College-Level Foreign Language Instructor\u27s Perceptions on the Incorporation of Mobile Technology Devices and Their Learning Applications in Curricula: A Collective Case Study

The purpose of this case study was to understand the integration of mobile technology devices (MTDs) and their learning applications (apps) into foreign-language curricula by foreign-language instructors at two colleges in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. The theory guiding this study was Bandura’s self-efficacy theory, which examined how self-efficacy affects college-level foreign language instructors’ integration of MTDs and their learning apps into foreign language curricula. In this project qualitative case study design was used to explore and investigate the issue of having limited technology knowledge and skills to integrate MTDs and their learning apps into foreign language classes. A critical question that this study attempted to answer was how mobile educational technology training improved the way college-level foreign-language teachers delivered effective foreign-language curricula in the classroom. The study took place in two colleges in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. A total of 10 college-level foreign-language instructors from these two colleges were the study participants. Additionally, the research instruments used throughout the study include journal prompts, foreign-language class syllabi, structured interviews, and transcripts from the interviews. Lastly, the researcher applied hand coding to complete an inductive and deductive coding process, including transcribing, categorizing, and analyzing the data collected from the participants. Five themes and fifteen sub-themes emerged from the study, underscoring the positive views of foreign language instructors on integrating MTDs and their learning apps. Yet, obstacles such as lack of training and connectivity issues challenge their full potential to enhance students\u27 self-efficacy in reading, speaking, and listening

A study of Chinese engineering students’ communication strategies in a mobile-assisted professional development course

[EN] The development of students’ professional skills is an important issue in higher education in China. This research reports a 3-month study investigating engineering students’ communication strategies (CSs) while they were interacting to do a 12-week mobile-assisted learning project, i.e., “Organizing and Attending a Model International Conference”. This learning project was a major teaching module of the English course of Professional Applications, which used a blended teaching mode integrating face-to-face instruction and mobile learning. Sixty-seven students volunteered to participate in the study. The instruments included eight oral communication sessions, a questionnaire, stimulated recall interviews, the participants’ WeChat exchanges, etc. Results showed that the participants used a variety of CSs when completing the academic learning project. Moreover, these CSs were closely related to the students’ involvement in social interaction. Future research should focus on a longitudinal investigation of the amount of scaffolding that helps students transfer their communication strategies across tasks.I would like to thank Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications for funding the research project.Cheng, L. (2016). A study of Chinese engineering students’ communication strategies in a mobile-assisted professional development course. The EuroCALL Review. 24(2):24-31. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2016.6467.SWORD2431242Beatty, K., & Nunan, D. (2004). Computer-mediated collaborative learning. System, 32(2), 165-183. doi:10.1016/j.system.2003.11.006Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies. Oxford: Blackwell.Blake, R., (2000). Computer mediated communication: a window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning and Technology 4(1), 120-136.BLIN, F. (2004). CALL and the development of learner autonomy: Towards an activity-theoretical perspective. ReCALL, 16(2), 377-395. doi:10.1017/s0958344004000928Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222-251. doi:10.3102/00346543049002222Cummins, J. (s. f.). Interdependence of first- and second-language proficiency in bilingual children. Language processing in bilingual children, 70-89. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511620652.006Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Linguistic interdependence: A central principle of bilingual education. In J. Cummins and M. Swain (Eds.), Bilingualism in education: Aspects of theory, research, and practice (pp. 80-95). New York: Longman.Dörnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication Strategies in a Second Language: Definitions and Taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.51997005Duff, P. A. (2000). Repetition in foreign language classroom interaction. In J. K. Hall & L. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 109-138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Plans and strategies in foreign language communication. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 20-60). Harlow: Longman.Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Godwin-Jones, R. (2008). Emerging technologies mobile-computing trends: Lighter, Faster, Smarter. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 7-13.Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Mobile apps for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 2-11.Jones, J. (2001). CALL and the responsibilities of teachers and administrators. ELT Journal, 55(4), 360-367. doi:10.1093/elt/55.4.360Kasper, G., & Kellerman, E. (Eds.) (1997). Communication strategies: Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. London: Longman.Lafford, B. A. (2004). THE EFFECT OF THE CONTEXT OF LEARNING ON THE USE OF COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES BY LEARNERS OF SPANISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(02). doi:10.1017/s0272263104262039Lam, W. Y. K. (2006). Gauging the effects of ESL oral communication strategy teaching: a multi-method approach. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 3 (2), 142–157.Nunan, D. (2004). Task-Based Language Teaching. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511667336Omar, H., Embi, M. A., & Yunus, M. M. (2012). Learners’ use of Communication Strategies in an Online Discussion via Facebook. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 535-544. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.063Selinker, L. (1972). INTERLANGUAGE. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4). doi:10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209Smith, B. (2003). The use of communication strategies in computer-mediated communication. System, 31(1), 29-53. doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(02)00072-6STOCKWELL, G. (2007). A review of technology choice for teaching language skills and areas in the CALL literature. ReCALL, 19(2), 105-120. doi:10.1017/s0958344007000225Tarone, E. (1980). COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES, FOREIGNER TALK, AND REPAIR IN INTERLANGUAGE1. Language Learning, 30(2), 417-428. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1980.tb00326.xVaradi, T. (1980). Strategies of target language learner communication: Message adjustment. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 59-71

Glossing and L2 vocabulary learning through dynamic instruction in the context of Primary Education

