Learning English Online: Possibilities and Pitfalls
Introduction
The rapid
technological evolution and growth of the Internet in the past few decades have
strongly influenced approaches to teaching and learning. As Felix (2005)
asserts, “over the past few decades [….], common adjectives attributed to both
education and educational institutions are: flexible, inclusive, collaborative,
authentic, relevant, global, and effective” (Felix, 2005, p. 86). Second-language
teaching and learning methods are no exception. The possibilities offered by the Internet
have led to the emergence of myriad websites, programs and online communities
which provide synchronous and/or asynchronous language instruction to language
learners worldwide. Being the leading language of international discourse and
the third most-spoken language in the world[i], the
English language benefits from the rich repertoire of linguistic and
interactional features available within the unlimited online language learning
communities.
There is much
debate around the efficiency of online learning resources between the
proponents of conventional brick-and-mortar classrooms and those of web-based
language learning. Critics of web-based learning often focus on the absence of
face-to-face interaction and/or the presence of a great number of online
resources which merely concentrate on the development of oral skills in
informal settings. However, as Felix (2002) notes, such comments are
“uninformed and flippant” (Felix, 2002, p. 2). He argues that “there are
millions of pedagogically unsound Web pages in existence – just as there are
millions of hours of poor teaching in classrooms around the world” (Felix,
2002, p. 3).
Focusing on
online English language learning resources, in the following sections I review
a number of possibilities and pitfalls that might attach to them.
Possibilities
There are
numerous online English learning resources, which promote learner autonomy,
encourage native-like fluency and also develop intercultural understanding. A
good example is the Effortless English website, whose focus is on auditory
learning and the long-term retention of new lexical material. Effortless
English does not teach language forms and structures explicitly. Learners are
supposed to learn English grammar through listening to short stories, which
usually carry cultural themes. To make use of the linguistic and interactional
features offered by this website,
learners are able to interact with both native instructors and with each other
through text and/or video chats.
Real-time chat
discussion is viewed as an essential feature of web-based language learning,
for it helps engage students in interpersonally meaningful communication. As
Thorne et al. (2009) assert, “Interactions with experienced or more established
members of a community are seen as pivotal processes that help novices develop
discrete semiotic resources as well as sensitivity to expected dispositions,
normative patterns of interaction, and status-appropriate identity stances”
(Thorne et al., 2009, p. 803).
Equally, when
highlighting the role of interaction in developing linguistic and
metalinguistic awareness, Thorne and Smith (2011) argue “that language
learning is both a social and cognitive experience (Pavlenko, 2001) and that
processes of language socialization are critical for the development of social
and pragmatic competencies” (Thorne and Smith, 2011, p. 272).
Moreover, as Kern et al. suggest, “an advantage of online
chatting […] is the ease with which conversational interactions can be
downloaded and studied” (Kern et al., 2004, p. 245). In
Effortless English, students are able to download, analyze and discuss their
verbal and/or written work and diagnose their strengths and weaknesses in more
depth.
Another point in favor of learning English
online is learners’ independence in terms of
managing the time and place of learning. As Warschauer (1997) notes,
“time- and place-independent communication allows users to write and receive
messages at any time of the day from any computer with an Internet connection”
(Warschauer, 1997, p. 474). Today, with the growth of smart phones and
mobile apps, it is even easier to connect to online communities almost anytime,
anywhere.
A further argument supporting the efficiency of online learning is the
implementation of graphics and visual features in most online resources. As
suggested by Felix (2005), “Visual
interface in general is seen as a fundamentally important element in online
design” (McGreal, 1997; Jung, 2001, cited in Felix, 2005, p. 95). Language
Guide and BBC Language are both good examples of online English learning,
websites which extensively use visual features as a primary learning tool.
Furthermore, compared to conventional
place-based instruction, learning English online is often
cost-effective.
Online, there are both free and/or relatively inexpensive English learning materials,
courses and programs, which impose either no or lower financial obligations
upon learners. VOA Learning English, Language Guide, and English Class 101
channel on YouTube are some examples of cost-free online English lessons.
Having
reviewed a number of the possibilities offered by online English resources, in
the next section, I look at some of the pitfalls.
