The Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication on Foreign ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

creating individual differences in language learning. Horwitz (2001) notes that several studies have found foreign language anxiety to be largely independent <strong>of</strong> other types <strong>of</strong> anxiety. Some researchers believe that CMC can create an environment in which foreign language anxiety is reduced. Kroonenberg (1994/1995) states that “the most timid language students can come alive while creating meaningful communication via the keyboard and screen” (p. 24). Kern (1995) reported that most students enjoyed CMC, with some evidence <strong>of</strong> reduced anxiety. Warschauer (1996) states that students reported “that they did not feel stress during electronic discussion” (p. 16). Sullivan & Pratt (1996) state: “Hypothetically, the networked classroom would <strong>of</strong>fer the less pr<strong>of</strong>icient speaker more time to think about what to „say,‟ thus reducing anxiety and the probability <strong>of</strong> error” (p. 492). In a descriptive study on students‟ attitudes and motivation on E-talk, Beauvois (1995) reports that over 70% <strong>of</strong> the students felt that the computer lab was much less anxiety-provoking than the regular classroom and 73% indicated that they would like to spend more time working in the lab. Based on 76 student interviews from all levels <strong>of</strong> classes over a three-year period, Beauvois (1999) reports that student responses to CMC were unanimously positive on the question <strong>of</strong> stress/anxiety; students also commented on the social aspects <strong>of</strong> CMC and how it creates a sense <strong>of</strong> community and a socially supported environment. Beauvois concludes: “What we do know now is that…we can use networked computers in our classrooms without activating anxiety in our students and without inhibiting their participation” (p. 162). González-Bueno & Pérez (2001) explored the significance <strong>of</strong> the overall effect <strong>of</strong> using e-mail in the quantity and accuracy <strong>of</strong> Spanish written language generated by the electronic media through dialogue journals compared to the paper-and-pencil version <strong>of</strong> the technique. Qualitative analysis revealed that a majority (86%) <strong>of</strong> the experimental students believed the assignment had improved their attitude towards the language, and half <strong>of</strong> them felt that the email journal had some advantages over its paper-and-pencil counterpart (including learning to communicate, self-monitoring, using technology appropriately, finding the assignment fun); on the other hand, only one third <strong>of</strong> the control subjects claimed that this practice was communicative, creative, meaningful and one that produced low anxiety. Arnold (2002) investigated the relationship between CMC and foreign language anxiety in five sections <strong>of</strong> third-semester German classes (N=56) with SCMC, ACMC, and a traditional face-to-face class. She found that students‟ self-ratings <strong>of</strong> their anxiety and self-confidence levels during each discussion did not change significantly between the three treatment groups (although 29% <strong>of</strong> the students experienced moderate levels <strong>of</strong> anxiety and 19% experienced high levels <strong>of</strong> anxiety); all groups generally enjoyed the group discussions, although the e-mail group (ACMC) provided some negative feedback (due to the lag time); in all three treatment groups, students displayed significantly lower levels <strong>of</strong> anxiety after the study (although modality did not have any effect on these changes). Arnold suggests using e-mail exchanges for writing practice instead <strong>of</strong> electronic discussions. In a later study, Arnold (2007) investigated the relationship between CMC and communication apprehension (one aspect <strong>of</strong> the foreign language anxiety construct proposed by Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope, 1986). Data from pretest and posttest questionnaires showed no significant differences in a reduction <strong>of</strong> communication apprehension between the control and experimental groups. Perez (2003) found that students who used ACMC (e-mail in this study) “had more time to think and elaborate while writing their weekly email message; consequently, average students 2 42 TPFLE