[EN] The present study deals with two types of L2 glosses, namely dynamic and traditional text-based glosses. The former were presented to students as a set of prompts designed to help learners identify the correct keyword, whereas the latter were introduced as traditional annotations containing L1 equivalents. A third control group was included in the study. Particularly, the focus is to compare the effects of these two types of glosses in Primary Education students of EFL. During the treatment session the dynamic glossing and the traditional glossing groups were presented three short texts with some unknown words. After the treatment, the three groups were tested in terms of both receptive and productive knowledge of the unknown words. Testing was carried out immediately and some weeks after the treatment. The results of immediate and delayed post tests revealed the superiority of the dynamic condition over traditional glossing and the control group as regards the two types of L2 vocabulary knowledge.This work was supported by the Spanish National Research Agency (AEI) through project LaTe4PSP (PID2019-107652RB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033).Alcaraz Mármol, G. (2021). Glossing and L2 vocabulary learning through dynamic instruction in the context of Primary Education. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas. 16(1):1-10. https://doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2021.14691OJS110161Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in second language learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Retrieved from: https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/paper/11063Alcaraz-Mármol, G. & Almela, Á. (2013). "The Involvement Load Hypothesis: Its effect on vocabulary learning in Primary Education". Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 26, 11-24.Ahmad, S.Z. (2019). "Multimedia glosses for enhancing EFL students' vocabulary acquisition and retention". English Language Teaching 12/12, 46-58. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n12p46Anderson-Inman, L. & Horney, M. A. (2007). "Supported eText: Assistive technology through text transformations". Reading Research Quarterly 42/1, 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.1.8Antón, M. (2009). "Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners". Foreign Language Annals 42, 576-598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01030.xAzizi, A. (2016). "Effects of non-negotiated pre-modified input, negotiation of input without output, and negotiation of input plus pushed output on EFL learners' vocabulary learning". Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7/4, 773-779. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0704.19Burton, V. J., & Watkins, R. V. (2007). "Measuring word learning: Dynamic versus static assessment of kindergarten vocabulary". Journal of Communication Disorders 40, 335-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2006.06.015Camilleri, B. & Botting, N. (2013). "Beyond static assessment of children's receptive vocabulary: The dynamic assessment of word learning (DAWL)". International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 48, 565-581. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12033Canga, A. (2013). "Receptive vocabulary size of secondary Spanish EFL learners". Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 8, 66-75. https://doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2013.1180Chang, C.K. & Hsu, C.K. (2011). "A mobile-assisted synchronously collaborative translation-annotation system for English as a foreign language (EFL) reading comprehension". Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24, 155-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.536952Chen, H. (2002). "Investigating the effects of L1 and L2 glosses on foreign language reading comprehension and vocabulary retention". Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Computer-Assisted Language Instruction Consortium, Davis, CA. Retrieved from http://www.sciepub.com/reference/208106Chun, D. (2011). "CALL technologies for L2 reading post Web 2.0", in L. Ducate & N. Arnold (eds.) Calling on CALL: Theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching. San Marcos, Texas: CALICO, 131-170.Davin, K. J. (2013). "Integration of dynamic assessment and instructional conversations to promote development and improve assessment in the language classroom". Language Teaching Research 17, 303-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813482934Eckerth, J. & Tavakoli, P. (2012). "The effects of word exposure frequency and elaboration of word processing on incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through reading". Language Teaching Research 16/2, 227-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811431377Gass, S. (1999). "Incidental vocabulary learning". Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21/2, 319-333. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199002090Golkar, M. & Yamini, M. (2007). "Vocabulary, proficiency and reading comprehension". The Reading Matrix 7/3, 88-112.Gorman, B. (2012). "Relationships between vocabulary size, working memory and phonological awareness in Spanish-speaking English language learners". American Journal of Speech- Language pathology 21, 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2011/10-0063)Herazo, J. D., Davin, K. J., & Sagre, A. (2019). "L2 dynamic assessment: An activity theory perspective". The Modern Language Journal 103/2, 443-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12559Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). "Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning", in P. J. Anaud & H. Béjoint (eds.) Vocabulary and applied linguistics. London: Macmillan, 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-12396-4_11Hulstijn, J. (2003). Incidental and intentional word learning, in M. Long& C. Doughty (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell, 349-381. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch12Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M. & Greidanus, T. (1996). "Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words". The Modern Language Journal 80, 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01614.xHulstijn, J. & Laufer, B. (2001). "Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition". Language Learning 51, 539-558. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00164Jacobs, G. M., Dufon, P., & Fong, C. H. (1994). "L1 and L2 vocabulary glosses in L2 reading passages: Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabulary knowledge". Journal of Research in Reading 17, 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.1994.tb00049.xJiménez Catalán, R. M. & Moreno Espinosa, S. (2005). "Using Lex30 to measure the L2 productive vocabulary of Spanish primary learners of EFL". Vial 13/2, 27-44.Jiménez Catalán, R. M. & Terrazas, M. (2008). "The receptive vocabulary of English foreign language young learners". International Journal of English Studies 2/2, 201-215. https://doi.org/10.18172/jes.127Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). "Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future". Journal of Applied Linguistics 1, 49-72. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.1.1.49.55872Lantolf, J. P. & Poehner, M. E. (2011). "Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development". Language Teaching Research 15, 11-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383328Lantolf, J. P. & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813850Lantolf, J.P. & S.L. Thorne. (2006). The Sociogenesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Laufer, B. & Hulstijn, J. (2001). "Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: the construct of task-induced involvement". Applied Linguistics 22/1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.1Lee, H., Hampel, R., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2019). "Gesture in speaking tasks beyond the classroom: An exploration of the multimodal negotiation of meaning via Skype videoconferencing on mobile devices". System 81, 26-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.013Lee, H., Warschauer, M. & Lee, J.H. (2017). "The effects of concordance-based electronic glosses on L2 vocabulary learning". Language Learning & Technology 21/2, 32-51.Lee, J.Y. & Jeon, Y.J. (2017). "Effects of L1 and L2 Glosses on Korean English Learners' Vocabulary Learning and Reading Comprehension: A Meta-Analysis". Proceedings of the International Conference on Platform Technology and Service, Busan, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/PlatCon.2017.7883703Lee, H., & Lee, J. H. (2015). "The effects of electronic glossing types on foreign language vocabulary learning: Different types of format and glossary information". The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 24/4, 591-601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-014-0204-3Lidz, C. S. & B. Gindis. (2003). "Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children", in A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (eds.) Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 99-116. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.007López-Mezquita, M.T. (2005). La evaluación de la competencia léxica: Tests de vocabulario. Su fiabilidad y validez. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Granada, University of Granada. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10481/4571Meara, P. (1980). "Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning". Language Teaching and Linguistics Abstracts, 13, 221-246. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800008879Milton J., Wander, L. & Hopkins, N. (2010). "Aural word recognition and oral competence in a foreign language", in R. Chacón-Beltrán, C. Abello-Contesse & M.M. Torreblanca-López (eds.) Further insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 83-98. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692900-007Miyasako, N. (2002). "Does text-glossing have any effects on incidental vocabulary learning through reading for Japanese senior high school students?" Language Education & Technology 39, 1-20.Mora, I. (2014). "Análisis del tamaño del vocabulario receptivo en alumnos de sección Bilingüe y no Bilingüe de Educación Primaria". Campo Abierto 33, 11-28.Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: CUP. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759Nation, P. (2006). "How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?" The Canadian Modern Language Review 63/1, 59-82. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59Nation, P. (2009). "New roles for FL vocabulary?" in L. Wei & V. Cook (eds.) Contemporary applied linguistics: Language teaching and learning. London, UK: Continuum, 99-116.Nation, P. & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Boston: Heinle.Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). "Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition", in J. Coady & T. Huckin (eds.) Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 174-200. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524643.013Poehner, M. E., Zhang, J. & Lu, X. (2015). "Computerized dynamic assessment (CDA): Diagnosing L2 development according to learner responsiveness to mediation". Language Testing 32, 337-357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214560390Pulido, D. (2007). "The effects of topic familiarity and passage sight vocabulary on L2 lexical inferencing and retention through reading". Applied Linguistics 28/1, 66-86. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml049Ramezamali, N., Uchihara, T., & Faez, F. (2020). "Efficacy of multimodal glossing on second language vocabulary learning: A meta‐analysis". TESOL Quarterly, 54/2, ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.579Ramezamali, N. & Faez, F. (2019). "Vocabulary learning and retention through multimedia glossing". Language Learning and Technology 23/2, 105-124.Rassaei, E. (2020). "Effects of mobile-mediated dynamic and nondynamic glosses on L2 vocabulary learning: A sociocultural perspective". The Modern Language Journal 104/1, 284-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12629Read, J. (2000). Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge: C.U.P. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732942Rea-Dickins, P. (2004). "Understanding teachers as agents of assessment". Language Testing 21, 249-258. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532204lt283edSato, T. & Suzuki, A. (2010). "Do multimedia-oriented visual glosses really facilitate EFL vocabulary learning?: A comparison of planar images with three-dimensional images". Asian EFL Journal 12/4, 160-172.Siekmann, S. & Charles, W. (2013). "Upingakuneng [When they are ready]: Dynamic assessment in a third semester Yugtun class", in M. Poehner & P. Rea-Dickins (eds.) Addressing issues of access and fairness in education through dynamic assessment. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis, 57-74.Stæhr, L.S. (2008). "Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing". Language Learning Journal 36/2, 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730802389975Teng, F. (2020). "Retention of new words learned incidentally from reading: Word exposure frequency, L1 marginal glosses, and their combination". Language Teaching Research 24/6, 785-812. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829026Teo, A. (2012). "Promoting EFL students' inferential reading skills through computerized dynamic assessment". Language Learning & Technology 16, 10-20.Van Compernolle, R.A. & Williams, L. (2012). "Teaching, learning, and developing L2 French sociolinguistic competence: A sociocultural perspective". Applied Linguistics 33, 184-205. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr048Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Webb, S. (2008). "The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning". Reading in a Foreign Language 20/2, 232-245.Wells, H.G. (2009). The Empire of Ants -A graded reader upper-intermediate. UK: Pearson.Yanguas, I. (2009). "Multimedia glosses and their effect on L2 text comprehension and vocabulary learning". Language Learning and Technology 13, 48-67.Yoshii, M. (2006). "L1 and L2 glosses. Their effects on incidental vocabulary learning". Language Learning & Technology 10/3, 85-101.Yoshii, M. & Flaitz, J. (2002). "Second language incidental vocabulary retention: The effect of text and picture annotation types". CALICO Journal 20/1, 33-58. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v20i1.33-5

