that the Japanese students’ 
English production as well as negotiation of meaning increased when they 
talked with the Mexican students. The findings are consistent with the 
hypothesis that information gaps between Japanese and Mexican cultures 
are an important factor for generating active discussion in English, and this 
study suggests that cross-cultural videoconferencing can be an effective 
tool for EFL learning. 
 

Introduction 
 
One of the challenges for English as a foreign language (EFL) learners is the lack of face-
to-face interaction in English with native speakers of English. Unlike English as a second 
language (ESL) learners, EFL learners in contexts such as Korea, Japan, and China 
rarely have an opportunity to converse with English speakers in their social settings. Since 
there are few native English speakers in their societies, these learners treat English as 
an academic subject rather than as a tool of daily communication. They memorize English 
using books, CDs, or DVDs. They practice manipulating English forms through drills in 
the classroom. They do communicative activities with their peers to accomplish 
communicative goals they are given by their instructors.  
 
However, the lack of real-time close interaction in English poses serious problems for EFL 
learners in terms of input and output. EFL learners who study English as a subject for 
exams do not have an environment in which they communicate meanings in English. 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

6 
 

According to Krashen (1985), learners acquire language through a sufficient amount of 
comprehensible input, and this is the single most important part in acquiring a second or 
foreign language. Without comprehensible input, or linguistic exposure slightly higher 
than the learner’s own ability level, learners would not be able to understand the meaning 
of a message. However, the above-mentioned EFL environment does not provide them 
with enough of it. It is true that they can receive input from stories and movies in the form 
of books and DVDs. However, extensive input is not always comprehensible for EFL 
learners without face-to-face interactions with English speakers who can modify their 
speech to make the input comprehensible. Another important principle of second 
language acquisition is comprehensible output, advocated by Swain & Lapkin (1995), 
which helps learners advance their second language proficiency by enabling them to 
notice their linguistic problems. The comprehensible output hypothesis states that 
learning occurs when learners realize that they cannot make themselves understood.  
However, in a social context where English speakers and English interactions are rare, 
an EFL learner lacks opportunities to produce output or test comprehensibility using 
feedback from English speakers.  
 
Japanese English learners represent a good example of these challenges. They study 
English for six years throughout junior and senior high school, but their English proficiency 
is generally very low. Japan is a monolingual country containing very few English 
speakers. In order to increase the English proficiency of Japanese college students, the 
Japanese government and individual universities are now encouraging college students 
to study abroad. If they live and study in English-speaking countries, they will have 
opportunities to interact with English speakers and improve their English proficiency. 
However, this option is costly, and few students can afford it. 
 
One possible solution is to bring English speakers into the classroom via 
videoconferencing. Videoconferencing is a synchronous communications technology that 
allows people in different locations to meet and talk to each other. High-quality audio and 
video enable participants to feel almost as if they are interacting face to face in the same 
room.  
 
The educational potential of videoconferencing has received much recent attention in EFL 
research. Shiozawa (2005) conducted a survey after English videoconferencing sessions 
between participants in Japan and Thailand, and reported that the learners were 
motivated to communicate in English and felt their English skills improved. Owada (2005) 
designed a course involving videoconferencing between Japan and Korea and reported 
that more than 80% of the students felt their speaking and writing abilities improved after 
videoconferencing. Lin (2007) found that Taiwanese participants reported improved 
language skills after videoconferencing sessions with Japanese partners. 
Videoconferencing seems to benefit EFL learners’ English abilities without requiring that 
they leave the classroom. 
 
However, no study has explored why videoconferencing positively increases English 
ability. Are participants so excited with the new technology that they want to speak 
English? Do they improve because they are emotionally attracted to the counterparts in 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

7 
 

a foreign country and feel like talking with them in English? Or are they so curious about 
topics addressed during videoconferencing discussions that they speak English a lot? 
Could it be information gaps created by cross-cultural encounters that encourage the 
participants to engage in active discussion? 
 
This study intends to explore the effect of information gaps created by cultural differences 
on EFL learners’ English production. Because it can connect people in different cultures 
in real-time interaction, videoconferencing can provide natural information gaps. When 
the participants discuss cultural differences and similarities, they will notice one another’s 
unexpected reactions and differing perspectives. Such cross-cultural experiences can 
increase their willingness to seek more information. This process will promote active 
discussion in English and ultimately facilitate language learning. 
 
