Navigation – Plan du site
Pratique et recherche

Telecollaboration: foreign language teachers (re)defining their role

Télécollaboration : comment les enseignants de langues (re)définissent leur rôle
Simon Ensor, Marcin Kleban et Christine Rodrigues

Résumés

La télécollaboration est reconnue par différentes études comme un soutien à l'apprentissage des langues et à l'acquisition de compétences interculturelles. Le concept plus récent de télécollaboration 2.0 (Guth & Helm, 2010 ; O'Dowd, 2010) se réfère notamment au développement de compétences communicatives et multimodales grâce à l'utilisation d'outils en ligne.

Notre article a pour objectif d'analyser dans ce contexte l'évolution de l'identité d'enseignants et de futurs enseignants de langues étrangères. Nous souhaitons, en effet, appréhender la perception que ces enseignants ont des rôles qu'ils jouent ou seront amenés à jouer, dans un monde où les dispositifs numériques personnels (Bax, 2003) et la télécollaboration (O'Dowd, 2009) seraient normalisés dans la classe.

Pour ce faire, nous utilisons une méthodologie mixte, adaptée de Scollon et Wong Scollon (nexus analysis, 2004). Nous avons recueilli et analysé différents discours, de type institutionnel, personnel, professionnel et informel. Nous suivons pour notre analyse les trois entités qui constituent un nexus of practice (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2004) : les discours en place (discourses in place), les ordres de l'interaction (interaction orders) et les corps historiques (historical bodies).

Sept futurs enseignants et six enseignants, impliqués dans un projet d'échanges entre Clermont-Ferrand (France), Warwick (Royaume-Uni) et Cracovie (Pologne), ont accepté de participer à cette étude. La méthodologie adoptée inclut l'analyse narrative (écrits des participants sur leur utilisation des technologies en dehors et dans la classe pour l'enseignement/apprentissage), des interviews semi-dirigées (menées en face à face ou en visio-conférence) portant sur leurs expériences passées, présentes et futures et leurs attitudes envers la télécollaboration, et un questionnaire quantitatif et qualitatif en ligne. Nous avons, en particulier, demandé aux participants d'imaginer des scénarios alternatifs d'intégration de la technologie et de la télécollaboration dans l'enseignement, afin de les opposer à la vision habituelle des sois-possibles (Kubanyiova, 2009).

Les résultats suggèrent que l'identité de l'enseignant résulte d'un croisement complexe entre des discours institutionnels, professionnels et informels. Ces discours peuvent tout autant être des obstacles que des ponts menant à une transformation pédagogique. Par ailleurs, les participants éprouvent des difficultés à redéfinir leur rôle lorsqu'ils sont confrontés à une classe connectée et à envisager un programme d'étude pour les langues étrangères qui intègrerait de nouvelles littératies et compétences avec lesquelles ils ne sont pas familiers.

Nous suggérons que la télécollaboration devrait être prise en compte dans un contexte de révolution culturelle numérique en réseau et utilisée comme moyen de susciter une transformation en profondeur de l'enseignement.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1. Introduction

Telecollaboration, or Online Intercultural Exchange (OIE), refers to the application of online communication tools to bring together classes of language learners in geographically distant locations with the aim to develop their foreign language skills and intercultural competence through collaborative tasks and project work (O'Dowd, 2013: 1).

1A number of studies confirm the educational potential of telecollaboration for the development of language skills (eg Guth & Marini-Maio, 2010; Lee, 2007; Polisca, 2011; Tian & Wang, 2010) and intercultural competence (eg Belz & Müller-Hartmann, 2003; Helm, 2009; O'Dowd, 2005, 2006; Derivry et al., 2015; Hoffstaedter & Kohn, 2015b). More recently telecollaboration has been related to the development of awareness of pedagogical knowledge (eg Dooly & Sadler, 2013; Guth & Helm, 2012), and "multimodal communicative competence" (Hauck, 2007), or multiliteracies (Hauck, 2010; Guth & Helm, 2012) which has led to the concept of "telecollaboration 2.0" (Guth & Helm, 2010; O'Dowd, 2010).

2Multimodal communicative competences (Hauck, 2007) or multiliteracies refer to a set of abilities related to communicating in the globalized, culturally and linguistically diverse world by means of multimedia communication tools available through the internet (New London Group, 2000). These competences are becoming increasingly important for learning and working in today's information society (O'Dowd, 2010: 3-4). Guth and Helm (2012) show that telecollaborative tasks can also lead to the development of the operational, cultural, and critical dimensions of new literacies (Lankshear & Knobel, 2006). Telecollaboration 2.0 follows the logic behind the related concept of learning 2.0 promising a transformation of foreign language education by the "penetration of informal Web 2.0 communication and socialisation practices into formal learning" (Lamy & Goodfellow, 2010: 2).

3Despite its potential, telecollaboration in all its forms remains largely "an add-on activity" (O'Dowd, 2010: 375). There seem to be at least three kinds of reasons for this situation. First, there are technological problems related to insufficient access or command of the technologies (eg Belz & Müller-Hartmann, 2003; Jauregi & Bañados, 2008; Ware, 2005). Second, there are difficulties related to incompatibilities between micro, meso and macro levels of institutions (Lamy & Goodfellow, 2010). Third, attitudes and beliefs of teachers can form barriers to the adoption of telecollaboration.

4Teachers are often reluctant to shift from existing traditional teaching modes, which some digital technologies (such as web 1.0 or desktop technologies) help to sustain (Blin & Munro, 2008). Teacher cognitions, or what they think, know, and believe (Borg, 2009), influence their attitudes towards pedagogy (Borg, 2009; Phipps & Borg, 2007). In this way, attitudes towards telecollaboration may depend on pre-existing teacher belief systems (Belz & Müller-Hartmann, 2003).

5Beliefs towards technology use and telecollaboration may also depend on personally associated professional or informal experiences (Borg, 2009). Uses of online technology being largely culturally dependent (Thorne, 2003), web 2.0 tools have been most commonly associated with the informal sphere and this no doubt goes some way to explain why telecollaboration 2.0's role has remained largely marginal (Dooly, 2009; Dooly & Sadler, 2013).

6One might surmise that younger generations of teachers who have been brought up with the internet (Beaven et al., 2010) would be readier to innovate in the classroom. However, apparent "techno-literacy" has been shown to be no guarantee of "change agency" (Donnison, 2007: 10). Pre-service teachers may profess adherence to learner-centred forms of teaching and yet "simultaneously (…) maintain conflicting cultural models of traditional and conservative models of schooling" (Donnison, 2007: 9).

7It is in this context of unfulfilled promise that we have decided to reflect on a future scenario of widespread integration of telecollaboration into foreign language education. We have chosen as a starting point O'Dowd's imagined future of a "normalisation" of telecollaboration in which he sees it becoming an "integral part of classroom activity, without being seen as an extra or a supplementary activity" (2009: 5). O'Dowd borrowed and mirrored an older vision of technological normalisation in which Bax foresaw a time when computers would be "used by language teachers and students as an integral part of every lesson, like a pen or book" (Bax, 2003: 23).

8Adopting a cultural-historical view of human activity (Vygotsky, 1978; Leontiew, 1962), we have set out to investigate how far teachers' groundings in existing discourses of practice are an obstacle or a bridge to future transformations of teacher roles. We investigate how telecollaboration forces teachers and pre-service teachers to rethink their roles in foreign language teaching.

2. Theoretical Perspectives

2.1. Nexus analysis

9Telecollaboration projects exist at a point of convergence of individual experiences, cultures of use (Thorne, 2003), institutional constraints and prerogatives and macro politico-economic pressures. This study aims to trace the various discourses which influence developments in teacher attitudes and behaviour towards technology use and telecollaboration.

10By discourses, taking the lead from Scollon and Wong Scollon (2004) we are using here a definition which includes not just "the ways in which people communicate" but also "non-language stuff" (Gee, 1999: 13) or "all forms of meaningful semiotic human activity seen in connection with social, cultural, and historical patterns and developments of use" (Blommaert, 2005: 3). So, we may speak of teacher, student, classroom, institutional, or informal discourses. These normative discourses are deeply rooted within particular physical or virtual spaces. Such spaces are, to use the Scollons' term, historical spaces.

11The classroom is one such historical space and its design has semiotic indications as to appropriate or transgressive behaviour. Traditionally, classrooms are organised to enable teachers to transmit information and efficiently control student interaction. Institutional virtual learning environments (VLEs) usually differentiate between levels of permission accorded to administrators and learners thereby extending recognisably traditional student-teacher relations. There may be tension between controlled walled gardens (Sclater, 2010) of VLEs and chaotic development of personal online spaces, between personal online interaction and corporate models of personal data exploitation.

12The introduction of student-owned mobile connected devices has often been seen by teachers and administrators as transgressive (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2003) or disruptive (Conole et al., 2008) of the classroom. While institutions have invested heavily in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) to modernise the teaching environment, there has been widespread reluctance to relinquish control of access to the internet within the institution. Informal online environments have also been blocked from institutional networks.

13Associated to physical and virtual space is the temporal space within which institutional discourses are placed. The lesson, the term, the exam week, the holidays, the academic year all frame how discourses in virtual or physical historical spaces are organised. Individual actors modulate their bodily rhythms, attitudes and their behaviour according to their positioning along career cycles, their contractual status and the various institutional time cycles.

14The ways in which people interact in a given situation, at a particular time, in this case in a classroom, have been rehearsed over years, by successive generations and constitute an interaction order (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2004; Goffman, 1983). This concept refers to the social arrangements (eg pairs, groups, communities, etc.) in which discourses are embedded and the resulting consequences of the ensuing discourses for human actions. Interaction orders can be modified by the introduction of new technology.

The technologically mediated class fosters new forms of communication while simultaneously restricting or inhibiting habitual or well-practised "traditional" forms of university class interactions (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2004: 16).

15If students collaborate more independently, this alters the interaction order and puts into question the architecture of the physical and online historical spaces.

16All historical spaces, indeed "all places in the world are complex aggregates (nexus) of many discourses which circulate through them" (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2004: 14). The classroom and the virtual classroom are formed by and reveal diverse discourses which come together at a particular moment. The regional, national and international political discourses may determine the size of the space, the technology which equips it and the pedagogical program and assessment which teachers and students follow. The design of an institutional learning management system may be determined by commercial interests of a multinational corporation or influenced by open source persuasions of local computer engineers.

17The different discourses, as Scollon and Wong Scollon (2004: 14) point out, take place at a "real, material place in the world." "Discourses in place" are used by these authors to refer to the nexus of objects, actions, ideas, thoughts, signs, language and dialogue, the material or social architecture of physical or virtual space, which determine specific interaction orders. To understand how these discourses converge in the material or in social action it is important to decide which of these discourses are relevant and which are not to the actions in question.

18Within these discourses in historical spaces, actors bring with them their individual experience of schooling, teaching, networking and learning. Each participant in the historical space is consciously or unconsciously performing actions which constitute a role, influenced by and simultaneously underpinning wider discourses. Such actions become integrated into his or her historical body (Scollon & Wong Scollon, 2004).

19Being teacher-researchers involved in a telecollaborative project with colleagues and students, we have identified ourselves as participants within a nexus of practice. In studying systematically, ethnographically the various cycles of discourse which come together, we are engaged in nexus analysis in an attempt to modify existing discourses and to imagine a new, perhaps more widely connected nexus of practice.

