Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language

Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education (JIRE)
Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2015, pp. 1–15
ISSN 2232-0180
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning
in the Malaysian Context
Khong Hou Keat
Universiti Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
© The Author(s) 2015. This article is published with open access by Taylor’s Press.
Abstract
Technology has led to significant transformations in numerous aspects of the knowledge
society we live in. It is therefore important for today’s teachers to prepare and adapt
themselves adequately to the new educational setting as educational technology gains
greater importance in the pedagogical landscape. This paper is intended to provide an
introduction to the thriving Web 2.0 that can be used to great effect in language teaching
and learning, especially in the context of foreign language. The concept and strengths of
Web 2.0 in facilitating Spanish language learning among technical students are discussed
with relevant learning theories, competencies, and the evolving roles of teachers and
students. Two contextual practices using Web 2.0 are examined and their applications to
language pedagogy are elucidated along with the related instructional praxis. The case
made is Web 2.0 affords an ideal opportunity to increase student engagement within and
beyond the classroom. Limitations of incorporating Web 2.0 as a language support are
also presented. The paper concludes that language teachers in higher learning institutions
should embrace and make the best of the available technologies to achieve the desired
pedagogical goals.
Key words: Web 2.0, educational technology, Spanish language teaching and learning,
technical education
INTRODUCTION
To date, technology has significantly permeated almost every corner of the living space,
and education is no exception. We are currently witnessing the profound paradigm shift
in second language education (Jacobs & Farrell, 2001) as well as a rapid and exponential
upsurge in educational technology (Morcillo Herrera, Ivars Ferrer & García Pérez, 2009).
This has led to immense transformations in numerous aspects of the knowledge society
we live in, namely computer-assisted language learning (CALL), e-learning, and virtual
learning environment (VLE), among others. Information and communication technology
*Corresponding author: Khong Hou Keat
Email: [email protected]
JIRE is a publication of the Centre for Research in Education & Instructional
Technologies, School of Education, Taylor’s University Sdn Bhd
1
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
(ICT) has diffused in a multidirectional manner into classroom routines, including
language classrooms (Garrett, 2009; González García, 2011). This phenomenon is
evidently fuelled by the fundamental attributes of ICT which underpin many constituent
changes of the new paradigm asserted by Jacobs and Farrell (2001). These changes
comprise learner autonomy, cooperative and interactive learning, attention to diversity,
attention to meaning, and thinking skills.
This paper aims to assess one of the leading technological concepts, Web 2.0, and its
relevance in facilitating Spanish language learning among Malaysian technical students.
The objective of this paper is to evaluate the concept of Web 2.0 within the context of
language teaching and learning (LTL) comprising second languages (SL) and foreign
languages (FL) domains, and offer some possible practices of this new concept based
on the context of Spanish as a foreign language in a technical university. It is hoped that
language teachers in higher learning institutions would be able to better prepare and
adapt themselves to the new educational setting where educational technology is gaining
greater importance in LTL (Cela, Fuertes, Alonso & Sánchez, 2010).
THE CONCEPT OF WEB 2.0
Coined by Dale Dougherty, co-founder of O’Reilly Media (O’Reilly, 2005), Web 2.0, a
new concept behind the technology crisis that occurred in 2001 (Margaix Arnal, 2007), is
a user-generated platform where information is fed into a virtual learning community by
means of Internet technologies (Verdier, 2009). Among the various attempts to establish
its definition, O’Reilly (2005) defined Web 2.0 as made of people and conserves the
“seven constitutive principles”, which Web 1.0 could not deliver (Hernández Santos,
2013, p. 5).
These principles include:
• the World Wide Web as a working platform: users can work collaboratively instead
of just sharing documents.
• harnessing collective intelligence: active user participation through open access
will lead to the creation of the intelligent web.
• database management as a basic competence: users will learn how to manage the
massive amounts of data.
• end of software release cycle: the dynamic information transforms software into
a service that keeps the available data up-to-date and relevant; this increases the
accuracy of information on the web.
• lightweight programming models: these simpler alternatives reach many more
users to facilitate data collection and hence a more intelligent web.
• software not limited to a single device: this enables a better flow of information,
hence users can use a wider range of devices to access and exchange relevant
information.
• rich user experiences: better web applications by users will lead to enhanced web
usages, therefore the creation of a more intelligent web.
