Reaching Criticality in an Outbound Mobility Program

Reaching Criticality in an Outbound Mobility Program | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Reaching Criticality in an Outbound Mobility Program Brittany Vermeulen, Jenny Pizzica, Adrian Renshaw, Jason Reynolds This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Short-term outbound mobility experiences can create transformative moments that challenge students’ perspectives and foster critical reasoning, self-reflection, and action (Barnett’s domains of criticality). Our program, Sustainable Development through Science in the Philippines, engaged a multidisciplinary cohort of undergraduate STEM students from two Australian universities in an immersive global experience. This paper examines qualitative data from learning journals, in-country interviews, and post-program focus groups to explore how a two-week trip influenced students’ development of criticality. Results Students engaged deeply with unfamiliar environments, navigating complex socio-cultural, ethical, and ecological sustainability challenges that prompted them to reevaluate themselves and the world around them. Program design, including structured reflection, collaborative research projects, short immersion experiences, and interactions with local stakeholders, was central to these outcomes. Experiences that disrupted assumptions and encouraged dialogue proved transformative; when linked to action, they supported growth toward becoming critical beings. Conclusion Short-term outbound mobility programs can intentionally embed intensive learning moments that advance students’ criticality. These forms of criticality, by challenging understanding, practices, and perspectives, are essential for STEM graduates to thrive in an increasingly complex and contested future. Embedding such experiences within STEM curricula offers educators a pathway to cultivate adaptable graduates equipped with diverse capabilities and perspectives. criticality short-term mobility programs transformative learning sustainable development STEM Figures Figure 1 Introduction Outbound mobility experiences (OMEs) can improve critical thinking, communication skills, global citizenship, multicultural and intercultural competence, independence, self-confidence and employability skills (Cruz & Whatley, 2024 ; Tran & Vu, 2018 ; Tran & Do, 2024 ). The global movement of university students participating in mobility has now surpassed 6 million participants (UNESCO, 2025 ). In Australia, for example, the latest statistics show that one in four students participated in a mobility experience while at university, and these were predominantly undergraduate students (71%) (Australian Government, 2021 ). Globally, OMEs are mainly undertaken by students in humanities, education, social sciences, and interdisciplinary studies (Cruz & Whatley, 2024 ), with STEM engagement underrepresented (Vermeulen et al., 2023 , 2024 ). Within short-term OMEs globally, a variety of undergraduate offerings exist, from credit-bearing to extra-curricular, and include activities such as thematic study tours, internships, or research conferences and summits (Dorah et al., 2022; Gaia, 2015 ; Hardiman et al., 2022 ). These experiences allow students to engage with a range of diverse and unfamiliar environments, contexts and perspectives, thereby enriching their understanding of their discipline in a global context (Vermeulen et al., 2023 ). Although studies of demographics and delivery mechanisms are available, program learning goals are often not reported or are ill-defined, leaving limited evidence of how OMEs affect discipline-specific and general learning outcomes (Tarrant, Rubin & Stoner, 2014; Nerlich, 2016 ; Tran & Bui, 2023 ). Researchers also argue that travelling overseas may not automatically equip students with the necessary knowledge and capabilities linked to their discipline, as is often assumed or expected (Bell et al., 2014; Townsin & Walsh, 2016 ; Nerlich, 2016 ; Cruz & Whatley, 2024 ; Vermeulen et al., 2024 ). Gaps also remain in short-term OME literature in the understanding of discipline-specific learning outcomes and professional practices (Tran & Bui, 2023 ). In this paper, we investigate a short-term OME to Panglao, the Philippines. Our OME aimed to foster a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainability by addressing the interlocked social, cultural, political, economic, and ecological challenges exacerbated by tourism. Through incorporating learning activities that encouraged critical and reflective thinking, interdisciplinary collaborative research, and cultural immersion, we sought to foster students’ learning and development across the three domains of criticality (critical reason, self-reflection and action) (Barnett, 1997 ; 2015 ). The research questions guiding this study are: What specific domains of criticality were developed during this OME? What factors influenced the development of criticality, and how did these factors affect student learning and development? By extending the classroom into the community, in settings that are typically culturally and geographically different from a student's prior experiences, intentionally designed programs have the potential to provoke and expand students' capacities for criticality. Literature Review Short-Term OMEs Universities have reshaped and embraced the short-term OME model in response to changing student communities, providing flexible options for non-traditional student participation (Dall'Alba & Sidhu, 2013 ; Tarrant et al., 2014; Hall et al., 2016 ; Lawrence, 2016 ; Rahimi, 2018 ; Gaia 2015 ; Dorah et al. 2022). In Australia, almost four out of every five (79%) experiences were less than a semester in length (Australian Government, 2021 ). Debate persists on the effectiveness of short-term versus semester or longer programs on student learning and development in the domains of criticality. Coker et al. ( 2018 ), for example, note that students in semester long programs self-reported higher ratings on critical and analytical thinking in their course overall compared to students who completed short programs, however there were no significant differences in related areas such as solving complex real-world problems, analysing ideas, making judgements or applying concepts in new situations. Others found no significant differences in transformative learning outcomes (i.e. a disorienting dilemma, self-reflection, and rational discourse) between short-term and longer programs (Strange & Gibson, 2017 ). Although the optimal length of a program will continue to be debated, it is generally agreed that offering short-term programs will increase the number and diversity of student participants (Gaia, 2015 ; Santos, 2017 ), and that program design will have important consequences for student learning. Effective program design in short-term OMEs increasingly draws on pedagogical approaches that prioritise deep, reflective learning and global engagement. This includes action-oriented, transformative, experiential, inquiry-based, or problem-based learning in addressing real-world challenges for positive societal change (Liao & Yuan, 2024 ; Wilson & Howitt, 2018 ; Wilson et al., 2015 ; Dirkx, Mezirow & Cranton, 2006 ). Beyond Critical Thinking and Towards Criticality Critical thinking (CT) broadly encompasses both cognitive skills (such as analysis, evaluation, and inference) and dispositions (such as open-mindedness, scepticism, and a willingness to reconsider beliefs) (Davies, 2013 ). STEM educators often adopt a cognitive skills approach to CT, highlighting logical connections, objectivity, argument evaluation, information processing, and problem solving (Pylypenko, 2020 ; Mayhew et al., 2016 ). While important to the discipline, this approach may overlook the importance of CT in preparing students to respond to and live within a disrupted, complex, and uncertain future (Vermeulen et al., 2024 ; Tilbury, 2019). Criticality extends beyond CT by foregrounding power, ideology, and context and by integrating reflection with meaningful action (Barnett, 1997 , 2015 ; Pettersson, 2023 ; Davies & Barnett, 2015 ). It is a reflective and transformative process through which individuals understand, assess, and respond to complex situations, interrogate norms and structures, examine their own assumptions and positionality, and consider the ethical implications of knowledge and practice (Pettersson, 2023 ). In this sense, criticality demands (or “necessitates”) engagement in transformative thinking to address systemic and complex challenges (Davies, 2013 ). For STEM educators and professionals, whose responsibilities extend beyond techno‑scientific solutions, criticality offers a way to develop reflexive, adaptive, and ethically attuned graduates capable of acting in varied social and professional contexts (Holdsworth & Thomas, 2021 ). Barnett ( 1997 ) conceptualises criticality across three connected and independent (Wilson & Howitt, 2016) domains that together form the basis of a ‘critical being’. That is, individuals who are “… more than just critical thinkers. They are able to critically engage with the world and with themselves as well as with knowledge” (Barnett, 1997 , p 1). These domains are: Knowledge (critical reason) : engaging analytically with complex ideas, knowledge and arguments (e.g. engaging critically with academic content or complex ideas), Self (critical reflection) : examining one’s own beliefs, values, and assumptions and understanding influence and power (e.g. reflecting on one’s identity and values), and World (critical action) : applying critical insights to act meaningfully in the world (e.g. acting critically in social and professional contexts). Barnett builds on this framework to conceptualises criticality as a developmental continuum (2015). Learners often begin with skills and reflexivity, progressing toward refashioning and transformation as they engage with ambiguous, value-laden challenges. The levels increase in sophistication and include: Critical Skills : The foundational level, involving analytical and evaluative abilities that are typically task-focused and discipline-specific (i.e. critical thinking). Reflexivity : A deeper level of criticality characterised by awareness of one’s own assumptions, values, and positionality. Refashioning : Moving beyond reflection to enact change in context, where individuals act on insights to reshape practices, projects, or approaches. Transformatory Critique : The most advanced level, involving radical reimagining of systems and purposes by embracing uncertainty and complexity. Criticality is rarely foregrounded in short-term OMEs, yet these experiences can play a pivotal role in its development. Intense, situated learning moments—those that disrupt assumptions, expose students to diverse perspectives, and require navigation of unfamiliar contexts—often act as disorienting dilemmas (Mezirow, 1991 ; 2003 ). When combined with structured reflection, dialogue, and opportunities for action, OMEs can move learners beyond technical skills toward reflexivity and, in some cases, toward refashioning or even transformatory critique (Perry, Stoner & Tarrant, 2012 ). In STEM education, fostering such progression involves more than disciplinary expertise. It may include cultivating appreciation for cultural diversity, advocating for social justice, and enabling action for positive change in response to global challenges (Liao & Yuan, 2024 ; Vermeulen et al., 2023 , 2024 ; Teshera-Levye et al., 2025 ; Guest et al., 2006 ). Our program was designed with these principles in mind. Methods Our study employed a qualitative exploratory research design (Creswell, 2014 ), to investigate the development of criticality in an outbound mobility program. The exploratory nature of the design and smaller sample size allowed for a richer, open-ended investigation into students’ experiences, particularly in a setting where limited prior research exists (Jones, 2002 ; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018 ; Creswell & Poth, 2017 ). Acknowledging our interpretation, subjectivity, and reflexivity as researchers, we employed reflective thematic analysis to analyse student learning journals, in-country interviews, and post-program focus groups (Braun & Clarke, 2019 , 2022 ; Braun et al., 2018 ). Our conceptual framework draws on Barnett’s ( 1997 ) interconnected domains of criticality. That is, critical reason (knowledge), critical self-reflection (self), and critical action (world). Through this process, three final themes are developed and presented. Research Setting and Overview Panglao, on the island state of Bohol, Philippines (9.8500° N, 124.1435° E), is a rapidly growing destination for recreational tourism in the Asia-Pacific. Bohol faces significant development challenges, and while local government efforts are underway to address these issues, the influx of over 1 million visitors annually to Panglao poses significant concerns for sustainable development (Provincial Planning and Development Office Bohol, 2016 ; 2024 ). Panglao, less than 50 km², hosts over 700 hotels and resorts and faces challenges such as changing land use, water resource management, waste management, food availability, and overexploitation of biodiversity and marine environments. Our short-term program, Sustainable Development through Science in the Philippines, engaged fourteen undergraduate STEM students from [University 1], Australia and [University 2], Australia. The two-week faculty-led OME took place in the Philippines from November – December 2023, founded on a long-standing partnership. [University 1] has previously delivered three science mobility programs to Panglao (in 2017, 2018, and 2019), each exploring tourism. Three facilitators from [University 1] – authors of this paper – along with two from [University 2] designed a coordinated suite of learning activities. The co-creation phase took over 18 months, which included the recruitment of students and a pre-departure workshop. While in-country, four academics co-led the study tour, which included stakeholder management, student evaluation, and providing pastoral care. The program was underpinned by transformative pedagogies (Mezirow, 1991 ) designed to engage students in reflection and experiential learning. The primary learning outcomes were to (1) foster a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainable development (through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals) by examining the interconnectedness of social, economic and ecological aspects of sustainability, and (2) develop critical and reflective thinking, interdisciplinary collaboration, intercultural awareness and communication. Students received academic credit towards their degree programs at their respective universities. The program was subsidised by the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan, with additional partial funding covered by participating students. The program structure included cultural immersion activities, site visits and stakeholder meetings in Week 1 to provide orientation, context, and background. In Week 2, students undertook ‘science in action’ research projects on a sustainability and tourism issue of their choosing and design – resulting in four topics: water infrastructure, natural disasters and health responses, eco-hotels and compliance, and mangrove conservation. Students collaborated intensively in cross-institutional project teams with local stakeholders (government officials, service providers, business owners, and the private sector, who were a mix of STEM and non-STEM professionals) on their selected topics, concluding with an oral presentation and written report of their findings. Student projects were designed to be student-directed, participatory and hands-on, allowing them greater autonomy and ownership of the project (Pesland et al., 2019; Pemberton & Nix, 2012 ). Structured reflective debriefs and journaling were scheduled at key points to support student learning and project progression. Social and recreational activities, as well as free time and independent exploration, were scheduled throughout the program for group cohesion. All students participated in two pre-departure workshops prior to travel, with project planning occurring six weeks before departure. Two group assessment tasks were completed in-country and submitted at the conclusion of the in-country program. (Fig. 1 ). Participants and data collection Students were invited to be study participants during the pre-departure workshop, with all fourteen students providing their informed consent to take part. All participants were undergraduate, domestic Australian STEM students enrolled at [University 1 or 2] (Table 1 ). The size of the cohort (n = 14) is representative of Australian short-term OMEs, which generally range from 15–18 students (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2024). Table 1 List and demographics of undergraduate student participants. Pseudonyms Gender Field of Study Year of Study Anne Female Built Environment* 3rd year Ava Female Environmental Science 3rd year Elise Female Built Environment* 3rd year Isabel Female Medical Science 2nd year Kiara Female Environmental Health 2nd year Lucia Female Science 3rd year Matthew Male Geospatial Science 1st year Mia Female Science 2nd year Naomi Female Environmental Health 2nd year Nick Male Environmental Health 2nd year Rebecca Female Environmental Health 2nd year Ryan Male Geospatial Science 1st year Samantha Female Animal Science and Zoology 2nd year William Male Animal Science and Zoology 4th year During the trip, students kept individual learning journals. At the start of each day, facilitators provided students with new reflection questions to prompt students’ journal writing. A group discussion activity marked the day’s end, where staff and students engaged in a structured reflective debriefing as one large group. Seven reflective exercises were integrated with specific scheduled activities (Fig. 1 ). After the program, students submitted their journals to the lead researcher. Semi-structured interviews with student project teams were conducted by the lead researcher towards the end of Week 2 while the students were immersed in their fieldwork. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, each lasting 30–45 minutes. Concentrated on their research projects in response to stakeholder engagement, students were also asked about their perceptions of sustainable development within the context of their project and the Philippines. Two weeks after returning to Australia, two online re-entry focus groups were conducted by the lead researcher. