This chapter first presents participants’ participation in this online learning community. Then, individual participants’ mediated actions and the underlying factors are presented through the lens of activity theory. Finally, the participants’ perceptions of the online experiences in this community are reported.
Mediated Actions in the Online English Learning Community
In the online learning community, community members participated in the discussion of the Facebook page. They posted messages on the wall of the Facebook page and got involved in the discussion with other community members. In total, the four participants posted 2,256 entries from April 2010 to April 2011. The entries can be categorized into two major types of participation, replying and initiating messages.
They were identified from the 2,256 entries by grounded theory approach: (1) answering questions, (2) showing appreciation, (3) chatting, (4) contributing knowledge, (5) asking questions, and (6) suggesting posting rules.
Table 4.1 displays types and frequencies of the four participants’ mediated
actions in this online learning community during the data collection time. As shown in Table 4.1, the frequency of replying messages (96.1%) was much higher than that of initiating message (3.9%). The distribution of participation revealed that the
participants of this study mainly replied messages in this online learning community.
In replying messages, the most frequently occurring mediated action was answering questions, accounting for 85.3%. Showing appreciation and chatting occurred with a lower percentage, 6.2% and 4.6%, respectively. On the contrary, the occurrence of initiating messages was considerably low, ranging from 0.2% to 3.0%.
Table 4.1
Types and frequency of participants’ mediated actions
Types of mediated actions Frequency Percentage Replying messages
Answering questions 1,925 85.3
Showing appreciation 140 6.2
Chatting 104 4.6
Total 2,169 96.1
Initiating messages
Contributing knowledge 67 3.0
Asking questions 16 0.7
Suggesting posting rules 4 0.2
Total 87 3.9
Note. In total, the four participants posted 2,256 entries in the Facebook page. Data were retrieved from April 2010 to April 2011.
In order to get an inclusive picture of different participants’ mediated actions, individual participants’ entries were further classified according to three time frames as shown in Table 4.2. All of the four participants contributed to the online learning community. In replying messages, every participant replied messages for answering community members’ questions, showing appreciation, and chatting with other community members. Nevertheless, the distribution of the types of mediated actions varied. For example, in initiating messages, only Participant A actively contributed knowledge concerning language learning and suggested posting rules to community members and only Participant D asked questions related English learning.
In conclusion, all of them contributed to the online learning community. They all answered English questions and had social interaction with community members.
Nevertheless, in terms of types of mediated actions, Participant A and D’s mediated actions were quite different from that of other participants. Participant A mainly contributed knowledge and suggested posting rules while Participant D asked English
questions in the online learning community. In other words, some particular participants did particular mediated actions in the learning community.
Table 4.2
Types and frequencies of mediated actions in three stages
Participant Participant A Participant B Participant C Participant D Stage 1st 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd 3rd
Note. 1. The one-year observation was divided into three stages lasting for four to four and half months.
The 1st stage was from 2010/04/17-2010/08; the 2nd stage was form 2010/09-2010/12; the 3rd stage was from 2011/01-2011/04. 2. Participant A and B started to participate in the Facebook page in April 2010 since the observation began while Participant C and D started to join the Facebook page in July 2010 which was at the later of 1st stage.
With regard to the total frequency of their mediated actions, it is found that Participant A contributed most with 952 entries followed by Participant B and D (617 and 449 entries) while Participant C contributed least with 238 entries. Furthermore, examining their participation from three different stages, some significant results, related to the time they participated, were observed. Figure 4.1 further shows the four participants’ mediated actions trends in the learning community over the three time frames.
Figure 4.1 Mediated action trends over the three observation stages
As shown in Table 4.2 and Figure 4.1, the frequency of Participant A and B’s mediated actions occurred most at the first stage, accounting for 544(57%) and 313(51%), respectively, which occupied over half of their total mediated actions.
Then, the frequency of their mediated actions decreased through the last two stages.
At the third stage, the frequency of Participant A and B’s mediated actions declined substantially to 110(12%) and 93(15%), respectively. As for Participant C and D, because they started to participate in the community from July 2010 in the end of the first observation stage, both their mediated actions occurred little at the first stage, accounting for 53(22%) and 103(23%), respectively. However, the frequency of their mediated actions rapidly increased from the first stage through the second stage and then sharply decreased at the third stage. At the second stage, they participated in the learning community actively. Participant C and D posted most at the second stage, representing 156(66%) and 265(59%), dominating the half of their total mediated actions. Similar to Participant A and B, Participant C and D’s mediated actions decreased at the third stage. The frequency of their mediated actions from the second
stage to the third stage decreased at only 29(12%) and 81(18%), respectively. All in all, all their mediated actions decreased through the time they participated.
To conclude, the results of the first section revealed two phenomena of the participants’ mediated actions in the learning community. First, different participants demonstrated different types of mediated actions in the learning community. Second, the four participants’ mediated actions generally decreased over the time they joined the online learning community.
Mediated Actions and the Underlying Factors in the Online English Learning Community
Examining the four participants’ cases through the analytical lens of activity theory, their participation in the Facebook page was seen as the mediated actions in the activity systems. This section presents each participant’s mediated actions and their activity system analysis in the online learning community.
