探討平板電腦在任務型語言教學法中對小組合作歷程的影響

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文 Master's Thesis Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University. 探討平板電腦在任務型語言教學法中對小組合作歷程的影響. Exploring How Tablet PC Facilitates Small Group Collaboration in a Task-Based Language Learning Classroom. 指導教授：林至誠. 博士. Advisor: Dr. Chih-Cheng Lin 研究生：許瀞尹 Student: Ching-Yin Hsu. 中華民國一百零七年八月 August, 2018.

(2) 摘要隨著資訊科技的發展，教師得以提供學生更加多元且有助學習的教學環境及資源。近年來，如何運用電腦輔助小組合作學習(Computer-supported Collaborative Learning)成為一重要研究課題，然而甚少研究著重於探討學生如何在平板電腦的輔助下，透過與同儕間的互動及討論來進行英語學習並建構知識。因此，本研究使用質性研究方法，旨在討論臺灣高中生在進行小組合作學習時的互動歷程，以及探討平板電腦如何輔助小組協同合作學習。本研究對象來自北臺灣九位高中學生。在為期兩個多月的課堂中，他們分成三組進行小組活動，透過用任務型語言教學法所設計的課堂活動(task)，探討與英雄故事以及世界飲食文化有關的主題。研究者觀察且記錄課堂活動，並收集學生進行小組討論時的對話內容，將其打成逐字稿後進行後續分析。除課堂互動紀錄外，研究者亦透過學生的課後心得日誌以及訪談內容了解學生學習狀況及歷程。結果顯示學生在與組員共同建構知識時，有固定的互動歷程。小組討論多從選定討論焦點、發現問題或分享知識開始，並依此為基礎而後更深入地探討，透過提出想法、闡述內容、協商及說服等方式來達成小組共識。除了知識面向，小組在進行合作學習時，也透過自我以及小組調節，維持小組學習的效率。在小組互動中，平板電腦的可攜性使得組員間更便於分享資訊，組員除了直接針對網路蒐集的資料做討論外，亦會即時利用網路溝通平台傳送連結，促進溝通效率。更重要的是，平板電腦扮演知識庫的角色，在建構知識和完成指定任務的過程中，組員得以使用平板電腦或線上字典查詢相關資料，再針對蒐集的資料進行討論及釐清。. 關鍵字：英語為第二外語學習者；行動科技輔助語言學習；合作學習;任務型語言教學法 i.

(3) ABSTRACT From the early 1960s on, technological advances have opened up new opportunities for teachers to engage learners in more facilitative learning environments. Although how learning unfolds and in what ways technologies support learning have been studied in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), there is relatively fewer research designed to investigate mobile-assisted collaborative learning practices, especially in language learning contexts. To address the gap, the present study examines EFL adolescents’ interactional process as well as the affordances of technological tools in mobile-assisted collaborative learning tasks. In the study, nine participants were recruited from a high school in Northern Taiwan. In a two-month period, they were asked to work in groups of three to explore two topics, including heroes and food and culture, with their tablet PCs. To capture the participants’ interactions while collaborating with learning peers, their face-to-face interactions were recorded for further analysis. Other data, including class observations, students’ weekly journals, and semi-structured interviews were also collected to increase the trustworthiness of the study. The results showed that learners followed certain participatory pattern starting with the emergence of problems, the identification of focus, or the sharing of knowledge regarding epistemic dimension of collaborative learning. Subsequent to the establishment of common ground, interactional moves aiming at generating, elaborating, and negotiating ideas followed so as to accomplish assigned tasks. It should be noted that the identified interactional pattern was not a linear, but a circular one. In other words, after the actions attempting to create shared understanding or generate collaborative actions, actions aiming at identifying focus, pointing out problems, and/or sharing knowledge might emerge if necessary and helpful for completing the tasks. In ii.

(4) addition to epistemic dimension, regulative dimension was also examined. Three situations where regulative actions recurrently occurred were found in our data, and these regulative actions helped facilitate the development and maintenance of collaborative learning. Lastly, in terms of technological affordances, it was discovered that mobile technologies facilitated collaborative learning by highlighting focus, pinpointing sources, and thus prompting conceptual changes. Other affordances included portability and connectivity of mobile devices and the Internet as a knowledge bank.. Keywords: EFL learners, mobile-assisted language learning, collaborative learning, task-based language teaching. iii.

(5) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to sincerely express my gratitude to many people who had provided profound help, support, and love in the journey of completing my master’s thesis. First of all, I am deeply indebted to my advisor, Dr. Chih-Cheng Lin for his persistent guidance, support, and encouragement. Academically, he gave me freedom to explore my interests and develop my ideas. Whenever I encountered difficulties, he was always patient and generous in offering guidance and advice to a novice researcher like me. He has also taught me the value of hard work and perseverance in life and work. His care and love for students has gone beyond the duties of an advisor. I was lucky to have such a mentor who inspired and believed in me while writing my thesis. I would also like to express my gratitude to my dearest committee members, Dr. Jun-Jie Tseng from National Taiwan Normal University and Dr. Yu-Ling You from National Changhua University of Education for their insightful advice and warmhearted encouragement. Their helpful and valuable feedback was very much appreciated. I also owe my gratitude to Ms. Kuo, Ann, and the participants in the study, for it would not have been possible to complete the thesis without them. Special thanks to all the teachers, especially Dr. Hao-Jan Chen, and my classmates in the NTNU TESOL program. I was honored to have learned a lot from the brilliant professors and diligent learning buddies in this program. It was a bliss to have my lovely classmates’ company and form life-long relationships with some of them. In addition, I would like to thank my supportive friends, Gimi, Trina, Mia, Janice, Umi, Pei-Yun, Peach, and Bear for lighting me up when I felt frustrated and thus tried to bury my head in the sand in the process of writing my thesis. Finally, I would like to thank my family for their huge emotional support and unconditional love. I am blessed and proud to be a member of this family. iv.

(6) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research Background ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Rationale of the Study ..................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................ 5 2.1 Task-based Language Teaching ...................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Theoretical Principles Underlying TBLT ................................................................. 6 2.1.2 Technology-mediated TBLT .................................................................................... 8 2.1.3 Mobile-assisted TBLT ............................................................................................ 13 2.2 Computer-supported Collaborative Learning ................................................................ 17 2.2.1 Computer-supported Collaborative Learning ......................................................... 17 2.2.2 CSCL and Language Learning ............................................................................... 21 2.3 The Present Study .......................................................................................................... 30 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 33 3.1 The Setting and Participants .......................................................................................... 33 3.2 Instructional Design....................................................................................................... 34 3.3 Technology Support ...................................................................................................... 36 3.4 Data Collection .............................................................................................................. 37 3.4.1 Instruments ............................................................................................................. 37 3.4.2 Procedure ................................................................................................................ 38 3.5 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 40 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS & DISCUSSION ................................................................... 43 4.1 Results ........................................................................................................................... 43 4.1.1 Class Observation and Recording........................................................................... 43 4.1.2 Participants’ Learning Journal ................................................................................ 63 4.1.3 Interview ................................................................................................................. 65 v.

