Monitoring Bilingualism

Pedagogical Implications of the Bilingual Tandem Analyser

Authors

  • Klaus Schwienhorst Trinity College Dublin
  • Alexandre Borgia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v23i2.349-362

Keywords:

Learner Autonomy, MOO, Tandem Learning, Bilingualism, Text-based Communication

Abstract

Tandem learning is the collaborative learning partnership of two language learners with complementary language combinations, for example an Irish student learning German and a German student learning English. One of the major principles in tandem learning, apart from reciprocity and learner autonomy, is balanced bilingualism. While learners may find it relatively easy to control their bilingualism in email exchanges, it is not so easy to do so in synchronous text-based exchanges in object-oriented multi-user domains (MOOs), where measurements of bilingualism are often crude and inaccurate. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we wanted to develop and test a computerized tool, the Bilingual Tandem Analyser, that automatically analyzes and provides feedback on the languages that are used during a "live" exchange. Second, we wanted to implement the tool in a bilingual exchange between German and Irish students to see whether the balance in bilingualism improved. Our results show that the Bilingual Tandem Analyser is quick, reliable, and highly accurate for the four languages tested. When implementing the tool, we noticed that there is a noticeable improvement towards more balanced exchanges but that more work is needed on the pedagogical implementation.

Author Biographies

  • Klaus Schwienhorst, Trinity College Dublin

    Klaus Schwienhorst works as co-ordinator of extracurricular language modules and Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the Centre for Language and Communication Studies at Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. He has published mainly in the area of learner autonomy and synchronous text-based communication tools. His main research interests lie in virtual reality, computer mediated communication, and learner autonomy for second language acquisition.

  • Alexandre Borgia

    Alexandre Borgia is an independent software developer whose main interests revolve around computer-assisted pedagogy. He has worked on many private eLearning solutions and research tools for language studies in collaboration with Trinity College Dublin. He is co-founder of MOOFrançais, a virtual French community, which has the goal of promoting French and helping second language learners.

References

Appel, M. C. (1999). Tandem learning by e-mail: Some basic principles and a case study (Vol. 54, CLCS Occasional Paper). Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language & Communication Studies.

Appel, C., & Mullen, T. (2000). Pedagogical considerations for a web-based tandem language learning environment. Computers and Education, 34 (3-4), 291-308.

Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. Harlow: Longman.

Borgia, A. (2003). Moo Utilities [Web page]. Retrieved August 24, 2003, from http://kontakt.tcd.ie/BTA

Cavnar, W. B., & Trenkle, J. M. (1994). N-gram-based text categorization. In Proceedings of third annual symposium on document analysis and information retrieval (pp. 161-175). Las Vegas, NV: UNLV Publications/Reprographics.

Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.

Kapec, P., & Schwienhorst, K. (2005). In two minds? Learner attitudes to bilingualism and the Bilingual Tandem Analyser. ReCALL, 17 (2), 254-268.

Kötter, M. (2002). Tandem learning on the Internet. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Kötter, M. (2003). Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 145-172. Retrieved October 12, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/kotter/default.html

Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues, and problems. Dublin: Authentik.

Little, D., & Brammerts, H. (Eds.). (1996). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet (Vol. 46, CLCS Occasional Paper). Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language & Communication Studies.

O’Rourke, B. (2002). Metalinguistic knowledge in instructed second language acquisition: A theoretical model and its pedagogical application in computer-mediated communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Trinity College, Dublin.

O’Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22 (3). 433-466

O’Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K. (2003). Talking text: Reflections on reflection in computer-mediated communication. In D. Little, J. Ridley, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom: Teacher, learner, curriculum and assessment (pp. 47-60). Dublin: Authentik.

Schwienhorst, K. (2000). Virtual reality and learner autonomy in second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Trinity College, Dublin.

Schwienhorst, K. (2002). Pressures, potentials, and affordances: The role of tools in CALL environments. Communication & Cognition—Artificial Intelligence, 19 (3-4), 133-149.

Schwienhorst, K. (2003a). Learner autonomy and tandem learning: Putting principles into practice in synchronous and asynchronous telecommunications environments. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 16 (5), 427-443.

Schwienhorst, K. (2003b). Neither here nor there? Learner autonomy and intercultural factors in CALL environments. In D. Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives (pp. 164-180). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Schwienhorst, K. (2004). Native-speaker/non native-speaker discourse in the MOO: Participation and engagement in a synchronous text-based environment. ComputerAssisted Language Learning, 17 (1), 35-50.

Shield, L. (2003). MOO as a language learning tool. In U. Felix (Ed.), Language learning online: Towards best practice (pp. 97-122). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Shield, L., Davies, L. B., & Weininger, M. J. (2000). Fostering (pro)active language learning through MOO. ReCALL, 12 (1), 35-48.

Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82-119. Retrieved October 12, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/default.html

Trebbi, T., Jopp, C., & Coco, M. (2003, 16-18 October). Didaktisk rollespill i en MOO: Er læringen satt på spill? Paper presented at the Digital Dannelse Conference, Oslo.

Van Noord, G. (1999). TextCat [computer software]. Retrieved 25 March, 1999, from http://odur.let.rug.nl/~vannoord/TextCat

Downloads

Published

2013-01-14

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Schwienhorst, K., & Borgia, A. (2013). Monitoring Bilingualism: Pedagogical Implications of the Bilingual Tandem Analyser. CALICO Journal, 23(2), 349-362. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v23i2.349-362

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>