In Fall 1998 an d 1999, th e auth ors teamed up to teach th e first lan guage course con ducted almost en tirely usin g a MO O an d in volvin g a 7-week exch an ge between studen ts lear
Trang 1Tech n ically Speakin g: Tran sfor min g Lan guage Lear n in g th rough Virtual Lear n in g En viron men ts ( MO O s)
Th ough MO O s ( multiple user domain s object-orien ted) h ave foun d a limited use in some lan guage courses, th eir poten tial for tran sformin g th e lan guage learn in g classroom h as n ot been fully recogn ized or valued In Fall 1998 an d 1999, th e auth ors teamed up to teach th e first lan guage course con ducted almost en tirely usin g a MO O an d in volvin g a 7-week exch an ge between studen ts learn in g German at an American college an d advan ced studen ts of En glish
at a German un iversity Drawin g on th eir experien ces, th e auth ors systematically map out th e tremen dous pedagogical ben efits to usin g a MO O for lan guage learn in g: a studen t-cen tered learn in g en viron men t str uctured by such objectives as peer teach in g, auton omous learn in g prin ciples, in tellectually rich con ten t-based in str uction , in dividualized learn in g, an d play In addition to offerin g a model for th e successful in tegration of tech n ology in to th e classroom,
th is article suggests h ow MO O s can h elp ach ieve th e lon g-sough t goal of securely an ch orin g
in termediate or even elemen tar y lan guage learn in g back in to th e liberal arts cur riculum
BEGINNING AS FAR BACK AS TH E 1950s WITH
th e use of tape decks in th e Audiolin gual
meth od, n ew tech n ologies h ave been a peren n ial
source of h ope for makin g lan guage learn in g a
faster an d more efficien t process ( Blake, 1998)
Th e in ven tion an d widespread use of person al
computers in th e late 1980s an d 1990s breath ed
n ew life in to vision s of a n ew future for foreign
lan guages ( FLs) Yet despite such promises, even
lon gtime propon en ts of FL tech n ology often
ex-press fr ustration with th e cur ren t state of affairs
Gar rett’s 1991 con clusion th at tech n ology is still
“ligh t-years ah ead of th e profession ’s ability” to
h ar n ess it for FL learn in g ( p 74) still seems tr ue
today More recen tly, Bush ( 1997) , citin g amon g
oth er studies an in for mal sur vey of subscribers to
th e Lan guage Learn in g Tech n ology In tern
a-tion al ( LLTI) listser ve th at “foun d few examples
of lan guage education programs wh ere studen ts
spen d at least 10% of th eir time usin g tech n ology
to h elp in th eir learn in g,” lamen ts th at “th ere is little eviden ce th at tech n ology is h avin g an y
sig-n ificasig-n t impact osig-n th e way most studesig-n ts learsig-n lan guages in today’s classroom” ( p 288) Wh ile
th e expen ses associated with most n ew tech n olo-gies sh are much of th e blame, teach ers h ave been
h ampered just as often by th e en ormous commit-men t of time required to develop or adopt n ew tech n ologies, especially because retur n on th at
in vestmen t of time is often n ot immediate More-over, man y multimedia software programs do n ot yet ach ieve th e promised goals for computer-assisted lan guage learn in g ( CALL) Even if most CALL activities are n o lon ger built aroun d
“drill-an d-kill” exercises, m“drill-an y commercially available programs are still str uctured quite rigidly an d lack a tr uly commun icative in ter face
Wh ile education al multiple user domain s ob-ject-orien ted ( MO O s) are n ot th e on ly kin d of tech n ology suited to lan guage lear n in g, we th in k
th e MO O -based project we con ducted with den ts learn in g Ger man at Vassar College an d
Department of German Studies Department of German Studies Westfälische Wilhelms–Universität Münster Vassar College, Box 426 Vassar College, Box 501 Englisches Seminar
Poughkeepsie, NY 12604 Poughkeepsie, NY 12604 Johannisstr 12–20
Email: vonderemde@vassar.edu Email: JeSchneider@vassar.edu D-48143 Münster, Germany
Email: kotterm@uni-muenster.de
The Modern Language Journal, 85, ii, ( 2001)
0026-7902/ 01/ 210–225 $1.50/ 0
©2001 The Modern Language Journal
Trang 2den ts studyin g En glish at th e Un iversity of Mün
-ster, German y, can ser ve as on e importan t model
for usin g tech n ology to tran sfor m an d to en rich
th e lan guage learn in g experien ce in th e un
der-graduate classroom Th e MO O h as evolved from
its origin s as Dun geon s an d Dragon s game
soft-ware in th e 1970s in to an on lin e, syn ch ron ous,
text-based learn in g en viron men t th at ser ves a
va-riety of profession al an d social purposes At
American un iversities, MO O s h ave foun d adh
er-en ts in En glish classes an d oth er subjects,1 but
th ey are on ly n ow startin g to fin d use in FL
class-room settin gs.2 Th is delay seems to be in part
because early gen eration s of MO O s admittedly
required some train in g an d adjustmen t time,
leadin g Lafford an d Lafford ( 1997) to
recom-men d avoidin g th em in favor of “less complicated
en viron men ts” ( p 259) such as ch at rooms
Nev-erth eless, th e n ewest gen eration of MO O in
ter-faces n ow makes such warn in gs un justified
MO O s h ave come a lon g way an d deser ve a
sec-on d look Un til n ow, h owever, research sec-on MO O s
eith er h as un der recogn ized th eir tr ue poten tial
for lan guage learn in g or, despite certain
similari-ties between MO O s an d ch at rooms, h as failed to
distin guish th em fully from oth er syn ch ron ous
on lin e tech n ologies An d wh ile we are n ot th e
first to use a MO O to teach a FL, we believe we
are th e first to teach an en tire semester-lon g FL
course aroun d it an d to assess systematically a
MO O ’s poten tial for th e FL classroom As th is
article will suggest, th e tr ue advan tages of usin g
MO O s are best ach ieved th rough full in tegration
in to th e syllabus—both as a way to modify
tradi-tion al classroom activities, such as discussion s,
small group work, an d paper writin g, an d as a
mean s for in troducin g importan t n ew commun
i-cative activities Moreover, optin g for a less
com-plex system mean s sacrificin g real opportun ities
to tran sfor m lan guage learn in g
Th us, rath er th an report directly on use of th e
MO O in th e classroom, th is article draws on
class-room experien ces to outlin e an d documen t
sev-eral extraordin ar y pedagogical ben efits from
us-in g MO O s for FL learn us-in g Th ough th e MO O
represen ts a tech n ological revolution of sorts th at
moves away from th e tradition al lan guage
class-room, it actually offers un ique possibilities for
applyin g man y th eoretically soun d lan guage
learn in g meth ods In deed, we wan t to suggest
th at th e MO O makes it tech n ologically possible
for th e first time for teach ers an d learn ers to
ach ieve man y lon g-h eld lan guage learn in g goals
in a man n er th at we could on ly h ave dreamt of
