“it's just reflex now”: german language learners’ use of online resources

“It’s just reflex now”: German Language

Learners’ Use of Online Resources

Julie Larson-GuenetteUniversity of Wisconsin—Madison

Abstract

This study examined how often and to what extent university learners of German use online resources

(e.g., online dictionaries and translators) in relation to German coursework, their motivations for use, and

their beliefs about online resources and language learning. Data for this study consisted of open-ended

surveys (n =71) and face-to-face interviews (n =13) with students from second-, fourth-, fifth-, and

sixth-semester language courses. Results from both the survey and interview data revealed that learners

consistently used online resources, including online dictionaries, translation sites, and other websites for

reasons related to time efficiency, vocabulary, to “check” or “compare” their work, and general reference.

As to whether or not the use of online resources contributes to learning, learners had mixed beliefs regard-

ing the advantages and disadvantages of using online resources.

�

Much attention has been given to the role(s) of technology and its impact on the teaching

and learning of second and foreign languages (Chapelle, 2007; Chapelle & Jamieson, 2008;

Hockly, 2011; Kern, 2006; Levy & Stockwell, 2006; Oxford & Oxford, 2009; Thorne & Payne,

2005; Warschauer & Kern, 2000). Particularly in the last decade, Internet accessibility and

web-based technologies have created opportunities for computer-mediated communication

(CMC) in the classroom setting (e.g., Chun, 2008; Goertler, 2009; Levy, 2009). Moreover, the

benefits, challenges, and even drawbacks of CMC such as intercultural E-mail exchanges,

(a)synchronous chats, blogs, and wikis have been well documented (Abrams, 2003; Arnold,

2007; Belz, 2005; 2007; Belz & Kinginger, 2005; Castañeda, 2011; Itakura, 2004; Lee, 2002;

2011; Magnan, 2008; O’Dowd, 2011; Schueller, 2007; Stickler & Hampel, 2010).

To date, many language textbooks are now accompanied by software packages and links to

companion websites for activities and supplementary materials. In addition to textbooks and

course materials, learners can also access numerous resources for language learning, which in-

clude, but certainly are not limited to, interactive software, mobile applications, and virtual

games and communities. The Internet in and of itself is an infinite resource, however, for the

purposeof this article, the term online resource is used to refer to any website, online document,

or online support software that may provide tools or information deemed useful by the lan-

guage learner.1 For example, online dictionaries and free web-based machine translation

(WBMT) sites are perhaps the most common and readily available Internet resources employed

62

1 Definition adapted from PC Magazine’s online encyclopedia: http://www.pcmag.com/encyclope-

dia_term/0,1237,t=online+resources&i=63951,00.asp

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/63951/online-resources

by language learners. Although dictionary use (e.g., paper, electronic, online) in language

learning has received positive attention in the literature (e.g., Chun, 2001; Elola, Rodríguez-

García, & Winfrey, 2008; Loucky, 2002; 2005; 2010; Pasfield-Neofitou, 2009), learners’ use of

WBMT and its role in language learning, however, have been regarded with mixed views (e.g.,

Luton, 2003; Niño, 2008; 2009; Steding 2009; Williams, 2006).

Recent research has sought to investigate the role of learners’ use of Internet and web-based

technologies with regards to coursework and language learning (e.g., Hobrom, 2004;

Karabulut, Levelle, Li, & Suvorov, 2012; Peters, Weinberg, Sarma, & Frankoff, 2011). Among

Canadian university learners of L2 French, Peters et al. (2011) identified three main reasons for

learners’ Internet use, namely, to expand knowledge, improve accuracy, and to consult lan-

guage course managementwebsites. In addition, Peters et al. noted the most frequentuse of the

Internet centered on improving accuracy in which learners reported to regularly consult online

dictionaries and translation sites to verify spelling and grammar. More recently, Karabulut,

