Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:10:46.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competence visualisation: Making sense of data from 21st-century technologies in language learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Susan Bull  and
Barbara Wasson
Susan Bull
Affiliation:
Institute of Education, University College London, UK (email: [email protected])
Barbara Wasson
Affiliation:
University of Bergen, Norway (email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper introduces an open learner model approach to learning analytics to combine the variety of data available from the range of applications and technologies in language learning, for visualisation of language learning competences to learners and teachers in the European language context. Specific examples are provided as illustrations (Facebook, Second Life and mobile assisted language learning (MALL)), though the approach is a general one. We describe the Next-TELL open learner model as an exemplar that can encompass a range of data from a variety of technologies and activities, and as a competence-focussed visual analytics tool that can be readily used inside and outside the classroom.

The Next-TELL open learner model offers several visualisations for learners and teachers to explore the learner’s current competences, which can be selected according to user preferences or the purpose of viewing the learning data. The selection of visualisations means that the open learner model is appropriate for school, university and other learning contexts. Viewing this data can help students to reflect on and monitor their learning, and can support teachers’ decision-making during classroom activities or later, in their planning of subsequent sessions. As an example, we outline the use of the Next-TELL open learner model in a school in Norway.

Keywords

Open learner model21st-century technologieslanguage learning competencesvisual learning analytics
Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , May 2016 , pp. 147 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2016 

