The INTENT Project: Integrating Telecollaborative Networks into Foreign Language Higher Education

[EN] No abstractO'dowd, R. (2013). The INTENT Project: Integrating Telecollaborative Networks into Foreign Language Higher Education. The EuroCALL Review. 21(1):54-59. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2013.10162OJS5459211Belz, J., & Kinginger, C. (2002). "The cross-linguistic development of address form use in telecollaborative language learning: Two case studies", Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(2), 189-214.Belz, J., & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2003). "Teachers negotiating German-American telecollaboration: Between a rock and an institutional hard place", Modern Language Journal, 87 (1), 71-89.Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1985). Research methods in education. London: Croom Helm.Hauck, M. (2010). "Telecollaboration: At the interface between multimodal and intercultural communicative competence", in S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.), Telecollaboration 2.0: Language and intercultural learning in the 21 st century. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 219-248.Nunan, D. & Bailey, K.M. (Eds) (2009). Exploring Second Language Classroom Research: A Comprehensive Guide. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.O'Dowd, R. (2011). "Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the core of foreign language education?, Language Teaching, 44(3), 368-380.Thorne, S. (2010). "The intercultural turn and language learning in the crucible of new media", in S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.), Telecollaboration 2.0: Language and intercultural learning in the 21 st century. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 139-165.Ware, P. (2005). "Missed communication in online communication: Tensions in fostering successful online interactions", Language Learning & Technology 9(2): 64-89. Available from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/default.html. Last accessed 09/01/2013

MIXED-USE SAFETY ON RURAL FACILITIES IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST: Consideration of Vehicular, Non-Traditional, and Non-Motorized Users

In the United States, one in 12 households do not own a personal automobile and approximately 13% of those who are old enough to drive do not. Trips by these individuals are being made in one of many other possible modes, creating the need to “share space” between many forms of travel. The goal of this project is to: improve safety and minimize the dangers for all transportation mode types while traveling in mixed-use environments on rural facilities through the development and use of engineering and education safety measures. To that end, this report documents three specific efforts by the project team. First, a comprehensive literature review of mixed-use safety issues with consideration of non-motorized and non-traditional forms of transportation. Second, a novel analysis of trauma registry data. Third, development, execution and analysis of the Pacific Northwest Transportation Survey geared toward understanding safety perceptions of mixed-use users. Most notably, findings indicate that ATVs (and similar non-traditional-type vehicles) are used on or near roads 24% of the time and snowmachines are used on or near roads 23% of the time. There are significantly more (twice as many) ATV-related on-road traumas in connected places than isolated places in Alaska and three times more traumas in highway connected places than in secondary road connected places. Comparably, bicycles had 449 on-road traumas between 2004 and 2011 whereas ATVs had 352 on-road traumas. Users of all modes who received formalized training felt safer in mixed-use environments than those who reported having no training at all