just a few years ago Even as exten sive con tact with
n ative speakers stan ds out as th e most obvious
in n ovation made possible by th e MO O , th e re-con ceptualization of all studen t in teraction as auth en tic in put th rough th e use of th e MO O is equally excitin g Th e MO O h as en abled th e auth ors to refash ion th e FL classroom in to a stu-den t-cen tered learn in g en viron men t str uctured
by such objectives as peer teach in g, auton omous learn in g prin ciples, in tellectually rich con ten t-based in str uction , in dividualized learn in g, an d, last but n ot least, play Th e MO O realizes th e core vision of “commun icative CALL” ( Un der wood, 1984) : th e tran sfor mation of th e lan guage learn
-in g classroom itself
MO O S AS A LEARNING ENVIRO NMENT
MO O s are virtual learn in g en viron men ts with power ful education al tools.3 As syn ch ron ous, text-based In ter n et databases, th ey exten d th e ver y con cep t of commu n ication itself—both with in an d beyon d th e four walls of th e class-room O f course, like ch at rooms, in wh ich users
h ave keyboard con versation s with each oth er,
MO O s en able people from all over th e globe to
“speak” to each oth er in real time Neverth eless,
to appreciate th e MO O ’s poten tial impact on lan -guage learn in g, it is importan t to un derstan d h ow
it differs from ch at rooms such as In tern et relay
ch ats ( IRCs) , or even more complex Web-based collaborative writin g programs such as Daedalus Alth ough th ey sh are with ch at rooms th e ability
to brin g togeth er lan guage learn ers with n ative speakers for con versation al exch an ge or directed writin g, MO O s offer users man y more commun i-cation features th an are available on th ese oth er
ch at systems First, MO O s offer a variety of commun icative modalities Not on ly can users con -verse with oth ers in th e same virtual room or across differen t rooms, but on e can also “wh is-per” to an oth er person ( so th at oth ers in th e room do n ot see wh at is bein g “said”) , “sh out” ( so
th at ever yon e in th e MO O sees, regardless of
th eir room location ) an d, most importan tly,
“emote” ( th at is, express feelin gs or “ph ysical” action s th rough words) Secon d, MO O s provide
a wide ran ge of man ipulable education al tools
an d allow users to create an d display th eir own virtual objects th rough simple comman ds or with
a few clicks of th e mouse For in stan ce, users can record en tire discussion s with a ( virtual) recorder
an d play th em back at a later date Th ey can also write n otes for oth er users—an d even post th em
on electron ic n oteboards In fact, users can cre-ate an almost un limited variety of person al cyber objects, sin ce all objects in th e MO O con sist of a textual description Th ird, in stead of usin g
Trang 3defin ed an d abstract spaces, MO O s allow users to
create person al rooms an d describe th em in a
person al way As th is article will sh ow, th e ability
to person alize space an d objects in th e MO O
allows a commun ity of users to create an d even
an alyze its own virtual culture Fin ally, th e n ewest
gen eration of MO O s are fully in tegrated with th e
World Wide Web Th is developmen t mean s n ot
on ly th at users can access MO O s based on th e
en Core MO O database usin g a stan dard Web
browser, but th ey can also import Web pages an d
oth er graph ics in to th e MO O an d sen d th em to
oth er people in th e MO O Because th e h
yper-lin ks in th ese Web pages are active, users can
jump from th e MO O to th e Web an d back again
with just a few clicks of th e mouse In fact, all
objects created in th e en Core system h ave un ique
Un iform Resource Locators ( URLs) an d can be
accessed directly th rough th e Web, makin g it easy
to publish electron ically with out an y train in g in
H ypertext Markup Lan guage ( H TML) As a
re-sult of th ese features, th e MO O retain s th e
text-based elemen ts th at its supporters h ave always
admired wh ile comparin g favorably with an y of
today’s graph ic-orien ted multimedia programs
Despite th ese expan sive possibilities, MO O s
are easy to learn to use It takes less th an 5 min
-utes for begin n ers to learn to move aroun d an d
to commun icate, an d we foun d th at as in str uctors
we n eeded n o more tech n ical support to teach in
th e MO O th an is required for an y n ew computer
software system used in th e classroom Especially
with th e n ew Web-based in ter face, even th e
ad-van ced features of th e MO O are in tuitive
Fur-th ermore, usin g an existin g MO O is absolutely
free: All th at each user requires is a computer
with access to th e In tern et Most education al
MO O s allow an yon e to sign on as a guest, after
wh ich it is possible to apply for a free per man en t
“ch aracter” ( sign -on n ame) Moreover, buildin g a
MO O at on e’s h ome in stitution is relatively easy,
th ough th e process requires a small amoun t of
tech n ical support For in stan ce, with th e h elp of
two studen t assistan ts, two of us, von der Emde
an d Sch n eider, developed MO O ssiggan g, on e of
th e world’s first bilin gual Ger man MO O s Th e
n ame is a pun on th e Ger man word Müßiggang,
wh ich mean s someth in g akin to leisure,
relaxa-tion , an d idlen ess an d is in ten ded to capture th e
MO O ’s dimen sion of play.4 Wh en a user en ters
MO O ssiggan g, h e or sh e h as th e option of goin g
to th e “En glish side” or th e “German side” of th e
MO O In rooms on th e German side, users are
expected to type comman ds in German , an d
al-most all feedback from th e computer is also in
Ger man 5 O f course, even th ough such a bilin
-gual MO O in ter face offers con tin uous
opportu-n ities for laopportu-n guage practice at th e level of com-puter comman ds, messages, an d use, man y of th e commun icative ben efits from usin g a MO O can also be obtain ed from an En glish -lan guage MO O
in ter face
CO URSE DESCRIPTIO N AND O NLINE EXCH ANGE
Begin n in g in Fall 1998, th e th ree of us collabo-rated to reorgan ize Vassar’s th ird-semester in ter-mediate Ger man course to in clude a virtual
ex-ch an ge with studen ts studyin g En glish at th e
Un iversity of Mün ster Kötter, an En glish in str uc-tor at Un iversity of Mün ster, was actively search in g for American partn ers for a collaborative
ex-ch an ge th at would en able h im to measure th e impact of MO O s on tan dem learn in g between lan -guage learn ers an d n ative speakers.6Mean wh ile, von der Emde an d Sch n eider were motivated to develop a course aroun d th e MO O to ach ieve two pedagogical goals: to fin d a solution to th e often vexin g ran ge of studen t proficien cies in our in ter-mediate German course ( a common problem in small lan guage programs th at often leave some studen ts un derch allen ged an d oth ers strivin g to keep up) an d to in troduce in tellectually rich con -ten t at an earlier stage in th e lan guage learn in g process an d th ereby move beyon d teach in g a FL as
