“Computer Means/Changes My Life”:
ESL Students and
Computer-mediated Technology
[PDF version]

Huihong Bao
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
U. S. A.

Overview
Literature Review
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Theorizing
Implications
References
Author’s  Biographical Sketch
Citing This Source in APA Style

Overview

The vast development of technology has changed the world in many aspects. Technology has helped improve teaching and learning in school in many ways. Yet the use of technology by ESL (English as a Second Language) students in the U. S. public schools has not been explored in depth. It is assumed that the use of technology—such as the use of Internet, Email, MSN, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Excess, and Excel—helps ESL students improve their L2 (English) literacy skills, shape their identity construction, and broaden their intercultural communication. I have questioned how much help ESL students can get from using computer-mediated technology, how their identity is constructed and reconstructed, how their L2 literacy levels are improved, and how their intercultural communicative skills are enhanced in reality.  In this study, I will focus mainly on exploring how ESL students use the Internet to develop their L2 literacy skills through their computer use and online intercultural communication.

The two consultants¹ in this study are both ESL students from Mainland China. The male consultant (C1) immigrated to the U. S. A. as a junior high school student in 2000. His frustration at being unable to understand English, particularly spoken English, was soon recognized by his school, and I was assigned as a bilingual tutor to help him with English and the U.S. school discourse in math, physics, and even keyboarding classes. He received ESL instruction five times a week together with students from other countries and was at the same LEP (Limited English Proficiency) level as the majority of ESL students. He often skipped lunch and went to the school library to read news from his home country on the Internet. He visited web sites written in Chinese because of his LEP level. Now he is a sophomore in a state university while serving in the U. S. army.  He spent some time in Iraq. The female consultant (C2) came to the U.S. in September, 2004. She had not graduated from a Chinese high school when she was accepted into an undergraduate program at a U.S. college that offered her some financial support. Thus, she came to the U.S. on a student visa.

Born and raised in China, these two students came to know each other uniquely through Internet in December, 2004. Both were interested in using the Internet as a tool to get to know other people, get news about the world, exchange ideas, and discuss political issues with other people. As a result of their frequent communication through MSN on the Internet, they got to know each other well and became close friends, and eventually fell in love. Internet communication brings them together. The Internet has served as “a new-age go-between” (C2) for these two students.

Literature Review

On Literacy Development

In the past, literacy development in an individual’s L1 (first language) has been studied extensively.  However, L2 (second language) literacy development has been less researched and published (Papai, 2000). Prior research suggests that the development of reading and writing skills are alike for native and non-native English speakers (Goodman & Goodman, 1978). In reading and writing, learners use their increasing English language abilities, their knowledge about the world, and their understanding of print conventions to understand and create written texts (Peregoy & Boyle, 1997, p. 32).  As literacy is developing, both native English speakers and ESL students need to learn the alphabet; how letters form words, sentences, and paragraphs, which are organized into stories, essays, and reports (Goldman & Trueba, 1987, p. 112).

Literacy is conventionally defined as “the ability to read and write.”  The new definition of literacy has added a social dimension (Gee, 1994; McKay, 1996; Street, 1984). Gee (1994) claims that literacy cannot be divorced from a cultural context. In the school, a cultural institution, academic literacy facilitates the transmission of norms, values, and beliefs of the specific discourse community in which it is rooted. Gee’s idea suggests that ESL students’ L2 literacy results in their becoming literate not only in English, but also in US cultural norms and values and in the US school discourse.

Despite some similarities, differences occur in the acquisition of literacy skills in L1 and L2. A student’s ability to read and write in his or her L1 affects L2 literacy development (Peregoy and Boyle, 1997). Strong L1 literacy and education are significant factors in L2 literacy development because literacy skills can be transferred from a native language and applied to L2 literacy (Cummins, 1981). The stronger ESL students’ L1 literacy skills are, the more transferable skills they possess that aid in L2 literacy skills. Krashen (1982) suggested that an L2 can be acquired more successfully when the focus of instruction is on the meaning rather than only on the linguistic forms of the L2. Doughty and Varela (1998) similarly argued that acquisition of language skills can be maximized when there is a focus especially on linguistic forms integrated within meaningful activities. This supports the idea that ESL students will be most successful in learning when there is a meaningful use of the language through academic content, with attention to language forms, which is what is termed as content-based instruction (Crandall, 1994).

