1

A Study of the Use of Language Learning Websites with Social Network Features by University ESL Students

Liu, M., 1Evans, M., Horwitz, E. K., Lee, S., McCrory, M., Park, J. B., and Parrish, C.

The University of Texas at Austin

1 The second through sixth authors are listed in alphabetical order.

2

As a Web 2.0 application, social networks hold much potential for education in different content areas. Unfortunately, however, there is little empirical research on whether or how social network sites can be used to facilitate the learning of a second language (Stevenson & Liu, 2010; Zourou, 2012). Understanding learners’ use of and reactions to Web-based learning experiences can provide valuable insights on how technologies can function as teaching and learning tools for language learners. In this study, we examined how university English as a Second Language (ESL) students use websites with social network features and their perceptions of these language learning experiences.

Theoretical Framework

Web 2.0 and Social Networking for Language Learning

Web 2.0 is considered a user-centric environment that is social, personalized, interactive, and participatory. According to O’Reilly (2005), Web 2.0 embraces “the power of the Web to harness collective intelligence.” Web 2.0 has been found to have numerous advantages for second language acquisition (SLA) especially in terms of increased learner autonomy and collaboration (De Weber, Mechant, Veevaete, & Hauttekeete, 2007; Solomon & Schrum, 2007). Autonomy and collaboration address the very core of Web 2.0: websites where users come together to “collaborate, learn, and build knowledge” (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007, p. 664). This nexus of learning is based upon an “architecture of participation” that enables users to generate content in a public space (Barsky & Purdon, 2006, p. 65).

Social networks (SN) or the use of SN websites to facilitate social relationships between members constitute an important Web 2.0 approach that can potentially create heretofore unimaginable language learning resources (Conole & Alevizou, 2010). Duffy (2011) identified five common features of social network sites (SNS): a user can (a) create a profile, (b) find peers online, (c) publicly erect or confirm peer connections, (d) collaborate to share content, and (e) form online communities (p. 286). boyd and Ellison (2007) stated that SNSs “allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system." In these networked social spaces, users with different interests are encouraged both to improve their individual ability and to "contribute to distributed knowledge" from which everyone in the community can benefit (Gee, 2004, p. 79).

Using Social Networks to Facilitate Language Learning

The user-centered, participatory, and collaborative practices associated with Web 2.0 applications are consistent with a sociocultural understanding of SLA. Influenced by Vygotsky (1978), sociocultural SLA theory posits that the source of language learning is social interaction, and that learners incrementally internalize socially acquired language, moving from egocentric, cultural ambivalence toward more socialized speech (Piaget, 1923, Lantolf, 2006). In this view, language learning takes place through scaffolded interactions where language learners use the social assistance of more expert language users to incorporate new linguistic features into their developing language competence (Cook, 2008). Social networks, augmented with technology to

3

allow learners from around the world to exchange ideas, would seem to be an ideal platform for scaffolded language interactions. Indeed, many second language researchers contend that social network sites have considerable potential for L2 pedagogy (Brick, 2011; McBride, 2009; Reinhardt & Zander, 2011). McBride (2009) suggested that social network sites naturally facilitate the development of second language skills and communicative competence, and Horwitz (2012) believes that learners can use social networks to find online tools for their personal language learning needs.

Although there is much enthusiasm about the potential of social network websites, unfortunately, there is little evidence-based research on their use as teaching and learning tools for second language learners (Stevenson & Liu, 2010, Zourou, 2012) or whether learners perceive networked experiences to be useful. It is especially important to understand students’ responses to SN sites as perception can influence learners’ future use of the sites.

Given the scarcity of research on this topic, this study addressed the following two research questions: 1. When language learning websites with social network features are used as a tool for in

and out of classroom language practice, what do university ESL students think of them and how do they use them?

2. What specific features of these sites do students find most useful in helping them develop language skills and why?

Method

Participants and Research Setting Twenty-one ESL students from 11 countries attending an Intensive English Program in a large public university in the southwestern US participated in this study in Fall 2011. They ranged in age from 18 to 40 with an average age of 25.88. Ten participants were female and eleven were male. Participants were enrolled in three ESL courses (Listening/Speaking – Advanced Level, Writing – Beginner Level Low, and Grammar - Beginner Level High). (Detailed demographic information is presented in the results section.)

Procedure This study included the following three steps. Step 1. Selecting Language Learning Websites With Social Network Features Zourou (2012) discussed the difference between the terms social “network” vs “networking” and cautioned that networking implied active “relationship initiation“ while network is a more neutral term. We followed this convention and use ‘network’ in this paper. Given our language learning focus, our selection involved only language learning websites and excluded generic SNS such as Facebook and Ning.