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, each lasting 90 minutes. Student participants shared their overall learning experiences and perceived learning gains and reflected on their research projects and contributions to the community. This study (H14388) was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at [University], Australia. Data analysis Guided by Braun and Clarke’s ( 2019 ) six-phase process, we identified and explored instances of criticality in response to the program's design. In the familiarisation phase (phase 1), the lead researcher first reviewed her fieldnotes and the student learning journals (n = 10). Using an inductive coding method (phase 2), five preliminary codes were developed during this review. Following this, the familiarisation phase was repeated for the interview transcripts by the research team. Listening and reading over the transcriptions, notes were taken, briefly detailing notable and interesting mentions of critical thinking, critical reasoning, critical self-reflection and critical action from each interview (n = 14) and focus group (n = 6) transcript. Inductive coding was again adopted (phase 2), allowing us to remain closely aligned with the students’ experiences. Familiarisation notes and coded excerpts were combined, compared, analysed and condensed through a collaborative discussion to generate initial themes (phase 3). Excerpts were extracted from the transcripts and student learning journals and collated for further analysis by the team through a cycle of reviews (phase 4). The initial themes were further defined and refined by the research team to arrive at the final three themes presented below (phase 5). Data was written up (phase 6), and a small group of quotations were selected to illustrate our interpretation. Student quotes are marked with acronyms to indicate the data source and stage of the program: LJ: Student learning journals with corresponding activity numbered (Week 1 and 2 of the trip) IN: In-country interviews with student teams (Week 2 of the trip) FG: Re-entry student focus groups (post-trip) Results From the data collected from our 14 participating undergraduate STEM students, through learning journals (LJ), interviews (IN), and focus groups (FG), our insights indicate that our program supported varying dimensions of criticality across the cohort. All students demonstrated critical reasoning (knowledge) (n = 14), with a high proportion of students exhibiting critical self-reflection (self) (n = 11). Fewer students showed evidence of critical action (world) (n = 5). Most (n = 9) students’ expressions of criticality were reflexive, with only two students demonstrating more sophisticated forms of criticality (refashioning), and three positioned at the introductory level (critical skills). Criticality was evoked as students contended with the entangled global contexts, societal structures and ideologies of sustainable development in Panglao. This stimulated criticality as students were moved to reflect on and reassess their prior perspectives and understanding. Students distanced themselves from their earlier position as problem solvers to learners and visitors. Below, we explore these in greater detail. Bridging knowledge and perspectives (Domain 1: Knowledge) Knowledge (critical reason) involves the analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information (elements of critical thinking) by developing the intellectual capabilities necessary to engage with complex ideas or arguments (Barnett, 2015 ). At its most advanced form, critical reasoning involves questioning, challenging and critiquing dominant or established norms, ideologies and structures that shape society and knowledge production (Davies, 2013 ). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in all participants (100%). Hands-on research projects were the catalyst for collaboration, learning and autonomy. The projects were situated in the complex, multifaceted sustainable development challenges unique to Panglao. They were designed to introduce students to research practices that could be both adaptable and socially contextualised. Students collaboratively engaged with scientific knowledge, working with their peers’ skillsets, integrating their prior understanding and experiences - “having people from different fields, different expertise… you learn so many different things… [It] helped you have even more understanding of what’s happening here...” (Matthew, IN). Students spoke of grappling with peers’ diverse viewpoints, while together navigating the nuances of multidisciplinary: I feel like I had my own opinion that I think is the only opinion, and then once I sit down at the end of the day and I hear everyone else’s, I’m like, “Oh my God. I didn’t even think about that.” We both saw the same thing, but we both have different perspectives. We all have like 20 perspectives. (Samantha, FG) … it just made it [sustainability] much more clear how big and intertwined– I mean, there’s four project groups but nothing is separate… (William, IN) Students reflected on how on-campus course-based research work was primarily done through the (often individual) application of disciplinary knowledge, via the analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information. Whereas in Panglao, they worked more intensively in interdisciplinary student teams. They found it unusual and invigorating, like “detective work” (Ryan, IN), to be discussing the project with their peers at breakfast together, throughout the day at meetings and site visits, in the evenings during debriefs or over dinner, examining results together. These experiences began to expand students’ understanding of the term ‘research project’, and they became more critically aware of the limitations of their knowledge of research and research practices Working with local stakeholders elicited critical reasoning in several ways. Firstly, exploring topics through the viewpoints of the stakeholders prompted students to examine their own preparedness and understanding of research. Students had completed their project pre-work before departure, as they best understood at the time. However, being in-country and interacting with stakeholders caused them to see the limitations in their knowledge and their approaches to the research, that being “… most of the prep for my group had been done… Everything had completely changed… you only realise what you’re doing once you’re really there.” (Kiara, FG), and “[being there] makes you think a lot deeper than when you’re just reading about it online…” (Rebecca, FG). Engaging with familiar processes (i.e. scientific research) in new collaborations (i.e. interdisciplinary student team with local stakeholders) and in unfamiliar environments pushed students to consider new ways to approach their projects, and critical reasoning became evident – “... [O]ur awareness has grown about what the real hurdles are and what the real issue is… It’s a lot of different things. It’s a very multifaceted issue that requires a lot of different solutions… And I think that’s been quite overwhelming.” (Anne, IN). The research projects enabled students to work through complex ideas, and became a turning point where students reconceptualise their projects to integrate the knowledge and experiences of the local communities. Students displayed a level of criticality representative of reflexivity as they demonstrated their awareness of their own understanding and practices: I found this experience [meeting government officials] valuable to our [research]. Learning about their policies and practices gave me a great understanding of the operations and the struggles they face... It was clear our team needed to adjust to the environment we are in. (Naomi, LJ 2) Even though things can be really well documented and follow organisation, that’s not the most effective method for science a lot of the time and there’s a lot of knowledge hidden in the people who just know the land… [C]onserving things isn’t as simple as just saying, “We need to conserve them.” (Lucia, LJ 7) The immersive experience of researching in Panglao also helped students recognise their unconscious cultural biases, enabling a reorientation of disciplinary thinking. Being actively involved in data collection and speaking with “...health officials and walk[ing] around the health units” (FG) for example, led Samantha to have a deeper understanding of the local context and structures where “... [t]he systems they had in place worked for them and their locals” (Samantha, FG). Students displayed a level of criticality consistent with reflexivity, with few moving toward refashioning, where individuals begin to reconfigure their professional approaches. Wrestling with their own scientific knowledge, research outcomes, stakeholder convictions, and the reality of the situation, critical reasoning was evident in the appropriateness of their initial approaches and thinking: We’re not there to go in and judge them and say, “This isn’t correct. This isn’t the way it should be run”, and change things… they have knowledge and they’re aware of that, which was quite the opposite to what I thought coming in. (Samantha, FG) There was a lot of confronting and conflicting… moments with my perception prior to the trip compared to when we were actually there … we had to [be] mindful of the things we were saying and doing. (Nick, FG) (Re)Examining roles and solutions (Domain 2: Self) Self (critical self-reflection) is the introspective aspect of criticality. It involves personal reflection on one's own beliefs, assumptions, biases, and/or values, aiming to understand how one's identity and experiences influence thinking and actions (Barnett, 2015 ). Perspective-taking is an act of self-reflection that helps an individual reflect on their own assumptions by stepping into another’s viewpoint (Southworth, 2022 ). During the OME, students felt their assumptions, biases, and values were challenged daily. In their reflections, they refer to personal transformative shifts, such as “... constantly changing my perspectives” (Elise, IN), and “I feel like it’s definitely changed me ... My perspective on the world and how I think about things…” (Rebecca, IN). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in a majority (79%). Students’ self-awareness was closely linked to a reflective and critical examination of their own motivations, intentions, and views of their discipline and practice. Most students cited that their initial motivation to participate in the program was to have an impact or make a change in the world, linked to their values and objectives as scientists – “I came here to help.” (Lucia, IN) and “… it’s up to us as students of science … to fix things or find solutions….” (Nick, FG). In examining their beliefs and the geopolitical systems they were engaging with, students began to reflect on their assumptions and the complexities of finding a solution. Unfamiliar with Panglao’s systemic environmental and societal challenges, we observed that students initially assumed a role as ‘the problem solver’ to “… give them [stakeholders] innovative solutions and … great ideas to fix [their sustainability challenge] ...” (Nick, IN). What began as a desire to “help” evolved into a deeper recognition of the emotions involved, highlighting the introspective work of criticality: I wish I did [have a solution]… if someone had an answer, that would solve a lot of our world problems. But there’s no one answer. I wish I could fix the world but I can’t. I feel like I was thinking about this the entire trip, and I was like, “It shouldn’t be so hard.” But just seeing their lack of resources, their lack of support, their lack of so many things, that I think is prevalent across all countries but just seeing it so in-depth there – I was going back and forth for so long just thinking, tiring my brain out and being like, “Why?”. It’s so hard to come up with a solution because every time you think that there is one, there’s a first-hand barrier that you’re standing in... (Elise, FG) Students’ desire to “fix” was gradually tempered by a deeper consciousness of context and the impact of their research project in delivering a solution – “We came in like, ‘We’re going to solve everything. We’re going to give you all those solutions.’ But it’s really not that easy.” (Rebecca, IN), demonstrating reflexivity. For facilitators, supporting students with the weight of their realisations through scheduled debrief sessions and one-on-one work with project teams became an evolving and integral part of the learning process. Students expressed a critical self-reflection by reconsidering their role and gaps in their knowledge caused by their preconceptions – “I just wasn’t aware of how their systems ran at all…” (Elise, FG). This realisation led students to explore alternative responses to sustainable development challenges in several ways. In doing so, they moved beyond reflexivity toward refashioning, seeking to rethink dominant paradigms and explore new approaches. For example, Ryan proposed that Western models of sustainable development are not universally applicable. He reflected on the broader context-specific solutions: I learned a lot … I kind of theorised that maybe [sustainable] development for everyone isn’t the same. They shouldn’t strive to be exactly like us [the Western world]. That wouldn’t work for them… not all these countries have to develop in the Western way… It can be completely different. Obviously, having streetlights, stable roads, and hospital infrastructure is important. But that doesn’t have to be achieved our way. (Ryan, IN) These moments of perspective-taking at the reflexivity level were evident in other cases (Southworth, 2022 ). Students demonstrated that learning was not solely content-oriented; it involved questioning assumptions, recognising context, and growing from these insights. Such reflections sparked ongoing dialogue about the appropriateness of external intervention, their roles as students, and the importance of locally led solutions. Both Will and Lucia illustrate a shift from problem-solving toward recognising the ethical limits of being an outsider: Where do we go from here? We go home and fix our own shit first… I don’t think “we” should go anywhere. I think the context has to be local. I just think the idea of external control – like how much guidance do you give to developing countries? Should we give any? (William, LJ 7) I don’t want my voice to be louder than people who live there, or to think that I know better, because I really don’t, and I learnt that several times over there. So that’s a future that I think they’ll have to have a large say in... (Lucia, FG) (Re)assessing the impact of self and science (Domain 3: World) World (critical action) is the practical or applied aspect of criticality, translating critical reasoning and self-reflection into real-world impact, especially in contexts of uncertainty, complexity, and contestability (Adams and Barnett, 2022). Critical action calls for individuals who are “able to act autonomously and purposively within it [the world]” (Barnett, 1997 , p. 4). It involves acting in the world, based on critical insights that are informed, reflective, and transformative (Barnett, 1997 ). It is exemplified through instances of personal behaviour, decision making, or social engagement (Barnett, 2015 ). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in a minority (36%) of students, with a further three students showing potential for critical action. During group debriefs as moments of disorientation, competing narratives, and ethical tensions were discussed. This led to students forming a more critical stance on their actions as visitors and (novice) scientists in their environment: “I really enjoyed the trip and most things that we did. But in the back of my mind, I did feel a bit guilty” (Rebecca, FG). A growing awareness of the effects of the tourism industry influenced how students used their free time. Some students considered their complicity as tourists and expressed critical action through decision making and their ability to act independently: “I did my best to stay informed and where I got the choice, avoided questionable or harmful [tourism activities]…” (Mia, LJ 5). “At the start of the trip me and a few others were very keen to swim with the whale sharks… However… we were confronted by the reality … As this activity is popular among tourists, the whale sharks are fed by people who do these tours... and they disrupt their migration patterns. Looking at the ethics, do we want to support this industry? Our answer was no!” (Isabel, LJ 7) A small number of students began to see science as a culturally embedded practice requiring more humility and adaptation than they had expected, demonstrating levels of reflexivity. One student expressed a shift in scientific practice as a call to “… decentralise Western science” (Lucia, LJ 7). They sought to reframe their approaches to become more constructive and relational. This was further demonstrated by creation of artefacts that expressed thoughtful responses to complex realities. For Kiara, rather than reacting with judgment, she used the assessment task (an oral presentation) to channel critique into a constructive stance that encouraged stakeholders to consider more sustainable alternatives, like “eco-hotels” (Kiara, IN): … there were so many policies in place to solve most of these problems… I found this so problematic… it felt like the prosperity of Panglao, its environment, community and animals were not protected. I wanted to get on my high horse and tell them what they’re doing is wrong. Instead, this wouldn’t make a change. I decided to highlight [in my presentation] where ecotourism is going in the right direction… and what this should look like (Kiara, LJ 7) Similarly, shifting from a technical scientific study to a shared opportunity for learning was further evidence of critical action. Mia (and her group) actively reoriented the project to meet local priorities rather than adhering to predetermined scientific outputs: We’ve realised that we’re not going to be able to do the stuff that we set out to do… So the aim has to shift a little bit to something a little bit more broad and conceptual, more conversational, than just “Get scientific data and show it to us.” But I kind of think it’s better, because the data we were going to collect in two days – they can do that themselves… I’m not sure how much that really would have helped them… It’s probably better to just have a bit of a chat about it and share what we’ve learned. (Mia, IN) Discussion This study demonstrates that short-term OMEs offer opportunities to transform students’ understanding of themselves and the world (Mezirow, 2003 ; Perry, Stoner and Tarrant, 2012 ). Positioning our active role and subjectivity in program design and participation, we acknowledge our subjectivity in the interpretation of these findings (Braun et al., 2018 ). Overall, short-term OMEs can provide impactful opportunities for student learning, particularly in geographically and socio-culturally distinct settings. We find that such experiences activate and deepen criticality across Barnett’s ( 1997 ) domains (knowledge, self and world) by exposing students to complex realities and fostering a more engaged global outlook. We observed shifts toward inclusivity, openness, and adaptability (Dirkx, Mezirow & Cranton, 2006 ), as students sought new ways to interpret differences and explore alternative approaches. Similar to Howitt and Wilson ( 2018 ), our findings indicate that although not all students reached advanced levels of criticality, the data highlight the crucial role of social interaction in learning and teaching. Our study builds on previous works that emphasise learning and development must be structured and well-planned in an OME (Townsin & Walsh, 2016 ; Bell et al., 2014; Nerlich, 2016 ; Cruz & Whatley, 2024 ; Vermeulen et al., 2024 ). Pre-departure and post-program support were integral to the design (Gothard et al., 2012 ; McLaughlin & Johnson, 2006 ), ensuring students felt prepared and engaged. Autonomy in project design, an acclimation period, scheduled activities, and established stakeholder relationships further contributed to program success within a limited timeframe. The results for all fourteen participating students showed a continuum of criticality across the three domains (knowledge, self and world) and levels of sophistication (from critical skill up to refashioning) (Barnett, 1997 ; 2015 ). This is consistent with Barnett’s ( 2015 ) description of criticality as a progressive and layered process. Dunne ( 2015 ) highlights that criticality, unlike critical thinking, cannot simply be activated when analysis is required; rather, it is embedded in everyday actions and experiences, however ordinary they may seem. Given these characteristics and the acknowledged time constraints of our program, forming an identity capable of transformative critique (the most sophisticated form of criticality) requires courage and openness to new ways of thinking and acting. These findings reinforce the importance of deliberate design, including reflection prompts, stakeholder engagement, cultural immersion, and collaborative student research, to foster deeper learning and development. Barnett ( 2015 ) emphasises that the starting point for criticality is critical thinking, which is often discipline-specific. Our findings support this. The domain of