Undergraduate students internationally struggle with engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking on societal problems impacting people across multicultural contexts. This applied dissertation explores contributing factors to this educational problem using the framework of nested (Neal & Neal, 2013) and networked (Bronfenbrenner, 1994) ecological systems theory. Next, the study examines how the problem of practice manifests in a state university in Hungary. The issue is explored through an empirical needs assessment using a mixed methods approach and convergent parallel design with quantitative and qualitative data sets involving a school-wide survey and focus group interviews with teachers and international students studying in English. Based on the literature review, needs assessment results, and extant data exploring similar constructs, the author develops a holistic theory of learning called DTECC by synthesizing five learning theories into a hybrid holistic model. The framework integrates principles of experiential, transformative, and collaborative learning as well as digital hybrid design and critical theory –– each having positive associations with increasing student engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in analytical thinking and writing. For an applied project, the DTECC model is utilized in conjunction with Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Design Thinking (DT) to develop (1) a curriculum enrichment framework for innovative critical pedagogy in mobile classrooms, (2) a pilot syllabus, and (3) a business plan for an educational consultancy called Intelligence Motion that will implement the curriculum framework across public and private HEIs in the United States and Europe during phase one of a proof-of-concept pilot study.

The primary objective of the needs assessment was to explore to what extent undergraduate international students feel proficient, engaged, and confident in writing academically and thinking critically in English. The primary contributing factor targeted in the needs assessment was classroom pedagogical practice in the university’s micro- and mesosystems.

There were two sets of research questions guiding the needs assessment at the University of Pecs in Hungary. The first group of questions targeted students: (1) What are the reasons international students provide for not feeling engaged, confident, and proficient in academic writing and critical thinking during university coursework? (2) How do international students describe their experiences with academic writing and critical thinking during university coursework? (3) What are international students’ perceptions on the type of curricula, classroom activities, and pedagogy they are exposed to across the disciplines? (4) How do international students view innovative classroom pedagogy (e.g., integration of inquiry-based experiential learning, transformative educational technology, collaborative student-centered learning, problem-based learning, etc.) and the impact it may have on their engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking? (5) How do international students perceive classroom-based academic writing support for decreasing their vulnerabilities and risk factors, and increasing their coping strategies, adaptivity, and productivity?

The second set of research questions targeted educators at the university: (1) What are the reasons teachers provide for international students not feeling engaged, confident, and proficient in academic writing and critical thinking during university coursework? (2) What are teachers’ perceptions of international students’ strengths and weaknesses in academic inquiry and productive skills in English? (3) What are teacher’s perceptions of how they integrate innovative pedagogy (i.e., experiential phenomenon-based learning and problem-based learning, transformative learning, principles of social-cultural constructivism, digital and hybrid design with EdTech integration, and principles of critical pedagogy to connect classroom learning to real-world societal problems) into their courses to engage students and improve their self-efficacy and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking? (4) How do professors provide classroom-based support for academic writing to decrease students’ vulnerabilities and risk factors, and to increase coping strategies, adaptivity, and productivity in student writing?

The needs assessment utilized a mixed methods approach (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2006) combining both quantitative and qualitative research questions. The empirical needs assessment study followed the steps in parallel convergent design (quan + QUAL), with both quantitative and qualitative data collected and analyzed simultaneously over a period of three months (Creswell & Clark, 2011; Johnson et al., 2017; Kerrigan, 2014). Finally, the two datasets were merged using joint display analysis (Creswell & Clark, 2011) to identify areas of convergence and divergence between the quantitative and qualitative findings related to the research questions connected to students’ self-efficacy, engagement, and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking on societal problems. Quantitative methods involved disseminating separate surveys to university professors and the estimated 5,000 international and Hungarian students on campus studying subjects in English. Qualitative methods included semi-structured focus group interviews with professors and international students about their experiences and perspectives on engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking. The needs assessment focused on student exposure to innovative critical pedagogy in the classroom to increase engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in academic writing, highlighting five constructs related to classroom pedagogy that international students experience at the University of Pecs. These constructs include the following, along with validated survey instruments for determining students’ needs related to classroom pedagogy and its potential for increasing engagement, self-efficacy, and proficiency in academic writing and critical thinking: (a) student proficiency in academic writing: the Student Perception of Academic Writing and English for Academic Purposes Scale (Cai, 2013); (b) pedagogy, methodology, and classroom practices: the Teacher Critical Pedagogy (TCP) questionnaire (Roohani et al., 2015); (c) student engagement in academic writing: the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI) (Assunção et al., 2020; Maroco et. al, 2016); (d) student self-efficacy in academic writing: the Situated Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale (SAWSES) for undergraduate students (Mitchell et al., 2021); and (e) effective utilization of educational technology: the Educational Technology Standards Scale (ETSS) (Coklar & Odabasi, 2009). Four semi-structured focus group interviews with students and two semi-structured focus group interviews with teachers were also conducted to collect qualitative data. Participants were identified for the study using convenience sampling coupled with both strategic and purposive strategies to target international students enrolled in English-based programs of study across all academic disciplines as well as professors who teach courses in English (Creswell & Clark, 2011; Miles et al., 2013).

