International Society for Language Studies 2011 ConferenceOranjestad, Arbua

June 23rd – 25th

Presented byLuba Iskold, Ed. D

Muhlenberg College

Presentation OutlineIntroduction:

Perspectives on collaborative nature of Web 2.0

tools

Research related to the use of SNSs for SLA

Potential benefits and possible drawbacks

Instructor’s role

Classroom examples

Student reactions to class-related FB experiences

2

Definition of TermsAvatar – Graphical representation of a user

Blog – Abbreviation for “weblog” with personal entries

CALL – Computer-Assisted Language Learning

CMC – Computer Mediated Communication

FB – Facebook, a social networking site

L2 – The terms “second language,” “target language,”

“foreign language” refer to languages other than

English taught as an academic subject

SNS – Social Networking Site

3

Introduction: Perspectives on collaborative nature of

Web 2.0 tools

Users not only engage in one-way communication, i.e., access web pages to retrieve content

They engage in multi-way communication, i.e., create content, contribute, share, and collaborate

Web 2.0 is about “encouraging and enabling participation through open applications and services” (Davis, 2005) 4

Perspectives on collaborative nature of Web 2.0 tools

Social-Networking Sites (SNSs) are the most convenient Web 2.0 tools for user collaboration

SNSs allow users toexpress themselveskeep in touch with friendsinteract with othersset up privacy specifications

5

Research Related to SNSs

Why incorporate SNSs into class-related activities?

Role in today’s society Communication and identity performance are both carried out via

SNSs SNSs are common in the workplace and in the job searches

User demographics 90% of people ages 20-30 participate in SNSs (Tufekci, 2008) SNSs are a “civil society of teenage culture” (boyd & Ellison, 2007)

Magnetizing power Observing friends’ profile updates Immediate reactions from friends Teenagers enjoy experimenting with identities and impression

management (Tufekci, 2008) SNSs provide for a safe experimentation with multiple identities

(Sykes et.al, 2008)

6

Research Related to SNSs & SLA‘Performing identities’ is the central activity on SNSs

where users “write themselves into being” (Atkinson, 2002)

Current generation of students has developed “new learning styles and qualitatively different thought patterns” (Thorne & Payne, 2005)

SNSs “foster the ideal language learning environment, one that encourages interaction and collaboration-the major goals, after all, or of language itself” (Lomicka & Lord, 2009)

Learning a language through interactions with others ties in with Vygotsky’s (1978) socio-cultural approach to learning and its later adaptation for L2 teaching and learning

Incorporating communicative acts via an SNS “could be as practical for [L2] students as teaching them how to order in a restaurant” (McBride, 2009)

7

Research on Experimenting with and Development of Identities

Acquiring an L2 involves the development of a new identity (Pavlenko & Lantolf)

CMC affords additive (vs. subtractive in face-to-face) experimentation with multiple identities

SNSs are characterized by “radical expansion of possibilities for artistic expression” (McBride, 2009)

8

Research on Experimenting with and Development of Identities

“Self-authorship,” i.e., remixing the self through text and media, may serve as the basis for new learning and lessons in CALL (McBride, 2009)

Using student-created materials for further learning fits with “student-centered” pedagogy

Self-authorship may lead to more time spent on taskraise interest in and motivation for learningresult in more active learning

9

Academic BenefitsStudents:Learn to analyze and appreciate netiquette

Develop critical thinking about social interactions with others

Distinguish what is public and what is private

Learn to avoid indulging in uncritical narcissism as in “me-me-I-I-I” (Thorne & Payne, 2005)

Integrate new knowledge and other’s perspectives into one’s personal experience

10

Limitations: Analysis of L1 online interactions and

L2 implications

Because SNSs are used primarily to maintain social bonds, exchanges are brief and frequently use simplified language, spelling, and colloquialisms

Writing does not require a “process” approach

Texts are scanned rather than read thoroughly

Messages with images are perceived differently than plain text

11

Student Challenges

Personal reasons not to be ‘friends’ with someone in class

‘Popularity contest’-may elevate anxiety and cause alienation in some L2 learners

Lack of L2 pragmatic knowledge in introductory language courses may make writing and interactions with others difficult

12

Instructors’ ChallengesShould the instructor be included?

Do students find it awkward?

Is there a difference between communicating with an authority figure via email vs. a SNS

Do SNSs undermine instructor’s authority? (Mazer, Murphy & Simonds, 2007)

Curricular limitations- difficulty to incorporate additional activities into syllabi

Time constraints- first learn about the technology and only then design own teaching

Resistance from more traditional instructors

Development of assessment strategies and grading parameters

13

Instructors’ ChallengesCurricular limitations- difficulty to incorporate additional

activities into syllabi

Time constraints- first learn about the technology and only then design own teaching