(7) 4.2 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 68 4.2.1 Epistemic Development in Small Groups .............................................................. 68 4.2.2 Technological Affordances .................................................................................... 73 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... 77 5.1 Summary of the Findings .............................................................................................. 77 5.2 Pedagogical Implications............................................................................................... 80 5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research ......................................................... 82 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 83 APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................................... 89 APPENDIX B.......................................................................................................................... 90. vi.

(8) LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Tasks in cycle 1 & 2 ....................................................................................... 34 Table 2 Overview of data collection procedure ........................................................... 39 Table 3 Analysis categories and dimensions adopted from Damşa et al. (2010) & Damşa (2014) ....................................................................................................... 42 Table 4 Frequencies of interaction types (cycle 1) ...................................................... 44 Table 5 Frequencies of interaction types (cycle 2) ...................................................... 45. vii.

(9) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Interface of WebQuest website ..................................................................... 35 Figure 2 Recursive pattern in group collaboration ...................................................... 69. viii.

(10) CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Background. From the early 1960s on, technological advances have brought up new opportunities as well as challenges for learners and teachers alike in terms of facilitating language learning (Levy, 1997). With the ubiquitous use of a variety of digital technologies, the term of “digital natives” is proposed to describe those who have grown up with technologies being an integral and essential part of their lives (Prensky, 2001). The use of computers, mobile devices, digital games, email, the Internet, instant messaging, social-networking tools, and even augmented reality technology has changed our daily lives fundamentally, including the ways people process information and acquire new skills. Without a doubt, many learners have taken advantage of the technological tools to support language development outside language classrooms. It is essential and inevitable for language teachers to consider incorporating technologies into language classrooms and learning practices. Some benefits of integrating technology in L2 learning have been proposed, including opportunities for intercultural learning, the enactment of agency, and access to a huge amount of resources (Chapelle, 2013). In particular, owing to its connectivity, technology has been described to widen opportunities for interaction, communication, and collaboration, all of which play a crucial role in language learning from the perspective of sociocultural theories (Chapelle, 2013). The potential of engaging learners in meaningful social interactions enables technology to open up new opportunities and to inform the practices of task-based language teaching (Reinders & 1.

(11) Thomas, 2010). TBLT, drawing on its theoretical background from sociocultural theories and communicative language teaching (CLT) approach, addresses the importance of meaning- and interaction- oriented practices as well as the attainment of an outcome (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985). As emphasized by Reinders and Thomas (2010), technologies offer an ideal venue for the realization of TBLT principles by providing language learners with meaningful learning environments or real-life tasks, just to name a few. Research on technology-mediated TBLT has investigated the effects of using technological tools on various aspects of language learning. Previous studies have reported language development in syntax, vocabulary, writing, and speaking in online task performances (Stockwell & Harrington, 2003; Vetter & Chanier, 2006). Also, an increase in language output and noticing of language components have been found in the adoption of technology-mediated TBLT (Lai & Zhao, 2006). In addition to supporting language development, the use of technology enables learners to gain access to authentic linguistic materials and interact with learners of different nationalities, which is shown to have promoted language learners’ intercultural competence (Ducate & Lomicka, 2008; Lee, 2009). More recently, the popularity of mobile devices and common access to Wi-Fi connections create more dynamic and flexible language learning experiences compared with the use of computers. In the field of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL), review articles have revealed that the majority of MALL implementations took a more teacher-centered pedagogical approach (Burston, 2014a, 2014b; Kukulska-Hulme & Shield, 2008). However, considering the affordances that mobile devices could offer, such as portability and social interactivity, scholars have suggested that mobile devices should be used to support learner-centered and task-based learning (Burston, 2014a, 2014b). In the existing literature of mobile-assisted TBLT studies, a large proportion of 2.

(12) them discuss the design of mobile learning systems and the systems’ effectiveness in facilitating language learning (Liu, Tan, & Chu, 2010; Ogata et al., 2008). Some others explore the built-in functions of mobile devices, focusing on the integration of mobile technologies and task-based pedagogical design (Tai, 2012). These studies have demonstrated the potential of mobile devices to promote students’ language learning in and outside the classroom. For instance, context-aware technologies, such as QR codes or GPS-sensitive apps, are shown to provide an interactive and authentic context for learners to develop their language skills (Liu et al., 2007, 2010). In addition, the studies also reported increases in language learners’ engagement, motivation, and enjoyment (Liu et al., 2010; Ogata et al., 2008; Tai, 2012).. 1.2 Rationale of the Study. As mentioned in the previous section, research has demonstrated the use of technology-mediated tasks in promoting language learning skills as well as intercultural competence. Also, it is found that the majority of studies exploring technologymediated TBLT have probed into learners' perceptions and reported heightened enjoyment and engagement. With regard to the use of mobile devices, research has shown similar results in terms of increases in affective dimension (Liu et al., 2010; Ogata et al., 2008; Tai, 2012). However, few of them have discussed the learning process in which language learners interact with their peers and work together to produce an outcome with the help of technologies. Little is known about how learners, based on their needs, utilize different functions of technological tools to help them along the interactional learning process. To address the research gap, this study aims to explore learners’ interactions and examine their use of technologies in collaborative language learning tasks. 3.

(13) 1.3 Research Questions. The following research questions were used to guide the present study: 1.. How do learners interact and collaborate with others in a mobile-assisted TBLT context?. 2.. What are the technological affordances during the learning process?. The present study seeks to contribute to the growing understanding of how learning unfolds through interaction and collaboration in mobile-assisted TBLT learning environments. With a better understanding of the ways in which group members collaborate to create a product or knowledge object, it is more likely for teachers to provide timely and proper pedagogical and technological support.. 4.

(14) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter begins with the review of literature on task-based language teaching (TBLT) and its underlying theoretical foundations. The second section introduces the field of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), with a focus on the related research in language learning. Then the chapter ends with an introduction to the present study.. 2.1 Task-based Language Teaching. Over the past two decades, task-based language teaching (TBLT) has attracted the attention of second language acquisition (SLA) researchers, curriculum developers, and teaching professionals around the world. Developed as an approach to language teaching aligning with the Communicative Language Teaching framework, TBLT is actually introduced as a resistance to traditional teacher-centered, form-focused language education (Long, 1985). TBLT advocates propose that language learning capacity would be most successfully developed and nurtured when language teaching aims to create a context where interaction and meaningful communication takes place (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985; Prabhu, 1987). The creation of contexts is then achieved through the implementation of tasks in language classrooms. Unlike approaches based on structural or form-oriented syllabuses, TBLT emphasizes the centrality of a task and the primary role it plays in terms of designing a language program or individual lessons (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985). Although various definitions or versions of what a task is have been proposed (see Ellis, 2003; Samuda & Bygate, 2008; Van den Branden, 2006 for overviews), a task must adhere to the following criteria: (a) focusing primarily on meaning and communication (b) reaching 5.