critical reasoning started from a disciplinary perspective, but through interdisciplinary, collaboration, and utilising prior knowledge, students were moved to challenge and question their understanding. This included a general increase in global awareness, which was brought about by being immersed in an unfamiliar and complex environment. Other STEM-based OME studies (Gaia, 2015 ; Scharoun, 2015 ; Lipsett, 2008 ; Parks, 2020 ) similarly report that even brief overseas experiences foster global awareness. The research projects were intended to challenge their critical thinking and also foster interdisciplinary collaboration among students, and in this respect, were successful. Previous STEM-based OME research has also found that real-world projects can be catalysts for critical thinking (Vermeulen et al., 2024 ; Montrose, 2002; Garibay, 2015 ; Bamber & Pike, 2013 ; Murphy et al., 2019 ; Oliver, 2015 ; Sanders & Hirsch, 2014 ; Santos, 2017 ). Our findings show similar outcomes. However, we also found that critical reasoning (going beyond critical thinking) can be enhanced when students are asked to question and rethink how to approach scientific research in response to sustainability and its complexity. It is further enhanced or made more complex by stakeholder engagement. As described by Duff ( 2004 ) deeper learning occurs when students engage with the material out of genuine curiosity, seeking to understand its meaning and thoughtfully connecting it to prior knowledge and experiences through critical thinking. This trajectory led students to reconsider their approaches to sustainability introspectively, acknowledging uncertainty and complexity and leading to further self-reflection (Guilikers & Oonk, 2019; Krueger et al., 2016). The domain of critical self-reflection enabled students to grapple with the complexities of sustainable development. Learning about sustainability involves “dealing with the unknown and with complexity” (Holdsworth & Thomas, 2015 , p.138). Incidental interactions and stakeholder meetings supported reflexivity, while engaging local voices encouraged perspective-taking (Southworth, 2022 ). Deeper reflection was fostered through dialogue with peers and facilitators and activated by structured reflective activities, which students cited as influential in reshaping viewpoints. We observed this shift in students’ frames of reference, becoming more inclusive, perceptive, open, empathetic, and emotionally adaptable (Dirkx, Mezirow & Cranton, 2006 ). Students’ growing awareness of complexity, alongside their willingness to challenge personal perspectives and assumptions, reinforces the domain of critical self. This was observed as an evolving process over the two-week OME. Structured activities before, during, and after the OME through journaling, curated prompts, and group debriefs actively supported reflection. Prompts asking students to consider the impact of their actions and responsibilities proved effective. The domain of critical action was achieved by only a small group of students, reflecting the challenge of attaining this level within a short timeframe. As noted in prior studies, the short duration may limit time for students to fully process and act on new perspectives (Engle & Engle, 2003 ; Dwyer, 2004 ; Tarrant, 2010 ; Nguyen, 2013 ). Additionally, learning is highly personal and contextual; the same set of experiences may trigger critical action for some students but not for others, and different experiences might have produced different outcomes. This variability underscores the importance of program design and can also explain the evidence observed. Incorporating a diversity of intentional, intensive opportunities for sustained engagement increases the likelihood that individual triggers for critical action will be met. The program overall aimed to create pivotal moments where critical action (world) depends on critical thought (knowledge) (Barnett, 1997 ). Our findings suggest OMEs can offer more opportunities for developing critical action than traditional classroom settings, though time constraints limited deeper or more sophisticated engagement (Howitt and Wilson, 2016). Research projects and stakeholder engagement prompted questioning of knowledge, power, and positionality, leading to reframed practices. These instances of reframing, though few, incorporated values-based strategies and efforts to decentralise Western science and mindsets. Student responses underscored the importance of dialogue with peers, facilitators, stakeholders, and communities for learning and self-awareness (Gieser, 2015 ; Tran & Vu, 2018 ; Vermeulen et al., 2024 ). Personal impacts as tourists further provoked tangible actions in spaces often considered peripheral in STEM programs. While some students expressed potential for action through new career paths, identified by other studies as critical action (Wilson & Howitt), we argue that this is not a strong indicator. It signals potential but lacks the depth and immediacy described by Barnett, which involves reconfiguring practices and engaging with complexity in the present rather than projecting future intentions. At varying stages, most students came to reflect on and acknowledge that achieving sustainable development (and by extension the SDGs) is deeply contextual, achieving our learning goal of fostering a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainability. As with other studies (Stein, 2021), these interactions helped students develop a nuanced understanding of sustainability’s complexity. Building on Tran et al. ( 2021 ), who note that observing different scientific practices prompt critical thinking among other capabilities, our findings show that the act of self-reflection further challenged the role of science, their own expertise, and envisioned alternative approaches to sustainability. Students recognised that there are no singular solutions, that diverse perspectives are complicated by uncertainty and chaos, and that applying rigorous scientific approaches to global challenges is both relevant and difficult (Guilikers & Oonk, 2019; Krueger et al., 2016). Our study also showed students rethinking cultural assumptions that science alone can solve these challenges, echoing Teshera-Levye et al. ( 2025 ). This reflective process led to insights for reshaping practices, projects, and social engagement. As evident in our study, criticality was developed in moments that involved challenges, conflict, complexity and context; experienced and most times shaped by the program design. This led to a small number of students demonstrating a movement toward critical being (i.e. progression across all three domains) (Barnett, 2015 ). As critical beings, and according to Barnett ( 2006 ), these students can navigate uncertainty, integrate diverse perspectives, act with ethical responsibility and continuously reflect and adapt. The findings indicated that these capabilities were illustrated in the way they began to envision themselves in and with the world (Tran et al., 2021 ). We therefore argue that short-term programs with intentional, intensive opportunities for sustained engagement and participation can have an impact on students’ criticality. Differences in students’ attainment of critical being appeared linked to program design, individual characteristics, and engagement with reflective activities, and leave space for further study. While we have shown short-term OMEs can achieve forms of criticality, there are inherent challenges in reaching these goals we acknowledge. This includes significant resourcing and time investment by the program facilitators to ensure a quality delivery of the program to foster such outcomes. Future research could explore how critical action can be further integrated within the constraints of a short-term OME by integrating practical dimensions of critical action earlier within the program structure and reflective prompts, and firmly embedding pivotal moments of reflection, active learning and discourse. Conclusion OMEs have the potential to foster a broad range of outcomes, including criticality. By navigating and challenging new and unfamiliar environments and contexts within an OME, these learning and development outcomes are reinforced through extensive participation in the world, challenging socio-cultural bias, situating disciplinary knowledge within the broader context, and working towards positive changes in light of interlinked sustainability challenges (Yuan & Liao 2024 ; Wilson & Howitt, 2018 ; Davies & Barnett, 2015 ). In shorter-term OMEs, ranging from 2–4 weeks, educators can focus on creating transformative and intentional moments to good effect. Transformative learning often requires sustained engagement and the opportunity to apply new insights repeatedly. By creating intensive, structured opportunities for critical reasoning and self-reflection, and embedding opportunities for critical action, short-term experiences can serve as powerful catalysts for student learning and development. Even brief exposure to different cultural practices or confronting social, cultural, political and ecological challenges can catalyse learning and development when properly structured, guided and facilitated. Abbreviations • CT Critical thinking • FG Re-entry student focus groups • IN In-country interviews • LJ Learning journal • OMEs Outbound mobility experience • SDGs Sustainable Development Goals • STEM Science, technology, engineering and mathematics Declarations The authors declare that they have no competing interests. This study was conceived and designed as part of a PhD thesis. Brittany Vermeulen conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Dr Jenny Pizzica contributed substantially to data analysis and interpretation, alongside Dr Jason Reynolds and Dr Adrian Renshaw who contributed to the overall study design, guidance and supervision, and critical revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Ethical approval: This study (H14388) was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at Western Sydney University, in accordance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (Updated 2018). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee. Consent to participate: All participants involved in this study provided informed consent to participate, having been fully briefed on the purpose, procedures, and potential risks associated with the research. Consent to publish: All participants consented to the publication of anonymised data and findings derived from this study, with assurances that their identities will remain confidential. No personal information was collected during this study. Funding: This research was supported by a research stipend provided by Western Sydney University as part of a PhD candidature for data collection and analysis. Author Contribution The authors declare that they have no competing interests. This study was conceived and designed as part of a PhD thesis. Brittany Vermeulen conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Dr Jenny Pizzica contributed substantially to data analysis and interpretation, alongside Dr Jason Reynolds and Dr Adrian Renshaw who contributed to the overall study design, guidance and supervision, and critical revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of our RMIT colleagues, Dr Usha Iyer-Raniga and Dr Christina Scott-Young, for their valued contributions to co-delivering and co-teaching this mobility program. We extend our heartfelt thanks to our gracious local hosts, stakeholders, the community of Panglao, and, of course, our students for their enthusiastic engagement and participation in the program. Student participation in this mobility experience was supported by the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Project. Data Availability All data and materials generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article. References Australian Government. (2021). Research snapshot: Higher education students studying abroad in 2019. Australian Government Department of Education, Skill and Employment. https://internationaleducation.gov.au/research/research-snapshots/Documents/RS_%20HE%20student%20mobility.pdf Bamber PM, Pike MA. Towards an ethical ecology of international service learning. J Curriculum Stud. 2013;45(4):535–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.675354 . Barnett R. Higher Education: A Critical Business. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University; 1997. Barnett R. Graduate attributes in an age of uncertainty. In: Hager P, Holland S, editors. Graduate attributes, learning and employability. Springer; 2006. pp. 49–65. Barnett R. A curriculum for critical being. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US; 2015. pp. 63–76. Bell K, Moorhead B, Boetto H. Social work students’ reflections on gender, social justice and human rights during a short-term study programme to India. Int Social Work. 2016;60(1):32–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872814559559 . Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11(4):589–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806 . Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic Analysis: A practical guide. 1st ed. SAGE; 2022. Braun V, Clarke V, Hayfield N, Terry G. (2018) Thematic Analysis. In: Liamputtong, P, Ed., Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, Springer Singapore, Singapore, 843–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103 Coker JS, Heiser E, Taylor L. Student outcomes associated with short-term and semester study abroad programs. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2018;30(2):92–105. Creswell JW. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE. https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/46924_CH_3.pdf Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. SAGE; 2018. Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. 4th ed. SAGE; 2017. Cruz NI, Whatley M. Domestic Study Away in Higher Education: A Systemic Literature Review. Rev Educ Res. 2024;1–32. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241279296 . Dall'Alba G, Sidhu R. Australian undergraduate students on the move: experiencing outbound mobility. Stud High Educ. 2013;40(4):721–44. Davies M, Barnett R. (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_1 Davies M. (2013). A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research , 30, 41–92. Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trading. (2024). Funding accepted in the 2024 New Colombo Plan Mobility Program round. Accessed: 31 October 2025. https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-ncp-funding-mobility-projects.pdf Dorah B, Hughes K, Ireland I, Matinec W, O’Callaghan E, Piper H, Potts D, Watson S. Learning Abroad in Australian Universities, White Paper, IEAA, 2022. https://ieaa.org.au/common/Uploaded%20files/Research%20Publications/2022/PUB-IEAA-Learning-Abroad-in-Australian-Universities.pdf Duff A. The revised approaches to studying inventory (RASI) and its use in management education. Act Learn High Educ. 2004;5(1):56–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787404040461 . Dunne G. Beyond critical thinking to critical being: Criticality in higher education and life. Int J Educational Res. 2015;71:86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.03.003 . Dwyer M. More is better: The impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2004;10:151–63. Dirkx JM, Mezirow J, Cranton P. Musings and reflections on the meaning, context, and process of transformative learning: A dialogue between John M. Dirkx and Jack Mezirow. J Transformative Educ. 2006;4(2):123–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344606287503 . Engle L, Engle J. Study abroad levels: Toward a classification of program types. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2003;9:1–20. Gaia AC. Short-term faculty-led study abroad programs enhance cultural exchange and self-awareness. Int Educ Journal: Comp Perspect. 2015;14(1):21–31. Garibay J. STEM students’ social agency and views on working for social change: Are STEM disciplines developing socially and civically responsible students? J Res Sci Teach. 2015;52(5):610–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21203 . Gieser JD. A sociocultural investigation of identity: How students navigate the study abroad experience. J Coll Student Dev. 2015;56(6):637–43. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0060 . Gothard J, Downey G, Gray T. (2012). Bringing the learning home: Programs to enhance study abroad outcomes in Australian Universities. Australian Government. Office for Learning and Teaching. [online] < https://researchportal.murdoch.edu.au/esploro/outputs/report/Bringing-the-learning-home-Programsto/991005541910507891 Guest D, Livett M, Stone N. Fostering International Student Exchanges for Science Students. J Stud Int Educ. 2006;10(4):378–95. Hall T, Gray T, Downey G, Sheringham C, Jones B, Power A, Truong S. Jafari and Transformation: A Model to Enhance Short-Term Overseas Study Tours. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2016;27:33–46. Hardiman BL, Reynolds J, Pizzica J, Renshaw A. Re-orientating experiences: Considerations for student development through virtual mobility in STEM. J Appl Learn Teach. 2022;5(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2022.5.1.20 . Harrison L, Potts P. Learning Abroad at Australian Universities: The current environment. International Education Associate of Australia; 2016. [online]. Holdsworth S, Thomas I. Framework for Introducing Education for Sustainable Development into University Curriculum. J Educ Sustainable Dev. 2015;9(20):137–59. 10.1177/0973408215588246 . Holdsworth S, Thomas I. Competencies or capabilities in the Australian higher education landscape and its implications for the development and delivery of sustainability education. High Educ Res Dev. 2021;40(7):1466–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1830038 . Jones SR. (Re)writing the world: Methodological strategies and issues in qualitative research. J Coll Student Dev. 2002;43(4):461–73. Lawrence R. (2016). Final Universities Australia Report into Student Mobility. [online] www.research.com.au. Liao W, Yuan R. March 20). Cultivating criticality through transformative critical thinking curriculums in a time of flux and transformation. Educational Philos Theory. 2024;56(8):743–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2024.2328076 . Lipsett A. 2008, October 16. Graduates who have studied abroad more appealing to businesses. Retrieved from http://www.guradian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/16/studentshighereducation Mayhew MJ, Rockenbach AN, Bowman NA, Seifert TAD, Wolniak GC, Pascarella ET, Terenzini PT. How college affects students: 21st century evidence that higher education works. Jossey-Bass; 2016. McLaughlin J, Johnson K. Assessing the Field Course Experiential Learning Model: Transforming Collegiate Short-term Study Abroad Experiences into Rich Learning Environments. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2006;13:65–85. Montrose L, Frontiers. Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91 . Mezirow J. Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1991. Mezirow J. Transformative learning as discourse. J Transformative Educ. 2003;1(1):58–63. Murphy S, MacDonald A, Danaia L, Wang C. An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futures Educ. 2019;17(2):122–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210318774190 . Nguyen AM. (2013). Transformation through study abroad: Critical thinking and world citizenship. In M. K. Mulvaney & K. Klein, editors, Preparing tomorrow’s global leaders: Honors international education. (21–44). Lincoln, NE. Nerlich S. Counting Outward Mobility: The Data Sources and their Constraints. In: Velliaris D, Coleman-George D, editors. Handbook of Research on Study Abroad Programs and Outbound Mobility. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2016. pp. 40–65. Oliver B. Redefining Graduate Employability and Work-Integrated Learning: Proposals for Effective Higher Education in Disrupted Economies. J Teach Learn Graduate Employab. 