It used to be, in a time not too distant from our own, students had to pick up an academic textbook or use software and audio CDs to help grasp a foreign language; but, if Susana M. Sotillo had her way, the students would drop the texts and log on to their favorite instant messenger, instead.
In 2006, Sotillo, an associate professor of linguistics at Montclair State University, in New Jersey, published the results of a pilot study she conducted measuring how students responded to collaborative language learning via instant messaging.
While analyzing the chat transcripts and audio exchanges of five pairs of students (one native speaker, one non-native) in the nine-week study, she made an interesting discovery: retention was higher because of the hands-on nature of IM.
“[The native speakers] used indirect feedback…whereas the advanced non-native speaker-tutors provided explicit correction. They interrupted learners a lot,” Sotillo said, “which could be very frustrating to the language learner…however, the native speakers in my group were very patient and polite.”
While textbooks and CD learning materials are one-sided, she said IM is a more multi-dimensional learning tool, allowing students to practice the written language and spoken language components over video or audio chat. In lieu of correcting language problems, however, tutors afforded non-native speakers the opportunity to learn from their own mistakes by asking for corrective feedback.
The results, she said, were a stronger grasp of the language for the student.
“They did not address serious grammatical errors,” she said. “When you are teaching adults, you need to get them to notice their erroneous output and compare it with target language model. Learners have to be able to notice the difference and restructure their evolving interlanguage.”
As Sotillo continues to study collaborative learning over IM, she said there are challenges to her work. While IM has proven to be a great resource, the challenge is finding the volunteers willing to take on helping non-native speakers over a technology she says is not at its full potential yet. Sometimes it is not the technology, she said, but the work ethic of the volunteer that is troublesome.
“When I first started, I recruited eight [pairs], but two of them dropped out…then, only five of them turned in their chat transcripts and tape recorded exchanges,” she said. “For immigrant students who work long hours and have very little contact with native speakers of the language (English in our case), finding volunteers among those who are in teacher-training programs is very important in helping these students.”
These are just some of the issues Sotillo hopes to avoid as she prepares to help launch a second study with German Arellano Soto, a Ph.D. student at Laval University, in Quebec. Despite past challenges, she’s optimistic.
“The technology is improving,” she said, adding, “However, language learning via IM, utilizing audio and video components ought to be more efficient. My ideal technology for language learning will be the next generation iPhone. I understand that IM and a webcam will be built into these gadgets.”
But, does Sotillo think IM should replace the high school language department?
“I am not suggesting that we replace face-to-face interaction for language learning purposes,” she said. “I see this as a very valuable tool in enhancing the language learning process.”
