Using Skype in a Primary Class: A Case Study
Resum
Es difícil negar l’important rol de les noves tecnologies per comunicar-se en el món globalitzat en el que vivim. Per aquesta raó, els discents haurien de tenir aquest fet en compte i deixar als infants construir els seu coneixement a través de l’aprenentatge del funcionament d’aquestes eines.
En el context del TEFL, la comunicació a través dels ordinadors pot convertir-se en una eina potent per l’aprenentatge, ja que dóna significat i realitat a les pràctiques i activitats didàctiques. Aquesta recerca, arrelada a la teoria sociocultural, mostra la implementació d’una activitat interaccional a través de l’ús de l’Skype i aporta dades que recolza el potencial dels recursos digitals per l’aprenentatge d’una llengua estrangera, ja que aquests poden funcionar com una eina mediadora que incrementa la motivació de l’alumnat i els anima a interactuar entre ells.
Paraules clau
teoria sociocultural, TIC, CMC, interacció, mediacióReferències
Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish. Language Learning & Technology, 120-136.
Breen, M., & Candlin, C. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1: 89-102.
Brooks, L., & Swain, M. (2001). Collaborative writing and sources of feedback: How they support second language learning. OISE/UT manuscript.
Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. A J. V. (Ed.) Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskyan, (pp. 21-34). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Charmaz, K. (1995). Grounded theory. In J. Smith, R. Harré, & L. Langenhove, Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27-65). London: Sage Publications.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: SAGE Publications.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1980). Research methods in education. London: Croom Helm.
Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1995). Brave new schools: Challenging cultural. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Dick, B., & Swepson, P. (2012). Action research resources. Retrieved from http://www.aral.com.au/
Dooly, M. (2008). Telecollaborative Language Learning. Bern: Peter Lang.
Dooly, M. (2010). Teacher 2.0. In: Telecollaboration 2.0. Language, literacies and intercultural learning in the 21st century. In S. Guth & F. Helm, (Eds.) (pp. 277-303). Bern: Peter Lang.
Dooly, M., & Sadler, R. (2013). Filling in the gaps: Linking theory and practice through telecollaboration in teacher education. ReCALL, 4-29.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1994). Conversation interactions and the development of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16: 183-302.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79(4), 457-476.
Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford Universty Press.
Kern, R. G., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. (Vol. 4). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 243-260.
Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1997). From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote it in the immersion classroom? In: M. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International Perspectives (pp. 284-309). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen,T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.
Lam, W. (2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 457-482.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mehan, H. (1985). The structure of classroom discourse. In: T. A. Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 120-131). London: Academic Press.
O'Brien, R. (2001). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. Retrieved from Theory and Practice of Action Research: http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html
O'Dowd, R. (2006). Telecollaboration and the development of intercultural communicative competence. Berlin: Langenscheidt.
Pelletieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Kern, Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about. Language, 3(44), 493-527.
Ratner, C. (2002). Cultural psychology: Theory and method. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
Richards, J. (2006). What is communicative language teaching? In: J. Richards (Ed.), Communicative language teaching today (pp. 2-5). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Riel, M. (2011). Understanding action research. Retrieved from Center for Collaborative Retrieved 21 February 2013 from Action Research:
http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/ccar/define.html.
Rivers, W. (1993). Interaction as the key to teaching language for communication. In W. Rivers (Ed.), Interactive language teaching (6th ed., pp. 3-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. Modern Language Journal, 38-57.