4

We constructed an initial list of possible sites from browsing through the literature on the topic. We then evaluated each potential site using SN criteria proposed by boyd and Ellison (2007) and Duffy (2011). Sites that had little or no free materials (e.g. Babbel, iTalki), did not enable user-generated content (e.g. Verbling.com), were only for teachers (e.g. CO13), had no or only limited network possibilities (e.g. ESL Café, English Central, SharedTalk), were not specific to language learning (e.g. Study Zone, MeetUp), or had too many advertisements (e.g. English Club) were eliminated. We also wanted the content of the sites to align well with the learning objectives of the participating ESL classes. This selection process resulted in three websites: Busuu.com, Livemocha.com, and English Café.com (see Appendix A for descriptions). These sites are not simply Web 2.0 language learning communities (Zourou, 2012), they offer specific SN features as defined by boyd and Ellison (2007) and Duffy (2011). Specifically, the three sites allow users to: 1) create a profile, 2) add friends to their network, 3) search for new friends, 4) create a circle of friends, 5) communicate with others in their network via multiple means such as email and chat in different modes and 6) get feedback from friends in their network. Step 2: Generating the Learning Tasks Guided by our two research questions, we created individual tasks for each of the participating ESL classes and carefully aligned the tasks with content topics and language skills the participants were learning when the study took place. In creating the tasks, we paid special attention to include SN features of the sites. For example, for the Listening/Speaking class, task 1 asked students to network with classmates and task 3 asked them to network with someone in the larger network (see Appendices B and C). Step 3. Implementing the Learning Tasks During Fall 2011, participants in the three ESL courses used the sites over a six-week period and performed the structured learning tasks as part of their in-class activities as well as for free exploration outside class. For each course, an introductory session was offered during which two to three researchers were present, one providing an introduction for this study and the other(s) helping students log in and begin the task as described in a handout (see Appendix D). Students were given 40 to 60 minutes to complete in-class tasks and up to 10 days to complete out-of-class tasks. They were encouraged to explore the sites freely on their own, to build their own networks outside of the class, and to chat with anyone they found online. Data Collection and Analyses Surveys were used as the primary data source for this study. At the beginning of the study, participants completed demographic surveys to describe their language-learning backgrounds and typical use of the Internet and SNS. At the end of a series of tasks for each site, surveys were distributed to elicit students’ use and perceptions of the website. These surveys contained a mix of general questions regarding each site and specific questions tailored to each assigned task. Survey responses were tallied and organized by demographic categories, website, and task. A constant comparative and iterative approach was used in sorting and analyzing the data (Strauss

5

& Corbin, 1990). Findings are organized by emerging themes as guided by the two research questions.

Results

Demographic Information

Since some participants were enrolled in more than one course, and not all participants responded to all questions, the response rate for each question varies. A 5-point Likert scale was used for some questions (1 being low and 5 being high); average scores are reported.

Table 1Participants’ Demographic InformationCourse Age Gender Country Years of

English learning

L/S_Advanced 20-30 (n=5)31-50 (n=1)

Male (n=4)Female (n=2)

China (2)Japan (1)Kazakhstan (1)Saudi Arabia (1)South Korea (1)

<=5 (n=1)>5 (n=5)

Grammar_Beginner_low 20-30 (n=7)31-50 (n=1)

Male (n=3)Female (n=5)

South Korea (2)Chile (1)Guinea (1)Kazakhstan (1)Mexico (1)Saudi Arabia (1)Thai (1)

<=5 (n=6)>5 (n=2)

Writing_Beginner_high 20-30 (n=8)31-50 (n=3)

Male (n=5)Female (n=6)

Saudi Arabia (3)South Korea (3)Chile (1)Kazakhstan (1)Mexico (1)Thai (1)Venezuela (1)

<=5 (n=8)>5 (n=3)

Note: Four students took both the Grammar and Writing courses. Students’ indicated that on average, they spent about 3 hours per day using the Internet and 2.5 hours per week studying English using the Internet. They had an average of 3.5 years computer experience. Their most frequently visited sites included Facebook, Google, Gmail, youtube, and several country-specific sites. In terms of social networking sites, participants mentioned Twitter and some country-specific sites.

Students’ Use and Perception of Three Language Learning Websites with SN Features

6

To explore affordances of language learning websites with SN features, ESL students were given specific tasks to perform both in and outside of class. Each learning task intentionally included the use of one or more SN features from the selected site (Appendix B). The results are organized by the themes that emerged from the data and the findings concerning SN for the three sites are highlighted. Student comments are unedited.

Busuu

A total of 21 participants (L&S_Adv, n=14; Grammar_Beginner_low, n=7) completed the Busuu survey.

Use of Busuu in class. 64% of L&S and 71% of Grammar participants indicated they made friends other than their classmates on Busuu, and 71% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants were comfortable making Busuu friends online. These participants viewed Busuu as an opportunity to interact globally with English speakers and learners commenting: “I want to make a lot of friends in all over the world” and “because I love making new friends.” However, 28% of the participants provided conflicting responses: 14% indicated they had made unknown friends on Busuu but were not comfortable, and 14% said, though comfortable adding friends, they had not made any unknown friends and had added only classmates to their networks. A few were hesitant about social networks: “I don’t feel comfortable with being online friends with total strangers. No offense to others, it's just my opinion about online friends” and “I don't use social networks in order to make friends.” When adding friends, age was the factor considered most important by the participants in both courses (see Table 2); country of origin was another crucial factor.

Table 2When adding a friend, what factors did you consider?

