=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2390/PaperA2
|storemode=property
|title=Strategic Learner Training for Language Learning in the Digital Environment
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2390/PaperA2.pdf
|volume=Vol-2390
|authors=Elżbieta Gajek
}}
==Strategic Learner Training for Language Learning in the Digital Environment==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2390/PaperA2.pdf
Strategic Learner Training for the Merge of Language Learning and
Crowdsourcing
Elżbieta Gajek
University of Warsaw
Institute of Applied Linguistics, 55 Dobra Street, Warsaw
e.gajek@uw.edu.pl
Abstract
There is a need for learner training on how to use digital tools and materials for effective learning languages. Numerous
studies indicate that learners require encouragement and support to be autonomous and efficient in the use of ICT in
language learning. Developing strategy training courses for both learners and teachers, as both need to be convinced that
their digital activity is beneficial for developing their language skills and knowledge. Strategy training helps to prevent
anxiety and ineffective use of technology. Basing on the research in language learning strategies and digital learning
strategies the article suggests some language learning strategies with the use of crowdsourcing.
Keywords: Language learning strategies, Digital learning strategies, Learner training, Crowdsourcing
1. Introduction In the most widely known taxonomy (Oxford, 1990)
strategies are divided into Direct strategies and Indirect
Assuming that for effective use of any tools and procedures
requires learner training the text presents an approach to Strategies. Direct strategies cover Memory strategies,
Cognitive strategies and Compensation strategies. While
identification of learning strategies in a specific
indirect strategies cover Metacognitive strategies,
collaborative digital environment, in which crowdsourcing
is implemented. Even digital natives are not able to use Affective strategies and Social strategies.
Researchers emphasise the role of strategy training in the
online tools proficiently and to their best advantage for the
context of individual learner variables (Oxford, Scarcella,
purpose of learning (Jeffrey et al., 2011; Thorne, 2003).
Technologies “can only be effective if they are in the hands 1994). Then, the interest in strategies decreased slightly.
However, some new insights were introduced in the
of students who know what to do with them” (Figura,
extended S2R Model which involves the role of learners’
Jarvis, 2007: 457) and that effective use of technologies
requires learners to possess certain skills, strategies and culture (Oxford 2011) which revitalize the interest in
strategies and strategy training. Finally, Griffiths (2013:15)
attitudes (Hubbard, 2004). The results of the research on
concludes “Language learning strategies are activities
the use of language learning strategies and the digital
learning strategies among young adult learners of English consciously chosen by learners for the purpose of
regulating their own language learning”.
(Gajek, Michońska-Stadnik, 2017) demonstrate the role of
the teacher in the process of developing strategic approach
to language learning. Although students may intuitively 3. Digital Learning Strategies
develop their own strategies when they use a new tool, they Although LLS have become a core in teacher training
do it more effectively if they are aware and trained in the courses, their use in a digital environment is not so well-
strategic use of tools. For example, they use mobile phones known. Joan Rubin (1988, 1996) was an author of a popular
in-campus and outside in very different ways but in the digital video disk for language learning. This technology
same categories (Gajek, 2016). In distance learning online, got outdated soon, and the strategic approach it had
the more strategies students know the more autonomous introduced was abandoned. Although many researchers
they are in developing their own learning strategies (White, (Wenden, 1986; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990; Oxford,
1995: 44; 2003: 141). There are also many studies which 1990; Shorrocks, 1991; Ellis, 1994; Mitchell and Myles,
show that teacher training for online learning environments 1998) emphasized the need for the use of strategies out-of-
is necessary to enhance the effectiveness of online learning class, the language teachers in the eighties and nineties of
(Ernest et al. 2013; Guichon, 2009; Hampel, Stickler 2005; the previous century rarely recognized digital environment
Wang et al. 2010). Thus, learner training introduced by as a place where strategies could be utilized. But research
language teachers will make crowdsourcing more familiar on LLS in CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning)
