1
A Study ofthe Use of Language Learning Websites with Social Network Features
by University ESL Students
Liu, M.,[1]Evans, M.,Horwitz, E. K., Lee, S., McCrory, M., Park, J. B., and Parrish, C.
The University of Texas at Austin
As a web 2.0 application, social network websites hold much potential for education in different content areas. However, there is little empirical research on whether or how social network sites can be used to facilitate the learning of a second language (Stevenson & Liu, 2010; Zourou, 2012) even though they could provide an abundance of hitherto unavailable opportunities for second language learning. Understanding learners’ use of and reactions to web-based learning experiences can provide valuable insights on how technologies can function as teaching and learning tools for language learners. In this study, we examined how university English as a Second Language (ESL) students use websites with social network features and their perceptions of these language learning experiences.
Theoretical Framework
Web 2.0 and Social Networking for Language Learning
Web 2.0 is considered a user-centric environment that is social, personalized, interactive, and participatory. According to O’Reilly (2005), web 2.0 embraces “the power of the Web to harness collective intelligence.” Web 2.0 has been found to have numerous advantages for second language acquisition (SLA) especially in terms of increased learner autonomy and collaboration (De Weber, Mechant, Veevaete, & Hauttekeete, 2007; Solomon & Schrum, 2007). Autonomy and collaboration address the very core of web 2.0: websites where users come together to “collaborate, learn, and build knowledge” (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007, p. 664). This nexus of learning is based upon an “architecture of participation” that enables users to generate content in a public space (Barsky & Purdon, 2006, p. 65).
Social networks (SN) or the use of SN websites to facilitate social relationships between members constitute an important web 2.0 approach that can potentially create heretofore unimaginable language learning resources (Conole & Alevizou, 2010). Duffy (2011) identified five common features of social network sites (SNS): a user can (a) create a profile, (b) find peers online, (c) publicly erect or confirm peer connections, (d) collaborate to share content, and (e) form online communities (p. 286). boyd and Ellison (as cited in Zourou, 2012) stated that SNSs “allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system." In these networked social spaces, users with different interests are encouraged both to improve their individual ability and to "contribute to distributed knowledge" from which everyone in the community can benefit (Gee, 2004, p. 79).
Using Social Network Websites to Facilitate Language Learning
The user-centered, participatory, and collaborative practices associated with web 2.0 applications are consistent with the sociocultural understanding of SLA. Influenced by Vygotsky (1978), sociocultural SLA theory posits that the source of language learning is social interaction, and that learners incrementally internalize socially acquired language, moving from egocentric, cultural ambivalence toward more socialized speech (Piaget, trans.1932, Lantolf, 2006). In this view, language learning takes place through scaffolded interactions where language learners use the social assistance of more expert language users to incorporate new linguistic features into their developing language competence (Cook, 2008). Social networks, augmented with technology to allow learners from around the world to exchange ideas, would seem to be an ideal platform for scaffolded language interactions. Indeed, many second language researchers contend that social network sites have considerable potential for L2 pedagogy (Brick, 2011; McBride, 2009; Reinhardt & Zander, 2011). McBride (2009) suggested that social network sites naturally facilitate the development of second language skills and communicative competence, and Horwitz (2013) believes that learners can use social networks to find online tools for their personal language learning needs.
Although there is much enthusiasm about the potential of social network websites, there is little evidence-based research on their use as teaching and learning tools for second language learners (Clark & Gruba, 2010; Stevenson & Liu, 2010; Zourou, 2012) or whether learners perceive networked experiences to be useful.As perceptions can influence learners’ future use of the learning sites, it is especially important to understand students’ responses to SN sites.
Given the scarcity of research on this topic, this study addressed the following two research questions:
1. When language learning websites with social network features are used as a tool for in and out of classroom language practice, what do university ESL students think of them and how do they use them?
2. What specific features of these sites do students find most useful in helping them develop language skills and why?
Method
To address these two research questions, survey research was employed. A survey, comprised of both Likert scale questions and open-ended questions, was designed to seek participants’ usage as well as perception of the selected language learning websites with social network features.