a mere “skill.” H en ce, we also used th e MO O in th e weeks prior to th e exch an ge to in troduce lowto in -termediate FL learn ers to texts an d question s ver y much alon g th e lin es of our own sch olarsh ip in lit-erar y an d cultural studies.7
Because th e German academic calen dar starts
in mid-O ctober, we at Vassar College organ ized our in termediate Ger man semin ar in two dis-tin ct ph ases.8 Durin g th e first 7 weeks, studen ts got acquain ted with th e MO O , began an in ten -sive grammar review, an d reflected upon gen eral cultural topics Th ough we drew on a grammar textbook, th e primar y focus of th is ph ase was
on explorin g issues of iden tity an d space
th rough literar y an d cultural readin gs, th rough discussion s in th e MO O , an d by h avin g studen ts create th eir own cultural spaces an d iden tities
in th e MO O In addition to activities th at en -couraged studen ts to reflect upon th e virtual cul-ture th ey were con str uctin g in th e MO O , th is first ph ase also in cluded assign men ts th at asked studen ts to defin e th eir learn in g goals, assess
th eir progress, build vocabular y, an d un derstan d
th e prin ciples of collaborative learn in g Durin g
th e secon d ph ase of th e course, wh ich lasted from mid-O ctober to early December, studen ts
Trang 4at Vassar worked in small groups with studen ts
from Mün ster to develop an d presen t th eir own
join t research projects in th e MO O Th ese
col-laborative, in terdisciplin ar y projects arose out of
th e studen ts’ own in terests, an d all projects
fo-cused primarily on differen ces an d similarities
between German an d American culture Projects
in th e Fall 1998 an d Fall 1999 semesters
com-pared German an d American education al
sys-tems, immigration policies, n ation al stereotypes,
multiculturalism, an d music culture Because th e
course met twice weekly for 75-min ute session s,
Ph ase 2 offered each studen t approximately 16
con tact h ours with n ative speakers—about 8
h ours in each lan guage—in groups n o larger
th an two American s an d two German s Project
work often n ecessitated th at groups also
ex-ch an ged emails or met in th e MO O outside of
class In addition to th e two weekly 75-min ute
session s in th e MO O , Vassar studen ts also met
for 50 min utes on a weekly basis with in str uctors
an d teach in g assistan ts to practice oral skills an d
reflect on th eir work in th e MO O In stead of
quizzes an d tests on grammar, studen ts kept a
learn in g portfolio of all th eir work completed
in side an d outside th e MO O th rough out th e
se-mester Th e studen ts an d teach ers used th ese
portfolios to evaluate th e studen ts’ overall class
per for man ce.9
FIVE PEDAGO GICAL BENEFITS TO USING
TH E MO O
O f course, computer tech n ologies such as th e
MO O do n ot represen t a particular or in h eren t
teach in g strategy in an d of th emselves As Gar rett
( 1991) h as obser ved, “th e computer is rath er a
medium or an en viron men t in wh ich a wide
varety of meth ods, approach es, or pedagogical ph
i-losoph ies may be implem en ted” ( p 75) Th ough
it is still n ecessar y to gath er more in for mation on
th e actual effects of th e MO O on studen t progress
before con clusive results can be made available,
our experien ce with MO O s in th e in termediate
lan guage classroom h as n everth eless led us to
iden tify at least five pedagogical dimen sion s th at
sh ould con stitute an in for med an d prin cipled in
-tegration of MO O s for FL learn in g Each of th e
followin g ben efits from usin g MO O s derives in
part from th e radically studen t-cen tered learn in g
en viron men t made possible by th e MO O
Authentic Communication and Content
Almost automatically, th e MO O restr uctures
lan guage learn in g dyn amics away from drill-like
exercises or an exclusive atten tion to grammatical accuracy to con ten tbased activities an d mean
-in gful commun ication between studen ts Re-search ers in secon d lan guage acquisition h ave lon g remin ded lan guage teach ers th at lan guage acquisition is n ot a passive skill of recogn ition but
a creative con str uction process Cogn itive scien -tists such as H un t ( 1982) h ave foun d th at by match in g n ew lan guage in put with older bits of
kn owledge—wh at lin guists call “sch emata”—stu-den ts con stan tly “n egotiate” between wh at th ey already kn ow an d wh at th ey h ear an d see in n ew commun icative situation s ( Rüsch off, 1993, p 29) In deed, in order to learn a n ew lan guage, studen ts must actively gath er n ew in for mation ,
an d th en process, reorgan ize, an d in tern alize it Already in 1985, Ellis pron oun ced th at lan guage learn in g results from commun icative lan guage use Un like man y textbook exercises ( an d cer-tain ly most grammar exercises) , h owever, th e
MO O establish es such auth en tic commun icative situation s in ideal ways
First of all, like ch at rooms, MO O s can be used
to discuss auth en tic materials For in stan ce, in a
un it on space durin g th e first ph ase of th e course ( prior to con tact with n ative speakers) , studen ts
an alyzed th ree exemplar y sh ort passages in Ger-man culled from differen t gen res Th e first was a paragraph from Fran z Kafka’s stor y “Der Bau” ( “Th e Burrow”) , wh ich portrays a mole’s n er v-ously ch arged relation to h is burrow Th e secon d was taken from a con temporar y detective stor y by Jakob Arjoun i th at describes th e protagon ist’s ver y messy office in iron ic, postmoder n n oir terms Th e th ird was excerpted from a letter writ-ten by Rosa Luxemburg, in wh ich sh e juxtaposes
th e dull con fin es of h er World War I prison cell with th e beautiful, emotion ally liberatin g, ph an -tasmic spaces of h er memor y an d imagin ation In
th e first step in th is un it, we asked studen ts to discuss th e readin gs in small groups in th e MO O
O ur experien ce with discussion s in th e MO O con firms wh at Beauvois ( 1997) h as foun d in h er study of ch at rooms: Studen ts at th e in termediate level were able to draw fairly soph isticated con clu-sion s in th e target lan guage because th e written con versation al form of th e MO O en ables th em to bridge th e gap between written an d oral skills—a gap th at oth er wise often preven ts th e “full ex-pression of ideas” in discussion s in a tradition al lan guage classroom ( p 167)
Usin g th e MO O as a ch at room–like discussion space, h owever, is n ot th e on ly, or even th e most
un ique, use of th e MO O Th e MO O also makes
it possible for studen ts to con str uct th eir own lan guage learn in g en viron men t an d th ereby
Trang 5fash ion th emselves in to a commun ity of lear n ers.
