1. The document discusses mobile language learning and the use of apps and social media for language acquisition. It introduces activity theory as a framework for understanding mobile language learning. 2. Key topics covered include the opportunities and challenges of using digital tools for second language learning, including collaboration, spontaneous language use, and developing learner autonomy. Mobile apps allow learning through activities like games and social media use. 3. The document models mobile language learning as an activity system and discusses the roles of different actors like teachers and learners. Practical exercises are suggested using mobile devices and apps to support language learning goals.

1. Mobile language learning:
from social media to
gaming praxis
Catherine Caws
Bernadette Perry
University of Victoria
ccaws@uvic.ca
@katrinrulokoz
@DL2LLab
© Catherine Caws
1Thursday, June 9, 16

2. Before we start
• connect your ipads to the Internet using
the Delta network (no password)
• use the ipad or your own device to open
your Twitter account
• if you do not have a Twitter account, you
can use a note taking app
• make sure that your photo or tweet
includes the hashtag #app4L2L
© Catherine Caws
2Thursday, June 9, 16

3. Goals of the session
1. Redefining learning in a digital world
i. what does it mean to teach and learn (a) language(s) in
2016?
ii. Activity Theory (AT) at a glance
2. Uses, opportunities, challenges, limits of digital L2 Learning
3. Roles of actors: teacher/mentor/learner
4. Mobile apps: byod (bring your own device)
5. Practical exercises using i-pads or your own device
a) Affordances? Usage?
b) Critical survey and discussions
© Catherine Caws
3Thursday, June 9, 16

4. Research lab on learner-computer
interactions (LCI)
http://dl2learninglab.com/
instruments
peers
tasks
L2
learner
© Catherine Caws
4Thursday, June 9, 16

5. © Catherine Caws
5Thursday, June 9, 16

6. Many people also fear that reading
and writing are “dying” in the face of
new digital media.What they really
fear is not that reading and writing
are actually dying, but that some of
our previously favored ways of
reading and writing are actually
dying or becoming much less
prevalent […] Reading and writing
are, if anything, increasing in the
digital world, but they are also
changing. (Gee & Hayes, 2011, p.21)
© Catherine Caws
6Thursday, June 9, 16

7. The artefact (instrument)
• Concept, object, or a process that is culturally grounded: a hammer, a pen, a
software, a web site, a text, a word, langage, …
• The artefact mediates the activity. The artefact can also be created,
transformed or modified during the activity (i.e. the artefact is not static, such
as language) (Kuutti, 1996)
• The artefact is often dynamic and socially constructed/motivated (Lantolf
& Thorne, 2006, p.67)
• Selber (2004) defines the computer as a cultural artefact (WhileVygotsky
would probably talk about a “tool for work” e.g., Friedrich 2012)
© Catherine Caws
7Thursday, June 9, 16

8. The activity (as seen by Vygotsky)
instrument
subject object
“Les deux types d’instrument (matériel ou psychologique) fonctionnent comme des
éléments intermédiaires, ils sont intercalés entre l’activité de l’homme et son
objet”. (Friedrich, 2010, p.60)
© Catherine Caws
8Thursday, June 9, 16

9. The Activity system as seen by Engeström (1987, p. 78):
an extended version ofVygotsky, then Leontiev
activity systems
© Catherine Caws
9Thursday, June 9, 16

10. Activity system (Engeström1987, p. 78)
used to illustrate the use of Twitter
to communicate in a L2
Twitter
L2 learners
languaging
production
exploration
tweets
norms &
conventions
individuals &
groups who
share the
same goal or
instrument
Who does what and
when?
© Catherine Caws
10Thursday, June 9, 16

11. Usages & Opportunities
• Collaboration/ co-creation of content/
creativity
• Direct, and often spontaneous engagement
with the language in authentic settings
• Recycling/Repurposing today’s learners socia
media skills
• Establishing a learning ecology
• Easy focus on form (such as during active
digital reading)(e.g., Ellis, 1999)
• Creating a learner corpus
‣ data driven learning
© Catherine Caws
11Thursday, June 9, 16

12. Becoming autonomous
• autonomy of learning
does not exclude the act
of belonging to a
learning community
• meta/cognitive and
affective strategies to
develop autonomy (e.g.,
Oxford, 1990)
© Catherine Caws
12Thursday, June 9, 16

13. Challenges & limitations
• Unsecure or unstable Networks (or lack of)
• Perceptions and expectations of participants/learners
• Space issue (classroom are rarely designed to
encourage interactive and collaborative L2 learning)
• Affordances of instruments
• Strict institutional regulations (such as issue concerning
tools for which data is stored in the US)
• Digital divide if using the byod approach (network, tool,
strategy, ...)
© Catherine Caws
13Thursday, June 9, 16

14. Roles of actors
Instructor Learner
Trainer Trainee
Mentor Researcher
© Catherine Caws
14Thursday, June 9, 16

15. Learning on your
device
© Catherine Caws
15Thursday, June 9, 16

16. Example 1: Gamified learning
Explorez:
Language learning quest game in an
augmented reality environment
© Catherine Caws
16Thursday, June 9, 16