2015;6(1):56–65. https://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2015vol6no1art573 . Parks E. (2020). Fostering criticality and intercultural communicative competence (ICC) in higher education. In E. Arks, Developing critical cultural awareness in modern languages . https://ebrary.net/295348/language_literature/fostering_criticality_development#505029 Peasland EL, Henri DC, Morrell LJ, Scott GW. The influence of fieldwork design on student perceptions of skills development during field courses. Int J Sci Educ. 2019;41(17):2369–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1679906 . Pemberton R, Nix M. (2012). Practices of critical thinking, criticality, and learner autonomy . In LD SIG Realizing Autonomy Conference Proceedings , Special Issue of Learning Learning, 19 (2). https://ld-sig.org/LL/19two/pemberton-nix.pdf Perry L, Stoner L, Tarrant M. More Than a Vacation: Short-Term Study Abroad as a Critically Reflective, Transformative Learning Experience. Creative Educ. 2012;3(5):679–83. 10.4236/ce.2012.35101 . Pettersson H. From critical thinking to criticality and back again. J Philos Educ. 2023;57(2):478–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad021 . Provincial Planning and Development Office Bohol. (2016). ‘Bohol’s Development Challenges’. Retrieved from https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/bohol-facts-and-figures/bohols-development-challenges/#:~:text=Hunger%20and%20malnutrition%20still%20pose,capacity%2C%20and%20poor%20physical%20growth/ Provincial Planning and Development Office Bohol. (2024). ‘Provincial Visitor Arrivals Database’. Retrieved from https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/socio-economic-profile/economic-development/tourism/visitor-arrivals/ Pylypenko O. Development of critical thinking as a means of forming STEM competencies. Educational Dimension. 2020;3:317–31. https://acnsci.org/journal/index.php/ed/article/view/479/493 . Rahimi M. New Colombo Plan: A review of research and implications for practice. Volume 14. International Education Associate of Australia; 2018. Santos LF. (2017). The Role of Critical Thinking in Science Education. J Educ Pract, 15 . Sanders E, Hirsch A. Immersing undergraduate students into research on the metagenomics of the plant rhizosphere: a pedagogical strategy to engage civic-mindedness and retain undergraduates in STEM. Front Plant Sci. 2014;5:157. Scharoun L. Short-term study tours as a driver for increasing domestic student mobility in order to generate global work-ready students and cultural exchange in Asia Pacific. Perspectives: Policy Pract High Educ. 2015;20(2):83–9. Southworth J. Bridging critical thinking and transformative learning: The role of perspective-taking. Theory Res Educ. 2022;20(1):44–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785221090853 . Strange H, Gibson HJ. An investigation of experiential and transformative learning in study abroad programs. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2017;29(1):85–100. Tarrant M. A conceptual framework for exploring the role of studies abroad in nurturing global citizenship. J Stud Int Educ. 2010;14(5):433–51. Teshera-Levye J, Alam I, Corwin L, Dauer JM. Developing a conceptual model for students’ scientific civic engagement self-concept. Int J Sci Educ. 2025;1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2449220 . Townsin L, Walsh C. (2016). ‘A New Border Pedagogy: Rethinking Outbound Mobility Programs in the Asian Century’. In Velliaris, D. and Coleman-George, D, editors, Handbook of Research on Study Abroad Programs and Outbound Mobility , pp.215–247. Hershey, PA, IGI Global. Tran LT, Bui H. It’s a few weeks I’ll cherish forever’: Transformative curriculum-specific learning, language awareness and cultural literacy development for Australian students in Vietnam through New Colombo Plan mobility programs. Res Comp Int Educ. 2023;18(2):228–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/17454999231163402 . Tran LT, Do TTQ. Transforming and thriving: Australian students in Vietnam through the New Colombo Plan. Educational Rev. 2024;1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2024.2408385 . Tran L, Vu T. Beyond the ‘normal’ to the ‘new possibles’: Australian students’ experiences in Asia and their roles in making connections with the region via the New Colombo Plan. High Educ Q. 2018;72(3):194–207. Tran LT, Phan HLT, Bellgrove A. There’s a much bigger world of science than just Australia’: Australian students’ development of disciplinary knowledge, transferable skills and attributes through a New Colombo Plan short-term mobility program to Japan. Int J Sci Educ. 2021;43(6):888–905. Tuma K, editor. The guide to successful short-term programs abroad. NAFSA, Association of International Educators; 2007. UNESCO. (2025). Global Convention on Higher Education [UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) data set]. UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/en/higher-education/global-convention Wilson AN, Howitt SM. Developing critical beings in an undergraduate science course. Stud High Educ. 2018;43(7):1160–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1232381 . Wilson AN, Howitt SM, Higgins DM, Roberts PJ. Making Critical Thinking Visible in Undergraduates’ Experiences of Scientific Reasoning. In: Davis M, Barnett R, editors. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking. 1st ed. Plagrave Macmillan; 2015. Vermeulen BL, Pizzica J, Renshaw A, Reynolds JK. New Frontiers: Fostering Students’ Critical Thinking in Science Through Virtual Mobility. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary . J Study Abroad. 2023;36(3):255–89. https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v36i3.850 . Vermeulen BL, Pizzica J, Renshaw A, Reynolds J. Fostering sustainability capabilities through experience: A case study on virtual mobility in STEM. J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2024;21(3). https://doi.org/10.53761/yg7d7a82 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8503238","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":575224948,"identity":"5c7fc34e-df64-4606-bfd1-44395b33d9bd","order_by":0,"name":"Brittany Vermeulen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Western Sydney University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Brittany","middleName":"","lastName":"Vermeulen","suffix":""},{"id":575224949,"identity":"47868095-1208-45e3-b039-a128e624caf4","order_by":1,"name":"Jenny Pizzica","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Western Sydney University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jenny","middleName":"","lastName":"Pizzica","suffix":""},{"id":575224951,"identity":"57fd8aa1-53f2-413a-bdc4-15f5fe627c93","order_by":2,"name":"Adrian Renshaw","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Western Sydney University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Adrian","middleName":"","lastName":"Renshaw","suffix":""},{"id":575224953,"identity":"b0466ef9-45ad-4d25-ab56-0a475ba0a6ed","order_by":3,"name":"Jason Reynolds","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Western Sydney University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jason","middleName":"","lastName":"Reynolds","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-02 20:53:06","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":100444552,"identity":"d845c8b4-732e-475f-b788-e645691001c6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 17:41:55","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":254294,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ReachingCriticalityinanOutboundMobilityProgramAnonymousmanuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/d5c64b9d978893e93016fdc7.docx"},{"id":100444551,"identity":"e28a2e8f-01e0-4354-a5a7-e4f171466663","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 17:41:55","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":6763,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"990b33a754d74e33bb8bbd4ef0841bd3.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/237745bb54f5571172f310e8.json"},{"id":100547420,"identity":"45d723c9-4929-46ac-b587-033ed4cf208b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-19 08:15:29","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":156769,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"990b33a754d74e33bb8bbd4ef0841bd31enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/0ea2db9b258b11f9d9d1c39c.xml"},{"id":100444549,"identity":"5ba7e6b7-f4bf-4e5f-b8f5-ddbbb634061a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 17:41:55","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":40532,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/f701203c40a719e8b4264e19.png"},{"id":100444553,"identity":"e8849c5c-c3ed-4225-88eb-d25b2ebb6f3a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 17:41:55","extension":"xml","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":154567,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"990b33a754d74e33bb8bbd4ef0841bd31structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/4bfab61469202d153c3fc109.xml"},{"id":100444555,"identity":"1b1ef8db-05ad-482f-b9a1-466a67ff6bfb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 17:41:55","extension":"html","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":164220,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/7c5bdab0162ca3538c9d29d7.html"},{"id":100547442,"identity":"38b4da91-8619-4da1-94cd-ccb058305259","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-19 08:15:34","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":186330,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDaily program itinerary with key learning activities characterised for the OME\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/bc5d9cf68145e8cc904acd75.png"},{"id":109172099,"identity":"1baa3ccb-d031-4681-8f77-2a67163cb2e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-13 09:02:49","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":528393,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8503238/v1/cb6d9542-6ba5-44e6-89d3-d26a599a8b84.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Reaching Criticality in an Outbound Mobility Program","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eOutbound mobility experiences (OMEs) can improve critical thinking, communication skills, global citizenship, multicultural and intercultural competence, independence, self-confidence and employability skills (Cruz \u0026amp; Whatley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Tran \u0026amp; Vu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Tran \u0026amp; Do, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The global movement of university students participating in mobility has now surpassed 6\u0026nbsp;million participants (UNESCO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). In Australia, for example, the latest statistics show that one in four students participated in a mobility experience while at university, and these were predominantly undergraduate students (71%) (Australian Government, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Globally, OMEs are mainly undertaken by students in humanities, education, social sciences, and interdisciplinary studies (Cruz \u0026amp; Whatley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), with STEM engagement underrepresented (Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin short-term OMEs globally, a variety of undergraduate offerings exist, from credit-bearing to extra-curricular, and include activities such as thematic study tours, internships, or research conferences and summits (Dorah et al., 2022; Gaia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Hardiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). These experiences allow students to engage with a range of diverse and unfamiliar environments, contexts and perspectives, thereby enriching their understanding of their discipline in a global context (Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Although studies of demographics and delivery mechanisms are available, program learning goals are often not reported or are ill-defined, leaving limited evidence of how OMEs affect discipline-specific and general learning outcomes (Tarrant, Rubin \u0026amp; Stoner, 2014; Nerlich, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Tran \u0026amp; Bui, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Researchers also argue that travelling overseas may not automatically equip students with the necessary knowledge and capabilities linked to their discipline, as is often assumed or expected (Bell et al., 2014; Townsin \u0026amp; Walsh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Nerlich, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Cruz \u0026amp; Whatley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Gaps also remain in short-term OME literature in the understanding of discipline-specific learning outcomes and professional practices (Tran \u0026amp; Bui, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this paper, we investigate a short-term OME to Panglao, the Philippines. Our OME aimed to foster a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainability by addressing the interlocked social, cultural, political, economic, and ecological challenges exacerbated by tourism. Through incorporating learning activities that encouraged critical and reflective thinking, interdisciplinary collaborative research, and cultural immersion, we sought to foster students\u0026rsquo; learning and development across the three domains of criticality (critical reason, self-reflection and action) (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The research questions guiding this study are:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat specific domains of criticality were developed during this OME?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat factors influenced the development of criticality, and how did these factors affect student learning and development?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy extending the classroom into the community, in settings that are typically culturally and geographically different from a student's prior experiences, intentionally designed programs have the potential to provoke and expand students' capacities for criticality.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Literature Review","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eShort-Term OMEs\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversities have reshaped and embraced the short-term OME model in response to changing student communities, providing flexible options for non-traditional student participation (Dall'Alba \u0026amp; Sidhu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Tarrant et al., 2014; Hall et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Lawrence, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Rahimi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Gaia \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Dorah et al. 2022). In Australia, almost four out of every five (79%) experiences were less than a semester in length (Australian Government, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Debate persists on the effectiveness of short-term versus semester or longer programs on student learning and development in the domains of criticality. Coker et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), for example, note that students in semester long programs self-reported higher ratings on critical and analytical thinking in their course overall compared to students who completed short programs, however there were no significant differences in related areas such as solving complex real-world problems, analysing ideas, making judgements or applying concepts in new situations. Others found no significant differences in transformative learning outcomes (i.e. a disorienting dilemma, self-reflection, and rational discourse) between short-term and longer programs (Strange \u0026amp; Gibson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Although the optimal length of a program will continue to be debated, it is generally agreed that offering short-term programs will increase the number and diversity of student participants (Gaia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Santos, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), and that program design will have important consequences for student learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffective program design in short-term OMEs increasingly draws on pedagogical approaches that prioritise deep, reflective learning and global engagement. This includes action-oriented, transformative, experiential, inquiry-based, or problem-based learning in addressing real-world challenges for positive societal change (Liao \u0026amp; Yuan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson \u0026amp; Howitt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Dirkx, Mezirow \u0026amp; Cranton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eBeyond Critical Thinking and Towards Criticality\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCritical thinking (CT) broadly encompasses both cognitive skills (such as analysis, evaluation, and inference) and dispositions (such as open-mindedness, scepticism, and a willingness to reconsider beliefs) (Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). STEM educators often adopt a cognitive skills approach to CT, highlighting logical connections, objectivity, argument evaluation, information processing, and problem solving (Pylypenko, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Mayhew et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). While important to the discipline, this approach may overlook the importance of CT in preparing students to respond to and live within a disrupted, complex, and uncertain future (Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Tilbury, 2019).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriticality extends beyond CT by foregrounding power, ideology, and context and by integrating reflection with meaningful action (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Pettersson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Davies \u0026amp; Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). It is a reflective and transformative process through which individuals understand, assess, and respond to complex situations, interrogate norms and structures, examine their own assumptions and positionality, and consider the ethical implications of knowledge and practice (Pettersson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). In this sense, criticality demands (or \u0026ldquo;necessitates\u0026rdquo;) engagement in transformative thinking to address systemic and complex challenges (Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). For STEM educators and professionals, whose responsibilities extend beyond techno‑scientific solutions, criticality offers a way to develop reflexive, adaptive, and ethically attuned graduates capable of acting in varied social and professional contexts (Holdsworth \u0026amp; Thomas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarnett (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e) conceptualises criticality across three connected and independent (Wilson \u0026amp; Howitt, 2016) domains that together form the basis of a \u0026lsquo;critical being\u0026rsquo;. That is, individuals who are \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; more than just critical thinkers. They are able to critically engage with the world and with themselves as well as with knowledge\u0026rdquo; (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e, p 1). These domains are:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eKnowledge (critical reason)\u003c/em\u003e: engaging analytically with complex ideas, knowledge and arguments (e.g. engaging critically with academic content or complex ideas),\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eSelf (critical reflection)\u003c/em\u003e: examining one\u0026rsquo;s own beliefs, values, and assumptions and understanding influence and power (e.g. reflecting on one\u0026rsquo;s identity and values), and\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eWorld (critical action)\u003c/em\u003e: applying critical insights to act meaningfully in the world (e.g. acting critically in social and professional contexts).