2.2. Teacher roles

20The term "role", as Dörnyei and Murphey (2003: 109) point out, is a technical term "which originally comes from sociology and refers to the shared expectation of how an individual should behave. In other words, roles describe what people are supposed to do." Teaching in blended learning contexts, which include telecollaborative exchanges, calls for teachers to be able to display a set of behaviours allowing educators to manage learning in both online and offline environments. Hence, teacher roles in telecollaboration must encompass the roles assigned to traditional classrooms and those required by online contexts.

21The traditional teacher roles are explained, for example, by Harmer (2001) who enumerates the following teacher roles: controller, organiser, assessor, prompter, participant, resource, tutor, and observer. These roles point to the teachers' managerial skills (controller, organiser), assessment skills (assessor), facilitating skills (prompter, resource, tutor). Additionally, the role of the observer converges in a number of skills such as the managerial, assessment, and the reflective ones.

22According to Zawadzka (2004) teachers perform the roles of expert, class tutor, organiser, moderator, advisor and evaluator. The author adds roles related to continuous professional development such as: innovator, researcher and reflective practitioner. Apart from those, she mentions that foreign language teachers need to perform the role of intercultural mediator.

23While teaching online and embarking on telecollaborative exchanges require teachers to be able to perform similar or even the same roles as the ones required by the traditional classroom, the digital teaching environments also call for other roles. For example, Berge (1995, in McPherson & Nuñez, 2004) suggests that e-tutors should be capable of performing pedagogical or intellectual roles (asking questions and leading discussions), managerial roles (organising learning) but also social roles (such as facilitating social and emotional bonds between students, and students and the teacher) and technical roles (handling technologies and supporting students' use of technologies).

24Müller-Hartmann (2007: 168) observes that new technologies put the teacher in the position of a designer of a pedagogical environment. This refers to the skills of establishing contact and dialogue as well as the skills of careful monitoring of learning activities and learners. He also stresses the role of the teacher as a reflective practitioner.

25Dooly (2010) points out that telecollaboration with its frequent use of web 2.0 tools creates an opportunity for teachers to encourage the development of critical reflection skills in students. This refers to the skills of critically evaluating collected information, use of online tools and social practices or the nature of intercultural interaction (Dooly, 2010: 290).

26Müller-Hartmann (2012: 172) notes organisational skills necessary for completing telecollaboration projects. He stresses that telecollaboration involves initiating, developing and monitoring exchanges. Furstenberg and Levet (2010) also underline the management skills when they point out that teachers should be able to organise telecollaboration, prepare students for the tasks and integrate exchanges into the existing framework of their classes.

27O'Dowd (2015) describes teacher roles in telecollaboration in the form of "can-do" statements. The competences he describes mainly refer to the traditional roles already described here, however, he provides a more field-specific list of the skills required by telecollaborative exchanges. The competences are arranged in three categories: organisational, pedagogical and digital. The first category roughly refers to the organiser, facilitator and course or task designer but also reflective practitioner as the skills also involve drawing conclusions from previous telecollaborative experiences. The second category encompasses the traditional role of a facilitator in that it requires teachers to be able to provide adequate scaffolding and support for completing learning tasks and also the role of the organiser, for example by explaining to students the telecollaboration objectives, deadlines, etc. The third category of competences refers to the digital skills of the teacher and involves the role of an expert in digital communication role, an organiser of the exchange roles.

28Pennock-Speck and Clavel-Arroitia (2015) agree with Hootstein (2002) that teacher roles in telecollaboration differ from traditional classroom teacher roles, as telecollaboration teachers act mainly as facilitators. They consider that the key role of a telecollaborative teacher is that of e-moderator and categorize potential teacher roles: the programme director or administrative e-moderator, the technical director or technical e-moderator, the instructor or academic e-moderator, and the social director or social e-moderator. Their study which involved teachers from Spain, Germany, Holland, the UK, and France revealed that teachers see themselves as mostly performing social e-moderating and academic moderating with less time devoted to social e-moderating and technical e-moderating. The authors add, however, that their findings come from the piloting phase of the project.

29Summarizing this discussion on the possible teacher roles in telecollaboration, it might be proposed that teachers' pedagogical activities during telecollaboration and, by the same token, teachers' roles fall into three broad categories:

  • the traditional language tutoring dimension, which applies equally to offline and online contexts; this encompasses the roles of designer, assessor, controller, expert, class tutor, facilitator, intercultural moderator, organiser or advisor;

  • the e-moderating dimension which includes the roles of facilitator, responsible for technical aspects, social and academic e-moderating and intercultural e-moderation;

  • the professional development dimension; this encompasses the roles of innovator, researcher, and reflective practitioner.

30It needs to be observed that some of the roles naturally belong to more than a single category. One such example is the role of facilitator which is typically performed in both student autonomy oriented offline classes and in online international distance collaboration contexts. Another example is the role of intercultural mediation which is required when dealing with cross cultural comparisons and juxtapositions discussed during traditional classes as well as online during telecollaboration projects.

2.3. Possible selves

31An analysis of the discourses which constitute our nexus of practice uncovers implicit and explicit anticipations of actions. Course programs are renewed at regular intervals, technology investment is limited by annual budgets, and research projects are governed by deadlines and measurements of academic influence. Teachers at the end of their career will have a different perspective on the future compared to teachers starting out. Teachers and students may demonstrate limited agency if they are unconsciously reproducing roles which have become integrated into their historical bodies. In an attempt to counter this, we have used the concept of possible selves or imagined future selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Dörnyei, 2009; Hamman et al., 2010; Kubaniyova, 2009) as a means to make educators aware of their current visions of the future and to confront them with alternative scenarios as to the place of personal connected digital devices or telecollaboration in the classroom. If there is no place for telecollaboration in teachers' possible selves, there will be little prospect for its normalisation.

3. Research context

3.1. CLAVIER

32The context for this study is the CLAVIER project (before 2014: Clermont And Warwick Virtual Interactive Exchange Research; after 2014: Connected Learning And Virtual Intercultural Exchange Research) (Helm et al., 2012; MacKinnon, 2016), a telecollaborative research project, and learning network (LN). It resulted from a meeting of two teachers on a blog popular in educational technology communities of practice. Initial contact was reinforced by networking via Twitter and collaboration using Google documents.

33Reflective practice led teachers to meeting with other practitioners at international conferences which have resulted in extensions of the CLAVIER LN (Figure 1).

Figure 1–Evolution of CLAVIER network.

Figure 1–Evolution of CLAVIER network.

34CLAVIER aims at making connections between formal and informal learning and personal, institutional and professional spaces (Figure 2).

Figure 2–CLAVIER informal/formal online ecology.

Figure 2–CLAVIER informal/formal online ecology.

35It provides synchronous and/or asynchronous collaboration for learners and teachers. The use of social media and social networking tools enables rapid connections to other individuals, communities or institutions. These connections can be momentary or become fully integrated long-term partnerships. Where this study is concerned, the exchange activities for Warwick, UK (WAR) and Clermont-Ferrand, France (CLER) consisted in a series of communicative tasks integrated into classroom programs over two terms: profile and blog article writing, picture sharing, collaborative storytelling, and optional teletandem partnerships using chat, email, and videoconferencing. For Krakow, Poland (KRA) and CLER, students conducted a term long collaborative information exchange activity using Google documents, email, Facebook chat, and videoconferencing which enabled them gain greater intercultural understanding of their different educational contexts. They also participated in optional teletandem activities. KRA pre-service teachers (Pre-Ts) also participated in a tutoring program of CLER undergraduate language learners via Google documents, Facebook, email, and videoconferencing in the second term. A central goal of CLAVIER is to facilitate the development of personal learning networks and to develop multiple literacies of learners and learner-teachers.

36The number of students and institutions participating in the CLAVIER project is changing from year to year (Figure 3). In 2012-13, the participants were 800 CLER and WAR undergraduate students studying English or French, with a team of 12 teachers, and 64 CLER and KRA postgraduate and undergraduate students training to teach or studying English with a team of four teachers. In 2013-14 there were over 1000 learners and over 20 teachers involved from CLER, WAR, KRA, Coventry (COV, UK) Santander (SAN, Spain), Kanda (KAN, Japan), and Linnaeus (LIN, Sweden).

Figure 3–CLAVIER Network Evolution.

Figure 3–CLAVIER Network Evolution.
 

3.2. Different institutional contexts

37This study focuses on exchanges between Warwick and Clermont-Ferrand (WARCLER) and Krakow and Clermont-Ferrand (KRACLER). These two exchanges were selected because of the close working relationships which have been developed between the partners.

38Collaboration between CLER and WAR/COV and CLER and KRA has been facilitated by teacher mobility financed by Erasmus funding. However, it has been the personal investment of the students and staff which has largely contributed to the development of the exchanges. Face to face meetings have enabled teachers to appreciate the partners' contexts and also to more easily integrate pedagogical activities in their respective programs. For both of these exchanges teachers use a dashboard of activities using collaborative Google documents. Further information is provided about these partners below.

3.2.1. Université Blaise Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, France

39Undergraduate students learn English as a compulsory part of their degree programs. They follow 48 hours of classes over two semesters provided by the Service commun des langues vivantes (SCLV). Classes mostly do not follow programs differentiated by levels in English. Students in the Sport Science Faculty work with a pair of teachers in a large open space equipped with computers and wifi. Many students bring portable PCs to class and most students are equipped with smartphones. Students in the faculties of Science, Humanities, and Psychology work in more traditional classrooms with one teacher. Teachers are employed on fixed posts or work on yearly contracts. The numbers of students and teachers involved in the study of English makes a generalisation of telecollaboration programs a major challenge.

3.2.2. Warwick University, UK

40Undergraduate and postgraduate students choose to learn French as an optional part of their degree programs. They follow 20 weeks of classes three hours per week over two semesters with Warwick Language Centre. The three hours are divided into two hours of core class time and one hour of workshop. Classes follow programs differentiated by levels in French. If most students are equipped with smartphones, it appears that most students do not bring their computers to class. Teachers have access to a set of 15 Chromebooks. The smaller numbers of students and teachers enable Warwick Language Centre to offer telecollaboration to almost all students studying French and to envisage widening the practice to other languages.

3.2.3. Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland

41Jagiellonian University students involved in CLAVIER are following an MA course in English as a Foreign Language (EFL). The curriculum offers them first-hand experience in teaching English as a lingua franca and an opportunity to witness the process of developing their own and others' intercultural communicative competence. Through the online distance tasks embedded in the project they support their French partners' development of English language skills, hone their pedagogical skills and intercultural awareness.

4. Methodology

42We seek to answer the following questions: (1) what are the social discourses which manifest themselves in their expressed beliefs, attitudes and visions and (2) what are the participants' current and imagined future visions of the role of language teaching, of the roles of technology, of the role of telecollaboration and of their own roles as teachers of foreign languages?

