Adolescent English Learners’ Use of Digital Technology in the Classroom

References

• Andrei, E. (2014). Digital technology in three middle school English as a second language language arts classrooms. TESL Reporter, 47(1&2), 35–50.
   Google Scholar
• Andrei, E. (2017). Technology in teaching English language learners: The case of three middle school teachers. TESOL Journal, 8(2), 409–431. doi:10.1002/tesj.280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. (2015). Technology device ownership: 2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-ownership-2015
   Google Scholar
• BabyCenter. (2015). Baby girl names. Retrieved from https://www.babycenter.com/babyNamerSearch.htm?gender=FEMALE
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, S. J., Maton, K. A., & Kervin, L. K. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billings, E. S., & Mathison, C. (2012). I get to use an iPod in school? Using technology-based advance organizers to support the academic success of English learners. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(4), 494–503. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9341-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chai, C. S., Koh, J. L., Tsai, C., & Tan, L. W. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57(1), 1184–1193. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164–195. doi:10.1080/15544800903076044
   Google Scholar
• Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., Gopalakrishnan, S., & Ross, E. (2000). April). Technology-using teachers: Comparing perceptions of exemplary technology use to best practice. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from http://www.edci.purdue.edu/ertmer/docs/AERA_2000.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, I., & Pena, M. I. (2011). Machine translation-assisted language learning: writing for beginners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 471–487. doi:10.1080/09588221.2011.582687
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaver, W. W. (1991). Technology affordances. In S. P. Robertson, G. M. Olson, & J. S. Olson (Eds.) Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘91), (pp. 79–84). New York, NY: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/108844.108856
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Grenslitt, J. (2015). Top digital school districts 2014-2015 using cutting edge technology. Retrieved from http://www.governing.com/templates/gov_print_article?id =297079161
   Google Scholar
• Groves, M., & Mundt, K. (2015). Friend or foe? Google Translate in language for academic purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 112–121. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2014.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammond, M. (2010). What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education?. Education and Information Technologies, 15(3), 205–217. doi:10.1007/S10639-009-9106-Z
   Google Scholar
• Hanover Research (2012). “Bring Your Own Device” initiatives. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://gssaweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Bring-Your-Own-Device-Initiatives-1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harklau, L. (2007). The adolescent English language learner. Identities lost and found. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 639–653). New York, NY: Springer International Handbooks of Education. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_41
   Google Scholar
• Interactive Educational Systems Design (2014). Educator edition: 2014 national survey on mobile technology for K-12 education. New York, NY: IESD, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 183–210. doi:10.2307/40264516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kučiš, V., & Seljan, S. (2014). The role of online translation tools in language education. Babel, 60(3), 303–324. doi:10.1075/babel.60.3.03kuc
   Google Scholar
• Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The Web as an information resource in K-12 education: Strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285–328. doi:10.3102/00346543075003285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuure, L., Molin-Juustila, T., Keisanen, T., Riekki, M., Iivari, N., & Kinnula, M. (2016). Switching perspectives: From a language teacher to a designer of language learning with new technologies. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 925–941. doi:10.1080/09588221.2015.1068815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai, C., & Li, G. (2011). Technology and task-based language teaching: A critical review. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 498–521. doi:10.11139/cj.28.2.498-521
   Google Scholar
• Lenhart, A. (2015). Teen, social media and technology overview 2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/
   Google Scholar
• Liu, M., Navarrete, C. C., & Wivagg, J. (2014). Potentials of mobile technology for K-12 education: An investigation of iPod Touch use for English language learners in the United States. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 115–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mao, J. (2014). Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 213–33223. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, N. M., & Lambert, C. (2015). Differentiating digital writing instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(2), 217–227. doi:10.1002/jaal.435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, D., & Adhikari, J. (2016). Bring your own device to secondary school: The perceptions of teachers, students and parents. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(1), 66–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Project Tomorrow (2014). The new digital playbook: Understanding the spectrum of students’ activities and aspirations. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU13StudentsReport.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Puentedura, R. R. (2012). The SAM R model: Background and exemplars. Retrieved from http://hippasus.com/blog/archives/date/2012/08
   Google Scholar
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816
   Google Scholar
• Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012). Learning in the field. An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, A. (2017). Encoding and decoding affordances: Stuart Hall and interactive media technologies. Media, Culture & Society, 39(4), 592–602. doi:10.1177/0163443717692741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sox, A., & Rubinstein-Ávila, E. (2009). WebQuests for English-language learners: Essential elements for design. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 38–48. doi:10.1598/JAAL.53.1.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel, C. H., & Levy, M. (2013). Language students and their technologies: Charting the evolution 2006-2011. Recall, 25(03), 306–320. doi:10.1017/S0958344013000128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storybird. (2015). Storybird. Retrieved from https://storybird.com
   Google Scholar
• Strobl, C. (2014). Affordances of Web 2.0 technologies for collaborative advanced writing in a foreign language. CALICO Journal, 31(1), 1–18. doi:10.11139/cj.31.1.1-18
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA). (2015). Languages spoken by English learners (ELs). Washington, DC: The Office of English Language Acquisition. Retrieved from https://ncela.ed.gov/files/fast_facts/OELA_FastFactsAllLanguages.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Second Language Acquisition (OELA). (2018). Fast facts. Profiles of English learners. Retrieved from https://ncela.ed.gov/files/fast_facts/Profiles_of_ELs_4.12.18_MM_Final_Edit.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). The condition of education 2014 (NCES 2014-083), English language learners. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp
   Google Scholar
• van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–259). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, A. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217–227. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warschauer, M. (2001). Millennialism and media: Language, literacy, and technology in the 21st century. AILA Review, 14, 49–59.
   Google Scholar
• Willingham, D. T. (2010). Have Technology and Multitasking Rewired How Students Learn? American Educator, 34(2), 23–28.
   Google Scholar
• YouTube. (2013). StoryBird intro for Students. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST2ZCtw18wo&t=3s
   Google Scholar