Innovation in Language Learning

Since one of the most important functions of social networks is the establishment of interaction and peer feedback is the result of the interaction between individuals in the learning process, the present research investigated the role of peer feedback in language learning. Students' views on peer feedback were investigated before and after the course. Important similarities and differences were also noticed between the two research groups, that is, the control face-to-face group and the experimental Facebook group. The results showed that in both groups, the students had positive views about peer feedback both in general education and learning languages before the course and that the positive attitude has increased more in the group using Facebook than the face-to-face group. The research also showed that there were significant differences between the peer feedback produced in face-to-face classrooms and Facebook in terms of shape and number. The corrective feedback occurred at a higher rate than others in both groups. However, the mean achieved in the Facebook group is about twice the mean in the face-to-face group. The results indicated a significant difference between the two groups in the production of different types of peer feedback in the course.

Keywords: Social Networks, language learning, Peer feedback 2.0, Type of peer feedback, learning outcomes.

References:
[1] Bauer, B., deBenedette, L., Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., & Waryn, S. (2006). The Cultura project. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education, 31-62.
[2] Bean, J. P., & Bradley, R. K. (1986). Untangling the satisfaction-performance relationship for college students. Journal of Higher Education, 57(4), 393–412.
[3] Belz, J., & Kinginger, C. (2003). Discourse options and the development of pragmatic competence by bclassroom learners of German: The case of address forms. Language Learning, 53(4), 591-647.
[4] Belz, J., & Vyatkina, N. (2005). Learner corpus analysis and the development of L2 pragmatic competence in networked intercultural language study: The case of German modal particles. Canadian Modern Language Review/Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 62(1), 17-48.
[5] Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41-68). New York: Cambridge University Press.
[6] Coit C. (2004). Peer assessment in an online writing course. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’04). Retrieved August 22, 2006, from www.csdl2.computer.org/comp/proceedings/icalt/2004/2181/00/21810902.df
[7] Cunningham, R. D. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic. Educational Psychology Review, 4, 165-194.
[8] Driscoll, M. (2004). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[9] Dussias, P. E. (2006). Morphological development in Spanish-American telecollaboration. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 121-146). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
[10] Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3-18.
--- others listed apart ---