43In order to answer these questions, we chose a mixed methodology including quantitative/qualitative surveys, narrative analysis, and semi-directed interviews inspired by the nexus analysis. Narrative analysis has proved to be particularly useful to study learner and teacher identity (Benson & Nunan, 2004) and technology usage (Conole et al., 2008). We used narrative analysis and semi-directed interviews to give a longitudinal perspective on teachers' historical bodies, their movement through formal and informal historical spaces, changing technology uses, changes in the interaction order. The cross-referencing of data enabled us to trace trajectories of discourses within an ever-evolving nexus of practice. Interviews also allowed us to challenge teachers' current visions of the future by presenting them with alternative scenarios.

4.1. Sample selection

44In-service teachers (In-Ts) and pre-service teachers (Pre-Ts) working on CLAVIER exchanges between WAR and CLER, and KRA and CLER were selected. Six In-Ts accepted an invitation to participate in the study: two from WAR (one female and one male), four from CLER (three male and one female). Additionally, seven Pre-Ts studying for a master in English as a Foreign Language Teaching (six Polish, one Spanish, all female) also responded. The names of the participants were changed to ensure anonymity.

45Identifying information taken from the data set concerning the In-Ts and the Pre-Ts professional and teaching experience can be found in the tables below (Table 1 and Table 2) to facilitate an overview of the groups and to follow the tracks of the individual historical bodies in the observations presented.

Table 1–Sample of the In-T participants.

Name

University

Age

Nationality

Remarks

Tim

CLER

59-67

British

Involved in life-long learning

Mick

CLER

49-58

British

Worked for a multinational until 2002. Involved in life-long learning

Laure

CLER

49-58

French

Taught French in UK, Company employee. Started teaching English in the 1990s

Bill

CLER

35-48

French/British

Already been involved in telecollaboration and distance learning, life-long learning

Kate

WAR

N/A

British

Taught in secondary schools, Involved in organising school exchanges

Rob

WAR

49-58

British

Has "director's hat" in language centre, seeks to encourage normalisation of telecollaboration

Table 2–Sample of the Pre-T participants.

Name

University

Age

Nationality

Remarks

Milena

KRA

18-34

Polish

Taught private one-to-one classes

Monika

KRA

18-34

Polish

Taught private one-to-one classes

Aga

KRA

18-34

Polish

Teaches in a private language school, taught private one-to-one classes

Anna

KRA

18-34

Polish

Taught private one-to-one classes

Kasia

KRA

18-34

Polish

Taught private one-to-one classes

Beata

KRA

18-34

Polish

Taught private one-to-one classes

Maria

KRA

18-34

Spanish

No teaching experience

4.2. Data collection

46The data was collected on participants' reported informal online practices in an online survey (Google form) that helped us to rapidly investigate differences between the older and younger generation. The participants were also asked to write narratives, one relating the development of their informal and professional technology use outside the classroom, and a second one relating their use of technology inside the classroom, in language learning/teaching. Further to this, a semi-directed interview was carried out face-to-face or online via Skype to investigate past, present, future experiences, as well as attitudes towards telecollaboration.

4.3. Data analysis

47The data gathered from the survey, the narratives, and the interview were combined and coded collaboratively. A synthetic analysis of the roles helped us to identify the roles which belong to the three dimensions: traditional language tutoring, e-moderating and professional development. Within each of these categories we isolated and used the following specific roles: organiser, designer, expert, intercultural mediator, reflective practitioner, researcher, innovator, assessor, controller and facilitator as codes for investigating the data.

48Once the data was coded, we analysed those narrative and interview episodes in which the participants talk about the specific roles. This allowed us to identify the relevant discourses, which may have led the study participants to these particular ways of thinking about their jobs and profession. The analysis of the nexus of their practices includes the three elements suggested by Scollon and Wong Scollon (2004): discourses in place, interaction orders, and historical bodies. Therefore, the narratives and the interviews were analysed with the view of identifying and examining these types of influences on professional roles that these teachers assign to themselves.

49Given the age and experience of the In-Ts teachers there was a greater quantity and richer variety of data concerning teaching and professional discourses than for the Pre-Ts. As participants within the nexus of practice, coordinators for the CLAVIER project, the data collected from the In-Ts teachers and Pre-Ts may well reflect some bias towards us as colleague or as computer assisted language learning teacher. In the case of the Pre-Ts this may result in a highlighting of the interest of technology innovation, for the In-Ts teachers it might lead to exaggerated enthusiasm for telecollaboration. Taking into account the objectives of this study, and the diversity of data collected, any bias, we suggest, would have a limited effect on findings and conclusions as to perceived current and future roles and the institutional, professional, formal and informal discourses which are traced into discourses in place, interaction orders, and historical bodies.

5. The findings

5.1. Discourses in place

5.1.1. In-service teachers

50CLAVIER takes place across multiple institutional, personal, offline and online spaces: classrooms, "multimedia labs", learner homes, institutional VLE forums, messaging and chat applications, corporate "personal" online spaces: Google docs, Facebook groups and chat, Twitter, email, Skype. As a result, we find diverse, foregrounded or backgrounded discourses present in these different spaces.

51On a supranational level, we noted the presence of European Union funded foreign language learning policy, and research in the assessment framework of WAR. Rob refers to learning outcomes for his class as being CEFR B1 (Council of Europe, 2001), in the promotion of compulsory English classes at CLER, in the action approach which is favoured in the pedagogy and assessment framework of CLER teachers, in the INTENT report (Integration of Telecollaborative Networks in European Universities) which Rob suggests is a means of encouraging staff to participate in telecollaboration. The collaborative research and writing of this article is itself facilitated by a European funded teacher mobility budget.

52On a multinational level, contrasting corporate or open-source discourses converge in the CLER and WAR classrooms. Institutional educational platform providers: Blackboard or Moodle, which aim at extending the institutional classroom within the confines of an institutionally controlled, hierarchically administered, "walled garden" on a local server, compete with more open, web-based, cloud-computing companies: Google, Skype, Twitter and Facebook. The commercial models of Google, Twitter and Facebook mean that while the platforms may offer users more flexibility or user-friendliness, their data is subject to scanning, and the users to targeted corporate advertising.

53Institutional policy governing technology procurement or use, rules concerning student data privacy, freedom given to teachers or students to choose technology personally determines or influences teacher practices in CLER and WAR. In both contexts, practices of more technologically adept, "adventurous and willing" teachers (Rob) have an impact on some colleagues or even a whole department.

Rob: French always try do this in Warwick they go for things 100%. You know we won't just try a little French 3 or French 5 group of students we'll get the whole 300 at once.

54On the other hand, a lack of technical support staff or training limits the use of technology. Teachers in WAR extend their classrooms within the institutional Moodle but also have access to a set of Google Chrome books, both supported by an educational technologist. CLER In-Ts speak of having chosen to use Google documents, convinced of its interest to their pedagogy through observation of the practices of a colleague. In both CLER and WAR, learners have access to multimedia documents to reinforce work done in the classroom. Teachers in WAR and CLER are encouraged to use Blackboard IM for video-conferencing for CLAVIER. CLER In-T Laure uses Skype for testing students for certification.

55Differing institutional technology choices between CLAVIER partners can lead to an imbalance in the time needed for teachers and students to use the tools effectively. For WAR In-T, Rob, a Moodle assignment is "straightforward", for a CLER In-T, the use of the VLE is problematic.

Laure: They couldn't get their connection, they had lost their password, so I had to call you, you know many times to get that sorted out and it sometimes blocked them. So sometimes we just said let's forget about it.

56Technology available to teachers and learners in classrooms (or used by teachers and learners) varies. Wireless internet infrastructure is more or less recent in CLER and WAR.

Rob: until very recently only half of our language centre classroom had proper wireless coverage so it's simple things like that at an institutional level which gradually evolves the speed at which (…) the change occurs.

57If all the In-Ts have access to a computer, a projector (either institutional or personal equipment) and an internet connection, both Rob in WAR and Laure in CLER note that not all students are (or come) equipped with either laptops or smartphones and are "dependent on university provision." Despite wifi connectivity, neither teachers nor students necessarily think or desire to use portable devices in classrooms.

58As an institutional telecollaborative project for undergraduate and post-graduate foreign language learners and pre-service language teachers, CLAVIER is largely situated within the academic term cycle and their timetables of courses and options. The university assessment calendar–whether by continuous assessment, portfolio, or end of term examinations–governs prioritisation of action for both students and teachers.

Bill: it was at a time where they had to prepare for their competitive exam so for some them it was clearly not a priority for them

59Investment of teacher time is also dependent on whether the teacher is working part-time (Kate) or full time (Rob, Bill, Laure, Mick, Tim), on whether the person has an administrative or managerial role (Rob), on the security of contract, on whether the teacher is at the beginning, in the middle (Bill) or at the end of their career (Tim). Time constraints are a constant concern for In-Ts, who look to "maximise time" (Kate), who only have "24 hours in a semester" (Tim), who worry about organisational "time wasting" (Tim), who consider that students "can take it as far as they like in their own time" (Kate), who suggest that students "are all supposed to be doing around 10 hours a week" outside of class (Rob). Meanwhile, a CLER In-T points out that students have their own time constraints and priorities which may reduce enthusiasm for activities outside of the classroom.

Mick: you know editing a blog is time-consuming and most of them in fact, all of my students, even the good students, I asked came up with excuses and said they didn't have time.

60If WAR, CLER and KRA university calendars are similar, timetabling differences limit the possibility of synchronicity between the partners' classes and therefore the modes of communication. Laure remarks that "time-slots didn't correspond." Changes in timetabling and module programs announced in WAR offer potentially more flexibility in types of activity.

Rob: these workshops (…) will help the EWC telecollaboration project because there will be a little bit more time to devote to the support of the interested students

61The presence of teachers' and students' personal devices in the classroom widens pedagogical possibilities. Mick uses his laptop to share his "personal iTunes music library," and Excel and PowerPoint files. In CLER, student smartphone ownership has enabled the change of assessment to include "video projects" (Mick and Laure) while other teachers (Rob) encourage a more limited use for dictionary consultation in support of teacher controlled activities. Use of Facebook or other social networks by students outside the classroom is noted and encouraged by In-Ts for the purposes of telecollaboration. There is no mention of its consultation via smartphone inside the classroom. The blurring of lines between formal and informal discourses is also given recognition by the CLAVIER project's structure which deliberately bridges institutional and personal spaces, by the idea of the organisation of a student trip to CLER mentioned by Kate, by the use of project based learning in CLER, by the use of portfolios for assessment at CLER and WAR.

5.1.2. Pre-service teachers

62At the university of KRA, supranational discourses are present in the European funding present in the construction of the university's buildings, and equipment of classrooms, and in Erasmus exchanges that two Pre-Ts mention participating in. It is also present in an appreciation that telecollaboration is a means to enable Polish integration into the European community.

Anna: I mean that telecollaboration is in line with the status of English, as a lingua franca, it is necessary because of our membership in the EU, to develop intercultural sensitivity, not to make diplomatic mistakes

63Multinational, corporate discourses can be noted in the use of Microsoft applications and open-source discourses in the use of Moodle. For the Pre-Ts, institutional technology choices complement or compete with corporate web applications which they use professionally or informally: Edmodo, Buusuu.com, Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Skype, and WhatsApp.