The function of information gaps as a motivator is widely known in communicative 
language teaching. According to Nunan (1989), “small-group, two-way information gap 
tasks” (p. 64) are effective to motivate students—even less confident students—to 
engage themselves in speaking. Klippel (1984) states that active language learning can 
be induced by presenting students with missing or muddled information: discrepancies 
can arouse the curiosity of a student, and learning is most effective when the learners are 
actively involved in the process. Indeed, curiosity has been recognized as an important 
motive that drives people to learn new things, and such curiosity can be stimulated when 
students are aware of gaps in knowledge (Loewenstein, 1994). 
 
The purpose of the present study is twofold. The first is to describe a course called “Global 
Understanding” (GU), which is a course where college students from around the world 
meet online synchronously, mainly via videoconferencing, to discuss topics related to 
their lives in order to deepen cross-cultural understanding. The second is to report on a 
study that tested whether cultural differences work as a motivator for students to engage 
themselves in active discussion, assuming active discussion will lead to learning English. 
A small-scale comparison was made between a cross-cultural discussion and a uni-
cultural discussion, both of whose data were collected via videoconferencing. 
 
Description of The Global Understanding course 
 
The Global Understanding course is a cross-cultural understanding course in which 
students around the world discuss issues online synchronously. The first pilot of GU was 
conducted in 2003 by East Carolina University, US (Chia, Poe, & Yang, 2011). Since its 
success, the number of partners has grown to include more than 40 institutions from 26 
countries across the world. The University of Shimane, Japan, joined the network in 
January 2010.  
 
Because of the importance of visual cues during social interaction, Chia et al. (2011), the 
originators of the course, decided to use real-time videoconferencing technology to bring 
face-to-face cross-cultural experience into the classroom of each partner university. They 
also decided to use Internet Relay Chat (IRC) that supported one-to-one synchronous 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

8 
 

text discussion. IRC allows each student to deeply connect to his or her partner, 
complementing the limitations of group video discussion. 
 
GU invented a novel method to overcome the differences in the academic calendars of 
the partner institutions. Not all universities in the world start the first semester in 
September. Some start in August, or October. For example, Spring Semester in Japan is 
between April and July, while it is between January and May in US. These differences 
limit bilateral collaboration between Japan and US because there is only one month of 
overlapping schedule. East Carolina University, on the other hand, created a system for 
each partner to be linked with three partners during the semester, taking advantage of 
the calendar differences. For example, the first 4-5 videoconferencing links might be 
paired with United States, then the second 4-5 links with China, and the third 4-5 links 
with Russia. All these countries have different academic calendars. In this way, a country 
like Japan whose academic calendar is very different from other countries can participate 
in the global project. 
 
Since the core goal of GU is to help students become more tolerant of cultures around 
the world, improving English ability is not the focus of the course. Nonetheless, GU 
provides an ideal place where EFL learners can learn English, because it is designed to 
facilitate students’ understanding of other cultures through active discussion in English. 
In each set of 4-5 links, the first link is devoted to getting to know each other better: 
students introduce each other, and instructors give lectures about each culture. During 
the subsequent links, the students lead 30-minute group discussions about topics such 
as college life, family, traditions, religion, stereotypes, and prejudice. Then they continue 
to discuss individually using IRC. The whole class is divided into two groups, A and B. 
While A Group students sit in front of the camera, B Group students text-chat in front of 
the computer. After 30 minutes, they change places. They repeat the process in the 
subsequent links. After engaging in 4-5 links with one country, they meet another country 
for another round of 4-5 links. The students are absorbed in talking about topics, and they 
forget that they are also studying English. By the end of the semester, they have become 
familiar with the discussion questions and have gained fluency in speaking about them in 
English. 
 
GU also has a mechanism to encourage students to communicate outside of the 
classroom. Students are required to communicate with their partners via email two or 
three times a week. They are assigned to work on collaborative projects with their 
partners. The students must work together to complete their joint projects, the process of 
which increases English interaction between partners outside of the classroom.  
 