2
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
Hernández Santos (2013) also indicated that the web “has gone from static to dynamic,
and always on the move” (p. 4) thanks to “digital activists” (Herrera Jiménez, 2007, p. 21).
This web version 2.0 that enhances social interaction among highly participatory users
in an authentic context highlights a profound social rather than technological revolution
(O’Reilly, 2005). It is therefore imperative to address the relationships between the
principles of this concept and the general objectives in LTL as a way to gain more insight
into the process of teaching and learning today.
EVALUATION OF WEB 2.0
Multidimensional Empowerment
The web today has become a dynamic and participatory platform based on open, flexible
and user-friendly technologies (Domínguez Fernández & Llorente Cejudo, 2009).
In addition to fostering social interaction through synchronous and/or asynchronous
communication with native or other students of the same SL/FL, Web 2.0 promotes
student participation collectively and more importantly, it is free. In accordance with
the underlying principle of constructivism (Herrera Jiménez, 2007), sharing content on
any website will break student passivity and hence provide them more opportunities to
engage in the target language to induce learning. According to Anderson (2007) and Díaz
Sánchez (2010), the web effect and the power of the crowd are not only able to enhance
student productivity and creativity, but can also narrow the gap between students and
teachers. In this respect, some of the well-known Web 2.0 applications include Blog,
Facebook, Twitter, Skype and Delicious.
Web 2.0 also consolidates collaborative learning among students (García Sans, 2008)
as well as among teachers (Montenegro & Pujol, 2010). Relevant Web 2.0 applications
such as Wikis, Blog, Webquest, YouTube and Flickr provide a virtual space where
participating agents (including students and/or teachers) can access, exchange, select,
filter and share knowledge as well as experiences in real time. Moreover, they learn how
to manage vast amounts of multimedia content together with others regardless of their
spatio-temporal constraints (Area, 2009 as cited in Domínguez Fernández & Llorente
Cejudo, 2009). In other words, Web 2.0 is a horizontal open access social space teeming
with infinite accessible information (Marquès Graells, 2007). It is hence a potential
alternative to the conventional static and unidirectional learning environment to promote
anytime, anywhere experiential and participatory learning for everyone. As Soria Pastor
(2001) implies, we are witnessing the transition of the classroom and it is no longer the
sole setting in LTL.
According to Jee (2011), Web 2.0 facilitates the management and fulfilment of new online
learning activities as well as the creation of social networking, developing student digital
literacy and therefore, empowering their overall competency. Undoubtedly, this also
applies to teachers. With reference to the philosophy of Web 2.0 in the construction of
3
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
knowledge and social learning processes, the diversity of the innovative technologies is
able to accommodate different learning styles found in the classroom (Alvear Saravia &
Mora Pedreros, 2013). In other words, Web 2.0 enables constructive changes in students
down the learning process. Rodríguez Tapia (2006) affirmed that this allows students to
identify and apply different strategies to retrieve information, select learning content,
assess their own difficulties, take responsibility for their own learning, and attempt to
make quick reactive decisions while working cooperatively, which will in turn lead to
learning to learn (Tíscar, 2005). This learner-centred approach is crucial to achieve the
desired learner autonomy that represents one of the axiomatic components of successful
language learning (Ikonen, 2013; Reinders, 2010; Tanyeli & Kuter, 2013).
Web 2.0 and Learning Theories
Sobrino Morrás (2011) indicated that none of the ICT tools can be ascribed unequivocally
to any of the three major learning theories, namely behaviourism, cognitivism and
constructivism. The emergence of Web 2.0 has led to the postulation of a fourth theory
of learning, connectivism, which is considered as a more pertinent version for the digital
age (Siemens, 2005 as cited in Kop & Hill, 2008). However, according to Siemens
(2010), instead of completely eliminating the theories and approaches that have worked
well in the field of learning for centuries, it is more sensible to retain their values and
integrate them judiciously in all possible domains. Siemens (2010) also revealed that the
modern knowledge ecology focuses on the social network and thrives on the diversity of
knowledge afforded collaboratively across different knowledge nodes (spaces, elements,
individuals). To meet the needs of today’s learners, connectivism emphasises the freedom
of choice to navigate multiple knowledge domains as well as to use diverse systems and
tools that are trademarked for their user-friendliness. According to Kop and Hill (2008),
in the connectivist approach, “learning transpires through the use of both the cognitive
and the affective domains; cognition and the emotions both contribute to the learning
process in important ways” (para. 6). In a nutshell, learning is no longer a linear process
but in the form of networking and connecting. It is therefore suggested that the existing
educational structures should be revised in order to meet the needs of pedagogical
innovations in language teaching (Alemi & Daftarifard, 2010), especially in this postdigital era (Siemens, 2010).
