Student mobility and international experience within Europe and beyond become increasingly popular and loaded with expectations for rich learning opportunities. When pre-service teachers take part in an internship at a school in a different surrounding from their familiar one, they are often expected to learn by being exposed to different teaching styles and education systems. However, studies have shown that the potential for learning during study and teaching abroad is rarely fully taken advantage of (e.g. Jackson & Oguro, 2018; Mitchell & Paras, 2018; Vande Berg, 2009). Accordingly, there is a strong consensus that unguided, non-structured experiences abroad do not automatically lead to a benefit in professionalisation and an increase in teaching-specific competencies. It is evident that appropriate forms of preparation, coaching, supervision or debriefing could be highly rewarding in enhancing the benefit of experiences teaching abroad (Leutwyler, 2014). Furthermore, the structure, placing and timing of such stays as well as the opportunities for involvement by the student teachers can have an influence and should be taken into careful consideration. For instance, research has shown that positive learning outcomes in terms of professionalisation in teaching take place more fully if the student teachers have the opportunity to immerse themselves in the daily school routine of the host institution, if they are able to teach at least some units in the foreign context or observe the daily life at the school and discuss their observations with local counterparts (Leutwyler, 2014).

Meanwhile, more scientific evidence and insight is needed to understand more deeply what the learning potential of an experience teaching abroad consists of and how this learning can be increased and more fully supported. Constructivist learning theories (e.g. Piaget & Inhelder, 1974) make clear that support measures can only be fruitful if they are meaningfully linked to the cognitive structures of the learners and their perspectives on what seems relevant and interesting as well as what they are struggling with and being limited by.

We therefore focus on these individually shaped learning processes including situations of non-learning, resignation or frustration, following these research questions:

• What kind of learning or non-learning processes are experienced by pre-service teachers during an internship abroad?
• How are these learning or non-learning processes linked to specific conditions in which they take place?

Within the qualitative research approach that we pursue (see below), the theoretical framework is typically only brought in during the processes of analysis and in a close conversation with the data and cannot be defined from the outset. As far as we can see for the time being, different learning theories will most probably come into play and add to a structure and deeper understanding of the research results. Constructivist learning theories such as proposed by Piaget and Inhelder (1974) may be most helpful to distinguish between assimilative and accomodative modes of learning; the transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 2012) or the concepts of ‘transformatorische Bildung’ from the German speaking tradition (Kokemohr, 2007; Koller, 2012) have an explanatory potential of greater shifts in perspective and finally, the concept of ‘expansive learning’ by Holzkamp (Straub, 2010) could be promising because of its emphasis on the significance of active involvement.

We pursue a qualitative-hermeneutical approach. For this purpose, we are planning to conduct 4 to 6 group discussions with a total of approximately 15 to 20 pre-service teachers that will have completed an international internship. These pre-service teachers will be from two different programmes, one part of them will be future secondary school teachers from the University of Teacher Education Zurich doing their internship in the context of language learning; the other part will be future kindergarten and primary school teachers from the University of Teacher Education Zug doing their internship on a voluntary basis. The data will be analysed with a hermeneu-tical approach that does not only allow insight into the explicit articulation of experience, but also into the implicit frameworks of orientation by the respondents (Bohnsack, 2010). Within this analytical process, theoretical fram-ings are understood in terms of ‘sensitising concepts’ (Glaser, 1978) that come into play in a close conversation with the data (see above).

We are expecting to generate findings that explain different kinds of learning which depend on the individual as well as on the circumstances and conditions in which the internship takes place. The preliminary theses that we have developed in the pursuit of analysis so far, show that learning as well as non-learning take place. Firstly, there is learning by dealing with contrasts which can be understood in terms of Piaget’s ‘assimilative learning’. Secondly, there is learning by dealing with challenges or disorienting dilemma resulting in new ways of thinking and change of attitude, which can be seen as Piaget’s ‘accomodative learning’ (Piaget & Inhelder, 1974; see also Mezirow, 2012). And finally, there are experiences of non-learning due to a lack of involvement or an overly challenging level of discomfort. All these kinds of learning will be contextualised with the particular conditions in which they take place. Overall, a rich field of learning opportunities can be seen that provide a deeper understanding of how learning during teaching abroad can be supported.

Bohnsack, R. (2010). Documentary Method and Group Discussions. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff & W. Weller (Eds.), Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method in International Education Research (p. 99-124). Opladen & Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity. Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley: The Sociology Press. Jackson, J. & Oguro, S. (2018). Introduction. Enhancing and extending study abroad learning through intercultural interventions. In J. Jackson & S. Oguro (Eds.), Intercultural Interventions in Study Abroad (p. 1-17). London: Routledge. Kokemohr, R. (2007). Bildung als Welt- und Selbstentwurf im Anspruch des Fremden. Eine theoretisch-empirische Annäherung an eine Bildungsprozesstheorie. In H.-C. Koller, W. Marotzki & O. Sanders (Eds.), Bildungsprozesse und Fremdheitserfahrung. Beiträge zu einer Theorie transformatorischer Bildungsprozesse (p. 13-68). Bielefeld: transcript. Koller, H.-C. (2012). Fremdheitserfahrungen als Herausforderung transformatorischer Bildungsprozesse. In S. Bartmann & O. Immel (Eds.), Das Vertraute und das Fremde. Differenzerfahrung und Fremdverstehen im In-terkulturalitätsdiskurs. (S. 157-175). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Leutwyler, B. (2014). Between Myths and Facts: The Contribution of Exchange Experiences to the Professional Development of Teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 3(2), 106-117. Mezirow, J. (2012). Learning to Think Like an Adult: Core Concepts of Transformative Theory. In E. W. Taylor & P. Cranton (Eds.), The Handbook of Transformative Learning (p. 73-98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mitchell, L. & Paras, A. (2018). When difference creates dissonance: understanding the ‘engine’ of intercultural learning in study abroad. Intercultural Education, 1-19. Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1974). Gedächtnis und Intelligenz. Olten: Walter-Verlag. Straub, J. (2010). Lerntheoretische Grundlagen. In A. Weidemann, J. Straub & S. Nothnagel (Eds.), Wie lehrt man interkulturelle Kompetenz? Theorien, Methoden und Praxis in der Hochschulausbildung. Ein Handbuch (p.31-98). Bielefeld: transcript. Vande Berg, M. (2009). Intervening in Student Learning Abroad: A Research-based Inquiry. Online unter: http://www.idrinstitute.org/allegati/IDRI_t_Pubblicazioni/31/FILE_Documento_MBM_Vande_Berg.pdf (09.10.2011)