[PDF] ENHANCING BEGINNERS SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

View - Download ENHANCING BEGINNERS SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Previous PDF

Next PDF

JOURNAL OF EDUCATORS ONLINE

ENHANCING BEGINNERS" SECOND LANGUAGE

LEARNING THROUGH AN INFORMAL ONLINE

ENVIRONMENT

Jessica Chakowa, Monash University

ABSTRACT

Web 2.0 tools are used increasingly to support second language learning, but there have been limited

studies involving beginner learners, multiple technologies, and informal settings. This current study

addresses this gap and investigates the factors affecting students' interest in a nongraded online learning environment and what kinds of tools, modes of expression, and activities they prefer. Findings reveal

which highlights the importance of addressing students' needs and interests and providing the appropriate

aspects of the platform under investigation, although to differing extents, hence the relevance of balancing

opportunities, combining different tools, and sustaining activities. Keywords: second language learning, blended learning, informal online learning

INTRODUCTION

Social networks, wikis, and blogs are ever-

present in our everyday lives, and communicating in a foreign language is increasingly likely to be done through these tools. Web 2.0 tools are used in on the use of online learning environments to support language learning at the beginner level.

Indeed, beginners' restricted knowledge of the

target language makes it more challenging for them to collaborate and interact. Further, while most studies focus on a single technology, few explore the affordances of multiple technologies. In the context of Second Language Acquisition, studies investigating Web 2.0 have predominantly focused on formal settings and paid less attention to informal learning, which is gaining interest worldwide.

The current study is based on an interactive

platform (French Plus) in an informal (i.e., not graded) setting. This project was conducted to support a French beginners course at Monash

University (Australia) over two semesters. French

Plus was introduced as an optional learning environment enriched with different tools to complement face-to-face classes. challenges of Web 2.0 in language learning, this paper investigates the following research questions:

1. What factors affect students' interest in an

informal learning platform (including those who have not used a learning platform before)?

2. What kinds of tools, modes of expression, and activities are preferred?

the challenges and makes recommendations for dealing with online learning.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Many factors support the integration of Web

2.0 into language learning. By providing access to

authentic material and real-world applications that have not been specially designed for learners, Web

2.0 caters to meaningful situations, particularly for students who cannot travel to the target country

to immerse themselves in the language and the culture (Simon, 2008).

Web 2.0, otherwise known as the “Read/Write

Web" (Richardson, 2006), allows users to easily

create and contribute content. This may increase autonomy, which is crucial when progressing in

JOURNAL OF EDUCATORS ONLINE

language learning. Web 2.0 not only provides opportunities for meaningful input but also for students' output. Swain (2000) has observed that output requires deeper language processing and greater mental effort than input, and “output may stimulate learners to move from the semantic, open-ended, strategic processing, prevalent in comprehension to the complex grammar processing needed for accurate production" (p. 99). In addition, the variety of Web 2.0 tools provides opportunities to enhance learners' creativity beyond writing, and it allows them to demonstrate their understanding about a subject matter by producing, for instance, an audio podcast or a video and easily sharing it (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). potential for student interaction and collaboration.

Many studies have demonstrated that collaborative

tasks contribute to the formation of learning communities (Kessler, 2009; Lee, 2009; Zorko,

2009). Kessler employed a wiki in class to enhance

students' collaborative writing skills. The wiki tool afforded a safe and interactive environment where students were willing and able to work collaboratively. Although grammatical accuracy was not necessarily achieved in the collaborative writing activities, students demonstrated a high were not hesitant to make alterations to their peers" work. Furthermore, Web 2.0 tools may promote affective learning by enhancing motivation, interest, and enjoyment (Ducate & Lomicka,

2008; Martínez, 2012; Pinkman, 2005), which

may enhance students' performance (Armstrong & Retterer, 2008; Chen, Chen, & Sun, 2010). In their study, Armstrong and Retterer (2008) revealed that all participants felt more comfortable when writing in Spanish after a one-semester blogging experience.

Students' awareness of audience on Web 2.0

seems stimulating for learners who wish to not just write for their teacher but to be understood by a community (Ollivier & Puren, 2011). It is “important that learners have an audience for the linguistic output they produce so that they attempt to use the language to construct meanings for communication rather than solely for practice" (Chapelle, 1998, p. 23).