General Competences
According to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning,
Teaching, Assessment (CEFR), the main objective of LTL is to enhance the overall
development of students and their general competences in becoming proficient social
agents who are able to act effectively in everyday communicative situations (Mula, 2002).
Mula (2002) also implied that the wide range of possibilities from Web 2.0 provides
varied real-world environments for students in which greater knowledge of the world
and social and communication skills can be developed through their active participation.
Apart from digital competence (Ilomäki, Kantosalo & Lakkala, 2011), Web 2.0 offers the
4
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
possibility to explore various languages and cultures without having to travel physically
(Villalba Varona, 2009), thus promoting positive attitudes towards differences and cultural
understanding (Trujillo Sáez, 2001). Web tools such as blogs (reading and writing) and
podcasts (listening and speaking) foster the development of various linguistic skills
(Villalba Varona, 2009). As a consequence, these tools will help generate a legitimate
interest in learning, and finally transform students into active members of the community
as well as knowledge creators (Castañeda Quintero & Adell Segura, 2011).
Roles of Teachers and Students
While the student is affected by the new perspectives of LTL, the work of teachers has
also undergone a major transformation. Teachers have stopped being a mere transmitter of
knowledge and become a mediator in its construction. In the virtual learning environment,
teachers also play the part of leader, monitor as well as motivator, assuming the seven
roles proposed by Connectivism (2010) in a proactive and self-directed way (Quintana,
2010; Salinas, 2004). This digital evolution demands a new mindset from the teachers.
Besides adapting to the rapid change of new teaching practices using ICT, teachers ought
to embrace new strategies and assess their own practices through constant reflections
(Castañeda Quintero & Adell Segura, 2011). On the other hand, today’s students have
grown to be active members of the Internet community, managing online information
flexibly and autonomously (Salinas, 2004).
Young learners who have been immersed in this atmosphere all their lives are more
predisposed to manipulating the latest technologies. This indirectly raises their awareness
of being able to learn independently and it turns out to be a stepping stone towards learning
autonomy (Chenoll, 2009). Like the students, teachers also can work collaboratively with
other peers and experts, exchanging information and experiences in order to expand their
dominance in Web 2.0.
CONTEXTUAL PRACTICES
Considering the advantages of Web 2.0, this section will share two classroom practices
that involved the application of Web 2.0. These practices were directed to a group of
technical students which consisted of youths and adult beginners, aged 18–23 years. Most
students are male because the university focuses on professional technical programmes.
It is important to note that the students have very few opportunities to practice Spanish
outside the classroom as the Spanish-speaking community in the country is very small. In
addition, the students have never been to any Spanish-speaking country; therefore, they
have very little exposure to fundamental aspects of the Hispanic language and culture.
These practices were carried out in a local technical university where Spanish is a
compulsory subject. In this university, the Spanish course consists of 42 contact hours.
In the context of learning Spanish as a foreign language, the amount of time allocated
is insufficient for an environment that lacks natural exposures to achieve authentic
5
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
communicative competence and socialisation (Manga, 2006). Over a 14-week period,
students were asked to accomplish various linguistic activities to fulfil the maximum
number of hours required. Despite the increased interest in foreign language learning
in the country in recent years (Martínez Vellón, 2006), Spanish remains a rarely-spoken
language with a low level of research and scarce chances of practice.
Among the various tools of Web 2.0, Facebook is the most prominent social network that
completely permeates all cultural communication barriers worldwide. Facebook is able
to draw students together in collaborative learning networks (Selwyn, 2007). It is also
important to note that students today are the key consumers of Web 2.0, especially the
digital natives (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005) who are defined by their high dependence on
the media and their technological multitasking capabilities (Rosen, 2010 as cited in Mills,
2011). Owing to its competitive advantages (Caldevilla Dominguez, 2010; Kabilan,
Ahmad & Zainol Abidin, 2010; Leier, 2011; Mills, 2011; Wu & Hsu, 2011), Facebook
has garnered increasing attention in the realm of the LTL today.
