mobile-enabled language learning �eco-system

Click here to load reader

Post on 13-Jun-2015




1 download

Embed Size (px)


  • 1. Mobile-Enabled Language LearningEco-SystemAgnieszka (Aga) Palalas, Ed.D. George Brown Collegeapalalas@georgebrown.camLearn 2012HelsinkiOctober 2012 1

2. 1. Background and statement of the problem2. Significance of the research3. Research question4. DBR phases and their findings5. Outcomes of the study6. Limitations7. Future research8. Conclusions 2 3. 3 4. Inadequate aural skills instruction - college ESP students Purpose: MELL educational intervention to enhance effectiveness and appeal of ESP augment in-class learning flexible contextualized communicative practice interaction with others personalized to learner preferences students own mobile devices replicable and reusable design principles4 5. Constructivism Social Constructivism SCT: Sociocultural Theory Ecological Constructivism (Bruner, Davis & Sumara, Dewey, Lafford, Lam & Kramsch, Lave & Wenger, Piaget, Proulx, Vygotsky, van Lier, von Glasersfeld, Wertsch) Listeningand language learning(Lynch, Nation & Newton, Rost) From SLA to MALL SLA: Second Language Acquisition(Chomsky, Krashen, Long, Swain) CALL: Computer-Assisted Language Learning (Warschauer, Davies, Levy) MALL: Mobile-Assisted Language Learning(Sharples, Kukulska-Hulme, Laurillard) MALL on listening(Kukulska-Hulme, Shield, Thornton & Houser) MALL design principles(Ally, Quinn, Rosell-Aguilar)5 6. Evolution of practice MELLES prototype model for replication Evolution of theory MELLES design framework Ecological Constructivism DBR application for mobile language learning environmentMELLES =Mobile-Enabled Language Learning Eco-System6 7. What are the characteristics of aneffective, pedagogically-sound learning object MELLESfor students mobile devices, through which adult ESPstudents in a community college enhance listeningskills, while expanding their learning outside theclassroom?7 8. A systematic but flexible methodology aimed to improveeducational practices through iterativeanalysis, design, development, and implementation, basedon collaboration among researchers and practitioners inreal-world settings, and leading to contextually-sensitivedesign principles and theories. (Wang & Hannafin, 1999, p. 7)8 9. Bannan, B. (2009) Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004) Brown, A. (1992) Dede, C. (2004) Herrington, J., McKenney, S., Reeves,T., & Oliver, R. (2007) Kelly, A. (2009) Plomp, T. (2009) Reeves, T. (2006) Van den Akker et al (2006) Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005) 9 10. 10 11. Findings: Emerging ThemesCritical Elements of Effective Design: Pedagogy PEDAGOGIC PROCEDURE - How CONTENT - What CONTEXT - When and Where ACTORS - Who Technology FUNCTIONALITY - How TECH SOLUTION What TECH CONTEXT - When and Where 11 12. Ecological Constructivism Social Constructivism + Sociocultural Theory + Ecological Linguistics + Contextual and situated learning Interaction mediated by cultural tools such as language and technology (Pachler, 2009, p. 5) Learning mediated by the context Active learning around real-life problems Goal-oriented real-life communicative activities Interactivity in social contexts Community-based communication Scaffolding and guidance Feedback from facilitators and peers12 13. Contextual mobile learning (context-aware):learning activities relate to the location (physical, geographicalor logical) of the actor and the context (David, Yin, & Chalon, 2009) Situated learning Authentic context & social interaction(Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989;Lave & Wenger, 1991) Access to expertise & collaboration with others (Herrington & Oliver,1995) metaphor of ecology attempts to capture theinterconnectedness of psychological, social, andenvironmental process in SLA (Lam & Kramsch, 2003, p.144) Affordance: a particular property of the environmentthat is relevant to an active, perceiving organism in thatenvironment (van Lier, 2000, p. 252) 13 14. 1. Language is dynamic and contextually contingent2. Affordances are inherent in the dynamic environment3. Learners act on linguistic affordances in the environment4. Learning, individual or collaborative, emerges from and through interactions co-construing of knowledge5. The process of collaboration enables individuals to perceive novel affordances6. Dynamic networks of fluidly inter-linked contexts form an open system7. Mobile technologies mediate interaction and connection over the network and with environment8. Knowing: an evolving process enabled by acting on affordances available in the environment, in which learners operate and collaborate across dynamic networks through connections made possible by mobile technologies 14 15. 15 16. Other speakers ofEnglish16 17. Design Prototype Testing Refinement 17 18. 18 19. 