(15) certain goals or producing a product, with language use serves as the means to achieve the outcome and (c) eliciting meaningful communication and interaction with other learners and/or with the teacher. In additional to the three criteria, Ellis (2003) adds that a task should provide learners with a need to convey information and to exchange thoughts with others by drawing their resources, both linguistic and non-linguistic ones, to accomplish a task. As discussed above, a language learning activity or exercise can function as a language learning task only when it caters to meaningful communicative language exchanges and interactions, through which a final outcome or product is produced by learners.. 2.1.1 Theoretical Principles Underlying TBLT. The previous section has highlighted the basic principles in implementing TBLT and key components that comprise a task. With a clear understanding of what TBLT is, what follows is an account of the theoretical rationales underlying TBLT. TBLT draws on a variety of theories, from general learning theories to theories specifically in second language acquisition. In educational sciences, over the past several decades, there has been a paradigm shift from a discrete, teacher-centered teaching to more holistic, learner-driven pedagogies. The shift echoes the emergence of task-based language teaching, which calls for a more learner-driven, problem-solving approach. Also, from a socio-cultural perspective, learning is a social and collaborative process in which knowledge is constructed through interaction between learners’ prior knowledge and the world (Vygotsky, 1978). In TBLT, task provides such a context for learners to engage in a social and collaborative endeavor and to participate in a shared activity. Meaning-based 6.

(16) interaction enables learners to not only co-construct knowledge with other learners but also consolidate learning at the same time. In addition to social-constructivist theory, TBLT is also informed by SLA theories, including Interaction Hypothesis (Long, 1985, 1996) and Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1995, 2000). Long (1996) argued that modified interaction is crucial for language development. Through interaction with peers, language learners would make use of their linguistic resources to not only make input comprehensible but make them understood by others. During the process, learners’ attention to meanings helps raise their awareness and thus prompts interlanguage change. In other words, negotiation of meaning during interactional practices facilitates language acquisition because “it connects input, internal learner capacities, particularly selective attention, and output in productive ways” (p. 451-452). Task-based language classes require learners to produce final products, which maximizes students’ efforts in producing meaningful exchanges of ideas through the use of target language. Looking at another aspect of interaction, Swain (1995) emphasized the facilitating role of output in language learning. She suggested that learners might notice a gap between their production and what they intend to say when attempting to communicate in the target language, which helps learners build a fuller understanding on their L2 knowledge at the moment and promote further learning based on communicative needs. Also, producing the target language creates contexts where language use and language learning co-occur. Compared with the role of input in language development, Swain argued that output involves more mental effort and deeper language processing by language learners. In TBLT, in order to produce a product in a shared task, learners collaborate with team members and participate in communicative dialogues in a joint effort. In the process, they are encouraged to engage in knowledge construction and production with the target language being used, noticed, and reflected at the same time. 7.

(17) In view of the above discussion, the emergence of TBLT is highly related to educational theories that call for a more learner-centered, problem-solving approach. Focusing on SLA theories, TBLT also finds its root in interaction and sociocultural approaches. The implementation of tasks enables interaction and collaboration among learners, which creates contexts where language use, including input and output, and knowledge building co-occur and facilitate one another.. 2.1.2 Technology-mediated TBLT. Research has examined the implementation of TBLT mainly in traditional face-toface classroom settings. Compared with face-to-face settings, there has been relatively few studies investigating the use of TBLT in technology-mediated contexts so far (Ellis, 2003). However, more and more researchers have recognized the reciprocal benefits between technologies and TBLT (González-Lloret & Ortega, 2014; Reinders & Thomas, 2010). As argued by Reinders and Thomas (2010), TBLT aims to provide language learners with authentic materials and real life tasks, which could be sufficiently supported by new technologies or the Internet that connects people around the world and promotes communication across the geographical boundaries. Also, with the increasing use of technology in language teaching, it is essential to build a fuller understanding of how the use of technology in TBLT promotes language learning and what affordances and challenges technology might bring into the task-based language learning and teaching practices. Aiming to integrate TBLT and the use of technology for its optimal reciprocal benefits, González-Lloret and Ortega (2014), in their book collection, propose the term “technology-mediated TBLT” to refer to a congruent, genuine, and productive integration of the two which deserves future research. In technology-mediated TBLT 8.

(18) environments, the use of technologies prompts transformations in learning and language use, which in turn informs the curricular design and pedagogical possibilities within TBLT framework. In the existing literature regarding the integration of technology and TBLT, research has explored whether and how technological means, such as synchronous and asynchronous communication or Web 2.0 technologies, contribute to task-based language teaching and learning.. Vetter and Chanier (2006) Research has found that in technology-mediated settings, learners produce a greater amount of language production (Lai & Li, 2011; Vetter & Chanier, 2006). Vetter and Chanier (2006) described a study in which 14 leaners at various proficiency levels were engaged in collaborative tasks. The participants were separated into two groups and worked on the tasks in Lyceum, a synchronous audio conferencing system with multimodal supports, such as text chat or graphics. Participants’ participation (oral and chat) was analyzed quantitatively and the content of interaction was examined qualitatively relating to the complexity of professional discourse. The results revealed that students’ proficiency level did not correlate with the degree of oral participation and that learners who were not confident in speaking English took advantage of the text chat to increase their participation rate. The study showed that the multimedia attribute, namely the availability of text chat, helped increase language production, especially for beginning learners.. Lai & Zhao (2006) In addition to the increase in language production, evidence has also shown that technology-mediated tasks facilitate various aspects considered crucial in language 9.

(19) learning, such as noticing, and contribute to more productive output (Lai & Zhao, 2006). Lai and Zhao (2006) explored language learners’ self-corrections and their noticing of interactional feedback on two modes of communication (face-to-face communication and text-based chat). In the study, 12 EFL participants were recruited and paired to form six mixed-proficiency dyads. Each dyad worked on two spot-the-difference tasks, with one conducted through face-to-face communication and the other via online text-based chat. The face-to-face and text-based interactions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to extract instances of negotiation of meaning, recasts, and self-correction. Follow-up stimulated recall sessions were conducted to identify participants’ noticing in terms of negotiation of meaning and recasts in the two modes. The findings suggested that the text-based chat environment elicited more self-corrections in a significant way. Also, text-based chat was thought to have the potential of enhancing language learners’ noticing of negotiation of meaning because the cases of negotiation were presented in a more explicit way when in text-based chat.. Solares (2014) In another exploratory action research, Solares (2014) compared three intact writing classes in EFL university setting, with one instructed with traditional textbook, another guided by and adapted into task-based curricular design, and the other implemented with the addition of technological use in the same task-based design. In the adapted task, Story Telling Contest, students were asked to participate in a writing contest in which they wrote and shared a personal story with classmates. The group with technological supports used online tools and a class blog to enhance their learning. Students’ grammar learning of narrative past tense use was measured by pre- and posttest, and their perceptions and attitude were surveyed by the use of questionnaires and focused group interviews. The results showed that all three groups demonstrated similar 10.