The main objective of this instructional practice was to provide the target group a
conducive platform not only to foster real interactive communication using the target
language, but also to neutralise some potential inhibitions that can hinder learning such
as fear of failure and anxiety in foreign language learning (Pérez-Paredes & MartínezSánchez, 2001; Wesely, 2012). The development of student communicative competence
is paramount in LTL and it usually encompasses four interrelated skills: linguistic,
sociolinguistic, discursive and strategic (Canale, 1983). Hence, a class Facebook was
created to make the Spanish learning more authentic and interesting as well as to engage
students in learning the language outside class time. Below are the communicative goals
guiding the development of the class Facebook.
LINGUISTIC: To activate student prior knowledge regarding the linguistic
features learned such as vocabulary, word and phrase formation, spelling and
semantics.
SOCIOLINGUISTIC: To expose students to various expressions in different
sociological contexts; the adequacy of meaning and appropriateness of the form
for different communicative functions.
DISCURSIVE: To expose students to different grammatical forms and meanings
in spoken or written text in different genres.
STRATEGIC: Students can strategically employ verbal and non-verbal
communication (emoticons) to compensate for communication failures due to
inadequacy in one or more areas of communicative competence.
The other Web 2.0 tool chosen to be incorporated in the instructional practices of Spanish
language was blogging. It is worth noting that blogging offers great potentials in LTL.
Blogging has a natural vocation to be a digital literacy platform and is defined as “the great
6
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
conversation” (Orihuela, 2005 as cited in Herrera Jiménez, 2007, p. 21) across networks.
With the many identifying features of Web 2.0, blogging has adequately responded to the
demand for continuing education and student-centred learning (Tíscar, 2005). As one of
the classroom practices, blogging was used as a collective platform for the target group
in order to awaken their interest in reading and writing. According to Tíscar (2005), the
collective blog not only encourages collaborative endeavours among students but also
reinforces their socialising and dynamic potential, promotes responsibility in terms of
online publications as well as generates a sense of equality between teachers and students.
Blogging, in fact, offers a wide range of learning possibilities in language classrooms
(Herrera Jiménez, 2007). In view of the students’ limited proficiency in Spanish and
the constraints of resources and time, the collective blog was delimited according to the
following intentions:
PRESENTATION: Students introduce themselves in the target language─name,
age, origin, languages spoken, interests and why they want to learn Spanish.
NARRATOR: The blog can be a class diary. Each student will take turns to write
in the diary including what they learned in class, anecdotes that occurred inside
or outside the classroom, and anything that students consider meaningful and
want to share.
TRACKER: Two students will be asked to share two stories from the weekly
press, while another two will comment on two websites that they found helpful
in their Spanish learning.
PRACTICE: The teacher will include practical exercises in the blog to
complement classroom learning, for example, if they are learning tenses,
a collaborative storytelling can be weaved via blogging. The teacher may
commence with the introduction and the students continue the story.
ORGANIZER: To remind the group of the tasks to be done and the work
scheduled.
ASSESSMENT: Both teachers and students hold a common evaluation of the
group blog in class. Personal assessments from students are also welcome.
These two examples show that Facebook and blogging positively encourage a greater
willingness and motivation from the group in the Spanish language learning. In
addition, observations reveal that students learned how to act and relate effectively and
appropriately in virtual communities as such. In short, these practices render positive
learning outcomes in various contexts in which the authentic language immersion is
limited as in ours.
LIMITATION
Web 2.0, in reality, is not without controversy and debate. It is vital to have a clear picture
of the constraints and limitations of Web 2.0 in order not to fall into the misconception
that Web 2.0 is the panacea for all the challenges posed in LTL. Among the limitations of
7
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
Web 2.0 are, access and practical difficulty, excessive digital freedom, lack of control of
data and its quality, electronic security, intellectual property rights, academic dishonesty
and above all, the lack of a reliable body of empirical research literature related to these
limitations.
