Abstract:

International engineering mobility is increasingly expected to enhance not only intercultural learning but also pedagogical quality. In the GP_TIME consortium (Good Practices in T.I.M.E.; four engineering institutions across Canada, Spain, Argentina, and Portugal), developed under the 2025 T.I.M.E. (Top Industrial Managers for Europe, https://timeassociation.org/in) Call for Projects, we position exchange students as comparative evaluators of “good teaching practices”. Using a sequential mixed-methods design, we surveyed 200 exchange students who nominated one host course as a good practice and reported teaching methods, assessment formats, perceived differences relative to their home institution, and academic/personal impact; open-ended responses were thematically analysed. A supplementary qualitative phase synthesised institutional focus-group summary reports to deepen and refine interpretation of the questionnaire findings.

Good-practice courses were characterised by hybrid active designs that integrated structured input with applied work: lectures appeared in 46% of nominated courses, typically combined with laboratory sessions and cooperative learning (24% each) and project/problem-based learning (23%). Assessment remained strongly multimodal: final exams were present in 70% of nominated courses but coexisted with group projects/reports (58%), oral presentations (55%), midterms (40%), and continuous assessment and individual assignments (30% each). Reclassification of 1,409 selected “reasons” for good practice using Chickering and Gamson’s principles revealed a relational–active core led by student–faculty contact (265 mentions), cooperation among students (156), and active learning (139). Perceived pedagogical contrast varied significantly by students’ home institution (χ²(56)=307.45, p<.001; Cramér’s V=0.26). Students reported multidimensional impact, including deeper understanding, increased confidence and autonomy, professional skill development, and improved international adaptation; focus groups highlighted enabling conditions such as same-session theory–practice integration, feedback loops with opportunities for revision, flexible assessment opportunities, mentoring, and accessible faculty support.

We propose a Multimodal Alignment Model in which active methodologies, diversified assessment, relational engagement, and supportive learning conditions interact to produce transformative learning in international engineering mobility. The findings suggest that sustainable innovation can emerge through integration—not substitution—of summative structures within feedback-rich, authentic learning ecosystems.

Keywords:

International mobility, engineering education, constructive alignment, authentic assessment, transformative learning, multimodal evaluation.