Eck, Legen h ausen , an d Wolff ( 1995) suggest th at
tr uly auth en tic commun icative situation s on ly
arise wh en th e lan guage classroom itself becomes
th e focus of studen t work an d activities, th at is,
wh en th e classroom en viron men t is recogn ized
an d th ematized as an in tegral part of studen ts’
livin g reality ( Lebenswirklichkeit) rath er th an as an
un reflected routin e outside of it Th us, after in
-itiatin g an oth er MO O -based discussion about th e
relation sh ip between th e MO O ’s un ique spatial
dimen sion s an d th e th ree texts illustratin g
differ-en t n otion s of space, we asked studdiffer-en ts to put
th eor y in to practice an d to con str uct th eir own
room in MO O ssiggan g In th e virtual, text-based
world of th e MO O , buildin g a room essen tially
mean s describin g a space—an y imagin ative
space—with lan guage, an d th us th e goal of th e
assign men t was to h ave studen ts produce texts
on par with th e discursive examples th ey h ad
read for th is un it Studen ts th en an alyzed with a
partn er th e spaces th ey h ad produced Th ese
partn er work exercises n ot on ly h elped studen ts
with th eir description s but also emph asized th at
th eir writin g h ad an auth en tic commun icative
purpose For in stan ce, after th ey built an d
de-scribed th eir rooms, partn ers gave each oth er
feedback about th eir description s, such as wh at
kin d of impression th ey made an d wh at kin d of
person th ey th ough t lived th ere Th us, rath er
th an an arbitrar y exercise un dertaken on ly to
practice th e lan guage, th ese spaces became
th emselves objects for th e same kin d of an alysis
don e on Kafka’s stor y or Luxemburg’s letter As
public documen ts of a sort, th ese virtual rooms
were qualitatively differen t from a description of
a dorm room, a stan dard assign men t in a
tradi-tion al FL classroom
An example of a room description by on e of
th e studen ts from th e Fall 1998 semester can
ser ve as an example:
Zimmer von Carla
Mein Raum ist prima Ich habe einen
Kuehlschrank, wo mein Wodka steht (aber ich
finde Rum am besten!) Mein Bett liegt in die
Ecke An meine Anrichte liegt eine Kerze Die
Kerze ist zauberhaft (aber ich weiss nicht
warum!) Meine Freunde glauben, dass sie eine
Frau in die Flamme sehen koennen Ja, ich finde
es sehr mystisch Mein Raum ist auch sehr ruhig.
Leute spricht nicht in meinem Raum Sie wollen
nur Musik hoeren Meine Waende sind
blau— blau wie die Himmel Mein Teppich ist
gruen— gruen wie das Gras Mein Raum gibt
nur ein Fenster Ich liebe, wenn ich mich aufs
Fenster lehnen Ich kann ein Wald sehen Die Aussicht ist sehr schoen Ich denke oft ueber die Waeldern Die Waeldern geben keine Waende Manchmal ist mein Raum ein bisschen unorden-tlich Mein Kleidung steht nicht im Schrank— aber es ist mir egal Mein Raum, schmutzig oder nicht schmutzig, gefaellt mir Ach so— ich habe eine Katze Herby, die SuperKatze, wohnt mit mir Ich bin nicht so einsam Mein Raum ist gemuetlich aber ein bisschen unheim-lich Ich liebe meinen Raum.
( Carla’s Room
My room is super I h ave a refrigerator,
wh ere I keep my vodka ( th ough I like r um
th e best!) My bed is in th e corn er A can dle lies on my sideboard Th e can dle is magical ( but I don ’t kn ow wh y!) My frien ds believe
th at th ey can see a woman in th e flame Yes,
I fin d it ver y mystical My room is also ver y calm People do n ot speak in my room
Th ey on ly wan t to h ear music My walls are blue—blue like th e sky My carpet is green —green like th e grass My room h as
on ly on e win dow I love to lean out of th e win dow I can see a forest Th e view is ver y beautiful I th in k a lot about th e woods
Th e woods don ’t h ave an y walls Sometimes
my room is a little disorderly My cloth in g
is n ot in th e closet—but th at’s n ot impor-tan t Dirty or n ot dirty, I th in k my room is great O h , I h ave a cat H erby, th e Super-Cat, lives with me I am n ot so lon ely My room is cozy but a little un can n y I love my room.)
