TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
Impact of native nonnative speaker interaction through video-web communication slideshare
1. Impact of native-nonnative speaker
interaction through video-web
communication and Second Life on
students’ Intercultural
Communicative Competence
Kristi Jauregi & Silvia Canto
Utrecht University
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
2. We present the results of a case
study (research in progress) on
the added value of implementing
networked interaction with expert
peers in language courses.
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
3. Introduction
NIFLAR (2009-2011)
Design & evaluation of innovative e-
learning tasks for synchronous
oral interaction with experts (NSs)
for the development of ICC
2 environments: 3D Virtual worlds
and Videocommunication
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
4. NIFLAR 2009-2011
Videocommunication
Adobe Connect
Virtual worlds
Second Life
Open Sim
5. Social- ti on SLA theories
ac
constructivism t er (Mackey & Polio, 2009)
(Vygotsky, 1978)
In
with expert peers
6. Context
• In a previous study (Canto, Jauregi & Bergh, in
press) it was found:
those students participating in
blended learning courses (with
opportunities to carry out tasks with
NSs through VC or SL) developed
more their communicative
competence than a control group
(who carried out the same tasks in the
classroom setting with no NSs).
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
7. Previous study: Effects on Communicative Competence
Subjects
3 groups of Spanish (B1) chosen at random:
1. Experimental group VC (N:14)
2. Experimental group SL (N:14)
3. Control group (N: 14)
Carried out 5 interaction tasks during a 7 weeks’
course.
Instruments:
- Pre- & post- oral tests were taken and recorded
- Oral tests were assessed by 2 independent
raters according to an assessment grid
(CEFR: range, accuracy, fluency, coherence & adequacy)
8. Previous study: Effects on Communicative Competence
Interaction effect between condition and pre- and post-tests was found to be
significant (F 2, 34 = 5.01; p = .012).
8 Oral Language Proficiency
VC
7
SL
C
Score
6
VC
C
5
SL
4
Pre Post
The results show that the difference between pre- and post- oral tests depends on the specific
condition. Especially in the SL and VC condition students show on average more progression than in
the control condition. Hence, both SL and VWC have an additive effect on students’ test scores.
9. Objectives of the present case
study (research in progress)
• To study what happens during those
interactions: what learning opportunities
emerge in NS-NNS interactions through
new media as compared to a control
group
• To analyse the differences in learning
opportunities the different contexts offer
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
10. Method: case study
• 3 groups at random chosen:
1. A videocommunication group: 2 NNs &1 NS
2. A Second Life group: 2 NNSs & 1 NS
3. A Control group: 4 NNSs
• NNSs: students of Spanish (B1 level)
from Utrecht University
• NSs: pre-service teachers from the
University of Valencia
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
11. Weekly tasks
Tasks Description
Session 1: Cool Students:
people (1) visit an apartment they are meant to share
(2) talk about themselves and exchange cultural information
triggered by pictures &
(3) choose an outing option (go to the cinema, to a museum
or to walk in the city).
Session 2: Participants plan a holiday and reflect on past holiday
People & adventure experiences
Session 3: Participants have to play different roles given the
Movie celebrity indications of a brief script
p
e
o
p
l
e
Session 4: Participants impersonate different characters and
People with heart experience the reactions caused on others
12. Interaction analysis
• Time devoted
• Language related episodes
(Swain & Lapkin, 1995)
• Interculturally related episodes
(Byram, 1997)
-> negotiation of meaning
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
19. Results: time + negotiation of
meaning
Table 1. Number of negotiations per group – task 2
Group Task Negotiations
duration
Second Life 01:15:01 27
Video communication 01:20:04 23
Control (C) 00:41:00 2
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
20. Results: time + negotiation of
cultural meaning
Table 2. Number of negotiations per group – task 5
Group Task Negotiations
duration
Second Life 01:46:08 26
Video communication 01:05:33 24
Control 00:41:00 12
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
21. Example of cultural clarification
Si ves estas imágenes por la calle, ¿qué piensas que ha pasado? [10]
22. Example of cultural clarification
NNS1: cuando has terminado el instituto/ NNS1: when you have finished your
¿sí? hay una fiesta y ponemos nuestras secondary education / yes? there is a
mochilas fuera/ con la bandera de party and we put our rucksacks outside/
Holanda y / y es como una fiesta que todo with the Dutch flag and / and it is like a
el mundo sabe que has hmm terminado el party that everybody knows that you have
instituto bien hmm finished your secondary education
NS: ¡Ah! ¿y entonces se quedan ahí las well
mochilas? NS: Ah! and then the rucksacks stay
NNS1 : sí/ fuera/ por dos semanas o así there?
(risas NNS1: yes/ outside/ for two weeks or so
NS: ¡Ah! (laughter)
NNS1: porque es la idea que nunca NS: Ah!
tenemos que usar la mochila (risas) NNS1: because the idea is that we don’t
NS: ¡Ah! ¡qué originales! have to use the rucksack anymore
(laughter)
NS: Ah! how original!
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
23. Differences VC vs SL?
• SL elicited a high degree of rich
participation, some triggered by elements of
the world. Added value: action.
• The interactions from the VC group (&
control group) were characterized by a
more descriptive language more limited to
the photographs being used. Added value:
access to visual information (through
webcam).
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
24. Conclusions
• The learning opportunities offered for SCMC via VC
and SL seem to be much richer than those offered by the
traditional educational setting (control group)
• This type of environments in addition to providing
access to a wide range of interlocutors (including
native speakers) may enhance cross-cultural
understanding and communicative competence in
the target language.
• The electronic medium seems to afford more
opportunities for active participation, particularly SL,
and provides a forum where participants actively
engage in negotiation of meaning.
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
25. Future research
• Negotiation of topic development
• Pragmatic issues (face)
• Identity negotiation
In further projects: EUROVERSITY & TILA
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
26. Thank you for your attention!
k.jauregi@uu.nl
s.canto@uu.nl
NIFLAR: www.niflar.eu
EUROVERSITY: www.euroversity.eu
Gothenburg, Eurocall 2012
27. References
• Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative
Competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Canto, S., Jauregi, K. & Bergh, H. v/d (in press). Integrating cross-cultural
interaction through video-communication and virtual worlds in foreign
language teaching programs: is there an added value? To be published in
January 2013 in ReCALL.
• Mackey, A. & Polio, Ch. (Eds.) (2009). Multiple Perspectives on Interaction.
New York: Routledge.
• Swain. M. & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive
processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied
Linguistics, 16: 371-91.
• Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind & Society. Cambridge: Mass. Harvard
University Press.
Notes de l'éditeur
Promoting blended learning Face-to-face classroom teaching Telecollaboration: To enhance oral interaction & ICC Using synchronous tools that enable oral distant interaction with expert peers According to relevant and meaningful tasks
Survey covered: A ttitudes towards interacting with native speakers (willingness to communicate): Learning goals: I really get to learn the language well by speaking with native speakers ; By learning this language I get new ideas and I am broadening my horizon ; I like speaking to native speakers in the target language ; Linguistic self-confidence: My competence in the target language is sufficient to communicate with native speech partner(s), Because of my positive attitude I can communicate well with native speech partners ; I can easily adapt to native speech partner(s) while speaking in the target language ; I can explain myself well in the target language ; I understand (almost) everything that is being said to me by native speech partner(s) in the target language; Language anxiety: I feel nervous when speaking in the target language; I get very worried if I make mistakes when interacting in the target language; Attitudes towards the course: I enjoy the language course this semester ; I feel I am making progress in the target language this semester; Attitudes to the L2 culture: I feel that there are hardly any cultural differences between the native speakers’ country and my country .