Ultimately, Web 2.0 can also promote lifelong

learning by allowing learning to take place outside the boundaries of the classroom, encouraging learners to interact with a global audience, and preparing them to be active citizens in the information society (Guth, 2009; Leone, 2009). Recognition of the importance of lifelong learning has been accompanied by increasing recognition of the importance of informal learning (Attwell, “any activity involving the pursuit of understanding, knowledge, or skill which occurs without the presence of externally imposed curriculum criteria" (2001, p. 5). According to Laakkonen (2011), language teachers should design environments in which the target language is not detached from its context of use, and they should equip students with life skills as opposed to focusing on test performance. Guth claims “language acquisition, especially, is a life-long process that cannot end with traditional education and must be cultivated throughout life often through informal learning in different contexts and situations" (2009, p. 453). of technology do not, by themselves, guarantee that effective learning will occur. Rather, it requires “careful planning and a thorough understanding of the dynamics of these affordances" (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007, p. 667). Warschauer adds that technology should not be regarded as “a magic bullet to solve educational problems, but rather as a powerful tool that can have both positive and negative impact, and that must be carefully exploited" (2009, p. xix- xx).

There are several challenges related to the

use of Web 2.0 tools in language learning. First, technical issues, including poor Internet access, have kept many teachers and students away from incorporating it (Bartlett-Bragg, 2008; Lee, 2011).

The longevity of new technologies is another

drawback. The number of tools available increases only a year or two of existence (Guth, 2009).

A lack of support from university Information

Technology (IT) services for freely available Web

2.0 technologies has been another downside. IT

departments are sometimes seen as controlling and obstructive, as they struggle to maintain both

Some teachers and students are reluctant to

integrate Web 2.0 tools in their learning. This may be because of their lack of experience with

JOURNAL OF EDUCATORS ONLINE

such tools (Gosper, Malfroy, & McKenzie, 2013;

Kennedy, Judd, Churchward, & Gray, 2008;

McLoughlin & Lee, 2007; Usher, 2013).

Additionally, students need to be self-motivated

and self-disciplined to successfully learn in an online environment (Sturm, Kennell, McBride, & Kelly, 2009). Even though institutions are able to attract learners to distance programs, they often language might also be a challenge. Most studies examine intermediate and advanced levels, as it is assumed students require the minimal skills to to communicate via technology. Very few studies based on the use of Web 2.0 at the beginner level

Quality of content is another major concern for

students involved in online learning environments.

While some authors argue that collective

aggregation of information can lead to better decisions than those any individual can make (Surowiecki, 2005), others caution against the cult of amateurism (Keen, 2007). In addition, most studies (Arnold, Ducate, & Kost, 2012; Elola &

Oskoz, 2010; Kessler, 2009) focus more on content

than form, which can be an issue for the learner yet to develop linguistic accuracy. In a study based on three foreign language social networking sites,

Stevenson and Liu (2010) revealed that most users

expressed a preference for interacting with native speakers over other learners, as they felt the former would be able to provide a better response.

Paradoxically, while students appear generally

willing to engage in real-life interactions with other users of the target language, they remain highly dependent on traditional methods of instruction.

Indeed, Stevenson and Liu's (2010) study revealed

web site and be able to practice the new language before interacting with others.

Web 2.0 as students must be evaluated not only

on their learning process, interact with others, stimulate debate, and work collaboratively (Gray,

Guth, 2009).

Time is another issue for both instructors

and students. Students may not be familiar with

PD\EHU HT XLUHGWREHFRPHSURquotesdbs_dbs21.pdfusesText_27

[PDF] french exercises pdf

[PDF] french gaap vs ifrs kpmg

[PDF] french grades to american grades

[PDF] french grammar for beginners

[PDF] french grammar rules

[PDF] french grammar test

[PDF] french history timeline

[PDF] french market

[PDF] french online grammar quiz

[PDF] frenchcoffeeshop

[PDF] frequence 4g france telecom

[PDF] fréquence ajustée calcul

[PDF] fréquence ajustée formule

[PDF] fréquence ajustée statistique

[PDF] fréquence cardiaque marche à pied