CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Online and Blended LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningForeign Language Teaching Methods

Supporting Chinese speaking skills online

Open access
Stickler, Ursula, Shi, Lijing·2013·System
DOI 10.1016/j.system.2012.12.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.system.2012.12.001

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A significant amount of learners' attention is devoted to social and technical features when interacting online.

    “(b) a significant amount of learners' attention is devoted to social and technical features when interacting online, and this can cause mismatches between teachers' and learners' expectations (Stickler & Shi, 2013;2015);”

    From Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers (2017) · cites this paper as Stickler & Shi, 2013

    Section 5.1 reports learners using textchat for greetings and peer conversations and engaging with other online features; section 6 says shifting between modes can distract students and cause cognitive overload. Section 5.6 documents mismatches between teacher intentions and student perceptions, but the paper does not establish how much attention learners devote to social and technical features or show that this attention causes those mismatches. The Further research section proposes observing learners’ attention to test its claims (pages unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Attention to social and technical features when interacting online can cause mismatches between teachers' and learners' expectations.

    “(b) a significant amount of learners' attention is devoted to social and technical features when interacting online, and this can cause mismatches between teachers' and learners' expectations (Stickler & Shi, 2013;2015);”

    From Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers (2017) · cites this paper as Stickler & Shi, 2013