64As in the case of WAR and CLER, institutional policy has determined the choice of technology and the VLE which has been set up in KRA. If most classrooms are equipped with internet-connected computers, projectors and wifi, Pre-Ts admit that most teachers do not apply much technology and if they do, this is done mainly to extend the traditional teaching methods. Classroom furniture expresses and maintains hierarchical differences between teachers and students. The teachers the Pre-Ts work with hardly use the university online learning platform and more often than not it is used to upload PowerPoint presentations and other documents thereby reinforcing traditional teacher practices. In the case of the CALL course within which CLAVIER is situated, the Pre-Ts are encouraged to develop their competences to innovate in teaching while other teachers do quite the opposite. The CALL course is the only one in which distance collaboration is present.

65The Pre-Ts are active as learners within the CALL course but also as teachers in periods of teacher-practice or as employees in private language schools. Depending on the institutional, environment the Pre-Ts experience more or less freedom and encouragement to use digital technologies. For example, Aga, who works in a private language school, actively uses a language management system at her disposal and supports her teaching with online tools such as bussuu.com. Milena, who teaches in the private sector too, uses Edmodo, or a free educational platform. Informal discourses clearly affect Milena's positive appreciation of Edmodo which she likens to Facebook. Aga complains about the limited availability of equipment in her school and feels somewhat isolated in her innovative efforts as few teachers in her school use the educational platform and the available digital technologies. Milena suggests that less technology is available to teachers in Poland than in other countries.

66As learners, the Pre-Ts bring their personal, informal discourses to both online and offline spaces. All of the interviewed trainee teachers have their own smartphones, personal computers or laptops or digital cameras which they don't necessarily bring to class. They are all active social media users. By far the most popular medium is Facebook which Maria and Monika note is used as a means to collaborate with other students on coursework. Other social networks are used too: one of Pre-Ts uses Twitter (Beata) and the Spanish trainee Maria uses WhatsApp communicator. It is safe to state that in the informal learning contexts digital and distance collaboration have been normalized. Their private life sphere is saturated with digital hardware and often takes place in digital spaces. Thus, it can be concluded that the informal discourses present in the spaces of their social networks both offline and online provide a good deal of support, at least in terms of technical skills, for applying telecollaboration in formal education. However, the discourses in formal education spaces seem to offer only partial support for introducing telecollaboration.

67CLAVIER is situated within the KRA university assessment framework and this is a major factor in determining the level of participation of students. Differing time prioritisation or timetabling between partners is evident in Monika's and Kasia's narrative of the difficulties of telecollaboration. As is the case for WAR and CLER,

Anna: I knew that the more active I was the better graded I would be. (…) that is why I took part in it.

68As learners and pre-service teachers, determining what constitutes private personal interaction and what constitutes work available for institutional assessment within personal time is problematic. Who has and who gives access to the platform of communication used appears to be a crucial question.

Anna: If you have an access to a platform, then you can see who participated in what way. When it comes to Facebook or Skype I think a recording is a good idea, you should always have some proof. Teachers should establish the assessment criteria before the project starts and students should know that that will be observed.

Monika: I would say that in the case of Skype interaction this should not be assessed

Kasia: should not be assessed because we are adults and we became friends.

69The trainee participants' university environment can be characterized by conflicting discourses: this may be a source of motivation for undertaking telecollaborative exchanges but also a form of promulgation of the traditional teaching methods. The discourses which are made manifest in these Pre-Ts' private lives seem to be conducive to using technology and engaging in distance collaboration. However, there may well be conflict between what is considered appropriate demands for telecollaborative activity within personal time and spaces.

5.2. Interaction orders

5.2.1. In-service teachers

70We noted a spectrum in the degree of teacher control of student interaction in offline and online spaces. The use of white boards and projectors, indicates the importance given to a hierarchical, formal transmission of information, of instructions, of feedback by the teachers, with the students acting as audience or more passive participants. In-Ts largely control interaction within the classroom; students are invited to communicate in writing or orally individually, in pairs or in groups. Teachers may walk around the class to control productions or animate student self-correction. In the setting up of CLAVIER both Kate and Rob (WAR) prepare and control communicative tasks in the classroom.

71The use of video conferencing in class by Mick, Tim and Laure is organised similarly, with teacher controlled preparation of questions and a meeting between a WAR teacher and a class of students who take it in turns to communicate. The size of groups determines dialogue time, teacher time to control production and interactions considered profitable by teachers or students.

Tim: I had relatively small groups with classes of about a dozen who had been primed and who had questions (…) that was very positive. If I had 18 people it would be hard.

72Mick, Tim, Laure and Bill mention that students conduct video-conferencing with partners via Skype in their own time. Interaction is not controlled by teachers. The use of a VLE in WAR has changed the type of interactions prioritised in the classroom and shifted the emphasis onto practising the language individually outside the classroom.

Rob: the Moodle thing completely changed the way in which I encouraged students to learn themselves and completely I think lessened the extent to which my input was teacher based or rather their learning was teacher based because I was constantly referring to things they could do by themselves: listening exercises reading exercises etc. thus changing the nature of the extent to which I focussed on different skills in the classroom much more on productive skills and less on receptive skills in the contact hours because they could do that in the time they have by themselves.

73The use of computers and Google documents both inside and outside the classroom by CLER In-Ts blurs the difference between offline and online. In the classroom, it enables the teacher to control student production "in real time" (Laure and Mick). At the same time, it alters relationships: the teacher ceases to be the unique corrector of a student's work and becomes one of a number of possible collaborators who may or may not be present within the same offline space.

Tim: I can see that I am not the only person that they’ve opened their document to they’ve added their friends names and a lot of them say that they have used GDocs among themselves they have their own documents and that they have started using GDocs for other subjects that they didn’t do before so in that respect their English classes have opened them up to telecommunication without necessarily the language input but simply the relational input.

74The use of technology or social networking sites with which an In-T is unfamiliar changes the interaction order, introduces colleagues into the classroom and ends up with the student becoming the teacher.

Laure: We tried Twitter but it was my fault they didn’t know much about Twitter, Bill came to explain, or you I can’t remember, I have a Twitter account but I don’t use it. One of the students opened a Twitter account for the class.

75In both CLER and WAR importance is given to free practice of the language outside the classroom which is not controlled by the teacher. The result is a diversity of interaction orders and technology uses.

Tim: Some of my students told me later that they chatted, others as they didn’t find it easy to find times so they sent each other long messages which they correct. I did see quite a few examples of collaboration where the Warwick student would say I have got to, I need to write a report on the French opinion towards gay marriage or things like that so the French student would make an effort to look at statistics, to do some research in French, because as they had a good relationship, the French student wanted to satisfy the English students’ questions and vice versa.

5.2.2. Pre-service teachers

76Data from the Pre-Ts as to what constitute interaction orders within the university classroom was limited. It can be deduced that instructions for participation in the CLAVIER program were given to the students in the classroom by the teacher, using a projector, and a connected computer. Subsequent interactions took place within personal time at home via Google documents, Facebook, Skype, and email. Applications employed depend on the informal practices of partners.

Milena: Skype and e-mail only, Because he did not have Facebook. In the Spanish project we had also Facebook and Skype contact when we doing the lesson plans.

77Interaction orders also depend on perceptions of objectives and competence in the language used for communication:

Kasia: At first it was just: hi, hello how are you? Kind of thing. He just wanted to meet someone else. At the beginning that person wanted to learn and of course I was very willing to help but our collaboration did not manage to be as it should have been because the level of English during the Skype conversations was poor. I could hardly understand this person. There was little I could do to help him to improve his English so it was difficult to achieve anything although we could stay friends.

78As far as interaction orders within the teaching practices of the Pre-Ts are concerned, these differ according to context. One Pre-T (Anna) mentions working in a classroom equipped with an interactive board, overhead projectors, and a computer during her teacher practice, which, we can deduce, enriches traditional teacher controlled interaction orders with students. Another Pre-T, teaching in a private language school, talks of asynchronous online interaction, with individual clients using Edmodo as a VLE. Interview data indicate that this interaction is supplementary work for face-to-face class.

Aga: On Edmodo yes. I send them test on Edmodo yes. They even have grades straight away. Sometimes when I send them materials on the platform I don’t assess because I consider it extra work. This is for the diligent students who want to do extra work. So I don’t assess.

79In the case of exercises, control is done automatically by computer.

Aga: It is easier also for scoring purposes because some of it, a big proportion can be scored automatically by the computer. Why should we do that?

5.3. Historical bodies

5.3.1. In-service teachers

80Supranational, national, regional, and commercial discourses are at play in CLER and WAR's differing institutional cultures of pedagogical experimentation and technology integration. These cultures are clearly present in the In-Ts' historical bodies expressed in both interviews and narrative. Tim relates experiments of distance education via video conferencing between local language centres, facilitated by negotiations with France Telecom to reduce cost, supported by regional policy to connect rural areas. He talks of individual telephone classes for privately funded business clients to enable more effective, continuous, tutoring in the workspace. Bill highlights participation in a European funded telecollaborative project between language centres in five countries and being involved in a distance learning program which creates an environment of innovation.

Bill: It set the standards for what we were going to do afterwards in our university in other words reflecting on the use of ICT and language learning and language teaching.

81Rob's experience of VLE use in a past job at a previous university is reflected in his attitude on arrival at WAR where he finds no VLE.

Rob: I mean in Warwick we are quite behind the times.

82Professional discourses underpin Mick's experience of technology use in a multinational corporation with "the very-advanced-for the time Minitel" and his reaction "oh-how-so-modern over-head projectors" being used in the classroom. Laure talks of volunteering to be trained to use word-processors for her job in a company.

Laure: I was thrilled. I spent my weekends finding out how it worked.

83The same attitude can be seen in her willingness to develop skills in video-creation.

84Professional discourses are found in the pedagogical activities of Bill, Tim, Mick and Laure in the simulation of emails, telephone calls, reports.

85The influence of past language teachers or "pioneering" or "adventurous" colleagues on perceived importance of the role of technological innovation in the classroom is mentioned by Laure, Tim, Kate, Rob and Bill. Tim reflects that a memorably innovative teacher from his school days enabled him to accept that.

Tim: Making a fool of yourself in front of students while dealing with "complicated" technology is not going to kill you.

86For Tim and Mick their innovative role is closely attached to their personal identities and an interest in "sound delivery" or "sound collection" is carried into their practice as teachers.

Mick: I regard myself as "fairly modern," firstly because as a youngster in the sixties, I have been interested in technological progress.

87A positive attitude to video-conferencing for telecollaboration is related to family use.

Mick: I must not forget Skype which I am a great fan of for family reasons (keeping in touch with my student children).

88Only two of the In-Ts, Bill and Rob, agree that they are very comfortable with Computer Mediated Communication (CMC). Only Bill uses social networking sites. While the others may see an interest for the young they see little interest in it for themselves. Mick, Kate, and Laure share a belief that "networking is something" a younger generation "do instinctively", that "they are talking to their millions of friends around the world."

89Bill's previous experience in a telecollaborative project is reflected in the roles that he talks of adopting: organiser of telecollaborative project, intercultural moderator, and social moderator.

90For the other In-Ts when asked to speak of telecollaboration, they are unfamiliar with the term and they associate a variety of past professional and informal experiences with the term (Table 3).

Table 3–Activity Associated with Telecollaboration by In-Ts.

In-T

Activity Associated with Telecollaboration

Laure

A telephone call in a classroom by a group of 7 adult learners who took it in turns to speak to a person in the UK to plan a visit.

Use of a language laboratory to simulate telephone calls.

