Institutional and individual dimensions of transatlantic group work in network-based language teaching
Abstract
Network-based language teaching (NBLT) involves the application of global or local communication networks within foreign and second language education (Warschauer and Kern, 2000). In telecollaboration, a type of NBLT, distally located language learners use internet communication tools to support dialogue, debate, collaborative research and social interaction for the purposes of language development and cultural awareness (e.g. Kinginger et al., 1999). To date, the research on NBLT has been limited, focusing primarily on pedagogical implementations of technology and linguistic features of online communication. In particular, researchers have not robustly explored social and institutional dimensions of telecollaboration (Chapelle, 2000:217) nor have they adequately investigated the pervasive assumption that telecollaborative interaction will necessarily and unproblematically afford language learning (e.g. Kramsch and Thorne, to appear). Drawing on social realism (Layder, 1993), a sociological theory which emphasizes the inter-relationship between structure, i.e. society and institution, and agency, i.e. situated activity and psycho-biography, in researching and explaining social action, I present a sociocultural account of German-American telecollaboration. In particular, I explore the meanings that the macro features of (1) language valuation (Hilgendorf, 1996); (2) membership in electronic discourse communities (Gee, 1999); and (3) culturally determined classroom scripts (Hatch, 1992) may have for the differential functionality of virtual group work in this partnership. Differences in group functionality are reflected at the micro-interactional level in terms of (1) frequency and length of correspondence; (2) patterns of discursive behavior such as question-answer pairs; and (3) opportunities for assisted L2 performance and negotiation of meaning. Ethnographic data (e.g. interviews, electronic and classroom discourse, surveys and participant observations) on individual psycho-biographies are interwoven with macro-level descriptions and statistics to paint a rich picture of learner behavior in intercultural telecollaboration. This project is funded by a United States Department of Education International Research and Studies Program Grant (CFDA No.: 84.017A). The author is a research associate for the German component.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The most recent studies on telecollaboration explore the kinds of cultural contact afforded by a technological medium.
“The most recent studies on telecollaboration (Belz, 2001(Belz, , 2002(Belz, , 2003;;Belz & Muller-Hartmann, 2003;Belz & Thorne, 2006;Chase, Macfadyen, Reeder & Roche, 2002;Kramsch & Thorne, 2002;O'Dowd, 2003O'Dowd, , 2005;;Schneider & von der Emde, 2006;Thorne, 2003Thorne, , 2006;;Ware, 2005) explore the kinds of cultural contact afforded by a technological medium.”
From An activity theory perspective on student-reported contradictions in international telecollaboration (2007) · cites this paper as Belz, 2001
Special attention in recent studies is paid to tensions and misunderstandings that might hinder intercultural learning.
“Special attention in recent studies is paid to tensions and misunderstandings that might hinder intercultural learning (Belz, 2001(Belz, , 2002(Belz, , 2003;;Kramsch & Thorne, 2002;O'Dowd, 2003O'Dowd, , 2005;;Thorne, 2003;Ware, 2005).”
From An activity theory perspective on student-reported contradictions in international telecollaboration (2007) · cites this paper as Belz, 2001
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication
Thorne, S. L. (2003) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/25200 · Cited by 573 · see citing works
“The resulting inter-class e-mail exchanges were combative, perplexing, and for the American students, resulted in a general sense of disappointment (see also Belz, 2001, 2003, this issue; Kramsch & Thorne, 2002).”
BackgroundAn activity theory perspective on student-reported contradictions in international telecollaboration
Basharina, O. K. (2007) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44105 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
“Related to this feature is Belz’s (2002) argument that national differences in computer access and technological know-”
Background
- Authors
- BELZ, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- BELZ, JULIE A.
- Venue
- ReCALL
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 213-231
- ISSN
- 0958-3440 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-0109
- OpenAlex
- W1992866977
- Cited by
- 97
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 44.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ReCALL (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- virtual exchange, virtual group work, language valuation, intercultural communication, social realism, structure and agency, negotiation of meaning, question-answer interaction, online language learning
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