Chat with PSU students

I would like to share my experiences of participation in the “chat room” with students from Pennsylvania State University (PSU). These students also study second language teaching and technology. Even though I did not talk a lot during the one hour chat session, I learned several lessons. First, they are very familiar with the technology available at PSU and knew the advantages and disadvantages of the equipment. They try to take advantage of the available equipment and they know how to operate the new technology. Compared to them, I do not know the technologies available for teachers at UA or in Taiwan, my home country. Secondly, they are all “fast typers.” It is difficult for me to follow their chatting speed, so it is necessary to increase your typing speed if you are chatting online. Next, I felt that they knew a lot of “models” with which I was not so familiar. Is it maybe that they have a class that mainly focuses on “models” in teaching? It seems that I am the outsider, but this encourages me, perhaps even “pushes” me (an old fashioned teacher) to learn the technology. In addition, they were friendly and asked me questions if I had not chatted for 5 minutes. They care about their chatting members. To sum up, it is a good opportunity to know how other students incorporate their teaching with technology. I look forward to chatting with them again.

Discussion of My presentation

Since I have not yet finished the questions during my presentation, I would like to share my opinion about them. The questions are: What impact does language and literacy have on the Internet? What is “technological revolution”? What is the benefit of technological change in regard to language learning?

Actually, the first question is borrowed from Blyth’s question in “Research perspectives on online discourse” which is on page 66. Murray (2000) noted that scholars often equate the Internet to the introduction of the printing press in the 15th century and that the printing press is generally understood to have triggered widespread changes in literacy practices. In other words, the literacy is related to the “technological revolution.” According to Murray’s article, technological revolutions entail rapid and far-reaching social change that is the inevitable result of the introduction of a major new technology. Obviously, people could not get rid of the technologies because the new inventions were born every day. Murray, therefore, states that technology and society are in a complex, mutual relationship. When talking about the “benefit” of technological change in regard to language learning, I know that someone might argue that what technology brings to people is “disadvantages.” I agree to some extent, but I still can not deny the “benefit” that technology creates. For instance, people can book tickets, check in, go shopping, chat with friends, and study online. Especially, a lot of software is free to the public, so I mainly use Skype and MSN to communicate with my friends and family.

Text-based Online Chat

I am very impressed by the “chatting room” we used during the class. I heavily rely on MSN and Skype to communicate with my friends and parents. It indeed shows that when I am chatting with my friends in English, I “negotiate the meanings,” and probably “struggle for the appropriate terms”. I support the argument that “online negotiation might be viewed as a way to promote noticing.” Take myself for example. Sometimes, I am not sure how to correctly use the preposition, and I “notice” this problem. This problem inspires me to find the answer either by using a website or by using the dictionary. In the following days, probably half a year, I might remember the correct usage if I use it occasionally, but if I do not use it soon after I notice the problem, this short-time memory will be gone very soon. This situation explains the importance of “uptake.” The language acquisition will develop only if the learners want to uptake the language skill.

Qestions about analyzing data

In my reflection this week, I raise a question based on the Shekary and Tahririan article about language-related episodes theory. I learned language – related episodes (LRE) theory based on the text-based online chat from Shekary and Tahririan’s article. The authors isolated LRE to discuss more thoroughly. I know the three stages of LRE: trigger, response and uptake, but I do not quite know how the authors analyzed the data; especially, the “reliability of coding.” The kappa coefficients for LRE characteristics ranged from k = .685 to .925. Furthermore, there is another theory “dichotomizing coding” I do not understand. Should we get more background about those analytical methods? I am interested in how the authors combined text-online chat with English learning, but I was kind of lost in the part of the article in which they analyze the data.