Tim

A demonstration of video-conferencing to connect distant centres

Penfriend correspondence

Kate

School linguistic trips

91The importance of facilitating opportunities for "real" or "natural" language learning via linguistic exchanges, book clubs, pen-friends, affinity groups, figure in the narratives of language learning of Laure, Tim, Bill, Mick, and Kate, and reflect blurring between institutional, professional and informal discourses. Bill reflects on how being bilingual is closer to the communicative approach he adopts as an EFL teacher than the traditional methods which he has experienced at school.

5.3.2. Pre-service teachers

92The narrative and the interviews with the Pre-Ts revealed their rich array of experience in applying digital technologies and some history of distance learning and collaboration in their private domains. Quite unsurprisingly, the trainees described frequent and habitual use of technologies for the purposes of managing their contacts, staying in touch with their families and friends as well as for entrainment. All of them use social networks not just for socializing but also for connecting with their university classmates in order to stay up to date with the news on the courses they attend. Interestingly, the participants almost exclusively talk about the digital technologies as ways of maintaining their existing, offline contacts. Only one participant, Anna, mentioned that during the telecollaboration with the French she made friends online and hopes to continue. This may suggest that these online contacts have a transactional rather than emotional value for these Pre-Ts.

93The other historical experiences of personal uses of technologies which may bear some resemblance to telecollaboration include using Skype for distance teaching and maintaining foreign contacts made offline. Aga talked about how she used this technology to teach her sisters English while working in the UK. Anna recollected that she continued the friendly relationships she made during a language course in England through Skype when she returned home to Poland.

94While the qualitative data collected from this group of participants provides a rich history of examples of technology use for private purposes, their experience of telecollaboration and, more generally, use of technologies in formal education sphere is largely limited. At schools the Pre-Ts did not participate in telecollaboration exchanges but at university they attended teacher training courses which offered them participation in two telecollaboration projects: one with Spanish graduates and one with French undergraduates. While working on these projects, they acted as language teachers who were responsible for creating didactic materials and also they took on the role of students who exchanged cultural knowledge. In sum, these telecollaboration projects gave them a chance to flavour the feeling of participation in telecollaboration.

95The experience of telecollaboration which they recorded were mixed in terms of the individual perception as some of the partners they collaborated with were more responsive whereas other were less. Monika states this:

I would say that it was difficult to agree on some appropriate time that would suit everybody. And it was difficult to synchronize those talks … yes, I think it was the most difficult…

96Kasia mentions that her Spanish partner had little time for her which was frustrating. However, she admits that due to telecollaboration she earned important experience of working with a person from another country: "It made me aware of how to work with different people, about their different attitudes."

97Some of the participants seem to have become trustful of the value of technologies once they successfully completed a task with the assistance of some digital applications or tools. For example, Anna recounts a situation where she wished to prepare a class with an interactive whiteboard. At first, she was sceptical and feared that the technology might turn out to be unreliable but she received help from her supervising teacher. This experience caused her to develop confidence in using technologies. Aga successfully managed to get a job in the UK after attending an interview through email and Skype.

98The collected data clearly indicate that this group of Pre-Ts grew up during what might be dubbed a transition period between the analogue and a more digitally driven education. This is maybe the reason why their attitudes towards technology in general are mixed. While Aga and Anna have had positive experiences of (language) learning with computers, and Beata and Maria had little experience of technology in school ("some VHS videos during classes"), Kasia and Monika remained sceptical and listed a number of negative issues related to the use of technologies. Kasia points out that due to using computer screens her eyesight deteriorated. Monika observed that her attitude towards technologies was evolving from a negative to a more positive or pragmatic one.

When I was a kid I was afraid of technology because I had little contact with it during my lessons. I did not think that it was useful for my learning at all. Now, I do not imagine my learning and my future teaching without various technological tools.

5.4. Teacher roles

5.4.1. In-service teachers

99The In-Ts consider their primary roles, understood as belonging to the traditional language tutoring dimension, to be organisers of classroom activities to enable learners to communicate orally and in writing, for which they search, organise and present documentary resources and act as language models, controllers, and assessors.

Laure: I mean English is to communicate. And communicating is what we want them to do. What we are here for. We have to teach them how to communicate.

100Only one CLER In-T (Bill) talks of facilitating and moderating distance learning online and being involved in research.

101The form of assessment determines the choice of activities. Given time constraints, and the unnaturalness of classroom communication, they see it as their role to organise and facilitate additional activities outside the classroom.

102All the In-Ts act as innovators. This innovation is firstly a means to carry out traditional teacher-centric roles more effectively. Three In-Ts (Mick, Laure, and Tim) mention the purchase of technology to introduce personal or authentic resources into the classroom (internet, PC, projector), to control learner productions more effectively (audio/video recorder). They talk of the adoption of Google documents as a means to present class or additional resources via shared "classnotes," to control and assess student work more effectively in "student portfolios," and to enable collaborative work inside or outside the classroom. Tim notes organisational time saved as compared to using email for student work. In the case of Rob and Kate, Moodle is used for similar functions.

103Four In-Ts (Mick, Laure, Tim, and Rob) encourage the learner use of portable devices in the classroom as dictionaries, internet terminals, or audio/video recorders. Mick and Laure innovate in assessment by asking students to use smartphones as cameras to create video projects.

104Rob, Kate, Tim, Mick, and Laure consider their role as regards telecollaboration to be that of organiser of additional activities, or facilitators, it is "a logistics exercise" (Mick) to enable "an excellent opportunity to actually do some real communication" (Rob). Tim and Laure, when faced with adopting the role of technical moderator for Moodle, consider it "difficult," "complicated" and "time-consuming." When Rob and Kate innovate by integrating written activities connected to WARCLER into the classroom: preparing profiles, writing blog articles, it increases learner motivation as "it had a real life feel to it because they knew that other native speakers were going to be reading it." In this case the teachers maintain their role of controllers of the production. Similarly, when Mick, Tim, and Laure innovate by organising a videoconferencing session with WARCLER, there is an increase in motivation of the learners to communicate.

105Faced with time constraints, organisational and technical difficulties, and lack of direct credit for participation, Laure, Rob, Kate, Tim, Mick, and the majority of the students focus on activities other than telecollaboration. The key role for In-Ts is that of assessor.

Laure: they want their exam, then you just concentrate on the exam.

106Given the importance of their roles as assessors, for the KRACLER exchange, Bill, Laure, and Mick innovate by organising an intercultural information exchange task, with a report and a portfolio of examples of participation as a core part of the course's assessment. They facilitate the grouping of students.

Laure: I had realised that for Warwick the fact that it wasn’t assessed was a problem.

Laure: It was really the way it should be done, more guided maybe with more tasks, specific tasks, and I really enjoyed it and the students too.

107They limit the role of technical e-moderation by using familiar Google documents and enabling students to use the collaborative tools of their choice, Google documents, Facebook, email, and Skype.

108Successful e-tandem partnerships lead one In-T to question the validity of his role.

Tim: Well for one thing for instance the students who had developed a partnership with a student in Warwick their online diary which they write on Google docs, explaining what they do from week to week to improve their English has become er they write a lot more, they are visibly very pleased to be able to share the pleasure they’ve got in communicating often they send me examples of their work, they ask me questions which are much more pertinent and a lot of them have stopped asking grammatical questions because they get the clear answers from the Warwick students so they have made tons of progress, my work has been for them… I could practically say you don’t really need me.

5.4.2. Pre-service teachers

109In reference to their current roles as teachers in technology rich contexts and those where telecollaboration could be employed as a pedagogical solution these teachers perceive themselves as predominantly performing the role of innovators.

110The student teachers express awareness of the need to be at the cutting edge of pedagogical developments.

Aga: [it is important to] keep abreast of the recent developments in the computer technology to exploit more effectively the possibilities it offers.

111They also wish to stay in tune with students' needs as regards their preferred learning strategies. Kasia makes the following statement:

Kasia: I am aware that the time goes by and I need to follow the newest trends because I will need it when I will be a teacher some day. I know that my students will be more familiar with online learning so I need to be prepared for it.

112Technologies are also perceived as a way of reaching the attention, interests and learning preferences of language learners that these Pre-Ts expect to encounter during their teaching careers, eg:

Beata: I would like to experiment with technologies to get to know my student's needs.

113The innovation role they assign to themselves encompasses a number of actions which involve the use of technologies. Aga, a student teacher who is especially innovation minded, says she experiments with various CMC modes, web 2.0 tools and learning management systems (eg Edmodo) while teaching her private classes. She uses computer technologies to enable students to have access to online homework or to catch up on classes which they have missed.

114Another way in which they see their jobs as involving some form of innovation is going beyond the resources traditionally offered by their work places such as course books or traditional library resources. The resources offered by the internet and digital technologies are perceived as having the advantage of adding extra value to classes in terms of interest and motivation to students.

115The second most often mentioned role is the role of the assessor. The teachers hold the belief that while working with computer technologies students need to be monitored, assessed, controlled and graded. However, what should constitute the target of assessment is not at all clear to them.

Monika: They should be assessed because this is some concrete activity that we were to complete and I wouldn’t like my conversations to be assessed, no… this is not appropriate for me.

116For example, what activities or productions should be assessed while learners engage in telecollaboration engenders some controversy. One of the Pre-Ts (Monika) clearly opts for a more traditional approach and aims to assess the traditional language elements in telecollaborative exchanges, such as grammar. She adds that students should be made aware of the assessment targets at the outset of a telecollaboration project.

Monika: I think it should be said much earlier that we are to be assessed.

117However, others are willing to give learners credit for participation.

Anna: But the most important condition is that teachers should mark it, grade it, the participation. You can’t be sure if students will be willing to participate willingly, intrinsically.

118There is a sense of the need to exercise control of what learners do when they engage in telecollaboration. This could take the form of tangible evidence which could be presented to the teacher, eg:

Anna: Students should provide some proof that interaction took place e.g. in the case of online interaction such as Skype meetings or chats.

119The Pre-Ts see themselves as moderators or e-moderators of the learning process. Moderation may take place between the teacher and students, between the students, and between the teacher and parents. One of the trainee teachers uses a learning management platform to communicate tasks to her students, discuss the tasks and give feedback. She is aware of those affordances of technologies which support the idea of learning anytime, anywhere, especially when it comes to teaching busy adults. Also, the moderator role involves encouraging students to engage in online discussions in the target language. An online learning management system became for Aga a way of informing parents about the progress their children make in learning English.

120Two Pre-Ts talk about their role as reflective practitioners or researchers. The experience of using technologies and participation in telecollaboration encouraged Monika to engage in professional development. She discovered her interest in technology supported language learning and claims to be willing to learn more.

Monika: So I am more aware of some affordances of technology and I think I am not going to stop my development and I am going to use various [MK4], I don’t know, maybe publications etc.

121Additionally, the Pre-Ts named some other roles they feel they need to perform. One of them is the role of an intercultural mediator. The experience of telecollaboration made one of the trainee teachers, Kasia, aware that organising distance collaboration tasks helps students learn about cultural differences between participants. Another role mentioned by the Pre-Ts was that of a designer, or a producer of resources to be used for language classes.

5.5. Possible selves

5.5.1. In-service teachers

122When asked to imagine the role of telecollaboration in language teaching, Mick, Laure, Tim, all focus on the development of linguistic competences. Mick stresses the use of Skype for oral expression.

