Annotated Bibliography: Stockwell’s (2012) Answer to Ballance’s (2012) Claims.

Stockwell, G. (2012). Working with Constraints in Mobile Learning: A Response to    

Ballance. Language Learning & Technology, 16 (3), 24-31.

Stockwell (2012) expresses his disagreement with Ballance’s (2012) commentary on the grounds of the latter’s failure to comprehend the activities described and the learning environment in which the research in his study was carried out (Stockwell, 2010, as cited in Ballance, 2012 ). He highlights Ballance’s (2012) unrealistic expectations of the effects of new technologies on learner attitudes.  He also enumerates Ballance’s (2012) claims and provides detailed responses to each of them. Stockwell (2012) concludes his response in a rather biased way. He seems to be personally involved in the discussion, finding it very difficult to be objective. Thus, he uses certain expressions that go beyond the scope of an impersonal academic paper. Certainly, Stockwell’s (2012) paper would have been much more appealing, from a constructivist standpoint, if he had resorted to the implementation of more impersonal language in his response.

 References

Ballance, J. (2012). Mobile Language Learning: More than just the platform. Language Learning & Technology, 14 (3), 21-23. University of Nottingham Ningbo, China. Retrieved October 2012, from

http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/ballance.pdf

Stockwell, G. (2012). Working with Constraints in Mobile Learning: A Response to Ballance. Language Learning & Technology, 16 (3), 24-31. Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved October 2012, from 

http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/stockwell.pdf

Outline: Ballance’s (2012) Commentary on Stockwell’s (2010) Research on Mobile-Assisted language Learning

Purpose: To share Ballance’s (2012) commentary on Stockwell’s (2010) research on Mobile-assisted Language Learning (as cited in Ballance, 2012)

Thesis Statement: Although Stockwell’s (2010) research is an attempt to exploit technological developments for language learning, Ballance (2012) disagrees with the quality and relevance of the data gathered and their implications.

Audience: Teachers and researchers interested in technological developments

I. Reasons for disagreement

          A. The speed of technological innovation in the area

          B. More care to be taken in research as regards platform layout characteristics   

II. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

          A. Early programs

                    1. Roots in the Audio-lingual Method

                    2. Alternative platforms for the delivery of pen and paper activities

III. Rise of the Internet

          A. Recent Research on Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

                    1. Focus

                              a- learner autonomy 

                              b- distance learning

IV. CALL literature

          A. The potentials of Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)

                    1. Flexibility

          B. Pace of technological innovation

                    1. Negative effects on research

                              a. Outdated quality

V. Stockwell’s (2010) research (as cited in Ballance, 2012)

          A. Time spent on research

          B. Use of pre-smart phones

          C. Possible problems addressed by Stockwell (2010)

                     1. Internet access costs

                     2. Scrolling time

                     3. Small screens and keypads

          D. Description of the activity-system in Stockwell ’s (2010) research to collect data.

                     1. Limitations posed by Stockwell (2010)

                     2. Stockwell’s (2010) unclear  assumptions about the potential of the Mobile

                         Assisted Language Learning (MALL) platform.

VI. Conclusion

          A. Recent Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) technological advances

                     1. App-based activities

          B. Effects of the environment on use

          C. Stockwell’s ( 2010) hypothesis about “dead time”

          D. Limitations of Stockwell’s (2010) research in terms of scope

          E.  Unanswered question by Stockwell ’s (2010) research (as cited in Ballance, 2012)

References

Ballance, J. (2012). Mobile Language Learning: More than just the platform. Language Learning & Technology, 14 (3), 21-23. University of Nottingham Ningbo, China. Retrieved October 2012, from

http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/ballance.pdf

A Critique on Bailey’s (2006) Handbook for International Students

          At present, bibliographic exemplars related to the practical development of literacy skills for students of English in academic settings do not abound. The purpose of this paper is to write a critique on Bailey’s (2006) handbook for international students. Bailey (2006) states that his handbook aims at ensuring that the students’ writing skills meet the required academic standards (p. i). In fact, his handbook provides a rather comprehensive approach to the gradual development of academic skills.

          Bailey’s (2006) work is divided into four parts, each containing instructions, explanations, diagrams and practice exercises, either to be used in the classroom or for self-study. Each part contains “sixty-one short units which teach practical writing skills and revise common difficulties” (Bailey, 2006, p. vii). A system of cross-referencing to help students link related units has been provided, and a Writing Tests section has also been included with the purpose of checking progress. In addition, the exercises in each unit are complemented by answer keys to help students self-assess their work.

         Although Bailey’s (2006) handbook is an innovative contribution to the development of literacy skills for international students delving into the arenas of academic writing, the author should have included in-text citations in his quotations from other sources. Not only has Bailey (2006) failed to acknowledge sources according to the American Psychological Association (APA) premises, he has also openly stated the reasons for not including them. All in all, Bailey’s (2006) overall interesting attempt to cover the gradual development of the skills needed by international students to be able to cope with academic requirements in the English language should not be discredited.