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarnett builds on this framework to conceptualises criticality as a developmental continuum (2015). Learners often begin with skills and reflexivity, progressing toward refashioning and transformation as they engage with ambiguous, value-laden challenges. The levels increase in sophistication and include:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCritical Skills\u003c/em\u003e: The foundational level, involving analytical and evaluative abilities that are typically task-focused and discipline-specific (i.e. critical thinking).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eReflexivity\u003c/em\u003e: A deeper level of criticality characterised by awareness of one\u0026rsquo;s own assumptions, values, and positionality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eRefashioning\u003c/em\u003e: Moving beyond reflection to enact change in context, where individuals act on insights to reshape practices, projects, or approaches.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eTransformatory Critique\u003c/em\u003e: The most advanced level, involving radical reimagining of systems and purposes by embracing uncertainty and complexity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriticality is rarely foregrounded in short-term OMEs, yet these experiences can play a pivotal role in its development. Intense, situated learning moments\u0026mdash;those that disrupt assumptions, expose students to diverse perspectives, and require navigation of unfamiliar contexts\u0026mdash;often act as disorienting dilemmas (Mezirow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). When combined with structured reflection, dialogue, and opportunities for action, OMEs can move learners beyond technical skills toward reflexivity and, in some cases, toward refashioning or even transformatory critique (Perry, Stoner \u0026amp; Tarrant, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn STEM education, fostering such progression involves more than disciplinary expertise. It may include cultivating appreciation for cultural diversity, advocating for social justice, and enabling action for positive change in response to global challenges (Liao \u0026amp; Yuan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Teshera-Levye et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Guest et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Our program was designed with these principles in mind.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur study employed a qualitative exploratory research design (Creswell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), to investigate the development of criticality in an outbound mobility program. The exploratory nature of the design and smaller sample size allowed for a richer, open-ended investigation into students\u0026rsquo; experiences, particularly in a setting where limited prior research exists (Jones, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Creswell \u0026amp; Plano Clark, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Creswell \u0026amp; Poth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Acknowledging our interpretation, subjectivity, and reflexivity as researchers, we employed reflective thematic analysis to analyse student learning journals, in-country interviews, and post-program focus groups (Braun \u0026amp; Clarke, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Our conceptual framework draws on Barnett\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e) interconnected domains of criticality. That is, critical reason (knowledge), critical self-reflection (self), and critical action (world). Through this process, three final themes are developed and presented.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch Setting and Overview\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePanglao, on the island state of Bohol, Philippines (9.8500\u0026deg; N, 124.1435\u0026deg; E), is a rapidly growing destination for recreational tourism in the Asia-Pacific. Bohol faces significant development challenges, and while local government efforts are underway to address these issues, the influx of over 1\u0026nbsp;million visitors annually to Panglao poses significant concerns for sustainable development (Provincial Planning and Development Office Bohol, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Panglao, less than 50 km\u0026sup2;, hosts over 700 hotels and resorts and faces challenges such as changing land use, water resource management, waste management, food availability, and overexploitation of biodiversity and marine environments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur short-term program, Sustainable Development through Science in the Philippines, engaged fourteen undergraduate STEM students from [University 1], Australia and [University 2], Australia. The two-week faculty-led OME took place in the Philippines from November \u0026ndash; December 2023, founded on a long-standing partnership. [University 1] has previously delivered three science mobility programs to Panglao (in 2017, 2018, and 2019), each exploring tourism. Three facilitators from [University 1] \u0026ndash; authors of this paper \u0026ndash; along with two from [University 2] designed a coordinated suite of learning activities. The co-creation phase took over 18 months, which included the recruitment of students and a pre-departure workshop. While in-country, four academics co-led the study tour, which included stakeholder management, student evaluation, and providing pastoral care.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe program was underpinned by transformative pedagogies (Mezirow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e) designed to engage students in reflection and experiential learning. The primary learning outcomes were to (1) foster a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainable development (through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals) by examining the interconnectedness of social, economic and ecological aspects of sustainability, and (2) develop critical and reflective thinking, interdisciplinary collaboration, intercultural awareness and communication. Students received academic credit towards their degree programs at their respective universities. The program was subsidised by the Australian Government\u0026rsquo;s New Colombo Plan, with additional partial funding covered by participating students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe program structure included cultural immersion activities, site visits and stakeholder meetings in Week 1 to provide orientation, context, and background. In Week 2, students undertook \u0026lsquo;science in action\u0026rsquo; research projects on a sustainability and tourism issue of their choosing and design \u0026ndash; resulting in four topics: water infrastructure, natural disasters and health responses, eco-hotels and compliance, and mangrove conservation. Students collaborated intensively in cross-institutional project teams with local stakeholders (government officials, service providers, business owners, and the private sector, who were a mix of STEM and non-STEM professionals) on their selected topics, concluding with an oral presentation and written report of their findings. Student projects were designed to be student-directed, participatory and hands-on, allowing them greater autonomy and ownership of the project (Pesland et al., 2019; Pemberton \u0026amp; Nix, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Structured reflective debriefs and journaling were scheduled at key points to support student learning and project progression. Social and recreational activities, as well as free time and independent exploration, were scheduled throughout the program for group cohesion. All students participated in two pre-departure workshops prior to travel, with project planning occurring six weeks before departure. Two group assessment tasks were completed in-country and submitted at the conclusion of the in-country program. (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParticipants and data collection\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents were invited to be study participants during the pre-departure workshop, with all fourteen students providing their informed consent to take part. All participants were undergraduate, domestic Australian STEM students enrolled at [University 1 or 2] (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The size of the cohort (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14) is representative of Australian short-term OMEs, which generally range from 15\u0026ndash;18 students (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eList and demographics of undergraduate student participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePseudonyms\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eField of Study\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYear of Study\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnne\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuilt Environment*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3rd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAva\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3rd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eElise\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuilt Environment*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3rd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIsabel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMedical Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKiara\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Health\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLucia\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3rd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMatthew\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeospatial Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1st year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMia\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNaomi\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Health\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNick\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Health\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRebecca\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Health\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRyan\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeospatial Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1st year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSamantha\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnimal Science and Zoology\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWilliam\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnimal Science and Zoology\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4th year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the trip, students kept individual learning journals. At the start of each day, facilitators provided students with new reflection questions to prompt students\u0026rsquo; journal writing. A group discussion activity marked the day\u0026rsquo;s end, where staff and students engaged in a structured reflective debriefing as one large group. Seven reflective exercises were integrated with specific scheduled activities (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). After the program, students submitted their journals to the lead researcher.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSemi-structured interviews with student project teams were conducted by the lead researcher towards the end of Week 2 while the students were immersed in their fieldwork. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, each lasting 30\u0026ndash;45 minutes. Concentrated on their research projects in response to stakeholder engagement, students were also asked about their perceptions of sustainable development within the context of their project and the Philippines.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwo weeks after returning to Australia, two online re-entry focus groups were conducted by the lead researcher. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, each lasting 90 minutes. Student participants shared their overall learning experiences and perceived learning gains and reflected on their research projects and contributions to the community.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study (H14388) was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at [University], Australia.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGuided by Braun and Clarke\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) six-phase process, we identified and explored instances of criticality in response to the program's design. In the familiarisation phase (phase 1), the lead researcher first reviewed her fieldnotes and the student learning journals (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10). Using an inductive coding method (phase 2), five preliminary codes were developed during this review. Following this, the familiarisation phase was repeated for the interview transcripts by the research team. Listening and reading over the transcriptions, notes were taken, briefly detailing notable and interesting mentions of critical thinking, critical reasoning, critical self-reflection and critical action from each interview (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14) and focus group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6) transcript. Inductive coding was again adopted (phase 2), allowing us to remain closely aligned with the students\u0026rsquo; experiences. Familiarisation notes and coded excerpts were combined, compared, analysed and condensed through a collaborative discussion to generate initial themes (phase 3). Excerpts were extracted from the transcripts and student learning journals and collated for further analysis by the team through a cycle of reviews (phase 4). The initial themes were further defined and refined by the research team to arrive at the final three themes presented below (phase 5). Data was written up (phase 6), and a small group of quotations were selected to illustrate our interpretation. Student quotes are marked with acronyms to indicate the data source and stage of the program:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eLJ: Student learning journals with corresponding activity numbered (Week 1 and 2 of the trip)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIN: In-country interviews with student teams (Week 2 of the trip)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eFG: Re-entry student focus groups (post-trip)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eFrom the data collected from our 14 participating undergraduate STEM students, through learning journals (LJ), interviews (IN), and focus groups (FG), our insights indicate that our program supported varying dimensions of criticality across the cohort. All students demonstrated critical reasoning (knowledge) (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14), with a high proportion of students exhibiting critical self-reflection (self) (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11). Fewer students showed evidence of critical action (world) (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5). Most (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9) students\u0026rsquo; expressions of criticality were reflexive, with only two students demonstrating more sophisticated forms of criticality (refashioning), and three positioned at the introductory level (critical skills). Criticality was evoked as students contended with the entangled global contexts, societal structures and ideologies of sustainable development in Panglao. This stimulated criticality as students were moved to reflect on and reassess their prior perspectives and understanding. Students distanced themselves from their earlier position as problem solvers to learners and visitors. Below, we explore these in greater detail.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eBridging knowledge and perspectives (Domain 1: Knowledge)\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKnowledge (critical reason) involves the analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information (elements of critical thinking) by developing the intellectual capabilities necessary to engage with complex ideas or arguments (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). At its most advanced form, critical reasoning involves questioning, challenging and critiquing dominant or established norms, ideologies and structures that shape society and knowledge production (Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in all participants (100%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHands-on research projects were the catalyst for collaboration, learning and autonomy. The projects were situated in the complex, multifaceted sustainable development challenges unique to Panglao. They were designed to introduce students to research practices that could be both adaptable and socially contextualised. Students collaboratively engaged with scientific knowledge, working with their peers\u0026rsquo; skillsets, integrating their prior understanding and experiences - \u0026ldquo;having people from different fields, different expertise\u0026hellip; you learn so many different things\u0026hellip; [It] helped you have even more understanding of what\u0026rsquo;s happening here...\u0026rdquo; (Matthew, IN). Students spoke of grappling with peers\u0026rsquo; diverse viewpoints, while together navigating the nuances of multidisciplinary:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI feel like I had my own opinion that I think is the only opinion, and then once I sit down at the end of the day and I hear everyone else\u0026rsquo;s, I\u0026rsquo;m like, \u0026ldquo;Oh my God. I didn\u0026rsquo;t even think about that.\u0026rdquo; We both saw the same thing, but we both have different perspectives. We all have like 20 perspectives. (Samantha, FG)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; it just made it [sustainability] much more clear how big and intertwined\u0026ndash; I mean, there\u0026rsquo;s four project groups but nothing is separate\u0026hellip; (William, IN)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents reflected on how on-campus course-based research work was primarily done through the (often individual) application of disciplinary knowledge, via the analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information. Whereas in Panglao, they worked more intensively in interdisciplinary student teams. They found it unusual and invigorating, like \u0026ldquo;detective work\u0026rdquo; (Ryan, IN), to be discussing the project with their peers at breakfast together, throughout the day at meetings and site visits, in the evenings during debriefs or over dinner, examining results together. These experiences began to expand students\u0026rsquo; understanding of the term \u0026lsquo;research project\u0026rsquo;, and they became more critically aware of the limitations of their knowledge of research and research practices\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorking with local stakeholders elicited critical reasoning in several ways. Firstly, exploring topics through the viewpoints of the stakeholders prompted students to examine their own preparedness and understanding of research. Students had completed their project pre-work before departure, as they best understood at the time. However, being in-country and interacting with stakeholders caused them to see the limitations in their knowledge and their approaches to the research, that being \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; most of the prep for my group had been done\u0026hellip; Everything had completely changed\u0026hellip; you only realise what you\u0026rsquo;re doing once you\u0026rsquo;re really there.