    Section 6 (Discussion) says that switching between online modes can distract some students and cause cognitive overload; section 5.6 documents mismatches between teacher intention and student perception. The paper does not establish that learners devote a significant amount of attention to social and technical features or that this attention causes the mismatches. Section 7.3 proposes eye-tracking to investigate learners’ attention more closely. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Anderson, B., 2004. Dimensions of learning and support in an online community. Open Learning 19 (2), 183e190.
  2. Bax, S., 2003. CALL e past, present and future. System 31 (1), 13e28.
  3. Calderhead, J., 1981. Stimulated recall: a method for research on teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology 51 (2), 211e217.
  4. Chan, M.K.M., 2003. The digital age and speech technology for Chinese language teaching and learning. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 38 (2), 49e86.
  5. Chang, L., 2007. The effects of using CALL on advanced Chinese foreign language learners. CALICO Journal 24 (2), 331e353.
  6. Comas-Quinn, A., Beaven, M., Pleines, C., Pulker, H., de los Arcos, B., 2011. Languages Open Resources Online (LORO): fostering a culture of collaboration and sharing. The EuroCALL Review 18.
  7. de los Arcos, B., Coleman, J.A., Hampel, R., 2009. Learners' anxiety in audiographic conferences: a discursive psychology approach to emotion talk. ReCALL 21 (1), 3e17.
  8. Dearing, R., King, L., 2007. Languages Review.
  9. Furnborough, C., 2010. The motivational challenge facing beginner learners of Spanish at a distance. In: Torreblanca Lo ´pez, M.d.M., Abello Contesse, C., Chaco ´n Beltra ´n, R., Lo ´pez Jime ´nez, M.D. (Eds.), The Impact of Affective Variables in L2 Teaching and Learning. Secretariado de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain, pp. 79e96.
  10. Goodfellow, R., 2011. Literacy, literacies, and the digital in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education 16 (1), 131e144.
  11. Hampel, R., 2003. Theoretical perspectives and new practices in audio-graphic conferencing for language learning. ReCALL 13 (1), 21e36.
  12. Hampel, R., Stickler, U., 2005. New skills for new classrooms: training tutors to teach languages online. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) 18 (4), 311e326.
  13. Hampel, R., Stickler, U., 2012. The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL 24 (2), 116e137.
  14. Hauck, M., 2005. Metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive strategies, and CALL. In: Egbert, J.L., Petrie, G. (Eds.), CALL Research Perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey, USA, pp. 65e86.
  15. Hauck, M., Hampel, R., 2008. Strategies for online environments. In: Hurd, S., Lewis, T. (Eds.), Language Learning Strategies in Independent Settings. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, UK, pp. 283e302.
  16. Heins, B., Duensing, A., Stickler, U., Batstone, C., 2007. Spoken interaction in online and face-to-face language tutorials. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) 20 (3), 279e295.
  17. Heiser, S., Stickler, U., Furnborough, C. Student training in the use of an online synchronous conferencing tool. CALICO Journal, in press.
  18. Hu, B., 2010. The challenges of Chinese: a preliminary study of UK learners' perceptions of difficulty. The Language Learning Journal 38 (1), 99e118.
  19. Jewitt, C., Kress, G., Ogborn, J., Tsatsarelis, C., 2001. Exploring learning through visual, actional and linguistic communication: the multimodal environment of a science classroom. Educational Review 53, 5e18.
  20. Lantolf, J.P., 2000. Introducing sociocultural theory. In: Lantolf, J.P. (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford Uni- versity Press, Oxford, England, pp. 1e26.
  21. Lee, C.H., Kalyuga, S., 2011. Effectiveness of on-screen pinyin in learning Chinese: an expertise reversal for multimedia redundancy effect. Computers in Human Behavior 27 (1), 11e15.
  22. Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., Lee, S., 2003. A look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: a review of the literature from 1990e2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 34 (3), 250e273.
  23. Pinkard, N., Austin, K., 2010. Digital youth network: creating new media citizens through the affinity learning model. International Journal of Learning and Media 2 (4).
  24. Pulker, H., Stickler, U., 2010. Elluminate for Languages: the Department of Languages at the Open University. UK Paper presented at the Elluminati conference, online.
  25. Salmon, G., 2004. E-Moderating: The Key to Online Teaching and Learning. Routledge, London.
  26. So, W., Hung, V., Yip, W., 2008. The digital video databases: a virtual learning community for teacher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24 (1), 73e90.
  27. Benson, P., Reinders, H. (Eds.), Beyond the Language Classroom. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 146e160.
  28. Stickler, U., Hampel, R., 2010. CyberDeutsch: language production and user preferences in a Moodle VLE. CALICO 28 (1), 49e73.
  29. Stickler, U., Hauck, M. (Eds.), 2006. CALICO Special Issue: What Does It Take to Teach Online? Towards a Pedagogy for Online Language Teaching and Learning, vol. 23(3). Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.
  30. Stickler, U., Batstone, C., Duensing, A., Heins, B., 2004. Distance and virtual distance: preliminary results of a study of interaction patterns in synchronous audio graphic CMC and face-to-face tutorials in beginners' language tutorials. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Sym- posium on Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching. University of Northern Iowa, Beijing, Shanghai, pp. 740e750.
  31. Stockwell, G., 2007. A review of technology choice for teaching language skills and areas in the CALL literature. ReCALL 19 (2), 105e120.
  32. Sun, S.Y.H., 2011. Online language teaching: the pedagogical challenges. Knowledge Management & E-learning: An International Journal 3 (3), 428e447.
  33. Vygotsky, L.S., 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
  34. Wang, D., Kirkpatrick, A., 2012. Code choice in the Chinese as a foreign language classroom. Multilingual Education 2 (1), 3.
  35. Wang, Y., 2004. Distance language learning: interactive fourth-generation internet-based videoconferencing. CALICO 21 (2), 373e395.
  36. Wang, Y., Chen, N.-S., 2007. Online synchronous language Learning: SLMS over the internet. Innovate 3 (3), 8 (online).
  37. Wang, Y., Chen, N.-S., 2009. Criteria for evaluating synchronous learning management system: arguments from the distance language classroom. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) 22 (1), 1e18.
  38. Wang, Y., Chen, N.-S., Levy, M., 2010. Teacher training in synchronous cyber face-to-face classroom: characterizing and supporting the online teachers' learning process. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) 23 (4), 277e293.
  39. Wertsch, J.V., Tulviste, P., 1992. L.S. Vygotsky and contemporary developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology 28 (4), 548e557.
  40. White, C., 2003. Language Learning in Distance Education. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  41. Zhang, H., 2002. Teaching business Chinese online. CALICO 19 (3), 525e532.
  42. Zhang, Z., 1998. CALL for Chinese e issues and practice. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 33 (1), 51e82.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers

    Baralt, M., & Morcillo Gómez, J. (2017) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44630 · Cited by 95 · see citing works

    “…is devoted to social and technical features when interacting online, and this can cause mismatches between teachers’ and learners’ expectations (Stickler & Shi, 2013; 2015); (c) socializing and the formation of trust and friendship is essential for language learning, and these can be more…”
    Background

Authors
Stickler, U., & Shi, L.
Affiliations
  • The Open University (GB)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Corresponding author
Stickler, Ursula
ORCID
Venue
System
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
50-69
ISSN
0346-251X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.system.2012.12.001
OpenAlex
W2077845833
Cited by
43
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
9.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • System (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Foreign Language Teaching Methods
Keywords
Chinese as a foreign language, synchronous online interaction, teacher-student relationship, online language learning, multimodal interaction, task design, learner perceptions, teacher intentions, sociocultural perspective

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review