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

3DLES. (2011) Taalwijs in de Digitale Wereld. OWG Digitaal. 18–19.Google Scholar
Amaral, L. A. and Meurers, D. (2011) On using intelligent computer-assisted language learning in real-life foreign language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 23(1): 4–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basoglu, E. B. and Akdemir, O. (2010) A comparison of undergraduate students’ English vocabulary learning: Using mobile phones and flashcards. TOJET, 9(3). http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ898010.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bentley, K. (2010) The TKT Course CLIL Module. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blattner, G. and Fiori, M. (2009) Facebook in the language classroom: Promises and possibilities. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1): 17–28.Google Scholar
Blattner, G. and Lomicka, L. (2012) Facebook-ing and the social generation: A new era of language learning. Apprentisage des Langues et Systemes d’Information et de Communication, 15(1). http://alsic.revues.org/2413Google Scholar
Buga, R., Capeneata, I., Chirasnel, C. and Popa, A. (2014) Facebook in foreign language teaching: A tool to improve communication competences. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128: 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, S., Gakhal, I., Grundy, D., Johnson, M., Mabbott, A. and Xu, J. (2010) Preferences in multiple view open learner models. In: Wolpers, M., Kirshner, P. A., Scheffel, M., Lindstaedt, S. and Dimitrova, V. (eds.), EC-TEL 2010. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 476–481.Google Scholar
Bull, S., Jackson, T. and Lancaster, M. (2010) Students’ interest in their misconceptions in first year electrical circuits and mathematics courses. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 47(3): 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, S. and Kay, J. (2007) Student models that invite the learner. In: The SMILI Open Learner Modelling Framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 17(2): 89–120.Google Scholar
Bull, S., Mabbott, A., Gardner, P., Jackson, T., Lancaster, M., Quigley, S. and Childs, P. A. (2008) Supporting interaction preferences and recognition of misconceptions with independent open learner models. In: Neijdl, W., Kay, J., Pu, P. and Herder, E. (eds.), Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive web-based systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, S., Wasson, B., Kickmeier-Rust, M., Johnson, M. D., Moe, E., Hansen, C., Meissl-Egghart, G. and Hammermueller, K. (2012) Assessing English as a second language: From classroom data to a competence-based open learner model. In: Biswas, G. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of International Conference on Computers in Education, Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.Google Scholar
Burston, J. (2015) Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1): 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, A. (2011) Language learning and virtual worlds: Using Second Life in the foreign language class. The FLAG Journal (Foreign Language Association of Georgia), 3(1): 22–31.Google Scholar
Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., Huang, C. S. J. and Liou, H-H. (2014) Student motivation and achievement in learning English as a second language using Second Life. Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 6(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (n.d.) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf. Accessed 19 March 2014.Google Scholar
Cui, Y. and Bull, S. (2005) Context and learner modelling for the mobile foreign language learner. System, 33(2): 353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De la Fuente, M. J. (2014) Learners’ attention to input during focus on form listening tasks: The role of mobile technology in the second language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(3): 261–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demmans Epp, C. and McCalla, G. (2011) ProTutor: Historic open learner models for pronunciation training. In: Biswas, G., Bull, S., Kay, J. and Mitrovic, A. (eds.), Artificial intelligence in education. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 441–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutschmann, M., Panichi, L. and Danielsen, J. M. (2009) Designing oral participation in Second Life: A comparative study of two language proficiency courses. ReCALL, 21(2): 206–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitrova, V. (2003) StyLE-OLM: Interactive open learner modelling. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(1): 35–78.Google Scholar
Dodigovic, M. (2013) Intelligent Sentence Writing Tutor: A system development cycle. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 22(3): 141–160.Google Scholar
Grigoriadou, M., Tsaganou, G. and Cavoura, T. (2003) Dialogue-based reflective system for historical text comprehension. Proceedings of Workshop on Learner Modelling for Reflection (supplemental proceedings Vol. 5), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 238–247.Google Scholar
Henderson, M., Huang, H., Grant, S. and Henderson, L. (2009) Language acquisition in Second Life: Improving self-efficacy beliefs. Proceedings of ASCILITE 2009, Auckland, New Zealand, 464–474. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/henderson.pdfGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2005) Inspectable learner reports for web-based language learning. ReCALL, 17(1): 32–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2008) Modeling learner variability in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(4): 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holden, C. L. and Sykes, J. M. (2011) Leveraging mobile games for place-based language learning. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 1(2): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsiao, I-H., Bakalov, F., Brusilovsky, P. and Koenig-Ries, B. (2011) Open social student modeling: Visualizing student models with parallel introspective views. User modeling, adaptation and personalization 2011. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 171–182.Google Scholar
Hsu, C-K., Hwang, G-J. and Chang, C-K. (2013) A personalized recommendation-based mobile learning approach to improving the reading performance of EFL students. Computers and Education, 63: 327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huhta, A. and Figueras, N. (2004) Using the CEF to promote language learning through diagnostic testing. In: Morrow, K. (ed.), Insights from the Common European Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 65–76.Google Scholar
Hwang, W-Y. and Chen, H. S. L. (2013) Users’ familiar situational contexts facilitate the practice of EFL in elementary schools with mobile devices. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(2): 101–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibrahim, C. W., Prain, V. and Collet, P. (2014) Perceived learning strategies of Malaysian university students in Web 2.0-based English as a second language informal learning. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 14(1): 29–42. http://ejournal.ukm.my/gema/article/view/3299/2669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. L. (2010) Serious use of a serious game for language learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 20(2): 175–195.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D., Cierniak, G., Hansen, C., Bull, S., Wasson, B., Biel, C. and Debus, K. (2013) Teacher approaches to adopting a competency based open learner model. In: Wong, L. H., Liu, C.-C., Hirashima, T., Sumedi, P. and Lukman, M. (eds.), Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computers in Education. Indonesia: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.Google Scholar
Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N. and Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010) Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education, 13(4): 179–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerly, A. and Bull, S. (2008) Children’s interactions with inspectable and negotiated learner models. In: Woolf, B. P., Aimeur, E., Nkambou, R. and Lajoie, S. (eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 9th International Conference. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kickmeier-Rust, M. and Albert, D. (2013) Learning analytics to support the use of virtual worlds in the classroom. In: Holzinger, A. and Pasi, G. (eds.), Human-computer interaction and knowledge discovery in complex, unstructured, big data. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 358–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klerkx, J., Verbert, K. and Duval, E. (2014) Enhancing learning with visualization techniques. In: Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J. and Bishop, M. J. (eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Springer, 791–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2013) Mobile-assisted language learning. In: Chapelle, C. A. (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Kukulska-Hulme, A. and Bull, S. (2009) Theory-based support for mobile language learning: Noticing and recording. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 3(2): 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kump, B., Seifert, C., Beham, G., Lindstaedt, S. N. and Ley, T. (2012) Seeing what the system thinks you know: Visualizing evidence in an open learner model. Proceedings of LAK 2012. New York, NY: ACM, 153–157. doi:10.1145/2330601.2330640.Google Scholar
Lantz-Anderson, A., Vigmo, S. and Bowen, R. (2013) Crossing boundaries in Facebook: Students’ framing of language learning activities as extended spaces. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8: 293–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, K. and Ranta, L. (2014) Facebook facilitating social access and language acquisition for international students? TESL Canada Journal, 31(2): 22–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, Y. and Aleven, V. (2013) Supporting students’ self-regulated learning with an open learner model in a linear equation tutor. In: Lane, H. C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J. and Pavlik, P. (eds.), Artificial intelligence in education. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mabbott, A. and Bull, S. (2004) Alternative views on knowledge: Presentation of open learner models. In: Lester, J. C., Vicari, R. M. and Paraguacu, F. (eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 7th International Conference. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 689–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milton, J. (2013) Second language acquisition via Second Life. In: Chapelle, C. A. (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Mitrovic, A. and Martin, B. (2007) Evaluating the effect of open student models on self-assessment. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 17(2): 121–144.Google Scholar
Nah, K-C., White, P. and Sussex, R. (2008) The potential of using a mobile phone to access the internet for learning EFL listening skills within a Korean context. ReCALL, 20(3): 331–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, D. J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2): 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogata, H. and Yano, Y. (2004) Context-aware support for computer-supported ubiquitous learning. Proceedings of IEEE Internatioal Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education. IEEE Computer Society, 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omar, H., Embi, M. A. and Yunus, M. M. (2012) ESL learners’ interaction in an online discussion via Facebook. Asian Social Science, 8(11): 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez-Marin, D., Alfonseca, E., Rodriguez, P. and Pascual-Neito, I. (2007) A study on the possibility of automatically estimating the confidence value of students’ knowledge in generated conceptual models. Journal of Computers, 2(5): 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, M. (2012) EFL learner collaborative interaction in Second Life. ReCALL, 24(1): 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietroszek, K. (2007) Providing language instructor with artificial intelligence assistant. iJET: International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2(4): 61–65.Google Scholar
Shahrour, G. and Bull, S. (2009) Interaction preferences and learning in an inspectable learner model for language. In: Dimitrova, V., Mizoguchi, R., du Boulay, B. and Graesser, A. (eds.), Artificial intelligence in education. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 659–661.Google Scholar
Suthiwartnarueput, T. and Wasanasomsithi, P. (2012) Effects of using Facebook as a medium for discussions of English grammar and writing of low-intermediate EFL students. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(2): 194–214. http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/main.htmGoogle Scholar
Terantino, J. and Graf, K. (2011) Facebook for foreign languages: Part of the Net generation curriculum. The FLAG Journal (Foreign Language Association of Georgia), 3(1): 44–49.Google Scholar
Thomasy Blasing, M. (2010) Second language in Second Life: Exploring interaction, identity and pedagogical practice in a virtual world. Slavic and East European Journal, 54(1): 96–117.Google Scholar
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (n.d.) Læreplan i Engelsk, http://www.udir.no/Lareplaner/Grep/Modul/?gmid=0&gmi=166919. Accessed 1 June 2012.Google Scholar
Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S. and Santos, J. L. (2013) Learning analytics dashboard applications. American Behavioral Scientist. doi: 10.1177/0002764213479363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virvou, M., Troussas, C., Caro, J. and Junshean Espinosa, K. (2012) User modeling for language learning in Facebook. In: Sojka, P., Horak, A., Kopecek, I. and Pala, K. (eds.), Proceedings of International Conference on Text, Speech and Dialogue. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S. and Vasquez, C. (2012) Web 2.0 and second language learning: What does the research tell us? CALICO Journal, 29(3): 412–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehner, A. K., Gump, A. W. and Downey, S. (2011) The effects of Second Life on the motivation of undergraduate students learning a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3): 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, J. and Bull, S. (2010) Encouraging advanced second language speakers to recognise their language difficulties: A personalised computer-based approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(2): 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yunus, M. M. and Salehi, H. (2012) The effectiveness of Facebook groups on teaching and improving writing: Students’ perceptions. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 1(6): 87–96.Google Scholar
Weber, G. and Brusilovsky, P. (2001) ELM-ART: An adaptive versatile system for web-based instruction. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12: 351–384.Google Scholar
Zapata-Rivera, D., Hansen, E., Shute, V. J., Underwood, J. S. and Bauer, M. (2007) Evidence-based approach to interacting with open student models. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 17(3): 273–303.Google Scholar