Netflix and L2 learning: A case study

[EN] The evolving video viewing habits of consumers combined with advances in mobile technology have resulted in the growth of video on demand (VOD) services. While these video streaming services potentially offer several benefits for L2 learners, little is known about them in the context of language learning. Thus, this study fills this gap in the literature by examining EFL students’ views of Netflix, the leading provider of subscription VOD. The study also investigates the extent to which EFL learners use Netflix for L2 learning and the means by which they access the service. Nine Japanese EFL students participated in the study and were given three months to use Netflix. The participants were then interviewed to obtain their opinions of the video streaming service. Four themes were extracted from the interview data: (1) enhanced learning effectiveness, (2) increased L2 motivation, (3) better access to L2 knowledge, and (4) hindered convenience. It was also found that the learners watched primarily through mobiles devices rather than PCs, and viewed more L2 titles than L1 programming. These results illustrate that subscription VOD has the potential to foster L2 learning and underscore the necessity for more research into their use for language learning.Dizon, G. (2018). Netflix and L2 learning: A case study. The EuroCALL Review. 26(2):30-40. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2018.9080SWORD3040262Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 233-262. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587583.Bianchi, F. & Ciabattoni, T. (2008). Captions and subtitles in EFL learning: An investigative study in a comprehensive computer environment. In A. Baldry, M. Pavesi, C. Taylor Torsello & C. Taylor (Eds.), From Didactas to Ecolingua: An Ongoing Research Project on Translation and Corpus Linguistics (pp. 69-80). Trieste: Edizonioni Università Trieste.Chapple, L. & Curtis, A. (2000). Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Student responses to film. System, 28(3), 419-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(00)00021-XDörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning, Language Teaching, 31(3), 117135. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480001315XGardner, R.C. & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning. Newbury House: Rowley, MA.Guichon, N. & McLornan, S. (2008). The effects of multimodality on L2 learners: Implications for CALL resource design. System, 36(1), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.11.005Hays, P. (2004). Case study research. In K. de Marrais & S.D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for Research: methods of inquiry in education and social sciences (pp. 217- 234). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Hubbard, P. (2009). Computer assisted language learning: Critical concepts in linguistics (Vols. I-IV). London; New York: Routledge.Ingram, M. (2017, March 10). Netflix is winning the streaming race - But for how long? Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/03/10/netflix-video-streaming-market.Kasper, G. (1997). The role of pragmatics in language teacher education. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & B. Hartford (Eds.). Beyond methods (pp. 113-141). New York, NY: McGraw-HillKing, J. (2002). Using DVD feature films in the EFL classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(5), 509-523. https://doi.org/10.1076/call.15.5.509.13468Lanvers, U. (2017). On the predicaments of the English L1 language learner: A conceptual article. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 147-167. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12082Lin, P.M.S. & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2014). Internet television for L2 vocabulary learning. In D. Nunan & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Language learning beyond the classroom (pp. 149-158). London: Routledge.Lu, M. (2008). Effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phone. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(6), 515-525. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00289.xMarkham, P.L., Peter, L.A. & McCarthy, J.T. (2001). The effects of native language vs. target language captions on foreign language students' DVD video comprehension. Foreign Language Annals, 34(5), 439-445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02083.xMasgoret, A.-M. & Gardner, R.C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53(1), 167-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00227Mitterer, H. & McQueen, J.M. (2009). Foreign subtitles help but native-language subtitles harm foreign speech perception. PLoS ONE, 4(11), 1-5.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007785Molla, R. (2017, October 6). Netflix spends more than any other streaming service on content. Retrieved from https://www.recode.net/2017/10/6/16438078/netflix-amazon-hulu-hbo-spending-streaming-service.Montero Perez, M., Peters, E., Clarebout, G., & Desmet, P. (2014). Effects of Captioning on Video Comprehension and Incidental Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 18(1), 118-141. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44357.Nielson. (2016, March). Video on demand: How worldwide viewing habits are changing in the evolving media landscape. Retrieved from http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/nielsenglobal/eu/docs/pdf/Nielsen-global-video-on-demand.pdf.Netflix. (2017). Company Info: Overview. Retrieved October 31, 2017, from https://ir.netflix.com.Qiang, N., Hai, T. & Wolff, M. (2007). China EFL: Teaching with movies. English Today, 23(2), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407002076Stockwell, G. (2010). Using mobile phones for vocabulary activities: Examining the effect of the platform. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 95-110. http://llt.msu.edu/ vol14num2/stockwell.pdf.Sydorenko, T. (2010). Modality of input and vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 50-73. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44216.Vandergrift, L. & Goh, C.C.M. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843376Walters, T. (2012). Understanding the "mobile shift": Obsession with the mobile channel obscures the shift to ubiquitous computing. Digital Clarity Group. Retrieved from http://digitalclaritygroup.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/DCG-Insight-Understanding-the-Mobile-Shift-Nov-2012.pdf.Winke, P., Gass, S. & Sydorenko, T. (2010). The effects of captioning videos used for foreign language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1), 65-86. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44203

Foreign Language Learning Boredom in the EFL Classroom and during Independent Language Learning : Examining and Comparing Finnish University Students’ Experiences

Regardless of the universal nature of boredom as an academic emotion, applied linguistic research regarding the emotion has only gained prevalence during the last decade. The present study examines the emotion specifically as Foreign Language Learning Boredom (FLLB) in the context of Finnish bachelor’s degree students studying English as a mandatory part of their degree. The study provides a comparative approach to FLLB experienced in two distinct contexts: the EFL classroom and independent language learning outside of the classroom. In the present study FLLB among 53 bachelor’s degree students was examined in terms of its intensity and common causes, as well as common coping styles and reactions related to the emotion. Intensity of FLLB was investigated statistically through quantitative data that was collected with a questionnaire that was modelled after two preexisting questionnaire tools for both studied contexts respectively. Causes of FLLB and students’ common reactions to the emotion were investigated with qualitative data collection and analysis methods. The study found that students were statistically more likely to experience higher levels of FLLB during independent language learning than they were in the EFL classroom. However, in both studied contexts FLLB scores were considered moderate at most. In both contexts common causes for FLLB were mostly attributed to the achievement setting and language tasks assigned by a teacher. Even during independent language learning which is on the surface less controlled by the teacher’s authority, most FLLB could be attributed to homework tasks or other work directly related to activity in the classroom. On the contrary, students’ coping styles during independent language learning demonstrated more autonomy and freedom than in the EFL classroom. Behavioral coping styles that allow students to change or exit boredom inducing situations as a consequence of their own behavior were commonly used during independent language learning, whereas common coping styles in the EFL classroom included short-term avoidance behavior, such as mobile phone usage, or cognitive reorienting of concentration towards the learning situation