Levelle, Li, and Suvorov (2012) found that university learners in a third-year French course

adopted a wide variety of online resources such as dictionaries and spelling/grammar checkers,

chat, YouTube, and French websites for reasons associated with efficiency, effectiveness as

tools, and learners’ ability to access language produced by native speakers of French. Con-

versely, the researchers also reported that some learners also rejected web technologies due to

perceptions of limited time, unnecessary features, and the belief that the technology did not

help them improve their French. In addition, among college-level learners of Arabic, Hobrom

(2004) documented how online resources led to enhanced learner autonomy in which learners

reported to take more responsibility for their learning and became more motivated in their

coursework. Moreover, the learners in Hobrom’s (2004) study enjoyed the ability to evaluate

themselves while practicing speaking and listening at their own convenience and pace.

Building on the findings of Hobrom (2004), Karabulut et al. (2012) and Peters et al. (2011),

the aim of this study was to gauge how often university learners of German use online resources

(e.g., online dictionaries, translation sites, or other Internet sources) in relation to their German

coursework, their motivations for doing so, and their beliefs about online resources and lan-

guage learning. It is my hope that this study will offer a glimpse as to how often and why learners

use online resources outside of the classroom and what the implications of such use may be for

both students and teachers alike. Thus, the following research questions will be addressed:

1. To what extent do university learners of German employ the use of online resources and what are their

primary motivations for such use?

2. What beliefs do learners have concerning the use of online resources and language learning?

The remainder of this article begins first with an outline of the methodology used in this study

followed by the results to each research question. A discussion of those results will be presented

thereafter to also include implications for teaching and learning. Finally, the article concludes

with limitations to the study and suggestions for further research.

Method

The materials used in this study included an open-ended survey and an interview protocol.2

The open-ended survey consisted of a brief demographic section (e.g., course level, age,

gender) in which students also reported on their past and present use of online resources and

LARSON-GUENETTE: LEARNERS’ USE OF ONLINE RESOURCES 63

2 This study was approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) as a “benign survey” that

posed little to no risk to participants. Interviews were audio-recorded with participants signed consent.

motivations for such use (see Appendix B). The interview protocol consisted of general ques-

tions concerning participants’ overall use of online resources, including their experience with

online resources, frequency and methods of use, and how the learners themselves view online

resources in relation to language learning.

Emails were sent at the beginning of spring semester 2007 to teaching assistants (TAs) of

second-, fourth-, fifth-, and sixth semester German courses seeking permission to visit each

class in order to introduce the study and distribute the voluntary survey.3 Eight course sections

with 137 students received the survey and participants had approximately two weeks to return

the surveys in sealed envelopes either to their instructor or to the researcher’s mailbox. Overall,

71 surveys were returned, with a return rate of 51.8%. Participants’ ages were between 18–26,

with the median age of 19. All participants indicated English as their first language (L1) with the

exception of one French/English bilingual. Table 1 provides a summary of the 71 survey partici-

pants, including a breakdown of course level and gender.

Table 1. Survey Participants by Semester of Study and Gender (n= 71)

Males Females Total (Per Semester)

2nd Semester 3 8 11

4th Semester 14 15 29

5th Semester 9 10 19

6th Semester 3 9 12

Total (Gender) 29 42 71

Students interested in follow-up interviews provided contact information on their surveys.

Thirteen students (six males, eight females) participated in the interviews, taking place on cam-

pus lasting between 35 minutes to an hour and were audio-recorded. To ensure confidentiality,

participants were assigned a number based on their initial survey.4 Data from the surveys and

the interviews were quantified and coded. For the survey data, the 71 participants were treated

as a group. The 13 interviews were transcribed and coded manually for emergent themes and

categories. Drawing on both sets of data, the results of the research questions are reported in the

next section and then further addressed thematically in the discussion section.

64 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

3 First-semester learners were not considered for this study because data collection occurred early in the se-

mester; as beginners they may not have had as much experience with online resources at that point. Learners

in third semester courses at the time were already participants in other studies conducted by colleagues and

for that reason, third semester TAs were not approached for this study.

4 For the purposes of identification, returned surveys were assigned a number to represent the semester in

which students were enrolled (i.e., 2 for 2nd, 4 for 4th) and a letter to simply indicate the order in which the sur-

veys were received (a, b, c, and so forth; also aa, ab, ac when received simultaneously).

Results

Research Question 1: To what extent do university learners of German employ

the use of online resources and what are their primary motivations for such use?

It shouldbementioned that words or phrases in quotationsareverbatim fromsurveypartici-

pants’ written responses or interviews. The following percentages represent the 71 students

who completed the survey. First off, 87% reported using an online dictionary or thesaurus at

some point in the previous semester including: Leo, Beolingus (also indicated as “Chemnitz”),

and Dictionary.com. Resources that received single mentions included: Microsoft Online

Dictionary; Freedictionary.com; Travelang.com; Wordchamp;Google; Thesaurus.com;Word-

reference.com; Grimm’s and the Oxford English Dictionary Online. Secondly, 68% indicated

that they had used an online translator site or program in the previous semester including:

Freetranslation.com; Babelfish; Google; and Dictionary.com. Single mentions included:

Wordreference.com; Prompt and “random sites.” In addition to online dictionaries and transla-

tor sites, 41% of learners had used other online resources including: Wikipedia (both English

and German); “grammar” sites; “pod casts” and “radio stations.” Single mentions included:

About.com; Verbix.com; Welt.de; Spiegel Online; Bundesliga; YouTube; “Denglisch Commu-

nities”; “random” and “all sorts.” (see Appendix A for a complete list along with URLs).

Regarding the use of online resources at any point in their language study (either past or

present), practically all of the learners surveyed (99%) had used an online dictionary and/or

translator site for single words, while 56% had used online dictionaries and/or translation sites

for phrases, clauses, and entire sentences. Only 13% of learners reported using online transla-

tion sites for paragraphs, and finally, 6% reported using translation sites for entire texts.

As for frequency of use in their previous semester, nearly half of the learners (43%) reported

to use online resources consistently on a daily basis such as “everyday” to “all the time” and

even “near constantly for both class work and personal correspondence.” On a weekly basis,

26% of learners reported to use online resources “at least twice a week” to a “few times a week.”

Additionally, 13% of learners reported to use online resources “only when writing.” The re-

maining participants reported using online resources from “rarely” or “not very often” (8%) to

“not at all” (2%). Additionally, a handful of participants did not supply an answer (8%). Figure 1

summarizes learners’ frequency of use.

The reader may wonder if there might be differences in the reported frequency of use of on-

line resources with gender and/or with course level. Given the small sample size and the nature


Figure 1. Reported Frequency of Use of Online Resources by Survey Participants

of categorical data, Chi-square tests revealed that frequency of use did not differ by gender (x2

(3, N =67) =1.57, p =.67). There was however, a significant difference between students in

second and sixth semester with a higher frequency of use among students in sixth semester (x2

(2, N = 22) = 8.26, p < .05).5

For written assignments, 76% of learners consulted online resources with specific mentions

of “Schreibprojekts”[sic], and/or “writing projects,” “Aufsätze,” and essays. In addition, 21% of

learners reported to use online resources for “most” or “all”written assignments. The remaining

3% of learners mentioned using online resources for specific assignments such as “adj. ending

worksheet” or left the question unanswered altogether.

Based on the interview data, 9 of the 13 participants reported “being at” or “near a com-

puter”whendoing anythingGerman-relatedand furthernoted that theydo notbegin theirGer-

man homework unless they have a computer nearby. Participant 4h stated, “I wouldn’t feel

comfortable doing my homework without the Internet. I always have my computer in front of

me.” One participant (4p) reported being at a computer “half the time” while participants 2b,

5aa, and 6d indicated that they used a computer only on a perceived “as needed basis” with

German coursework or if an assignment specifically required them to go online.