Mick: I would see it as you know first and foremost as an oral device–oral comprehension, oral expression.

123When asked to imagine telecollaborative activities which they might organise, both Mick and Laure again stress that tasks are for "developing communication skills".

Laure: Just give them tasks, ask them to do something specific… Debating, er well writing blogs and things, things that I am not familiar with er… I don’t know.

124Tim, Mick and Bill all consider that telecollaboration has an important role to play in developing intercultural awareness. They do not specify that this might be a core objective. Tim finds it difficult to conceive lingua franca exchanges as do other of his colleagues.

Laure: One of our colleagues said why do you want to, why are you communicating with Polish people instead of British people? They found it strange.

125This appears ironic bearing in mind the large percentage of non-British students at WAR.

126Both Mick and Laure suggest that telecollaboration might also be a means to develop digital literacies or knowledge related to professional or academic discourses.

Mick: whether it’s in their private life or in a company they are going to be using you know technology to video-conference.

Laure: they can exchange also in their academic field, it can be useful for them in their studies outside of English, and it can be useful for them when they are looking for a job

127Only Rob suggests that digital literacies might become a core component of assessment in the future.

Rob: the outcomes could be modified to incorporate the fact of technology and the practice of technology in language acquisition can become a more explicit outcome in its own right in due course.

128Tim notes the growing importance of informal passion-based online learning to his students via gaming and music which he considers very much "the future." Mick imagines encouraging, facilitating, or perhaps setting up online communities. He gives no indication whether this might be a core activity to be recognised institutionally for assessment or whether it would be simply an additional learning activity to be encouraged.

129Mick, Laure, Rob, Bill all envisage changes to learning spaces and timetabling towards a more open organisation, with learners spending more time learning autonomously in personal spaces with a classroom as a space for feedback.

Mick: yeah, the outcome of this will be openness it will not be a closed space.

Rob: do lots of technologically based stuff outside the classroom so in a sense there’s nothing really preventing that happening now, the only thing that is preventing that now… full on change now is probably tutor attitudes more than anything else.

130In order to further develop telecollaboration, Rob highlights the importance of a "need for even more on-going staff development" which Kate echoes as she feels she needs "some practical ideas of how we can manage this." There are times however when In-Ts simply feel overwhelmed by the pace of technological change and thus are at a loss to see a way forward.

Laure: I feel like I am caught up in a whirlwind. Is all this new technology really going to be useful for language learning?

131All the In-Ts envisage a differentiation of roles. Teachers will be specialised in different areas. Laure, Mick, Rob, and Kate speak of a group of "pioneers" or "experts."

Mick: I could see more easily at this point a group of experts who really do the conceptual also the networking to put in place a program and maybe another group of teachers who just use that in a very passive way because it’s effective and maybe a middle way with a group of teachers who come in to the expert group who come in to give their opinion to the experts excluding the ones of course who just don’t want to play the game at all.

132Bill imagines teachers becoming "designers" of learning "frameworks," more "facilitators" than instructors.

Bill: Our role will be different in the sense it will be more regarded as setting a framework, setting a system in which we give the opportunity to a learner to open up towards other spaces and other people and also it will also enable us to be more of a guide to some extent rather than simply being able to transfer knowledge and so on.

133He talks of adopting a social moderation role for online learners. Both Mick and Bill talk of the importance of the role of intercultural moderation.

Bill: the first barrier is that one is to go towards someone else, there has to be a triggering device for our students to be able to open up.

Mick: we have got to overcome is this parochialism that we have today where just a few people network.

134In order to moderate interculturally online Mick suggests that teachers need themselves to have or to develop such networking competences.

Mick: if you are going to open up a group of students nationally or internationally then it seem absurd to expect the students to network if the teachers are not also involved in that.

135Kate, and Laure believe that with a younger generation networking already there is perhaps no need for teachers to moderate.

Laure: the students won’t need the teachers to be connected.

136With many international students at WAR this may be the case for some, in CLER, Tim tempers this vision.

Tim: what they are not doing is networking in other languages.

137Given the possibility of changing roles, neither Mick, Kate, Laure nor Tim imagine themselves networking to organise telecollaborative exchanges with other institutions.

Laure: Am I prepared to try and call and pair this university with another university? I don’t know if I would take the time to do that.

138Tim questions whether organising exchanges is really part of a teacher's role.

Tim: do I need to be an English teacher to do that?

139As for other colleagues becoming involved in telecollaboration…

Bill: some of my colleagues wouldn’t do it because it’s too much hassle.

Kate: Organise Internet exchanges–I don’t think everybody would be willing to.

Laure: it’s one more thing to do, something which they don’t know and it’s work so… (laughs).

140All the In-Ts see telecollaboration becoming normalised in some form in the future. Rob sees his role as facilitating its development in his local context.

Rob: I am trying to encourage it across all languages in the next year or two so it will actually be a normal part of language centre activity.

141To the question "Will telecollaboration be a core part of language teaching in 20 years' time?" Rob, Laure, and Mick reply "Yes!" Bill considers it will be "very much close to the centre of teaching." Tim answers with a laugh, "Anything is possible in 20 years!"

5.5.2. Pre-service teachers

142The Pre-Ts were asked about their visions of teacher roles they might perform as regards employing technologies and especially organising telecollaboration in the future. The most frequently mentioned role in this context is the role of the facilitator in its various guises. The participants point out that telecollaboration creates learning situations, which make language learning fun, enjoyable, develop learners' digital communication skills, help them become more efficient learners, and which facilitate real communication.

143The need to make language learning attractive is one reason for teachers to adopt technology-based solutions, including telecollaboration, in teaching.

Aga: telecollaboration makes language learning fun (…) and useful.

Kasia: technologies would make some classes more interesting for students.

144Some of these Pre-Ts also are aware that while working with telecollaboration projects their teaching needs to encompass digital literacy education. Monika, for example, notes that learners will have to be instructed and helped on how to communicate with others using video tools.

Monika: …teachers will focus on such skills (…) to raise awareness of how to collaborate with some other universities and to develop such skills which are important in the interaction, (…) with video interaction.

145The same student teacher points out that telecollaboration may help learners to become more autonomous. She notes that while working on telecollaborative tasks students can develop their decision-making skills and engage in reflection on learning. This can take the form of the teacher encouraging learners to work with a portfolio in which learners document their interaction with their telecollaboration partners.

146One more aspect of the facilitator role which comes with telecollaboration concerns the opportunity for students to complete real communication tasks in the target language. The Pre-Ts stated that the aims of telecollaboration will be "to make students able to find themselves in communicative situations" (Anna) and "to encourage students to communicate with the peers" (Beata).

147The second most often mentioned future role of the teacher was that of the innovator. Most of these Pre-Ts find themselves obliged to stay up to date with pedagogical innovations and are willing to implement them. For example, they feel they might need to go beyond the classroom in seeking liaison opportunities with other institutions. Telecollaboration will also create the need to develop some alternative to the traditional assessment procedures.

148Another future teacher role imagined by theses Pre-Ts was that of the reflective practitioner and researcher. The experience of telecollaboration and using technologies seemed to have aroused in these Pre-Ts the contention that dealing with technologies in teaching requires engaging in continuous professional development. The Pre-Ts spoke of their desire to continue their professional education by means of reading relevant publications or enrolling in professional courses for teachers. Taking up telecollaboration projects was also seen as a way of dealing with the so-called teacher burnout syndrome. Telecollaboration is regarded as a "non-standard" pedagogical practice, and hence a way of avoiding the ennui of the everyday teaching chores.

149The role of the assessor was mentioned a number of times in the interviews and narratives written by the Pre-Ts. Notably, the interviewed trainees foresee changes in the ways that learners will have to be assessed. First of all, they note that telecollaboration which hinges upon free interaction requires teachers to probe into the nature of interaction in the target language. For example, Anna, when commenting on the assessment in the context of telecollaboration, states:

Anna: (…) not only of grammar etc. but also some other aspects which are important in real interaction on the everyday basis.

150Here, she points to the need to go beyond assessing only such traditionally evaluated aspects as grammatical accuracy, and probably assess also discourse skills and the efficiency of interaction.

151The technical aspects of assessment were also mentioned. Since some of the interactions will need to be recorded or video recorded, teachers will be in a better position to assess the quality of the language and the interactions. Aga hopes that "teachers will be able to revise… and listen to them again." The technological enhancement of assessment may also aid language learners since the real interaction within the exchanges with collaborating partners will make communication easier and more realistic. Anna recalls classes when they discussed tests in which learners were involved in real communication when they saw their interlocutor and she concludes that the use of video might give learners an opportunity to perform better due to the more realistic and facilitative conditions of such communication in which learners can read the body language, gestures or facial expressions.

152One more role envisaged by the Pre-Ts cohort was that of the intercultural mediator.

Beata: Telecollaboration should serve the purpose of exchanging experiences and ideas and also learning from other people from different countries.

153The Pre-Ts acknowledge the integrative value of English in facilitating intercultural understanding. The teacher is the one who can aid students in developing their intercultural sensitivity. Telecollaboration exchanges are also perceived as useful in shaping learners' social and political identities.

Anna: [Such exchanges are] necessary because of our membership in the EU.

154As regards telecollaboration these Pre-Ts would see themselves mainly in the roles of innovators in the educational institutions in which they find themselves at present. These students seem to feel that introducing technology-based pedagogy is a matter of going to considerable lengths in straining their own and schools' resources in overcoming organisational and structural obstacles. One source of such difficulties is the relative lack of access to technologies which enable telecollaboration. The experience they have with their private classes or the internships in schools is that most technologies (especially hardware) are not easily obtained in their most immediate workplaces, ie classrooms. The trainees experienced difficulties as regards the access to laptop/desktop computers. Aga is fairly explicit about it.

Aga: When it comes to classroom I hope they will be better equipped.

Aga: I don’t think teachers have enough equipment.

155Aga also feels that teachers around her need to be better educated in terms of ICT in language teaching, especially in comparison with her generation.

Aga: I hope there will more courses for teachers who are not digital natives.

6. Discussion

156This analysis has enabled us to identify discourses within our nexus of practice which may act as obstacles or bridges to rethinking and redefining teaching roles. If interaction orders within classrooms remain largely unchanged, the introduction of connected collaborative tools like Google documents, video-conferencing or chat for online exchanges is clearly affecting relations between learners and teachers. In WAR, CLER, and KRA, there is a clear move of focus away from teacher monitored classroom activities to more personally meaningful interaction outside the classroom. Informal or professional discourses associated with technology can, we have seen, motivate teachers to innovate within the classroom, or to engage in professional development in order to assimilate emerging digital literacies. One such example of this is the emergence of collaborative video projects for assessment at CLER. Study of the historical bodies of the In-Ts and Pre-Ts shows diverse cultures of use of technology but clear generational patterns in the use of social networking sites for instance. Professional discourses and past experience of online collaboration integrated into historical bodies of teachers is a major factor in their readiness to innovate and influences their attitudes as to what are considered appropriate tools, tasks or means of assessment for language learners. The use of Skype for professional communication, the growing emphasis on corporate social networking applications, the need to be interculturally sensitive in a globally connected world, and the importance of developing individual digital identities are examples of this and may lead to their integration into course programs as explicit objectives. Conversely, traditional roles of teachers as assessors of what are considered purely linguistic competences act as obstacles to the transformation of practices. It would appear that assessment by reflective portfolio has the potential to facilitate modification of these roles. However, including informal or personal discourses in assessment leads to the blurring of boundaries and is problematic for both teachers and learners.

