Designing interactive cross-cultural mobile-assisted language learning

Designing interactive cross-cultural mobile-assisted language learning Pin-Hsiang Natalie Wu, Chien-kuo Technology University, Changhua, Taiwan Michael W. Marek Wayne State College, Wayne, Nebraska, USA

ABSTRACT Using communication technology for learning is a path to new patterns of thinking. This study examined the affordances provided by using smartphone technology in English for cross-cultural understanding. University students from Japan and Taiwan used the popular app LINE collaboratively for five weeks, culminating in jointly-written essays. Data collection used a survey, open-ended questions, and analysis of the essays. The students saw English as an important international language in which they need competency, strongly favored use of technology to assist language learning, appreciated the study’s cross-cultural experience, and found the dynamics of the group to be interesting and motivating. The authors provide four best practices for using LINE and similar applications for English learning - that they be thought of as communication tools, that students need strong support concerning required tasks, that students must understand how tasks using technology benefit them, and that true online communities may include multiple platforms. KEYWORDS affordance, CALL, cross-cultural, interactive, APP, MALL Note: This document is a pre-press version of this article:

Wu, P-H. N. & Marek, M. W. (2018). Designing interactive cross-cultural mobile-assisted language learning. In B. Zou & M. Thomas (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Integrating Technology into Contemporary Language Learning and Teaching, (pp. 262-285). Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5140-9.ch13

See: https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/designing-interactive-cross-cultural-mobile-assisted-language-learning/198125

There may be slight formatting and editorial differences from the published version . 1

INTRODUCTION There is a growing emphasis around the world on interaction processes and the socio-cultural aspects of language learning. Raising cultural understanding and increasing cultural sensitivity are both necessary in the language learning process, if students are to progress beyond basic knowledge into idiomatic language use (Wu & Marek, 2013). Collaboration is a key ingredient of teaching and learning (Bruning et al., 2011). Many studies have shown the benefits of collaborative learning of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) (Li et al., 2010; Shih, 2011; Tchounikine et al., 2010). Collaborative learning is also a major focal point of research in Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) (Carter & Stockwell, 2008; Chai et al., 2016; Wu & Marek, 2010). The understanding of other cultures as a tool for language learning has also been an area of research emphasis (Chun, 2006) and Web 2.0 technology can be a tool for improving cultural understanding (Toetenel, 2014), given its ability to provide fast, interesting, and low-cost channels of communication among collaborators from different cultures. Stockwell (2014) found that while there is considerable research citing development of cultural awareness as an outcome of the study, these elements are often unplanned and not a purposeful goal of the study. One way to gain the advantages of collaboration is to use Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) applications to facilitate communication among different cultural groups. CMC/CALL scholarship is paying growing attention to such applications because today’s college students virtually all have mobile data access (Chen & Li, 2010; Huang et al., 2012; Ma, 2017). Adopting smartphones in language learning can successfully motivate students (Leis & Tohei, 2015) and promote autonomous study (Wang et al., 2014). Zou & Yan (2014) also stated that there is a strong motivation among students for learning English via mobile devices, and there is also a wide diversity of mobile learning activities appearing in higher education curricula. This study used MALL technology to mediate a collaborative learning environment focused on cross-cultural understanding. The researchers selected the LINE text messaging platform because it provided individual and group interaction while providing a strong level of student privacy. LINE was well-known to Asian college students and did not require a significant learning curve for convenient use, yet it had not been widely researched. The goals of the study were to (a) understand the experiences of students who used LINE as a MALL platform, (b) raise cultural understanding via cross-cultural collaboration in language learning, (c) identify the affordances of the technology used, and (d) develop best practices recommendations for instructional use of smartphone applications, such as LINE, for cross-cultural understanding. The specific research questions that guided this study were: 2

1. What are the perceptions of the participants on the role of the English language today and their resulting attitude toward learning English? 2. What do the participants feel about using technology to assist language learning, which technology or network do they prefer, and why? 3. What are the reactions of the participants about learning via cross-cultural interaction and how did cross-cultural interaction affect their willingness to communicate? 4. What are resulting instructional technology design best practices for English learning activities using LINE? Although determining the affordances of the technology was a key goal of the study, the authors determined that they should not ask students about affordances directly, because it is an academic term outside their experience. The research questions addressed the perceptions, feelings, and reactions of the students. The data were then used to understand the resulting affordances. This study, therefore, is significant because of the resulting analysis of affordances provided by purposeful use of the little-researched smartphone application LINE for collaborative learning about culture. Authentic experiences while learning about other cultures can improve motivation to learn English (Kim et al., 2013; Shadiev et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2017) and therefore, the affordances demonstrated in this study can be used by other instructional technology designers to promote a positive state of mind among students.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE English is the global language, such that wherever two people meet who do not speak the same language, English will likely be the common basis for communication between them (Dörnyei, 2005). As a result, English is the language of international business, science, and culture (Benzie, 2010; Ferguson et al., 2011). Many students of English as a Foreign Language, however, have little opportunity for practical use, causing them to rarely use what they have learned outside the classroom in their daily lives (Wu & Marek, 2007). This contradiction has resulted in the need for more practical cross-cultural interaction in educational settings to prepare students for future cross-cultural interaction in the workplace (Walton et al., 2013). The following sections present specific literature relevant to this study. Theoretical Framework A review of the relevant literature reveals that many papers reporting CALL/MALL research studies do not contain a theoretical framework (Duman et al., 2015). The current authors 3

present the following theoretical context for the present study. Much research shows that Computer Mediated Communication for language instruction can benefit EFL students (e.g. Ortega, 2009). The general theme across many studies is that such technology-rich learning, as is employed in the current study, provides authentic, interactive experiences that students greatly desire. Motivation, confidence, and ability have been shown to interact with each other (Bodnar et al., 2017; Butler & Lumpe, 2008; Phillips & Lindsay, 2006; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009) such that the state of mind of students is directly related to their motivation and success. Dörnyei (2005) postulated a model of motivation in which the EFL learner imagines an idealized future English-speaking self, based in part on emotional reactions to real-life encounters with other English speakers and in part on hopes of future functioning in international society. Research has shown that even a small amount of successful interaction with speakers of the target language can inspire students to desire global, cross-cultural connections (Wu & Marek, 2010), thus greatly influencing their motivation. Research also shows, however, that such interaction needs to be structured in a way that feels authentic and organic to the student (Marek & Wu, 2011). For example, as opposed to direct instruction of grammar and pronunciation, it is better to enrich regular student-centered classroom instruction with explorations of cultural elements, particularly those not commonly known by the L2 learner (Wu & Marek, 2007). The current study was designed to promote such successful interaction among Japanese and Taiwanese students. A key factor in fostering student success is the technique of scaffolding (Lee, 2003; Van de Pol et al., 2010), an instructional practice that extends far beyond MALL methodology. Teachers initially provide high levels of support as students perform early learning tasks, but progressively lessen support to encourage students to be independent. As a result, student confidence and ability improve over time. This focus on authentic interaction and student success aligns well with Constructivist learning theory, emphasizing student-centered active learning and collaboration, as opposed to traditional instructional models stressing grammar and direct translation (Bruning et al., 2011; Ellis, 2009). The teacher in this study, therefore, served as a guide, but no longer the central, unquestionable authority (Wu et al., 2012). In turn, Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) have been shown to facilitate active, collaborative learning. Nguyen (2011) found that CMC interactions yielded more equal participation than face-to-face interactions and therefore promoted collaborative learning and a beneficial frame of mind among the learners.

4

Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL) Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL) refers to learning with mobile technology and handheld devices (Stockwell, 2012) including rapidly-evolving smartphone technology (Ballance, 2012), such as the LINE app used in this study. Such mobile learning has the potential to increase the amount of time learners spend engaged in their learning activities and make them active participants in their learning, as opposed to passive receivers of information (Shadiev et al., 2017; Stockwell, 2010). The ubiquitous access to mobile devices conforms with the communicative approach to language learning (Looi et al., 2010) but issues have also been identified that must be addressed in MALL instructional design, such as small screen size, screen layout, product design, and limited input methods, all of which can impact the types of tasks and amount of information that can be conveyed (Alnajjar & Brick, 2017; Shadiev et al., 2017; Stockwell, 2012). In addition, Hockly (2013) said that both teachers and learners must be familiar with the applications they will use. Teachers must also be emotionally willing to use technology in the classroom, rather than seeing it as an invasion of their territory, or something that has only narrow pedagogical value (van Prag & Sanchez, 2015). Simplicity, user-friendliness, and ease of training are important (Marek & Wu, 2012; Milutinović et al., 2015). In general, however, learners welcome using handheld devices as part of language learning (Kim et al., 2013).

METHODOLOGY The participants in this study were taking English classes in Japan and Taiwan. The following sections contain details. Research Philosophy Dörnyei (2014) held that many diverse variables exist in language learning that an experimental design cannot take into account. Wu and Marek (2013) expanded on this concept and demonstrated dozens of internal and external factors that may influence EFL learning and teaching, concluding that it would be supremely difficult to account for all of them in a language learning experimental design. Colpaert (2012) also said that there are so many factors that, in spite of rigorous experimental methodologies, it is hard to predict whether a successful CALL implementation at one school will also be successful when employed at a different school. He suggested that rather than studying the differences that result from the use or non-use of a particular technology, researchers should better study the affordances, in other words, the ability that technology provides to contribute to specific educational goals. 5

Accordingly, the researchers focused on analysis of the affordances of the LINE mobile app to mediate a beneficial cross-cultural collaborative language learning environment as part of a broader instructional design. Indeed, as the study progressed, this judgment was validated. For example, in spite of delimiting the instructional design to using LINE and email for cross-cultural interaction, many of the students also exchanged Facebook IDs, an almost automatic social response when young people in Asia meet. The affordance-based design of this study relieved the researchers of trying to control for any possible study-based Facebook communication as a confounding variable. Technology Design This study created an online learning community to connect students in Japan and Taiwan. The researchers selected the LINE smartphone application, available for Android, iOS, and Windows desktop operating systems. LINE is a leading smartphone application with 217 million monthly users in the fourth quarter of 2016 (Statistica, 2017). It was created after the 2011 Fukishima earthquake in Japan which incapacitated a large part of the Japanese telephone system, leaving people no easy way to communicate with loved ones during the crisis (Bushey, 2014). Users have been shown to rank a technology according to how they personally perceive the technical usability (Alnajjar & Brick, 2017) and because using LINE for personal communication was so common among participants, the researchers judged that it would receive acceptance by the users. LINE allowed users to communicate via individual or group text messages, as well as voice and video calls, because “real time” messaging was feasible given that Japan and Taiwan have a time zone difference of only one hour apart. The participants used email if messages or file transfers needed to be longer or larger than was convenient for LINE. Instructional Design An interaction-oriented learning project was designed for the purpose of this study. Participants from each country were divided into groups on LINE. Each group was assigned to write a collaborative 700-word five-paragraph essay about the members’ viewpoints on English education in the two countries. After discussion designed to allow the participants to become acquainted, they used LINE messages to discuss topics assigned by the teacher that were relevant to the contents of the final essay paragraphs. To complete the final collaborative task, the students performed extensive task interaction, that is, they conducted research, compared and contrasted the information they assembled, and reflected on their own experiences. After they had decided what to say, they exchanged drafts via e-mail. Scaffolding was used, so that in the early stages of the study, the teacher provided discussion topics with short deadlines, prompts, 6

and reminders. As the study progressed, the participants were expected to become more self-directed. Figure 1 presents details of how the study progressed.

Research Design This study employed a mixed methodology, including quantitative data collection via a survey, as well as qualitative critical text analysis of data collected from the participants’ written responses 7

to end-of-study questions, records of actual LINE interaction, and the contents of the collaboratively-written essays. The quantitative data were used for basic descriptive analysis and for regression analysis that provided insights for formulation of the qualitative questions and for the overall Critical Text Analysis. Table 1 contains a matrix detailing which data source answered which research question. Although the research questions were about the perceptions, feelings and reactions of the students, the analysis allowed identification of the affordances, in keeping with the original goals of the study.

Table 1. Plan for Answers to Research Questions Research Question

Data source for answer

1. What are the perceptions of the participants on the role of the English

Written Q&A; final essays.

language today and their resulting attitude toward learning English? 2. What do the participants feel about using technology to assist

Survey; written questions.

language learning, which technology or network do they prefer, and why? 3. What are the reactions of the participants about learning via

Survey; written questions.

cross-cultural interaction and how did cross-cultural interaction affect their willingness to communicate? 4. What are instructional technology design best practices for English

Survey, written questions, and critical text

learning activities using LINE?

analysis of the LINE interactive dialog.

Participants The Taiwanese participants in this program were majoring in applied English and invited from a “Conversational English” class at a technology university. In Japan, the participants were Economics majors at a Japanese university, invited from a “Media English” course. The selected students already had the habit using LINE for daily social communication, as well as using email, and had intermediate English levels (TOEIC scores above 400 or GEPT at the A2 level or above). In addition, the invitees had demonstrated strong motivation toward cross-cultural interaction. Forty-one students joined the study. Each group included four participants, two from each country, except that because of the odd number of participants, one group had five members. Data Collection and Analysis Quantitative Methodology 8

Survey questions were created based on previous research identified during the literature review and on the experience of the researchers. Five dimensions were examined including (A) Perception of willingness to communicate in this study, two questions, (B) Perception of cross-cultural collaboration effectiveness/success in this study, six questions, (C) Perception of future willingness to communicate in an international context, two questions, (D) Perception of using LINE in the context of this study, four questions, and (E) Perception of using email in the context of this study, three questions. Students answered the survey via a five point Likert-like scale, ranging from 1, Strongly Disagree, to 5, Strongly Agree. Answers were coded and analyzed via the SPSS statistical software for descriptive statistics and Multiple Regression Analysis. End-of-Study Qualitative Questions At the conclusion of the study, participants provided written responses to nine questions about their perspectives on English language learning and the use of handheld devices. The question protocol was based on previous research identified during the literature review and on the quantitative findings (Table 2). The researchers employed critical text analysis (Ingulsrud et al., 2002) to interpret the answers to the end-of-study questions. The researchers read the answers several times, grouping the student comments into themes, which helped to describe the experiences of the students. Contents of the Collaboratively Written Essays The researchers also analyzed the actual content of the final essays of the students. Because the focus of the analysis was affordances provided by LINE for intercultural understanding, the researchers did not analyze the technical writing of the essays, deeming questions of organization, vocabulary, punctuation, and logical flow of ideas to be outside the focus of the current study. Rather they used critical text analysis to uncover the feelings of the students about the importance and role of English today and the corresponding affordances provided by LINE.

9

Table 2. Question protocol 1. How important do you think it is to have ability in English in today’s world? Please explain. 2. What did you think of the idea of using Communication Media (LINE, MSN, Yahoo Messenger) to learn English? Do you think LINE is an appropriate media to learn English? Why or why not? 3. In reality, how did it work? Were you satisfied? Why or why not? 4. Do you have any ideas for improvements or better ways to do a collaborative learning English project using Communication Media? 5. Do you think good size of learning group can bring good intergroup atmosphere, and will influence the outcome of learning? 6. In reality, does your learning group foster a shared purpose and have good outcome of learning? 7. Do you prefer learning English with people from your own culture, or from different cultures? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these two kinds of learning? 8. In reality, how does it work? Do you learn more with people from different cultures or not? Please explain. 9. Whether or not you were happy with this learning experience, what advice do you have for teachers who want to use communication media for cross-cultural English learning? What should they do or not do?