Resistance from more traditional instructors

Development of assessment strategies and grading parameters

14

Why Facebook?Student familiarity with this particular SNS

eliminates the need for L1 training

Ease of navigation and use

Privacy settings

Ability to set the interface and IM in L2

Convenience: meeting social and class needs in one place

15

Examples of what was done in Russian Language and Literature Classes

16

17

18

19

20

Alternative vs. Real Identity Profiles

Extending oneself by taking the point of view of one’s respective character Choosing among the characters may increase motivation and interest Keeps learners away from overindulging in themselves Student popularity in class may suffer less Engage in further development of L2 characters Use critical thinking and analytical skills to invent new situation and plot

developments Employ additional resources to develop characters’ attributes and ensure

their authenticity Participate in task-based experiential learning focused on online

exchanges between characters

Learn how to make predictions relevant to the country where L2 is spoken Creating stereotypes seems less dangerous

(vs. collaborating in groups to create a fictitious L2 profile)

21

Facebook Pre-Survey

QuestionsStandard Deviation

Mean

Help me express myself more creatively 0.991 3.875

Provide an additional way to interact with peers in class 0.641 4.125

Help me spend more time writing and communicating in Russian 0.744 4.625

Motivate me to experiment with a Russian character identity 1.509 3.875

Be a “popularity contest” in class 0.787 1.571

Distract me from learning the course content 0.535 1.500

Consume too much time relative to other assignments 1.488 2.500

Motivate me to expand my vocabulary in Russian 0.744 4.375

Motivate me to look for additional resources to develop my character’s attributes 1.069 3.500

My peers in class will quickly react and comment on my profile 0.000 3.000

I will frequently update and check my Russian profile 0.354 3.875

I find it awkward to have my instructor on my ‘friends’ list 0.926 2.000

I have trouble being ‘friends’ with individuals in class 0.744 1.375

Instructor’s corrective feedback will diminish my ego 0.707 1.750

I am familiar with Facebook and will not need technical assistance 0.744 4.625

22

Note. Judgments were made on 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

Facebook Post-SurveyQuestions

Standard Deviation

Mean

Helped me express myself more creatively 0.629 3.61

Provided an additional way to interact with peers in class 1.113 3.94

Helped me spend more time writing and communicating in Russian 0.921 3.67

Motivated me to experiment with a Russian character identity 0.094 3.89

Was a “popularity contest” in class 0.213 2.06

Distracted me from learning the course content 0.276 2.00

Consumed too much time relative to other assignments 0.327 2.11

Motivated me to expand my vocabulary in Russian 1.001 3.83

Motivated me to look for additional resources to develop my character’s attributes

0.862 3.80

My peers in class quickly reacted and commented on my profile 0.292 3.07

I frequently updated and checked my Russian profile 0.412 2.60

I found it awkward to have my instructor on my ‘friends’ list 0.519 1.80

I had trouble being ‘friends’ with individuals in class 0.412 1.87

Instructor’s corrective feedback diminished my ego 0.328 1.93

I was familiar with Facebook and did not need technical assistance 1.184 4.27

I would like to continue using FB for my study of Russian 0.763 3.33

23

Note. Judgments were made on 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

Conclusions Discuss upcoming projects and potential problems

Use SNSs projects that can support course objectives

Explain the connection to students

Specify expected quality and quantity of communication

Develop brief tasks tied to topics covered in class Examples:

Physical and personality descriptions Likes and dislikes, hobbies Daily routines Context-based plot development

Provide corrective feedback only in individual messages

24

BibliographyAtkinson, D. (2002). Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 86, 525-545. boyd, d. m., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.htmlDavis, I. (2005, July 4). Talis, Web 2.0 and all that. Internet Alchemy blog. Retrieved December 31, 2008, from http://iandavis.com/blog/2005/07/talis-Web-20-and-all-thatLange, P.G. (2007). Publicly private and privately public: Social networking on YouTube. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1). Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.htmlLarsen Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141-165. Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2009). Introduction to social networking, collaboration, and web 2.0 tools. In L. Lomicka, & G. Lord, The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 1-11). San Marcos, Texas: CALICO.Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I'll see you on "Facebook": The effects of computer- mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication education, 56, 1-17. McBride, K. (2009). Social Networking sites in foreign language classes: Opportunities for re-creation. In L. Lomicka, & G. Lord, The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 35-58). San Marcos, Texas: CALICO.Pavlenko, A., & Lantolf, J.P. (2000). Second language learning as participation and the (re)construction of selves. In J.P. Lantolf (Ed.), Mediating discourse online (pp. 331-355). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Sykes, J.M., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S.L. (2008). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive environments, and mobile resources for language education. CALICO Journal, 25, 529-546. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5Thorne, S. L., & Payne, J.S. (2005). Evolutionary trajectories, internet mediated expression, and language education. CALICO Journal, 22, 371-397. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5Tufecki, Z. (2008). Grooming, gossip, Facebook and MySpace. Information, Communication, and Society, 11, 544-564. 25

Contact Information:Dr. Luba Iskold

2400 Chew StreetMuhlenberg College,

Languages, Literatures and Cultures,Allentown, PA 18104

Phone: 484-664-3516Fax: 484-664-3722

E-mail: iskold@muhlenberg.eduhttp://www.muhlenberg.edu/depts/forlang/LLC/

iskold_home/index.htm

26