Th ough th is assign men t gen erated an impressive amoun t of lan guage use from a th ird-semester studen t just weeks after th e start of our course,
we advocate readin g th e room description for
th e cultural an d person al n otion s of space it con veys As Kramsch an d Nolden ( 1994) stress, in termediate lan guage studen ts ( an d th eir teach -ers) n eed to value studen t writin g—an d take it seriously—by subjectin g it to th e kin ds of cul-tural an alyses th at are practiced in th e classroom
on th e publish ed writin g by n ative-speakin g auth ors Such an approach mean s th at gram-matical accuracy sh ould n ot be th e on ly or even
a primar y focus of an y respon se to studen t
writ-in g—eith er by a teach er or by a fellow studen t
In deed, like th e sh ort texts by Kafka, Luxem-burg, or Arjoun i, Carla’s room description offers
an imagin ar y space worth y of more careful con -sideration Perh aps th e most strikin g feature of
h er room is its fusion of practicality with mysti-cism Th ough on e of th e first th in gs sh e tells us
Trang 6is th at sh e h as a refrigerator with alcoh ol ( n ot
an un common feature of a dorm room) , sh e
also in forms h er fellow studen ts th at sh e h as a
burn in g can dle n ear h er bed in wh ose flame
sev-eral visitors claimed to see a spirit Th is secon d
poin t makes th e room seem ver y differen t from
a typical dorm room Neverth eless, it is possible
to read Carla’s room as a reaction to th e ch
al-len ges an d un certain ties of life as a first-semester
fresh man H er own virtual room—with its blue
walls resemblin g th e limitless sky—attempts to
strike a curious equilibrium between un limited
possibility an d n atural borders Th is search for
an equilibrium seems to be required of all fresh
-men as th ey leave th e con fin in g comfort of
h ome for th e big adven ture of college Th at n ew
life is both excitin g an d scar y—perh aps
some-times lon ely or even un can n y Carla’s virtual
room captures th at h eady combin ation of
feel-in gs—an d, with affir mative statemen ts at th e
be-gin n in g an d en d of h er description , embraces
it
Wh en studen ts build th eir own rooms, create
n oteboards or oth er education al tools, an d
rep-resen t th eir own ( virtual) person ality in th e FL,
th eir motivation to use th e target lan guage is
gen uin e an d h as auth en tic commun icative goals
Wh ile research in to computer-mediated
commu-n icatiocommu-n ( CMC) h as verified its sigcommu-n ificacommu-n t
im-pact on learn er motivation ( Warsch auer, 1996;
Beauvois, 1994) , th e MO O n ecessarily expan ds
th e defin ition of “commun ication ” beyon d syn
ch ron ous discussion s or oth er direct an d in ten
-tion al exch an ges ( such as email) with n ative
speakers, classmates, an d teach ers In deed,
buildin g rooms in th e MO O is n ot just a preten d
exercise, wh ich studen ts h an d in an d th en
forget In stead, th eir rooms become part of th e en
viron men t th at th e studen ts th emselves con
-str uct an d use for th eir lan guage learn in g
Because th ese virtual rooms become th e meetin g
places for groups of studen ts workin g on
proj-ects or just lookin g for fun , th e studen ts’ writin g
becomes part of th eir iden tity as lan guage learn
-ers an d can poten tially trigger coun tless
discus-sion s an d exch an ges with oth er learn ers in th e
MO O Like on e’s own apartmen t, h ome, or
dorm room, th e virtual rooms con vey importan t
in for mation about wh o studen ts are or wan t to
be in th e target lan guage, an d in th is sen se th ey
represen t th eir own ers to th e n ative an d n on n
a-tive speakers th ey migh t soon en coun ter an d
even work with H en ce, it would be a mistake
to discoun t th e virtual n ature of spaces an d in
teraction s in th e MO O as “un real” or “in auth en
-tic.” As H ayn es an d H olmevik, th e developers of
th e MO O core used in th is study an d two of th e
MO O ’s most th ough tful th eorists, eloquen tly put it: “O ur work debun ks th e myth th at on lin e re-lation sh ips are someh ow UNREAL an d O NLY full of in an e ch at; rath er, it is a testimon y to commun ity-buildin g, n ot deh uman izin g urban i-zation ” ( H ayn es & H olmevik, 1995) Th e writin g
th at studen ts do in th e MO O becomes part of
th is commun ity’s discourse an d plays an in tegral
an d lastin g role in con str uctin g th at public cul-ture Wh at kin d of commun ication could be more auth en tic?
Autonomous Learning and Peer Teaching in a Student-Centered Classroom
Much research on th e use of syn ch ron ous on -lin e systems in classes h as obser ved th at workin g with th ese programs in evitably tran sfers more re-spon sibility for th e direction of th e course from
th e teach er to th e studen ts ( Beauvois, 1992; Laf-ford & LafLaf-ford, 1997) In our use of th e MO O ,
th is h appen ed at two distin ct but in timately re-lated levels First, th e decen tered space of th e
MO O n ecessarily gives studen ts more auton omy
as learn ers, wh ich Little ( 1991) provision ally de-fin es as “a capacity for detach men t, critical reflec-tion , decision -makin g an d in depen den t acreflec-tion ” vis-à-vis th e ver y process of lear n in g ( p 2) In th e small group work th at takes place in th e MO O , studen ts largely con trol th e flow of discussion ; in completin g auth en tic documen ts for th e MO O , such as th eir room or ch aracter description , stu-den ts decide h ow man y drafts an d revision s th ey must complete in order to meet th eir own stan -dards for self-presen tation ; in reviewin g th eir logs, studen ts iden tify th eir con tribution s to class discussion s an d th eir own learn in g Secon d, th e commun ity-based str ucture of MO O s also n atu-rally leads to peer teach in g, sin ce studen ts begin
to learn from an d teach each oth er Th ough tan -dem learn in g is an age-old meth od th at relies on auton omous learn in g prin ciples, n ew tech n olo-gies such as email h ave made it more feasible to brin g n ative speakers togeth er with lan guage learn ers across great ph ysical distan ces ( Brammerts, 1996) In th e case of th e exch an ge organ -ized between studen ts from Vassar College an d studen ts at th e Un iversity of Mün ster durin g
Ph ase 2, all participan ts were respon sible n ot on ly for th eir own but also for th eir partn ers’ lan guage learn in g progress Wh ile h avin g n ative speakers fun ction as experts in creased th e n umber of teach ers available to studen ts ( from 1 to about 20) an d allowed each studen t to receive much more feedback, takin g on th e role of teach er for
Trang 7th eir own n ative lan guage also automatically
made studen ts’ own lan guage learn in g process
more self-reflective
In lin e with th e prin ciples of auton omous
learn in g an d peer teach in g, studen ts n egotiated
with th eir n ative-speaker partn ers about h ow
much time sh ould be spen t workin g in each lan
-guage an d h ow th ey wan ted to h an dle cor
rec-tion s All studen ts un derstood th at th eir partn ers
sh ould h ave a fair ch an ce to learn from th em,
too, an d th us each lan guage sh ould get equal
time Each group, h owever, could decide h ow to
ach ieve th is goal In th e first exch an ge ( Fall
1998) , man y groups decided to switch h alf-way
th rough each session , wh ile oth ers decided to
altern ate en tire periods—a possibility sin ce th e
class met twice weekly In addition to determin in g
th e time allotted to each lan guage in th e
discus-sion s, studen ts also n egotiated h ow to h elp each
oth er learn th e target lan guage Th e logs from
th e studen ts’ group work demon strated time an d
again h ow th ough tful an d respon sibly studen ts
teach th eir partn ers: Th ey cor rect each oth er
po-litely an d in en couragin g ways, th ey gen tly
re-min d on e an oth er to get back to work, an d th ey
praise each oth er’s efforts an d accomplish men ts
O ften a series of complex in teraction s occurs in a
sh ort period of time, such as in th e followin g
in teraction about lan guage learn in g th at took
place in a group con sistin g of two American s an d
on e Ger man :
Mich ael laechelt auch
Fran k says, “Mmh, ich denke, Hemmungen
beim Sprechen einer Fremdsporache [sic] liegen
oft daran, dass wir beim lernen gesagt bekommen
haben, dass alles korrekt sein muss Dabei ist
doch der Inhalt viel wichtiger als die absolute
fehlerfreie Sprache.”
