Understanding Language Learners’ (Non)Use of Digital Technology
This book has uncovered L2 learners’ choices of technology (non)use. It identifies a range of contextual elements that mediate L2 behaviours surrounding digital technology and individual characteristics underlying such a use—justifying the sociocultural approach adopted in this book. Accordingly, L2 learners’ choice of technology (non)use is a complex one. Against this background, this final chapter identifies the main contribution of the present study in two steps. First, the foregoing empirical Chaps. 5, 6 and 7 are summarized. Second, the background and theoretical literature reviewed in Chaps. 1, 2 and 3 are related to and compared with the findings presented in this study. A sociocultural understanding of ‘English learning with Web 2.0’ is proposed, together with a framework that demonstrates the roles of context and agency in out-of-class language learning with online technology. On the basis of these findings and arguments, this chapter then considers how the potential of online technologies can be maximized for university EFL learners in China. After that, this chapter acknowledges the limitations of this study and makes suggestions for further research. Finally, this chapter concludes by highlighting the need to research learner voices in the field of CALL, as well as the importance of context and agency when seeking to understand learners’ behaviours surrounding digital technology.
- Benito-Ruiz, E. (2009). Infoxication 2.0. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Handbook of research on web 2.0 and second language learning. New York: IGI Global.Google Scholar
- Cheng, L. (2010). The history of examinations: Why, how, what and whom to select? In L. Cheng & A. Curtis (Eds.), English language assessment and the Chinese learner. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- China Internet Network Information Centre. (2010). Open image in new window (The 26th statistical report on Internet development in China). Available at http://www.cnnic.net.cn/hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/hlwtjbg/201206/t20120612_26717.htm. Last accessed August 10, 2014.
- Dooly, M., Masats, D., & Muller-Hartmann, A. (2008). Building effective, dynamic online partnerships. In M. Dooly (Ed.), Telecollaborative language learning: A guidebook to moderating intercultural collaboration online. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning (Online). System, 33(2), 209–224. Available at: http://www.finchpark.com/courses/grad-dissert/articles/methodology/instructed-language-learning.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Engeström, Y. (1996). Development as breaking away and opening up: A challenge to Vygotsky and Piaget. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 55, 126–132.Google Scholar
- Felix, U. (2008). The unreasonable effectiveness of CALL: What have we learned in two decades of research? (Online). ReCALL, 20(02), 141–161. Available at: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0958344008000323.
- Francis, R. J. (2010). The decentring of the traditional university: The future of (self) education in virtually figured worlds. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Gao, Y. (2009). Sociocultural contexts and English in China: Retaining and reforming the cultural habitus. In J. Bianco, J. Orton, & Y. Gao (Eds.), China and English: Globalization and the dilemmas of identity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, G. E., & Judd, T. S. (2011). Beyond Google and the ‘satisficing’ researching of digital natives. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Lantolf, J. P. (2004). Sociocultural theory and second and foreign language learning: An overview of sociocultural theory. In K. V. Esch & O. S. John (Eds.), New insights into foreign language learning and teaching. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Individual cognitive/affective learner contributions and differential success in second language acquisition. In M. P. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
- MacLean, G. R., & Elwood, J. A. (2009). Digital natives: learner perceptions and the use of ICT. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Handbook of research on Web 2.0 and second language learning. PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
- McGrath, I., Sinclair, B., & Chen, Z. (2007). Designing an innovative online course in language teaching methodology for middle school teachers of English in China: Encouraging learner and teacher autonomy. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), E-learning initiatives in China. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
- Nardi, B. A. (1996). Studying context: A comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Nye, D. (2007). Technology matters: Questions to live with. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- O’Dowd, R. (2007). Foreign language education and the rise of online communication: A review of promises and realities. In R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Pachler, N., & Daly, C. (2011). Key issues in e-learning: research and practice. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
- Palfreyman, D. (2006). Social context and resources for language learning (Online). System, 34(3), 352–370. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X06000601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rogers, F., & Sharapan, H. (1994). How children use play. Education Digest, 59(8), 13–16.Google Scholar
- Sefton-Green, J. (2004). Literature review in informal learning with technology outside school (Future lab) (Online). Available at: http://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/02/22/PDF/Sefton-Green_2004.pdf. Last Accessed August 20, 2014.
- Selwyn, N. (2011). Schools and schooling in the digital age: A critical analysis. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sharpe, R., & Beetham, H. (2010). Understanding students’ uses of technology for learning: Towards creative appropriation. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., & De Freitas, S. (Eds.). (2010). Rethinking learning for a digital age. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Steel, C. H., & Levy, M. (2013). Language students and their technologies: Charting the evolution 2006–2011 (Online). ReCALL, 25(03), 306–320. Available at: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8971762&fileId=S0958344013000128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011). Deconstructing digital natives. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Tudor, I. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- White, C. (2008). Language learning strategies in independent language learning: An overview. In S. Hurd & T. Lewis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in independent settings. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Yang, G. (2013). The power of the internet in China: Citizen Activism online. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar