You are here:

#SaudiMoves: How Saudi EFL Learners Exchange Intercultural Microblogs on Twitter PROCEEDING

, Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Saudi Arabia

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-31-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the discourse of the intercultural microblogs used for meaning making and negotiation between the Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners and Native Speakers (NSs) and non-Arab Non-native Speakers (NNSs) of English on Twitter Chiefly, it endeavored to analyze their exchange structure The Saudi EFL learners’ microblogs were collected from preexisting intercultural Twitter pages and hashtags through a non-probability sampling technique They underwent a discourse analysis of the exchange structure according to Sinclair and Coulthard (1975), Stubbs (1983) and Pilkington's (1999, 2001) approaches The findings of the study revealed that the Saudi EFL learners interacted with the NSs and non-Arab NNSs of English mainly by employing responsive moves They also composed initiative and re-initiative moves With respect to the sub-moves, evaluation and complement were found to be more common than feedback and informing in their intercultural tweets

Citation

AL-Qudaimi, K. (2017). #SaudiMoves: How Saudi EFL Learners Exchange Intercultural Microblogs on Twitter. In J. Dron & S. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 898-904). Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 16, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Al-Zubeiry, H. (2013). Intercultural miscommunication in the production of communicative patterns by Arab EFL learners. International Journal of English Linguistics, 3(5), 69.
  2. Benson, P. (2015). Commenting to learn: Evidence of language and intercultural learning in comments on YouTube videos. Language Learning& Technology, 19(3), 88-105.
  3. Chartrand, R. (2012). Social networking for language learners: Creating meaningful output with Web 2.0 tools. Knowledge Management& E-Learning: An International Journal, 4(1), 97-101.
  4. Fewell, N. (2014). Social networking and language learning with Twitter. Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 223.
  5. Guba, E. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Technology Research and Development, 29(2), 75-91.
  6. Hansen, M., Fabriz, S., & Stehle, S. (2015). Cultural cues in students' computer mediated communication: Influences on email style, perception of the sender, and willingness to help. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 20(3), 278-294.
  7. Hsiao, Y., & Broeder, P. (2014). Let's tweet in Chinese! Exploring how learners of Chinese as aforeign language self-direct their use of microblogging to learn Chinese. Language Learning in Higher Education, 4(2), 469-488.
  8. Internet Live Statistics. (2016). [Real Time Statistics Project] Internet live stats. Retrieved from http://www.internetlivestats.com/ Kitade, K. (2012). An exchange structure analysis of the development of online intercultural activity. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(1), 65-86.
  9. Kneser, C., Pilkington, R., & Treasure-Jones, T. (2001). The tutor’s role: An investigation of the power of exchange structure analysis to identify different roles in CMC seminars. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(63-84).
  10. Lee, L., & Markey, A. (2014). A study of learners’ perceptions of online intercultural exchange through Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 26(03), 281-297.
  11. Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2012). A tale of tweets: Analyzing microblogging among language learners. System, 40(1), 48-63.
  12. Lotherington, H. (2009). Emergent multiliteracies in theory and practice. Retrieved from http://multiliteracies4kidz.blog.yorku.ca/ Moloney, R., & Harbon, L. (2010). Student performance of intercultural language learning. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(2), 177-192.
  13. Pilkington, R. (1999). Analyzing educational discourse: The DISCOUNT scheme. Technical report no. 99/2, Computer Based Learning Unit, The University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  14. Pilkington, R. (2001). Analysing educational dialogue interaction: towards models that support learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (IJAIED), 12, 1-7.
  15. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, R. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
  16. Stubbs, M. (1981). Motivating analyses of exchange structure. In M. Coulthard & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis (pp. 107-119). London: Routledge.
  17. Sotillo, S. (2009). Learner noticing, negative feedback, and uptake in synchronous computer-mediated environments. Electronic discourse in language learning and language teaching, 87-110.
  18. WWP. (2015). Arab social media report [Data file]. Retrieved from www.wpp.com/govtpractice/~/media/wppgov/files/arabsocialmediareport-2015.pdf

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Slides