Age Country of origin

Gender

Language

learning

Name

Profile picture

L1 Other

L&S_Adv (n=14) 57%

43% 29% 29% 29% 21% 7% 7%

Grammar_Beg_low (n=7)

43%

43% 43% 29% 29% 29% 0% 0%

Total (n=21) 52%

43% 33% 29% 29% 24% 5% 5%

Note: As the participants were allowed to choose as many factors as desired, the total percentages for this question do not add to 100. This is also the case for Tables 7 and 10. Merely having students connect with others in a network was not the primary goal of this study. Rather, this study sought to encourage students to use social networks as a means to communicate with others in order to practice English. Thus, several tasks specifically required participants to conduct a synchronous live chat with classmates, friends they made through the network or even strangers. The average comfort level for text chat was ML&S=4, Mwriting=3; for audio chat ML&S=3.21, Mwriting=2; and for video chat ML&S=2.86, Mwriting =2. In general, participants found text chat the most comfortable mode. However, the more proficient L&S

7

participants were more comfortable than the less proficient Writing participants in all chatting modes.

An important affordance of SN for language learning is getting help from others in a networked circle. Participants from the three courses had different experiences receiving and giving feedback while chatting: Only 14% of the advanced proficiency L&S participants reported receiving corrective feedback while 71% of the Grammar participants did. Moreover, 49% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants reported noticing a chatting partner’s English errors, and 91% pointed out their partner’s mistakes.

Use of Busuu outside class. We encouraged the participants to use Busuu outside of class. 52% of the participants indicated that they had used Busuu in their free time, including 38% of L&S and 85% of Grammar participants (see Table 3).

Table 3How long did you use Busuu/Livemocha/English Cafe over the past week?

0minutes

30 minutes

60 minutes

90 minutes

120 minutes

More than3 hours

Busuu L&S (n=14) 36% 50% 14% 0% 0% 0%Grammar (n=7) 14% 29% 29% 0% 14% 14%Total (n=21) 29% 43% 19% 0% 5% 5%

Livemocha L&S (n=9) 44% 33% 11% 11%Writing (n=7) 29% 29% 43% 0%Total (n=16) 38% 31% 25% 6%

English Café

Writing (n=9) 22% 56% 22% 22%

Grammar (n=4) 25% 25% 50% 25%Total (n=13) 23% 46% 31% 23%

Different ways of communication are available in these three sites to connect to others in the network. Busuu offers chat, through text, audio, and video, as a means for language learners to communicate with friends or strangers within their network. All participants –especially the Grammar participants—felt comfortable using text, but they were all less comfortable with either audio- or video-chat (see Table 4).

Table 4Outside of class, how did you use Busuu.com?

Language content Social networking N/AListening exercise

Vocabulary exercise

Grammar exercise

Make friends

Help others learn your L1

Chatting

Video Audio

Text

L&S (n=14)

36% 36% 29% 21% 21% 21% 7% 36% 14%

8

Grammar(n=7)

14% 29% 29% 14% 0% 0% 86% 57% 0%

Total (n=21)

29% 33% 33% 19% 14% 14% 33% 43% 10%

Perception of Busuu. Compared to the Grammar participants, L&S participants found the site more helpful (ML&S=3.57 v. Mgrammar=2.71) and enjoyable (ML&S=3.36 v. Mgrammar=2). One student, however, expressed mixed feelings about Busuu: “It was interesting to talk with other people who I don't know, but I think there are some problems with people who are available to talk with. I tried more than 10 people to busuutalk, but no one answered. Except for this point, I think Busuu is an interesting website that helps learning English.”

Participants identified a variety of favorite Busuu features. 57% of Grammar participants appreciated the social networking aspect, as reflected in responses such as: “easy to make a friends” and “Because you can talk with many people at the same moment and from different place.” L&S participants’ responses addressed various features of the site: “because I learned more [grammatical] rules”, “this [translator tool] is a very useful tool for chat” and “I might get the feedback from other people that I’ve never met before” [using recording tool]. Participants’ least favorite features included video chatting: “I don't feel comfortable talking with other person who I don't know.”

64% of L&S participants and 57% of Grammar participants said that they would like to use Busuu in the future. Additionally, 86% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants reported that they would recommend Busuu to someone learning English. In terms of their future use of Busuu, L&S participants most often selected learning new vocabulary and helping others, but Grammar students indicated they would use the site in the future to practice reading and grammar (see Table 5).

Table 5How will you use Busuu.com in the future?

Language content Social networking Fun Other

Practicing a skill Question about

grammar

Learn new

vocab

Make friends

Help others

learn my L1

Write Speak

Listen

Read

L&S (n=14)

57% 43% 36% 43% 36% 43% 14% 43% 21%

21%

Grammar (n=7)

71% 14% 29% 57% 57& 29% 43% 29% 14%

0%

Total (n=21)

67% 33% 33% 48% 43% 38% 24% 38% 19%

14%

9

On the whole, 38% of the participants preferred practicing English on Busuu over face-to-face communication (see Table 6). Interestingly, while 57% of Grammar participants preferred face-to-face interaction, only 21% of L&S participants selected this option.

Table 6Which do you prefer for practicing English?

Using Busuu.com Face-to-face BothL&S (n=14) 36% 21% 43%Grammar (n=7) 43% 57% 0%Total (n=21) 38% 33% 29%

Using LivemochaL&S (n=9) 33% 44% 33%Writing (n=7) 17% 29% 57%Total (n=16) 25% 38% 44%

Using English CaféWriting (n=9) 33% 44% 22%Grammar (n= 4) 75% 0% 25%Total (n=13) 46% 31% 23%

Livemocha

A total of 16 participants (L&S n= 9, Writing n=7) completed the Livemocha survey. Use of Livemocha in class. 44% of L&S and 86% of Writing participants reported making friends in addition to their classmates on Livemocha. 78% of L&S and 100% of Writing participants felt comfortable making friends. Consistent with their feelings about Busuu, some L&S participants with negative views were hesitant about making friends via a SN: “I don’t usually make friends out of social networks,” “I’m not used to having online friends,” and “As I mentioned before, I don't like being friends with strangers that I've never talked or met before.” Whereas 38% of Livemocha participants reported conflicting views on adding strangers as online friends, most participants’ expressed a desire to make new friends. Some participants explicitly commented positively on using social networks for language learning: “Because I make friend to practice English,” “It’s nice to make friends who wants to learn Chinese,” and “Because is interesting know about other countries.”

When adding friends, practicing/learning language(s) and age were the factors considered most important by participants in both courses, with 52% each selecting these factors (see Table 7). L&S participants also highly valued a potential friend’s country of origin.

Table 7When adding a friend, what factors did you consider?

Learning or practicing

language(s)

Age Country of origin

Profile picture

Gender Name

L&S (n =9) 43% 50% 50% 21% 21% 21%Writing (n =7) 71% 57% 43% 57% 43% 43%

10

Total (n =16) 52% 52% 48% 33% 29% 29%

Participants in L&S conducted a live chat and posted audio recordings on Livemocha to get feedback via the SN. Unfortunately, only two of them actually received feedback on their audio postings, but both of these participants found that the feedback was helpful. In communicating with others in the network via chatting, L&S participants again reported higher comfort levels with text only (Mtxt=3.89, Mvoice=3.33, Mvideo=2.44). Participants favorably rated the helpfulness of giving and receiving feedback: ML&S=3.67, Mwriting=3. 44% of L&S participants reported that their Livemocha chatting partner had explicitly corrected an error in their L2 production. Additionally, 78% of L&S participants reported noticing a chatting partner’s English error, but only 67% reported pointing out the error.

Use of Livemocha outside class. 50% of the participants indicated that they had used Livemocha in their free time, including 44% from the L&S class and 57% from the Writing class. Considering both courses together, the most popular features used outside class were vocabulary exercises (38%) and adding friends (31%) (see Table 8). 25% of the participants, mostly from the Writing class, worked on grammar exercises outside class.

Table 8Outside of class, how did you use Livemocha?

Language content Social networking N/A

Listening exercises

Vocabulary exercises

Gram

mar

exercises

Making friends

Helping others

learn your L1

Chatting

Video

Audio

Text

L&S(n 9) 0% 22% 0% 22% 22% 0% 22% 0% 33%

Writing(n =7) 14% 57% 57% 43% 0% 29% 14% 43% 29%

Total(n=16) 6% 38% 25% 31% 13% 13% 19% 19% 13%

Perception of Livemocha. In general, the participants reported that Livemocha was helpful for improving their English: ML&S=4, Mwriting=4. 19% of the participants mentioned that they enjoyed the tandem-learning aspect of Livemocha while others commented on the social network features in particular, which allowed them to make “friend with people from all over the country” and “make a lot of relations from other country.” One participant was pleased that the site allowed him to share information about his native country with others including strangers in the network.

Responses varied when participants were asked to name their favorite Livemocha feature. One reported enjoying helping other others to learn their native tongue: “My favorite part of Livemocha was that I can give feedback to other people... I was surprised that there are a lot of people who are interested in my language.” When asked for their least favorite feature of

11

Livemocha, one participant lamented that she did not receive any feedback on her audio recording: “Since I didn’t get any feedback from no one, it was disappointing.”

When asked if they would use the site in the future, all participants in Writing and 67% of the L&S class responded positively. 88 % of the participants said that they would recommend Livemocha to someone learning English, and 50% indicated that they would return to the site in the future to help others learn their native language (see Table 9). Interestingly, details of future use differed between participants in the two courses, possibly reflecting different learning content in the courses.

Table 9If yes, how will you use Livemocha in the future?

Language content Social networking Entertainm

ent

Other

None

Practicew

riting

Practice speaking

Practice listening

Practice reading

Gram

mar

questions

Learn new

vocabulary

Making friends

Help others

learn my L1

L&S (n=9) 22% 33% 22% 11% 0% 11% 22% 56% 22% 11% 11%

Writing (n=7) 43% 43% 43% 57% 71% 71% 57% 43% 29% 0% 0%

Total (n=16) 31% 38% 31% 31% 31% 38% 38% 50% 25% 6% 6%

In terms of learning preferences, 38% preferred practicing English face-to-face and 25% preferred practicing via Livemocha (see Table 6). However, 44% of the participants indicated that they liked both modes of practice equally. There were variations in responses between the two courses, with L&S participants preferring face-to-face practice and Writing participants expressed a preference for both.

English Café

A total of 13 participants (Writing n=9, Grammar n=4) completed the English Café survey.