Digital Video Creation in the LSP Classroom

[EN] The twenty-first century world of digital media and multimodalities demands a rethinking of approaches to languages for specific purposes (LSP). This article seeks to determine the effectiveness of digital video creation as a teaching and learning tool in the LSP context through an investigation of students’ perceptions of the usefulness of this activity. The study is based on a digital video creation project carried out with a group of second year undergraduate students on the BSc in Biotechnology programme in NUI Galway who also study French as part of their degree programme. The findings are indicative of an overwhelmingly positive response from learners to this activity, both in terms of the development of language skills and other key social and professional skills. However, findings also warn that students’ digital competencies must not be over-estimated, despite a general assumption in technology-enhanced language learning research, that the current generation of students have a high level of digital literacy. This study highlights the pedagogical potential of digital video creation in the language classroom and demonstrates that it embraces many of the core elements underpinning progressive LSP pedagogy, by giving students the opportunity to keep pace with the multimodality afforded by digital media and by ensuring their language learning is both contextualised and authentic. It advocates the use of digital video creation in language learning and particularly in LSP, by highlighting the strong impact that this activity had on the participants in this study.Rodgers, O.; Ni Dhonnchadha, L. (2018). Digital Video Creation in the LSP Classroom. The EuroCALL Review. 26(1):43-58. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2018.96664358261Allan, M. (1985). Teaching English with video. Essex: Longman.Arnó-Macià, E. (2012). The role of technology in teaching languages for specific purposes courses. The Modern Language Journal, Focus Issue: Languages for Specific Purposes, (96): 89-104.Arnó-Macià, E. (2014). Information technology and languages for specific purposes in the EHEA: options and challenges for the knowledge society. In Bárcena, E., Read, T. and Arus, J. (eds.) Languages for specific purposes in the digital era. Heidelberg; New York; Dordrecht; London: Springer.Arnó, E., Soler, A. and Rueda, C. (eds.) (2006). Information technology in languages for specific purposes. New York: Springer.Bárcena, E., Read, T. and Arus, J. (eds.) (2014). Languages for specific purposes in the digital era. Heidelberg; New York; Dordrecht; London: Springer.Burston, J. (2016). The future of foreign language instructional technology: BYOD MALL. The EUROCALL Review, 24(1): 3-9.Caws, C. and Heift, T. (2016). Evaluation in CALL. Tools, interactions, outcomes. In Farr, F. and Murray, M. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology. London; New York: Routledge, 127-140.Chambers, A. (1996). LSP theory and second language acquisition. In Hickey, T. and Williams J. (eds.), Language, education and society. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 232-238.Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for Teaching, Testing and Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Cooper, R., Lavery, M. and Rinvolucri, M. (1991). Video. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Dal, M. (2010). Digital video production and task-based language learning. Ráostefnurit Netlu-Menntakvika. http://netla.khi.is/menntakvika2010/alm.021.pdf (accessed June 20, 2017)Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T. and Smit, U. (2010). Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. Philadelphia; Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Dudley-Evans, T. and St. John, M.J. (1998). Developments in ESP. A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Dugartsyrenova, V. and Sardegna, V. (2016). Developing oral proficiency with VoiceThread: Learners' strategic uses and view. ReCALL, 29(1): 59-79.Duman, G., Orhon, G. and Gedik, N. (2014). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL, 27(2): 197-216.García Laborda, J. (2011). Revisiting materials for teaching languages for specific purposes. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 17(1): 102-112.Gardner, D. (1994). Student-produced video documentary: Hong-Kong as a self-access resource. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 17: 45-53.Gee, J.P. and Hayes, E.R. (2011). Language and learning in the digital age. New York: Routledge.Goldstein, B. and Driver, P. (2015). Language learning with digital video. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Gollin-Kies, S., Hall, D. and Moore, S.H. (2015). Language for specific purposes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.González-Pueyo, I., Foz, C. Jaime, M. and Luzón, M.J. (eds.) (2009). Teaching academic and professional English online. Bern: Lang.Goulah, J. (2007). Village voices, global visions: digital video as a transformative foreign language tool. Foreign Language Annals, 40(1): 62-78.Gromik, N. (2012). Cell phone video recording feature as a language learning tool: A case study. Computers & Education, 58: 223-230.Guichon, N. and Cohen, C. (2016). Multimodality and CALL. In Farr, F. and Murray, M. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology. London; New York: Routledge, 509-521.Hafner, C. and Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy in English for science: a collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3): 68-86.Halliday, M.A.K., Strevens, P. and McIntosh, A. (1964). The linguistic sciences and language teaching. London: Longman.Harbon, L. and Shen, H. (2015). Researching language classrooms. In Paltridge, B. and Phakiti, A. (eds.). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. A Practical Resource. London; New Delhi; New York; Sydney: Bloomsbury, 457-470.Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes. London: Longman.Kearney, M., Jones, G. and Roberts, L. (2012). An emerging learning design for student-generated 'iVideos'. Teaching English with Technology. Special Issue on LAMS and Learning Design. 12(2): 103-120.Naqvi, S. and Mahrooqi, R. (2016). ICT and language learning: A case study on student-created digital video projects. Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 18(1): 49-64.Nikitina, L. (2010). Video-making in the foreign language classroom: applying principles of constructivist pedagogy. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(1): 21-31.Nokelainen, P. (2006). An empirical assessment of pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning material with elementary school students. Educational Technology and Society, 9(2): 178-197.Prensky, M. (2012). From digital natives to digital wisdom: hopeful essays for 21st century learning. California, London, New Delhi: Sage.Prensky, M. and Heppell, S. (2008). Teaching digital natives: partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon (MCB University Press). 9(5): 1-6.Reyes, A., Pich, E. and Garcia, M.D. (2012). Digital storytelling as a pedagogical tool within a didactic sequence in foreign language teaching. Digital Education Review, 22: 1-18.Rodgers, O., Chambers, A. and Le-Baron Earle, F. (2011). Corpora in the LSP classroom: a learner-centred corpus of French for biotechnologists. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. Applying Corpus Linguistics, 16(3): 391-411.Sager, J.C., Dungworth, D. and McDonald, P.M. (1980). English special languages: principles and practice in science and technology. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter Verlag.Secules, T., Herron, C. and Tomasello, M. (1992). The effect of video context on foreign language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 76: 480-490.Shrosbee, M. (2008). Digital video in the language classroom. JALT CALL Journal, 4(1): 75-84.Swales, J.M. (2000). Languages for specific purposes. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20: 59-76.Über-Grosse, C. and Voght, G.M. (2012). The continuing evolution of languages for specific purposes. The Modern Language Journal, Focus Issue: Languages for Specific Purposes 96: 190-202.Widdowson, H.G. (1998). Communication and community: the pragmatics of ESP. English for Specific Purposes. 17: 3-14.Willis, J. (1983). Implications for the exploitation of video in the EFL classroom. In McGovern, J. (ed.), Video applications in English language teaching, ELT documents 114. London: Pergamon Press, 29-42

A Review of Mobile Language Learning Applications: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities

[EN] Mobile language learning applications have the potential to transform the way languages are learned. This study examined the fifty most popular commercially-available language learning applications for mobile phones and evaluated them according to a wide range of criteria. Three major trends were found: first, apps tend to teach vocabulary in isolated units rather than in relevant contexts; second, apps minimally adapt to suit the skill sets of individual learners; and third, apps rarely offer explanatory corrective feedback to learners. Despite a pedagogical shift toward more communicative approaches to language learning, these apps are behaviorist in nature. To better align with Second Language Acquisition (SLA) and L2 pedagogical research, we recommend the incorporation of more contextualized language, adaptive technology, and explanatory feedback in these applications.Heil, CR.; Wu, JS.; Lee, JJ.; Schmidt, T. (2016). A Review of Mobile Language Learning Applications: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities. The EuroCALL Review. 24(2):32-50. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2016.6402.SWORD3250242Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.BLYTH, C. (1997). A Constructivist Approach to Grammar: Teaching Teachers to Teach Aspect. The Modern Language Journal, 81(1), 50-66. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb01626.xBrown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.Burston, J. (2014). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1), 4-20. doi:10.1017/s0958344014000159CANALE, M. (1980). THEORETICAL BASES OF COMMUNICATIVE APPROACHES TO SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING AND TESTING. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47. doi:10.1093/applin/1.1.1Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and Implicit Negative Feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 357-386. doi:10.1017/s0272263100012158Chen, C.-M., & Chung, C.-J. (2008). Personalized mobile English vocabulary learning system based on item response theory and learning memory cycle. Computers & Education, 51(2), 624-645. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.06.011Chinnery, G. (2006). Going to the MALL: Mobile Assisted. Language Learning, Language Learning & Technology, 10(1), 9-16.Duman, G., Orhon, G., & Gedik, N. (2014). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL, 27(2), 197-216. doi:10.1017/s0958344014000287Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND THE ACQUISITION OF L2 GRAMMAR. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(02). doi:10.1017/s0272263106060141Gamper, J., & Knapp, J. (2002). A Review of Intelligent CALL Systems. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(4), 329-342. doi:10.1076/call.15.4.329.8270Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Emerging technologies: Mobile apps for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 2-11. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2011/emerging.pdfGrohtjahn, R. (1987). On the methodological basis of introspective methods. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (54-82). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Hymes, D.H. (1972) "On Communicative Competence" In: J.B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.) Sociolinguistics. Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp. 269–293.Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Bull, S. (2009). Theory-based Support for Mobile Language Learning: Noticing and Recording. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 3(2). doi:10.3991/ijim.v3i2.740Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271-289. doi:10.1017/s0958344008000335Lee, Kwang-wu. "English teachers' barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning." The Internet TESL Journal 6.12 (2000): 1-8.Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LEARNER UPTAKE. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66. doi:10.1017/s0272263197001034Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2008). Speech and language processing: An introduction to speech recognition. Computational Linguistics and Natural Language Processing. Prentice Hall.Lee, J.F. & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Moundridou, M., & Virvou, M. (2003). Analysis and design of a Web-based authoring tool generating intelligent tutoring systems. Computers & Education, 40(2), 157-181. doi:10.1016/s0360-1315(02)00119-7Nah, K. C., White, P., & Sussex, R. (2008). The potential of using a mobile phone to access the Internet for learning EFL listening skills within a Korean context. ReCALL, 20(3), 331-347. doi:10.1017/s0958344008000633Nation, P. (2015). Principles guiding vocabulary learning through extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27(1), 136.OXFORD, R. L. (1997). Cooperative Learning, Collaborative Learning, and Interaction: Three Communicative Strands in the Language Classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 443-456. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05510.xPellegrino, J., Chudowski, N., and Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: the science and design of assessment. National Academies Press.Purpura, J. E. (2004). Assessing Grammar. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511733086Reinders, H., & Pegrum, M. (2016). Supporting Language Learning on the Move: An Evaluative Framework for Mobile Language Learning Resources. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Research and Materials Development for Language Learning (pp. 219-232). New York, NY: Routledge.Sauvignon, S. J. (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. New Haven: Yale University.Stockwell, G. (2008). Investigating learner preparedness for and usage patterns of mobile learning. ReCALL, 20(3), 253-270. doi:10.1017/s0958344008000232Sweeney, P., & Moore, C. (2012). Mobile Apps for Learning Vocabulary. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 2(4), 1-16. doi:10.4018/ijcallt.2012100101Ur, P. (2013). The communicative approach revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://www.cambridge.com.mx/pennyur/Penny-TCAR.pdfWarschauer, M. (1996b). Computer-assisted language learning: an introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia language teaching, 3–20. Tokyo: Logos.Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language Teaching, 31(2), 57-71. doi:10.1017/s0261444800012970Wu, T. Sung, W. and Burston, J (2011) Reexamining the effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phones. Turkish Online Journal on Educational Technology, 10(3), 203-214