157Workloads of In-Ts and the importance accorded to their roles as traditional assessors may limit their ability to invest in non-core activities and training. Similarly, teachers who work part time, are at the end of their careers, or who have no job security will probably be unable or unwilling to invest the time necessary. Institutional support of pedagogical innovation, policies of continuous professional development, access to communities of practice, the presence of pioneers, are essential bridges to transformation. Data from the Pre-Ts indicates that including telecollaboration in teacher training will allow them to more easily envisage its integration into their classrooms. On the other hand, colleagues with more traditional approaches, lack of access to technology, and heavy workloads will remain obstacles to its generalisation.

158Both In-Ts and Pre-Ts consider their primary roles to be organisers, facilitators, controllers, and assessors of language for communicative purposes, thus emphasizing the language tutoring dimension. Pre-Ts, as post-graduate EFL students, see themselves more explicitly as reflective practitioners who need to be engaged in continuous professional development. The In-Ts feel obliged to reflect on their roles when faced with a continual, at times disorienting introduction of technology into institutional, professional, and informal spaces. Both In-Ts and Pre-Ts consider that telecollaboration is an additional activity to facilitate "real" language practice for learners. Excepting In-Ts with experience of international corporate or educational networks, non-native Polish Pre-Ts are more prepared to see the importance of lingua franca exchanges and the interest of development of intercultural awareness. The In-Ts are more convinced of telecollaboration becoming a core part of language teaching but both groups struggle to determine the tasks which should be organised and be assessed.

159The introduction of telecollaboration creates tensions in both In-Ts' and Pre-Ts' perceptions as to what roles they should perform. The In-Ts see that there needs to be differentiation and specialisation of roles connected to telecollaboration, particularly as regards the roles of designer, online, technical or intercultural moderator. While In-Ts might appreciate the professional need for digital presence, the Pre-Ts hesitate to make a connection between their largely informal digital presence and professional discourses. The latter observation to a large extent resonates with Hoffstaedter and Kohn's (2015a: 7) findings concerning the impact of telecollaboration on student teachers who say that: "The overall impact of telecollaboration on teacher and student teachers can be described as a conflict between perceived pedagogic potential and adverse conditions for implementation."

160Only those In-Ts and Pre-Ts with a well-developed digital presence for informal or professional purposes are able to take on the role of modelling digital presence. Training of these In-Ts in the use of social networking applications may make them aware of their importance and enable them to facilitate activities in a limited way but a lack of personal digital presence will prevent them from acting as networking models, or moderators, and assessors of genres of digital communication with which they remain unfamiliar. Pre-Ts, having largely been taught in traditional classrooms, with a focus on the development of purely linguistic competence, struggle to make the connection between their informal online presence and professional discourses. Differentiation of training, to reflect evolving and more specialised roles of teachers, and a formal recognition of such roles by institutions is essential for more widespread, core integration of telecollaborative practices.

161There is an appreciation of a need to adapt the locus of learning towards personal spaces and to facilitate the autonomy of learners. There is a realisation among In-Ts in particular that "we are at a crossroads" (Bill) and that teacher roles are evolving. These new roles include designer of online or hybrid learning environments, e-moderator, intercultural moderator. This realisation is accompanied by fear, reluctance or inability to see a clear way forward. We would agree with Thorne and Black (2007) that the time has come to stop viewing telecollaboration as a "proxy" for face to face or non-digital textual communication. Indeed, we would suggest that is essential to

accommodate emerging communication tools, their emergent and plastic cultures of use, as well as their attendant communicative genres that are, and have been for some years, everyday dimensions of competent social and professional activity (Thorne & Black, 2007: 136).

7. Conclusions

162By adopting this approach, we have situated ourselves as co-participants in this nexus of practice. Through the action of this reflective telecollaboration, we better understand the diverse supranational, corporate, institutional, professional, personal, and informal cycles of discourses which affect our practice, the enduring resistance of traditional classroom interaction orders, the tension between walled gardens which maintain institutional boundaries, and web 2.0 tools–seductively open, widely networked, "personal" data farms for extranational corporations. We have been able to examine the complexity of the multiple discourses, experiences, and influences which make up our historical bodies and differentiate our cultures and beliefs. This study has indeed been a useful means to uncover the perceptions of in-service and pre-service teachers as to the roles which they currently perform and those which they might adopt in the future.

163We conclude that there is a marked difference between personal practices and discourses and the institutional discourses. The personal context is technology saturated and is conducive to telecollaboration in which sometimes the teachers engage spontaneously for pragmatic and personal reasons. On the other hand, the different institutional discourses overpower the desire to innovate and induce more traditional roles on the teachers. There is a marked difference between how In-Ts and Pre-Ts define their roles. Pre-Ts declare that they need to develop their technical competences in order to be effective, innovative teachers. Also, they discern the gap between their and their students' informal educational strategies and the teaching practices that take place at the university and schools. At the same time, while the In-Ts express willingness to innovate, not all of them feel comfortable with the technologies that telecollaboration requires.

164Telecollaboration may be perceived as a transformative activity in that it has the potential to prompt teachers to redefine their current roles. Telecollaboration brings into the classroom and institution voices from the outside and gives more agency to the voices from within thereby potentially changing the interaction orders in the educational institution. The tensions between the long established and the new discourses thus created may lead to the transformation of teaching practices and, in consequence, to teachers redefining their professional roles.

165In conducting this nexus analysis, we have become aware of its current limitations. To further extend this analysis it would be necessary to include observation notes and to widen samples to include colleagues who are not engaged in telecollaboration so as to inform institutional policy, to study Pre-Ts who are being educated within the CLER and WAR contexts as well as those of KRA, to engage in autoethnography using the data amassed in the setting up and development of CLAVIER. Given the scale of the project, it will be necessary to expand the team of researchers who work with us to be able to follow the evolution of this institution-wide project longitudinally.

166We ourselves are ever more conscious of the need to rethink and redefine our own roles, given the time constraints which oblige us to prioritise with respect to our different contexts, resources, and beliefs. It is essential that we define the digital and intercultural literacies which are appropriate to each pedagogical context, to reconsider the offline and online places of interaction to be monitored, to redefine the means and criteria of assessment, to work in close collaboration with colleagues of other disciplines. Finally, we must engage in critical reflection so that we may educate our co-learners ethically within these increasingly connected spaces which blur separations between personal and professional life, between personal, institutional, and corporate imperatives.

Haut de page

Références

Les liens externes étaient valides à la date de publication.

Bax, S. (2003). "CALL–past, present and future." System, vol. 31, n° 1. pp. 13-28. Available online: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~jonrein/internettech10/bax_03.pdf

Beaven, T., Emke, M., Ernest, P., Germain-Rutherford, A., Hampel, R., Hopkins, J., Stanojevic, Mateusz M. & Stickler, U. (2010). "Needs and challenges for online language teachers–the ECML project DOTS." Teaching English with Technology: A Journal for Teachers of English, vol. 10, n° 2. pp. 5-20. Available online: http://oro.open.ac.uk/23330/1/beaven_et_al.pdf

Belz, J. & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2003). "Teachers as Intercultural Learners: Negotiating German-American Telecollaboration along the Institutional Fault Line." Modern Language Journal, vol. 87, n° 1. pp. 71-89. Abstract available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1193000

Benson, P. & Nunan, D. (eds.) (2004). Learners' Stories. Differences and Diversity in Language Learning. Cambridge: CUP. Available online: http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/49388/sample/9780521849388ws.pdf

Blin, F. & Munro, M. (2008). "Why hasn't technology disrupted academics' teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory." Computers & Education, vol. 50, n° 2. pp. 475-490. Abstract available online: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131507001194?via%3Dihub

Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.

Borg, S. (2009). "English Language Teachers' Conceptions of Research." Applied Linguistics, vol. 30, n° 3. pp. 358-388. Abstract available online: https://academic.oup.com/applij/article-abstract/30/3/358/229029

Conole, C., De Laat, M., Dillon, D. & Darby, J. (2008). "'Disruptive technologies', 'pedagogical innovation': What's new? Findings from an in-depth study of students' use and perception of technology." Computers & Education, vol. 50, n° 2. pp. 511-524. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/42795967_%27Disruptive_technologies%27_%27pedagogical_innovation%27_What%27s_new_Findings_from_an_in-depth_study_of_students%27_use_and_perception_of_technology

Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: CUP. Available online: https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf

Derivry, M., Stratilaki, S., Potolia, A. & Boughnim, A. (2015). "Intercultural communication from the perspectives of experienced TILA learners." In TILA Research Results on Telecollaboration. pp. 102-117. Available online: http://www.tilaproject.eu/moodle/pluginfile.php/2694/mod_page/content/15/TILA%20Research%20Results%20on%20Telecollaboration.pdf

Donnison, S. (2007). "Digital Generation Pre-Service Teachers as Change Agents: a Paradox." Australian Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 32, n° 4. pp. 71-86. Available online: http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1389&context=ajte

Dooly, M. (2009). "New competencies in a new era? Examining the impact of a teacher training project." ReCALL, vol. 21, n° 3. pp. 352-369. Abstract available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/recall/article/new-competencies-in-a-new-era-examining-the-impact-of-a-teacher-training-project/A660536824A0B5556FD0EAEAAC76ED17/core-reader

Dooly, M. (2010). "Teacher 2.0." In Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds.). pp. 277-303.

Dooly, M. & Sadler, R. (2013). "Filling in the gaps: Linking theory and practice through telecollaboration in teacher education." ReCALL, vol. 25, n° 1. pp. 4-29. Abstract available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0958344012000237

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). "The L2 motivational self system." In Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. pp. 9-42.

Dörnyei, Z. & Murphey, T. (2003). Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: CUP.

Furstenberg, G. & Levet, S. (2010). "Integrating telecollaboration into the language classroom: Some insights." In Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds). pp. 305-336. Available online: http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/prodev/si11olc/integrating_telecollaboration_in_classroom.pdf

Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: theory and method. London and New York: Routledge.

Goffman, E. (1983). "The interaction order." American Sociological Review, vol. 48, n° 1. pp. 1-17. Available online: https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/academic/social_sciences/sociology/Reading%20Lists/Social%20Psych%20Prelim%20Readings/I.%20Classics/1983%20Goffman%20-%20Interaction%20Order.pdf

Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds.) (2010). Telecollaboration 2.0. Languages, Literacies and Intercultural Learning in the 21st Century. Bern: Peter Lang.

Guth, S. & Helm, F. (2012). "Developing multiliteracies in ELT through telecollaboration." ELT Journal, vol. 66, n° 1. pp. 42-51. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francesca_Helm/publication/273370405_Developing_multiliteracies_in_ELT_through_telecollaboration/links/56577c8508aefe619b1f2215.pdf

Guth, S. & Marini-Maio, N. (2010). "Close Encounters of a New Kind: The Use of Skype and Wiki in Telecollaboration." In Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds.). pp. 413-427.

