Saturday, November 14, 2009

Cyber-Language in Education

Final Video Project Posted on YouTube


Annotated Bibliography
Baron, N. (2005). Instant Messaging and the Future of Language. Communications of the ACM, 48(7), 29-31. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
In collaboration with her students, Baron (2005) conducted exploratory research at the American University in Washington D.C on the use of Instant Messages (IM) by students which spans over three years. The purpose of the research is to explore the question whether computer-mediated-communication (CMC) degrades the language. Baron states that viewing CMC as either good or bad is twofold. Online communication reflects on gender, age, educational level, cultural background, personality and experience with CMC platforms or the purpose of use. Furthermore, Baron writes that adolescents have long been a source of linguistic and behavioral novelty. They often use language to express group identity. However, Baron’s research concludes that the use of IMs is unlike to play a role in altering writing standards unless parents and educators allow it to happen.

Derk, D., Bos, A., & von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication: Social Motives and Social Context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 99-101. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9926.
The study examined the social motives for emoticon use and other aspects that might influence emoticon use in computer-mediated-communication (CMC). The participants were subscribers of Psychology Magazine Web site in the Netherlands. This group consisted of 789 women and 136 men for a total 925 participants who filled out the questions handling the background variables. The questionnaire focused on motives for emoticon use. The emoticons used were big smile, smile, sad, wink, confused, and cry. Through statistical analyses, the study demonstrates that people use more emoticons in communicating with friends than in communicating with strangers. Furthermore, more emoticons are used in positive contexts than in negative contexts. Emoticons are mostly used for the expression of emotion, for strengthening the verbal part of a message, and for expressing humor. These purposes correlate with the functions of nonverbal emotional expression in face-to-face communication. The study only concentrated on the senders’ perspective and not the receiver.

Fox, A., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, Distractions: Does Instant Messaging Affect College Students' Performance on a Concurrent Reading Comprehension Task? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(1), 51-53. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0107.
The research purpose is to investigate whether the use of Instant Messages (IM) affects cognition in student’s performances when used simultaneously while studying. The study sprouts from other qualitative studies which investigated the effects of media on cognition during study and work time. Sixty-nine undergraduate students participated for course credit in an introductory psychology course using AOL Instant Messenger (AIM). Researchers tested their reading comprehension in order to test recognition memory and a survey of computer and web use and attitudes were also evaluated. Overall, the authors concluded that their results were inconsistent with prior research indicating: “that interaction negatively affects task performance;” however IM usage did affect negatively performances on reading comprehension.

Lee, C. (2007). Affordances and Text-Making Practices in Online Instant Messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223-249. doi:10.1177/0741088307303215.
The purpose of the qualitative study conducted by Lee (2007) is to examine the factors that influence “text-making practices” in IM within a social theory of literacy. In addition, the study seeks to understand the changing nature of practices through analyzing IM texts and people’s perceptions associated with these texts. The data was collected over a 2-year period and is based on a study that examines the everyday uses of IM by conducting qualitative and semi-structured interviews, including observations, logbook keeping, face-to-face and online interviews. The sample group consisted of 19 participants, all located in Hong Kong, who shared similar linguistic backgrounds and were aged 20-28 years. Lee’s (2007) study concluded that the participants’ familiarity with their linguistic resources and typing speed justified their choice of language use in IM (English or Cantonese). Moreover, Lee (2007) states that environmental factors impact people’s decision what to do and how to act within an IM.

Lo, S. (2008). The Nonverbal Communication Functions of Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 595-597. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0132.
Lo’s (2008) research examined the use of emoticons as a communication tool in computer-mediated communication (CMC) where nonverbal cues are lacking. The purpose of the study was to verify whether emoticons possess nonverbal cue functions based on the definitions of nonverbal communication (emotion, attitude, and attention). The methodology used simulated three scenarios and evaluated 137 instant message service (IMS) users who were randomly assigned into one of three scenarios. The experiment adopted a widely uses IMS software as a background. Lo’s (2008) research concludes that without emoticons, most people cannot recognize correct emotions, attitude, or intent as they are lacking the visual cues in CMC. These results prove that emoticons perform nonverbal communication functions.

Maness, J. (2008). A Linguistic Analysis of Chat Reference Conversations with 18-24 Year-Old College Students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 31-38. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Maness’ (2008) research analyzed and compared Instant Messaging (IM) conversations held among students and among students talking to librarians using IM. The data was collected from two sources. The first source relied on the research done by Baron in 2004 that reported the findings of a study of 23 undergraduate students’ IM conversations at American University. The second source was chat reference conversations provided by AskColorado, a state-wide multi-type library collaborative service administered through the Colorado State Library using a survey and by a study. It analyzed 31 chat reference conversations by tabulating the number of words written by patron and librarians. Maness (2008) concluded that the chat reference conversation is more formal than the student-to student IM conversation. It appears that the librarians were writing, but the patrons were “speaking.” However, Maness (2008) concludes that the use of emoticons, abbreviations, acronyms, and other nonverbal compensations was infrequent when used with librarians and that student’s linguistic style changes according to the social setting.

References
Baron, N. (2005). Instant Messaging and the Future of Language. Communications of the ACM, 48(7), 29-31.

Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge U P.

Derk, D., Bos, A., & von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication: Social Motives and Social Context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 99-101. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9926.

Fox, A., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, Distractions: Does Instant Messaging Affect College Students' Performance on a Concurrent Reading Comprehension Task?. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(1), 51-53. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0107.

Lee, C. (2007). Affordances and Text-Making Practices in Online Instant Messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223-249. doi:10.1177/0741088307303215.

Lo, S. (2008). The Nonverbal Communication Functions of Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 595-597. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0132.

Maness, J. (2008). A Linguistic Analysis of Chat Reference Conversations with 18-24 Year-Old College Students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 31-38. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Moving Toward Dynamic Technologies

In the article, McGreal and Elliott (2008) examine some of the latest multimedia technologies used in online classes. The article also offers suggestions for the use of the multimedia in an instructional setting. Moller (2008) states that dynamic tools: “involve learner on a much deeper level” (pp.1). Moller (2008) uses an interesting analogy when he compares the integration of technology to crafting a new recipe (pp.2). The instructor should use his experience with technology to wisely choose technology with which he is familiar and according to the skills of his students. Although, Fahy (2008) states: “technological trends tend to translate rapidly from culture to the (virtual classroom),” pedagogues have to be selective with regards to which multimedia tools they integrate into the classroom (pp.168).

Moller (2008) writes: “technology can be conceptualized along a continuum of static to dynamic” (pp.1). Furthermore, not all technologies create an active learner; web pages, podcasts, eBooks, Google scholar may contribute to learner’s knowledge, but they are static tools. Learning will be generated as expected in a traditional environment, where the learner is a passive receiver of information. Moller (2008) states that static technologies allow learner “to capture information,” and the reason they are popular is because they “mimic traditional environment” (pp.1), a zone of comfort for many educators.

As I read McGreal and Elliott’s (2008) article, I was mentally marking multimedia tools that I can use in my web design and eBusiness classes. Since I prepare my students to be integrated into the 21st century work force, there is a need for students to learn to communicate and work in concert. Dynamic tools involve learning on a “deeper cognitive level” (Moller, 2008, pp.1) by preparing students to be able to construct knowledge not provided by the instructor.

Reference:

Fahy, H. (2008). Characteristics of Interactive Online Learning Media. The theory and practice of online learning (T. Anderson, Ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

McGreal, R. & Elliott , M.,(2008). Technologies of Online Learning (E-Learning). The theory and practice of online learning (T. Anderson, Ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].