(20) linguistic gains of past tense use, while the two groups experiencing task-based design reported more positive attitude toward learning activities according to the questionnaire and interviews. Regarding the use of technology, the group experiencing technologymediated tasks was found to have more frequent email interaction with their teacher and expressed a sense of satisfaction in adopting technology. The study demonstrated how textbook materials could be adapted to tasks and explored students’ perceptions toward task-based learning activities and technology-mediated tasks. A potential limitation of the study was that the questions on the questionnaire were not designed based on any theoretical framework, so further research is needed to provide more solid evidence on how technology-meditated tasks influence learners’ affective dimension toward language learning.. Ducate & Lomicka (2008) Aside from facilitating language development and arousing learners’ interests, technology-mediated tasks are reported to develop language learners’ intercultural competence. In a two-semester research conducted by Ducate and Lomicka (2008), around 20 American university students learning French and German were asked to finish project-based tasks in networked communities. In the first semester, the participants read blogs written in the target languages, gathered information about the bloggers or the related issues mentioned in the blog postings, and had a final presentation on their findings. They then maintained their own personal blogs, posted entries based on class readings, and commented on classmates' blogs in the following semester. The researchers aimed to document how the students exploited the social and technological elements of blogging to develop their language competence, mainly reading and writing, to build the ownership as a blog writer, and to better understand the culture of the target language. Qualitative data, including blog entries, 11.

(21) questionnaires, and focus group interviews were analyzed. It was indicated that blogging helped provide platforms for students to be exposed to authentic materials and issues related to the target culture. Through accomplishing the assigned tasks in networked communities, learners were able to explore different perspectives on cultural-related topics and develop their opinions in writing, which enhanced their intercultural competence.. Lee (2009) With an attempt to promote cultural exchange, Lee (2009) described a telecollaborative study in which American and Spanish graduate students worked together by using message boards, writing blogs, and creating podcasts for intercultural sharing and exchange. Students in both countries were asked to collaborate with classmates to finish the assigned tasks, and then their partners from the other country commented on the blogs and podcasts. Survey and open-ended questions were used to understand how the use of technology-mediated tasks affected learners’ view on cross-cultural exchange. The findings showed that the use of blogs and podcasts facilitated the development of intercultural communication. The tools helped bridge the geographical boundary and thus created opportunities for language learners to engage in cultural exchange. The study also suggested that personal commitment and well-established interpersonal relationship with cross-cultural partners were important in maximizing the learning outcomes.. 12.

(22) 2.1.3 Mobile-assisted TBLT. With the advancement of mobile technologies and popularity of handheld devices, the use of mobile devices in language learning (mobile-assisted language learning, or MALL) has been widely accepted and explored during the past two decades. Several review articles on MALL have pointed out that the majority of MALL implementations took a more teacher-centered pedagogical approach (Burston, 2014a, 2014b; KukulskaHulme & Shield, 2008). However, considering the affordances that mobile devices could offer, such as portability and social interactivity, scholars have suggested that mobile devices should be used to support learner-centered and task-based learning (Burston, 2014a, 2014b). So far, only few studies have investigated the use of mobile devices from a task-based language learning approach. The following paragraphs described the studies that incorporated handheld devices to facilitate task-based language learning.. Liu et al. (2007; 2010) Liu et al. (2007; 2010) developed a learning system, HELLO, which incorporated the use of context-aware 2D or QR code as well as augmented reality (AR) supported materials to facilitate language learning and enhance students' motivation. A task-based language learning approach was adopted to design a 4-week experiment. In the first two weeks, 20 undergraduate students were asked to launch a game “My Student Life” on their PDA phones. They were able to explore different spots on campus and get exposed to corresponding language learning materials, such as reading passages or short movies, without the constraints of time and space. In the other two weeks, students participated in context-aware language learning activities in which they walked around the campus, scanned 2D barcode, and interacted with virtual characters. Questionnaire was 13.

(23) administered to understand the perceived usefulness, ease of use and students’ attitudes towards the system. The items on usefulness and use-friendliness were based on the technology acceptance model (TAM). The results indicated that most students considered the context-aware and immersive language learning experience useful and fulfilling. Students showed novelty in using PDA phones to learn anytime and anywhere. The adoption of context-aware technology and virtual learning environment increased their motivation according to the descriptive statistics results.. Ogata et al. (2008) Ogata et al. (2008) described a project in which overseas learners in Japan participated in a series of language learning tasks outside the classroom by using a mobile learning environment called LOCH. In the one-day field trip, participants used the handheld PDA to accomplish the assigned real-life tasks. For example, learners went to the local shops to ask for information or interacted with people on the streets using the target language. Through the LOCH system, the instructors could monitor learners’ locations and provide necessary help for learners to finish the tasks. After the field trip, learners gathered in the classroom to share what they had achieved and reflected on the language use. Questionnaire was employed to understand learners’ comments and their attitudes towards the experience and system. Overall, the participants showed positive attitudes towards adopting the system and considered the system helpful in applying what they had learned inside the classroom into real-life situations. It was suggested that learners needed more time to familiarize themselves with the system or any new technology tools in future studies.. 14.

(24) Tai (2012) Without designing a system which might take a considerable amount of time and technical knowledge, Tai (2012) explored the built-in functions of mobile devices, focusing on the integration of mobile technologies and task-based pedagogical design. In the study, a three-phase (pre-, main-, and post- task) framework was adopted. In the main task phase, 35 six-graders were put into 11 teams, and each team was asked to work on 6 tasks, such as spot-the-difference and problem-solving task, in various locations within a historical site in Taipei. The mobile devices were used as a communication platform, where participants not only received input, such as pictures or texts, but also produced output, including sending text messages or making voice calls to the instructors. Face-to-face interaction and collaboration among group members were required to accomplish the tasks. In order to investigate participants' attitudes toward the design and their improvement with regard to target vocabulary items and sentence structures, pre- and post- surveys and proficiency tests were administered. From the statistical results of the proficiency tests, participants made a significant progress in both vocabulary and grammar. The surveys showed that participants' attitude toward English learning in general and the design improved significantly, especially in the aspects of enjoyment, interests, efforts, and willingness to learn English. This study demonstrated an integration of task-based pedagogical orientation and the use of mobile devices, and advanced MALL research by focusing on the built-in functions provided by mobile devices. Consistent with previous studies, this study revealed the potential of technological use in promoting language learners' motivation and providing an authentic context for language use.. 15.