Primary reasons and motivations for learners to consult online resources centered on time

efficiency, vocabulary, accuracy, and general reference. Specifically, 41% of learners indicated

reasons related to time such as “speed” and “efficiency” while 31% mentioned the need to look

up vocabulary, namely to “find new words” or “correct definitions” along with “German/English

equivalents” and/or “uncertainty with vocabulary.” Other reasons learners cited (13%) in-

cluded “reference,” “translating directions for clarity,” “more accurate writing,” and “better un-

derstanding.” Furthermore, 11% of learners reported a perceived need to “check” or “com-

pare” their work in order to “reassure a translation” or “to check my conjugations.”6 Finally, 4%

did not supply a reason. Figure 2 presents learner’ reported motivations for their use of online

resources.

Chi-square tests revealed that motivations for use differed with regards to vocabulary as

66 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

Figure 2. Reported Motivations for Use of Online Resources by Survey Participants

5 For the 11 and 12 students in second and sixth semester respectively, Fisher’s exact test revealed this dif-

ference to be highly significant (p = .017; FET).

6 Reference to “conjugations” emerged frequently in the surveys and interviews. I interpret this as an um-

brella term used by learners, which in addition to verbs, “conjugations” may also refer to any aspect of inflec-

tional morphology (e.g., plurals, gender/case, adjective endings).

women’s primary motivation to consult online resources (x2 (3, N = 68) = 8.14, p < .05).7 The

interview participants’ motivations for using online resources also echoed with what learners

reported on the surveys, namely, for time efficiency (e.g., “get my homework done faster”; “I

can get through the reading”) and for desired accuracy when writing. All of the interview partici-

pants were motivated to self-check, citing reasons such as “so I can check my plurals and stuff”

and “I like to cross-check my vocab.” A perceived need to “understand what is going on” had

motivated participants 4w and 2h to use online dictionaries and translators for the purpose of

reading and comprehending directions written in German. Participant 4w even stated that she

pulls up tabs for Leo and Babelfish before she begins her German homework:

I use Leo a lot, I mean a lot, to just look up words and a lot of my assignments, I have to look up the directions

because I just don’t get them and I want to make sure that I’m getting the assignment. Or if I get something from

[name of course management site], I copy-paste the directions into Babelfish to see if I’m on the right track.

Two interview participants in particular stood out among the others with regards to online re-

sources and their motivations and frequency of use. Participant 6b reported that she was on-

line “constantly” and simply wanted to “figure out things” on her own. She consulted online

resources well beyond the scope of her German coursework, and above all, enjoyed her access

to chat forums and German mainstream media online. Participant 6i described being online

“all the time” when doing anything German-related and also indicated that he had a German

contact from high school with whom he chatted online almost daily.

Research Question 2: What beliefs do learners have concerning

the use of online resources and language learning?

Interview participants who believed the use of online resources to play a prominent role in

their language learning included 4p, 4aa, and 6b. Participant 4p attributed her learning to the

process of looking up and incorporating vocabulary from online dictionaries and German

websites into her own work and stated, “Anytime you put anything into practice, you learn it.”

In a similar fashion, participant 4aa viewed his learning as a result of a perceived connection

between reading, looking up vocabulary, and writing: “The more I’ve done it, I can look back

and remember more.” The use of online resources to supplement course materials and to

cross-reference vocabulary with a paper dictionary was believed by participant 4aa to be a

“significant element” to his learning. In addition, participant 6b believed that access to online

resources had been very important for allowing her to develop her language capabilities and

skills at her own pace. She “definitely” learns because she can “talk to people on the fly” in live

chat forums, and thus allowed her to communicate with other speakers of German, native and

non-native. In this way, she reported being able to “enhance” her understanding of how

language is used in context with the added bonus of “picking up things” (e.g., phrases, new

words).