\u0026rdquo; (Kiara, FG), and \u0026ldquo;[being there] makes you think a lot deeper than when you\u0026rsquo;re just reading about it online\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; (Rebecca, FG).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEngaging with familiar processes (i.e. scientific research) in new collaborations (i.e. interdisciplinary student team with local stakeholders) and in unfamiliar environments pushed students to consider new ways to approach their projects, and critical reasoning became evident \u0026ndash; \u0026ldquo;... [O]ur awareness has grown about what the real hurdles are and what the real issue is\u0026hellip; It\u0026rsquo;s a lot of different things. It\u0026rsquo;s a very multifaceted issue that requires a lot of different solutions\u0026hellip; And I think that\u0026rsquo;s been quite overwhelming.\u0026rdquo; (Anne, IN). The research projects enabled students to work through complex ideas, and became a turning point where students reconceptualise their projects to integrate the knowledge and experiences of the local communities. Students displayed a level of criticality representative of reflexivity as they demonstrated their awareness of their own understanding and practices:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI found this experience [meeting government officials] valuable to our [research]. Learning about their policies and practices gave me a great understanding of the operations and the struggles they face... It was clear our team needed to adjust to the environment we are in. (Naomi, LJ 2)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEven though things can be really well documented and follow organisation, that\u0026rsquo;s not the most effective method for science a lot of the time and there\u0026rsquo;s a lot of knowledge hidden in the people who just know the land\u0026hellip; [C]onserving things isn\u0026rsquo;t as simple as just saying, \u0026ldquo;We need to conserve them.\u0026rdquo; (Lucia, LJ 7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe immersive experience of researching in Panglao also helped students recognise their unconscious cultural biases, enabling a reorientation of disciplinary thinking. Being actively involved in data collection and speaking with \u0026ldquo;...health officials and walk[ing] around the health units\u0026rdquo; (FG) for example, led Samantha to have a deeper understanding of the local context and structures where \u0026ldquo;... [t]he systems they had in place worked for them and their locals\u0026rdquo; (Samantha, FG). Students displayed a level of criticality consistent with reflexivity, with few moving toward refashioning, where individuals begin to reconfigure their professional approaches. Wrestling with their own scientific knowledge, research outcomes, stakeholder convictions, and the reality of the situation, critical reasoning was evident in the appropriateness of their initial approaches and thinking:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe\u0026rsquo;re not there to go in and judge them and say, \u0026ldquo;This isn\u0026rsquo;t correct. This isn\u0026rsquo;t the way it should be run\u0026rdquo;, and change things\u0026hellip; they have knowledge and they\u0026rsquo;re aware of that, which was quite the opposite to what I thought coming in. (Samantha, FG)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere was a lot of confronting and conflicting\u0026hellip; moments with my perception prior to the trip compared to when we were actually there \u0026hellip; we had to [be] mindful of the things we were saying and doing. (Nick, FG)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e(Re)Examining roles and solutions (Domain 2: Self)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf (critical self-reflection) is the introspective aspect of criticality. It involves personal reflection on one's own beliefs, assumptions, biases, and/or values, aiming to understand how one's identity and experiences influence thinking and actions (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Perspective-taking is an act of self-reflection that helps an individual reflect on their own assumptions by stepping into another\u0026rsquo;s viewpoint (Southworth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). During the OME, students felt their assumptions, biases, and values were challenged daily. In their reflections, they refer to personal transformative shifts, such as \u0026ldquo;... constantly changing my perspectives\u0026rdquo; (Elise, IN), and \u0026ldquo;I feel like it\u0026rsquo;s definitely changed me ... My perspective on the world and how I think about things\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; (Rebecca, IN). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in a majority (79%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents\u0026rsquo; self-awareness was closely linked to a reflective and critical examination of their own motivations, intentions, and views of their discipline and practice. Most students cited that their initial motivation to participate in the program was to have an impact or make a change in the world, linked to their values and objectives as scientists \u0026ndash; \u0026ldquo;I came here to help.\u0026rdquo; (Lucia, IN) and \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; it\u0026rsquo;s up to us as students of science \u0026hellip; to fix things or find solutions\u0026hellip;.\u0026rdquo; (Nick, FG). In examining their beliefs and the geopolitical systems they were engaging with, students began to reflect on their assumptions and the complexities of finding a solution. Unfamiliar with Panglao\u0026rsquo;s systemic environmental and societal challenges, we observed that students initially assumed a role as \u0026lsquo;the problem solver\u0026rsquo; to \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; give them [stakeholders] innovative solutions and \u0026hellip; great ideas to fix [their sustainability challenge] ...\u0026rdquo; (Nick, IN). What began as a desire to \u0026ldquo;help\u0026rdquo; evolved into a deeper recognition of the emotions involved, highlighting the introspective work of criticality:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI wish I did [have a solution]\u0026hellip; if someone had an answer, that would solve a lot of our world problems. But there\u0026rsquo;s no one answer. I wish I could fix the world but I can\u0026rsquo;t. I feel like I was thinking about this the entire trip, and I was like, \u0026ldquo;It shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be so hard.\u0026rdquo; But just seeing their lack of resources, their lack of support, their lack of so many things, that I think is prevalent across all countries but just seeing it so in-depth there \u0026ndash; I was going back and forth for so long just thinking, tiring my brain out and being like, \u0026ldquo;Why?\u0026rdquo;. It\u0026rsquo;s so hard to come up with a solution because every time you think that there is one, there\u0026rsquo;s a first-hand barrier that you\u0026rsquo;re standing in... (Elise, FG)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents\u0026rsquo; desire to \u0026ldquo;fix\u0026rdquo; was gradually tempered by a deeper consciousness of context and the impact of their research project in delivering a solution \u0026ndash; \u0026ldquo;We came in like, \u0026lsquo;We\u0026rsquo;re going to solve everything. We\u0026rsquo;re going to give you all those solutions.\u0026rsquo; But it\u0026rsquo;s really not that easy.\u0026rdquo; (Rebecca, IN), demonstrating reflexivity. For facilitators, supporting students with the weight of their realisations through scheduled debrief sessions and one-on-one work with project teams became an evolving and integral part of the learning process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents expressed a critical self-reflection by reconsidering their role and gaps in their knowledge caused by their preconceptions \u0026ndash; \u0026ldquo;I just wasn\u0026rsquo;t aware of how their systems ran at all\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; (Elise, FG). This realisation led students to explore alternative responses to sustainable development challenges in several ways. In doing so, they moved beyond reflexivity toward refashioning, seeking to rethink dominant paradigms and explore new approaches. For example, Ryan proposed that Western models of sustainable development are not universally applicable. He reflected on the broader context-specific solutions:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI learned a lot \u0026hellip; I kind of theorised that maybe [sustainable] development for everyone isn\u0026rsquo;t the same. They shouldn\u0026rsquo;t strive to be exactly like us [the Western world]. That wouldn\u0026rsquo;t work for them\u0026hellip; not all these countries have to develop in the Western way\u0026hellip; It can be completely different. Obviously, having streetlights, stable roads, and hospital infrastructure is important. But that doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to be achieved our way. (Ryan, IN)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese moments of perspective-taking at the reflexivity level were evident in other cases (Southworth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Students demonstrated that learning was not solely content-oriented; it involved questioning assumptions, recognising context, and growing from these insights. Such reflections sparked ongoing dialogue about the appropriateness of external intervention, their roles as students, and the importance of locally led solutions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoth Will and Lucia illustrate a shift from problem-solving toward recognising the ethical limits of being an outsider:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere do we go from here? We go home and fix our own shit first\u0026hellip; I don\u0026rsquo;t think \u0026ldquo;we\u0026rdquo; should go anywhere. I think the context has to be local. I just think the idea of external control \u0026ndash; like how much guidance do you give to developing countries? Should we give any? (William, LJ 7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eI don\u0026rsquo;t want my voice to be louder than people who live there, or to think that I know better, because I really don\u0026rsquo;t, and I learnt that several times over there. So that\u0026rsquo;s a future that I think they\u0026rsquo;ll have to have a large say in... (Lucia, FG)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e(Re)assessing the impact of self and science\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e(Domain 3: World)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorld (critical action) is the practical or applied aspect of criticality, translating critical reasoning and self-reflection into real-world impact, especially in contexts of uncertainty, complexity, and contestability (Adams and Barnett, 2022). Critical action calls for individuals who are \u0026ldquo;able to act autonomously and purposively within it [the world]\u0026rdquo; (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e, p. 4). It involves acting in the world, based on critical insights that are informed, reflective, and transformative (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). It is exemplified through instances of personal behaviour, decision making, or social engagement (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The development of criticality in this domain was evident in a minority (36%) of students, with a further three students showing potential for critical action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring group debriefs as moments of disorientation, competing narratives, and ethical tensions were discussed. This led to students forming a more critical stance on their actions as visitors and (novice) scientists in their environment: \u0026ldquo;I really enjoyed the trip and most things that we did. But in the back of my mind, I did feel a bit guilty\u0026rdquo; (Rebecca, FG). A growing awareness of the effects of the tourism industry influenced how students used their free time. Some students considered their complicity as tourists and expressed critical action through decision making and their ability to act independently:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;I did my best to stay informed and where I got the choice, avoided questionable or harmful [tourism activities]\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; (Mia, LJ 5).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;At the start of the trip me and a few others were very keen to swim with the whale sharks\u0026hellip; However\u0026hellip; we were confronted by the reality \u0026hellip; As this activity is popular among tourists, the whale sharks are fed by people who do these tours... and they disrupt their migration patterns. Looking at the ethics, do we want to support this industry? Our answer was no!\u0026rdquo; (Isabel, LJ 7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA small number of students began to see science as a culturally embedded practice requiring more humility and adaptation than they had expected, demonstrating levels of reflexivity. One student expressed a shift in scientific practice as a call to \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; decentralise Western science\u0026rdquo; (Lucia, LJ 7). They sought to reframe their approaches to become more constructive and relational.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis was further demonstrated by creation of artefacts that expressed thoughtful responses to complex realities. For Kiara, rather than reacting with judgment, she used the assessment task (an oral presentation) to channel critique into a constructive stance that encouraged stakeholders to consider more sustainable alternatives, like \u0026ldquo;eco-hotels\u0026rdquo; (Kiara, IN):\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip; there were so many policies in place to solve most of these problems\u0026hellip; I found this so problematic\u0026hellip; it felt like the prosperity of Panglao, its environment, community and animals were not protected. I wanted to get on my high horse and tell them what they\u0026rsquo;re doing is wrong. Instead, this wouldn\u0026rsquo;t make a change. I decided to highlight [in my presentation] where ecotourism is going in the right direction\u0026hellip; and what this should look like (Kiara, LJ 7)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, shifting from a technical scientific study to a shared opportunity for learning was further evidence of critical action. Mia (and her group) actively reoriented the project to meet local priorities rather than adhering to predetermined scientific outputs:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe\u0026rsquo;ve realised that we\u0026rsquo;re not going to be able to do the stuff that we set out to do\u0026hellip; So the aim has to shift a little bit to something a little bit more broad and conceptual, more conversational, than just \u0026ldquo;Get scientific data and show it to us.\u0026rdquo; But I kind of think it\u0026rsquo;s better, because the data we were going to collect in two days \u0026ndash; they can do that themselves\u0026hellip; I\u0026rsquo;m not sure how much that really would have helped them\u0026hellip; It\u0026rsquo;s probably better to just have a bit of a chat about it and share what we\u0026rsquo;ve learned. (Mia, IN)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study demonstrates that short-term OMEs offer opportunities to transform students\u0026rsquo; understanding of themselves and the world (Mezirow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Perry, Stoner and Tarrant, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Positioning our active role and subjectivity in program design and participation, we acknowledge our subjectivity in the interpretation of these findings (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Overall, short-term OMEs can provide impactful opportunities for student learning, particularly in geographically and socio-culturally distinct settings. We find that such experiences activate and deepen criticality across Barnett\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e) domains (knowledge, self and world) by exposing students to complex realities and fostering a more engaged global outlook. We observed shifts toward inclusivity, openness, and adaptability (Dirkx, Mezirow \u0026amp; Cranton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), as students sought new ways to interpret differences and explore alternative approaches. Similar to Howitt and Wilson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), our findings indicate that although not all students reached advanced levels of criticality, the data highlight the crucial role of social interaction in learning and teaching. Our study builds on previous works that emphasise learning and development must be structured and well-planned in an OME (Townsin \u0026amp; Walsh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Bell et al., 2014; Nerlich, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Cruz \u0026amp; Whatley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Pre-departure and post-program support were integral to the design (Gothard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; McLaughlin \u0026amp; Johnson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), ensuring students felt prepared and engaged. Autonomy in project design, an acclimation period, scheduled activities, and established stakeholder relationships further contributed to program success within a limited timeframe.