Several trends emerged in the joint display analysis comparing the quantitative data sets with many areas of convergence and divergence. Educators and students at the University of Pecs believe pedagogical practice must be improved by cultivating learning experiences that are more student-centered, open-ended, and applied in real-world environments outside of traditional classrooms. Educators also articulated they require more structured support in moving from a transmission-based model of instruction that is teacher-centered, rigid, and lecture-based to a more transformative model that is exploratory, dynamic, iterative, and formative. Therefore, the applied project and curriculum enrichment framework are designed to meet this need among stakeholders at this institution and other HEIs in the European Union, providing a theoretical framework to systematically enrich existing curricula across academic disciplines with principles of applied experiential learning, transformative learning, radical collaboration, digital hybrid technology, and critical pedagogy. Both educators and students perceive there is not sufficient academic writing support at the institution and across all departments and faculties. Therefore, the curriculum enrichment framework is also designed to fill this void by engaging learners in transformational and meaningful writing experiences on the road in mobile classrooms during problem-based passion projects. These units of enriching expeditionary learning are intended to increase students’ self-efficacy, engagement, and proficiency in academic writing, critical thinking, and civic discourse on societal problems that require urgent solutions. The needs assessment conclusions are also confirmed by recent OECD data on related constructs. Higher educational institutions internationally are limited by curriculum overload, inflexible curriculum design, and prioritization of memorizing lexical knowledge for summative standardized assessments (EduSkills, OECD, 2018; OECD, 2022). The study confirms OECD’s recommendation that school systems in developed and developing countries should reduce the quantity of core content and increase the quality of student-centered, inquiry-based learning and innovative critical pedagogy.

Bradberry, L. A., & de Maio, J. (2019). Learning by doing: The long-term impact of experiential learning programs on student success. Journal of Political Science Education, 15(1), 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1485571 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecology models of human development. In T. N. Postlewaite & T. Husen, (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1643–1647). Elsevier. Cabrera, D., & Cabrera, L. (2015). Systems thinking made simple: New hope for solving wicked problems (2nd ed.). Plectica Publishing. Camacho, A., Alves, R. A., & Boscolo, P. (2021). Writing motivation in school: A systematic review of empirical research in the early twenty-first century. Educational Psychology Review, 33(1), 213-247. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-020-09530-4 Heinrich, W. F., Habron, G. B., Johnson, H. L., & Goralnik, L. (2015). Critical thinking assessment across four sustainability-related experiential learning settings. Journal of Experiential Education, 38(4), 373-393.https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825915592890 Kolb, D. (2014). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Second Edition. 2nd edition PH Professional Business. Kumar, R., & Refaei, B. (2017). Problem-based learning pedagogy fosters students’ critical thinking about writing. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1670 Marlink, J., & Wahleithner, J. (2011). Improving students academic writing: Building a bridge to success. Final Report for National Writing Project, 1–103. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329058265_Improving_Students%27_Academic_Writing_Building_a_Bridge_to_Success Neal, J. W., & Neal, Z. P. (2013). Nested or networked? Future directions for ecological systems theory. Social Development, 22(4), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018 Nur, I. R. D., & Firmansyah, D. (2019, October). The use of transformative learning in developing students’ self-efficacy. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1315, No. 1, p. 012057). IOP Publishing. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1315/1/012057/pdf Rahimi, A., & Sajed, M. A. (2014). The interplay between critical pedagogy and critical thinking: Theoretical ties and practicalities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 41-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.284 Randolph, G. B. (2000). Collaborative learning in the classroom: A writing across the curriculum approach. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 119-122. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00504.x Robinson, A. A., & Levac, L. (2018). Transformative learning in developing as an engaged global citizen. Journal of transformative education, 16(2), 108-129. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1541344617722634?casa_token=v3DgYjnGbV0AAAAA:Qdbo8xmg0mg2_9CfryWGnNM85tNGuJYRvwshJsbkw57TYZXA5INP2P4qx9tjSvQMHz0gPC-jkMUFfw Shively, K., Stith, K. M., & Rubenstein, L. D. (2018). Measuring what matters: Assessing creativity, critical thinking, and the design process. Gifted Child Today, 41(3), 149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217518768361 Smith, M. K., & Vass, V. (2017). The relationship between internationalisation, creativity, and transformation: A case study of higher education in Hungary. Transformation in Higher Education, 2. https://doi.org/10.4102/the.v2i0.22