Computer-Mediated%20Communication%20and%20Language%20Learning:%20From%20Theory%20to%20Practice

1
Computer-Mediated Communication and Language
Learning From Theory to Practice

• Randall Sadler, UIUC Betil Eröz, METU

2
What is CMC?

• CALL ? self-contained, programmed applications
  (e.g., tutorials, drill, simulations,
  instructional games, standardized tests, such as
  TOEFL, TSE)
• CMC/NBLT ? a different kind of CALL
• computers connected in local or global networks
• human-to-human communication is the focus (KW1)
• A Sociocognitive Approach to CALLShifts from
  learners' interaction with computers to learners
  interaction with other humans via the computer (K
  W11)
• computer as tutor? computer as tool (Crook, 1994)

3
CMC and Learning Theory

• Vygotsky (1934) claimed that all human learning,
  including language learning, is attained through
  interaction with other people.
• Zone of Proximal Developmentlearners will
  benefit most from social interaction when the
  tasks they are engaged in cannot be accomplished
  alone, but, instead, must be achieved
  collaboratively, preferably with the aid of more
  knowledgeable teammates

4
CMC and Learning Theory (cont.)

• Language is a socially constructed phenomenon
  (Hymes, 1971)
• Communicative Competence
• there are rules of use without which the rules
  of grammar would be useless (Hymes, 1971, p. 10).

5
Why CMC? Theory to Practice

• extends interaction possibilities beyond
  classroom walls time constraints and the usual
  limited type of interlocutors of classroom pair
  and group work (Belcher,99)
• Allows learners to engage in playful
  interaction (Belz Reinhardt, 2004)
• enhances opportunities and motivation for
  authentic interaction and meaning negotiation
  (Kern, 1995)
• reduces anxiety and produces more talk
  (Fanderclai, 1995 Harris, 1995 Kern, 1992
  Reid, 1994)
• improves linguistic proficiency and increases
  self-confidence (Beauvois Eledge, 1996 Gebhard
  Nagamine, 2005).

6
UIUC and METU collaboration

• Course
• Joint course
• Technology in ELT (METU), 8 students
• Computer-Mediated Communication and Language
  Learning (UIUC), 10 students
• Same class time, syllabus, schedule, and readings

7
ProcedureTools Explored

• Asynchronous
• Email
• Message Boards
• Wikis
• Blogs

• Synchronous
• Text chat
• Audio Telephony
• MUDs, MOOs, WOOs
• Video/ teleconferencing

AND what are these things???
8
Message Board www.eslweb.org/cmcforum/
9
Blogs Student Blog for a Course
10
WIKIs
www.wikipedia.org
11
Lingua MOO Sadlers Shack
12
WOOs Active Worlds
13
Audio telephony Skype
14
Video Conferencing MSN Messenger
15
Advantages of using CMC in ELT

• Opportunity to meet people from other cultures
  who are located thousands of miles away
• Real and authentic communication in English
  (especially for NNSs)
• First-hand and hands on experience with the
  technology they could use in their own classroom
  (trail and error, warm-up before using with their
  Ss)
• Chance to have discussions and see different
  perspectives on the uses and applications of CMC
  in pedagogical contexts

16
Student responses to using CMC tools in ELT

• As a teacher, I think having students use a MOO
  in the way we did could be very beneficial.
  Students can 1) meet people from across the globe
  while 2) still accomplishing something important
  3) in real time. Without MOOs, you could
  certainly meet people from other countries
  online, but usually just for fun things. In
  class, you can accomplish something important,
  but only with people in the same geographical
  space. With discussion boards, you can accomplish
  important things with people from other
  countries, but not in real time! (Errol, M, U.S.)
• Each time I read the articles assigned for the
  weeks and the suggestions provided by the members
  of this forum, I feel more happy to take such a
  course which helps me to get more acquainted with
  the limitless facilities of virtual world.
  (Elcin, F, TR)

17
Student responses to using CMC tools in ELT

• As language teachers, we can use MOOs to be able
  to help our students out of the class. We create
  a virtual world on the web and register all our
  students. In this world, we can add a virtual
  library, some information of useful links, some
  sample term projects, assignments, visual and
  audial elements,  etc. or anything that we cannot
  include in a traditional classroom. (Banu, F, TR)
• Moo chatting is better than regular chatting
  room in that it's more teacher-controlled. I
  think msn or yahoo has the similiar function, but
  it will be harder for the teacher to monitor
  several groups at the same time. (Penny, F,
  China)

18
Potential Disadvantages

• Message lag time in emails
• Technical Issues
• Busy Schedules
• Conflicting time zones
• Semester schedule conflicts
• Waning enthusiasm or no enthusiasm to begin with!

19
Pedagogical Implications

• Collaborative projects must activate and
  integrate prior ICT knowledge.
• Tasks must have a concrete framework, with a
  clear purpose.
• Tasks must be motivating and engaging.
• Task instructions should be available to all
  students in various formats.
• Cultural aspects of communication should be
  discussed.
• Provide students with a collaboration contract.
• Collaborative projects should include getting to
  know each other time.
• Teachers should be actively involved and give
  regular feedback in order to maintain student
  motivation.