Pitfalls
One of the
main arguments against learning online focuses on the potential tensions
aroused by different cultural values and patterns in learners’ online
intercultural interactions. As Thorne (2003) emphasizes, “cultures of use
surrounding a given Internet communication tool (e.g., e-mail, chat rooms,
instant messaging) may differ across social, generational, institutional, and
national groups (Thorne, 2003, cited in Kern et al., 2004 ,p. 252).
Equally, Wu (2018) argues that “despite
[the] promising affordances, intercultural computer-mediated communication is
fraught with potentials of miscommunication and misunderstanding […], largely
due to socio-cultural, rhetorical, and netiquette differences” (Wu, 2018, p.
75). For instance, assuming their identity inferior to others’, users from
disadvantaged contexts – e.g. underdeveloped countries- will often hide,
change, or erase their identities in public WhatsApp language learning group
discussions. Most such users assume a native-like identity, particularly in
text-based private or group conversations.
A further argument
undermines the claim that online learners are able to assume neutral identities.
As Pasfield-Neofitou (2011) observes about online interaction “it is possible to feel like a foreigner (and to be
treated as one) even in what has been viewed as a gigantic, placeless
cyberspace” (Pasfield-Neofitou, 2011, p.105).
As an Iranian English language learner, who mainly used
Yahoo chat rooms for synchronous interaction with members of diverse
nationalities back in the 90s, I occasionally experienced exclusion based
solely on my national identity.
Conclusion
Above, I
have considered a number of the possibilities and pitfalls attached to English
language learning online. Both online and traditional modes of English language
learning have advantages and disadvantages. However, the unique attributes of
online learning -learner autonomy, time-and place- independence, real-time
interaction, cost-effectiveness, etc. – make it a powerful way of learning
English.
Given the
absence of face-to-face interaction, the decentralized role of teachers and the
abundance of online resources, students of English do not necessarily get low
quality instruction in online classes. As Felix (2002) aptly notes, “what
students do resent – quite rightly – is the replacement of quality classroom
teaching by inferior cost-cutting online ventures” (Felix, 2002, p. 3).
Moreover,
it is essential to bear in mind that in online learning
"previously dominant constructs such as form, cognition, and the
individual are not ignored; they get redefined as hybrid, fluid, and situated
in a more socially embedded, ecologically sensitive, and interactionally open
model" (Canagarajah, 2007, p. 924, cited in Thorne et al., 2009, p. 814).
Effective
online English learning values both form and function, as they are inseparable
components of English language proficiency.
References
Felix, U. (2002).
The web as a vehicle for constructivist approaches in language
teaching. ReCALL, 14(1),
2-15.
Felix, U. (2005).
E-learning pedagogy in the third millennium: The need for combining social
and cognitive constructivist
approaches. ReCALL, 17(1), 85-100.
Kern, R., Ware,
P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). 11. CROSSING FRONTIERS: NEW
DIRECTIONS IN ONLINE PEDAGOGY AND
RESEARCH. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 24, 243-260.
Pasfield-Neofitou,
S. (2011). Online Domains of Language Use: Second Language Learners'
Experiences of Virtual Community
and Foreignness. Language Learning &
Technology, 15(2), 92-108.
Thorne, S., & Smith,
B. (2011). Second Language Development Theories and Technology-
mediated Language Learning. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 268-277.
Thorne, S., Black,
R., & Sykes, J. (2009). Second Language Use, Socialization, and Learning in
Internet Interest Communities and
Online Gaming. The Modern Language
Journal, 93 (Focus issue), 802-821.
Warschauer, M.
(1997). Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and
Practice. Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-81.
Wu, Z. (2018). Positioning (mis)aligned: The
(un)making of intercultural asynchronous
computer-mediated
communication. Language Learning & Technology , 22 (2), 75– 94.
Web-Based Resources
VOA Learning English: https://learningenglish.voanews.com/p/5611.html
Effortless
English: https://effortlessenglishclub.com/
BBC Languages: http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/
LanguageGuide: http://www.languageguide.org
WhatsApp: https://www.whatsapp.com/
Comments
Post a Comment