For certain individuals, access to Web 2.0 can be hindered by technical and logistical
issues (Blazer, 2008), practical problems associated with digital literacy (Yagüe, 2007)
and even by “the technological divide” (Trabaldo, 2004, p. 4). This causes friction for
students, teachers and institutions. Besides, possessing much information does not
necessarily mean being better informed. The web itself does not guarantee learning. On
the contrary, it demands a strong conceptual and technological aptitude from the users.
In addition, technological dependence should also be avoided especially among younger
learners. Amidst the rapid development of technology and exponential growth in the
use of the Internet, digital content including video and audio files, software, graphics,
animations and images can become irrelevant to the learning process without proper
pedagogical manipulation (Yagüe, 2007).
Moreover, parents tend to show a strong resistance towards certain web applications as
the open access nature provokes distrust and a sense of insecurity. The democratisation of
Web 2.0 to boundless web content may trigger possible violations of intellectual property
rights (Alexander, 2006; Anderson, 2007). Web 2.0 has also sparked debates about
the lack of awareness of plagiarism and other academic dishonesty especially among
university students (Egaña, 2012). As a result, more empirical studies are anticipated to
validate the effectiveness of Web 2.0 in the terrain of LTL (Merchant, 2012; Stevenson &
Liu, 2010; Wang & Vásquez, 2012; Yagüe, 2007).
CONCLUSIONS
Student development is a continuous process that can be sustained by various personal
or situational motives. According to Marsh (2012), emergent educational proposals
are inclined towards learner-centricity that emphasises on inclusion, innovation and
integration while promoting competence in rich learning environments. Throughout this
paper, the use and importance of Web 2.0 in the process of LTL today are reflected,
including two contextual practices and the limitations of the concept. As a result, it can be
concluded that language teachers should embrace the advantages of web-based learning
as it has become an important component in the ecology of modern living. However,
it is not practical to let technology be the only factor of success in LTL. As Contreras
Izquierdo (2008) warned, the new technology should only be perceived as another tool in
LTL. Web-based instruction is a powerful tool that teachers could count on to complement
their usual teaching practices. It can also be used as a ubiquitous instrument for students
to interconnect with one another and with the outside world. In sum, Web 2.0 can be an
innovative and interactive resource for language teachers and students.
8
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
However, the use of Web 2.0 does not guarantee that students will automatically be able
to manage their own learning or achieve learner autonomy without being taught how
to manage the information correctly and effectively. In conclusion, the challenges in
incorporating the concept of Web 2.0 into the curriculum would include a sound framework
that synchronises with pedagogical demands and approaches (Rodríguez Tapia, 2006). It
is therefore important that teachers know how to make use of the available web tools such
as Web 2.0 for best practices in the teaching and learning of a foreign language, Spanish
in this instance.
Open Access: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC-BY 4.0) which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
REFERENCES
Alemi, M., & Daftarifard, P. (2010). Pedagogical innovations in language teaching
methodologies. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(6), 765–770.
Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0. A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning.
EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 32–44.
Alvear Saravia, A. E., & Mora Pedreros, P. A. (2013). Herramientas web 2.0 y estilos de
aprendizaje: un aporte a los AVA desde una experiencia investigativa en dos cursos
de filosofía [Web 2.0 tools and learning styles: a contribution to AVA from a research
experience in two philosophy courses]. Revista TRILOGÍA, 8, 77–92.
Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education.
Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf
Blazer, C. (2008). Literature review: Educational technology. Miami, Florida: MiamiDade County Public Schools, Research Services (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 536868)
Caldevilla Domínguez, D. (2010). Las Redes Sociales. Tipología, uso y consumo de
las redes 2.0 en la sociedad digital actual [Social networks. typology, use and
consumption of 2.0 networks in the present digital society]. Documentación de las
Ciencias de la Información, 33, 45–68.
Canale, M. (1983). De la competencia comunicativa a la pedagogía comunicativa del
lenguaje [From communicative competence to communicative pedagogy]. In Llobera
et al. (Eds.), Competencia comunicativa. Documentos básicos en la enseñanza de
lenguas extranjeras (pp. 63–83). Madrid : Edelsa
9
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
Castañeda Quintero, L., & Adell Segura, J. (2011). El desarrollo profesional de los
docentes en entornos personales de aprendizaje (PLE) [Professional development
of teachers in personal learning environments (PLE)]. In Roig Vila, R. y Laneve, C.