H olger_Guest says, “ich bemerke gerade, dass
das hier suechtig macht, nicht wahr?”
Linda says, “Was heissen Hemmungen und
suechtig?”
Fran k says, “Hemmungen sind, wenn man sich
nicht traut, etwas zu tun, wenn man zoegert,
weil man Angst hat, etwas Falsches zu tun.
Suechtig: wenn man die Finger nicht davon
las-sen kann und immer mehr will; abhaengig, wie
von Drogen Okay?”
Lin da says, “Ja, danke.”
Mich ael says, “die Saetze mit viele Infinitivs,
und mit dem Konjunktiv sind sehr schwer fuer
mich””
Fran k says, “Mmmh, ich versuche, kuerzer zu
schreiben Und einfacher.”
( Mich ael smiles too
Fran k says, “H mm, I th in k speakin g in h
ibi-tion s [ Hemmungen] in a foreign lan guage
are often due to th e fact th at wh en we were learn in g we were always told th at ever
y-th in g h ad to be cor rect Yet y-th e con ten t is really more importan t th an totally er ror-free speech ”
H olger_Guest says, “I already n otice th at
th is [ talkin g in th e MO O ] is addictive
[ suechtig] —don ’t you agree?”
Lin da says, “Wh at do ‘Hemmungen’ an d
‘suechtig’ mean ?”
Fran k says, “Hemmungen are wh en you
don ’t dare to do someth in g, wh en you h esi-tate because you are afraid to do someth in g
wron g Suechtig: wh en you can ’t keep your
h an ds off someth in g an d always wan t more
of it; depen den t, like addicted to dr ugs
O kay?”
Lin da says, “Yes, th an ks.”
Mich ael says, “Th e sen ten ces with lots of
in fin itives an d with subjun ctive/ con di-tion al are ver y difficult for me.”
Fran k says, “H mmm, I will tr y to write
sh orter sen ten ces An d simpler on es.”)
As th is example illustrates, studen ts workin g in
th e MO O often felt much more comfortable
ask-in g th eir partn ers for defask-in ition s an d oth er h elp
th an ten ds to be th e case in th e tradition al class-room, wh ere th eir question s migh t h ave in
ter-r upted th e discussion foter-r th e wh ole class Wh ile both Ger man an d American studen ts often re-sorted to En glish words an d tran slation s, espe-cially wh en th ey excitedly sough t to con vey in for-mation or make a poin t quickly, man y also put extraordin ar y care an d effort in to givin g defin i-tion s of words an d even wh ole con cepts in th e target lan guage Fran k’s th ough tful defin ition s of
“H emmun gen ” ( in h ibition s) an d “süchtig” (
ad-dictive) h elped h is American partn er Lin da, but
th e complex syn tax h e used in h is in itial poin t about speakin g in h ibition s con fused Mich ael Fortun ately, th e MO O ’s mediated con versation al format lowered speakin g in h ibition s, an d
Mi-ch ael was able to admit th at h e did n ot un der-stan d someth in g an d to ask h is partn ers to slow down or to use simpler German Th us, th ough Fran k focused on h elpin g Lin da an d Mich ael learn German , h e also received feedback on h is use of h is n ative lan guage, makin g h im more cogn izan t of th e complex social an d psych ologi-cal processes required to facilitate positive an d effective lan guage learn in g Th is, of course, was
th e poin t Fran k origin ally set out to make about speakin g in h ibition s!
Trang 8Studen ts similarly sh owed great respon sibility
in eith er cor rectin g th eir partn ers’ mistakes or
h elpin g th em with vocabular y With out th e teach
-ers’ h elp, most groups in th e Fall 1998 semester
actually discussed on th eir own in itiative wh en
th ey would in ter ven e to cor rect th eir partn ers
an d wh en th ey would overlook less importan t
slips in order to refrain from in ter r uptin g th e
con versation For in stan ce, in th is same
discus-sion Fran k employs a ver y effective meth od of
h an dlin g mistakes:
Mich ael says, “Ich will ein ‘Webpage’
machen.”
Lin da says, “Also, Schwierigkeiten mit
Immigra-tion, und .
Fran k says, “Auf einer Internet-Seite? Okay,
klingt gut.”
Mich ael says, “Ahhh Vielen Dank, Frank”
Mich ael says, “Sollen wir eine Internet-Seite
ue-ber Immigration machen?
Oder ueber ein andere Thema?”
( Mich ael says, “I wan t to make a ‘Web
page.’”
Lin da says, “O kay, difficulties with
Immi-gration , an d ”
Fran k says, “O n an ‘Internet-Seite’ [ Web
page] ? O kay, soun ds good.”
Mich ael says, “Ah h h Th an ks a lot,
Fran k”
Mich ael says, “Sh ould we make eine
Internet-Seite [ a Web page, gen der ⫽ feminine]
about Immigration ? O r about a differen t
topic?”)
In stead of cor rectin g Mich ael, Fran k simply
mod-eled th e cor rect use of th e German word for Web
page ( “Internet-Seite”) Mich ael immediately
picked up on th is in put an d used th e word
cor-rectly—with th e cor rect gen der!—from th is poin t
on Even th ough Mich ael, Fran k, an d Lin da un
-derstood each oth er in th is discussion , Mich ael
still sign aled h is in terest in improvin g h is Ger man
skills an d th us improvin g h is ch an ces of bein g
un derstood better in th e future It was obvious
h ow much th e studen ts in th is group liked on e
an oth er an d h ow th ey tr usted th eir partn ers to
treat th em with respect an d empath y In th is way,
peer teach in g actually in creased th e studen ts’
self-con fiden ce in usin g th e lan guage Because all
American studen ts were learn ers of th e FL as well
as teach ers of th eir n ative lan guage, th ey n ot on ly
felt safe to make mistakes but th ey also gain ed
self-con fiden ce in th e kn owledge th at th ey h ad
someth in g to teach th eir partn ers in Ger man y
Alth ough th e En glish of th e studen ts from th e
Un iversity of Mün ster was more advan ced th an
th e Ger man of th e studen ts from Vassar College,
th e American studen ts did cor rect th eir German partn ers an d th ey did feel th at th ey h ad
some-th in g to offer to some-th e studen ts in German y
If studen ts usin g a MO O assume th ese two roles previously h eld by th e teach er —on th e on e
h an d settin g learn in g goals an d str ucturin g class discussion s, wh ile on th e oth er cor rectin g mis-takes an d represen tin g th e target lan guage an d culture—th en clearly th e role of th e in str uctor must ch an ge radically Th us, th e in troduction of tech n ology ch allen ges teach ers to develop n ew pedagogical approach es as much as it promises deeper studen t lan guage learn in g Blake ( 1998) suggests th at empowerin g studen ts “to commun i-cate with oth er studen ts an d teach ers from oth er
in stitution s in th e Un ited States an d abroad” n e-cessitates th at teach ers “sur ren der th eir sover-eign ty over th e direction of th e classroom” an d
“embrace a n ew social in frastr ucture” ( p 232) Rath er th an ser vin g as th e fin al arbiter of wh at
h as to be learn ed, th e teach er becomes “facilita-tor” an d “guide” ( Beauvois, 1992) in th e common project of explorin g th e FL
O f course, th e respon sibility th at teach ers turn over to studen ts does n ot dimin ish th eir role in
th e classroom, let alon e make th em super fluous Rath er th an person ally directin g all activities in
th e classroom, teach ers usin g th e MO O n eed to facilitate studen t learn in g in th ree primar y ways First, teach ers n eed to design mean in gful stu-den cen tered activities with explicit con ten t-based goals Because we n o lon ger relied on a textbook to organ ize classroom activities, prepa-ration s for th e course in volved iden tifyin g topics, locatin g pertin en t readin gs, developin g discus-sion question s ( wh ich we posted in th e MO O ) , guidin g studen ts th rough th e features of th e
MO O , an d supplemen tin g work in th e MO O with class session s devoted to oral practice
Sec-on d, teach ers n eed to h elp studen ts become auton omous learn ers by lettin g th em defin e
th eir in dividual learn in g goals an d an alyze th eir own progress, sin ce, as Little ( 1991) emph asizes,
“auton omy is likely to be h ard-won an d its
perma-n eperma-n ce caperma-n perma-n ot be guaraperma-n teed” ( p 4) We met with studen ts on ce each week outside th e MO O
to sh ow th em, for in stan ce, h ow to go back
th rough th eir logs to iden tify er rors an d use th e cor rect modelin g don e by th eir n ative-speaker partn ers, h ow to iden tify grammar exercises for
th eir own practice, an d h ow to learn th e vocabu-lar y th ey n eeded for th eir projects Th e results of
th ese activities for med th e basis of th eir learn in g portfolios, wh ich also in cluded prin touts of all
Trang 9th eir work in th e MO O Th ird, in str uctors n eed
to respon d regularly to th e studen ts’ on goin g
portfolios as well as to th eir efforts in th e MO O ,
because studen ts require coun selin g an d
feed-back from in str uctors in order to be effective
peer teach ers ( Brammerts, 1996) In th e en d, th e
effective in tegration of MO O s in to th e lan guage
learn in g cur riculum does n ot mean turn in g
stu-den ts loose simply to “ch at.” O n th e con trar y, th e
un str uctured exercises in early experimen ts
us-in g th e MO O to teach ESL ( Pus-in to, 1996) can
leave studen ts feelin g bored or con flicted about
its ben efits for th eir lan guage learn in g—even
wh en con versin g with n ative speakers
Individualized Learning
An importan t facet of th e MO O is its poten tial
for in dividualized learn in g By h avin g studen ts
work togeth er in th e MO O , all studen ts write an d
speak at th e level th ey are capable of wh ile still
participatin g fully in th e collaborative learn in g
projects takin g sh ape th ere As th e two examples
above illustrate, th e MO O en ables multiple an d
flexible commun ication levels th at can be
tai-lored to each studen t’s n eeds th rough n
egotia-tion with h is or h er partn er Moreover, th e
prac-tice of h avin g studen ts main tain logs of th eir
work in th e MO O allowed slower learn ers to
“re-peat” th e con versation at a later date to study th e
vocabular y an d syn tax th at h ad given th em
prob-lems th e first time aroun d Th is mediated str
uc-ture to commun ication in th e MO O is especially
importan t for small lan guage programs like th e
Ger man section at Vassar College, wh ere an in
-str uctor is more likely to h ave a larger ran ge of
studen ts at differen t—sometimes perplexin gly
differen t—skill levels in th e same classroom In a
recen t article, for in stan ce, Tsch irn er ( 1997) calls
such h eterogen eity in lan guage classrooms “th e
biggest problem” after th e persisten t “lack of
time” required to ach ieve our goals as teach ers
an d learn ers ( p 123)
In addition to facilitatin g partn er an d group
work between studen ts at differen t proficien cy
levels, th e MO O an d oth er on lin e, syn ch ron ous
systems lead all studen ts to produce more lan
-guage th an is possible in a tradition al classroom
( Beauvois, 1992; Pin to, 1996) Even in an era of
lan guage teach in g th at values ( or even over
val-ues) oral proficien cy, such lan guage production
is sign ifican t, given th at research by Beauvois
( 1996, 1997) an d Smith ( 1990) suggests th at
writ-ten skills practiced in syn ch ron ous en viron m en ts
may lead to improved oral per forman ce
More-over, alth ough th e logs from th e classroom
ses-sion s documen t in creased lan guage production for all studen ts, th is in crease was even more prevalen t an d n oteworth y for studen ts wh o were eith er sh y, afraid of makin g mistakes, or oth er-wise un able to per form equally well in all
differ-en t skill areas Wh ile a tradition al classroom set-tin g migh t easily discourage th ese kin ds of studen ts from participatin g fully in a class discus-sion , th e more mediated for m of oral commun i-cation creates a less-pressured atmosph ere by al-lowin g studen ts to con sider th eir words before pressin g en ter O n e of th e American studen ts, for example, a sh y but talen ted per fection ist wh o would n ot participate in a discussion un less sh e was absolutely certain th at wh at sh e wan ted to say was free of all grammatical mistakes, gave at th e