Participants and Research Setting
Twenty-one ESL students from 11 countries attending an Intensive English Program in a large public university in the southwestern US participated in this study in Fall 2011. They ranged in age from 18 to 40 with an average age of 25.88. Ten participants were female and eleven were male. Participants were enrolled in three ESL courses (Listening/Speaking – Advanced Level, Writing – Beginner Level Low, and Grammar - Beginner Level High). (Detailed demographic information is presented in the results section.)
Procedure
This study included the following three steps.
Step 1. Selecting Language Learning Websites With Social Network Features
boyd and Ellison (as cited in Zourou, 2012) discussed the difference between the terms social “network” vs “networking” and cautioned that networking implied active “relationship initiation“ while network is a more neutral term. We followed this convention and use ‘network’ in this paper. Given our language learning focus, our selection involved only language learning websites that have SN characteristics as discussed above and excluded generic SNS such as Facebook, Twitter, and Ning.
We constructed an initial list of possible sites from examining the literature on the topic. We then evaluated each potential site usingthe SN criteria proposed by boyd and Ellison (2007) and Duffy (2011). Sites that had little or no free materials (e.g. Babbel, iTalki), did not enable user-generated content (e.g. Verbling.com), were only for teachers (e.g. CO13), had no or only limited network possibilities (e.g. ESL Café, English Central, SharedTalk), were not specific to language learning (e.g. Study Zone, MeetUp), or had too many advertisements (e.g. English Club) were eliminated. We also wanted the content of the sites to align well with the learning objectives of the participating ESL classes. This selection process resulted in the choice of three websites: Busuu.com, Livemocha.com, and English Café.com (see Appendix A for descriptions).These sites are not simply web 2.0 language learning communities (Zourou, 2012), they offer specific SN features as defined by boyd and Ellison (2007) and Duffy (2011). That is, the three sites allow users to: 1) create a profile, 2) add friends to their network, 3) search for new friends, 4) create a circle of friends, 5) communicate with others in their network via multiple means such as email and chat in different modes and 6) receive feedback from friends in their network.
Step 2: Generating the Learning Tasks
Guided by our two research questions, we created individual tasks for each of the participating ESL classes and carefully aligned the tasks with the content topics and language skills the participants were learning when the study took place. In creating the tasks, we paid special attention to include SN features of the sites. For example, for the Listening/Speaking class, Task 1 asked students to network with classmates and Task 3 asked them to network with someone in the larger network (see Appendices B and C).
Step 3. Implementing the Learning Tasks
During Fall 2011, participants in the three ESL courses used the sites over a six-week period and performed the structured learning tasks as part of their in-class activities as well as for free exploration outside class.
For each course, an introductory session was offered during which two to three researchers were present, one providing an introduction for this study and the other(s) helping students log in and begin the task as described in a handout (see an example in Appendix D). Students were given 40 to 60 minutes to complete in-class tasks and up to 10 days to complete out-of-class tasks. They were also encouraged to explore the sites freely on their own, to build their own networks outside of the class, and to chat with anyone they found online.
Data Collection and Analyses
Surveys were used as the primary data source for this study. At the beginning of the study, participants completed demographic surveys to describe their language-learning backgrounds and typical use of the Internet and SNS. At the end of a series of tasks for each site, surveys were distributed to elicit students’ use and perceptions of the website. These surveys contained a mix of general questions regarding each site and specific questions tailored to each assigned task. Survey responses were tallied and organized by demographic categories, websites, and tasks. A constant comparative and iterative approach was used in sorting and analyzing the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Findings were organized by emerging themes as guided by the two research questions.
Results
Demographic Information
Since some participants were enrolled in more than one course and not all participants responded to all questions, the response rate for each question varied. A 5-point Likert scale was used for some questions (1 being low and 5 being high); and average scores are reported.
Table 1
Participants’ Demographic Information
Course / Age / Gender / Country / Years of English learningL/S_Advanced / 20-30 (n=5)
31-50 (n=1) / Male (n=4)
Female (n=2) / China (2)
Japan (1)
Kazakhstan (1)
Saudi Arabia (1)
South Korea (1) / <=5 (n=1)
>5 (n=5)
Grammar_Beginner_low / 20-30 (n=7)
31-50 (n=1) / Male (n=3)
Female (n=5) / South Korea (2)
Chile (1)
Guinea (1)
Kazakhstan (1)
Mexico (1)
Saudi Arabia (1)
Thai (1) / <=5 (n=6)
>5 (n=2)
Writing_Beginner_high / 20-30 (n=8)
31-50 (n=3) / Male (n=5)
Female (n=6) / Saudi Arabia (3)
South Korea (3)
Chile (1)
Kazakhstan (1)
Mexico (1)
Thai (1)
Venezuela (1) / <=5 (n=8)
>5 (n=3)
Note: Four students took both the Grammar and Writing courses.
Students indicated that on average, they spent about 3 hours per day using the Internet and 2.5 hours per week studying English using the Internet. They had an average of 3.5 years computer experience. Their most frequently visited sites included Facebook, Google, Gmail, youtube, and several country-specific sites. In terms of SNS, participants mentioned Twitter and some country-specific sites.
Students’ Use and Perception of Three Language Learning Websites with SN Features
To explore the perceived affordances of language learning websites with SN features, ESL students were given specific tasks to perform both in and outside of class. Each learning task intentionally included the use of one or more SN features from the selected site (see Appendix B). The results are organized by the themes that emerged from the data and the findings concerning SN for the three sites are highlighted. Student comments are unedited.
Busuu
A total of 21 participants (L&S_Adv, n=14; Grammar_Beginner_low, n=7) completed the Busuu survey.
Use of Busuu in class. 64% of L&S and 71% of Grammar participants indicated they made friends other than their classmates on Busuu, and 71% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants were comfortable making Busuu friends online. These participants viewed Busuu as an opportunity to interact globally with English speakers and learners commenting: “I want to make a lot of friends in all over the world” and “because I love making new friends.” However, 28% of the participants offered conflicting responses: 14% indicated they had made unknown friends on Busuu but were not comfortable, and 14% said, though comfortable adding friends, they had not made any unknown friends and had added only classmates to their networks. A few were hesitant about using social networks: “I don’t feel comfortable with being online friends with total strangers. No offense to others, it's just my opinion about online friends” and “I don't use social networks in order to make friends.”When adding friends, age was the factor considered most important by the participants in both courses (see Table 2); country of origin was another crucial factor.
Table 2
When adding a friend, what factors did you consider?
Age / Country of origin / Gender / Language learning / Name / Profile picture / L1 / OtherL&S_Adv (n=14) / 57% / 43% / 29% / 29% / 29% / 21% / 7% / 7%
Grammar_Beg_low (n=7) / 43% / 43% / 43% / 29% / 29% / 29% / 0% / 0%
Total (n=21) / 52% / 43% / 33% / 29% / 29% / 24% / 5% / 5%
Note: As the participants were allowed to choose as many factors as desired, the total percentages for this question do not add to 100. This is also the case for Tables 7 and 10.
Merely having students connect with others in a network was not the primary goal of this study.Rather, this study sought to encourage students to use social networks as a means to communicate with others in order to practice English. Thus, several tasks specifically required participants to conducta synchronous live chatwith classmates, friends they made through the networkor even strangers. The average comfort level for text chat was ML&S=4, Mwriting=3; for audio chat ML&S=3.21, Mwriting=2; and for video chat ML&S=2.86, Mwriting =2. In general, participants found text chat to be the most comfortable mode.However,the more proficient L&S participants were more comfortable than the less proficient Writing participants in all chatting modes.
An important affordance of SNfor language learning is getting help from others ina networked circle. Participants from the three courses had different experiences receiving and giving feedback while chatting: Only 14% of the advanced proficiency L&S participants reported receiving corrective feedback while 71% of the Grammar participants provided feedback. Moreover, 49% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants reported noticing a chatting partner’sEnglish errors, and 91% of those who noticed the errors pointed out their partner’s mistakes.
Use of Busuu outside class. We encouraged the participants to use Busuu outside of class. 52% of the participants indicated that they had used Busuu in their free time, including 38% of L&S and 85% of Grammar participants. Mostparticipants used between 30 minutes to an hour while a few used more than 60 minutes (see Table 3).
Table 3
How long did you use Busuu/Livemocha/English Cafe over the past week outside class?