(Eds.), La práctica educativa en la Sociedad de la Información: Innovación a través
de la investigación (pp. 83–95). Alcoy: Marfil.
Cela, K., Fuertes, W., Alonso, C., & Sánchez, F. (2010). Evaluación de herramientas
web 2.0, estilos de aprendizaje y su aplicación en el ámbito educativo [Evaluation of
web 2.0 tools, learning styles and their application in education]. Revista Estilos de
Aprendizaje, 5(5). Retrieved from http://www.uned.es/revistaestilosdeaprendizaje/
numero_5/articulos/lsr_5_articulo_8.pdf
Chenoll, A. (2009). Adoptando y adaptando la web 2.0 al alumno. El papel del profesor
en la explotación de la red [Adopting and adapting Web 2.0 to students. The teacher’s
role in the network exploitation]. In A. Barrientos Clavero, J.C. Martín Camacho,
V. Delgado Polo y M.I. Fernández Barjola (Eds.), El profesor de español LE-L2:
Actas del XIX Congreso Internacional de ASELE (pp. 381–394). Cáceres: Servicio
de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Extremadura.
Connectivism. (2010, February 16). Teaching in social and technological networks.
Retrieved from http://www.connectivism.ca/?p=220
Contreras Izquierdo, N. M. (2008). La enseñanza-aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras
y las TICs: el caso del Español como Lengua Extranjera (ELE) [The teaching and
learning of foreign languages and ICT: the case of Spanish as a Foreign Language
(ELE)]. Revista electrónica de la iniciación a la investigación de la Universidad
de Jaén, Número Especial: Innovación Docente UJA 2008. Retrieved from http://
revistaselectronicas.ujaen.es/index.php/ininv/article/view/233/214
Díaz Sánchez, J. (2010). Aprendizaje, Web 2.0 y teoría del caos [Learning, Web 2.0 and
chaos theory]. Retrieved from http://javierdisan.com/2010/09/01/aprendizaje-web2-0-y-teoria-del-caos/
Domínguez Fernández, G., & Llorente Cejudo, M. C. (2009). La educación social y
la web 2.0: nuevos espacios de innovación e interacción social en el espacio
europeo de educación superior [Social education and Web 2.0: new opportunities
for innovation and social interaction in the European higher education]. Pixel-Bit.
Revista de Medios y Educación, 35, 105–114.
Egaña, T. (2012). Uso de bibliografía y plagio académico entre los estudiantes
universitarios [The use of bibliography and academic plagiarism among university
students]. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 9(2), 18-30 UOC.
10
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
Retrieved from
v9n2-egana
http://rusc.uoc.edu/ojs/index.php/rusc/article/view/v9n2-egana/
García Sans, A. (2008). La evaluación del trabajo colaborativo con las herramientas 2.0:
Una propuesta de aplicación universitaria [The evaluation of collaborative work
with the 2.0 tools: A proposal for university application]. Retrieved from http://www.
mentalidadweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/ annagarciasans_comunicacion_
evaluacion_tic.pdf
Garrett, N. (2009). Technology in the service of language learning: Trends and issues.
The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 697–718.
González García, V. (2011). TIC y enseñanza de E/LE: abc para principiantes [ICT
and teaching Spanish as a foreign language: abc for beginners]. Revista Foro de
profesores de E/LE, 7. Retrieved from http://www.foroele.es/revista/index.php/
foroele/article/view/119/116
Hernández Santos, A. (2013). La Web, las TIC y el Blog en el aula de ELE [Web, ICT and
Blog in the language classroom] (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from Universidad de
Oviedo: http://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/handle/10651/13076
Herrera Jiménez, F. J. (2007). Web 2.0 y didáctica de lenguas: un punto de encuentro
[Web 2.0 and language teaching: a meeting point]. Glosas Didácticas, 16, 18–26.
Ikonen, A. (2013). Promotion of learner autonomy in the EFL classroom: the students’ view
(Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/handle/123456789/42630
Ilomäki, L., Kantosalo, A., & Lakkala, M. (2011). What is digital competence? Linked
portal Brussels: European Schoolnet (EUN), 1–12.