en d of th e semester th e followin g evaluation of
h er learn in g in th e MO O : “I th in k I pick up on mistakes wh en I’m speakin g an d tr y to correct
th em, but th is is, of course, easier in th e MO O because th e text is righ t in fron t of us I th in k I’ve also been a little more experimen tal with th e lan guage, usin g a word th at I’m n ot completely sure of or makin g a Ger man word out of an
En glish on e an d th en askin g my MO O -mates if I did use th e word cor rectly.” Th ough workin g in
th e MO O did n ot n ecessarily lead h er to ch an ge
h er approach dramatically, it did h elp h er to par-ticipate more fully in class by givin g h er more con trol, an d teach in g h er to rely on h er partn ers for assistan ce O f course, th e MO O does n ot on ly facilitate more direct participation —in th e for m
of discussion —with oth er class members or n ative speakers As a space for producin g culture an d
n on -syn ch ron ous documen ts ( i.e., room description s) th at are th en in tegrated back in to th e syn
-ch ron ous en viron men t, th e MO O also offers FL learn ers a variety of participator y an d expressive option s n ot available in IRCs an d oth er ch at rooms Not on ly is th e MO O , as a gen eral space,
h ospitable to a wide variety of in teraction s be-tween studen ts, but th rough person al rooms an d oth er tools, it allows each studen t to tailor h is or
h er learn in g en viron men t to make in dividualized learn in g possible
Importance of Experimentation and Play
Aside from str ucturin g all commun ication as mean in gful in teraction , th e MO O also en cour-ages an elemen t of play an d experimen tation with th e lan guage wh ich triggers studen ts’ crea-tivity, a vital dimen sion of th e lan guage learn in g process Rüsch off ( 1993) , for example, remin ds
us th at “lan guage learn ers n ot on ly n eed ample opportun ity to en gage in commun icative
Trang 10ties but must also be given en ough freedom
to creatively in teract with [ lan guage] in order to
build on th eir men tal kn owledge base” ( p 9)
Like n o oth er medium, th e MO O allows learn ers
to experimen t with an d explore th e lan guage to
wh ich th ey are bein g exposed For in stan ce,
th rough th e use of pseudon yms, th e MO O
pro-vides a wealth of opportun ity for role-play
activi-ties th at can even exten d to con str uctin g th e n
ec-essar y settin g an d props as well as “filmin g” for
playback at a later date But even with out th e
an on ymity of assign ed or freely ch osen n ames in
an organ ized activity, th e MO O ’s more mediated
for m of in teraction —its relian ce on “written
speech ”—makes it also a safe en viron men t for
studen ts to experimen t an d play with n ew lan
-guage str uctures Such a playful an d n on
-pres-sured en viron men t can lower or even elimin ate
affective filters, th us en couragin g learn in g as well
as experimen tation with commun ication
strate-gies ( Beauvois, 1992)
It is possible to fin d coun tless examples of in
-stan ces in th e logs wh ere studen ts began to play
an d experimen t with th e target lan guage: Th ey
tried to be fun n y in th e target lan guage, th ey
displayed an amazin g creativity with th e emote
comman ds, an d th ey explored ways to symp
a-th ize, en courage, an d con vin ce a-th eir partn ers At
th e en d of on e group’s oth er wise productive
ses-sion , on e of th e American studen ts tempted h er
Ger man partn er in to leavin g th e more soph
isti-cated discussion of multicultural iden tities in
Ger man y an d th e Un ited States for some MO O
play in En glish :
Sarah says, “ok—I’ve got a quote we could
discuss ”
Carla says, “let us h ave it”
Carla eats Luigi
Carla an d spits h im out
Luigi doesn ’t taste th at good, really ;)
Luigi n ibbles on Carla’s ear
Luigi says, “I’d like to h ear th e quote too”
Luigi pokes you in th e ribs
Sarah says, “As lon g as th e U.S con tin ues
to emph asize teh [ sic] righ ts of in dividuals
over th ose of groups, we n eed n ot fear th at
teh [ sic] diversity brough t by immigration
will lead to eth n ic division or disun ity”
Carla r un s away
Sarah feels left out of th e action
Luigi comforts Sarah , tellin g h er th at ever
y-th in g will be allrigh t [ sic]
Sarah won ders “wh at about my ears?”
Luigi n ibbles on Sarah ’s ear too
Sarah expresses gratitude
Even in situation s wh ere studen ts on ly seemed to
be silly an d n ot ver y focused on th e task at h an d,
th ey displayed a tremen dous ran ge of commun i-cation strategies In terms of solicitin g spon tan e-ous an d un selfcon scie-ous use of lan guage, playin g
an d experimen tin g with lan guage is probably th e most obvious an d on e of th e most productive learn in g strategies th at th e MO O en courages Yet playin g is also a mean s for studen ts to develop
an d to affir m th eir mean in g with in th e
commu-n ity th ey h ave establish ed icommu-n th e MO O Th ough Sarah in itially felt left out of th e play between Carla an d Luigi, Luigi brough t h er in to th e game
an d afforded h er th e same kin d of affection h e
h ad sh own Carla Th us, play also en courages stu-den ts to build th e kin d of bon ds with each oth er
th at make th e MO O such a safe place for experi-men tin g with lan guage
Students as Researchers: The Intellectual Dimension
As several of th e studen t examples illustrate,
n ot on ly did th e target lan guage ser ve as th e medium of auth en tic con versation al exch an ges
in th e MO O course, but it also for med th e in tel-lectual focus of th e class an d project work In addition to th e usual expectation of an in terme-diate class th at studen ts become better “users” of
a lan guage, a con ten t-based approach to our work in th e MO O also asks studen ts to become research ers of th eir target lan guage an d its cul-ture With th is pron oun ced focus on culture in
th e lan guage classroom we join lan guage learn
-in g th eorists such as Kramsch ( 1993) , wh o -in sist
th at lan guage—as on e of th e ver y str uctures of culture—can n ot be learn ed in isolation from its cultural uses Kramsch explain s th at:
Culture in lan guage learn in g is n ot an expen dable fifth skill, tacked on , so to speak, to th e teach in g of speakin g, listen in g, readin g, an d writin g It is always
in the backgroun d, righ t from day on e, ready to un -settle the good lan guage learn ers wh en they expect it least, makin g eviden t the limitation s of their h ard-won commun icative competen ce, ch allen gin g th eir ability to make sen se of th e world aroun d them ( p 1)
In th e first h alf of th e course, studen ts from Vas-sar College used th eir own lan guage production
in th e MO O —for example, th e room descrip-tion s an d th eir self-descripdescrip-tion s—as a site for combin ed cultural an d lin guistic an alysis Wh ile
th ese activities durin g Ph ase 1 were design ed to lead to such an alyses, th e project work th at stu-den ts completed with th eir n ative-speaker
part-n ers duripart-n g Ph ase 2 facilitated potepart-n tially evepart-n