20

• Comments ?
• Questions?
• This presentation is available at
• http//www.eslweb.org

21
Some useful CMC Resources

• Message Boards
• Simple Machines
• PhpBB
• Blogs
• Blogger
• Xanga
• Wordpress

• Wikis
• Wikipedia
• Wikimedia software
• Pbwiki
• MOOs and WOOs
• Lingua MOO
• Active Worlds

22
More ResourcesAudio/Video

• Audio/Video
• VOIP Buster
• Skype
• MSN Messenger
• Ivisit
• Paltalk

• Language Exchange Sites
• http//www.xlingo.com
• http//www.sharedtalk.com
• http//www.zuiop.com
• http//www.friendsabroad.com
• http//www.eslbase.com/language-exchange/
• http//www.atisba.com
• http//www.exchangelanguage.com
• http//www.flale.com
• http//www.inlinguapenpals.com
• http//www.languagebuddy.com
• http//www.lingup.com
• http//www.phrasebase.com
• http//www.languagepenpals.com
• http//www.tandemcity.com

23
Selected Research from the field

• Bays, H. (1998). Framing and face in internet
  exchanges A socio-cognitive approach. Linguistik
  Online, 1.
• Bearden, R. J. (2003). Chatting in a foreign
  language An interactional study of oral vs.
  Computer-assisted discussion in native speaker
  and non-native learner dyads. THE UNIVERSITY OF
  TEXAS AT AUSTIN.
• Beauvois, M. H., Eledge, J. (1995 Winter 1996
  Spring). Personality types and megabytes Student
  attitudes toward computer mediated communication
  (cmc) in the language classroom. CALICO journal,
  13(23), 27-45.
• Belz, J. A. (2002). Social dimensions of
  telecollaborative foreign language study.
  Language learning Technology, 6(1), 60-81.
• Belz, J. A. (2005). At the intersection of
  telecollaboration and learner corpus research
  Considerations for language program direction. In
  J. A. Belz S. L. Thorne (Eds.),
  Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language
  education. Boston, MA Heinle Heinle.
• Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2003). Asynchronous
  discussion groups in teacher training classes
  Perceptions of native and non-native students.
  Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3),
  24-46.
• Blake, R. (2001). What language professionals
  need to know about technology. ADFL Bulletin,
  32(3), 93-99.
• Bloch, J. (2004). Second language cyber rhetoric
  A study of chinese l2 writers in an online usenet
  group. Language Learning Technology, 8(3),
  66-82.
• Carney, N. (2005). A critical review of
  telecollaborative projects involving japan. The
  Pennsylvania State University.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2004). Learning through onilne
  communication Findings and implications from
  second language research. DRAFT.
• Chen, Y. H. (2005). Computer mediated
  communication The use of cmc to develop efl
  learners communicative competence. Asian EFL
  Journal, 7(1).
• Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the
  collaborative experience of learning. London
  Routledge.
• Cziko, G. A., Park, S. (2003). Internet audio
  communication for second language learning A
  comparative review of six programs. Language
  learning Technology, 7(1), 15-27.

24
Selected Research from the field (cont.)

• Egbert, J., Hanson-Smith, E. (Eds.). (1999).
  Call environments Research, practice, and
  critical issues. Alexandria, Viginia Teachers of
  English to Speakers of Other Languages.
• Gebhard, J. G., Nagamine, T. (2005). A mutual
  learning experience Collaborative journaling
  between a nonnative-speaker intern and
  native-speaker cooperating-teacher. Asian EFL
  Journal, 7(2).
• Godwin-Jones, R. (2003). Emerging technologies
  tools for distance education Toward convergence
  and integration. Language learning Technology,
  7(3), 18-22.
• Hampel, R. (2002). Network-based language
  teaching today Multimodality, multi-dimensionalit
  y and interaction. Paper presented at the the
  International conference on Computers in
  Education (ICCE).
• Hampel, R., Hauck, M. (2004). Towards an
  effective use of audio conferencing in distance
  language courses. Language learning Technology,
  8(1), 66-82.
• Kelm, O. R. (1996). The application of computer
  networking in foreign language education
  Focusing on principles of second language
  acquisition. In M. Warschauer (Ed.),
  Telecollaboration in foreign language learning
  (pp. 19-28) University of Hawaii Press.
• Kern, R., Warschauer, M. (2000). Intoduction
  Theory and practice of network-based language
  teaching. In M. Warschauer R. Kern (Eds.),
  Networked-based language teaching Concepts and
  practice (pp. 1-19). Cambridge, UK Cambridge
  University Press.
• Kung, S.C. (2002). Synchronous electronic
  discussions in an EFL reading class.
• Lee, B. C. (2004). Korean efl inservice teachers'
  experiences with native-speaking teachers of efl
  using two computer-mediated communication modes
  A qualitative case study. University of Alberta.
• Liu, Y. (2002). What does research say about the
  nature of computer-mediated communication
  Task-oriented, social-emotion-oriented, or both?
  Electronic Journal of Sociology.
• Murray, D. E. (2000). Protean communication The
  language of computer-mediated communication.
  TESOL QUARTERLY, 34(3), 397-421.
• O'Dowd, R. (2004). Network-based language
  teaching and the development of intercultural
  communicative competence. University
  Duisburg-Essen.
• Smith, B., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., Zhao, Y.
  (2003). Features of cmc technologies and their
  impact on language learners' online interaction.
  Computer in Human Behavior, 19(6), 703-729.
• Warschauer, M. (2000). On-line learning in second
  language classrooms An ethnographic study. In M.
  Warschauer R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based
  language teaching Concepts and practice (pp.
  41-58). Cambridge, UK Cambridge University
  Press.
• Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social
  inclusion Rethinking tje digital divide. London,
  England The MIT press.