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results for all fourteen participating students showed a continuum of criticality across the three domains (knowledge, self and world) and levels of sophistication (from critical skill up to refashioning) (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This is consistent with Barnett\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) description of criticality as a progressive and layered process. Dunne (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) highlights that criticality, unlike critical thinking, cannot simply be activated when analysis is required; rather, it is embedded in everyday actions and experiences, however ordinary they may seem. Given these characteristics and the acknowledged time constraints of our program, forming an identity capable of transformative critique (the most sophisticated form of criticality) requires courage and openness to new ways of thinking and acting. These findings reinforce the importance of deliberate design, including reflection prompts, stakeholder engagement, cultural immersion, and collaborative student research, to foster deeper learning and development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarnett (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) emphasises that the starting point for criticality is critical thinking, which is often discipline-specific. Our findings support this. The domain of critical reasoning started from a disciplinary perspective, but through interdisciplinary, collaboration, and utilising prior knowledge, students were moved to challenge and question their understanding. This included a general increase in global awareness, which was brought about by being immersed in an unfamiliar and complex environment. Other STEM-based OME studies (Gaia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Scharoun, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Lipsett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Parks, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) similarly report that even brief overseas experiences foster global awareness. The research projects were intended to challenge their critical thinking and also foster interdisciplinary collaboration among students, and in this respect, were successful. Previous STEM-based OME research has also found that real-world projects can be catalysts for critical thinking (Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Montrose, 2002; Garibay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Bamber \u0026amp; Pike, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Murphy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Oliver, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Sanders \u0026amp; Hirsch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Santos, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Our findings show similar outcomes. However, we also found that critical reasoning (going beyond critical thinking) can be enhanced when students are asked to question and rethink how to approach scientific research in response to sustainability and its complexity. It is further enhanced or made more complex by stakeholder engagement. As described by Duff (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) deeper learning occurs when students engage with the material out of genuine curiosity, seeking to understand its meaning and thoughtfully connecting it to prior knowledge and experiences through critical thinking. This trajectory led students to reconsider their approaches to sustainability introspectively, acknowledging uncertainty and complexity and leading to further self-reflection (Guilikers \u0026amp; Oonk, 2019; Krueger et al., 2016).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe domain of critical self-reflection enabled students to grapple with the complexities of sustainable development. Learning about sustainability involves \u0026ldquo;dealing with the unknown and with complexity\u0026rdquo; (Holdsworth \u0026amp; Thomas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e, p.138). Incidental interactions and stakeholder meetings supported reflexivity, while engaging local voices encouraged perspective-taking (Southworth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Deeper reflection was fostered through dialogue with peers and facilitators and activated by structured reflective activities, which students cited as influential in reshaping viewpoints. We observed this shift in students\u0026rsquo; frames of reference, becoming more inclusive, perceptive, open, empathetic, and emotionally adaptable (Dirkx, Mezirow \u0026amp; Cranton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Students\u0026rsquo; growing awareness of complexity, alongside their willingness to challenge personal perspectives and assumptions, reinforces the domain of critical self. This was observed as an evolving process over the two-week OME. Structured activities before, during, and after the OME through journaling, curated prompts, and group debriefs actively supported reflection. Prompts asking students to consider the impact of their actions and responsibilities proved effective.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe domain of critical action was achieved by only a small group of students, reflecting the challenge of attaining this level within a short timeframe. As noted in prior studies, the short duration may limit time for students to fully process and act on new perspectives (Engle \u0026amp; Engle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Dwyer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Tarrant, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Nguyen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, learning is highly personal and contextual; the same set of experiences may trigger critical action for some students but not for others, and different experiences might have produced different outcomes. This variability underscores the importance of program design and can also explain the evidence observed. Incorporating a diversity of intentional, intensive opportunities for sustained engagement increases the likelihood that individual triggers for critical action will be met. The program overall aimed to create pivotal moments where critical action (world) depends on critical thought (knowledge) (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). Our findings suggest OMEs can offer more opportunities for developing critical action than traditional classroom settings, though time constraints limited deeper or more sophisticated engagement (Howitt and Wilson, 2016). Research projects and stakeholder engagement prompted questioning of knowledge, power, and positionality, leading to reframed practices. These instances of reframing, though few, incorporated values-based strategies and efforts to decentralise Western science and mindsets. Student responses underscored the importance of dialogue with peers, facilitators, stakeholders, and communities for learning and self-awareness (Gieser, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Tran \u0026amp; Vu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Vermeulen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Personal impacts as tourists further provoked tangible actions in spaces often considered peripheral in STEM programs. While some students expressed potential for action through new career paths, identified by other studies as critical action (Wilson \u0026amp; Howitt), we argue that this is not a strong indicator. It signals potential but lacks the depth and immediacy described by Barnett, which involves reconfiguring practices and engaging with complexity in the present rather than projecting future intentions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt varying stages, most students came to reflect on and acknowledge that achieving sustainable development (and by extension the SDGs) is deeply contextual, achieving our learning goal of fostering a deeper appreciation and understanding of sustainability. As with other studies (Stein, 2021), these interactions helped students develop a nuanced understanding of sustainability\u0026rsquo;s complexity. Building on Tran et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), who note that observing different scientific practices prompt critical thinking among other capabilities, our findings show that the act of self-reflection further challenged the role of science, their own expertise, and envisioned alternative approaches to sustainability. Students recognised that there are no singular solutions, that diverse perspectives are complicated by uncertainty and chaos, and that applying rigorous scientific approaches to global challenges is both relevant and difficult (Guilikers \u0026amp; Oonk, 2019; Krueger et al., 2016). Our study also showed students rethinking cultural assumptions that science alone can solve these challenges, echoing Teshera-Levye et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This reflective process led to insights for reshaping practices, projects, and social engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs evident in our study, criticality was developed in moments that involved challenges, conflict, complexity and context; experienced and most times shaped by the program design. This led to a small number of students demonstrating a movement toward critical being (i.e. progression across all three domains) (Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). As critical beings, and according to Barnett (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), these students can navigate uncertainty, integrate diverse perspectives, act with ethical responsibility and continuously reflect and adapt. The findings indicated that these capabilities were illustrated in the way they began to envision themselves in and with the world (Tran et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). We therefore argue that short-term programs with intentional, intensive opportunities for sustained engagement and participation can have an impact on students\u0026rsquo; criticality. Differences in students\u0026rsquo; attainment of critical being appeared linked to program design, individual characteristics, and engagement with reflective activities, and leave space for further study. While we have shown short-term OMEs can achieve forms of criticality, there are inherent challenges in reaching these goals we acknowledge. This includes significant resourcing and time investment by the program facilitators to ensure a quality delivery of the program to foster such outcomes. Future research could explore how critical action can be further integrated within the constraints of a short-term OME by integrating practical dimensions of critical action earlier within the program structure and reflective prompts, and firmly embedding pivotal moments of reflection, active learning and discourse.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOMEs have the potential to foster a broad range of outcomes, including criticality. By navigating and challenging new and unfamiliar environments and contexts within an OME, these learning and development outcomes are reinforced through extensive participation in the world, challenging socio-cultural bias, situating disciplinary knowledge within the broader context, and working towards positive changes in light of interlinked sustainability challenges (Yuan \u0026amp; Liao \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson \u0026amp; Howitt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Davies \u0026amp; Barnett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). In shorter-term OMEs, ranging from 2\u0026ndash;4 weeks, educators can focus on creating transformative and intentional moments to good effect. Transformative learning often requires sustained engagement and the opportunity to apply new insights repeatedly. By creating intensive, structured opportunities for critical reasoning and self-reflection, and embedding opportunities for critical action, short-term experiences can serve as powerful catalysts for student learning and development. Even brief exposure to different cultural practices or confronting social, cultural, political and ecological challenges can catalyse learning and development when properly structured, guided and facilitated.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionList\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; CT\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical thinking\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; FG\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRe-entry student focus groups\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; IN\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn-country interviews\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; LJ\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLearning journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; OMEs\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOutbound mobility experience\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; SDGs\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSustainable Development Goals\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003e\u0026bull; STEM\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScience, technology, engineering and mathematics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":" \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests. This study was conceived and designed as part of a PhD thesis. Brittany Vermeulen conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Dr Jenny Pizzica contributed substantially to data analysis and interpretation, alongside Dr Jason Reynolds and Dr Adrian Renshaw who contributed to the overall study design, guidance and supervision, and critical revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study (H14388) was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at Western Sydney University, in accordance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (Updated 2018). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eConsent to participate:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll participants involved in this study provided informed consent to participate, having been fully briefed on the purpose, procedures, and potential risks associated with the research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConsent to publish:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll participants consented to the publication of anonymised data and findings derived from this study, with assurances that their identities will remain confidential. No personal information was collected during this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research was supported by a research stipend provided by Western Sydney University as part of a PhD candidature for data collection and analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests. This study was conceived and designed as part of a PhD thesis. Brittany Vermeulen conceived and designed the study, collected and analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. Dr Jenny Pizzica contributed substantially to data analysis and interpretation, alongside Dr Jason Reynolds and Dr Adrian Renshaw who contributed to the overall study design, guidance and supervision, and critical revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors gratefully acknowledge the support of our RMIT colleagues, Dr Usha Iyer-Raniga and Dr Christina Scott-Young, for their valued contributions to co-delivering and co-teaching this mobility program. We extend our heartfelt thanks to our gracious local hosts, stakeholders, the community of Panglao, and, of course, our students for their enthusiastic engagement and participation in the program. Student participation in this mobility experience was supported by the Australian Government\u0026rsquo;s New Colombo Plan Mobility Project.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll data and materials generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAustralian Government. (2021). Research snapshot: Higher education students studying abroad in 2019. Australian Government Department of Education, Skill and Employment. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://internationaleducation.gov.au/research/research-snapshots/Documents/RS_%20HE%20student%20mobility.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://internationaleducation.gov.au/research/research-snapshots/Documents/RS_%20HE%20student%20mobility.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBamber PM, Pike MA. Towards an ethical ecology of international service learning. J Curriculum Stud. 2013;45(4):535\u0026ndash;59. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.675354\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00220272.2012.675354\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarnett R. Higher Education: A Critical Business. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University; 1997.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarnett R. Graduate attributes in an age of uncertainty. In: Hager P, Holland S, editors. Graduate attributes, learning and employability. Springer; 2006. pp. 49\u0026ndash;65.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarnett R. A curriculum for critical being. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US; 2015. pp. 63\u0026ndash;76.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBell K, Moorhead B, Boetto H. Social work students\u0026rsquo; reflections on gender, social justice and human rights during a short-term study programme to India. Int Social Work. 2016;60(1):32\u0026ndash;44. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0020872814559559\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0020872814559559\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11(4):589\u0026ndash;97. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V. Thematic Analysis: A practical guide. 1st ed. SAGE; 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V, Hayfield N, Terry G. (2018) Thematic Analysis. In: Liamputtong, P, Ed., Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, Springer Singapore, Singapore, 843\u0026ndash;860. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCoker JS, Heiser E, Taylor L. Student outcomes associated with short-term and semester study abroad programs. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2018;30(2):92\u0026ndash;105.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCreswell JW. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/46924_CH_3.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/46924_CH_3.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCreswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. SAGE; 2018.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCreswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry \u0026amp; research design: Choosing among five approaches. 4th ed. SAGE; 2017.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCruz NI, Whatley M. Domestic Study Away in Higher Education: A Systemic Literature Review. Rev Educ Res. 2024;1\u0026ndash;32. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241279296\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3102/00346543241279296\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDall'Alba G, Sidhu R. Australian undergraduate students on the move: experiencing outbound mobility. Stud High Educ. 2013;40(4):721\u0026ndash;44.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavies M, Barnett R. (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1057/9781137378057_1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavies M. (2013). A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. In Higher Education: \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Theory and Research\u003c/em\u003e, 30, 41\u0026ndash;92. Springer International Publishing AG. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDepartment of Foreign Affairs and Trading. (2024). \u003cem\u003eFunding accepted in the 2024 New Colombo Plan Mobility Program round.\u003c/em\u003e Accessed: 31 October 2025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-ncp-funding-mobility-projects.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-ncp-funding-mobility-projects.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDorah B, Hughes K, Ireland I, Matinec W, O\u0026rsquo;Callaghan E, Piper H, Potts D, Watson S. Learning Abroad in Australian Universities, White Paper, IEAA, 2022. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ieaa.org.au/common/Uploaded%20files/Research%20Publications/2022/PUB-IEAA-Learning-Abroad-in-Australian-Universities.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ieaa.org.au/common/Uploaded%20files/Research%20Publications/2022/PUB-IEAA-Learning-Abroad-in-Australian-Universities.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDuff A. The revised approaches to studying inventory (RASI) and its use in management education. Act Learn High Educ. 2004;5(1):56\u0026ndash;72. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1469787404040461\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1469787404040461\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDunne G. Beyond critical thinking to critical being: Criticality in higher education and life. Int J Educational Res. 2015;71:86\u0026ndash;99. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.03.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijer.2015.03.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDwyer M. More is better: The impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2004;10:151\u0026ndash;63.