Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T21:20:03.401Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using social networking sites as a language teaching and learning environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2022

Jessie S. Barrot Open the ORCID record for Jessie S. Barrot [Opens in a new window]
Jessie S. Barrot*
Affiliation:
College of Education, Arts and Sciences, National University, Manila, Philippines
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The growing adoption of emerging technologies for language pedagogy, literacy development, and language assessment has accelerated computer-assisted language learning (CALL) as a major field of education and led to the establishment of major specialized journals, such as Language Learning and Technology, Computer Assisted Language Learning, and ReCALL. As technologies further advanced, we began to see individuals and schools increasingly adopt CALL technologies and use their interactive features to facilitate language learning. Consequently, CALL research began to gain momentum and expand its research foci during the mid-1990s (Levy, 2000; Uzunboylu & Ozcinar, 2009). This expansion gave birth to some independent and stand-alone subfields, such as computer-assisted language testing (CALT) (Parmaxi et al., 2013).

Type
Research Timeline
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , April 2023 , pp. 181 - 196
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association for Applied Linguistics. (2021). 2022 Call for proposals. Retrieved from https://www.aaal.org/news/2022-call-for-proposalsGoogle Scholar
Barrot, J. S. (2021a). Social media as a language learning environment: A systematic review of the literature (2008–2019). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1883673.Google Scholar
Boulton, A. (2017). Corpora in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 50(4), 483–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chugh, R., & Ruhi, U. (2018). Social media in higher education: A literature review of Facebook. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 605–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chugh, R., & Ruhi, U. (2019). Social media for tertiary education. In Tatnall, A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of education and information technologies (pp. 1–6). Springer.Google Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hattem, D., & Lomicka, L. (2016). What the Tweets say: A critical analysis of Twitter research in language learning from 2009 to 2016. E-Learning and Digital Media, 13(1–2), 5–23. doi:10.1177/2042753016672350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hew, K., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J., Thorne, S. L., & Poehner, M. (2015). Sociocultural theory and second language development. In van Patten, B., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 207–226). Routledge.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Beckett, T. G. (2009). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 42(4), 459–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, M. (2000). Scope, goals and methods in CALL research: Questions of coherence and autonomy. ReCALL, 12(2), 170–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016a). Is Facebook still a suitable technology-enhanced learning environment? An update critical review of the literature from 2012 to 2015. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32, 503–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016b). ‘Yes for sharing, no for teaching!’: Social media in academic practices. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuoka, R., & Evans, D. (2004). Socio-cognitive approach in second language acquisition research. Journal of Nursing Studies, 3(1), 2–10.Google Scholar
Menzies, R., Petrie, K., & Zarb, M. (2017). A case study of Facebook use: Outlining a multi-layer strategy for higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 22(1), 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
OECD. (2019). Society at a glance 2019: OECD social indicators. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/soc_glance-2019-enGoogle Scholar
Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P., Papadima-Sophocleous, S., & Ioannou, A. (2013). Mapping the landscape of computer-assisted language learning: An inventory of research. Education, 10(4), 252–269.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, J. (2020). Metaphors for social media-enhanced foreign language teaching and learning. Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 234–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solmaz, O. (2018). A critical review of research on social networking sites in language teaching and learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(3), 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statista. (2022, 21 August). Most popular social networks worldwide as of January 2022, ranked by number of monthly active users. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/Google Scholar
Swain, M., Kinnear, P., & Steinman, L. (2015). Sociocultural theory in second language education. Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uzunboylu, H., & Ozcinar, Z. (2009). Research and trends in computer-assisted language learning during 1990–2008: Results of a citation analysis. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34, 133–150.Google Scholar