Interview participants 4w, 6i, 6j, and 6l viewed online resources as beneficial to learning in a

“yes and no” fashion. Participant 4w believed that her vocabulary “has increased” but her

understanding of “how the language works” had not improved because “I haven’t had to figure

any of it out on my own, just because it’s been handed to me, so I don’t have to understand why

it is the way it is and how those words equal this phrase.”Participant 6i believed“theLeo site” to

be a “great tool,” but credited his learning more with having completed fourth semester Ger-


7 Fisher’s exact test revealed this difference to be significant (p = .04; FET).

man and “now having to apply everything—all that grammar stuff—because you can now [in

sixth semester] use it in context.”

Interview participants 6j and 6l expressed conflicting views about online resources and

learning. Participant 6j stated, “it’s debatable if it’s part of the learning process” while partici-

pant 6l noted, “The dictionary doesn’t really help me. Kind of, but with the tables—there’s this

website8 and it helped me understand it [cases, endings] and it’s kinda helping me learn, to un-

derstand better.” She further acknowledged that without having access to the “nice little tables”

she would “struggle even more” with grammar.

The two interview participants in second semester (2b, 2h) were unsure if the accessibility

and use of online resources had any effect on learning German. Participant 2b reported that she

had not used online resources enough to say that it would have contributed to her learning

while participant 2h noted that, although the use of online resources allowed him to “get things

done faster” he believed that he would “remember things more” if he were to “look them up in a

book.” Participant 4h acknowledged that she used Leo “for everything” and was uncertain as

to whether or not online resources contributed to her learning:

It’s kinda like the chicken or the egg [laughs], I mean, do you blame not knowing many conjugations because

you look them up every time and you don’t bother memorize them, or do you not memorize them because I

don’t know, you need to look ‘em up and see ‘em right off the bat?

Participant 6d could not say one way or another if online resources helped him in the learning

process or if he was “just progressing in German” via the courses taken since coming to the

university. Finally, the participants in fifth semester (5i, 5aa) did not believe online resources to

be helpful for learning, but rather held the view that online resources, such as dictionaries,

were simply “tools” available for use.

Discussion

The results of this study are suggestive, yet they do offer a glimpse as to how and why univer-

sity learners on their own time are using online resources relative to their German course work.

The major findings of this study will be addressed in the context of the themes that emerged

from the survey and interview data.

Online Resources as “Time Savers.”

The primary motivation for learners’ use of online resources dealt with the accessibility and

ease of use that culminates in a perceived amount of time saved for class preparation and

homework assignments. Online dictionaries for the purposes of reading and writing were often

mentioned in the surveys with the following words: fast(er), quick(er), easy, convenient, instant,

and saves time. All 13 of the interview participants acknowledged the foremost advantage of

online resources to be the amount of time spent using online resources versus textbooks and pa-

per dictionaries. Participant 4h saw a clear advantage of online resources as a way to complete

day-to-day assignments and be prepared for class:

68 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

8 She bookmarked on her computer a personal website “from some German teacher” that featured gram-

mar paradigms.

It’s an advantage because I can get my homework done and I can feel accomplished and the next day I can

have it done. And you know, we’re going to be reading off from the homework, or we’re going to be discussing

answers from the homework and I can feel confident that, well, you went through it and you knew almost every

word because the words you didn’t know, you could look up and you could look ‘em up fast so you could look

up almost any word you didn’t know.

Alternative Usage of WBMT Sites

From both the surveys and interviews, many participants noted how teachers discouraged

the use of online translators on the premise of academic dishonesty with regards to writing.

Some reported uses of online translators were unanticipated and even surprising, such as

typing in or copying and pasting directions from German to English and to check “conjuga-

tions” and spelling. Participant 2h preferred to use Babelfish because “you can look up words

and phrases or check spelling without all that extra info”, i.e., information that usually appears

with a dictionary entry such as parts of speech, plural forms, synonyms, or pronunciation.