(25) The reviewed literature has demonstrated the beneficial effects that technologies might bring to language development under the adoption of TBLT framework, including more productive language output, increased intercultural competence, and enhanced motivation towards language learning. From the few studies that used mobile devices to support task-based language learning, it is revealed that the portability and flexible use afforded by mobile devices may create a more diverse, authentic, and motivating language learning environment. However, as noted by some researchers, the integration of technologies into TBLT does not guarantee successful language learning or development. A variety of factors, such as students’ online communication skills or online learning readiness (Hung et al., 2010), may come into play. Due to the complexity and variety of different technologies, more research is needed to examine how different technology influences the implementation of a task and advances students' learning or the field of TBLT. In addition, as argued by Norris (2009), longitudinal research which takes on a full TBLT program approach rather than adopts a single trial of tasks is needed to fully understand how technology and TBLT complements and enhances one another.. 16.

(26) 2.2 Computer-supported Collaborative Learning. Communication and collaboration have been deemed to be two crucial and important skills in P21’s Framework for 21st Century Learning (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Collaborative learning, as an umbrella term, refers to a learning environment or an instructional design in which learners work together to jointly construct knowledge, solve problems, and create intellectual products (O’Malley, 1995). In recent years, the growth in the use of technologies in both formal and informal educational contexts has brought opportunities and creativities for collaborative learning practices. Aiming to understand the nature of group learning and interactional patterns mediated by computational or mobile devices, the community of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) draws on research from various disciplines, including computer science, mathematics, social studies, and language learning. It is hoped that research in CSCL helps advance our understanding of how technologies best support learners’ interaction and learning.. 2.2.1 Computer-supported Collaborative Learning. Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is an interdisciplinary field of research that has attracted vigorous discussion and research in the past two decades (O’Malley, 1995). Traditionally, research on learning sciences focuses much on individual minds or views learning as primarily an individual process. However, the concept of learning as an individual process has been challenged by researchers who approached learning from a social-cultural perspective. For example, Vygotsky (1980) proposed the idea of “zone of proximal development,” by which he underlined the proposition that learning took place and was mediated by social factors and by collaborating with peers. Vygotsky’s social-cultural approach to learning justifies the 17.

(27) role of social contexts in learning and has become one of the prominent theoretical sources for CSCL community (Bannon, 1995). Another principal source of CSCL’s learning theory comes from constructivism and situated learning, which emphasizes the importance of meaning making and knowledge construction through engaging learners in communities (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Constructivist view on learning highlights the relationship between learning and the social situation where it occurs, including broader contexts such as social interaction and practices, beyond the study of individual minds. Inspired by social-cultural approach towards leaning, CSCL community focuses on how learning occurs and unfolds in the context of collaborative learning with technological support. It should be noted that the term “collaborative learning” is not a clearly defined concept and the ambiguity between the two constructs, “collaborative learning” and “cooperative learning,” has been acknowledged. Some researchers use the two terms interchangeably; some argue that cooperation connotes division of labor among participants in a shared task, while collaboration focuses on the joint process of discussion and assumes a high degree of responsibility for collective knowledge building and problem solving (Dillenbourg, 1999). Regardless of the differences in defining the terms, collaborative learning refers to learners working together in small groups and maximizing learning from interaction among peers (Resta & Laferrière, 2007). With the advance of technology and networked devices, the use of technology to better support collaborative learning and social interaction has been vigorously explored by teachers or researchers alike in recent years. As mentioned in a review article by Resta and Laferrière (2007), while there is a solid body of research concerning face-to-face collaborative learning, less is known about the role of technology across various collaborative settings. CSCL community aims to bridge the gap and investigate issues in relation to collaborative learning with computational support. 18.

(28) There has been a wide diversity in the role of technology across collaborative learning contexts. In some settings, technologies are used to support face-to-face interaction or collaboration. For example, Crina I. Damşa (2014) investigated learners’ productive interactions and the multi-layered nature of small-group learning by incorporating the use of online course management system to chat out-of-class, post their ideas, and exchange information or files. In other settings, without working faceto-face, learners collaborate with peers via computational support, including synchronous (e.g. web-conferencing) or asynchronous (e.g. blog or wiki) communication system. Aside from the role of technology, the diverse nature of the collaboration being studied vary from context to context. In terms of the nature of collaboration, three perspectives are frequently adopted, namely cognitive, socio-cognitive, or sociocultural perspectives (Ludvigsen, 2016). These different perspectives influence the research foci of studies and analytical frameworks. Cognitive or socio-cognitive perspectives are connected to Piagetian school of thinking, in which individual processes, such as cognitive conflict or individual conceptual change, are investigated within collaborative settings. Researchers adopting cognitive or socio-cognitive perspective also concern the production of models which specify how specific features of technology or technological system contribute to, or constrain collaboration and knowledge sharing and building (Dillenbourg, 1999; Ludvigsen & Mørch, 2010). Socio-cultural perspective, on the other hand, influenced by the premise that learning is a socially organized activity, is concerned with how learning emerges from social dialogues, interactions, or practices across time and space (Vygotsky, 1986b; Wertsch, 1991). Understanding how physical or abstract tools, such as language or technology, mediate human actions or group practices provides broader insights regarding the dynamic process of discussion, information sharing, collaboration, sense-making, 19.

(29) negotiation, and problem solving. Despite different orientations, all the perspectives mentioned underscore the importance of coordination, communication, and interactivity on facilitating learning (Zurita & Nussbaum, 2004). Collaborative learning does not guarantee successful learning, and one of the crucial issues in CSCL lies in understanding the social interaction or group learning process. When analyzing social interactions or practices, three interdependent units of analysis are possible: individual, small group, and community (whole-class or school). Studies on analyzing social interactions of different levels shed lights on how micro- and macro- social contexts shape and facilitate learning in different ways. However, as argued by Stahl (2013), more studies are needed to explore the relationships across levels and to understand how the interconnections across levels are mediated by artefacts. So far, different issues have been addressed in CSCL, and among important lines of research are knowledge building (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1992, 2006), group cognition (Stahl, 2006), scripted roles (Fischer et al., 2013), and argumentative knowledge construction (Weinberger & Fischer, 2006). The accumulative research deepens our understanding of how individual and collective learning are enhanced in complex CSCL settings, and more studies exploring the nature or practices of CSCL are needed (Ludvigsen, 2016).. 20.

