1. By: Dallas Malhiwsky

2. The Research Problem Many colleges and universities are offering classes online or are using web tools in their courses. Many of these tools require students to be producers or creators on the web Web 1.0 technologies: are tools and features which have the user as the consumer. Web 2.0 technologies: use tools and features which create the user as the producer rather than the consumer.

3. Web 2.0 Competencies

4. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand learner initiated web production for Spanish college students at Midwestern colleges. Voices of participants

5. Central Question & Sub-Questions What are student experiences with learner initiated web production for college students in Spanish classes? How do students use Web 2.0 technology tools? In what ways, if any, do student initiated web production tools hinder language learning? What role/s do students see learner initiated web production tools playing in their classes? How do students feel about feedback on their web produced activities? In what ways, if any, do Web 2.0 technologies foster a community in the classroom?

6. Data Collection Site: 2 Midwestern colleges Participants: Enrolled in an online beginning or advanced Spanish language course during the Fall 2008 N=26 participants/Total students: 38 Types of data: online interview with 6 open-ended questions video recordings of students working online

7. Synchronous online interview sample (Hand-coded)

8. Video Recordings

9. Data Analysis Downloaded transcripts and handed coded transcripts of the online interview Hand coded video recordings of students (no audio was used) Found 22 codes from both video and online interview Condensed these codes into 5 themes Used in vivo coding to support the 5 major themes which emerged.

10. Findings These are the student experiences using learner initiated web production for college students in Spanish classes: 5 themes: 1. “Communication Outside of Class”: Network. 2. “Provided Another Way to Access”: Convenience. 3. “Gives the Subject More Life.”: Enhancement. 4. “They’re Already Daily Commodities.”: Pleasure. 5. “Easy to Use.”: Ease. Negative case analysis-validity

11. Theme 1. “Communication Outside of Class”: Network. Communicate inside/outside class Keep in touch “It was easier to communicate with people.” (P18) Another participant detailed: “MySpace is the best one to use for contacting anyone, as well as Google, Wiki and even You Tube.” (P29) “It (Web 2.0 tools) gives students another form of contact with the professor, outside sources, and other students not typically achieved inside the classroom.” (P28) Enhanced communication “(we use it) so we can get to know our classmates and communicate. I think the class would be more effective and willing to participate and work with each other if we were familiar with each other.” (P6) Distraction (-)

12. Theme 2. “Provided Another Way to Access”: Convenience. Anytime access “My iPod has really helped me with Spanish 101. I can listen to it whenever I want. My car has a jack so my iPod plays through my car stereo which is nice. My iPod plays videos so I can watch the Spanish videos also.” (P6) Accessibility (+/-) “(It) Enhanced it. Easy to use. Very accessible. Helped a lot in Spanish to be able to hear the language any time I needed to.” (P16) Familiarity Reference tools “The more interaction you have access to and the more you can hear the language the more proficient you can become.” (P12) Another way to access “(Web 2.0 tools) provided another way to access…” (P3)

13. Theme 3. “Gives the Subject More Life.”: Enhancement. First-hand experience “I got to see what my teacher was talking about in a first person view for I saw it with my own eyes.” (P8) Gives the Subject More Life “Seeing and hearing are better that just reading, it gives the subject more life.” (P3) Multi-functioning (+/-) “Online classes limit visual teaching techniques, so I think Web 2.0 technologies can compensate for this shortcoming.” (P6) “Enhances the quality of teaching and learning.” (P5)

14. Theme 4. “They’re Already Daily Commodities.”: Pleasure. They’re Already Daily Commodities “YouTube, Facebook, They’re already daily commodities, it would be easy to create educationally-based applications.” (P24) Entertainment (+/-) “It (Web 2.0) makes me want to take part in the activity.” (P18) “… entertaining, interesting, attention grabbing, and most importantly a great contact source.” (P23)

15. Theme 5. “Easy to Use.”: Ease. Easy to Use “Enhanced it. Easy to use. Very accessible. Helped a lot in Spanish to be able to hear the language any time I needed to.” (P16) “It is easier to communicate with people.” (P18) Easy to Access “It gives easier access to homework and lectures from wherever you may be.” (P16) “They (Web 2.0) enhanced it because it was easier to watch documentaries about what we were learning at the time.” (P4)

16. Summary of experiences Networking, convenience, enhancement, pleasure and ease are everyday descriptors of student experiences using Web 2.0 technology. In order to connect with students, instructors must interact with students on multiple levels, and must also provide an environment where learning can take place. Activities must be centered on students and their productions. Students want to learn the language and be able to use it to communicate.

17. Significance of the Study The findings show that student experiences are mostly positive using Web 2.0 technologies Based on the findings, pedagogical changes can be made to online and on-campus courses to make them more student-centered