Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Computer-Mediated Communication and Video Chat Randall Sadler University of Urbana-Champaign.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Computer-Mediated Communication and Video Chat Randall Sadler University of Urbana-Champaign."— Presentation transcript:

1 Computer-Mediated Communication and Video Chat Randall Sadler University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign

2 What is CMC/NBLT? Computer-Mediated Communication (for language learning) is the use of computers connected by networks to engage in authentic communication with other language learners and/or teachers. “NBLT represents a new and different side of CALL, where human-to-human communication is the focus” (Kern & Warschauer, 2000, p. 1).

3 Many of these influenced by The Audiolingual Approach Aka, Drill and Kill How is that different from CALL? “…CALL has traditionally been associated with self- contained, programmed applications such as tutorials, drills, simulations, instructional games, tests, and so on” (Kern & Warschauer, 2000, p. 1).

4 A VERY short review of research… Email: Absalon & Marden, 2004; Biesenbach- Lucas & Weasenforth, 2001; Fedderholdt, 2001; O'Dowd, 2003; Shang, 2003 Message Boards: Benton, 1996; Kamhi-Stein, 2000; Ware, 2004 MUDs and MOOs: Kötter, 2001b; Peterson, 2001; Weininger & Shield, 2003 Text Chat: Bearden, 2003; Freiermuth, 2002; Perez, 2003; D. B. Smith, 2001; Tudini, 2003; Williams, 2003

5 Okay, a fairly short review… Audio Chat: Cziko & Park, 2003; Hampel & Hauck, 2004; Kötter, 2001a; Kötter, Shield, & Stevens, 1999; Lamy, 2004 Video Conferencing: Goodfellow et al., 1996; Kinginger, 1998; Matthews, 1998; McAndrew, Foubister, & Mayes, 1996; Egert, 2000 Video Chat: Wang, 2004

6 Research Questions 1. What programs are freely available for engaging in synchronous video chat? 2. How different are these tools from each other in terms of technical and pedagogical issues? 3. How suitable are these programs for personal communication? 4. How suitable are these programs for language teaching purposes?

7 What did the study do? Evaluated 8 freely available video chat programs 1. CU-See Me World 2. ICQ 3. MSN Messenger 4. Paltalk 5. Skype 6. Yahoo Messenger

8 Participants Turkey 8 MATEFL students 4 female & 4 male Taking course on “The use of computers for language learning” US 10 MA TESL students 5 male & 5 female U.S., Argentina, China, Cambodia, and Korea Taking course on “CMC for Language Teaching”

9 Procedure Groups of 2-3 students used each program for international communication Each student completed a 28-item questionnaire for each tool & a final questionnaire 3,132 item responses total

10 Results ToolM (over 95) SDRank MSN80.5013.101 Skype76.559.302 Yahoo56.4414.233 ICQ46.7715.204 CUworld41.8315.165 Paltalk35.6116.636

11 Paired t-tests 15 possible combinations of video tool pairs. MSN Messenger Skype Yahoo ICQ ICQ CUworld CUworldPaltalk

12 Technical & Use Issues

13 The Upper 3 rd —MSN & Skype (Traditional)

14 What they liked/disliked High audio and video quality Ability to make landline calls Familiarity No possibility for multi-user video chat Skype—small user video

15 The Lower 3 rd —Paltalk & CUworld (Community Oriented)

16 What they liked/disliked “Potential” for multi-user chat Pre-existing interest groups Free usage restricted Button turn-taking (Paltalk) Technical Issues (CUworld) Wow/Yikes Factor

17 The Middle 3 rd —Yahoo & ICQ (Transitional Tools)

18 Free Multiuser video chat for free—ICQ Some video and audio issues Annoying extra software (Yahoo) Chat overload—317

19 What does all this mean for us? 1. Do you need video? 2. In class or out of class usage? 1. Individual or class to class (videoconferencing)? 3. Free or pay? 4. 1-1 or multi-person communication? 5. Have a partner or need a partner? 6. xLingo & mylanguageexchange

Download ppt "Computer-Mediated Communication and Video Chat Randall Sadler University of Urbana-Champaign."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google