Records of Actual LINE Interaction The researchers preserved the entire record of LINE interaction in each of the groups. At the end of the study, the researchers reviewed the interaction. Because the conversation in the student groups was highly diverse and distinctive, the researchers elected not to attempt to identify overarching qualitative themes, but they, nevertheless, searched for lessons that could be learned from the interaction about the emotional and motivational states of the participants.

QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS The participant answered survey questions exploring five constructs. Forty-one students completed the survey and written questions. The 20 Taiwanese and 21 Japanese participants (N=41) included 24 (58%) female and 17 (41%) male participants. A pre-test checked the internal consistency of the scale and Cronbach's alpha was 0.84 (Cronbach's alpha=.84) which showed a high level of internal consistency among all questions. Table 3 displays the means and standard deviations for the five constructs, as well as the descriptive statistical results for all questions.

10

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of all questions Items

M

Construct (A) Perception of willingness to communicate in this study

SD

3.40

.85

I enjoyed the experience of working with my partners of another culture.

3.33

1.08

I was active in contacting my partners of another culture.

3.48

1.12

3.81

.54

My partners of another culture were very cooperative.

4.00

.93

My partners of another culture and I were able to solve our problems.

3.67

.89

The interaction in this cross-cultural collaboration was successful.

3.73

.71

The collaboration in this cross-cultural activity was effective.

3.79

.85

I learned valuable skills for how to work well with people of another culture.

3.88

.82

I was able to develop a better understanding of my partners from another culture.

3.82

.68

4.03

.74

4.03

.84

4.03

.77

3.61

.54

I have encountered problems in the communication through Line.

3.91

.84

My partners of another culture and I were able to solve our problems through Line.

3.24

1.17

The Line experience helped my English communication ability.

3.67

.89

Instant Message sent via Line was helpful in my cross-cultural communication.

3.64

.82

3.05

.65

Using email for cross-cultural communication improved my English.

2.70

1.18

I enjoyed using email communicating with people.

3.12

.89

Messages sent via email were helpful in my cross-cultural communication.

3.33

.95

Construct (B) Perception of cross-cultural collaboration effectiveness/success in this study

Construct (C) Future Willingness to communicate in an international context The collaboration skills gained from this experience would help me interacting with people of different cultures in the future. I become more interested in getting to talk to people of different cultural backgrounds after this experience. Construct (D) Perception of using LINE as a tool in this study

Construct (E) Perception of using email as a tool in this study

In the responses to individual questions, the participants gave their highest level of agreement to “The collaboration skills gained from this experience would help me interacting with people of different cultures in the future” and “I become more interested in getting to talk to people of different cultural backgrounds after this experience” both with (M=4.03), followed by “My partners of another culture were very cooperative” (M=4.00). Their lowest level of agreement was with “Using email for cross-cultural communication improved my English” (M=2.70), the only question that received a mean on the Disagree side of 11

the Likert scale. “I enjoyed using email communicating with people” (M=3.12) and “My partners of another culture understood my messages in English” (M=3.24) followed with barely above a neutral response. In the construct results, the participants gave their highest level of agreement to construct (C) addressing their future willingness to communicate in an international context (M=4.03). The lowest level of agreement was construct (E) about their perception of using email as a tool in the study (M=3.05). In order to examine the motivation of the participants for future engagement in cross-cultural communication, and how other constructs influenced student motivation, Multiple Regression Analysis was performed, shown in Table 4 (R2=60%). Results showed that the construct “future willingness to communicate in an international context” was predicted by “willingness to communicate in this study” (ß=.599, p