Session 2: Culture, Identity and Belonging in Online Groups

Module: Foundations of Intercultural Dialogue.

Context and rationale

This session helps participants move beyond simplified ideas of culture. They examine identity as layered and dynamic, reflect on belonging in online communities, and explore how creative spaces can either open or restrict participation.

This session is written for virtual creative exchange settings where participants are expected to communicate, reflect and often create something together. It assumes that intercultural learning is not automatic simply because people from different countries meet online. The facilitator must intentionally build the conditions that allow participants to understand each other, question assumptions and turn dialogue into cooperation.

The session can be delivered as a stand-alone activity or as part of the full DigiCreate guidance pathway. When used on the platform, it can be presented as a downloadable session plan with editable templates and a short reflection form. When used in live training, the facilitator should adapt the language, examples and digital tools to the group profile.

Learning objectives

By the end of the session, participants are expected to have developed both understanding and practical confidence. The objectives combine knowledge, skills and attitudes, because intercultural dialogue requires all three dimensions. Participants should be able to:

• describe culture as more than nationality, language or tradition
• reflect on their own identity layers without being forced to disclose private information
• understand how belonging and exclusion are produced in online group dynamics
• apply inclusive language and representation principles to virtual creative exchange

Competences developed

The session contributes to intercultural competence, communication competence, digital collaboration competence and reflective learning competence. Depending on the group, it may also support facilitation, creative teamwork, conflict management, ethical representation and project design. Facilitators should make these competences visible during the debrief so that participants understand not only what they did but what they learned to do.

Duration, group size and setting

Recommended duration is 90 minutes for a standard online session. The session can be extended to 120 minutes when the group is large, multilingual or expected to produce a more developed output. It works best with 10 to 25 participants, but can be adapted for smaller mentoring groups or larger cohorts by using breakout rooms and shared templates. For self-paced platform use, the session can be transformed into a guided learning unit with short videos, downloadable worksheets and a reflection form.

Materials and digital tools

The facilitator should use a stable video-conferencing platform with breakout rooms, a shared visual workspace such as Miro, Padlet or Google Slides, and a simple form for reflection or evaluation. The tool choice is less important than accessibility. If participants have limited bandwidth or device constraints, the facilitator should use chat and one shared document instead of multiple platforms.

Preparation for the facilitator

• Prepare a short introduction slide that explains the purpose of the session in plain language.
• Create a shared workspace with one clearly labelled area for each task and each group.
• Prepare the session output template so participants do not have to design the structure from zero.
• Check that links are open, editable where necessary, and accessible without complicated login procedures.
• Prepare one backup plan in case a tool fails, such as using chat, a shared document or verbal reporting.
• Review the dialogue agreement and decide which boundaries are non-negotiable for safety and respect.

Detailed implementation process

Personal identity lens. Approximate time: 10 minutes. The facilitator introduces this phase by connecting it to the session purpose and by giving clear instructions on the expected contribution. Participants should know whether they are speaking, writing, working individually or collaborating in a shared space. The facilitator should not rush this stage; in intercultural online groups, two additional minutes of explanation often prevent confusion later.

The opening should be low-risk and inclusive. Participants may be invited to respond in chat, use one word, select an image, or reflect silently before speaking. This protects participants who need time to formulate thoughts in a second language and avoids rewarding only the quickest voices.

Culture iceberg discussion. Approximate time: 15 minutes. The facilitator introduces this phase by connecting it to the session purpose and by giving clear instructions on the expected contribution. Participants should know whether they are speaking, writing, working individually or collaborating in a shared space. The facilitator should not rush this stage; in intercultural online groups, two additional minutes of explanation often prevent confusion later.

During this phase, the facilitator makes contributions visible. Visibility matters because it allows the group to notice patterns and allows less vocal participants to see that their written input is part of the shared learning process.

Belonging in online spaces case study. Approximate time: 25 minutes. The facilitator introduces this phase by connecting it to the session purpose and by giving clear instructions on the expected contribution. Participants should know whether they are speaking, writing, working individually or collaborating in a shared space. The facilitator should not rush this stage; in intercultural online groups, two additional minutes of explanation often prevent confusion later.

The core activity should generate a concrete output. The facilitator should clarify what the output will look like and where it will be saved. If the activity is conducted in breakout rooms, each group should have a clear role distribution and a shared place to write.

Creative representation analysis. Approximate time: 20 minutes. The facilitator introduces this phase by connecting it to the session purpose and by giving clear instructions on the expected contribution. Participants should know whether they are speaking, writing, working individually or collaborating in a shared space. The facilitator should not rush this stage; in intercultural online groups, two additional minutes of explanation often prevent confusion later.

The plenary exchange should focus on learning rather than performance. Groups are not presenting perfect answers; they are sharing material for collective reflection. The facilitator should ask follow-up questions that explore reasoning, choices and dilemmas.

Reflection on inclusive choices. Approximate time: 15 minutes. The facilitator introduces this phase by connecting it to the session purpose and by giving clear instructions on the expected contribution. Participants should know whether they are speaking, writing, working individually or collaborating in a shared space. The facilitator should not rush this stage; in intercultural online groups, two additional minutes of explanation often prevent confusion later.

The closing reflection should help participants name what they learned and how they can apply it. A strong debrief moves from experience to insight and then to transfer: What happened? Why did it matter? What will we do differently next time?

Facilitation notes and possible challenges

If the group is silent, the facilitator should not immediately fill the silence with more explanation. Silence may indicate reflection, language processing, uncertainty or discomfort. Offer participants a written option, invite pair discussion before plenary, or ask a more concrete question. If one participant dominates, thank them for their contribution and deliberately open another channel: “I would like to hear from people who have not spoken yet; you can also write in the chat.”

If tension appears, the facilitator should slow the conversation down. Ask participants to describe what they heard before responding. Separate intention from impact, return to the dialogue agreement and, if needed, take a short pause. The goal is not to avoid all disagreement but to prevent harm and keep the conversation educational.

Expected outputs

• identity and belonging map
• inclusive language notes
• group recommendations for online belonging

Evaluation and follow-up

At the end of the session, participants should complete a short reflection form with three dimensions: what they learned, how included they felt, and how useful the activity is for their future creative or educational work. Facilitators should review the answers and adapt future sessions accordingly. If the session is part of platform implementation, the output can be uploaded as evidence of activity, while personal data should be anonymised unless explicit consent has been collected.

Adaptation options

For low-bandwidth groups, reduce tool use and rely on chat, shared documents and asynchronous reflection. For advanced groups, add more complex case studies, ethical dilemmas or peer facilitation tasks. For university settings, connect the session to course learning outcomes. For youth work settings, emphasise personal reflection, group safety and local action. For CCI organisations, connect the session to real projects, audiences and creative outputs.