Effect of Gamification on students’ motivation and learning achievement in Second Language Acquisition within higher education: a literature review 2011-2019

[EN] This paper focuses on a fairly new motivational technique, the so-called Gamification, which consists of introducing game mechanics in non-game environments to promote motivation and engagement. By the turn of the 21rst century, Gamification took off in the business field and soon after became an attractive concept for researchers and professionals in education as it appears to be an increasingly popular method to motivate learners. Nevertheless, it is still a nascent field in terms of empirical evidence available to firmly support its educational benefits. This paper intends to shed some more light on this topic through a comprehensive review of literature published in the most prominent journals. The present study is framed within the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) in higher education and Computer-Assisted Language Learning, and focuses on the effects of gamified learning environments on student’s motivation and learning. A Meta-analysis method was used to explore relevant empirical research published between 2011 and 2019. After reviewing a corpus of 68  papers drawn from the leading databases Scopus and Web Of Science, and from which only 15 could be included in the study, we can point out two main findings: (i) there is still very limited literature in the field of SLA and, (ii) results seem to be predominantly positive in terms of motivation and engagement but only a few studies confirm clear interconnections with learning outcomes. The results suggest a lack of solid correlations between Gamification, motivation and cognitive processes. Azzouz Boudadi, N.; Gutiérrez-Colón, M. (2020). Effect of Gamification on students’ motivation and learning achievement in Second Language Acquisition within higher education: a literature review 2011-2019. The EuroCALL Review. 28(1):40-56. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.12974OJS4056281Bandura, A. (2012). Social cognitive theory. In P. A. Van Lange A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins Handbook of theories of social psychology: volume 1 (pp. 349-374). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n18Barcena, E., & Sanfilippo, M. (2015). The audiovisual knowledge pill as a gamification strategy in second language online courses. Circulo de Linguistica Aplicada a La Comunicacion, 63, 22- 151. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CLAC.2015.v63.50172Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1(1), 19-42. Retrieved from https://urlzs.com/HTjvG%0ABeatty, K. (2013). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning, second edition. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833774Berns, A., Isla-Montes, J.-L., Palomo-Duarte, M., & Dodero, J.-. (2016). Motivation, students' needs and learning outcomes: A hybrid game-based app for enhanced language learning. SpringerPlus, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2971-1Bustillo, J., Rivera, C., Guzmán, J., & Ramos, L. (2017). Benefits of using a mobile application in learning a foreign language. Sistemas & Telemática, 15(40), 55- 68. https://doi.org/10.18046/syt.v15i40.2391Cardoso, W., Rueb, A., & Grimshaw, J. (2017). Can an interactive digital game help French learners improve their pronunciation? In K. Borthwick, L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds), CALL in a climate of change: adapting to turbulent global conditions - short papers from EUROCALL 2017 (pp. 67-72). Researchpublishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2017.eurocall2017.691Castañeda, D. A., & Cho, M.-H. (2016). Use of a game-like application on a mobile device to improve accuracy in conjugating spanish verbs. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(7), 1195-1204. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1197950Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English Language Learning and Technology: Lectures on applied linguistics in the age of information and communication technology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.7Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer-assisted language learning. Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 741- 753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00970.xChapelle, C. A. (2016). Call in the year 2000: A look back from 2016. Language Learning and Technology, 20(2), 159-161. https://doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44468Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, USA: Academy of Management Review.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Self-Determination. In The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0834Deterding, S., Khaled, R., Nacke L.E. and Dixon, D. (2011). Gamification: Toward a Definition. In CHI 2011 Gamification Workshop Proceedings, Vancouver, 2011 (pp. 1215.). https://doi.org/978-1-4503-0268-5/11/0Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in education: A systematic mapping study. Educational Technology and Society, 18(3), 75- 88. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2014.6826129Domínguez, A., Saenz-De-Navarrete, J., De-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J. J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. Routledge. New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315779553Figueroa Flores, J. F. (2015). Using gamification to enhance second language learning. Digital Education Review, 27, 32-54. Retrieved from http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/11912/pdfGafni, R., Biran Achituv, D., & Rahmani, G. (2017). Learning Foreign Languages Using Mobile Applications. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 301- 317. https://doi.org/10.28945/3855Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.Godwin-Jones, R. (2015). Emerging technologies the evolving roles of language teachers: trained coders, local researchers, global citizens. Language, Learning and Technology, 19(1), 10-22.Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025-3034). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377Hew, K., Huang, B., Wah Samuel Chu, K., & Chiu, D. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: Findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92-93, 221- 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.010Hubbard, P. (2008). CALL and the Future of Language Teacher Education. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 175. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.25.2.175-188Hung, H.-T. (2017). Clickers in the flipped classroom: bring your own device (BYOD) to promote student learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(8), 983-995. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1240090Iaremenko, N. (2017). Enhancing English language learners' motivation through online games. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 59, 126-133. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v59i3.1606Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. San Francisco, USA: Pfeiffer & Company. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207270.2211316Kétyi, A. (2016, September 1). From Mobile Language Learning to Gamification: an Overlook of Research Results with Business Management Students over a Five-Year Period. Innovating in the Didactic Second Language Scenario Innovating in the Didactic Second Language Scenario: New Mobile, Open and Social Model, Edition: Monográfico I., 45-59. Retrieved from https://urlzs.com/iZXtMLi, L. (2016). Benefits of CALL in lexico-grammatical acquisition. The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching (p. 463). London and New York: Routledge.Liu, Y., Holden, D., & Zheng, D. (2016). Analyzing students' Language Learning Experience in an Augmented Reality Mobile Game: An Exploration of an Emergent Learning Environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 228, 369-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.055MacIntyre, P. D. (2002). Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning, 2, 45-68. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.05macMarczewski, A. (2019). Introduction to Gamification Part 4: Motivation (R.A.M.P, Maslow, SDT and more). Retrieved from https://www.gamified.uk/2019/01/30/introduction-to-gamification-part4-motivation-r-a-m-p-maslow-sdt-and-more/Mateo-Gallego, C., & Ruiz Yepes, G. (2018). Terapias de errores con aprendizaje móvil y gamificación: estudio comparativo en español de los negocios. Folios, 48, 121-135. https://doi.org/10.17227/folios.48-8139Munday, P. (2016). The case for using Duolingo as part of the language classroom experience. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 19 (1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.19.1.14581Palomo-Duarte, M., Berns, A., Cejas, A., Dodero, J. M., Caballero, J. A., & Ruiz-Rube, I. (2016). Assessing Foreign Language Learning Through Mobile Game-Based Learning Environments. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 7(2), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJHCITP.2016040104Perry, B. (2015). Gamifying French Language Learning: A Case Study Examining a Quest-based, Augmented Reality Mobile Learning-tool. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2308- 2315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.892Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of Game-Based Learning. Educational Psychologist, 50, 258-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533Purgina, M., Mozgovoy, M., & Blake, J. (2019). WordBricks: Mobile Technology and Visual Grammar Formalism for Gamification of Natural Language Grammar Acquisition. Journal of Educational Computing Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119833010Rickinson, M., & May, H. (2009). A Comparative Study of Methodological Approaches to Reviewing Literature. UK : Higher Education AcademySeverengiz, M., Roeder, I., Schindler, K., & Seliger, G. (2018). Influence of Gaming Elements on Summative Assessment in Engineering Education for Sustainable Manufacturing. In Procedia Manufacturing (pp. 429-437). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.141Sheldon, L. (2012). The Multiplayer Classroom: Designing Coursework as a Game. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Skinner, B. F. (1958). Teaching machines. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.128.3330.969Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012a). For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Digital Press.Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012b). The Gamification Toolkit Game Elements. In For the Win: How Game Thinking Can Revolutionize Your Business. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004Zichermann, G. (2011). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Gamification. Retrieved from https://www.gamification.co/2011/10/27/intrinsic-and-extrinsic-motivation-in-gamification