On L2 Literacy and Intercultural Communication  

Globalization has widened the need for intercultural communication and collaboration, and the Internet, as a computer-mediated technology tool, has built a bridge for people of diverse cultures to communicate with each other for various purposes. Wang (2001) proposes that the Internet network has provided the possibility of erasing geographic and interpersonal boundaries among people of diverse background in the world, created opportunities for widespread electronic delivery of news, information, and curriculum, and altered the way we communicate, share knowledge, deliver education, and conduct business. Wang’s research suggests that to integrate technology into instruction and learning, it is essential to focus on human needs, strategies, perceptions, and experiences communicating and collaborating in the cyber-learning environment rather than solely on the functionality of technological tools.

Hanna and de Nooy’s (2003) research about language students’ Internet use for intercultural communication found that electronic discussion inflects and “is inflected by cultural and generic expectations” (p. 71). Their research suggests that successful participation in Internet fora depends on awareness of such cultural and generic mores and an ability to work within and/or with them. Scollon and Scollon (2004) conducted a nexus analysis on their own experiences of pioneering computer-mediated communication in Alaska in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. They suggested that the nexus analysis connects the key elements of social action together: i.e., it links people, places, discourses, and objects. This suggests that computer-mediated technology provides more chances for people to conduct intercultural communication, to relate with each other through their ways of talk, and to bring their cultural traits into a new web-based intercultural discourse. ESL students, equipped with electronic media, are increasingly connected with the cultural expression of various groups of native and non-native speakers of English around the world (Lam, 2000; Warschauer, 1998).

Data Collection

The data of this study were collected from three structured phenomenological interviews (Seidman, 1991) that centered on exploring the lived experiences of my two consultants in the historical context of their using computer-mediated technology, showing how the Internet appeared in their life and has been connected to their life and how their ways of living have been reconstructed and changed through the use of the Internet. Three 90-minute in-depth interviews were conducted with each consultant. Detailed consent letters were sent out to them, and signed consent forms were returned before the first interviews. In the first interview, I asked each consultant to talk about their life experience prior to the time when they learned to use computer-mediated tools in their daily life and study. In other words, I asked them to tell me about themselves as much as possible up to the time they began to learn to use computer-mediated tools in their life. In the second interview, I asked them to describe their experiences using computer-mediated tools, what it was like for them to be able to use computer-mediated technology. They could tell me anything related to their use of computer-mediated tools: for example, how often, where, when, and for what purposes they were using computer-mediated tools, including their frustrations in managing these tools if they had any and the enjoyment they got out of using these tools. In the third interview, I asked them to reflect on the meaning of using computer-mediated technology. What did computer-mediated tools mean to them? How did they make meaning of using computer-mediated tools? Did their use of computers make great differences in their life? If yes, in what ways? Did the use of computers make them think they had changed a lot? Could they provide some examples? They could tell me anything related with their computer use that made impact on their life.

Data Analysis

Data analysis in this study was based on grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) that was originally developed by two sociologists, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss (1967), who came from a different philosophical and research tradition. Grounded theory is a theory derived from data, systematically gathered and analyzed through the research process, in which data collection, analysis and eventual theory stand in close relationship to one another. In this study I started with a research question and conducted in-depth interviews and generated some elements of theory from the findings emerged from the data.

First, I did the data transcription and translation when the consultants used L1 or code-switched from L2 (English) to L1 (Chinese) in the interview and marked my translation in italics. Then I followed Strauss and Corbin’s steps of data analysis in grounded theory to analyze the data. I microscopically coded two paragraphs of my first interviews (one from C1 and one from C2) by raising questions about each word, phrase, clause, sentence, and some non-verbal communication cues, and worked with data to adequately address my research question. Later I used open coding, axial coding, and selective coding alternatively and jointly to search for some categories, properties, and dimensions in the data and worked out some diagrams that show the interrelations between these categories, properties, and dimensions. I used memos to keep records of my analyses varying in type and form. I used A-B storylines in which “A” represents my data set without specifically mentioning of my categories while “B” rewrites the storyline incorporating all of my categories and properties. I used comparative analysis to work out the similarities and differences between the two consultants’ computer-mediated technology use in their lives.