Participant A
“Jokes are a big part of me. I’m a guy who likes to tell jokes and appreciate good jokes. This place is somewhere for me to tell jokes. If no one else is joking on the page, I'm getting bored with it.” (Interview #1, October 15, 2010)
Participant A’s mediated actions in the online English learning community As revealed from previous section, Participant A posted 952 entries in total during his one-year participation. From the online observation, it was found that Participant A regularly visited the online learning community and actively participated in the discussion by providing answers in the learning community. At the beginning, he posted messages every day. He also interacted with other community members, such as showing appreciation or chatting with them. In addition, different from other
participants, he contributed knowledge to the community and suggested posting rules to other community members. In general, Participant A’s mediated actions in the learning community included answering questions, contributing knowledge to the community, interacting with community members, and suggesting posting rules to community members.
In the Facebook page, Participant A mainly provided answers with clear
explanations or examples. Because of his unique learning experience and background, his mediated actions were quite different from most community members who mainly asked questions in the Facebook page. Participant A, born in the U.S., had lived in Taiwan for seven years from the age of six and then went to a senior high school in Sweden. After graduating from high school, he continued his studies in the U.K. and he lived there until the data collection time. He learned several languages including English, Chinese, and Swedish. He perceived his first language as English and his second language as Chinese. Owing to his learning background in English-speaking countries, he considered himself as a competent English speaker. In the Facebook page, Participant A’s answers usually provided explanations and examples to help community members solve English problems. He described himself and other members as a ―big team‖ who worked around the clock and tried to respond to members’ questions with all efforts, as he wrote in one entry (see Figure 4.2).
Figure 4.2 Participant A’s self-description of his participation
In addition to responding to other members’ questions, Participant A regularly initiated entries titled ―daily contribution‖ which was a self-created title by him (see Figure 4.3). The daily contribution included an English phrase with its definition, example sentences, and Chinese translation. During his one-year participation, he initiated 67 daily contribution entries in total. He came up with these English phrases on his own, as he described about his daily contribution in interview, ―I hear these [common idioms and phrases] everyday…I didn't use a reference for
them…‖(Interview #2, April 15, 2011).
Figure 4.3 Example of Participant A’s ―daily contribution‖ entry
Other than contributing to the community, the interaction with other community members kept Participant A participating in the discussion. The motive which made him keep engaging in the discussion intensively was appreciation from other
community members and the pleasure he got from bantering with community members. He received much appreciation from other community members to
contribute more and more in the learning community. Furthermore, he also joked with them when providing answers to community members. Figure 4.4 demonstrates an example of his joke comments.
Figure 4.4 Example of Participant A’s joke comment
He enjoyed joking with community members and got a lot fun from it. As he said, I like jokes…I believe jokes are a big part of me. I think I’m a guy who likes to tell jokes and appreciates good jokes. What I try to do is making the online experience fun. If no one else is joking on the page, I'm getting bored with it.
(Interview #1, October 15, 2010)
He further noted, ―Since I lived in the U.K. for quite some time, people generally have a sense of humor, often involving sarcasm and irony‖ (Interview #1, October 15, 2010). Because of the environment where he was situated, he got used to exchanging banter with friends. He loved joking and appreciated good jokes which made by members in the community. He tried to make this online experience fun which made him keep participating in the learning community. At the beginning, there were a lot of questions asking some interesting Chinese-English translation. These interesting questions made Participant A participate in the discussion actively and
enthusiastically. He enjoyed answering the questions and made jokes in the answers.
However, as time went by, the questions asked by community members became complicated and mundane. Therefore, when there was no room to joke, the enthusiasm of participating in the discussion started to decrease.
The community was also a key factor which influenced his participation. The community founder played a vital role to affect Participate A to take the responsibility to suggest posting rules to community members. The community founder was quite
active at the beginning of the Facebook page. When talking about Batman, Participant A said, ―Batman was quite active at the beginning. We all used to chat and joke. But after this whole group snowballed into this massive Facebook page that it is today, Batman was not here as often as before‖ (Interview #2, April 15, 2011). According to the online observation, Batman posted his last message in the Facebook page in December 2010 after the Facebook page was founded for eight months. After that, Batman disappeared and did not administrate the Facebook page anymore.
Due to the lack of management, there was so much spam posted on the wall of the Facebook page and the situation became worse and worse. Participant A
mentioned the spam invasion,
Well, lots of Facebook page advertising agents come here and spam. I've sent them packing since I like this place to be clean…I personally don't like it, but I'm not in charge. I tried once [to contact Batman] to take over the Facebook
page…but no response [from Batman]. It is rather hard to get his/her attention without being too obvious as I can't send him/her private message, nor do I know who s/he is. I'll be happy with the ability to delete some spams and keep things in order. (Interview #2, April 15, 2011)
Participant A loved this Facebook community which provided him a place to interact with others and get fun from it. He did not want this place to be ruined so he thought about taking over the Facebook page. However, he did not know how to do it without the Facebook page founder’s authorization. One incident happened which made him start to take the responsibility to remind community members to follow the posting rules in the community. He initiated one entry shown in Figure 4.5. Participant A reminded community members to follow the rule when replying to entries. He asked members not to copy and paste things from the Internet. He posted this request which aimed at one member’s replies in the Facebook page.
