Blasing’s (2010) research aims at identifying evidence of language
acquisition through interaction and negotiation of meaning, examining questions
of L2 identity choices and exploring the presence of TL culture in SL. Her
study is based on the Russian language teaching to the American college
students from Midwest, who participated in the project.
Before outlining the details of procedure (study design, data collection
methods and participants’ profiles), Blasing (2010) provides an overview of the
benefits using SL as an educational platform and associated challenges, and
also explains what SL is. The latter suggests that she seems to be aware of the
diverse readership that may not be familiar with this platform. I suppose the
main idea in that part of the article is that SL should not be seen as a
replacement of the traditional classroom (Blasing, 2010). She argues that it
should rather be used as a complementary tool that may help language learners
“develop particular skills by creating a more contextualized language use
experience” (Blasing, 2010, p. 96).
The study consists of 2 major parts: pilot and case study. The pilot
study enabled the researcher to draw a few lessons. The first lesson is the
learners should possess strong typing skills in the TL. It is indeed a
worthwhile consideration, because people’s typing skills may vary depending on
a language. Russian is based on Cyrillic alphabet, and although students may
have strong typing skills in English or any other language that is based on
Latin alphabet, their typing speed and accuracy in Russian could be much lower
and poorer than, for example, in English. Another lesson drawn from the pilot
study is that the learners must be aware of the presence of social norms within
online cultural communities. For instructors it is critical to explore and
understand these norms and social culture of SL in general before recommending
their students to visit various sites. And finally, instructors should be aware
that interaction with native speakers is not the only possible use for SL.
Blasing (2010) argues that “groups of learners can effectively interact with
one another and practice their language skills in contextualised, content-rich
environments even without native speakers” (Blasing, 2010, p. 104). These
environments can be created by means of simulated literary tours. For example,
learners can be given the task to trace Mikhail Raskol’nikov’s (the main
character) journey in St Petersburg based on Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment.
Student can also collect information on different locales, read or listen to
excerpts from the novel, perform scenes from the novel in the virtual space,
answer questions about theme, plot and characters in certain online forums (Blasing,
2010). In my view, it’s an excellent suggestion that could motivate language
learners to read the TL literature and familiarize themselves with the TL
culture.
The findings of the case study were quite insightful, too. Results
indicated that typed chat in SL might help the learners develop lexicon,
improve writing skills, and encourage focus on form, private speech and
self-correction in learners (Blasing, 2010). When the author examined L2
anxiety among the learners, it was found that SL’s visual component actually
“increases anxiety to a level that mimics face-to-face interaction in the
target culture” (Blasing, 2010, p. 109). This contrasts with what other authors
had reported (see e.g. Wang,
Song, Xia & Yan 2009, also in Peterson, 2012). Blasing (2010) inferred that the students had
experienced a strong degree of social anxiety in their interactions with native
speakers in SL. She suggested that students transferred their anxiety about
meeting new people in real life into SL context and some of them felt an
emotional pressure when operating in the target culture. With regards to the L2
identity, most participants used their non-native speaker status as a way of
connecting on a comfortable level with the natives. Although there was one
participant who had the highest proficiency of all chose to modify his national
and sexual identity. He did it by means of choosing Russian first name and
surname in order to seem Russian to others and presented himself a bisexual.
Would he do this in his real life? I very much doubt it. But this suggests that
SL gives language learners an opportunity to experiment with their imagination
and thus challenge their language skills.
It
wasn’t surprising that the findings concerning anxiety levels differed from the
ones in previous articles that I had reviewed. Having learned both English and
Spanish as foreign languages and being familiar with the Russian social
culture, I can understand why people’s anxiety levels might vary both in SL and
real classrooms. All three languages reflect different cultures and the
learners’ cultural identities might either facilitate or hinder the process.
For example, Americans and Russians have a long history of rivalry, which
affected both people’s attitudes to each other’s cultures and languages.
Furthermore, the American and Russian social cultures and the way people
interact with each other differ substantially. Another reason for contrasting
findings, as mentioned in the previous reviews, could be a small sample size
and examination of different languages. The good thing about it is it leaves
plenty of room for further investigation at a larger scale and comparative
analysis between anxiety levels in learning, for example, Spanish and Russian
in SL.
References:
Blasing,
M.T. (2010). Second language in Second Life: Exploring interaction, identity
and pedagogical practice in a virtual world. Slavic and East European Journal, 54(1), 96-117
Peterson, M. (2012). EFL learner collaborative
interaction in second life. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL, 24(1),
20-39. doi: 10.1017/S0958344011000279
Wang, C., Song, H., Xia, F. & Yan, Q. (2009).
Integrating Second Life into an EFL
program:
Students' perspectives. Journal of Educational Technology Development and
Exchange, 2(1), 1-16
No comments:
Post a Comment