0minutes / 30 minutes / 60 minutes / 90 minutes / 120 minutes / More than
3 hours
Busuu / L&S (n=14) / 36% / 50% / 14% / 0% / 0% / 0%
Grammar (n=7) / 14% / 29% / 29% / 0% / 14% / 14%
Total (n=21) / 29% / 43% / 19% / 0% / 5% / 5%
Livemocha / L&S (n=9) / 44% / 33% / 11% / 11%
Writing (n=7) / 29% / 29% / 43% / 0%
Total (n=16) / 38% / 31% / 25% / 6%
English Café / Writing (n=9) / 22% / 56% / 22% / 220%
Grammar (n=4) / 25% / 25% / 50% / 025%
Total (n=13) / 23% / 46% / 31% / 023%
Different types of communication are available in these three sites to connect toothersin the network. Busuuofferschat, through text, audio, and video, as a means for language learners tocommunicate with friends or strangers within their network. All participants–especially the Grammar participants—felt comfortable using text, but they were all less comfortable with either audio-or video-chat (see Table 4).
Table 4
Outside of class, how did you use Busuu.com?
Language content / Social networking / N/AListening exercise / Vocabulary exercise / Grammar exercise / Make friends / Help others learn your L1 / Chatting
Video / Audio / Text
L&S (n=14) / 36% / 36% / 29% / 21% / 21% / 21% / 7% / 36% / 14%
Grammar
(n=7) / 14% / 29% / 29% / 14% / 0% / 0% / 86% / 57% / 0%
Total (n=21) / 29% / 33% / 33% / 19% / 14% / 14% / 33% / 43% / 10%
Perception of Busuu. Compared to the Grammar participants,L&S participants found the site more helpful (ML&S=3.57 v. Mgrammar=2.71) and enjoyable (ML&S=3.36 v. Mgrammar=2). One student, however, expressed mixed feelings aboutBusuu:“It was interesting to talk with other people who I don't know, but I think there are someproblems with people who are available to talk with. I tried more than 10 people to busuutalk, but no one answered. Except for this point, I think Busuu is an interesting website that helps learning English.”
Participants identified a variety of favorite Busuu features. 57% of Grammar participants appreciated the social networking aspect, as reflected in responses such as: “easy to make a friends” and “Because you can talk with many people at the same moment and from different place.” L&S participants’ responses addressed various features of the site: “because I learned more [grammatical] rules”, “this [translator tool] is a very useful tool for chat” and “I might get the feedback from other people that I’ve never met before” [using recording tool]. Participants’ least favorite features included video chatting: “I don't feel comfortable talking with other person who I don't know.”
64% of L&S participants and 57% of Grammar participants said that they would like to use Busuu in the future. Additionally, 86% of L&S and 57% of Grammar participants reported that they would recommend Busuu to someone learning English. In terms of their future use of Busuu, L&S participants most often selected learning new vocabulary and helping others, but Grammar students indicated they would use the site in the future to practice reading and grammar (see Table 5).
Table 5
How will you use Busuu.com in the future?
Language content / Social networking / Fun / OtherPracticing a skill / Question about grammar / Learn new vocab / Make friends / Help others learn my L1
Write / Speak / Listen / Read
L&S (n=14) / 57% / 43% / 36% / 43% / 36% / 43% / 14% / 43% / 21% / 21%
Grammar (n=7) / 71% / 14% / 29% / 57% / 57& / 29% / 43% / 29% / 14% / 0%
Total (n=21) / 67% / 33% / 33% / 48% / 43% / 38% / 24% / 38% / 19% / 14%
On the whole, 38% of the participants preferred practicingEnglish on Busuuover face-to-face communication (see Table 6). Interestingly, while 57% of Grammar participants preferred face-to-face interaction, only 21% of L&S participants selected this option.
Table 6
Which do you prefer for practicing English?
Using Busuu.com / Face-to-face / BothL&S (n=14) / 36% / 21% / 43%
Grammar (n=7) / 43% / 57% / 0%
Total (n=21) / 38% / 33% / 29%
Using Livemocha
L&S (n=9) / 33% / 44% / 33%
Writing (n=7) / 17% / 29% / 57%
Total (n=16) / 25% / 38% / 44%
Using English Café
Writing (n=9) / 33% / 44% / 22%
Grammar (n= 4) / 75% / 0% / 25%
Total (n=13) / 46% / 31% / 23%
Livemocha