SNSs potential for FL pedagogy

McBride, K. (2009), Social-Networking Sites in Foreign Language Classes: Opportunities for Re-creation. In L. Lomicka & G. Lord (Eds.) In The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp.35-58). San Marcos, TX: CALICO

Summary:

SNSs potential for FL pedagogy: ‘self-authorship’ development

In this theory-driven chapter, McBride reviews the potential of Social Network Sites (SNS) for second language (L2) pedagogy as ideally posed to develop two crucial aspects of L2 learners’ interactional skills: the pragmatic knowledge and ability to participate in today’s most significant space of social interaction—the Internet—and the intellectual autonomy and critical awareness to pursue learning beyond contexts of formal instruction. Such potential rests on the emerging view, among literacy scholars, of Web 2.0 technologies—of which SNSs are crucial exemplars—as promoting values of information dispersion (as opposed to scarcity) and participation (as opposed to information consumption) and therefore affording fundamentally new literacy and social practices anchored in new modes of authorship, meaning and identity construction.

SNSs are not only described as integral to the lives, learning styles and peculiar thought patterns of “neo-millenial”, “net-generation’ or ‘digital natives’ students, but, similarly to meaningful L2 learning contexts,  also fundamentally organized around the features of self-expression, social interaction and the ‘performance of identities’. This in itself justifies exploring their use in L2 pedagogy. In particular, McBride invites us to value the potential of SNSs as spaces where “users “write themselves into being” through their personal profiles”(38) and notice the contribution of this technology to learners’ practice of “self-authorship”—or “the writing/remixing [of] the self through the manipulation of text and media”(40). She compels us to understand this concept dually: not only from an expressive perspective furthering a pragmatically appropriate literacy development but also as the development of critical awareness skills which will prompt learners into an exploration of the views and worlds of themselves and others. Practice of “self-authorship may lead to self-authorship”(42)—or intellectual autonomy—in the design of learners’ own meanings and understandings of their and others’ contexts of practice and interaction.

Difficulties

But the use of SNS technologies for promoting such skills in L2 learners is not without obstacles, often restricting the achievement of both of McBride’s pragmatic competence and critical awareness goals. A first set o difficulties is derived from the limited critical approach to media often common among younger users’ of SNSs. Of particular concern is their scarce awareness of the difference between public and private social practice as well as of the social consequences of their casual attitude to such difference. Another concern is the common narcissistic mode of participating and using SNS, which is likely to hinder critically aware forms of social interaction. The medium itself also imposes certain obstacles to meaningful L2 and literacy skill development. First, the level of L2 pragmatic skills required for full participation in non-class based SNS is generally high. Second, intrinsic social character of the medium will naturally create in and out-groups, potentially leading to the alienation of certain learners from the classroom community and, worse, from L2 learning in general. Third, the prominence of physical social markers as crucial resources for the ‘writing of self’ in SNSs, makes their users much more vulnerable to social discrimination than other CMC technologies, like instant messaging, for example. Finally, the widespread use of SNSs in out-of-school settings may render its mandatory use for instruction forced and inauthentic. Now, the medium is also said to involve important difficulties for teachers who may resist it out of lack of familiarity with sheer technology or, if they are younger and technologically-acculturated, with the proper ways of using SNSs for pedagogical purposes. Other issues teachers need to deal with are getting native or advanced L2 users involved in SMSs set up for class purposes and devising productive and manageable ways of grading work through this medium.

SNS uses in the FL class

Before advocating for specific SNS projects in the FL classroom, McBride reviews general best practices in leveraging the potential of SNSs for FL pedagogy along three crucial aspects: the way to use SNSs; teachers’ role while using them; selection of SNS type. First of all, the use of SNSs should be clearly and explicitly aligned with learning goals. Single pairing of SNS use with certain topics (cultural, as opposed to personal experience and identity) and languages (L1, as opposed to L2) should also be avoided. Medium, topic and language configurations should not be fixed. Secondly, teachers should not retrieve to the side but offer “substantial guidance” in preparing students for critical exchanges. This can be done through a reflective exploration of own identities and beliefs and the anticipation of upcoming projects and interaction problems. Thirdly, the choice of SNS types should consider their appropriateness in terms of the kind of advertisements they feature, the availability of L2 interfaces and students’ disposition to deal with membership in multiple SNSs at one time.

SNSs have mostly been used as “online points of coordination”(47) around several classes or common academic interests (like learning a specific L2). McBride advocates instead for “comfortable first step”(48) task-based uses recurring only once or a couple times during an entire course. A first project is the creation of personal (real or alternative) profiles within networks limited to the class. Organized around several brief assignments on self-description and a few visits and interactions, these uses are seen as particularly suitable for beginner levels as well as for intercultural reflective practice in the case of assumed identity profiles of imaginary L2 users. Secondly, group profiles of a single imaginary L2 character are projects which have the advantage of requiring negotiation for meaning and the use of metalanguage in order to collectively enact the lives of the created characters. A more systematic global simulation approach along the UA-Cercll experiences recorded in Dupuy 2006 and Waugh et al 2008 may thus allow for only occasional online exchanges or for more extended task-based experiential learning. Other projects proposed by McBride include image or video searches and postings on media sites like Flickr and Youtube. Through their image description features, these offer some potential for vocabulary development and even cultural learning through the study of associations between image or video and geographical groups or people’s profiles, when available. Finally a last option includes organizing the creation of profiles around themes, events, social associations or other cultural phenomena. Activity design should always consider grading and the inclusion of reflection on participation in the SNSs.

Comments:

McBride makes an excellent case for the affordances of SNSs for FL learning based on the significance of SNS in the lives of today’s learners as well as on how this Internet-based medium encapsulates crucial aspects of meaningful FL learning: self expression, social interaction and the exploration of identities. Most importantly, in my view, her understanding of language competence development is not restricted to mere linguistic ability but includes reflective practice and thus accounts for a literacy and reflection-based view of communicative and intercultural competence. An other strength of her review lays in providing concrete examples of activities to carry out in the FL classroom. I particularly liked her idea of restricting the scope of activity designs and ensuring the alignment of CMC-based activities with overall learning goals and teaching philosophies. “If done well”(51), she argues in her conclusion, SNS-based FL instruction will not only develop L2 proficiencies but also general intellectual development. I take “well” to mean ensuring enough critical awareness on meanings drawn from and made in SNS interactions as well as instructors’ close attention to how students diversely experience and signify those interactions. To these two quality requirements I might add instructors’ responsibility in guiding students to understand the social and semiotic links between the specific social and linguistic practices around SNS as a media and textual genre. Becoming aware that SNSs involve highly linguistic practices worth understanding and learning to use in an L2 might go a long way in improving their FL literacy skills as well as their interest in the medium as a relevant FL learning tool.