Use of English Café in class. 33% of Writing and 50% of Grammar participants responded that they made friends on English Café in addition to their classmates, and 44% of Writing and 75% of Grammar participants were comfortable making friends using English Café. Similarly to the use of the other two sites, participants had conflicting responses about making friends: 31% who only made friends with classmates felt comfortable while 15% who had made unknown friends felt uncomfortable. Interestingly, 50% of positive comments on adding friends focused on the utility of the site, with one student commenting directly on the social networking aspect: “I think I can find some people if I have question about English.” Of the 31% of participants who expressed reluctance in adding friends, only one participant admitted hesitance to engage with the social network aspect of the site. When adding friends, learning or practicing languages was the most common factor to consider (77%), as shown in Table 10.

12

Table 10 When adding a friend, what factors did you consider?

Learning or practicing

language(s)Profile picture Age Sex Name

Country of origin Other

Writing(n=9) 78% 44% 33% 33% 33% 22% 0%Grammar(n= 4) 100% 25% 50% 50% 25% 50% 25%Total(n=13) 77% 38% 38% 38% 31% 31% 8%

Finally, the participants indicated that they were neutral or slightly uncomfortable with posting comments on other users’ content on English Café: Mwriting=2.67, Mwriting=3.

Use of English Café outside class. Only 11% of Writing and 25% of Grammar participants indicated that they used English Café outside class. Of those who did use the site for extracurricular purposes, 77% of participants spent at least 30 minutes using the site outside of class (see Table 4).

62% of participants reported that they recorded and posted or reviewed a video during their free time, making this the most popular of the social network features (see Table 11). Additionally, 68% used English Café to do grammar exercises outside class.

Table 11 Outside of class, how did you use English Café?

Language content Social networkingG

ramm

ar exercise

Vocab.

exercise

Listeningexercise

Record or

review a video

Help others

learn your L1

Com

ment on

others’ posts

Forum discuss-ion

Make friends

Writing(n=9) 56% 22% 22% 78% 0% 11% 11% 0%

Grammar

(n= 4)75% 25% 25% 25% 25% 0% 0% 25%

Total(n=13) 62% 23% 23% 62% 8% 8% 8% 8%

Perception of English Cafe. Participants reported that English Café was useful for improving their English: Mwriting=3.5, Mgrammar=3.33. Their favorite features of English Café were similar across both courses: 38% mentioned the class video feature, citing the usefulness of this feature and their level of enjoyment. Comments included “many pictures and videos. They are very useful to me,” “Classes' video. Because they are very useful to learn more English” and “video, more fun.” In contrast, participants’ least favorite features were less clear. 31% reported not

13

having a least favorite feature, and another 23% offered ambiguous responses such as “I don’t know.” One participant reported discomfort with the social networking feature of adding online friends to the profile.

Positively, 78% of Writing and 50% of Grammar participants indicated that they would like to use English Café in the future. In terms of specific purposes, 62% indicated that they would return to find help with grammar-related questions, while 54% chose writing practice (see Table 12).

Table 12 If yes, how will you use English Café in the future?

Language content Social networking

Fun Questions about

grammar

Practicing a skill Learn new

vocab

Make friends

Help others learn

my L1Write Read Listen Speak

Writing(n=9) 67% 44% 44% 44% 44% 22% 22% 33% 11%

Grammar(n= 4) 50% 75% 50% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%

Total(n=13) 62% 54% 46% 38% 38% 15% 23% 31% 15%

In terms of learning preferences, 46% of all participants preferred practicing English via English Café as compared with 31% who preferred face-to-face practice (see Table 7). 75% of the Grammar participants preferred to use English Café, whereas 44% of the Writing participants preferred face-to-face communication.

Overall, 67% of Writing and 75% of Grammar participants reported that they would recommend English Café to someone learning English. When asked for final comments regarding English Cafe, most participants offered positive responses, describing the website as “useful for people learning English.” Only 15% of the responses were negative.

Discussion

As one of many Web 2.0 applications, social networks reflect the social, personalized, interactive, and participatory nature central to Web 2.0 technology. Two main affordances of SNS are to enable users to connect to others, either someone they know or to strangers, and to encourage learner autonomy and collaboration in a digital social space so that users with different abilities and skills can serve as the knowledgeable other in building a distributed knowledge base for meeting their language needs. We were particularly interested in determining what ESL students think when they are asked to perform purposeful learning tasks on language learning websites with SN features. We wished to explore how such sites could be used as teaching and learning tools both in formal and informal language learning contexts.

14

Because our goal was to examine the extent language learning sites with SN features can facilitate the learning of language, each learning task was intentionally created for students to perform a language task using social network features offered by the sites. It is, therefore, important to point out that the design of this study introduces a particular kind of learning context where both pre-assigned “closed” as well as open-ended tasks are included in formal instruction. In addition, completely free exploration was encouraged outside of class.

Overall the participants reported positive experiences interacting with peers via SN, although some expressed conflicting views. The results revealed that several factors played important roles in participant satisfaction with their networking experiences in the social spaces provided by the three sites: overall comfort level, language proficiency levels, preferred communication modes for connecting with others, and the design of the websites.