and effective to students. has continued (Chapelle and Mizuno, 1989; Hagen, 1994;
Harris, 2003; Hauck and Hampel, 2008; Huang, Chern and
2. Language Learning Strategies Lin, 2009; Li, 2009; Pujolá, 2002; Ulitsky, 2000; Chapelle,
Language learning strategies (LLS) have been discussed 2000). Recent approaches discuss the role of strategies
embedded in the digital tools (Ulitsky, 2000), strategic
since Joan Rubin (1975) noticed actions of behaviours
creativity of learners (Yoon and Jo, 2014) as well as the
which good learners perform to achieve a success in
learning. Then Stern (1975), Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern and influence of context on learners’ behaviour (Huang and
Sheng Yi, 2016). The application of strategies in using
Todesco (1996) characterized the good learner’s activities
online dictionaries and corpus based learning is widely
in more detail. Later the interest in language learning
strategies grew (Bialystok, 1978; O’Malley et al., 1985; investigated (Charles, 2007; Gaskell and Cobb, 2004;
Gilmore, 2009; Kennedy and Miceli, 2010; Lee and Chen,
Wenden, 1986; Rubin, 1987; Oxford, 1989; O’Malley and
2009; Lee and Swales, 2006; O’Sullivan and Chambers,
Chamot, 1990, Oxford, 1990; Michońska-Stadnik, 1996).
The taxonomies become more and more extended. 2006; Sun, 2007; Yoon, 2008; Yoon and Hirvela, 2004).
EnetCollect WG3 & WG5 Meeting, 24-25 October 2018, Leiden, Netherlands 13
Also the selection of digital tools available for the learners Awareness and implementation of pedagogical
in the light of their strategic use has been discussed underpinnings of activities in class is to a great extent
(Kukulska-Hulme, 2009; Bekleyen and Yilmaz, 2012, teachers’ concern but learners should be also aware of how
Gajek and Michońska-Stadnik, 2017). they learn.
o Goal 4.2 Learner oriented
4. Learner Strategic Training for This goal strictly refers to the selection and use of
Crowdsourcing individual learning strategies. The gains of a user differ
from the gains of a creator the materials. Awareness of
As the studies presented above justify the need for learner
educational incentives for a user may motivate them to
strategy training both for language learning and for sustain and continue learning.
innovative approaches to the use of technology for
Ability to act as a developer of resources offer other
pedagogical purposes. There is also a need for learner
incentives and also contributes to learning. In the process
training for combining crowdsourcing and language of creating materials for educational purposes the issue of
learning.
quality of the crowdsourced content requires constant
4.1 Goals of Learner Training for monitoring and evaluation by the author and by other stake-
Crowdsourcing holders. It could be approached in various ways either via
The generic goals of learner training for crowdsourcing can experts’ evaluation or via developing a sequence of
be grouped into three areas. The first area is general and evaluative processes or via negotiations of the content
covers entrepreneurial and ethical aspects of among the crowd.
crowdsourcing that is goal 1 and 2. o Goal 4.3 Quality assurance
Goal 1. Enterpreneurial Either the users need to be trained how to evaluate critically
The users need to understand the role of crowdsourcing in the materials they use or produce, which in the case of
business and in education. Thus, they need to be aware of learners at low level of proficiency or very young might be
benefits but also risks for contributors. This goal involves, difficult. Or there is a body of evaluators who monitor and
e.g. time management, awareness of various incentives evaluate entries introduced by the crowd. The latter
participants may get from crowdsourcing activities. approach requires a well-set quality control procedures
Goal 2. Ethical and/or extra voluntary work by contributors.
Protecting personal data is one of the key issues in 4.2 Strategies for Combining Crowdsourcing
crowdsourcing. The learners need to utilise their general and Language Learning
knowledge about the cybersafety such as protecting
An important part of learner training refers to taking the
personal data, uploading images and video towards specific
language learner perspective of the goals. This makes the
crowdsourcing-related ethical issues depending on the
idea of combining crowdsourcing and language learning
activity they participate, e.g. a game, etc. or type of
meaningful to learners. The statements which start with
interactions among users e.g. peer assessment, « I » or can do approach are widely used in educational
collaborative projects.
documents such as Strategy Inventory for Language
Learner training addresses the issue of critical thinking and
Learning (SILL) (Oxford, 1990), TESOL Technology
cautiousness at any stage of contribution in crowdsourcing
Standards (Healey et al. 2011), Common European
activities.
