- -

Smartphone tapping vs. handwriting: A comparison of writing medium

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Smartphone tapping vs. handwriting: A comparison of writing medium

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

dc.contributor.author Lee, Bradford J. es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2020-06-16T09:17:25Z
dc.date.available 2020-06-16T09:17:25Z
dc.date.issued 2020-03-31
dc.identifier.issn 1695-2618
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/146449
dc.description.abstract [EN] Mobile-learning (m-learning), or mobile-assisted language learning (MALL), has been the object of a great deal of research over the last twenty years. However, empirical work in this area has largely failed to produce generalizable conclusions due to variation in methodology, target feature, and task-type (Burston, 2014, 2015). As schools in Japan begin to join the growing number of classrooms worldwide using mobile-based assignments, this study examined how Japanese EFL students’ writing task production differed depending on writing medium (i.e., handwritten on paper vs. tapped on a smartphone). Writing samples were collected from N = 1,449 participants, divided into smartphone- or paper-based groups, across a spectrum of English proficiencies. Handwritten submissions were found to be significantly longer than those composed on a smartphone (p < .001, d = .54), with differences being more pronounced for learners of higher proficiency than lower ones. Significance and effect sizes steadily dropped from p < .001, d = .66 for advanced learners to p = .168, d = .38 for beginners. These results indicate that care must be taken in designing m-learning activities, and that students must be given adequate training in smartphone-input skills (i.e., tapping) and time to acclimate before using such tasks for high-stakes assessments. es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher Universitat Politècnica de València es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof The EuroCALL Review es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento - No comercial - Sin obra derivada (by-nc-nd) es_ES
dc.subject M-learning es_ES
dc.subject Mobile-Assisted Language Learning es_ES
dc.subject Tapping es_ES
dc.subject Handwriting es_ES
dc.subject Writing task es_ES
dc.title Smartphone tapping vs. handwriting: A comparison of writing medium es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.4995/eurocall.2020.12036
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Lee, BJ. (2020). Smartphone tapping vs. handwriting: A comparison of writing medium. The EuroCALL Review. 28(1):15-25. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.12036 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod OJS es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.12036 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 15 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 25 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 28 es_ES
dc.description.issue 1 es_ES
dc.relation.pasarela OJS\12036 es_ES
dc.description.references Baron, D. (2009). A better pencil: Readers, writers, and the digital revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. es_ES
dc.description.references Beare, K. (2018, October 8). How many people learn English? https://www.thoughtco.com/howmany-people-learn-english-globally-1210367. es_ES
dc.description.references Burston, J. (2014). The reality of MALL: Still on the fringes. CALICO Journal, 31(1), 103125. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.31.1.103-125 es_ES
dc.description.references Burston, J. (2015). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1), 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000159 es_ES
dc.description.references Collier, R., & Werier, C. (1995). When computer writers compose by hand. Computers and Composition, 12(1), 47-59. es_ES
dc.description.references https://doi.org/10.1016/8755-4615(95)90022-5 es_ES
dc.description.references Connelly, V., Gee, D., & Walsh, E. (2007). A comparison of keyboarded and handwritten compositions and the relationship with transcription speed. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 479-492. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906X116768 es_ES
dc.description.references Chen, Y., Carger, C. L., & Smith, T. J. (2017). Mobile-assisted narrative writing practice for young English language learners from a funds of knowledge approach. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 28-41. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44594. es_ES
dc.description.references Elgort, I. (2017). Blog posts and traditional assignments by first- and second-language writers. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 52-72. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44611. es_ES
dc.description.references Ellis, R. (1997). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. Paper presented at the Regional Language Center Seminar, Singapore, April 22-28, 1991. es_ES
dc.description.references Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 318. https://doi.org/10.5070/L2.V1I1.9054 es_ES
dc.description.references Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (1994). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Hilldale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. es_ES
