Complementing in-class language learning with voluntary out-of-class MALL. Does training in self-regulation and scaffolding make a difference?

Abstract

Learners need diligence when going solo in technology-enhanced learning environments. Nevertheless, self-regulation and scaffolding are two under-researched concepts when it comes to mobile learning. To tackle this knowledge gap, this study focuses on self-regulation and scaffolding for mobile assisted language learning (MALL). Fifty-two students of French as a foreign language were divided into one control and two experimental groups. The two experimental groups were invited to engage in voluntary language learning through a language platform, Duolingo. One of the two experimental groups was trained for self-regulation and received scaffolding for their MALL. The study reveals five main findings: First, students who were trained in self-regulation and received temporary scaffolding present a significantly higher participation in Duolingo. Second, self-regulation features provided by Duolingo are not frequently used by students and therefore do not substantially contribute to students’ own learning micromanagement. Third, there is a correlation between high use of Duolingo and improvement in French writing skills. Fourth, just inviting students to engage in voluntary out-of-class MALL does not result in higher test scores for French listening, reading or writing skills. Fifth, in a MALL context, self-regulation training and temporary scaffolding contribute to higher test scores in French writing. Overall, the results suggest that training and scaffolding for self-regulation is beneficial in a voluntary out-of-class MALL context. However, more research is needed to analyze in which conditions voluntary out-of-class MALL can lead to substantial learning improvements.

Keywords:

• Learning outcomes
• mobile assisted language learning
• scaffolding
• self-regulation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 To reach the sub goal for the first week, for example, Duolingo proposes the learning units: basic 1, basic 2, common phrases and food.

2 In the definitions provided by Lajoie (1993) and later on by Azevedo et al. (2010) a metacognitive tool is a computer environment designed to support goals of instruction. It requires students to make decisions about these goals and about the context needed to lead to successful learning. It also models, prompts and supports metacognitive and self-regulatory processes before, during and following learning. A metacognitive tool also involves peers, tutors or artificial agents as supporters of learning.

3 The Exg1 did not have proximal goals for the first four weeks. However, the goal attainment benchmarks of the Exg2 were checked for Exg1 for indicative purposes. The results indicate an attainment drop from 50% to 7% of students in this group.

4 As indicated in our results section, students’ goal attainment in the first four weeks passed from 45% to 14%

5 These features are: tap to see the translation, review the lesson, pronunciation and repetition, fluency percentage and memory bars.

6 These reasons can help to explain why none of the forethought features in Duolingo presented an average use.

7 Finding out about language learning, organizing learning, setting goals and objectives, identifying the purpose of the language task, planning for a language task, and seeking practice opportunities are some important metacognitive strategies for language learning (Oxford, 1990).

8 According to www.duolingo.com/team, Duolingo is composed of 50% engineers, 6% community, and 4% researchers.

9 Some difficulties are present due to spelling-to-sound differences in both languages (see Sprenger-Charolles, 2004)

10 IMPROVE is a metacognitive training method that stands for: Introducing the new concepts, Metacognitive questioning, Practicing, Reviewing and reducing difficulties, Obtaining mastery, Verification, and Enrichment (Mevarech & Kramarski, 1997)

11 According to the Common European Framework for Reference of the languages (CEFR), students acquire different level of language competences which are categorized from A1(Breakthrough) to C2 (Mastery).

12 There was a complementary sheet in the logbook which showed a picture of the feature measured in each item.

Additional information

Funding

This study is funded by the European Commission – Erasmus Mundus Action 2 – Eureka SD Project under the grant number 2013-2591/001-001.

Notes on contributors

Gustavo García Botero

Gustavo García Botero is a Spanish, English and French language teacher. He is a PhD researcher in Educational Sciences. His research interests include language teaching and learning, educational technologies, mobile learning, and adult education.

Margarita Alexandra Botero Restrepo

Margarita Alexandra Botero Restrepo teaches French as a foreign language at the Universidad del Quindío, in Colombia. Margarita holds a double degree in discourse analysis and didactics. Her main fields of interest are interculturality, metalinguistics, bilingualism and mobile technologies. She is currently a PhD researcher in Educational Sciences.

Chang Zhu

Prof. Dr. Chang Zhu is a professor in Educational Sciences. One of her main research directions focuses on the implementation of educational innovations, educational technology, and in particular, the design and use of online and blended learning in higher education.

Frederik Questier

Prof. Dr. Frederik Questier has a passion for open innovation and technologies. His research focuses on their implementation in higher education. He is involved in a large number of related international projects for developing countries.