Framework for Languages (CEFR). They help learners to
The second area is technology specific and it depends on
better understand their position, attitude, level of
the functionalities of a single application as even a so called
competences. This approach also helps learners to learn
digital natives (Prensky 2001) may not use a device of
from answering questions and reflecting upon them. The
software effectively (Jeffrey et al. 2011, Thorne 2003).
exemplary questions within each goal may be the
Thus, Goal 3 is strongly related to the management of following:
learning and learning strategies embedded in the software
Goal 1
used for crowdsourcing activities.
1. While entering a crowdsourcing application I am
Goal 3. Technological aware of my goals.
As each resource requires its own operational actions,
2. I find time for crowdsourcing activities.
learners need to be acquainted with the specific
3. I am able to assess how I benefit from the activities.
functionalities. 4. I am able to justify my choice of the resources
The third area of goals refers strictly to crowdsourcing for
comparing them with other learning resources.
language learning. Thus, Goal 4 relates to educational
Goal 2
issues. 5. I am aware of the safety conditions provided by the
Goal 4. Educational
crowdsourcing portal.
This goal falls into three specific subcategories which are
6. I know the purpose of sharing my data with the owners
worth considering by both teachers and learners. of the resource.
o Goal 4.1 Pedagogical
7. I know how to protect my own safety while I
It refers to the pedagogical instructional design interrelated
participate in the crowdsourcing activity.
with technological solutions. The instructional approaches
8. I respect other participants’ rights.
comprise: Collaborative projects, supplemental instruction,
9. I can monitor ethical issues in the progress of
using and creating Open Educational Resources (OER) or
activities.
public content, assessment based on problem solving and 10. I know when to stop the activity if I have doubts about
peer assessment, and various educational games (Anderson
ethical issues.
2011: 583, cf. Zdravkova 2018).
11. I know how to end an activity without doing any harm
to others.
EnetCollect WG3 & WG5 Meeting, 24-25 October 2018, Leiden, Netherlands 14
Goal 3 Chapelle, C. A. (2000). Is network-based learning CALL?
12. I can use the functionalities of the resource. In M. Warschauer, R. and Kern (eds.). Network-based
13. I can follow the rules of a game. language teaching; concepts and practice. (204-228).
14. I am able to find technical resources which respond to Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
my goals. Chapelle, C. A. and Mizuno, S. (1989). Students' strategies
15. I can assess the effectiveness of the technical with learner-controlled CALL. CALICO Journal, 7(2),
functionalities for learning. 25-47.
16. I search for the best technical resources with the Charles, M. (2007). Reconciling top-down and bottom-up
growth of my linguistic level. approaches to graduate writing: Using a corpus to teach
o Goal 4.1 rhetorical functions. Journal of English for Academic
17. I can collaborate with others for learning purposes. Purposes, 6, 289-302.
18. I know what Open Educational Resources (OER) are. Common European Framework of Reference for
19. I can identify resources stored under the Creative Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment (2001)
Commons licenses. Council of Europe, Strasbourg
20. I take responsibility of my opinions while assessing Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition.
others. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. I can give feedback to my collaborators. Figura, K. and Jarvis, H. (2007). Computer-based
22. I can estimate learning benefits of games. materials: A study of learner autonomy and strategies.
o Goal 4.2 System, 35 : 448-468.
23. I can monitor my linguistic progress while using Gajek, E. (2016). Mobile technologies as boundary objects
crowdsourcing. in the hands of student teachers of languages inside and
24. I can contribute to the development of the resources I outside the university. International Journal of Mobile
am using. and Blended Learning, 8(2)/April-June 2016, DOI:
25. I can select resources to develop a specific linguistic 10.4018/IJMBL.2016040107.
content. Gajek, E., and Michońska-Stadnik, A. (2017). Strategie
26. I can select resources to develop linguistic skills I uczenia się w środowisku cyfrowym Warszawa: Instytut
need. Lingwistyki Stosowanej.
27. I know how to share resources which I produce while Gaskell, D. and Cobb, T. (2004). Can learners use
learning. concordance feedback for writing errors? System, 32,
o Goal 4.3 301-319.
28. I can critically assess the quality of resources. Gilmore, A. (2009). Using online corpora to develop
29. I know how to check quality of the resource with the students’ writing skills. ELT Journal, 64(3), 363-372.
use of other resources. Griffiths, C. (2013). The strategy factor in succesful
30. I know when and how to get help from others. language learning. Bristol-Buffalo-Toronto:
The suggested list of statements may help learners to Multilingual Matters.
acquire strategies, which they may use independently while Guichon, N. (2009). Training future language teachers to
learning the language with the use crowdsourcing. The develop online tutors’ competence through reflective
strategy training presented above can be implemented as analysis. ReCALL, 21(2), 166-185.
part of language strategy training and digital literacy Hagen, L. K. (1994). Constructs and measurement in
training. Teachers’ role is essential for making this happen. parameter models of second language acquisition. In E.
F. Tarone, M. Gass, A. and D. Cohen (eds.). Research
5. Conclusions methodology in second-language acquisition (61-87).
Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
The analysis attempts to mediate crowdsourcing as a big
Hampel, R. and Stickler, U. (2005). New skills for new
cultural trend to the language teachers and learners. The
adaptation of ideas to the learning environment they work, classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(4), 311-326.
to their needs and making crowdsourcing meaningful to
Harris, V. (2003). Adapting classroom-based strategy
learners promotes the use of it for language learning
purposes. It may also increase the effectiveness of learning, instruction to a distance learning context. TESL-EJ, 7(2),
1-19.
awareness of ethical issues and critical thinking among
Hauck, M. and Hampel, R. (2008). Strategies for online
learners. Further work may be focused on integration the
language learning strategies with crowdsourcing learning environments. In S. Hurd, and T. Lewis (eds.).
Language learning strategies in independent settings
techniques. To attract language teachers attention
(283-302). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
worksheets and detailed lesson plans should be prepared.
Healey, D., Hanson-Smith, E., Ioannou-Georgiou, S.,
Hubbard, P., Kessler, G. and Ware P. (2011) TESOL
6. Bibliographical References technology standards: Description, implementation,
Anderson, M. (2011). Crowdsourcing higher education: A integration. Alexandria, Virginia: Teachers of English to
design proposal for distributed learning. Journal of Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
Online Learning and Teaching, 7, 576–590. Huang, H.-C., Chern, C.-L. and Lin, C.-C. (2009). EFL
Bekleyen, N. and Yilmaz, A. (2012). Language learning learners’ use of online reading strategies and
strategies and mobile learning. 7th International ELT comprehension of texts: An exploratory study.
Research Conference, Çanakkale, 27-28. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13-26. DOI:
Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.003.
language learning. Language Learning, 28(1), 69-83.
EnetCollect WG3 & WG5 Meeting, 24-25 October 2018, Leiden, Netherlands 15
Huang, Sheng Yi, C. (2016). Language learning strategies Pujolá, J. T. (2002). CALLing for help: Researching
in context. The Language Learning Journal 1-13 language learning strategies using help facilities in a
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1186723 web–based multimedia program. ReCALL, 14(2), 235-
Hubbard, P. (2004). Learner training for effective use of 262.
CALL. In S. Fotos and C. and M. Browne (Eds.), New Rubin, J. (1975). What the good language learner can teach
perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms us? TESOL Quarterly, 9(1), 41-51.
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 45-68. Rubin, J. (1988). The language learning disc. In W. F.
