A NATI

VE SPEA

KER IN

EVER

Y PC:

WE

B 2

. 0 I

N F

OR

EI G

N L

AN

GU

AG

E T

EA

CH

I NG

RO

B A

. MA

RT

I NS

EN

, AS

SI S

TA

NT

PR

OF

ES

SO

R, B

YU

SP

AN

PO

RT

.

INFINITE OPTIONSHow to pick, where to start?

IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT TECHNOLOGY:

• Studies show that 21st Century Learners want a

moderate amount of technology integrated into courses.

• Too little technology in courses risks losing the power

that technology has to [help students]; too much

technology risks losing interaction with the instructor.”

Adaptado del artículo de Michael Rodgers and David Starrett National Teaching and Learning Forum Newsletter, Volume 14, Number 5 © Copyright 1996-2005

IS THIS A GOOD USE OF TECHNOLOGY?

• Russian students go to a computer lab. Then call each other using Skype to have long conversations in Russian.

• Technologies used in education were generally created for other purposes. A given technology, therefore, is best used in ways that mirror its original purpose.

• A given use of technology in language teaching should improve upon or at least be equal to other techniques using no or low technology.

• Technologies used in education were generally created for other purposes. A given technology, therefore, is best used in ways that mirror its original purpose.

IS THIS A GOOD USE OF TECHNOLOGY?

• Students create a website with lots of pictures of their favorite French singer and write about them, mostly in English.

• Within reason, technology can be used simply for the purpose of increasing motivation and interest among students as long as the other principles are not violated.

IS THIS A GOOD USE OF TECHNOLOGY?

• A teacher asks students to get online with a native speaker. They are to read a written dialogue out loud from the class textbook.

• A given use of technology should stem from the teacher’s overall goals for students’ outcomes.

• Technologies used in education were generally created for other purposes. A given technology, therefore, is best used in ways that mirror its original purpose.

WEB 1.0

• First “version/stage” of the internet.

• Internet = Information

• Web pages with fixed info.

• Ejemplos:

• http://www.bobrk.com

WEB 2.0

• Version 2 of the internet

• Internet ≠ information

• Internet = information AND interaction

• User-generated content

• Little to no tech skills required

•

WEB 2.0

• Uses of web 2.0 technologies for language teaching:

• Wiki for graduate students

• Class Wikis

• Free!!!

WEB 2.0 – A NATIVE SPEAKER AT EVERY PC (OR MAC, OR IPHONE, OR ANDROID, BLACKBERRY, IPAD, ETC. ETC. ETC. :)

WEB 2.0 – A NATIVE SPEAKER AT EVERY PC (OR MAC, OR IPHONE, OR ANDROID, BLACKBERRY, IPAD, ETC. ETC. ETC. :)

• fhj

TANDEM LEARNING

Organized language exchanges between two language learners, each

of whom wishes to improve his or her proficiency in other’s native language” 

(Appel & Mullen, 2000, p. 291).

WEBEX

• WebEx Platform

• Oral and Visual Communication

• Use of web cam and mic

• 1st time contact with native speaker

PARTICIPANTS

• 5 dyads:

• Metropolitan Autonomous University (Mexico City) Learning English

• Brigham Young University (Provo, Utah. USA)

Learning Spanish

• Students were native speakers of English and Spanish (respectively)

TASKS

• 7 tasks,

• Dyads met once a week / 7 weeks

• 30min each language

• A different topic for each task

• Booklet with suggestions for the discussion’s topic

METHODOLOGY

• Video conference set up beforehand (by researcher)

• Researcher was present (silently) to observe the exchanges

 

WEBEX

WEBEX

Audio

Video

Chat (written)

Whiteboard

Sharing: picture, desktop, (ppp, doc, etc.)

Note taking (not used)

AUDIO

To negotiate meaning

(repeating, paraphrasing, shortening, etc)

To correct pronunciation

To clarify pronunciation

To provide a translation (how do you say x?)

To learn new vocabulary

Clip :

snow.wrf

VIDEO Felt more personal

Felt more connected

Was more interesting and more fun

Helped stay more focused

Paid more attention

Saw gestures from partner: helped understanding

Saw partner’s reactions to what was said

Was nice to see their partners

Clip : (“headband” ln.1)

Hair.wrf

TEXT CHAT

Due to audio problems (interference, brakes/gaps, volume, sound speed-slowness)

To keep the conversation going (i.e. when audio is out)

To clarify meaning of single words or complete (long) phrases, when understanding fails.

To provide translation

To correct grammar/syntax

To reinforce / support / confirm oral information

Lanae : at your university, uh are there jobs available for students to work? Are they offered by the university? Can you work on campus?

Brenda: uh do you write?, please, could could you write?

Lanae: yeah

Brenda: could you write write your question?

Lanae: Do you want me to write?

Brenda: please? [could you write your question please?] could you…

Lanae: yes [yes]

Brenda ((giggles))

Lanae: [does your university have on –campus jobs available for students?] does your university have on-campus jobs available for students?

Brenda : °…jobs available for students?° yes my university have uh jobs mm mm

[ CHAT TRANSCRIPT ] [ ]= CHAT

WHITEBOARD

To draw in order to verify/reinforce vocabulary

To explain a word or phrase that was not comprehended orally

Personal interaction (non-linguistic)

 

SHARING

• Document, PPP, Pics, Desktop, etc.

• Personal things : a dorm room, campus, family, etc.  

• Places to visit : cities or countries

CONCLUSION

• P. were aware of affordances

• P. used affordances to enhance L2 language learning

• Affordances used to carry out the flow of conversations

• Affordances offered additional resources for communication not present in standard oral conversation alone.

• Note taking (not used by the participants)

• Video wasn’t exploited linguistically (tech?)

• Audio was the most used (it was crucial)

• Chat was the next most used (exploited a lot)

• Whiteboard was helpful too & fun

END / FIN