The socially-networked language learner: from reception...

transcript

The socially-networked language learner: from reception through participation to creative contribution – Implications for

language teaching

Malgorzata Kurek

College of Foreign Languages Czestochowa, Poland

Malgorzata Kurek, College of Foreign Languages, Czestochowa, Poland

Main findings:

• regular use of SM in L1 and FL

• receptive uses outweigh participatory ones,

• content creation driven by personal interests

• the role of formal schooling

(Krajka, J., Kurek, M., Maciaszczyk, S., Savlovska, D., Vlad, M., Zourou, K. (2010)

Social media features

Users • create identities (real or

fictitious);

• add /create content (stored and visible);

• share content ;

• communicate through various modes and channels;

• have the quality of contributions evaluated directly or indirectly by other users;

• can create social networks.

Malgorzata Kurek, 4

Yes, social media • enable social contacts and activities

• facilitate online communication

• facilitate collaboration

• create the sense of flow

• facilitate sharing multimodal

information

• facilitate content creation and publication

• facilitate generation of new knowledge (Sykes, Oskoz, Thorne, 2008)

… but they also • promote the me -me-I- I approach

(Thorne &Payne, 2005),

• reduce communication to symbolic or ritual gestures (ritual purpose – Lam, 2000)

• affect F2F peronal contacts (Moor, 2010)

• may contribute to social isolation

• are distracting (Carr, 2008)

• blur the real with the virtual (Bugeja,

2005) .

after McBride, 2009)

The socially-networked learner:

• is immersed in a loosely -structured environment

• uses social media mainly for entertaining and socializing

• frequently interacts with other users

• can create content or reuse content created by others

• naturally engages in multitasking,

• may find it difficult to concentrate (Carr, 2008)

• finds it easier to work with graphics and sounds than with text,

• craves interactivity (Prensky, 2001)

• is rather ego-oriented (Thorne & Payne, 2005),

The networked student’s optimal learning procedure

• selects a research topic,

• finds relevant websites and ensures their credibility,

• locates and bookmarks reviewed articles (Google Scholar),

• creates a blog to record one’s reflections and opinions on the topic,

• subscribes to podcasts on the topic,

• keeps track of all subscriptions,

• contacts and consults experts,

• creates and publishes one’s own materials.

(inspired by http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwM4ieFOotA)

The new digital divide?

• Referring to disparities in the quality od online users’ activities

• Not access to technology but HOW and to what purposes it is used.

Possible problems:

• coping with language issues

• structuring ill-defined situations

• motivation deficiencies

• inability to attend to all task components to

the same degree

Malgorzata Kurek, College of Foreign

Languages, Czestochowa, Poland 13

Using task design to manipulate learner’s attention

• Limited Attentional Capacity Model (Skehan & Foster, 2000).

• Task complexity vs. task difficulty (Robinson 2005)

• „Pedagogic tasks should be developed and sequenced to increasingly approximate the dameands of the real world target tasks” (Robinson, 2005:1)

• Loosely structured tasks under socioconstructivist approaches

Components for L2 task design (Robinson, 1995, 2001)

Successful 21st century online learning

Creative contribution

Thoughtful prticipation

Purposeful reception

Purposeful reception Competences in focus:

• Comprehenion, crtitical reflection, analysis, drawing connections, interpretation, evaluation, interpretation of various modes

Language issues

• attention to lexical and visual forms of expression

• familiarity with the discourse used for interpreting various modalities;

• being able to interpret and report visual data (charts, diagrams)

• using elements of discourse as cues for identifying dated, biased or exploitative sources;

• rephrasing skills

• Teacher role: provide a variety of input

Thoughtful participation: voicing one’s views

Competences in focus: argumentation, intercultural competence, evaluating contributions,the awareness of one’s online presence (Pegrum’s personal and interultural literacies)

Language issues:

• being able to communicate messages by recognizing, choosing and imitating a particular convention or type of discourse;

• pragmatic competence and netiquette;

• using the language to create the feeling of community;

Teacher role: cultivate interaction

Creative contribution:

Competences:

• production and publication od sharable input with focus on process

• keeping the right balance between modalities,

• restructuring the content,

• exploring tool afordances,

• remixing.

Language issues:

• describing the process,

• using the language for negotiating, analysing and cooperating

• adjusting to other language varieties and non-native language models

Successful 21st century online learning

Creative contribution

Thoughtful prticipation

Purposeful reception

Poor and optimal task design factors (Youngs 2007:84)

„Present yourself to the world”

• Viewing examples of personal presentations – expressing opinion

• Drawing a list of generic features

• Tool exploration (e.g. Sky Rocket, Prezi, Glogster, recordr.tv)

Suggestions for task design

• Academically weaker students need careful task structuring and (achievable steps),

• attention given to all the three dimensions of online performance,

• manipulation of task complexity (cognitive factors),

• attention to linguistic features

• authenticity in terms of audience, purpose and processes

• need for language output (clear criteria)

• honing reflection and critical thinking

• choice and diversity respected

References • Arnold, N. Ducate, L. Eds (2011) Present and Future Promises of CALL: From Theory and Research to New Directions in Language

Teaching. CALICO Monograph Series

• Mc Bride, K. (2009) “Social-Networking Sites in Foreign Language Classes: Opportunities for Re-creation”. In Lomicka, L. &Lord, G. (eds).

The Next Generation: Social Networking and Onlie Collaboration in Foreign Language Learning. CALICO Monograph Series

Volume 8 ,San Marcos, TX: CALICO pp.35-58.

• Prensky M. (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants – Do they really think differently?. Retrieved:

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20-%20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part2.pdf

• Robinson, P. (2001) "Task Complexity, Cognitive Resources, and Syllabus Design", in Robinson, ed.,(2001), pp. 287-318 Evolutionary

trajectories,Internet-mdiated expression, and language education. CALICO Journal, 22(3),371-397.

• Skehan, P., Foster, P. (2001) “Cognition and Tasks”, in Robinson, ed. (2001), pp. 183-206.

• Sykes, J., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. L. (2008) Web 2.0, inmersive environments, and the future of language education. CALICO Journal,

25(3), 528-546.

• Youngs, B. L. (2007) "Teaching teachers: Methodological questions for the online environment." In Kassen, M. A., Lavine, R. Z., Murphy-

Judy, K. & Peters, M. (eds.). Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers. CALICO Monograph Series Volume 6,

San Marcos, TX: CALICO. pp. 67-90

• Zikhur,K. (2010).Pew Internet & American Life Project:Generations 2010. Retrieved:

http://www.pewinternet.org/topics/Generations.aspx

Thank you for your attention

From Where is my jetpack

The socially-networked language learner: from reception...

Documents