A great feature of GU in light of foreign language acquisition is that it provides participants 
with natural information gaps. Since the students are matched with others from a different 
cultural background, they are more likely to ask each other questions. They have enough 
in common to feel familiar with each other as young college students, as well as different 
enough to be curious about each other as foreigners. Such natural information gaps lead 
them to have more comprehensive input and output through negotiation of meaning, 
which is considered to promote leaning English. 
 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

9 
 

Method 
 
Participants 
 
Eight Japanese students took GU as an elective course in Fall 2012. They were three 
juniors and five seniors, aged between 20 and 22, four of whom were female and four 
male. All of them had received more than nine years of English education at school, but 
their English listening and speaking abilities varied from very limited to fluent. They were 
all born and raised in Japan. The eight Japanese students were split into two groups; 
Group A consisted of one female student and three male students, while Group B 
consisted of three female students and one male student.  
 
There were seven Mexican students in GU at Universidad de Monterrey, Mexico in Fall 
2012. The three students in that class’s A Group were participants in this study. There 
were two female students and one male student, ranging from freshmen to seniors, aged 
20 to 22 years old. They were all born and raised in Mexico but were fluent and accurate 
speakers of English, having received bilingual education. 
 
Design and Procedure 
 
As an exploratory study, a cross-cultural videoconferencing discussion between the 
Japanese and the Mexican students was compared with a uni-cultural videoconferencing 
discussion between the two groups of the Japanese students.  
 
As mentioned before, GU partner universities typically have 4-5 links in a semester. The 
first meeting is for the students to get to know each other by introducing themselves and 
receiving lectures from the instructors. The second link focused on discussion of college 
life. This study recorded the third link, when the Mexican and Japanese students were 
scheduled to discuss the topic of family and traditions. First, a uni-cultural 
videoconference between A Group and B Group of the Japanese students was recorded. 
They engaged in a discussion about the issues of family and traditions in Japan using two 
videoconferencing units in two different rooms in the same building. Then, about an hour 
after the local videoconference, a cross-cultural videoconference between A Group of the 
Japanese students and the Mexican students was recorded. They discussed the issues 
of family and traditions both in Japan and Mexico. Both recordings lasted for 25 minutes.  
 
Both the Japanese and Mexican students lacked a prior understanding of the families and 
traditions of the other culture. The Japanese students listened to a short lecture about 
Mexican geography and general information before the link, while the Mexican students 
spent two hours reading and giving presentations of general facts on Japan that they had 
found on the Internet. 
 
Hypothesis 
 
It was hypothesized that the Japanese participants would produce more English in the 
cross-cultural discussion than in the uni-cultural discussion. The cultural differences 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

10 
 

between Japan and Mexico would reveal more information gaps, which would encourage 
the participants to produce more English. They would want to know more about the 
others, want to explain their views more, and clarify their understanding about the others. 
Therefore, it was expected that English production and negotiation of meaning by 
Japanese students would increase when they talked with the Mexican students. In the 
uni-cultural discussion, on the other hand, Japanese students would produce less 
English, because sharing the same culture would probably reduce the willingness to 
elaborate on their opinions or to ask for clarification questions.  
 
English Production by the Number of Utterances  
 
English Production was measured by the number of utterances produced by the students. 
One utterance is defined as speech given by a student in one conversational turn. One 
utterance may be a group of a few words, or a group of sentences. In order to count the 
utterances, the videoconferencing sessions were recorded and transcribed into text data. 
Each utterance was marked with the initials of the speaker, and the totals were tallied in 
order to find out who produced how many utterances. 
 
Negotiation of Meaning by the Number of Questions Asked 
 
Negotiation of meaning was measured by the number of questions asked by the students. 
One question is defined as speech given by a student in a form of question. Questions 
are recognized by rising intonation or inverted subject-verb position. Questions include 
standard discussion questions provided in the GU manual. The students exchanged 
questions such as “At what age do children leave their parents’ house?” They also asked 
spontaneous questions to clarify or confirm meanings.  
 

Results 
 
English Production by the Number of Utterances  
 
Table 1 shows the number of utterances in the Japanese uni-cultural discussion by the 
two groups of students. 

 
Table 1    
Number of Utterances in Uni-cultural Discussion 
 

       A Group         B Group 

T 19 N 3 

Mi 6 Yr 9 

Ma 1 Mr 8 

D 6 Yk 3 

 
In the uni-cultural exchange, the total numbers of utterances in Groups A and B were 32 
and 23, respectively. The average numbers of utterances per member of each group were 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

11 
 

8 and 6, respectively. There was a lot of side conversation in Japanese among the 
participants of each group. The utterances spoken in Japanese were not counted. 
Student T was the most fluent, and he spoke a lot in English, dominating the rest of the 
members. 
 