Comfort Using Social Networks

Although there were some variation, in general, two-thirds of the participants made friends and reported feeling comfortable making friends using these SNS. About one-third of the participants had mixed views about making friends through social networks: They indicated a reluctance to make friends with strangers, but were comfortable making friends with a classmate or someone they knew. This finding does not appear to be site specific and is consistent with previous findings (Brick, 2011; Harrison & Thomas, 2009). When considering adding a friend to their circle, finding those who are similar in age and country of origin were important factors. Given these findings, when designing classroom activities, instructors who wish to incorporate SNS need to pay particular attention to students’ comfort level in using such tools and encourage them to begin with their classmates, then move to a circle of friends in their age group before reaching out to complete strangers.

The positive feedback provided by the participants about their experiences using the three sites highlight the affordances of using social network features to connect to native or other target language speakers to form a learning community and practice language skills in an authentic setting (Conole & Alevizou, 2010; Gee, 2004). Participants particularly valued language practice opportunities (e.g. structured speaking and writing activities, vocabulary and grammar exercises, and unstructured interactions) provided by the websites. These findings show clearly that the participants were receptive to SN features as tools for language learning (Forlano, 2009).

Communication Modes Preferred In Connecting With Others

A fundamental aspect of SNS is that it allows people to form networks, and networks make it possible for language learners to practice their new skills in authentic interactions with friends or strangers. Networks, for example, can provide opportunities for language learners to chat with and receive feedback from others. These three SN sites provide a variety of means for communication including email, forums, and chat (text, audio, and video). Although chatting itself is not a SN feature, SN is rarely used by itself. Web 2.0 features are inextricably connected and most Web 2.0 applications are used in combination to achieve a particular language learning goal. In this case, ESL students connected to others in their circle via SN and practiced English

15

skills via chat. Of the three chatting modes available in these sites, participants were most comfortable with text mode and least comfortable with video, especially when connecting with a stranger. Although some participants were comfortable sharing photos and videos, they were reluctant to connect to strangers using video in real-time. Responses also showed that those with higher proficiency levels were more comfortable than the novice participants in all modes. The reluctance in connecting with others via video indicated the challenge of connecting to unfamiliar people through SN and suggests that instructors need to consider learners’ preferences when incorporating SN as a teaching tool. Website designers should make a variety of communication modes available to facilitate language instruction and take different learners’ characteristics into account.

Influence of Language Proficiency Level

Content topics and proficiency level also appeared to influence the participants’ use of the sites. Participants’ use of the sites outside the class varied according to proficiency level: Participants in the beginning courses spent more time practicing their English than the advanced level students. Not surprisingly, they all tended to look for activities related to the specific class content they were studying such as listening or grammar. We were especially pleased that all participants intended to return to the websites in the future to practice English skills. This finding is an encouraging sign indicating the potential of SN tools for language learning outside the classroom, especially for beginners. Most language learners visit sites such as the ones studied here to improve their language skills,,SNS can provide an important means for them to be connected with people beyond their immediate circles. In developing language learning websites, creating interactive and useful language learning activities should be the primary goals. Web 2.0 tools particularly social networks offer language learners significant new opportunities for language interaction.

Importance of Receiving Feedback

Consistent with a sociocultural view of SLA, receiving feedback from other users, especially native speakers, is a very important affordance social network websites can provide (Brick, 2011). Participants had favorable perceptions toward the sites when they received feedback. However, actually receiving feedback was challenging since network participants are not obligated to supply feedback (Jee & Park, 2009). Herein lies an important challenge of SNS. Many participants reported that they did not receive feedback, and (the quality of feedback responses varied among the three sites. While chatting on Busuu, Grammar participants received more explicit correction on accuracy than L&S participants. Grammar participants also noticed a chatting partner’s error slightly more often than those in the L&S course, and almost everyone pointed out their partner’s mistakes. Such reciprocal feedback (Schmidt, 2010), when it occurs, illustrates the benefits of social network sites as a tool in mediating language development (Harrison & Thomas, 2009). However, the lack of feedback can negatively influence users’ perception of a site and interest in its future use. For students to continue to use SN websites as a learning tool and maintain a community, the instructor and students must be diligent in providing peer support and feedback to supplement what is offered online. Support is especially important for those who are less comfortable or do not see the potential value of SNS.

16

Design Features

All three sites allowed participants to make friends and collaborate with other users. However, the participants’ responses showed differences based on the site designs. For instance, Livemocha and Busuu have embedded chat features, whereas English Café does not. Busuu users are free to personalize their learning by choosing the order in which they complete each lesson, whereas Livemocha users have to follow a more linear track from one lesson to lesson, making the learner less autonomous and learning less personalized (De Weber et al., 2007; Solomon & Schrum, 2007). On the other hand, English Café does not provide its own lessons but is a space for users to post their own lessons for language learners, thus relying on user-generated content (Duffy, 2011). Regarding participants’ expected future uses of the sites: Busuu was chosen for future writing and reading practice, Livemocha for building social networks for language learning purposes as well as to practice speaking English and learn new vocabulary, and English Café was chosen for grammar questions and to practice writing and reading.

So we end with a question about social network sites: Which design features actually facilitate language learning? A possible direction for future research would be usability studies on site-specific features to determine which design features are most accessible or useful for language learners.

