Advertisement

Crossing boundaries in Facebook: Students’ framing of language learning activities as extended spaces

  • Annika Lantz-Andersson
  • Sylvi Vigmo
  • Rhonwen Bowen
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Young people’s interaction online is rapidly increasing, which enables new spaces for communication; the impact on learning, however, is not yet acknowledged in education. The aim of this exploratory case study is to scrutinize how students frame their interaction in social networking sites (SNS) in school practices and what that implies for educational language teaching and learning practices. Analytically, the study departs from a sociocultural perspective on learning, and adopts conceptual distinctions of frame analysis. The results based on ethnographic data from a Facebook group in English-learning classes, with 60 students aged between 13 and 16 from Colombia, Finland, Sweden and Taiwan indicate that there is a possibility for boundary crossing, which could generate extended spaces for collaborative language-learning activities in educational contexts where students combine their school subject of learning language and their communicative use of language in their everyday life. Such extended spaces are, however, difficult to maintain and have to be recurrently negotiated. To take advantage of young people’s various dynamic communicative uses of language in their everyday life in social media, the implementation of such media for educational purposes has to be deliberately, collaboratively and dynamically negotiated by educators and students to form a new language-learning space with its own potentials and constraints.

Keywords

SNS Boundary crossing Extended spaces Computer-supported collaborative learning Language-learning activities Facebook Framing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research reported here was funded by Marcus and Amelia Foundation and conducted within the University of Gothenburg Learning and Media Technology Studio (LETStudio), and the Linnaeus Centre for Research on Learning, Interaction and Mediated Communication in Contemporary Society (LinCS). We wish to convey our thanks to the anonymous reviewers and Gerry Stahl for their invaluable comments on a former version of this article.

References

  1. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alhabash, S., Park, H., Kononova, A., Chiang, Y. H., & Wise, K. (2012). Exploring the motivation of Facebook use in Taiwan. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Socialnetwork, 15(6), 304–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aydin, S. (2012). A review of research on Facebook as an educational environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 1093–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blattner, G., & Lomicka, L. (2012). Facebook-ing and the social generation: A new era of language learning. Alsic, 15(1), http://alsic.revues.org/2413.
  5. Bonderup Dohn, N. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 343–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, D. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In I. D. Buckingham (Ed.), The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Canagarajah, S. (2006). Toward a writing pedagogy of shuttling between language: Learning from multilingual writers. College English, 68(6), 589–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. York: HEA Academy.Google Scholar
  9. Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student guide. Oxon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Derry, S., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J., Sherin, M. G., & Sherin, B. L. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dirksen, V., Huizing, A., & Smit, B. (2010). “Piling on layers of understanding”: The use of connective ethnography for the study of (online) work practices. New Media & Society, 12(7), 1045–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Drotner, K. (2008). Leisure is hard work: Digital practices and future competencies. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (pp. 167–184). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Drouin, M. A. (2011). College students’ text messaging, use of textese and literacy skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(1), 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ducate, L. C., & Lomicka, L. L. (2008). Adventures in the blogosphere: From blog readers to blog writers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(1), 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul.Google Scholar
  17. Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farmer, B., Yue, A., & Brooks, C. (2008). Using blogging for higher order learning in large cohort university teaching: A case study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), 123–136.Google Scholar
  19. Goffman, E. (1959/1990). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  20. Goffman, E. (1974/1986). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Goodwin, C., & Heritage, J. (1990). Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gutiérrez, K., Rymes, B., & Larson, J. (1995). Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of education. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 445–471.Google Scholar
  23. Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture and Activity, 6(4), 286–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall, J. K., Cheng, A., & Carlson, M. (2006). Reconceptualizing multicompetence as a theory of language knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 220–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994/2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  26. Hemmi, A., Bayne, S., & Land, R. (2009). The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jenkins, J. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kern, R. G., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kramsch, C., A’Ness, F., & Lam, W. S. E. (2000). Authenticity and authorship in the computer-mediated acquisition of L2 literacy. Language, Learning and Technology, 4(2), 78–104.Google Scholar
  31. Lam, W. S. E. (2000). L2 Literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 457–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lampe, C., Wohn, D., Vitak, J., Ellison, N., & Wash, R. (2011). Student use of Facebook for organizing collaborative classroom activities. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 329–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lemert, C., & Branaman, A. (Eds.). (2005). The Goffman reader. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  34. Leppänen, S., Pitkänen-Huhta, A., Piirainen-Marsh, A., Nikula, T., & Peuronen, S. (2009). Young people’s translocal new media uses: A multiperspective analysis of language choice and heteroglossia. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1080–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lewis, S., Pea, R., & Rosen, J. (2010). Beyond participation to co-creation of meaning: Mobile social media in generative learning communities. Social Science Information, 49(3), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ludvigsen, S. R., Lund, A., Rasmussen, I., Säljö, R. (Eds.) (2010). Introduction. Learning across sites. New tools, infrastructures and practices. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. McBride, K. (2009). Social-networking sites in foreign language classes: Opportunities for re-creation. I. L. Lomicka, & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning. CALICO Monograph Series Volume 8. San Marcos, Texas: CALICO.Google Scholar
  38. Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching, 44(4), 412–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rogers, R. (2009). The end of the virtual: Digital methods. Amsterdam: Vossiuspers UvA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosenberg, J., & Egbert, N. (2011). Online impression management: Personality traits and concerns for secondary goals as predictors of self-presentation tactics on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schneider, E. W. (2011). English around the world. An introduction. Cambridge, UK: CUP.Google Scholar
  44. Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  45. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford, UK: OUP.Google Scholar
  46. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors of learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Thorne, S. L. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language, Learning and Technology, 7(2), 38–67.Google Scholar
  49. Thorne, S. L. (2009). ‘Community’, semiotic flows, and mediated contribution to activity. Language Teaching, 42(1), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  51. Vygotsky, L. S. (1939/1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Warschauer, M., Black, R. W., & Chou, Y.-L. (2010). Online Englishes. In A. Kirpatrick (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of world Englishes (pp. s 490–505). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(1), 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. West, A., Lewis, J., & Currie, P. (2009). Students’ Facebook ‘friends’: Public and private spheres. Journal of Youth Studies, 12(6), 615–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. White, J. (2013). Language economy in computer-mediated communication: Learner autonomy in a community of practice. In B. Zou, M. Xing, Y. Wang, M. Sun, & C. H. Xiang (Eds.), Computer-assisted foreign language teaching and learning: Technological advances (pp. 75–90). Hershey: USA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  57. Yang, Y.-F. (2011). Learner interpretations of shared space in multilateral English blogging. Language, Learning and Technology, 15(1), 122–146.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. and Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annika Lantz-Andersson
    • 1
  • Sylvi Vigmo
    • 1
  • Rhonwen Bowen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Education, Communication and Learning, The Linnaeus Centre for Research on Learning, Interaction and Mediated Communication (LinCS), The University of Gothenburg Learning and Media Technology Studio (LETStudio)University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.Faculty of Arts, Department of Languages and Literatures, The University of Gothenburg Learning and Media Technology Studio (LETStudio)University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options