The number of utterances in the cross-cultural discussion between the Group A Japanese 
students and the Mexican students is shown in Table 2. 
 

Table 2    
Number of Utterances in Cross-cultural Discussion  
 

      Japanese        Mexicans 

T 19 L 39 

Mi 18 M 32 

Ma 2 J 33 

D 1     

 
In the cross-cultural exchange, the total numbers of the utterances are 40 for the 
Japanese and 104 for the Mexican students. The average number of utterances for the 
Japanese students was 10, while that of the Mexicans was 34.  
 
Compared with the number of the Japanese students’ utterances in the uni-cultural 
exchange, the results are mixed. At the level of averages, the cross-cultural discussion 
seemed to increase the number of students’ utterances from 8 to 10. However, on the 
individual level, the student T showed no change, Mi increased her output a lot, Ma 
showed almost no change, and D decreased his output.  
 
Negotiation of Meaning by the Number of Questions Asked 
 
The number of questions asked in the uni-cultural discussion between the two groups of 
Japanese students is shown in Table 3. 

 
Table 3    
Number of Questions Asked in Uni-cultural Discussion 
 

       A Group         B Group 

T 5 N 0 

Mi 0 Yr 0 

Ma 0 Mr 0 

D 0 Yk 0 

 
In the uni-cultural exchange, the total numbers of questions asked in each group were 5 
and 0. Group A and B averaged 1 and 0 questions, respectively. Student T introduced 
the questions described in the GU manual, and everyone took a turn giving their own 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

12 
 

answers. They did not raise any spontaneous questions in English. They asked questions 
in Japanese, but those questions were about how to say ideas in English. 
 
Table 4 shows the number of questions asked in the cross-cultural discussion by the 
Group A Japanese students and the Mexican students. 

 
Table 4    
Number of Questions Asked in Cross-cultural Discussion 
 

     Japanese          Mexicans 

T 6 L 13 

Mi 5 M 7 

Ma 1 J 6 

D 0     

 
In the cross-cultural discussion, the total numbers of questions asked were 12 for the 
Japanese and 26 for the Mexican students. The average was 3 for the Japanese students 
and 9 for the Mexican students.  
 
Compared with the number of the Japanese students’ questions in the uni-cultural 
exchange, the result seems to show a positive increase. In the cross-cultural discussion, 
students’ average number of questions increased from 1 to 3. On the individual level, the 
students T and Ma showed an increase of 1. Mi had an increase from 0 to 5 questions, 
but D was quiet in both cultural settings.  
 
Table 5 shows the total number of utterances and questions by the Japanese students in 
both settings. In terms of utterances and questions asked, the numbers increased in the 
cross-cultural setting compared with those in the uni-cultural one. 

 
Table 5    

Total Number of Utterances and Questions Asked by Japanese Students 
 

 
Uni-cultural 

Setting 
Cross-cultural 

Setting  

Utterances 32 40  

Questions 5 12  

 
 

Discussion 
 
The data showed that the Japanese participants produced more utterances and questions 
when they spoke with Mexicans than with their Japanese peers. In the uni-cultural 
discussion, they produced 32 utterances and 5 questions, while they produced 40 
utterances and 12 questions in the cross-cultural discussion. These results are congruent 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

13 
 

with the information gap theory of second language acquisition. They seem to support the 
hypothesis that Japanese students would produce more language and negotiate meaning 
more when they interact with a culturally different group of people than with those who 
share the same culture.  
 
However, it is too early to conclude that the increased English production and negotiation 
of meaning by the Japanese participants were triggered by their perception of missing 
information and their willingness to fill the gaps. There may be other possible explanations 
for the participants’ enhanced speech production in the cross-cultural interaction. For 
example, they might have felt more comfortable with the Mexican students than with the 
other Japanese students, as the Japanese students perceived the Mexicans as more 
outgoing and relaxed. Therefore, the Japanese students’ perceptions of the Mexican 
students and their own Japanese peers must be investigated.  
 