Jacobs, G. M., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2001). Paradigm shift: Understanding and implementing
change in second language education. TESL-EJ, 5(1). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.
org/ej17/a1.html
Jee, M. J. (2011). Web 2.0 technology meets mobile assisted language learning. IALLT
Journal of Language Learning Technologies, 41(1), 161–175.
Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Zainol Abidin, M. J. (2010). Facebook: An online
environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? The Internet
and Higher Education, 13(4), 179–187.
11
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the
past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(3).
Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103
Leier, V. (2011). Facebook used in a German film project. Nottingham, UK: European
Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning, EUROCALL (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 542419)
Manga, A. M. (2006). El concepto del entorno en la enseñanza-aprendizaje del español
como lengua extranjera [The concept of environment in teaching and learning of
Spanish as a foreign language]. Tonos Digital, 12. Retrieved from https://www.
um.es/tonosdigital/znum12/secciones/Estudios%20P-Ensenanza-Aprendizaje.htm
Margaix Arnal, D. (2007). Conceptos de web 2.0 y biblioteca 2.0: origen, definiciones
y retos para las bibliotecas actuals [Concepts of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0: origin,
definitions and challenges for the existing libraries]. El profesional de la información,
16(2), 95–106.
Marquès Graells, P. (2007). La Web 2.0 y sus aplicaciones didácticas [Web 2.0 and its
teaching applications]. Retrieved from http://www.peremarques.net/web20.htm
Marsh, D. (2012). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL). A development
trajectory. Retrieved from http://helvia.uco.es/xmlui/handle/10396/8689
Martínez Vellón, S. (2006). El español en Malasia [Spanish in Malaysia]. In S. Martínez
Vellón (Dir.), Barataria: Apuntes de la cultura española en Malasia Número 0 (pp.
6–9). Kuala Lumpur: Uniprints Marketing Sdn. Bhd.
Merchant, G. (2012). Unravelling the social network: theory and research. Learning,
Media and Technology, 37(1), 4–19.
Mills, N. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The
development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire.
CALICO Journal, 28(2), 345–368.
Montenegro, M., & Pujol, J. (2010). Evaluación de la wiki como herramienta de
trabajo colaborativo en la docencia universitaria [Evaluation of the wiki as a tool
for collaborative work in university teaching]. Revista de Educación a Distancia,
Número monográfico XI. Retrieved from http://www.um.es/ead/red/M11/4MontenegroPujol.pdf
12
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
Morcillo Herrera, M. E., Ivars Ferrer, E., & García Pérez, J. B. (2009). Tema 9:
Tecnologías para la enseñanza-aprendizaje del español como segunda lengua [Title
9: Technologies for the Spanish teaching and learning as a second language] (Class
materials). Retrieved from http://ocw.um.es/cc.-sociales/tecnologias-de-apoyo-yatencion-a-la-diversidad/material-de-clase-1/tema9.pdf
Mula, X. (2002). La web 2.0 y el desarrollo de la competencia textual [Web 2.0 and
development of textual competence]. XI Encuentro práctico de profesores de E/LE –
International House y Difusión. Retrieved from http://www.encuentro-practico.com/
pdf10/competencia-textual.pdf
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0? Retrieved from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/
oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J.L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Boulder, CO:
Educause.
Pérez-Paredes, P., & Martínez-Sanchez, F. (2001). A Spanish version of the foreign
language classroom anxiety scale: Revisiting Aida’s factor analysis. RESLA, 14,
337–352.
Quintana, E. (2010). El papel del profesor en entornos educativos en red [The role of the
teacher in web education]. Retrieved from http://www.nodosele.com/blog/?p=2889
Reinders, H. (2010). Towards a classroom pedagogy for learner autonomy: A framework
of independent language learning skills. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,
35(5), 40–55.