(30) 2.2.2 CSCL and Language Learning. As mentioned in the previous section, CSCL is an interdisciplinary field of research and draws a sociocultural approach to learning. Socio-cultural approach to learning echoes and influences the field of SLA, where the importance of social contexts and peer interactions is recognized. Vygotsky (1986b) foregrounds the role of tools in mediating cognitive developments, and language is thought of as the most prevalent and important mediating tool. Through language, namely speaking and writing, individuals consolidate their thinking and shape, reshape, or transform their thoughts while interacting with others. Informed by Vygotsky’s insight into language and thought, Swain (2000) proposes the idea of languaging being a source of second language learning and development. Collaborative dialogue, one type of languaging, has been defined as a dialogue in which learners solve problems and build knowledge together and proven to facilitate language learning and develop metalinguistic awareness (Swain et al., 2002; Swain & Watanabe, 2012). Collaborative language learning provides learners with the opportunities to utilize L2 and to pool linguistic resources collectively to solve the encountered problems. Recent studies on computer supported collaborative language learning have examined the use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools in facilitating language learning, especially in productive skills (e.g. writing and speaking). Web 2.0 tools, virtual worlds, or social-networking sites have also been adopted to support collaborative language learning. Research focus vary from one study to another. The following sections discuss studies on computer-supported collaborative language learning in terms of language skills.. 21.

(31) Reading & Writing In terms of writing, the benefits of face-to-face collaborative writing tasks, such as the production of more accurate texts and more organized ideas generated by learners, are well documented (Storch, 2011). There has been accumulating research in the use of wikis in supporting collaborative writing. Research has revealed that creating wiki pages collaboratively has a positive impact on students’ writing skills, since peer feedback and discussion scaffold the writing process in terms of the writing content and language accuracy (Lee, 2010). In additional to improving writing skills, the use of wikis creates a sense of belonging and a place for authentic writing (Mak & Coniam, 2008). Attempting to explore how online communication tools influenced collaborative writing process, Elola and Oskoz (2010) investigated L2 learners’ use of two social technologies, wikis and chats (oral or text-based), in writing tasks. Students were asked to write two argumentative essays, one individually and the other collaboratively, in the wikis. Learners’ tracked activities in the wikis and chats, their drafts and writing products, and questionnaire were collected to understand how they approached the two writing tasks. Although there were no significant differences between individual and collaborative writing product in terms of accuracy, fluency, and complexity, learners acknowledged that through a dynamic process of discussion with peers, they produced a more fine-tuned thesis with satisfying quality. The findings also showed that when working collaboratively, learners tended to discuss thesis or the structure of writing by using chats, while focused on paragraph- or sentence- level in the wikis. In a follow-up study, Oskoz and Elola (2014) implemented task-based approach in teaching process model of writing. 16 undergraduate learners in an advanced Spanish writing course were asked to work collaboratively in pairs and complete two threeweek modules in writing both argumentative and expository essays. Two Web 2.0 tools, 22.

(32) chatrooms and wikis, were employed. Learners’ chat interactions (oral and written chat), tracked changes of the drafts in wiki pages, and the final writing products were collected for further analysis. It was suggested that the technology-mediated tasks supported learners’ reflexive thinking and helped learners achieve a thorough understanding of genre differences. Regarding the effects of Web 2.0 tools, the study showed that learners focused predominantly on content when utilizing the two online tools, which resonated with Kessler’s (2009) finding that students focused more on meaning than form in webbased writing contexts. Concerning the use of two tools, the participants were found to focus more on localized aspects, such as fine-tuning of their vocabulary when using wikis in comparison with using online chats. This finding demonstrated how online tools and the specific features of each affected learning activities and the content of discussion. In capturing the complex interaction between group activities and tools, Wen et al. (2013) examined how participants utilized, or “appropriated” the technological tools in the context of L2 (Chinese) collaborative writing task. They also explored the benefits of such tools in complementing face-to-face communication. Nineteen participants worked in five separate groups, with everyone having his or her own laptop to access GS, a representational tool used in the study. Participants were asked to engage in a planning task comprised of several phases of discussion on the debatable topic “plastic surgery.” Video recordings of face-to-face and GS-based interactions were analyzed by using open-coding. Researchers first identified “events,” in which uninterrupted interactions center on the same semantic content. These events were then categorized to three groups based on their functions: (a) social related events (b) cognitive-related events, either about discussion content or about language use and (c) off-task events. Interactions across media were also investigated to understand the mediating effect of technology. Through qualitative analysis of group interactions, five beneficial functions 23.

(33) of posts on a representation tool space were observed: (1) referencing, (2) pinpointing, (3) prompting notice, (4) realizing parallels, and (5) promoting synergy. The results also showed that different groups adopted alternative approaches in carrying out the task and that various patterns of media transitions were found based on learners’ proficiency level or the task design itself. This study stressed that representational tools could play a complementary role in supporting L2 learning and face-to-face communication. The tools not only encouraged equal participation among group members, but provided opportunities for learners to discuss and solve their language problems.. Listening & Speaking Language learning anxiety has been considered to negatively correlate with language learners’ achievement and willingness to participate in learning activities (Horwitz, 2001), especially in relation to speaking and listening skills. Compared with practicing speaking in front of the whole class, collaborative learning often provides a more comfortable learning environment for students with high anxiety levels. In collaborative learning settings, listening and speaking skills are more likely to be developed through peer support, productive interaction, and abundant input and output in the target language. However, collaboration among peers does not always lead to successful learning. Several key factors may come into play, including the technology, the tasks or learning activities, and the ecology of groups. In an attempt to understand how task design affected language learners’ oral participation, Deutschmann et al. (2009) conducted an action research and compared two courses in a multi-user virtual environment called Second Life. The two courses both consisted of six sessions (approximately 1.5 hours for each session). Course Two was re-designed based on the findings of Course One and was offered to a new group of students in the following semester. A major difference between the two courses was 24.

(34) the task design. In Course One, a role play scenario was adopted, while the participants were not engaged by the design and did not fit into the assigned roles. This led to a freer design of Course Two in which only general themes were defined and participants had more freedom express themselves and to engage in a more authentic communication. In addition, in Course Two, teachers played a facilitating role rather than a directing role in managing the communicative activities. To understand how the differences between the two courses affected students’ participation, the floor space, turn lengths, and turn taking patterns were analyzed. The results indicated that compared to Course One, the floor space taken up by the teachers decreased considerably in Course Two. With regard to turn lengths, active participation and longer turn lengths on average were observed in Course Two. Also, student-student turn taking pattern was seldom found in Course One, while this pattern was much more frequent in Course Two, with participants participating in more vigorous discussion and communication. Given the research design, no strong arguments could be made in terms of what exact changes in Course Two contributed to the increased oral participation. However, it is suggested that task design which encouraged authentic communication and collaboration among group members better supported the development of oral skills. There are fewer studies investigating the use of mobile devices in supporting collaborative learning. Looking at the use of mobile devices, Hwang et al. (2016) designed mobile learning activities by adopting game-based approach to enhance learners' listening and speaking ability in EFL environment. A between-subject experimental design was used. 40 high school Taiwanese students were assigned randomly to form control and experimental groups with 20 participants for each group. An instructor provided guidance and the same learning content to both groups during a three-week experimental period. Games, including interactive jigsaw and card game, were played in class. For example, in the card game, students created their own 25.

