Tandem language learning: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:28, 6 June 2019

Revision as of 11:48, 6 June 2019

Line 74:

* '''Task design''': &nbsp;If the online language interaction lacks proper integration within the learning process and the course curriculum, displays no pedagogical leadership and has carelessly designed tasks, the value of tandem language learning can be downplayed by both students and teachers alike (O´Dowd, 2013).<ref>O'Dowd, R. (2013). Telecollaboration and CALL. In Thomas, M., Reinders, H., & Warshauer, M. (Eds.) ''Contemporary computer-assisted language learning''. London: Bloomsbury Academic. pp. 123-140. Retrieved from <nowiki>http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uon/detail.action?docID=10632566</nowiki></ref> &nbsp;

* '''Affordances of technology:''' Technology can sometimes come in the way of successful online intercultural exchanges. Lewis (2017)<ref>Lewis, T. (2017). Introduction to system special issue on telecollaboration. ''System,'' ''64'', 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.system.2017.01.007</ref> argues that there may be a non - alignment of visual input and output when using certain conferencing technologies such as [[Skype]]. Consequently, &nbsp;students will appear to be socially absent from the conversation which will bring about miscommunication. Moreover, the affordances of [[Teleconference|teleconferencing]] can undermine actual communication by interrupting the usual process of indicating social presence that includes looking directly at the interlocutor. Hence, if students by mistake signal themselves as socially absent from the other teleconference participants, it can contribute to their exclusion from the conversation.

* '''Cultural issues:''' Telles (2015)<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Telles|first=João Antonio|last2=Telles|first2=João Antonio|date=March 2015|title=Teletandem and performativity|url=http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S1984-63982015000100001&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en|journal=Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada|volume=15|issue=1|pages=1–30|doi=10.1590/1984-639820155536|issn=1984-6398}}</ref> implies that during tandem programmes when comparing cultures, students may share their subjective opinions and reinforce intercultural [[stereotype]]s that may create a hostile discourse and interrupt the flow of the conversations. &nbsp;To this end, he suggests that without teacher interventions tele tandem interactions “may fall into shallow performances of sedimented and pre-given representations of self and other” (Telles, 2015, p.&nbsp;1).<ref name=":1" /> This tallies with O’ Dowd (2013)’s<ref name="O'Dowd2013">{{cite book|title = Telecollaboration and CALL. In Thomas, M., Reinders, H., & Warshauer, M. (Eds.) Contemporary computer-assisted language learning.|last = O'Dowd|first = R.|publisher = London: Bloomsbury Academic.|year = 2013|isbn = |url=http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uon/detail.action?docID=10632566|pages= 123–140}}</ref> views who sustains that preconceptions of the other learner's culture can affect learners’ proactive attitudes and levels of participation in the exchange (O´Dowd, 2015 as cited in O´Dowd, 2013).<ref name="O'Dowd2013" /> &nbsp;

To conclude, in theory, language tandem is a great idea and at times it may be beneficial. However, it requires a mutual effort from both parties, time and synchronization. If one of the parties is not satisfied with the learning experience, the tandem language experience may not be a successful educational endeavour (Drummer, 2012).<ref name=":0" /> &nbsp;