Communication Strategies in synchronous CMC and face-to-face interactions

1,860 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,860
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Communication Strategies in synchronous CMC and face-to-face interactions

  1. 1. Communication strategies in synchronous CMC and face-to-face interaction Cristina Palomeque Faculty of Education EUROCALL 2007 – Coleraine, Northern Ireland
  2. 2. Index <ul><li>Aims </li></ul><ul><li>Framework of the study </li></ul><ul><li>Research Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Data collection </li></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul><ul><li>Future research </li></ul>
  3. 3. Aims of this study <ul><li>To describe and compare the communication strategies (CS) used in online synchronous interaction and </li></ul><ul><li>face-to-face interaction </li></ul><ul><li>To provide an opportunity for learners to practice the target language out of class . </li></ul><ul><li>To help learners engage in face-to-face interaction through practice in CMC </li></ul>
  4. 4. Framework of the study <ul><li>Interaction hypothesis (Long, 1983) – negotiated interaction - language learning </li></ul><ul><li>CMC - negotiated interaction (Lee, 2001) </li></ul><ul><li>Communicative competence (Hymes, 1971) - language learning through use </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Strategic competence: communication strategies </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Framework of the study <ul><li>Language use, embracing language learning, comprises the actions perfomed by persons who (…) develop a range of competences, both general and in particular communicative language competences (…) activating those strategies which seem most appropriate to carrying out the tasks to be accomplished (…) </li></ul><ul><li>CEFR (2001: 9) </li></ul>
  6. 6. Research Questions <ul><li>RQ 1: What communication strategies do learners employ during task-based synchronous online interaction and during face-to-face interaction? </li></ul><ul><li>RQ 2: How do students deal with the distance factor in synchronous text-based online interaction? How do they achieve proximity? </li></ul>
  7. 7. Data collection: Context <ul><ul><li>University of Barcelona </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A group of 1st year university students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Training to be primary teachers of English </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Native speakers of Catalan and/or Spanish </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>English as a Foreign Language I (B2) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Heterogeneous level of proficiency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Blended learning: class + VLE (Moodle) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assessment: exam + portfolio </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Data Collection: Tasks <ul><ul><li>Chosen topic: should people be allowed to have weapons? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Discussion task in groups of 4 in a text-based chat </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Post their findings and answer to other classmates through a forum </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Face-to-face debate on the subject </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ For and against” composition </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. CS found in this study: Repair strategies <ul><li>Self-repair </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AG: imagine you hear a sound at night... / during the night </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Other-repair </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RA: countries of first world sells warm to countries third world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: Weapons you mean, don't you? </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. CS found in this study: Understanding (input) <ul><li>Expressing non-understanding </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: Don't you just love being a guinea pig ? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RA: guinea pig. sorry but i don´t understand </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Asking for clarification </li></ul><ul><ul><li>MP: can you xplain? </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. CS found in this study: Understanding (output) <ul><li>Comprehension check </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RA: I don’t sure that you understand me </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Rephrasing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: and what do they say 'bout peoplo who dies? I mean citizens </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MG: sorry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IG: I mean … in America there're a lot of people who have died due to guns and things like that...do the NRA say sth about it?? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Definition / Explanation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: have U seen Bowling for Colombine?? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MG: no </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: okey, it's quite interesting to see. It's a movie... </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. CS found in this study: Help <ul><li>Direct appeal for help </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: girls, how can I add some faces, smiles and things like these?? no idea lol I'm awful with computers!! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Indirect appeal for help </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: and what do they say 'bout people who dies? I mean citizens </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MG: sorry </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. CS found in this study: L1-based strategies <ul><li>Code-switching </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RA : no te rias por mis faltas,OK? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Literal translation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AF : it sounds to me but I haven’t seen it </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Foreignizing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AG: some studios shown that people who have got weapons, use them not only at home... but also in the street </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. CS found in this study: Word modification <ul><li>Similar sounding words </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RA: countries of first world sells warm to countries third world </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Word creation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>CC : A man was driving with her car his car and he choked with a policeman car </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. CS found in this study: Miscellaneous <ul><li>Message abandonment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AG: do you remember Farenheit 9/11? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AF: I haven't seen it... </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AG: no matter </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Fillers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AF: wel l... if you want we can start and they will join us then... </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Imitation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: I can't believe that finally we're talking about the same thing.. .lol : ) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MG: Gema, do you like the guns? I don't belive it. You are a dangerous girl! Lol </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. CS found in this study: Paralinguistic strategies <ul><ul><li>Capitalizing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Emoticons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Onomatopeia </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contextual cues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abbreviation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Punctuation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gestures and mime (debate) </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Results <ul><li>RQ 1: What communication strategies do learners employ during task-based synchronous online interaction and during face-to-face interaction? </li></ul>
  18. 18. Results - RQ1 - Chat <ul><li>Most used chat communication strategies: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Paralinguistic (56%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fillers (10%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-correction (7%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Comprehension checks (5%) </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Results - RQ1 - Chat <ul><li>Paralinguistic strategies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Punctuation - MG: safe?????????????? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abbreviations - IC: What 'bout the NRA? tell me sth 'bout it please </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. Results - RQ1 - Chat <ul><li>2. Fillers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Gain time: well </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AF: well... if you want we can start and they will join us then... </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dynamize interaction: OK </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IC: okey, well ladies!! c'mon </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Results - RQ1 - Chat <ul><li>3. Self-correction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mistype - AB: Hello Laura, how are yoy ? / you? </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Results - RQ 1 - Debate <ul><li>Most used debate communication strategies: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Paralinguistic (38%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fillers (27%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-correction (13%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Literal translation (6%) </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Results RQ1 - debate <ul><li>1. Paralinguistic </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mime (80%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Emphasis (20%) </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. Results RQ1 - debate <ul><li>2. Fillers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Thinking: umm, ahh </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gaining time: OK, I mean, I don’t know, whatever </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>- IG: OK umm my name is Irene </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>- AF: I don’t know anybody but I saw it on TV or whatever </li></ul></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Results RQ1 - debate <ul><li>3. Self-correction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Form </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- IG: you think that weapons is not are not the problem </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Meaning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- IC: weapons are really useful... I mean... weapons are not useful for the dialogue </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Results - RQ2 <ul><li>RQ 2: How do students deal with the distance factor in synchronous text-based online interaction? How do they achieve proximity? </li></ul>
  27. 27. Results - RQ2
  28. 28. Results - RQ2
  29. 29. Results - RQ2 Non-task related interaction
  30. 30. Results and conclusions <ul><li>Similar CS in chat and debate. </li></ul><ul><li>Great ammount of paralinguistic strategies and self-correction. </li></ul><ul><li>Absence of other-correction . </li></ul><ul><li>Students adjusted their input/output according to their interlocutor. </li></ul><ul><li>Students used a number of strategies during the chat to achieve proximity . </li></ul><ul><li>Different degree of participation in chat and debate  different tasks should be designed to cater for different learning styles. </li></ul>
  31. 31. Students’ opinion <ul><li>Gathered through questionnaires and portfolio comments </li></ul><ul><li>Positive experience </li></ul><ul><li>Chat: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Helped them organize ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Helped them learn new language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provided a comfortable environment to speak in </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Was not as immediate or as close as a face-to-face conversation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Debate </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sense of achievement as they were able to communicate their ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Some did not participate because of their shyness and perceived lack of proficiency. </li></ul></ul>
  32. 32. Future research: Virtual Worlds <ul><li>What is it? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Online environment. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2D or 3D immersive enviroment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Participants - avatars </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Participants control and design their avatars and world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Users can interact with other users and create objects. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Freedom to do things you cannot do in “real life”. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Examples: Second Life, Active Worlds </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. Future research: Second Life <ul><li>3D virtual reality platform </li></ul><ul><li>Synchronous text and voice interaction </li></ul><ul><li>Avatar </li></ul><ul><li>Navigation: walk, run, fly, ‘teleport’ </li></ul><ul><li>Participants have an active role in building in the virtual world </li></ul>
  34. 34. Future research: Second Life
  35. 35. Future research <ul><li>CS in virtual worlds </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural differences in the use of CS </li></ul><ul><li>Different way of communication </li></ul><ul><li>Add on: sense of “presence” </li></ul><ul><li>Text-based and voice  different learning styles </li></ul><ul><li>Learning by doing </li></ul>
  36. 36. Thank you for your attention! Cristina Palomeque [email_address]

×