Jonathan shared with me a link to the 2007 report on teens and social media by Pew Internet and American Life Project:
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Social_Media_Final.pdf
We discussed their earlier report in Jan.
Thanks, Jonathan!
Jonathan shared with me a link to the 2007 report on teens and social media by Pew Internet and American Life Project:
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Social_Media_Final.pdf
We discussed their earlier report in Jan.
Thanks, Jonathan!
Dear CALL-ers,
here is a couple of questions for everybody from David and one from me. Enjoy!
1) Hegelheimer gives us an example of a NS corpus-based project and B & V give us an example of a NNS and NS corpus-based project. What do you think are the benefits or drawbacks of both. Does using the student’s own errors make for better instruction?
2) What are some ways you can use web 2.0 (second generation) applications in your classes?
3) We have read many CMC studies which are IA-driven and focus on turn-taking. How is Belz & Vyatkina’s study different in this respect (i.e. what’s their analytical focus)? We’ve also read studies which voiced a belief that metalinguistic explanations have no direct bearing on learners’ interlanguage development. What’s B&V’s take on the issue?
Dear CALLers,
here are a couple of questions based on our readings. Next week this prerogative of initiating a discussion thread will be all yours!
–Are you convinced by the evidence presented in P&W’s article which suggests a positive connection between the use of written chat and oral production? Why or why not? Additionally, what do you think of P&W’s use of nonword repetition test score, measuring phonological capacity, and the reading span measure as the means for corroborating their argument??
–The literature we have read argues for indisputable advantages of tandem learning. While for the most part the term is used to refer to bilingual interactions between native speakers (NS) and learners (NNS) who switch the roles in a balanced manner during their interactions, in your opinion, would tandem learning preserve its merits in NNS-NNS CMC context? Why or why not?
See you on Tuesday! Bagels promised
Read on to learn about UGA events relevant to CALL issues
Hello UGA CALLers,
After you’ve read all these articles and book chapters on CMC, which types of CMC appeal to you the most in terms of their modal characteristics, affordances that they create for developing communicative skills and intercultural competence, and, finally, practicality and appropriateness for the academic environment in which you are teaching (planning to teach)?
See you on Super Tuesday! We can cast CMC votes then
Viktoria.
Hello UGA CALLers,
Here are a couple of questions for us to ponder over. Tackle as many as you have interest in. I am looking forward to hearing what you have to say!
Levy & Stockwell (2006) lament the limitations plaguing CALL research. Specifically, they point out ambiguity and lack of detail in the presentation of findings, analysis, assessment, etc. that many CALL studies suffer from. While there is no easy answer, how would you organize data collection and analysis in your CALL course to ensure that you would be able to assess the effectiveness of CALL activities upon the completion of the project? A number of different methodological designs were discussed in the readings – which design model (or at least design features) seem optimal to you?
All of our readings for this week forefronted the importance of learner feedback. In your perspective, could learner feedback be an instructive and trustworthy evaluation criterion (for assessing the effectiveness of CALL activities) ?
Let’s blog!!!
Viktoria.
Welcome to the weblog of ELAN8045/7045 Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching @ UGA!