Although many students on the surveys commented that online translators were “unreliable” or

“not trustworthy” for writing, the interview participants in fourth semester explained that they

used online translators to determine if their own sentences or phrases approximated (or at the

very least resembled) those produced by Babelfish or Freetranslation.

Online Resources Offer Extended Opportunities to Engage with Language and Culture

For some learners, online resources provide opportunities to enhance language learning.

For example, participants 5i, 6b, 6i, and 6l reported that German was a priority in their aca-

demic and personal lives and that they used online resources as means to explore culture and

further engage with language beyond their respective German courses. For the purpose of

general reference, personal curiosity, or for other coursework, participant 6b would consult the

German language Wikipedia site instead of the English version: “Wikipedia is great, I love it.

German is fun, I don’t mind doing German at all. I’ve got classes where I have to make myself

stop doing German and work on other stuff [laughing].” To overcome feeling self-conscious

about her spoken German, participant 6l preferred to practice listening and speaking on her

own with online resources:

There are a lot of websites where you can hear something and practice your Aussprache, you know, your pro-

nunciation and that helps. You listen and practice and it’s less embarrassing than going and doing it in front of

someone else. German music videos and stuff, that kind of thing you have better access to and you can hear

Germans talk on YouTube or something, so that helps.

Participant 6i indicated that he kept a “word bank” Microsoft Word file on his computer desk-

top comprised of “new and interesting words and phrases” that he would encounter from

reading German language news sites or from his online chats with his native speaker contact.

He would later use Leo to look up the words and phrases to add to his Word file and when

possible, incorporate the new vocabulary into his written assignments for class.

Habitual Use, Concerns for Dependency, and Compromised Learning?

For many students in this study, online resources go hand in hand with homework and class

preparation. Three participants made statements that reflect the commonplace of online re-

sources in conjunction with coursework (and not just for German) such that using online re-


sources is “just reflex now” (6i) and that “for anything school related” Internet use is “just part of

life now” (6j) and that “everyone in my generation uses it now” (2h). When asked if they could

do German-related work without Internet access, interview participants often hesitated and

said that theyprobablycould, butwould prefernot toas indicated in the following statements:

I’m not sure. I’d be uncomfortable with it. It would take triple the time it does now.” (4w)

Yeah, I guess I could. Do I want to? [laughing] No! (6b)

I guess I don’t really need them, but it would just take me way longer. (6l)

Maybe I could, I don’t know. I love Leo, maybe I have a biased opinion, but I definitely wouldn’t want to give

up using it, [laughing] even if your study did tell me it was bad for me. (4h)

What is more, regular or habitual use of online resources were at times equated with depend-

ency as evidenced in the following statements:

You can become dependent on them and then not really learn any German. (4w)

I guess just with the amount of words I look up, I do have some dependence on it. (6d)

I feel dependent on them and I can look up endings, but I don’t think it actually helps me learn. (6j)

A lot of time when you do online translations and stuff like that, you get too—not really addicted to it, but you

like rely on it too much and then you’re not really learning anything new and a lot of the stuff you put in there

doesn’t turn out right…you save time, but you don’t get the quality of work that you should, but that’s with ev-

erything, like you get out of it what you put into it. I guess that’s basically it—you can become dependent on it.

(5aa)

In particular, the fifth- and sixth-semester students viewed possible overuse of online re-

sources and Internet dependenceas questionable in the learning process. Although easy to use,

“becoming dependent” on online resources was a legitimate concern among learners who

believed that if they were to continue with German courses or even go abroad, they would have

to change their habits. Participant 5aa acknowledged that his initial goal placing into fourth-se-

mester German was “to get the retro-credits” and he found himself using online resources “too

much.” He decided to continue with fifth semester as a result of “getting more interested in

German” and at the time of the study, his goal that semester was to “not turn to the computer all

of the time.”