(35) sentences, read them out loud, and made other students pick up as many corresponding cards as possible. After class, control group practiced what they had learned using a paper and pen method, while the experimental group utilized a mobile system. Pre- and post- listening and speaking tests taken from a standardized English proficiency test (GEPT) were administered. For experimental group, questionnaires and one-on-one semi-structured interviews were employed after the intervention to investigate participants' perceptions toward the mobile-assisted language learning platform. According to the statistical analysis, no significant difference was found between the two groups' listening abilities. However, concerning the speaking abilities, the results showed that the experimental group outperformed the control group significantly. The researchers indicated that the improvement of speaking abilities in experimental group may result from the use of the mobile system, which enabled students to practice their oral skills through imitating (listening to the pronunciation of words), recording, sharing (sending their recorded files to peers or the instructor), and reflecting (listening to their peers' recording and identifying mistakes in their own recordings). Also, through the use of mobile technology, students could create meaningful cards of their own in the card game based on situational contexts, which brought in-class language learning into the real world. The questionnaire surveys and interviews revealed that participants' motivation levels were high, and that they expressed positive attitudes toward the mobile-assisted language learning experience, which was in consistent with the findings of many other mobile-assisted collaborative learning studies. The studies using mobile technology to support collaborative learning practices focus mainly on teenagers or adults. In order to understand how children use mobile devices in language learning, Kirsch (2016) presented a two-year longitudinal study in which 18 six- and seven-year-old primary school students utilized an iPad app iTEO to collaboratively engage in the tasks of digital storytelling. The app provided open-ended 26.

(36) frames in the interface for students to insert pictures and create their own stories. It also enabled users to record, edit, and replay oral language. Aiming to investigate the process of collaboration as well as the affordances of iTEO, qualitative data, including observations, video recordings, interviews, and students’ products were collected. Informed by the concept of exploratory talk and the work of Nystrand et al. (2003) on discourse analysis, the researchers coded according to categories like “the language use,” “the characteristics of talk,” and “function attributed to iTEO.” The findings provided concrete examples of students’ exploratory talk that emerged when students built linguistic knowledge jointly by discussing and justifying better story content or word choices. Students’ interaction also illustrated how more knowledgeable children facilitated their peers’ learning by encouraging talk and promoting comprehension. As for the role of iTEO on students’ learning, the tool was recognized as a successful learning tools which facilitated language learning and the collaboration process in different ways. For instance, the recording and automatic playback functions helped redesign the recording process and created space for learners to negotiate and reflect on their language production. The app also functioned as an audio and text bank from which learners could refer to when getting lost.. Other In an exploratory study, Lantz-Anderson et al. (2013) considered whether and how social networking sites could be used as an extended space for language learning activities. 60 students, aged from 13 to 16, from four countries joined a Facebook page for interaction. The idea of “framing,” relating to how participants define activities and how they adjust their language repertoires, is adopted. From the postings in which learners introduced themselves, changes were found in how students framed their presentations. Initially, a formal and expository writing style was used. As the 27.

(37) interaction evolved, students’ increasing use of digital vernacular language, such as the emoticons, was reported. It is revealed that as the interaction in SNS continued, schooling norms were collaboratively negotiated and challenged. The study suggested that SNS could be a dynamic and extended space for language learning activities, but at the same time it brought challenges for both teachers and students in the reframing of the activities and in the negotiation of new roles and expectations in such platforms. Aiming to understand how artefacts mediated students learning process, Wong et al. (2012) reported an intervention study in a mobile-assisted Chinese language learning environment. In a learning activity called “Move, Idiom!”, after an in-class learning session, 35 fifth-graders worked in groups and used mobile phones to take photos of everyday life scenarios that might be associated with the idioms. Then they made sentences or composed a short story by using the idioms to describe the photos they had taken. Group products were then upload to a class wiki space for further classroom discussion and reflection. Attempting to investigate the interplay between students’ meaning making and the artefacts (e.g. existing artefacts like physical environment or example sentences offered by the teacher; artefacts co-created by students, such as student-generated work at a certain moment), the researchers analyzed audio and video recordings as well as the field notes of in-class session by using open coding. A new visualization approach was derived to conduct the artefact-oriented analysis. The study offered a novel visualization approach to analyze how artefacts affected students’ meaning making process, and identified potential distracting artefacts that might constrain the learning tasks in certain cases. For example, the example sentences provided by the teacher constrained some students’ creativity in the following activity of photo taking and story creation. The researchers stressed that students should be encouraged and trained to identify and take advantage of resources at hand to facilitate their learning instead of being asked to use certain resources provided merely by the 28.

(38) teachers. Of the different studies discussed here, several observations and research focus can be identified. First of all, the use of technology has been shown to support collaborative learning process and language learning in a variety of ways. Wiki-based and blog writing, for example, provide platforms for language learners to co-create a text, read their peers' writings, and interact with learners without the constraints of time and space (Oskoz & Elola, 2014). Also, the portability and the built-in functions of mobile devices create new learning experiences in which learners get exposed to different modes of presentation, including visual or oral ones, in an authentic context or a real-world situation (Hwang et al., 2016; Kirsch, 2016). Secondly, the pedagogical approaches adopted by the reviewed studies include game-based learning, task-based language, or situated learning. It is indicated that the design of the learning activities or tasks affects learners' interaction patterns (Deutschmann et al., 2009). The use of tasks or learning activities should be meticulously designed to create more opportunities for collaboration and communication among learners and teachers. Thirdly, most research has investigated learners' perceptions and reported improved motivation and engagement in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Fewer studies examine the learning process, such as how students construct new knowledge, how the interaction with peers lead to learning, and how the affordances of technology or the created artefacts mediate students' learning (Wen et al., 2015; Wong et al., 2012). Thus, there is a need to understand more about the learning process and the role of mobile technologies especially in collaborative language learning context.. 29.