felt more relaxed during this activity” (p. 94). She concluded that both modes <strong>of</strong> CMC (i.e., ACMC and SCMC) created a nonthreatening atmosphere and lowered the affective filter. <strong>The</strong> Spanish students in Lee‟s (2004) study <strong>of</strong> online discussions experienced anxiety when communicating with native speakers at the beginning <strong>of</strong> the semester, as they felt that their limited Spanish did not allow them to fully express their ideas. <strong>The</strong>y were also afraid to make mistakes. Heritage Students <strong>of</strong> Spanish A heritage student refers to “a language student who is raised in a home where a non- English language is spoken, who speaks or at least understands the language, and who is to some degree bilingual in that language and in English” (Valdés 2001). <strong>The</strong>re are several reasons to focus on heritage students, especially heritage students <strong>of</strong> Spanish. According to Campbell & Peyton (1997), “Interest in this student population has been triggered by major demographic changes in this country…Most heritage language speakers (43 percent) are Hispanic Americans…This group is now the fastest growing and most diverse population group in the United States” (p. 38). Consequently, their enrollments in universities are picking up all over the country. Fishman (1966) argues that heritage languages are a national resource that should be preserved and encouraged. Van Deusen-Scholl (2003) states: “<strong>The</strong> events <strong>of</strong> September 11, 2001, underscored the critical need for language competence in strategic languages…Given the nation‟s expressed need for strategic linguistic competence, rethinking the role that heritage learners can play is advisable” (p. 215). Draper & Hicks (2000) note that “heritage language learners are different from the traditional foreign language student” (p. 20), and, therefore, “the instructional goals <strong>of</strong> the heritage learner may clash with those <strong>of</strong> the program in which they seek instruction” (Van Deusen-Scholl, 2003, p. 223). This has led researchers to try to develop a theoretical foundation for heritage language instruction (Valdés, 2001). Webb and Miller (2000) point out that heritage language students are pr<strong>of</strong>icient in their language in ways that foreign language learners, and sometimes even their foreign language teachers, are not and may never be. At the same time, they may have gaps in their knowledge <strong>of</strong> their heritage languages that foreign language learners do not have, and these gaps prevent them from performing certain kinds <strong>of</strong> communicative tasks, reading and writing in particular. As a result, when teachers attempt to apply a standard foreign language curriculum and foreign language teaching strategies to the teaching <strong>of</strong> a heritage language, it can lead to discomfort, if not frustration and failure, for both students and teachers alike. Foreign language learners and heritage language learners are two different groups <strong>of</strong> students, each with their own needs. Campbell and Rosenthal (2000) provide several characteristics <strong>of</strong> a “typical” heritage language learner: (1) they have acquired nearly 90% <strong>of</strong> the phonological system <strong>of</strong> their ancestral language; (2) they have acquired 80% to 90% <strong>of</strong> the grammatical rules; (3) they have acquired extensive vocabularies, although the semantic range is limited to a few sociocultural domains; (4) they have typically acquired appropriate sociolinguistic rules; (5) they have learned and adopted many <strong>of</strong> the customs, values, and traditions (i.e., the culture) <strong>of</strong> their community; (6) they rarely have opportunities to gain literacy skills in their ancestral languages; and (7) they present a wide range <strong>of</strong> reasons for wanting to study their ancestral languages. It should be noted that their proposed hypotheses need to be validated by empirical evidence collected from both heritage students and non-heritage students in future research. Peyton, Ranard and McGinnis (2001) make the point that heritage language learners also differ from traditional foreign language learners in that many heritage language learners are FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANXIETY AND CMC 43
Page 1 and 2: The Effect
Page 3: studies have also found a greater l
Page 7 and 8: RESEARCH QUESTIONS The</str
Page 9 and 10: Cope, 1986 and Aida, 1994). It was
Page 11 and 12: Table 5 Pre- and Post-test Anxiety
Page 13 and 14: “Yes I enjoyed the work that I di
Page 15 and 16: Estimated Marginal Means Estimated
Page 17 and 18: ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Michael Tallon (P
Page 19 and 20: Apprehension and Hispanics: An Expl
Page 21 and 22: Appendix A Pre-Test Questionnaire (
Page 23 and 24: SA A N D SD 1 2 3 4 5 _____________
Page 25 and 26: Appendix B Post-Test Questionnaire
Page 27 and 28: Appendix C Post-Test Questionnaire

The Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication on Foreign ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?