17. PE 1: Practical exercises &
comments on various apps
• Recording a text or speech to test your pronunciation
‣ In Settings, under General, Language & Region, add one or multiple languages.
Enable Siri (iPhone or IPad). Use any note taking (Notes, Onenote (office),
Notability, Evernote, Supernote, .. ) apps to record yourself. If Siri can understand
you, there is a good chance that your pronunciation is close to that of a native
speaker.
• Recording, translating, interpretating (practicing oral
translation)
‣ This exercise works well with the Supernote app. Each student translates orally a
sentence that is presenting to her/him on a board.They translate from French
into English (a more natural order if you are an English Speaker) or vice versa.
Then the recording is played and students must re-translate into the first
language. Sentences produced by students are compared to the original ones,
allowing conversation regarding language (lexicon, syntax, morphology, etc).
Excellent exercise for critical analysis of languages.
© Catherine Caws
17Thursday, June 9, 16

18. PE 1 (...): reading online [What activity could you imagine?]
• Dynamic reading
Using ibooks, the reader/learner selects a book to read in the L2. Using the search function, a word can be selected to
show other occurrences of the same word in the text (hence focusing on forms in context), to look up the word in a
dictionary (define function), to annotate (note function), to underline (for grammatical analysis for instance, highlight
function), to copy an extract (copy) and share it (share).Any note that is added to the original text can then be shared via
email or SMS (please note that the sharing function works on mobile device but not necessarily on the computer
version). Figures 1 et 2 below illustrate some of these functions:
Figure 1: digital book (computer version) Figure 2: digital book (mobile version)
© Catherine Caws
18Thursday, June 9, 16

19. PE 2: words in French
• Mobiles dictionnaries
‣ Antidote ardoise 2
‣ dictionnaire (CNRTL)
‣ Robert mobile
Q:What advantages/disadvantages of digital
dictionariesVS paper dictionaries?
© Catherine Caws
19Thursday, June 9, 16

20. EP 3: the pedagogical scenario
• In groups of 2 or 3, using your device or an iPad
• Select an app ( artefact/ instrument)
• Think of an activity that is directly related to a learning objective/outcome
• (re) think about the app you selected: what motivated your choice?
• Using the AT figure, try to imagine every component of the activity
• How will the activity be organized/managed?
• How will it be evaluated? (success/ failure)
• Prepare your scenario using Notability
© Catherine Caws
20Thursday, June 9, 16

21. The pedagogical scenario (adapted from
Mangenot and Louveau, 2006)
‣Define the learners (subject)
‣Define the objective (short/long
terms, abstract or concrete, generic
or specific)
‣Affordances of the instrument(s)
(artefact) and of other tools used
‣Constraints (rules, time, network, etc)
‣Define/imagine the role played by
each participant (Division of labor)
‣Consider the context (language
learning community, inside/outside
the institution, etc)
© Catherine Caws
21Thursday, June 9, 16

22. The pedagogical scenario (adapted from
Mangenot and Louveau, 2006)
‣Define the learners (subject)
‣Define the objective (short/long
terms, abstract or concrete, generic
or specific)
‣Affordances of the instrument(s)
(artefact) and of other tools used
‣Constraints (rules, time, network, etc)
‣Define/imagine the role played by
each participant (Division of labor)
‣Consider the context (language
learning community, inside/outside
the institution, etc)
© Catherine Caws
21Thursday, June 9, 16

23. Selected references
Besnard, C. (1995) Les contributions de la psychologie cognitive à l’enseignement stratégique des langues secondes au niveau universistaire. The Canadian
modern language review, 51(3): 426-441.
Bertin, J.C. & Gravé, P. (2010) In favor of a model of didactic ergonomics. In Bertin, J.C., Gravé, P., & J.-P. Narcy-Combes (Eds.), Second language distance
learning and teaching: theoretical perspectives and didactic ergonomics (pp.1-36). IGI Global USA.
Chalmers, P. (2003) The role of cognitive theory in human–computer interface. Computers in human behaviour, 19: 593-607.
Engeström, Y, 1987. Learning by expanding: an activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki : Orienta-Konsultit.
Friedrich, J. (2010). Lev Vygotski: médiation, apprentissage, développement. Genève : Carnet des Sciences de l’Education
Ellis, R. (1999) Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gee, J. P.& Hayes, E. (2011) Language and learning in the digital age. New York: Routledge.
Oxford, R. (1990) Language learning strategies-What every teacher should know. New York:Newbury House Publishers.
Lantolf J.P., Thorne S.L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006) CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Norman, D. (1991) Cognitive artifacts. In Carroll, J. M. (ed.) Designing interaction: psychology at the human-computer interface. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 17-38.
Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies : approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Paris: Armand Colin.
Raby, F. (2005) A user-centered ergonomic approach to CALL research. In Egbert J.L. & G.M.Petrie (Eds.) CALL research perspectives (pp.179-190). New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Selber, S. (2004) Multiliteracies for a Digital Age. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Vygotski, L. (1997). Pensée et langage. Paris : La dispute.
Warschauer, M. (2011) Learning in the Cloud: How (and Why) to Transform Schools with Digital Media. New York: teachers College Press.
© Catherine Caws
22Thursday, June 9, 16