Standardization of Design Interfaces Applied to Language Test on-line through Ubiquitous Devices

[EN] Normalization of design rules and guidelines in English language tests to help future instructors and assessment developers in the field of examination of English as a foreign language. have not been defined sufficiently until present days. In fact, there are several experiences and investigations related to the user¿s experiences in the handling of computer exams for learning a second language that have been evaluated in, for and through different experimental interactive digital environments. These interactive scenarios oriented to the user experience, UX in the ubiquitous devices, have allowed to learn technological, functional and design aspects that will be necessary in the future to establish the standards in design and vision for language tests in its online environment. The lack of effective and realistic regulations has become a functional requirement for the progress of research on digital environments adapted to the needs of competence assessment and more specifically, to the learning environment of second language (L2). Proliferation of on-line tests of language certification of ls with a structural corpus depends on where there are not really functional and formal guidelines that allow evaluating their quality and adequacy from the experience of the user and according to the level of learning competences acquired in a second language. This article describes aspects of design that should be taken into account when defining an online test of languages in a ubiquitous device that will mark verifiable guidelines of a general nature and affect the evaluation task in the formation of languages that need to be checked and evaluated periodically.Magal Royo, T.; García Laborda, J. (2018). Standardization of Design Interfaces Applied to Language Test on-line through Ubiquitous Devices. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM). 12(4):21-31. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v12i4.9197S213112

NovoLearning: A strategic response to large class problems in teaching non-English department students

Having English for all non-English department students as a compulsory course in the institution is worthwhile for the improvement of students’ ability in using foreign language; however, practically, the students and the lecturers deal with a lot of issues regarding the implementation of the subject itself. Every English class of non-English department is a large class consisting of more than 50 and even 100 students. Handling large classes constitutes a real challenge to every lecturer that it may hinder greater academic achievement and favorable attitudes toward learning. This study aims to find out how NovoLearning program can be the alternative to cope with large class problems of non-English language students. NovoLearning program is an artificial intelligence-based mobile learning that provides a fully integrated training solution, allowing focused English language instruction, communication preparation and integrated skills training. This study employed descriptive qualitative research involving 356 non-English department students from MIPA major namely Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Natural Science Education Study Programs. Interview, observation, and documentation were employed to obtain the data of this present study. The results show that NovoLearning program can elevate the efficiency of the teaching and learning level to its best quality. It witnessed several views of students that get advantages from the use of the program such as the interactivity, boost on students’ English proficiency, and high-quality feedback. The practical use of this program makes it potential to be applied not only for today’s learning as an alternative to cope with ineffectiveness of large class but also for more advanced learning in the future