(39) 2.3 The Present Study. In the first section of the literature review, task-based language learning, its underlying theories, and the incorporation of technology into TBLT have been discussed. Based on the socio-cultural approach toward language learning, task-based language. learning. emphasizes. the. importance. of. interaction,. meaningful. communication, and a product created through a collaborative process of learning. Studies have confirmed the positive effects of adopting technology-mediated TBLT on language learning. For instance, an increase in language output and noticing of language components have been reported (Lai & Li, 2011). Also, the use of technology enables interactions among learners of different nationalities, which is shown to have promoted language learners’ intercultural competence (Ducate & Lomicka, 2008). With the ubiquity of mobile devices, more and more research has managed to investigate how handheld devices have to offer under the TBLT framework. Of the reviewed mobile-assisted TBLT studies, most of them focus on the design of mobile learning systems and the systems’ effectiveness in facilitating language learning (Liu et al., 2010; Ogata et al., 2008). As suggested by Tai (2012), the development of a learning system or software requires a substantial amount of technical knowledge which most language teachers do not have. Thus, more attention should be paid to how the built-in functions of mobile devices, such as video recording or photo-taking, facilitate language learning. Recognizing the need, instead of designing or employing a particular mobile learning system, the present study designed tasks adhering to the principles of task-based language teaching and learning using online tools (e.g. Websites). The instructional design could be reproduced by future research and it also serves as a demonstration for language instructors to incorporate accessible technological tools into TBLT framework. 30.

(40) As mentioned earlier, the majority of literature in technology-mediated TBLT has probed into learners' perceptions and reported improved motivation and engagement. Studies have also demonstrated the use of technology-mediated tasks in promoting language learning skills, inter-cultural competence, and learning engagement or motivation. However, few of them have discussed the learning process in which language learners work together to produce an outcome with the help of technologies. With a better understanding of the ways in which groups collaborate to create a product or knowledge object, it is more likely for teachers or language instructors to provide needed pedagogical and technological support. In order to explore the group interactions and technological affordances, the literature on computer-supported collaborative learning with a focus on language learning was then discussed in the second section of literature review. In terms of the role of technology in facilitating group interactions, studies have shown that the interactive nature of technology is able to create a context for collaboration. Also, technologies have allowed interaction without the constraints of time and space and facilitate learner interaction (Hwang et al., 2016; Oskoz & Elola, 2014). Other than describing the advantages of adopting certain technology tools, some researchers have focused on how technologies mediate group interaction and how learners interact with technology (Overdijk et al., 2014). In line with this reasoning, Wen et al. (2015) looked at the active role of learners in interacting with technology and found that different groups implemented the same representational tool in different ways during the learning process. In exploring learners’ active roles in using technological tools, the present study intends to investigate the affordances offered by mobile devices. Affordances, in the present study, are realized as the understood features afforded by Tablet PC. Taking a step further, the study aims to understand more about how the complex use of these tools influences group interactions. 31.

(41) In this study, the following research questions were addressed: 1.. How do learners interact and collaborate with others in a mobile-assisted TBLT context?. 2.. What are the technological affordances during the learning process?. 32.

(42) CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 3.1 The Setting and Participants. The research site was a public high school in an urban area of Northern Taiwan. The school focused on the promotion of students’ English competence and thus offered special courses featuring project-based learning. The instructor for the elective course was an experienced teacher who had been teaching English for more than twenty years. She was also the participants’ English teacher in regular English class, so the participants were familiar with her teaching style and classroom routines. A friendly and welcoming classroom atmosphere was found in the observed classes. In terms of the participants, a total of nine students, including five females and four males, were recruited in the study and they met once a week for two class periods (each class period took fifty minutes). In order to ensure confidentiality, pseudonyms were used in the study. The participants included Alex, Ariel, Claire, Elva, Julia, Kelly, Ken, Ray, Tony. The participants have learned English as a foreign language in school for at least six years. Their English proficiency is at intermediate level, with seven out of nine participants having passed the first stage of General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) intermediate level. The first stage (reading and listening tests) of GEPT intermediate level corresponds to the CEFR’s B1 level.. 33.

(43) 3.2 Instructional Design. The present study adopted a task-based language learning approach and implemented two inquiry-based learning cycles, each of which consisted of several sub-tasks. Each cycle took about one month (eight class periods in total; instructional time for each period was around fifty minutes) to accomplish. The first cycle engaged students in the topic of heroes across time and cultures, and the second cycle introduced food and culture around the world. The main-task and sub-tasks in each cycle were designed based on the criteria proposed by Ellis (2003) to fulfill the definition of a task: (a) create a need for leaners to convey. information and exchange thoughts (b) focus primarily on meaningful communication (c) elicit interaction with learners and/or with the teacher (d) encourage language learners to draw on both linguistic and non-linguistic resources to accomplish the task and (e) learners should achieve certain goals or produce a final product. Table One showed the tasks employed in each cycle.. Table 1 Tasks in cycle 1 & 2 Cycle 1: Heroes Task 1. Task 2. Cycle 2: Food and Culture Table manners:. Read about the heroes:. Comparing and contrasting,. Identifying, classifying. seeking information. Think about the heroes:. Food around the world:. Generating ideas, selecting. Brainstorming, classifying. Present the heroes: Task 3. Brainstorming, seeking and synthesizing information. Food safety: Brainstorming, decision making Food in Taiwan:. Task 4. Brainstorming, seeking and synthesizing information. 34.

(44) During the intervention, students interacted face-to-face with each participant having an iPad to support their learning. In order to guide the students through a variety of complex tasks as well as incorporating online materials into learning, WebQuests were adopted in this study. Developed by Bernie Dodge and Tom March in 1995, WebQuests have been shown to successfully guide the learners from one task to another as well as help learners navigate the Internet in a structured manner (Dodge, 2001). Also, the interactive nature of WebQuest is considered to facilitate collaborative learning and social interaction during the learning process (Perkins & McKnight, 2005). As shown in Figure 1, a WebQuest comprised of six essential attributes: Introduction. (to set the background), Task (to introduce practical task or sub-tasks), Process (to guide learners in a structure way to accomplish the main task), Resources (to provide and list assigned reading materials or useful online resources), Evaluation (to show rubrics or standards used to assess task performances), and Conclusion (to wrap-up the cycle and encourage reflection). In each class meeting, students got access to the WebQuest page and the instructor guided them through different stages of a cycle.. Figure 1 Interface of WebQuest website. 35.

(45) 3.3 Technology Support. The technological support for the study was provided in a variety of ways. In each class meeting, participants were equipped with iPads for them to use. The portability and the powerful functions provided by iPads were considered to be beneficial in facilitating learning. Also, the online WebQuest pages for cycle 1 and 2 made course documents and resources available all the time. Students would be able to review the teaching materials at home, extend their learning by visiting the online resources listed in “resources” section, and refer to the website when they got lost during the transitions of activities or tasks. A class forum was created for each participant or group to post their ideas, findings, and thoughts in and out of class. Instructors and participants used the forum to provide feedback or comments to the postings. In addition to the class forum, a powerful note-taking app Evernote was introduced for participants to take notes for group discussion or presentation preparation.. 36.