Conclusion

We examined university ESL students’ use and perception of three popular language learning websites with social network features. The findings demonstrated a number of benefits that SNS offer to extend learning beyond classrooms into online language learning communities. The results also found important challenges associated with the use of SNS as teaching and learning tools. When incorporating SNS, instructors need to be aware of their limitations and take measures to provide support for learners to develop their language proficiency.

(6006 words)References

Barsky, E. & Purdon, M. (2006). Introducing Web 2.0: Social networking and social bookmarking for health librarians. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 27(3), 65-67.

boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,13. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html

Brick, B. (2011). Social networking sites and language learning. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 2(3), 18-31.

Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in higher

education. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from from:http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/EvidenceNet/Conole_Alevizou_2010.pdf 

17

Cook, V. (2008). Second language learning and language teaching. London: Hodder Education. De Weber, B., Mechant, P., Veevaete, P., & Hauttekeete, L. (2007). Web 2.0: Social software for

educational use. Paper presented at the ninth IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia, Taichung, Taiwan.

Duffy, P. (2011). Facebook or faceblock: Cautionary tales exploring the rise of social networking

within tertiary education. In C. McLoughlin & M. Lee (Eds.), Web 2.0-based E-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 284-300). Hershey, PA: Information Science.

Forlano, D. (2009). Social networking for language learning. The Language Educator, 4(1), 43-45.

Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning. New York: Routledge. Harrison, R., & Thomas, M. (2009). Identity in online communities: Social networking sites and

language learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society, 7(2), 109-124.

Horwitz, K. E. (2012). Becoming a language teacher: A practical guide to second language

learning and teaching. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Jee, M. J., & Park, M. J. (2009). Livemocha as an online language-learning community. CALICO Journal, 26(2), 448-456.

Lantolf, J. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 67-109.

McBride, K. (2009). Social networking sites in foreign language classes: Opportunities for re-creation. 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.

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical

choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. Paper presented at the Ascilite Conference, Singapore.

O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next

generation of software. Retrieved September 7, 2008, from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/or eilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html .

Piaget, J. (1932). The language and thought of the child (M. Gabain, Trans.). London: Routledge

& Kegan Paul Ltd. (Original work published 1923). Reinhardt, J., & Zander, V. (2011). Social networking in an intensive English program

classroom: A language socialization perspective. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 1-19.

18

Schmidt, C. (2010). Livemocha and the power of social language learning. International House Journal of Education and Development, 28(4), Retrieved from http://ihjournal.com/Livemocha-and-the-power-of-social-language-learning

Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Washington, DC:

International Society for Technology in Education.

Stevenson, M., & Liu, M. (2010). Learning a language with Web 2.0: Exploring the use of social networking features of foreign language learning websites. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 233-259.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park Calif.: Sage Publications.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Zourou, K. (2012). On the attractiveness of social media for language learning: a look at the state

of the art. In F. Demaizière & K. Zourou, (eds.) Special issue “language learning and social media: (r)evolution?” ALSIC. 15(1). http://alsic.revues.org/2436

19

Appendix A

Brief Descriptions of Three Selected Sites

Site Description Screenshot of homepage

Busuu incentivizes learner participation by awarding badges and “busuu berries” for giving comments on other learner’s work and completing activities. Learners can give them to friends on Busuu or earn the ability to form a discussion group within the forum.

Livemocha has a reward system, awarding tokens when learners provide feedback. Those who receive feedback can also rate their peer’s comments. Livemocha has a variety of social networking features, such as learner profiles with personal details, including relationship status, hobbies, and age, in addition to a “wall” feature on the homepage where the actions of a learner’s friends are posted.

English Café provides a variety of learning materials, including video and audio lessons created by learners. Learners interact with each other by posting comments that support their uploaded videos, audio files, photos, and documents. To find a chat partner, learners post their Skype address on a forum or simply join or create groups in a forum for asynchronous communication. Finally, users can pose questions to native speakers on the site who serve as tutors.

20

Appendix B

Description of the Learning Tasks

Website Class Tasks

Busuu Speaking & Listening Adv.

1. Students find a classmate on the network, chat with him or her using the video feature, and then add the person to their network. They talk about two inventions, the water purifier and the solar oven, two topics covered in class. They speak for 10 minutes, trying to convince the other that their chosen invention is better. Afterwards, students write a short report about the discussion, using expressions for agreeing and disagreeing to express their opinions.

2. For pronunciation, students listen to an audio recording of sentences or words and then repeat back the same material while recording it on the website. Their recordings are posted for the community to offer suggestions.English-speaking native and near native speakers then have the opportunity to offer feedback on the students’ pronunciation. (See screenshot in Appendix C)

3. After selecting a vocabulary lesson from Busuu’s English courses, students find a stranger online to do a video chat with and try to use the vocabulary that was just learned. This activity gives students the opportunity to put vocabulary into a meaningful context and test out new words.

Busuu Grammar & Idioms Beginner High

1. To practice grammar previously covered in class, students find a classmate online and have a text chat about a topic from class (cities of the future). Students are encouraged to use the following structures: a. Will + base verb , b. If clause + will + base verb, and c. I think + will + base verb.

