CMC SUMMARY: liyana

Researchers being interested in the use of computer-mediated communication in language learning have long acknowledged the effectiveness of using MOOs in facilitating language learners to improve their language skills. MOO is a form of real time communication in which interaction taking place is within a theme-based virtual world that provides a frame for the interaction. The article “Non-native Speaker Interaction Management Strategies in a Network-based Virtual Environment” from the Journal of Interactive Learning Research by Mark Peterson, therefore, attempted to find out if this was the case in the interaction of two groups of ESL learners based in Japan.

Three research questions had been attempted by Peterson which are; 1) Does negotiation of meaning occur during Non-native Speaker interaction in a MOO?, 2) What are the interaction management strategies adopted by two groups of learners during task-based interaction in a MOO environment?, and 3) In what ways are the strategies identified quantitatively and qualitatively different from those reported in other studies of learner interaction in task-based real time CMC and what are the possible causes of these differences?. Being well-known for its reliability and efficiency, the Schmooze University MOO based at New York University was selected as the platform of this 13-week long study.

The participants for this research consisted of 14 second and third undergraduates majoring in English from two universities both in western and central Tokyo. They ranged in age from 19 to 27 years old, 11 were native speakers of Japanese, 2 being native speakers of Thai and 1 was a native speaker of Chinese. Four task types had been introduced to students to utilize which were opinion-exchange, information-gap, jigsaw and decision-making. In opinion-exchange, students were asked to exchange views on the best ways to learn English, Japan’s economic crisis, education reform in Japan and their ideal university. Information-gap required learners to exchange information in order to complete the tasks given to them. Students worked in pair and were asked to develop a personality profile of their partner. In the other task, students had to guess the meaning of two different sets of words (while receiving hints from their partner) and then switch roles. Jigsaw made it possible for the students to utilize their current knowledge of English while requiring them to share information in order to reach a single outcome. In decision-making, students were asked to express their views regarding advantages and disadvantages of studying in the MOO.

In conducting the project which involved two phases, learners, in the first phase were given insights on the use of MOO in order to familiarize them that later enabled them to become proficient users of MOO. In the second phase, participants worked in dyads on a specific task for 60 minutes. Participants in each group were located in separate areas in the same computer room. The learners accessed the Schmooze MOO and later their text-output was displayed on-screen in the order it was produced. All data produced by them then was saved to a log file and emailed to the instructor. Several data received was later selected for analysis.

From the data analyzed, Peterson identified interaction management strategies that have been described in the literature of non-native speaker interaction in both face-to-face and real time online interaction. The strategies were definition request (43% of total strategies), clarification requests (16%), confirmation (9%) and comprehension checks (8%). There were also self-correction and non-response strategies. The definition request which marked the most frequently used strategy reflects the fact that the subjects were intermediate level and therefore had gaps in their vocabulary knowledge. When a problem occurred, learners usually resorted to this strategy to maintain the discourse. Confirmation and comprehension checks were less frequent due to the fact that the online text-based nature of the interaction in the MOO gave the participants few other means to indicate that a communication problem had arisen.

The jigsaw tasks had resulted in a lot of negotiations among the learners. However, there was infrequency of negotiated turns in the data compared to other studies done by other researchers. The causes might be the nature of real time online medium where interaction occurs via typed-text that on occasions when messages were scrolling rapidly, learners tended to deploy the strategies in order to keep up with the discourse. Another possible cause is socio-cultural factor where subjects in this study were from a culture where avoiding threats to face is very important. So, learners tended to be reluctant of using some negotiation strategies to avoid embarrassment that later led them to non-response. The overall results of the study suggest the fact that non-native speaker interaction management in real time text-based CMC is a complex phenomenon influenced by a number of variables including the nature of the online environment under utilization, proficiency levels, task configuration, affective, sociolinguistic and cultural factors.