Reflection on Reading and Vocabulary

There were a number of applications brought up in class and the readings that I think have potential for teaching reading and vocabulary. Robert Godwin-Jones (2010) mentions how Lextutor has a number of useful tools for integrating texts and vocabulary. Another tool he mentions is Visual Understanding Environment (VUE) from Tufts University, which can be used to create concept maps. Students could possibly create concept maps around a concept that is important for a particular reading and then share those maps with the class. There seems to be support for the use of multi-media glosses for teaching reading and vocabulary (Chen, 2012). However, I'm not sure what is gained in using such glosses over traditionally created glosses, unless further information such as frequency and multiple aspects of word knowledge can be accessed through these glosses.

None of the readings mentioned how graded reader publishers are now offering their books for the i-pad and or in digitized format, although they mention the possibility of this. I think that there is a lot of potential in this area. Black Cat is one publisher that is now offering digital graded readers, which feature a number of interactive activities accompanying them. In the demo version of Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer, for example, readers can listen to the text being read out loud with the text being highlighted as the passages are read. A highlight and pen tool allows readers to highlight and mark places in their text. Students can click on comprehension questions to help them monitor their comprehension as they read. They can also click on hyperlinks to discover more information about the author and do vocabulary matching activities.

Week 8 Asynchronous CMC

In this blog post I have embedded a rough audio reflection using the Audioboo to describe how I have used different Asynchronous CMC tools.

listen to ‘Weekly Reflection on Asynchronous CMC’ on Audioboo

Week 7 Synchronous CMC

My own take on synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) is that is often unprincipled or structured. This was brought up in our reading. DuBravac (2013) mentions that even though there is a an abundant amount of literature citing the benefits of CMC in language learning, little if any literature is available highlighting the use of effective and well-structured tasks using CMC.

I have a hard time seeing how chat rooms or texting can be structured to promote language learning. DuBravac (2013) mentions a number of criteria such as limiting the number of participants, having time limits and identifying a clear goal that students can complete in the time allotted to them. Of these, I feel the latter to be the most critical. Having used programs such as Apple's Facetime with L2 learners in the past, I feel it can be difficult to structure effective tasks. The examples listed in the reading included information-gap activities and problem solving activities. While interesting examples in and of themselves, I have difficulty seeing how the time it might take to train students on using a chatroom, monitoring it, and setting up the tasks would be more advantageous than using non-computer methods to set up a similar activity.