19 20. Ten Essential Pedagogic Characteristics1/21. Balanced combination of individual and collaborative (group work) tasks2. Learner-generated linguistic artefacts (audio, video, photos, images)3. Game-like real-life communicative tasks4. Expert facilitation: scaffolding, feedback, and coordination5. Feedback mechanism (immediate and delayed)6. Focus on authentic listening tasks in the dynamic real-world communicative situations 20 21. Ten Essential Pedagogic Characteristics 2/27.Support of self-paced individual audio tasksfeeding into/preparing learners for the real-lifetasks8.Integrate all four language skills but focus onlistening outcomes9.Linguistic resources (task-related): relevantvocabulary, dictionaries, pronunciation, clear taskdirections and explanations, examples10. Support of out-of-class learning with in-class (f2f)instruction and practice (a blend of in-class andout-of-class context) 21 22. Eight Essential Technological Components1.One-point access to all resources2.Exchange and communication platform3.Scalability, flexibility and adaptability of the system4.Scalable rating scheme (from artefact to learningstructures to the whole system)5.Multimedia (including text) - artefact authoring,management and usage capabilities6.Cross platform and multi-technology support7.Integrated technology support andtutoring/instruction8.Personalized user progress tracking capabilities22 23. Evolutionof practice MELLES prototype model for replication Evolutionof theory MELLES design framework Ecological Constructivism DBR application for mobilelanguage learningInterconnected elements of the MELLES environmentlearning context23 24. The scope of DBR complexity of the system - breadth no objective measure of learning amount of data intensity The role of the researcher multifaceted conflicting roles threats to validity24 25. In-depth examination of constituent elements Measuring effectiveness - tests of proficiency Actualization of the MELLES theory technology Role of the teacher Transferability of findings 25 26. 26 27. Ally, M. (2004). Designing effective learning objects for distance education. In R. McGreal(Ed.), Online education using learning objects (pp. 87 -97). London: Routledge Falmer. Bannan, B. (2009). The Integrative Learning Design Framework: An illustrated example fromthe domain of instructional technology. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction toeducational design research (pp. 53-73). SLO: Netherlands Institute for CurriculumDevelopment. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the Culture ofLearning, Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. David, B., Yin, C., & Chalon, R. (2009). Contextual mobile learning: Principles and nutritionalhuman being case study. Proceedings from IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning2009 (pp. 97-104). Barcelona, Spain. IADIS Press. Hoven, D. & Palalas, A. (2011). (Re)-conceptualizing design approaches for mobile languagelearning. CALICO Journal, 28(3) Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (1995). Critical characteristics of situated learning: Implications forthe instructional design of multimedia. In J. Pearce & A. Ellis (Eds.), Learning with technology(pp. 235-262). Parkville, Vic: University of Melbourne. Retrieved from Lam, W. S. E. & Kramsch, C. (2003). The ecology of an SLA community in a computer-mediated environment. In J. Leather & J. Van Dam (Eds.), Ecology of language acquisition (pp.141158). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York:Cambridge University Press. 27 28. Mwanza-Simwami, D. (2009). Using activity-oriented design methods (AODM) toinvestigate mobile learning. In G. Vavoula, N. Pachler, & A. Kukulska-Hulme(Eds.), Researching mobile learning: Frameworks, tools and research designs (pp. 1-16).Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang AG. International Academic Publishers. Pachler, N. (2009). Research methods in mobile and informal learning: Some issues. InG. Vavoula, N. Pachler, & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Researching mobile learning:Frameworks, tools and research designs (pp. 1-16). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang AG.International Academic Publishers. Palalas, A. (2012). Design guidelines for a Mobile-Enabled Language Learning systemsupporting the development of ESP listening skills (Doctoral dissertation, AthabascaUniversity). Retrieved from Palalas, A. (2011). Mobile-Assisted Language Learning: Designing for your students. InThousny, S. and Bradley, L. (Eds.) Second Language Teaching and Learning withTechnology. Voillans. Plomp, T. (2009). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen(Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 9-36). SLO: NetherlandsInstitute for Curriculum Development. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). Theory of learning for the Mobile age. In R.Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (E

View more