This study has a number of limitations. First, it used a small number of participants, and 
only one combination of cultures was compared. It is possible that Japanese students 
were affected by the energy and speaking speed of the Mexican students, not by 
information gaps created by cultural differences. If Japanese are paired with people who 
produce fewer words, they may produce less English. In order to find out why cross-
cultural videoconferencing is effective in EFL learning, more studies should be conducted 
incorporating a larger number of participants and a variety of combinations of cultures. In 
addition, a detailed investigation of the language data should be conducted to find out 
what type of information gaps seem to cause what type of negotiation of meaning.  
 
Although the results of this study cannot be generalized because of its small sample size 
and the limited variety of cultures, this study still supports the effectiveness of cross-
cultural videoconferencing in English on EFL learning in light of English production and 
negotiation of meaning. Cross-cultural videoconferencing in English is an excellent 
opportunity for English learners to have real-time interaction with English speakers. With 
the help of videoconferencing that supports synchronous face-to-face interaction, EFL 
learners can increase comprehensible input and output from a variety of English speakers 
in the world without leaving the classroom. International videoconferencing courses in 
English such as GU satisfy the need of EFL learners for authentic communication stated 
by Klippel (1984): 

 
For learners who are studying English in a non-English-speaking setting it is 
very important to experience real communicative situations in which they 
learn to express their own views and attitudes, and in which they are taken 
seriously as people. (p. 5) 

 
In the age of globalization, the ability to communicate in English is important to exchange 
ideas and overcome stereotypes and prejudice. A long-term study abroad in an English 
speaking country is the ideal way for EFL learners to acquire English skills, but the 
financial burden is too big a barrier for most learners. Bringing English speakers into the 
classroom to discuss cultural differences is a cost-effective alternative method, and 
programs like GU offer innovative new ways to incorporate authentic cross-cultural 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

14 
 

interactions into foreign language learning. The examination of a wider variety of cultural 
combinations could provide additional insights into the value of videoconferencing and 
other technologies for communicative language learning. Indeed, teaching English 
through synchronous face-to-face English interaction may one day be a norm for twenty-
first century EFL education. 
 

References 
 
Chia, R., Poe, E., & Yang, B. (2011). History of Global Partners in Education. Global 

Partners in Education Journal, 1, 3-7. 
Klippel, F. (1984). Keep talking: Communicative fluency activities for language teaching. 

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Torrance, CA: Laredo 

Publishing Company. 
Lin, C. (2007). EFL college students’ perceptions of video-conferencing-assisted English 

learning. English Teaching and Learning, 31, 77-116. 
Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretations. 

Psychological Bulletin, 116, 75-98. 
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: 

Cambridge University Press. 
Owada, K. (2005). The effective use of videoconferencing in cross-cultural English 

language instruction. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association 
of Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from the Pan-Pacific Association of Applied 
Linguistics (PAAL) website:  
http://www.paaljapan.org/resources/proceedings/PAAL9/pdf/Owada.pdf  

Shiozawa, Y. (2005). Strategic use of videoconferencing in intermediate EFL. Journal of 
the Faculty of International Studies, 16, 103-114. Kanagawa; Bunkyo University, 
Faculty of International Studies. 

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they 
generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391. 

  

http://www.gpejournal.org/
http://www.paaljapan.org/resources/proceedings/PAAL9/pdf/Owada.pdf


Global Partners in Education Journal   April 2014, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 5-15 
www.gpejournal.org   ISSN 2163-758X 
 

15 
 

 
 
About the Author 
 
Mariko Eguchi is a professor of English language education at the Faculty of Policy 
Studies, the University of Shimane, Japan. She received her BA and MA in British and 
American Literature from Seikei University, Tokyo, and MA in Communication and 
Theatre from the University of Illinois at Chicago. She has been teaching the Global 
Understanding, a cross-cultural understanding course through videoconferencing, since 
2009. She has been editor-in-chief of Real Reporter, an international English language 
newspaper since 2003. She can be reached at ma-eguchi@u-shimane.ac.jp. She would 
like to thank Professor Ana Cristina Salinas from Universidad de Monterrey as well as her 
students for their providing information. This research was supported by JSPS Grants-in-
Aid for Scientific Research (KAKEN-HI), (FY2012-FY2013, Grant Number 24520634, 
Principal Investigator: Mariko Eguchi) 
 

http://www.gpejournal.org/
mailto:ma-eguchi@u-shimane.ac.jp

