Reading about Webquests

This week's reading focused on the theme of webquests. I guess after readings that seemed more 'colorful' or varied, this week's readings seemed to be very much focused on the core topic. I guess there was just no way around webquests this week!

I enjoyed the online webquest by Dodge (not the car company, mind you!). Things always seem to make more sense when you can explore someone's actual work and examples. I particularly enjoyed the country one, I guess in part because it seems to have the most relevance for the world language field. I also like Dodge's description of the four "personalities" that can be used when evaluating webquests. I think each point of view should be considered and is very much justified. They are helpful lenses, that can aid teachers in evaluating existing webquests and making sure that their self-created webquests live up to their expectations.

Siekmann's article beautifully complements our current learnings in the SLA class. It offered a very interesting insight into what actually happens during pair tasks. Since the teacher can only supervise and overhear a given number of conversations at a time (although I swear I'm starting to think that I can listen to at least 4 beginning-level L2 conversations at once!), it is fascinating to read such a detailed description of partner work and the scaffolding that takes place. I sure don't envy Sabine or her research assistant for transcribing all of those camtasia sessions, though!

After reading Siekmann's article, Dodge's thoughts or definitions of webquests did not seem all that surprising or new. What I found very intriguing, however, is the fact that the website openly states that the links may not work anymore. I'm not sure I had seen such a "disclaimer" before. It's like an online relic that is not fully functional anymore. Come to think of it, it seems ironic that a website about webquests - tasks that lead learners to other websites through links - does not consider the links to be valuable enough to keep updated... (even though only two links seem to be dead despite the warning that most are dysfunctional).

In my classroom, I find that students enjoy webquests, especially when they can make some choices (e.g., chose and research in more detail one of the...). Considering the wealth of information that is available on the internet, it seems that well-designed webquests can really serve the purpose of directing students to instructional homepages. I'm actually wondering whether webquests couldn't actually be a way of combining several of the technologies that we have been discussing. I'm thinking about the possibility of including a link to a language learning page on the webquest... Would there be any use for that? I guess it would depend on the goal and task of the webquest.

Technology and language developing all kinds of flowers!

This week's reading comprised three articles, all focusing on different aspects of using technology for language learning.

I liked Beauvois' analysis of synchronous chatrooms as an alternative to classroom discussions. The idea of all the students sitting in a computer lab, typing away rather than talking to each other in person seems bizarre. However, it seems like there could really be a place for synchronous "chatting" in the language curriculum. I certainly agree with the fact that a written environment can really help lower anxiety in the foreign language classroom. Since I'm teaching younger students (middle/high school), I would be interested in more research about how this hybrid form of communication affects students' oral proficiency (since I consider that to be the ultimate goal in middle and high school language classes). But reading about all the advantages of this form of classroom "discussion" really makes me want to teach older learners, so I can experiment with this way of using the L2.

I actually see an interesting connection between Beauvois' article and Lee's article. I believe that Beauvois' synchronous chatroom actually allows learners to take the time to focus on form. Students can only focus on so many things at once. Typing instead of speaking allows them to think about their statement (meaning) first and to then look at their utterance and check it for form, before hitting enter - something that cannot really be accomplished in oral conversations (things just go way too fast...).
I understand some of the learners' frustration in Lee's study about the focus on form that would just interrupt the meaningful conversation. It seems unnatural to interrupt a conversation to correct an error when the error did not actually impede communication (I guess it's trying to fight Selinker's fossilization through 'strategy of communication'...). However, it seems like a fairly effective way of focusing on accuracy rather than just meaning.
Lee's methodology of pairing more advanced speakers of a language with novice speakers also seems to make a lot of sense. Explaining the rules and correcting a novice speaker helps the advanced speakers gain practice and a deeper understanding of the language, while the novice speaker can get meaningful one-on-one interaction with a more advanced speaker of the language. I actually wonder whether this model could be embedded in let's say a forth and second year foreign language class: Once a week, pairs of students meet and discuss an assignment or topic that the instructor gives to both classes. It really seems like that would lead to a win-win situation. Even a ratio of 1-2 (one advanced speaker to two novices) would seem beneficial and much more effective than the traditional one instructor to a minimum of 10 students.

McHenry's article makes many very valid and interesting points about Native languages and the internet. Considering I'm one of many non-natives interested in the field, I will only say that I fully agree. Go Tracey McHenry!!

Multimedia and language learning

It was interesting to see how much technology has changed in recent years. Nowadays, most people aren't all that excited anymore about being able to pause, replay, slow down or accelerate a video, search for a phrase within a text, etc. I found it fascinating to read an article that was written in the heyday of that technology. What I really enjoyed from Chiquito, Meskill and Renjilian-Burgy's article was the application examples. It was great to read descriptions of how these different technologies were actually used in the classroom.

I also found it helpful to read some research that seems to prove that L2 learners learn vocabulary more easily, when they associate the L2 word with an actual picture. So, I guess there is a reason behind using picture flashcards and colorful pictures in the presentation of new vocabulary. I actually just recently seemed to find in my own classroom that students learn vocabulary much more easily when it is associated to a movement or gesture. Besides giving the kids a chance to move, gestures that accompany vocabulary presentations really seemed to help acquisition. This is of course a very unscientific classroom observation of mine...

My favorite quote from the reading: "The computer ... seduces us into believing that the truth is just around the corner of the next "text" that will fill the ultimate gap in our understanding" (Kramsch & Andersen, 1999, p.40). So true!