Jeffrey, L., Hegarty, B., Kelly, O., Penman, M., Coburn, D. Smith (ed.). Modern technology in foreign language
and McDonald, J. (2011). Developing Digital education: Applications and projects. Lincoln, IL:
information literacy in higher education: Obstacles and National Textbook Co.
supports. Journal of Information Technology Education, Rubin, J. (1996). Using multimedia for learner strategy
10, 383-413. instruction. In R. L. Oxford (ed.). Language learning
Kennedy, C. and Miceli, T. (2001). An evaluation of strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives.
intermediate students’ approaches to corpus Manoa: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum
investigation. Language Learning and Technology, 5(3), Center, University of Hawai’i.
77-90 Stern, H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009). Will mobile learning change language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review,
language learning? ReCALL, 21(2), 157-165. 31(4), 304-318.
Lee, D. and Chen, S. (2009). Making a bigger deal of the Shorrocks, D. (1991). The development of children’s
smaller words: Function words and other key items in thinking and understanding. In C. Brumfit, J. Moon and
research writing by Chinese learners. Journal of Second R. Tongue (eds.). Teaching English to children (260-
Language Writing, 18, 149-165. 274). London: Collins ELT.
Lee, D. and Swales, J. (2006). A corpus-based EAP course Sun, Y. (2007). Learner perceptions of a concordancing
for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available tool for academic writing. Computer Assisted Language
specialized corpora to self-compiled corpora. English for Learning, 20(4), 323-343.
Specific Purposes, 25, 56-75. Thorne, S. L. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in
Li, J. (2009). The evolution of vocabulary learning intercultural communication. Language Learning and
strategies in a computer–mediated reading environment. Technology, 7(2): 38-67.
CALICO Journal, 27(1), 118-146. Ulitsky, H. (2000). Language learner strategies with
Michońska-Stadnik, A. (1996). Strategie uczenia się i technology. Journal of Educational Computing
autonomia ucznia w warunkach szkolnych. Wrocław: Research, 22(3), 285-322.
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego. Wenden, A. (1986). Helping language learners think about
Mitchell, R. and Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning. English Language Teaching Journal, 7(2), 186-
learning theories. London, New York: Arnold. 205.
Naiman, N., Fröhlih, M., Stern, H. and Todesco, A. (1996). Yoon, H. (2008). More than a linguistic reference: The
The good language learner. Bristol-Buffalo-Toronto: influence of corpus technology on L2 academic writing.
Multilingual Matters Language Learning and Technology, 12(2), 31-48.
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Yoon, H. and Hirvela, A. (2004). ESL students toward
Kupper, L.and Russo, R. (1985). Learning strategies corpus use in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language
used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Writing, 13, 257-283.
Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46. Yoon, H. and Jo, J. W. (2014) Direct and indirect access to
O'Malley, J. M. and Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning corpora. Language Learning and Technology 18(1) 96-
strategies in second language acquisition. New York: 117.
Cambridge University Press. Wang, Y., Chen, N.-S. and Levy, M. (2010). Teacher
O’Sullivan, Í. and Chambers, A. (2006). Learners’ writing training in a synchronous cyber face-to-face classroom:
skills in French: Corpus consultation and learner Characterizing and supporting the online teachers'
evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(1), learning process. ComputerAssisted Language Learning,
49-68. 23(4), 277-293.
Oxford, R. L. (1989). Use of language learning strategies: White, C. (1995). Autonomy and strategy use in distance
A synthesis of studies with implications for strategy foreign language learning: research findings. In A.
training. System, 17(2), 235-247. Wenden and L. Dickinson (ed.). System: An
Oxford, R. L. (1990b). Language learning strategies: What International Journal of Educational Technology and
every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House. Applied Linguistics. Special Issue on Autonomy, 23(2):
Oxford, R. L. and Scarcella, R. C. (1994). Second language 207-221.
vocabulary learning among adults: state of the art in White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance education.
vocabulary instruction. System, 22(2), 231-243. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language Zdravkova, K. (2018) Ethical issues of crowdsourcing in
learning strategies. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. education. Presentation at Second Annual Meeting,
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: EnetCollect COST Action 16105, Iasi, Romania, 14-16th
Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. March 2018.
EnetCollect WG3 & WG5 Meeting, 24-25 October 2018, Leiden, Netherlands 16