References

Bailey, S. (2006). Academic Writing: A Handbook for International Students (2^nd Ed.). Taylor and Francis e-library. Routeledge, Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York. Retrieved October 2012, from

http://npu.edu.ua/!e-book/book/djvu/A/iif_kgpm_t27.pdf

Academic Summary About the Use of Wikipedia to Develop Literacy Skills

          The process of learning to write academically may pose certain challenges to Second Language students. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the educational article "Writing for the World: Wikipedia as an Introduction to Academic Writing",  written by Tardy (2010). The article consists of an introductory explanation of the topic, followed by a detailed definition of Wikipedia and a thorough description of the assignment implemented in the project under analysis. Next, the eight steps of the project are deeply explored, supported by three Figures containing samples of an outline, a first draft, and a near-final draft with footnotes and wiki links, respectively. After the Conclusions Section, the References Section, and a brief description of the author’s professional experience, two Appendixes have been included.

          Throughout the project, the nature of Wikipedia as a collaborative global encyclopedia is explored in detail, and students are introduced to the fact that “Wikipedia summarizes existing knowledge while Academic Writing aims to create knowledge” (Tardy, 2010, p. 15).  The students are given instructions as regards how to avoid plagiarism, select topics, organize facts, and paraphrase as well as acknowledge sources correctly. In addition, they are guided in the process of drafting, summarizing, revising, formatting, polishing and publishing their work, taking into consideration their English-language readers (pp. 14-18).

          The Wiki-writing project presented in Tardy’s (2010) article poses many challenges to Second Language students during the process of acquiring academic literacy skills. She asserts that it can be implemented in different contexts, ranging from undergraduate or graduate level to secondary school students (p. 18). In short, the academic use of Wikipedia contributes to the achievement of a real sense of audience, and it also provides the invaluable experience of students seeing their productions publicly acknowledged “on  a high-traffic global website” (Tardy, 2010, p. 18).

References

Tardy, C. M. (2010). Writing for the world: Wikipedia as an introduction to academic writing. English Teaching Forum, 1, pp. 12-19, 27. Retrieved October 2012, from  http://exchanges.state.gov/englishteaching/forum/archives/docs/10-48-1-c.pdf 

          

         

Identifying Discourse Community Components

                    The purpose of this paper is to find evidence in four different articles to support Swales’ (1990) theory in relation to the six characteristics that define a Discourse Community.  Swales states that for a group of people to be considered an academic community, the following requirements should be met: common goals as the group should achieve certain objectives and have specific interests; participatory mechanisms to provide information and feedback; information exchange, which implies that the members of the group should be intercommunicated to survive as such; common-specific genres that define different associations of members; highly specialized terminology, by means of the use of abbreviations and acronyms and finally, high general level of expertise in the sense that the group should achieve a certain level of knowledge.  

                   The four articles show that each of the communities has specific goals to achieve. In the case of Wenzlaff and Wieseman (2004), they specify that the main purpose of their study was to provide teachers with the confidence to connect what they do in the classrooms to research-informed practices.  Hoffman-Kipp, Articles and Lopez-Torres (2003) acknowledge that the purpose of their study “is to outline a vision of teacher reflection that is constitutive of teacher learning as praxis” (para. 5).  As regards participatory mechanisms, Kelly-Kleese (2004) refers to the discourse of community college scholars as taking the form of  “oral discussion or text in arenas such as e-mail, electronic mailing lists, and discussion forums on the Web” (para. 30).

                   With reference to information exchange, team teaching and collaborative planning demand teachers to discuss their beliefs and practices within the routines of their daily work (Hoffman-Kipp et al., 2003.) Each of the communities makes use of academic writing. Kelly-Kleese (2001, 2004) uses block quotations to directly cite other authors. Furthermore, she introduces her paper (2001) with an abstract. Specialized vocabulary is also used in the papers. Kelly-Kleese (2004) names an organization, followed by its abbreviation: “American Association for Higher Education (AAHE)” (para. 25). Hoffman-Kipp et al. (2003) refer to Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) (para. 17). Lastly, each group shows different levels of expertise. As Wenzlaff and Weiseman (2004) describe:

          Seventy-six percent of the teachers in this cohort teach in rural, small schools; the remainder teaches in urban schools. The teachers hold positions at every level of education from kindergarten to high school and range from two to twenty years of teaching experience (para. 9).

          The four articles under analysis share the six characteristics postulated by Swales (1990). All of them have their own purposes according to the specific discourse community to which they belong. They have different as well as varied participatory mechanisms, ranging from face-to-face to electronic intercommunication, including time and regulations related to information exchange. The four communities share the genre of academic writing, regulated by stylistic conventions. They are characterized by the use of specific lexis or jargon, contributing to the papers’ formal register, and also by the different levels of expertise, which are clearly specified.

                                                                            References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Articles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher 

learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved October 2007, from

http:// findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

 Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice:  An open memo to community college faculty      

 and administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from

 http:// findarticles.com/p/articles/mi-m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

 Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college    

 scholarship  and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.   

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher  Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa200404/ai_n9349405

How to set up papers in APA 6th edition.

APA Style