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDirkx JM, Mezirow J, Cranton P. Musings and reflections on the meaning, context, and process of transformative learning: A dialogue between John M. Dirkx and Jack Mezirow. J Transformative Educ. 2006;4(2):123\u0026ndash;39. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1541344606287503\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1541344606287503\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEngle L, Engle J. Study abroad levels: Toward a classification of program types. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2003;9:1\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGaia AC. Short-term faculty-led study abroad programs enhance cultural exchange and self-awareness. Int Educ Journal: Comp Perspect. 2015;14(1):21\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGaribay J. STEM students\u0026rsquo; social agency and views on working for social change: Are STEM disciplines developing socially and civically responsible students? J Res Sci Teach. 2015;52(5):610\u0026ndash;32. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21203\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/tea.21203\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGieser JD. A sociocultural investigation of identity: How students navigate the study abroad experience. J Coll Student Dev. 2015;56(6):637\u0026ndash;43. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0060\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1353/csd.2015.0060\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGothard J, Downey G, Gray T. (2012). Bringing the learning home: Programs to enhance study abroad outcomes in Australian Universities. Australian Government. Office for Learning and Teaching. [online]\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e\u0026thinsp;https://researchportal.murdoch.edu.au/esploro/outputs/report/Bringing-the-learning-home-Programsto/991005541910507891\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://\u0026thinsp;https://researchportal.murdoch.edu.au/esploro/outputs/report/Bringing-the-learning-home-Programsto/991005541910507891\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuest D, Livett M, Stone N. Fostering International Student Exchanges for Science Students. J Stud Int Educ. 2006;10(4):378\u0026ndash;95.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHall T, Gray T, Downey G, Sheringham C, Jones B, Power A, Truong S. Jafari and Transformation: A Model to Enhance Short-Term Overseas Study Tours. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2016;27:33\u0026ndash;46.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHardiman BL, Reynolds J, Pizzica J, Renshaw A. Re-orientating experiences: Considerations for student development through virtual mobility in STEM. J Appl Learn Teach. 2022;5(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2022.5.1.20\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.37074/jalt.2022.5.1.20\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarrison L, Potts P. Learning Abroad at Australian Universities: The current environment. International Education Associate of Australia; 2016. [online].\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoldsworth S, Thomas I. Framework for Introducing Education for Sustainable Development into University Curriculum. J Educ Sustainable Dev. 2015;9(20):137\u0026ndash;59. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1177/0973408215588246\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0973408215588246\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoldsworth S, Thomas I. Competencies or capabilities in the Australian higher education landscape and its implications for the development and delivery of sustainability education. High Educ Res Dev. 2021;40(7):1466\u0026ndash;81. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1830038\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/07294360.2020.1830038\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJones SR. (Re)writing the world: Methodological strategies and issues in qualitative research. J Coll Student Dev. 2002;43(4):461\u0026ndash;73.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLawrence R. (2016). Final Universities Australia Report into Student Mobility. [online]\u0026thinsp;\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e www.research.com.au.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http:// www.research.com.au.\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiao W, Yuan R. March 20). Cultivating criticality through transformative critical thinking curriculums in a time of flux and transformation. Educational Philos Theory. 2024;56(8):743\u0026ndash;9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2024.2328076\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00131857.2024.2328076\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLipsett A. 2008, October 16. Graduates who have studied abroad more appealing to businesses. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.guradian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/16/studentshighereducation\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.guradian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/16/studentshighereducation\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMayhew MJ, Rockenbach AN, Bowman NA, Seifert TAD, Wolniak GC, Pascarella ET, Terenzini PT. How college affects students: 21st century evidence that higher education works. Jossey-Bass; 2016.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcLaughlin J, Johnson K. Assessing the Field Course Experiential Learning Model: Transforming Collegiate Short-term Study Abroad Experiences into Rich Learning Environments. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2006;13:65\u0026ndash;85.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMontrose L, Frontiers. Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad, 8(1), 1\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e DOI: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.36366/frontiers.v8i1.91\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMezirow J. Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1991.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMezirow J. Transformative learning as discourse. J Transformative Educ. 2003;1(1):58\u0026ndash;63.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurphy S, MacDonald A, Danaia L, Wang C. An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futures Educ. 2019;17(2):122\u0026ndash;39. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1478210318774190\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1478210318774190\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyen AM. (2013). \u003cem\u003eTransformation through study abroad: Critical thinking and world citizenship.\u003c/em\u003e In M. K. Mulvaney \u0026amp; K. Klein, editors, \u003cem\u003ePreparing tomorrow\u0026rsquo;s global leaders: Honors international education.\u003c/em\u003e (21\u0026ndash;44). Lincoln, NE.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNerlich S. Counting Outward Mobility: The Data Sources and their Constraints. In: Velliaris D, Coleman-George D, editors. Handbook of Research on Study Abroad Programs and Outbound Mobility. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2016. pp. 40\u0026ndash;65.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOliver B. Redefining Graduate Employability and Work-Integrated Learning: Proposals for Effective Higher Education in Disrupted Economies. J Teach Learn Graduate Employab. 2015;6(1):56\u0026ndash;65. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.21153/jtlge2015vol6no1art573\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.21153/jtlge2015vol6no1art573\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParks E. (2020). Fostering criticality and intercultural communicative competence (ICC) in higher education. In E. Arks, \u003cem\u003eDeveloping critical cultural awareness in modern languages\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ebrary.net/295348/language_literature/fostering_criticality_development#505029\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ebrary.net/295348/language_literature/fostering_criticality_development#505029\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeasland EL, Henri DC, Morrell LJ, Scott GW. The influence of fieldwork design on student perceptions of skills development during field courses. Int J Sci Educ. 2019;41(17):2369\u0026ndash;88. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1679906\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2019.1679906\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePemberton R, Nix M. (2012). \u003cem\u003ePractices of critical thinking, criticality, and learner autonomy\u003c/em\u003e. In LD SIG \u003cem\u003eRealizing Autonomy Conference Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e, Special Issue of \u003cem\u003eLearning Learning, 19\u003c/em\u003e(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ld-sig.org/LL/19two/pemberton-nix.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ld-sig.org/LL/19two/pemberton-nix.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerry L, Stoner L, Tarrant M. More Than a Vacation: Short-Term Study Abroad as a Critically Reflective, Transformative Learning Experience. Creative Educ. 2012;3(5):679\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4236/ce.2012.35101\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4236/ce.2012.35101\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePettersson H. From critical thinking to criticality and back again. J Philos Educ. 2023;57(2):478\u0026ndash;94. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad021\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/jopedu/qhad021\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eProvincial Planning and Development Office Bohol. (2016). \u0026lsquo;Bohol\u0026rsquo;s Development Challenges\u0026rsquo;. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/bohol-facts-and-figures/bohols-development-challenges/#:~:text=Hunger%20and%20malnutrition%20still%20pose,capacity%2C%20and%20poor%20physical%20growth/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\" https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/bohol-facts-and-figures/bohols-development-challenges/#:~:text=Hunger%20and%20malnutrition%20still%20pose,capacity%2C%20and%20poor%20physical%20growth/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eProvincial Planning and Development Office Bohol. (2024). \u0026lsquo;Provincial Visitor Arrivals Database\u0026rsquo;. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/socio-economic-profile/economic-development/tourism/visitor-arrivals/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\" https://ppdo.bohol.gov.ph/profile/socio-economic-profile/economic-development/tourism/visitor-arrivals/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePylypenko O. Development of critical thinking as a means of forming STEM competencies. Educational Dimension. 2020;3:317\u0026ndash;31. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://acnsci.org/journal/index.php/ed/article/view/479/493\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://acnsci.org/journal/index.php/ed/article/view/479/493\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRahimi M. New Colombo Plan: A review of research and implications for practice. Volume 14. International Education Associate of Australia; 2018.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSantos LF. (2017). The Role of Critical Thinking in Science Education. J Educ Pract, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSanders E, Hirsch A. Immersing undergraduate students into research on the metagenomics of the plant rhizosphere: a pedagogical strategy to engage civic-mindedness and retain undergraduates in STEM. Front Plant Sci. 2014;5:157.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScharoun L. Short-term study tours as a driver for increasing domestic student mobility in order to generate global work-ready students and cultural exchange in Asia Pacific. Perspectives: Policy Pract High Educ. 2015;20(2):83\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSouthworth J. Bridging critical thinking and transformative learning: The role of perspective-taking. Theory Res Educ. 2022;20(1):44\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/14778785221090853\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/14778785221090853\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStrange H, Gibson HJ. An investigation of experiential and transformative learning in study abroad programs. Frontiers: Interdisciplinary J Study Abroad. 2017;29(1):85\u0026ndash;100.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTarrant M. A conceptual framework for exploring the role of studies abroad in nurturing global citizenship. J Stud Int Educ. 2010;14(5):433\u0026ndash;51.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeshera-Levye J, Alam I, Corwin L, Dauer JM. Developing a conceptual model for students\u0026rsquo; scientific civic engagement self-concept. Int J Sci Educ. 2025;1\u0026ndash;22. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2449220\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2024.2449220\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTownsin L, Walsh C. (2016). \u0026lsquo;A New Border Pedagogy: Rethinking Outbound Mobility Programs in the Asian Century\u0026rsquo;. In Velliaris, D. and Coleman-George, D, editors, \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Research on Study Abroad Programs and Outbound Mobility\u003c/em\u003e, pp.215\u0026ndash;247. Hershey, PA, IGI Global.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTran LT, Bui H. It\u0026rsquo;s a few weeks I\u0026rsquo;ll cherish forever\u0026rsquo;: Transformative curriculum-specific learning, language awareness and cultural literacy development for Australian students in Vietnam through New Colombo Plan mobility programs. Res Comp Int Educ. 2023;18(2):228\u0026ndash;48. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/17454999231163402\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/17454999231163402\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTran LT, Do TTQ. Transforming and thriving: Australian students in Vietnam through the New Colombo Plan. Educational Rev. 2024;1\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2024.2408385\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00131911.2024.2408385\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTran L, Vu T. Beyond the \u0026lsquo;normal\u0026rsquo; to the \u0026lsquo;new possibles\u0026rsquo;: Australian students\u0026rsquo; experiences in Asia and their roles in making connections with the region via the New Colombo Plan. High Educ Q. 2018;72(3):194\u0026ndash;207.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTran LT, Phan HLT, Bellgrove A. There\u0026rsquo;s a much bigger world of science than just Australia\u0026rsquo;: Australian students\u0026rsquo; development of disciplinary knowledge, transferable skills and attributes through a New Colombo Plan short-term mobility program to Japan. Int J Sci Educ. 2021;43(6):888\u0026ndash;905.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTuma K, editor. The guide to successful short-term programs abroad. NAFSA, Association of International Educators; 2007.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNESCO. (2025). Global Convention on Higher Education [UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) data set]. UNESCO. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.unesco.org/en/higher-education/global-convention\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.unesco.org/en/higher-education/global-convention\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilson AN, Howitt SM. Developing critical beings in an undergraduate science course. Stud High Educ. 2018;43(7):1160\u0026ndash;71. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1232381\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03075079.2016.1232381\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilson AN, Howitt SM, Higgins DM, Roberts PJ. Making Critical Thinking Visible in Undergraduates\u0026rsquo; Experiences of Scientific Reasoning. In: Davis M, Barnett R, editors. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking. 1st ed. Plagrave Macmillan; 2015.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVermeulen BL, Pizzica J, Renshaw A, Reynolds JK. New Frontiers: Fostering Students\u0026rsquo; Critical Thinking in Science Through Virtual Mobility. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers: The Interdisciplinary\u003c/em\u003e. J Study Abroad. 2023;36(3):255\u0026ndash;89. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v36i3.850\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.36366/frontiers.v36i3.850\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVermeulen BL, Pizzica J, Renshaw A, Reynolds J. Fostering sustainability capabilities through experience: A case study on virtual mobility in STEM. J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2024;21(3). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.53761/yg7d7a82\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.53761/yg7d7a82\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"criticality, short-term mobility programs, transformative learning, sustainable development, STEM","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eShort-term outbound mobility experiences can create transformative moments that challenge students\u0026rsquo; perspectives and foster critical reasoning, self-reflection, and action (Barnett\u0026rsquo;s domains of criticality). Our program, Sustainable Development through Science in the Philippines, engaged a multidisciplinary cohort of undergraduate STEM students from two Australian universities in an immersive global experience. This paper examines qualitative data from learning journals, in-country interviews, and post-program focus groups to explore how a two-week trip influenced students\u0026rsquo; development of criticality.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents engaged deeply with unfamiliar environments, navigating complex socio-cultural, ethical, and ecological sustainability challenges that prompted them to reevaluate themselves and the world around them. Program design, including structured reflection, collaborative research projects, short immersion experiences, and interactions with local stakeholders, was central to these outcomes. Experiences that disrupted assumptions and encouraged dialogue proved transformative; when linked to action, they supported growth toward becoming critical beings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eShort-term outbound mobility programs can intentionally embed intensive learning moments that advance students\u0026rsquo; criticality. These forms of criticality, by challenging understanding, practices, and perspectives, are essential for STEM graduates to thrive in an increasingly complex and contested future. Embedding such experiences within STEM curricula offers educators a pathway to cultivate adaptable graduates equipped with diverse capabilities and perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Reaching Criticality in an Outbound Mobility Program","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-01-16 17:41:50","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8503238/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"54dd34ae-1227-4fba-9e96-62d182118ce0","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 16th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Withdrawn","date":"2026-05-13T08:46:05+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-13T08:59:03+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-01-16 17:41:50","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8503238","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8503238","identity":"rs-8503238","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}