dc.description.references Gentile, C., Riazantseva, A., & Cline, F. (2001). A comparison of handwritten and word processed TOEFL essays: Final report. (TOEFL Research Council). Princeton, NJ: ETS. es_ES
dc.description.references Godwin-Jones, R. (2017). Smartphones and language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 3-17. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44607. es_ES
dc.description.references Haas, C. (1996). Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203811238 es_ES
dc.description.references James, K. H., & Engelhardt, L. (2012). The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1(1), 3242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2012.08.001 es_ES
dc.description.references James, K. H., & Gauthier, I. (2006). Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory-motor brain network. Neuropsychologia, 44(14), 29372949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.06.026 es_ES
dc.description.references Kiefer, M., Schuler, S., Mayer, C., Trumpp, N., Hille, K., & Sachse, S. (2015). Handwriting or typewriting? The influence of pen- or keyboard-based writing training on reading and writing performance in preschool children. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 11(4), 136146. https://dx.doi.org/10.5709%2Facp-0178-7 es_ES
dc.description.references Lantolf, J. (2000). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching, 33(2), 79-96. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800015329 es_ES
dc.description.references Lee, B. (2019a). Japanese tertiary students' access to smartphones and their feelings regarding their use in the EFL classroom. Memoirs of Fukui University of Technology, 49, 216-224. es_ES
dc.description.references Lee, B. (2019b). A case study of writing task performance: Smartphone input vs. handwriting. Memoirs of Fukui University of Technology, 49, 225-231. es_ES
dc.description.references Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3 es_ES
dc.description.references Longcamp, M., Zerbato-Poudou, M-T., & Velay, J. (2005). The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in preschool children: A comparison between handwriting and typing. Acta Psychologica, 119(1), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.10.019 es_ES
dc.description.references Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J., & Velay, J. (2006). Remembering the orientation of newly learned characters depends on the associated writing knowledge: A comparison between handwriting and typing. Human Movement Science, 25(4-5), 646656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2006.07.007 es_ES
dc.description.references Mangen, A., & Velay, J. (2010). Digitizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of writing. In M. H. Zadeh (Ed.), Advances in Haptics. IntechOpen, 385-401. https://doi.org/10.5772/8710 es_ES
dc.description.references Matsuo, K., Kato, C., Okada, T., Moriya, T., Glover, G., & Nakai, T. (2003). Finger movements lighten neural loads in the recognition of ideographic characters. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(03)00114-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Mogey, N., Paterson, J., Burk, J., & Purcell, M. (2010). Typing compared with handwriting for essay examinations at university: letting the students choose. ALT-J, 18(1), 2947. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687761003657580 es_ES
dc.description.references Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 11591168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581 es_ES
dc.description.references Nyugaku, N., Koyama, M., Lee, B., & Thomson. S. (2017). On the application of communicative approach in English education at Fukui University of Technology. (Japanese language). Memoirs of Fukui University of Technology, 47, 373-381. es_ES
dc.description.references Petrescu, A. (2014). Typing or writing? A dilemma of the digital era. eLearning & Software for Education, 2, 393-397. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-026x-14-115 es_ES
dc.description.references Plato. (c. 370 B.C.) Phaedrus [EPub]. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1636.epub.images?session_id=723fa a18883337783d2449c2a9d8e262a8cad15b. es_ES
dc.description.references Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. (2014). How big is "big"? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 es_ES
dc.description.references Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 es_ES
dc.description.references Tsai, C.-H., Kuo, C.-H., Horng, W.-B., & Chen, C.-W. (2012). Effects on learning logographic character formation in computer-assisted handwriting instruction. Language Learning & Technology, 16(1), 110-130. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44277. es_ES
dc.description.references Wolfe, E. W., Bolton, S., Feltovich, B., & Bangert, A. W. (1996). A study of word processing experience and its effects on student essay writing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14(3), 269-283. https://doi.org/10.2190/XTDU-J5L2-WTPP-91W2 es_ES
dc.description.references Wolfe, E. W. & Manalo, J. R. (2004). Composition medium comparability in a direct writing assessment of non-native English speakers. Language Learning & Technology, 8(1), 53- 65. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25229. es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem