Telecollaboration in Spanish as a Foreign Language in Trinidad
The objective is to study how participation in tandem partnership influences the motivation towards the target language and culture and the autonomy of learners of Spanish as a foreign language in Trinidad and Tobago. For this reason, an action research project was conducted with thirty-three learners of Spanish in Trinidad and thirty-three learners of English in Colombia, who engaged in a seven week tele-collaboration during which they used email and Web 2.0 technologies to communicate. Data were collected through questionnaires and a weekly journal. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were carried out. As a result the project was a rich source of learning for all the participants and stresses the need of a deeper understanding of learners' language learning, an analysis of the sociocultural, psycholinguistic, and linguistic dimensions of intercultural competence in a specific context, and the critical assessment of the role of Web 2.0 technologies in fostering autonomy.
Received: 26-08-09 /Accepted: 28-02-10
How to reference this article:
Neva, C.; Landa-Buil, M.; Carter, B.-A. & Ibrahim-Ali, A. Telecollaboration in Spanish as a Foreign Language in Trinidad. Íkala [online]. 2010, vol.15, n.24, pp.75-102.
Bailey, K. M. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning: Looking at and through the diary studies. In H.W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67-103). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Bailey, K. M., & Oschner R. (1983). A methodological review of the diary studies: Windmill tilting or social science? In K. M. Bailey, M. H. Long & S. Peck (Eds.), Studies in second language acquisition: Series on issues in second language research (pp. 188-198). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Belz, J. A. (2002). Social dimensions of telecollaborative language study. Language Learning & Technology, 6 (1), 60-81. Retrieved November 15, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/belz/
Belz, J. A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 68-99. Retrieved November 15, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/belz/
Benson, P. (1996). Concepts of autonomy in language learning. In R. Pemberton et al. (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 27-34). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Blake, R. J. (2008). Brave new digital classroom. Technology and foreign language learning. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and methods. 3rd edition. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Boud, D. (Ed.) (1988) Developing student autonomy in learning. 2nd ed. London: Kogan Page.
Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the Internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 121-130). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Morgan, C. (1994). Teaching-and-learning language-and-culture. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Carroll, J. B. (1967). Foreign language proficiency levels attained by language majors near graduation from college. Foreign Language Annals, 1, 131-151.
Carter, B. (2006a). Language learning beyond the classroom: The contribution of study abroad. In M. J. Nzengou-Tayo & H. Peters (Eds.),
Caribbean Journal of Education. Special Issue. Foreign language teaching and learning in the Caribbean, 27, 123-41.
Carter, B. (2006b). Teacher/student responsibility in foreign language learning. New York: Peter Lang.
Coleman, J.A.(1995).The current state of knowledge concerning student residence abroad.In G. Parker, & A. Rouxeville (Eds.), The year abroad. Preparation, monitoring, evaluation (pp. 17-42). London: CILT.
Coleman, J. A. (2001). What is residence abroad for? Intercultural competence and the linguistic, cultural, academic, personal and professional objectives of student residence abroad. In R. Di Napoli, L. Polezzi, & A. King (Eds.), Fuzzy boundaries? Reflections on modern languages and the humanities (pp. 121-140). London: CILT.
Corbett, J. (2003). An intercultural approach to English language teaching. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Cornwall, M. (1988). Putting it into practice: Promoting independent learning in a traditional institution. In D. Boud, (Ed.), Developing student autonomy in learning 2nd ed. (pp. 242257). London: Kogan Page.
Cotterall, S. (1995). Readiness for autonomy: Investigating learner beliefs. System, 23, 195-205.
Cotterall, S., & Crabbe, D. (1999). Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field and effecting change. Bayreuth Contributions to
Glottodidactics, Vol 8. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
Davis, K. A. (1995). Qualitative theory and methods in Applied Linguistics research. TESOL Quarterly, 29 (3), 427-453.
Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: A literature review. Special Issue. System, 23, 165-174.
Ehrman, M. (1988). The learning alliance: Conscious and unconscious aspects of the second language teacher's role. System, 26, 93-106.
Esch, E. (______) Promoting autonomy: Criteria for the selection of appropriate methods. In R. Pemberton et al. (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 35-48). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Freed, B. F. (Ed.) (1995). SLA in a Study Abroad Context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. SiBil. (Studies in Biligualism).
Guarnieri, M., & Usategui, C. (______) Developing a new language curriculum for nonspecialists: From theory to practice and back. In M. Fay & D. Ferney (Eds.), Current trends in modern languages provision for non-specialist linguists (pp. 193-205). London: CILT.
Hinkel, E. (1999). Culture in second language teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Holec, H., & Huttunen, I. (Eds.) (1997). Learner autonomy in modern languages: Research and development. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Johnson, L. C. (1996). The keypal connection. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 131-142). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Kelly, M. (2000). Mapping culture in language degrees. In N. McBride, & K. Seago (Eds.), Target culture — target language? (pp. 81-92). London: CILT.
Kern, R. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Using e-mail exchanges to explore personal histories in two cultures. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 105-119). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Kinginger, C. (1998). Videoconferencing as access to spoken French. The Modern Language Journal, 82 (4), 502-513.
Kinginger, C., Gourvès-Hayward, A., & Simpson, V. (1999). A tele-collaborative course on French-American intercultural collaboration. The French Review, 72 (5), 853-866.
Knapper, C. (1988). Technology and lifelong learning. In D. Boud, (Ed.), Developing student autonomy in learning 2nd ed. (pp. 91-106). London: Kogan Page.
Kötter, M. (2003). Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Language Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 145-172. Retrieved
November 15, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/kotter/
Liskin-Gasparro, J. (1998). Linguistic development in an immersion context: How advanced learners of Spanish perceive SLA. Modern Language Journal, 82, 159-175.
Little, D. (1996). Freedom to learn and compulsion to interact. Promoting learner autonomy through the use of information systems and information technologies. In R. Pemberton et al. (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 203-218). Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Marsh, Debra. (1997). Computer conferencing: Taking the loneliness out of independent learning. Language Learning Journal, 15, 21-25.
McBride, K. (2009). Social-networking sites in foreign language classes: Opportunities for recreation. In L. Lomicka & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 35-58). San Marcos, TX: Calico.
McBride, N., & Seago, K. (Eds.) (2000). Target culture — target language? London: CILT.
O'Dowd, R. (2003). ''Understanding the 'other side': intercultural learning in Spanish-English e-mail exchange''. Language Learning and
Technology 7 (2), 118-144. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/odowd/default.html
Parker, L.(2004).Adultslearninglanguages—the challenge.InH.Harnisch&P.Swanton(Eds.), Adults learning languages. A CILT guide to good practice (pp. 9-20). London: CILT.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6.
Seago, K. (2000). Shifting targets: Language, culture, interculture. In N. McBride & K. Seago (Eds.), Target culture — target language? (pp. 1-15). London: CILT.
Seelye, H. N. (1984). Teaching culture. Strategies for intercultural communication. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
Seliger, H. W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shetzer, H., & Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to network-based language learning. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 171-185). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spratt, M., Humphreys, G., & Chan, V. (2002). Autonomy and motivation: Which comes first? Language Teaching Research, 6 (3), 245-266.
Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner Autonomy 5: The role of motivation. Dublin: Authentik.
Ushioda, E. (2000). Tandem language learning via e-mail: From motivation to autonomy. ReCALL, 12, 121-128.
Walker, L. (2000). What makes a successful e-mail tandem partnership? In T. Lewis & A. Rouxeville (Eds.), Technology and the advanced language learner (pp. 125-147). London: CILT AFLS.
Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.) (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Copyright (c) 2010 Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.