Theorizing

“Computer means/changes my life”

Both the ESL students perceive computer-mediated technology as extremely vital in their lives. C1 said, “Computer means my life” (first interview with C1, March 28, 2005) and C2 summarized her life with computers as “Computer changes my life” (third interview with C2, April 20, 2005).  Computers play a significant role in their lives.

Strong L1 literacy contributes a lot to L2 literacy because of knowledge transfer

Both C1 and C2 have strong L1 skills in reading. C1 has a wide knowledge of Chinese classic works, and he considers his reading speed “super fast” (C1, interview 3, April 15, 2005). He had an astonishing memory, remembering the classic works he read and even detecting a missing paragraph easily. The female student began her unique L1 literacy when she was only one year old. She claimed that she could recognize several thousand Chinese characters at a very young age. She is good at imitating intonations and acquiring different accents, which contributes to her quick acquisition of “college-like-accent” (she uses the filler word, “like,” a lot) in her L2 literacy. Their strong L1 skills contribute a lot to their L2 literacy because the knowledge acquired in L1 can be easily transferred to L2 literacy (Cummins, 1981).

The use of the Internet helps ESL students acquire some online expressions but their L2 literacy development varies

In terms of their L2 development through online intercultural communication, C1 and C2 have different experiences.  C1 did not think that online intercultural communication activities helped him improve his grammar in L2, but he thought that he had acquired some unique lexical expressions used by online communicators. “My English literacy skills didn’t get improved much because Internet is just a way through which we don’t say what we want to say, but we type what we want to say. So if I type in wrong grammar, no one cares. I can guess from up and down. I can just guess what the people are going to talk about. If I am wrong in grammar or diction, no one points it out to me. However, through Internet communication, I adopted some kind of English, but it’s not like typical writing or literary English. It’s more like adopting a way of what people online would use. For example, I learned that BRB meant ‘Be right back’, TTYL stood for ‘Talk to you later’, and ROL ‘Rolling on floor’ which meant laughing, LOL ‘Laugh Out Loud’, RUZ ‘Are You There?’” (Last interview with C1, April, 2005)

Frequent Internet use has helped C2 with her oral English, improved her English reading comprehension, enlarged her English vocabulary, and improved her English writing as well. C2 searched information about US colleges in the Internet, did all her applications online, and was accepted by a college providing her some financial aid. Her oral English was improved quickly through some interviews: for example, MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) required of international students for college entrance, all of which was conducted through the Internet. She often uses the Internet to communicate with other people either intraculturally or interculturally. She reads extensively online as she claimed, “I did everything on-line” and “Internet has changed a lot of my life”. 

Frequent use of computers promotes intercultural communication, enlarges friends’ circles, helps participants realize “American Dream,” and helps find potential life partners

Both C1 and C2 use computers frequently for acquiring information and socializing. C1 uses computers “full time, 8 hours per day” for “all kinds of purposes” as he himself declared (interview with CI, April 1, 2005). He makes friends cross-culturally. He gets to know other people’s perspectives as to which candidate they prefer to vote for because he thinks it is good to know other people’s perspectives. C2 used computer to realize her “American Dream.” She researched about US colleges in the Internet, submitted her applications online, and was accepted to a college that provided her with some financial aid. She uses the Internet to keep interacting with her old friends in China and to make new friends in the U.S.A. She found a boyfriend after having searched through descriptions of 300 men in 35 pages in the BBS web site ².  She and her boyfriend use the Internet to date. She humorously calls the Internet “a new-age go-between” (interview with C2, April 1, 2005). Both C1 and C2 use the Internet to acquire information, such as getting a recipe for making cocktails, and even to do shopping. “Electronic literacies can be either empowering or stultifying; people will use the Internet for everything from creative construction of knowledge to passive reception of a multimedia glitz. Whether users fall on one end of this continuum or the other is likely to be highly influenced by class, race, gender, and country, but highly influenced does not mean completely determined” (Warschauer, 1999, p. 21). The ESL students’ frequent computer use for various purposes are empowering to them but not stultifying.

Implications

This research presents several challenges to ESL and other language educators:

1.      Computer literacy, L1 literacy, and L2 literacy are interrelated. The “chain reaction” challenges ESL and other language teachers to integrate the development of multiple literacies into curriculum design for language students.

2.      Meaningful and purposeful intercultural communication enriches ESL students’ lives. It is a challenge for language teachers to help their students get appropriate cultural meaning when conducting web-based intercultural communication.

3.      Language teachers can empower, not stultify, their students in using computer-mediated technology for multiple purposes. This is another challenge that the teachers should consider when integrating computer-mediated technology into their curriculum design.

4.      Language teachers can integrate cultural analysis into their web-based curriculum design to help students discover, interpret, and translate cultural meanings to understand the appropriate language of different target groups.

Endnotes

1.      I chose to use the word “consultants,” instead of “participants,” “informants,” or “interviewees,” because they gave me many wonderful ideas and taught me many things that I did not know during the interview process and the other terms are not as empowering as the word “consultants.” My participants did feel empowered to be addressed as “consultants.”

2.      BBS refers to a website (http://www.mitbbs.com), written in Mandarin Chinese, in which a section (sub-web) called “Anonymous friends-making” (http://www.jiaoyou8.com/unknown-friends) is nestled.  This socialization web was created in October, 2003, in Boston. Now it has become the biggest friends-making web for Chinese all over the world. More than 100,000 users in Mainland China, USA, Australia, Germany, Britain, Hong Kong, Japan, etc. have registered to use this web. The main purpose is for its users to search for their soul-mates. It claims that it has bridged the communication between people in Mainland China and oversea Chinese and it has set up a platform for Chinese people all over the world to make friends.

References

Crandall, J. (1994). Content-centered Language Learning. ERIC Digest, January,1994. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Washington, D.C.

Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 3-49). Los Angeles, CA: California State University.

Doughty, C. & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). New York: Cambridge University.

Gee, J. (1994). Orality and literacy: From the savage mind to ways with words. In J. Maybin (Ed.), Language and literacy in social practice (pp. 168-192).  Clevedon, UK: The Open University.

Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Goodman, K. & Goodman, Y. (1978). Reading of American children whose language is a stable rural dialect of English or a language other than English (Final Report No. C-003-0087). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.

Goldman, S. & Trueba, H. (1987). Becoming literate in English as a second language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Hanna, B. E. & de Nooy, J. (2003). A funny thing happened on the way to the forum: Electronic discussion and foreign language learning. Language Learning &Technology, 7(1), 71-85.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

Lam, Wan Shun Eva. (2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 457-482.

McKay, S. (1996). Literacy and illiteracies. In N. Hornberger & S. McKay (Eds.),Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 421-445). New York: Cambridge University.

Papai, N. D. (2000). Literacy development through content based instruction: A case study. Working Paper in Educational Linguistics.16(2), 81-95.

Peregoy, S. & Boyle, O. (1997). Reading, writing, & learning in ESL (2^nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Scollon, R & Scollon, S. W. (2004). Nexus analysis: Discourse and the emerging internet. New York: Routledge.

Seidman, I. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative Research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Wang, C. Y. J. (2001). Handshakes in cyberspace: Bridging the cultural differences through effective intercultural communication and collaboration. In Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development [and] Practice Papers Presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Atlanta, GA, November 8-12, 2001.

Warschauer, M. & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching. Retrieved April 25, 2006 from http://acadweb.snhu.edu/riabov_lyra/Lyra_Web/W_2_MW_ Computers and Language Learning An Overview.htm

Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies: Language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ms. Huihong Bao, a doctoral student in UMass, came from China. Her research interest focuses on L2 acquisition/learning and teaching, power relations between ESL/ELL students and teachers, computer-mediated instruction, intercultural communication, and autoethnography. (Contact this author at hhbao@psych.umass.edu; contact the editors of EMME at emme@eastern.edu.)

Recommended Citation in the APA Style:

Bao, H. (2006). “Computer Means/Changes My Life”: ESL students and computer-mediated technology. Electronic Magazine of Multicultural Education, 8(1). Retrieved your access month date, year, from http://www.eastern.edu/publications/emme/2006spring/bao.pdf

 (Please note that in order to comply with APA style citations of online documents regarding page numbers, only the PDF versions of EMME article, which are paginated, should be cited.)