Rodríguez Tapia, E. (2006). Incidencia de las nuevas tecnologías en el aprendizaje
autónomo de lenguas extranjeras [Impact of new technologies in the autonomous
learning of foreign languages]. Paper presented at el Sexto Encuentro Nacional e
Internacional de Centros de Autoacceso de Lenguas, UNAM, México. Retrieved
from http://cad.cele.unam.mx:8080/RD3/prueba/pdf/rodriem7.pdf
Salinas, J. (2004). Innovación docente y uso de las TIC en la enseñanza universitaria
[Teaching innovation and the use of ICT in higher education]. Revista Universidad
y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 1(1), 1-16 UOC. Retrieved from http://www.uoc.edu/
rusc/dt/esp/salinas1104.pdf
Selwyn, N. (2007). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for informal
learning - a critical review. Paper presented at OECD-KERIS expert meeting, Cheju
Island, South Korea. Retrieved from https://www1.oecd.org/edu/ceri/39458556.pdf
13
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Khong Hou Keat
Siemens, G. (2010). Conociendo el conocimiento [Knowing knowledge] (Quintana,
E., Vidal, D., Torres, L. y Castrillejo, V.A., Trans.). Nodos ELE. (Original work
published in 2006). Retrieved from http://craig.com.ar/biblioteca/Conociendo%20
el%20Conocimiento%20-%20George%20Siemens.pdf
Sobrino Morrás, A. (2011). Proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje y web 2.0: valoración del
conectivismo como teoría de aprendizaje post-constructivista [Teaching-learning
process and web 2.0: Assessment of connectivism as post-constructivist learning
theory]. Estudios sobre educación, 20, 117–140.
Soria Pastor, I. (2001). Las nuevas tecnologías en la formación de los profesores de E/
LE [New technologies in the E/LE teacher training]. In A. M. Gimeno Sanz (Ed.),
Tecnologías de la información y de las comunicaciones en la enseñanza de la E/
LE: Actas del XII Congreso Internacional de ASELE (pp. 421–430). Valencia:
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia.
Stevenson, M. P., & Liu, M. (2010). Learning a language with Web 2.0: Exploring the
use of social networking features of foreign language learning websites. CALICO
Journal, 27(2), 233–259.
Tanyeli, N., & Kuter, S. (2013). Examining learner autonomy in foreign language
learning and instruction. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 53(A), 19–36.
Tíscar, L. (2005). Blogs para educar. Usos de los blogs en una pedagogía constructivista
[Blogs for education. Uses of blogs in a constructivist pedagogy]. Revista Telos, 65,
86–93.
Trabaldo, S. (2004). “Panorama” enseñanza y aprendizaje de idiomas a distancia
por internet [“Panorama” online distance language teaching and learning]. Paper
presented at el Primer Congreso Virtual Latinoamericano de Educación a Distancia
LatinEduca2004.com. Retrieved from http://www.ateneonline.net/datos/77_01_
Trabaldo_Susana.pdf
Trujillo Saéz, F. (2001). Objetivos en la enseñanza de lenguas extranjeras: De la
competencia lingüística a la competencia intercultural [Objectives in teaching
foreign languages: from the linguistic competence to the intercultural competence]. In
F. Herrera Clavero, F. Mateos Claros, S. Ramírez Fernández, M.I. Ramírez Salguero
y J.M. Roa Venegas (Coords.), Inmigración, interculturalidad y convivencia (pp.
407-418). Ceuta, Instituto de Estudios Ceutíes. Retrieved from http://meteco.ugr.es/
lecturas/objetivos.pdf
14
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015
Using Web 2.0 to Promote Spanish Language Learning in the Malaysian Context
Verdier, R. (2009). The rise of Web 2.0 technology and its implications for democracy
(Bachelor’s thesis). Retrieved from http://wesscholar.wesleyan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=1300&context=etd_hon_theses
Villalba Varona, M. A. (2009). Recursos de la Web 2.0 para la Enseñanza de Idiomas
[Web 2.0 Resources for Language Teaching]. Retrieved from http://ced.cele.unam.
mx/ciberestrategias/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ villalba_web2.pdf
Wang, S., & Vásquez, C. (2012). Web 2.0 and second language learning: What does the
research tell us? CALICO Journal, 29(3), 412–430.
Wesely, P. M. (2012). Learner attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs in language learning.
Foreign Language Annals, 45 (s1), s98–s117.
Wu, P., & Hsu, L. (2011). EFL learning on social networking site?: An action research
on Facebook. Paper presented at Teaching & Learning with Vision Conference,
Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from http://tlvconf.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/
tlv-paper-wu.pdf
Yagüe, A. (2007). “La tostadora se ha vuelto asesina y el ordenador no me puede ver...”
A propósito de la Internet y la enseñanza del ELE. Glosas Didácticas, 16, 1–16.
15
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume 5, Issue 1, 2015