Hamman, D., Gosselin, K., Romano, J. & Bunuan, R. (2010). "Using possible-selves theory to understand the identity development of new teachers." Teacher and Teacher Education, vol. 26, n° 7. pp. 1349-1361. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223551670_Using_possible-selves_theory_to_understand_the_identity_development_of_new_teachers

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education ESL.

Hauck, M. (2007). "Critical success factors in a TRIDEM exchange." ReCALL, vol. 19, n° 2. pp. 202-223. Abstract available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/D8E4E235D0144677A33BADDC46C02CFA/S0958344007000729a.pdf/critical-success-factors-in-a-tridem-exchange.pdf

Hauck, M. (2010). "Telecollaboration: At the Interface between Multimodal and Intercultural Communicative Competence." In Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds.). pp. 219-248.

Helm, F. (2009). "Language and culture in an online context: what can learner diaries tell us about intercultural competence?" Language and Intercultural Communication, vol. 9, n° 2. pp. 91-104. Abstract available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14708470802140260

Helm, F., Guth, S. & O'Dowd, R. (2012). University Language Classes Collaborating Online. Report on the Integration of Telecollaborative Networks in European Universities. Available online: https://www.unicollaboration.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/1.1-Telecollaboration_report_Executive_summary-Oct2012_0.pdf

Hoffstaedter, P. & Kohn, K. (2015a). "Research on results on telecollaboration: General part." TILA Research Results on Telecollaboration. pp. 3-20. Available online: http://www.tilaproject.eu/moodle/pluginfile.php/2694/mod_page/content/15/TILA%20Research%20Results%20on%20Telecollaboration.pdf

Hoffstaedter, P. & Kohn, K. (2015b). "Cooperative lingua franca conversations in intercultural telecollaboration exchanges between pupils in secondary foreign language education." TILA Research Results on Telecollaboration. pp. 66-83. Available online: http://www.tilaproject.eu/moodle/pluginfile.php/2694/mod_page/content/15/TILA%20Research%20Results%20on%20Telecollaboration.pdf

Hootstein, E. (2002). "Wearing Four Pairs of Shoes: The Roles of E-Learning Facilitators." In Driscoll, M. & Reeves, T. (eds.). E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). pp. 457-462. Available online: http://www.astd.org/LC/2002/1002_hootstein.htm

Jauregi, K. & Bañados, E. (2008). "Virtual interaction through video-web communication. A step towards enriching and internationalizing language learning programmes." ReCALL, vol. 20, n° 2. pp. 183-207. Abstract available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/recall/article/virtual-interaction-through-videoweb-communication-a-step-towards-enriching-and-internationalizing-language-learning-programs/0FBF5F37F94B448DB3D2173AFB463895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344008000529

Kubanyiova, M. (2009). "Possible selves in language teacher development." In Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. pp. 314-332.

Lamy, M.-N. & Goodfellow, R. (2010). "Telecollaboration and Learning 2.0." In Guth, S. & Helm, F. (eds.). pp. 107-138. Available online: https://lamymn.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/telecollaboration-and-learning-2-0.pdf

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2006). New Literacies: Everyday Practices and Classroom Learning. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/567501/New_Literacies_Everyday_Practices_and_Classroom_Learning

Lee, L. (2007). "Fostering Second Language Oral Communication Through Constructivist Interaction in Desktop Videoconferencing." Foreign Language Annals, vol. 40, n° 4. pp. 635-649. Abstract available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02885.x/abstract.

Leontiew, A. N. (1962). O rozwoju psychiki. Warszawa: PWN.

MacKinnon, T. (2016). "The Clavier network." In O'Dowd, R. & Lewis, T. (eds). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 235-240. Available online: https://books.google.fr/books?id=dRreCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA235&lpg=PA235&dq=The+Clavier+Network&source=bl&ots=YbxA9DhKRp&sig=VvUuf9IFJdWXNwl_mS71LSG7UaE&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizs5Wi0fvUAhVFsxQKHe-GCwAQ6AEITDAH#v=onepage&q=The%20Clavier%20Network&f=false

Markus, H. & Nurius, P. (1986). "Possible Selves." American Psychologist, vol. 41, n° 9. pp. 954-969. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232565363_Possible_Selves

McPherson, M. A. & Nuñez, J. M. B. (2004). "The Role of Tutors as an Integral Part of Online Learning Support." European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, n° 1. pp. 1-10. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8b51/6b177400bcfe282e5ab25f40ecb1fe506a36.pdf?_ga=2.216964885.247619946.1499584672-1855901177.1499584672

Müller-Hartmann, A. (2007). "Teacher Role in Telecollaboration: Setting Up and Managing Exchanges." In O'Dowd, R. (ed.). Online Intercultural Exchange. An Introduction for Foreign Language Teachers. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. pp. 167-193.

Müller-Hartmann, A. (2012). "The Classroom-Based Action Research Paradigm in Telecollaboration." In Dooly, M. & O'Dowd, R. (eds.). Researching online foreign language interaction and exchange. Bern: Peter Lang. pp. 156-192. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0414-1

O'Dowd, R. (2005). "Negotiating Sociocultural and Institutional Contexts: The Case of Spanish-American Telecollaboration." Language and Intercultural Communication, vol. 5, n° 1. pp. 40-56. Abstract available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14708470508668882

O'Dowd, R. (2006). Telecollaboration and the Development of Intercultural Communicative Competence. Berlin: Langenscheidt. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/362172/Telecollaboration_and_the_development_of_intercultural_communicative_competence

O'Dowd, R. (2009). "Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the core of foreign language education?." In Develotte, C., Mangenot, F. & Nissen, E. (eds.). Actes du colloque "Échanger pour apprendre en ligne". http://epal.u-grenoble3.fr/pdf/epal2009-odowd.pdf

O'Dowd, R. (2010). "Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the core of foreign language education?" Language Teaching, vol. 44, n° 3. pp. 368-380. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231992442_Online_foreign_language_interaction_Moving_from_the_periphery_to_the_core_of_foreign_language_education

O'Dowd, R. (2013). "The competences of a collaborative teacher." The Language Learning Journal, vol. 43, n° 2. pp. 194-207. Abstract available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09571736.2013.853374?journalCode=rllj20 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2013.853374

Pennock-Speck, B. & Clavel-Arroitia, B. (2015). "Analysis of teacher roles in TILA telecollaboration." TILA Research Results on Telecollaboration. pp. 131-137. Available online: http://www.tilaproject.eu/moodle/pluginfile.php/2694/mod_page/content/15/TILA%20Research%20Results%20on%20Telecollaboration.pdf

Phipps, S. & Borg, S. (2007). "Exploring the relationship between teachers' beliefs and their classroom practice." The Teacher Trainer, vol. 21, n° 3. pp. 17-19.

Polisca, P. (2011). "Language learning and the raising of cultural awareness through Internet telephony: a case study." The Language Learning Journal, vol. 39, n° 3. pp. 329-343. Abstract available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09571736.2010.538072

Sclater, N. (2010). "eLearning in the Cloud." International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, vol. 1, n° 1. pp. 661-670. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220066307_ELearning_in_the_cloud

Scollon, R. & Wong Scollon, S. (2003). Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London and New York: Routledge.

Scollon, R. & Wong Scollon, S. (2004). Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. London and New York: Routledge. Available on line: https://www.ut.edu.sa/documents/182223/5072461/Nexus+Analysis-+Discourse+and+the+Emerging+Internet.pdf/f3940f86-0716-4b38-827a-8d6796787e2b

The New London Group (2000). "A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures." In Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (eds.). Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. London: Routledge. pp. 60-92. Available online: http://vassarliteracy.pbworks.com/f/Pedagogy+of+Multiliteracies_New+London+Group.pdf

Thorne, S. L. (2003). "Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication." Language Learning & Technology, vol. 7, n° 2. pp. 38-67. http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/thorne/

Thorne, S. L. & Black, R. W. (2007). "Language and literacy development in computer-mediated contexts and communities." Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, vol. 27. pp. 133-160. Abstract available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annual-review-of-applied-linguistics/article/language-and-literacy-development-in-computer-mediated-contexts-and-communities/F4075BF342FCDCC8762C08A3885319B6

Tian, J. & Wang, Y. (2010). "Taking language learning outside the classroom: Learners' perspectives of eTandem learning via Skype." Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, vol. 4, n° 3. pp. 181-197. Abstract available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/50219649_Taking_language_learning_outside_the_classroom_Learners%27_perspectives_of_eTandem_learning_via_Skype DOI: 10.1080/17501229.2010.513443

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ware, P. (2005). "'Missed' communication in online communication: tensions in a German-American telecollaboration." Language Learning & Technology, vol. 9, n° 2. pp. 64-89. http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/ware/

Zawadzka, E. (2004). Nauczyciele języków obcych w dobie przemian. Kraków: Impuls.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1–Evolution of CLAVIER network.
URL http://alsic.revues.org/docannexe/image/3140/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 100k
Titre Figure 2–CLAVIER informal/formal online ecology.
URL http://alsic.revues.org/docannexe/image/3140/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 164k
Titre Figure 3–CLAVIER Network Evolution.
URL http://alsic.revues.org/docannexe/image/3140/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 65k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence

Simon Ensor, Marcin Kleban et Christine Rodrigues, « Telecollaboration: foreign language teachers (re)defining their role », Alsic [En ligne],  | 2017, mis en ligne le 14 octobre 2017, Consulté le 23 novembre 2017. URL : http://alsic.revues.org/3140 ; DOI : 10.4000/alsic.3140

Haut de page

Auteurs

Simon Ensor

Simon Ensor is an English teacher at Centre des langues et du multimédia, université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand. His research interests include language learner motivation, connecting informal and formal learning, telecollaboration and social networks.
Affiliation: laboratoire de recherche sur le langage EA 999, université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
E-mail: simon.ensor@univ-bpclermont.fr
Web: http://lrl.univ-bpclermont.fr/spip.php?rubrique46
Address: laboratoire de recherche sur le langage, Maison des sciences de l'homme, 4, rue Ledru, 63057 Clermont-Ferrand cedex 01, France.

Marcin Kleban

Marcin Kleban is a researcher at the Institute of English studies at the Jagiellonian university in Krakow. His research interests include applications of computer technologies in English language teaching and learning, school and classroom use and implementation of ICT in language learning, teacher education and telecollaboration in teacher education and EFL pedagogy.
Affiliation: Institute of English Studies of the Jagiellonian university.
E-mail: marcin.kleban@uj.edu.pl
Web: http://www.ifa.filg.uj.edu.pl/marcin-kleban
Address: institute of English studies, Jagiellonian university, ul.Mickiewicza 9a, 31-120 Kraków, Poland.

Christine Rodrigues

Christine Rodrigues is associate professor of language sciences at université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand. Her research areas include vocabulary learning in multimedia environments, CALL for French as a foreign language and English as a foreign language, open and distance learning, and virtual worlds.
Affiliation: laboratoire de recherche sur le langage EA 999, université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
E-mail: christine.rodrigues@univ-bpclermont.fr
Web: http://lrl.univ-bpclermont.fr/spip.php?rubrique58
Address: laboratoire de recherche sur le langage, Maison des sciences de l'homme, 4, rue Ledru, 63057 Clermont-Ferrand cedex 01, France.

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d'auteur

CC-by-nc-nd

Haut de page