Figure 4.5 Example of Participant A’s rule suggested
According to the online observation, the member always worked hard to provide detailed and clear information from the Internet in his every reply. However, Participant A did not appreciate his method of providing answers in which some mistakes were found in the answers. He described this incident in the interview,
There is this guy who used to copy and paste things off the web. I just made a joke and said it's best not to do it, and the forum rules stated it's better to search things first themselves. [I posted it] because he has made quite a lot of mistakes.
I backtracked his entries, and found a number of grammatical mistakes in his response, and he's rather active. So, I thought someone should intervene and I had to put an end to that. (Interview #1, October 15, 2010)
He further added on, ―I would like to take over the group. For some members, their involvements exceed their English proficiency. I believe it is becoming a serious hazard that can spiral out of control if unchecked‖ (Interview #1, October 15, 2010).
He wanted everything in order in the community so he stood up to suggest rules to remind community members to follow. In this incident, he acted to moderate the learning community.
Factors influencing Participant A’s mediated actions
Analyzing Participant A’s mediated actions through an activity theory perspective, it is found that his participation in the learning community was
influenced by his language background, previous experiences, his object of participation in the community, and the contextual factors from the community.
Participant A’s distinct subject agency which was different from other members deeply affected his mediated actions. Because of Participant A’s native English proficiency, he always felt confident in providing answers and contributing English knowledge to the community. Thus, he actively provided answers in the learning community. Moreover, his learning background also shaped his choice and rule of language use in the online community. Because of his learning experience in native speaking environment, he believed that the use of Chinese may hinder English learning. Therefore, he preferred to use English as the main mediating artifact in writing entries of the English learning community. Furthermore, Participant A’s humorous personality was an influential factor which trigger him to set his object of participating in the English learning community. His object of getting involved in the community was to get fun from chatting with community members with his humorous language. This object directed him to interact with community members a lot. During the process of bantering with community members, he got a lot of fun from the interaction which made him keep participating in the community.
Other than the influence of his subject agency and object, the interactive relations between contextual factors were found to influence Participant A’s participation. First, the community members influenced Participant A’s use of language in the entries. Initially, he only used English as his written tool since he believed Chinese may hinder English learning. However, several members asked him to add more Chinese translations and explanations to make his answers more clearly.
Participant A replied to the member, ―I still prefer not to use Mandarin in entries unless absolutely necessary, because it does hinder learning slightly. However, I can always include a line or two in Mandarin if it helps you pick up the pace‖ (Facebook
entry, January 17, 2011; see Figure 4.6). Thus, he started to add some Chinese but English was the main language tool in mediating his participation. Second, the change of the community influenced Participant A’s participation. When the questions in the community were not interesting anymore, Participant A did not get involved in the discussion as often as he did at the first two time frames. Third, the division of labor shaped the power relations to regulate his participation in the online learning
community. As a native speaker of English, he possessed more power to make his voice heard in this English learning community. In the Facebook page, he acted to respond to questions and contribute English knowledge actively, and to suggest posting rules. He dominated the discussion in the learning community. Hence, he was in a higher status than other members in the community. Furthermore, the higher status equipped him with the power to suggest posting rules to other community.
Figure 4.6 Participant A’s reply to the member who asked to add Chinese in entries
Participant B
“In the process of reading answers and finding answers on my own, I learn a lot.
I feel content when I learn a new idea or an expression. Actually, I not only learn new words and phrases, but also the art of expression, very often with deep cultural significance embedded.” (Interview #1, October 11, 2010)
Participant B’s mediated actions in the online English learning community Participant B posted 617 entries which ranked second in the number of entries among the four participants. As shown in Table 4.2, Participant B only replied messages in the Facebook page. He replied messages to answer questions, show appreciation to community members, and chat with community members.
As an English learner in Taiwan, he assessed his own English proficiency as intermediate rather than advanced for the lack of much English input and exposure to an English speaking environment. For Participant B, the English learning community provided him opportunities to acquire English phrases out of class. As he said,
In the process of reading answers and finding answers on my own, I learn a lot. I feel content when I learn a new idea or an expression. Actually, I not only learn new words and phrases, but also the art of expression, very often with deep cultural significance embedded. It’s always interesting to learn something you don’t know. (Interview #1, October 11, 2010)
In the English learning community, he learned English phrases by reading the entries and finding answers for community members. Joining the English learning
community helped him learn English phrases, especially slangs, colloquial and situational usages with deep cultural significance.
In addition to learning language in the community, Participant B also had social interaction with other members. He and some community members chitchatted their life and background. When talking about the online experience, Participant B remarked,
When replying questions in the page, sometimes we go off-topic. It is a way to communicate with other members, just chitchatting. It is something funny or interesting. We are not paid to teach English. So why not? It is not our job, and we are here for leisure. (Interview #1, October 11, 2010)
Apparently, Participant B enjoyed social interaction with community members. The