The earlier low level of scholarly attention on care in higher education (Walker & Gleaves, 2016) has seen a recent rise in the era of uncertainty due to wars, environmental threats and pandemics, as we are re-formulating the concept of knowing and living in the „Anthropocene” (Malone & Young, 2023). In light of the growing diversity among university students in terms of culture, social background, and language, there is a demand for transformative pedagogies (Lopez & Olan, 2018). These pedagogies require educators who establish compassionate relationships, fostering learner well-being. In this respect, we are viewing compassion in a positive light, as it has always been seen by non-Western cultures (White, 2017). This approach aligns with the novel methods in intercultural education (Kawalilak & Lock, 2018; Tongori, 2023) as well as the pedagogy of care. Both emphasize mutual respect and fostering genuine dialogue (Barek, 2023) along with „making kin”, which translates as experimenting within a shared student-teacher environment with a more “symbiotic” relationship (Duraiappah, 2018, p. 1; Malone & Young, 2023). Caring, and being culturally responsive [as well as interculturally competent] as an educator could also be regarded as identical approaches in that teaching builds on ethnically diverse students’ own cultural experiences to avoid inflicting on them a cultural dominance with unfavourable or even debilitating effects (Gay, 2018).

Incorporating the principles of culturally responsive pedagogy and the pedagogy of care, the objective of the activities to be introduced was to create educational spaces where learners feel seen as individuals and cared for, fostering reciprocal care for others. The integration of indispensable 21^st-century digital and AI-powered tools provided avenues for creativity and developing critical thinking. The aim of the presentation is to reflect on the care-based practices proposed.

In addressing the need for transformative pedagogies, the research questions formulated are as follows: Is it possible to achieve the development of student engagement, collaboration, research skills, critical thinking, and creativity through cultural information exchange in a caring environment? Additionally, do care-based, culturally responsive methods contribute to the well-being of the dance university students involved? These questions aim to explore the effectiveness of the implemented pedagogical approaches.

Care could take various forms, from course design to ways of offering help during the teaching-learning process, to the manner of interacting with students, to what extent and how regularly interest in their well-being is expressed (Bali, 2020). The presentation explores activities conducted with a diverse multinational group of students attending the practical courses for training 'ballet artist' and 'dancer and coach' students, however, also taking theoretical courses relating to host country culture and the dance culture of students’ country of origin as well as English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes. The students were encouraged to make their own choices in their research, enjoying the benefits of a supportive environment, including the teacher and the student body. Cultural immersion in the classes did not only serve to acquaint them with the host country's culture but also fostered a shared environment, promoting equality, homeliness, and a sense of belonging. This shared foundation also facilitated the exchange of their respective cultural heritages through digital products, characterized by mutual interest, appreciation, and respect. In EFL classes, eliciting the subtopics from students to match their cultural interests and providing culturally appropriate materials to make students feel comfortable and base their own learning experiences on were the key elements of culturally responsive pedagogy. The project methodology comprised several steps within the 90-minute time frame. The structure of a class was dependent on the nature of the course (culture- or language-related). However, project-like activities had the following steps: (1) initial instruction and demonstration of basic knowledge and skills by the teacher; (2) independent research by students using their digital devices; (3) creation of a product using various digital tools; (4) presentation and communication of the product; and (5) assessment of products by peers and the teacher. The pre-teaching step involved introducing the new topic, demonstrating the use of suggested digital platforms or tools, and presenting a sample product. During subsequent sessions, students showcased their products, ranging from storyboards to slide-show-supported presentations, from virtual museums to posters and videos to peers and the teacher. Evaluation followed a pre-agreed criterion-referenced assessment rubric (also fostering student well-being), rating categories such as content accuracy, content depth, organization, and style on a 1-5 point scale. Learner feedback was also invited in the form of digital sticky notes to allow the students to reflect on the processes and what they took away with them.

Looking back at our research questions, taking into account the teaching-learning processes studied based on the literature discussed as well as student feedback, we can make the following observations: The outcomes observed from the flexible exchange of conventional teacher-student roles to collegial and interdependent ones resulted in heightened student engagement and the fostering of collaboration. By incorporating digital and/or Ai-powered tools, enhancement of research skills, stimulation of critical thinking and creativity also took place, together with the practical application of skills through the exchange of cultural information. Based on student feedback and teacher observation, the classes made the participants feel engaged, relaxed and cared for.

Anderson, V., Rabello, R. C. C., Wass, R., Golding, C., Rangi, A., Eteuati, E., Bristowe, Z., & Waller, A. (2019). Good teaching as care in higher education. Higher Education, 79(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00392-6 Bali, M. (2020, May 29). Pedagogy of Care: COVID-19 Edition. Reflecting Allowed. https://blog.mahabali.me/educational-technology-2/pedagogy-of-care-covid-19-edition/ Barek, H. (2023, August). Pedagogies of Care in Precarity — SAGE Research Methods Community. Sage Research Methods Community. https://researchmethodscommunity.sagepub.com/blog/pedagogies-of-care-in-precarity Duraiappah, A. K. (2018). Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Education. The Blue Dot, 9(18), 1. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366389.locale=en Gay, G. (2018). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. Tongori, A. (2023). Ki a mester és ki a tanítvány? / Who is the Master and Who is the Student?: Interkulturális szerepcsere a nemzetközi táncos hallgatók “elméleti” képzésében / International Role Reversal in the “Theoretical” Training of International Dance Students. In D. E. Szente (Ed.), IX. Nemzetközi Tánctudományi Konferencia - Műfajok, módszerek, mesterek a táncművészetben - Programok és Absztraktok / 9th International Conference on Dance Science - Genres, Methods, Masters in Dance - Programme and Abstracts. Magyar Táncművészeti Egyetem. https://mte.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Absztraktkotet.pdf White, R. (2017). Compassion in Philosophy and Education. In P. Gibbs (Ed.), The Pedagogy of Compassion at the Heart of Higher Education (Vol. 1, pp. 19–31). Springer.