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

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

2

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


5

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)


10

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),


11

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)


12

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


15

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


16


17

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


19

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




21

Successful 21st century online learning

Creative contribution

Thoughtful prticipation

Purposeful reception

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


22

„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


24

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


25

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









26

Thank you for your attention


28

From Where is my jetpack

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

Documents