2. To practice grammar previously covered in class, students choose a friend in his/ her network and write a message about what he or she will be doing over winter break. Students are encouraged to use the following structures: a ‘be going to’ - with a time frame, to show something in the future based on something in the present, to indicate specific dates. b. 'will'- with a time frame, with simple present to express future time, to show future conditional, to show future time clause. Students ask for feedback about their grammar.

3. The intention is to determine how useful a social network can be when a student has a specific question in mind. So that

21

students can utilize the social network they have formed up to this point, they ask for help on grammar directly. Students think of three grammar mistakes they often make, choose two, and then message a friend in their network asking the friend to help them understand the grammatical structure better. Students then post the same two grammar issues on the discussion forum within a group dealing with grammar or any questions.

Livemocha

Speaking & Listening Adv

1. Students find any person available on the network to begin a video chat. They are allowed to discuss any topic of their choice. They are also encouraged to consider adding the person to their networks.

2. Students focus on their pronunciation and give a short speech about the causes of global warming. After listening to the recordings other members make on the same topic, students then record themselves explaining what they think are the causes of global warming. The following week students check back on their submission to see what feedback the community has left. (See screenshot in Appendix C)

3. Students listen to a native speaker’s audio sample, taking note of where the stresses occur in the English sentences. Then, they record themselves reciting the practice sentences. Students submit their recording to one of their friends in their network so that a native speaker can offer comments and suggestions. Students check back to see what kind of feedback they have received. In turn, they help others learn their native language by responding to the material that was submitted by other users.

Livemocha

Writing –Beginner Low

Students share information about their own culture with the online community. First, as a model, they read the posts of other members about culture in the United States. Then they add to the user-generated content of the site by posting their own stories about life and culture in their home country. Students check back a week later for comments.

English Café

Writing –Beginner Low

Students join a group called “World Culture,” where they share their culture with friends from different countries. Students post comments by uploading a photo that shows some aspect of their culture and writing sentences to describe the people and objects in the photo. They also reply to one of their group members’ comments. (See screenshot in Appendix C)

English Café

Grammar & Idioms Beginner high

Students join a group called “The English Forum” and learn the “present perfect tense.” Students watch the video of the present-perfect grammar lesson created by one of the group members.

22

After watching the video, they write at least two sentences using the present perfect tense about a place they have been. Students also reply to one of their group members’ comments to evaluate their friends’ sentences. In addition, on the Ask & Answer page, they ask a grammar question and find answers offered by native speakers.

23

Appendix C

Screenshots of social network features available in the selected sites

Busuu

Listening & Speaking activities:Students identified a topic that interested them, listened to an audio recording of a few sentences, and recorded the sentences on the website for feedback.

Livemocha

Speaking activity: After practicing pronunciation and reviewing other members’ submissions, students recorded a speech and then submitted this audio to the website for feedback.

24

English Café

Writing activity: Students joined a group called “World Culture” and shared their culture with friends from different countries by describing pictures they had posted.

25

Appendix D

ESL AND SOCIAL MEDIA: SPEAKING AND LISTENING TASKS:PROJECT OVERVIEWThank you for participating in our study in language learning and social media. With your help, we will have a better understanding of the usefulness of websites, like Busuu.com. Over the next few weeks, you will create a profile, complete tasks, and do surveys to give us feedback about the sites, most of which will be done as homework. If you have any questions about the tasks, please contact your instructor.

BUSUU.COM

WEEK ONE – PROFILE, TASK 1, ONLINE SURVEY, EXPAND NETWORK (10/27/11)A. Create Profile

1. Go to busuu.com 2. Click on “Join now for free!”3. On the registration page, fill out your information, select English as the language you are

learning, select your native language, and then click on “Join Now for Free!”4. Go to the e-mail address you used, open the e-mail from busuu.com, and activate your

account. A new window will open and you can enter “Additional Personal Info”. Then click on “submit”. Your profile is now complete. If a window appears, click on “homepage”.

5. After you create your profile, let your teacher know your username, so she (or he?) can write it on the board.

B. Task 1 Instructions (In Class)In this task you will have a video chat with a friend online and then e-mail a short report about what you talked about.

1. From your homepage, find the Friends tab on the toolbar across the top of page, then select “Find new friends.” Add all of your fellow classmates as friends by searching their user names.

2. Click on “Home” and scroll down to a friend who is currently online and click on the

blue start busuutalk bubble icon that appears next to their name. 3. A chat window will open. In the lower right corner next to your profile icon, click on

"mic off" to turn it on and "video off" to turn it on.

26

4. Conduct a video chat with your friend for at least 2 minutes about the two inventions, the water purifier and the

solar oven. Try to persuade him or her that your invention is better. Use expressions for agreeing and disagreeing to express your opinion.

5. Now, e-mail a short description of what you chatted about to your friend. In a Word document,

summarize the conversation and feedback in three sentences, put your assigned number at the top, save the file as Listening and Speaking Task 1, and email it to learning.english.2.0@gmail.com

C. Complete Online Survey (In Class)

1. Go to this website: http://tinyurl.com/esl-surveydemo2. Please complete this survey.

D. Explore busuu.com and Expand Network (Homework)

On your own, explore different features of busuu.com. Upload your photo to your profile. Feel free to meet new people, add more friends to your network, and chat with them to practice English.