Implications for Teaching and Learning

Many (if not most) students are using online resources consistently in their coursework. Be-

ginning students may use online resources differently and to a lesser extent than intermediate

and advanced students. Despite the small sample size, students in sixth semester were using on-

line resources more than those in second semester. Considering that course content in sixth se-

mester is more likely to be text-based and would require more reading and writing, it stands to

reason that students’ use of online resources may increase with course level.

For some students, online resources are considered a vital component to language learning;

for others, online resources may simply serve as tools to be used as a means to an end in order to

complete assignments. Regardless, students will continue to use online resources, as Chapelle

(2007) reminds us, “the march of technology throughout all aspects of the lives of language

learners is expanding whether it be through formal education or in their everyday lives” (p.

108). In the interim since this study, many students have replaced desktop computers with

70 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

laptops and mobile devices (e.g., tablets, smartphones) such that checking “conjugations” and

looking up vocabulary is even more accessible.

What we can draw from this study is that students are able to reflect on their use of online

resources and how it may (or may not) relate to learning German. Given the accessibility and

the pace of technology, Levy (2009) states that, “learners will need to make informed choices

concerning the technologies they use for language learning,” (p. 777). In order for learners to

make such choices, it is important for teachers to acknowledge students’ use of online resources

and to engage in a dialogue with them in order to assess how and why they use such resources.

Teachers can begin to periodically survey their students to find out what kinds of web-based (or

other) technologies students are using and how they are using them. A class session could be

conducted as a workshop to model appropriate and effective uses of online resources (e.g., a

translator is not the same as a dictionary). Media and technology literacy can be considered a

unit of support for the teaching and learning of language and will require an expanded role of

the teacher. Teachers are not just teaching language anymore, they are also teaching students

how to use emerging technologies that will help them become autonomous language learners

beyond the classroom. In some classrooms, the use of online resources, in particular web-based

translators, are prohibited. This study gives reason to critically examine the role of online re-

sources for language learners and how that may influence classroom practices.

Limitations and Further Research

There are several limitations to be noted in this study. First, the population sampling was not

random as students self-selected to participate in the surveys and interviews; it cannot be said

with certainty that these participants are representative of the hundreds of students enrolled in

German courses each semester. With self-reported data it is also unknown if reported behaviors

would match observed behaviors. In retrospect, the survey itself lacked items and distinctions

that would have helped during the analyses (e.g., reasons for taking German; the distinction

made on the survey itself between online dictionary and translator). Moreover, categorical and

qualitative data also present certain challenges with analyses and interpretations.

There is certainly a need for further research into students’ use of online resources. Future

studies should continue to investigate precisely how students are using online resources and

other emerging technologies (e.g., mobile applications). Without violating issues of privacy,

and perhaps in a laboratory setting, it would be insightful to employ web-monitoring software

that would record and track language learners’ use of online resources and/or keystroke logging

software to obtain real-time accounts of student-computer interaction, in particular for L2

writing. Longitudinal studies would be particularly valuable to see how students use online

resources over a period of time, as one may wonder from this study if the students who planned

to go abroad, whether or not they continued to use online resources in a similar fashion, or did

they use them differently? It would be interesting to see how the role of online resources may

differ in various settings (e.g., immersion, language lab, workplace, home). In addition, it would

be worthwhile to examine how teachers themselves use online resources, for example, when

planning lessons or grading papers, their motivations for such use, and how such use may

shape their own classroom practice.

References

Abrams, S. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern

Language Journal, 87 (2), 157–167.


Arnold, N. (2007). Reducing foreign language communication apprehension with computer-mediated communication: A

preliminary study. System, 35 (4), 469–486.

Belz, J. A. (2005). Intercultural questioning, discovery, and tension in internet-mediated language learning partnerships.

Language and Intercultural Communication, 5 (1), 3–39.

Belz, J. A. (2007). The role of computer mediation in the instruction and development of L2 pragmatic competence. Annual

Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 45–75.

Belz, J.A., & Kinginger, C. (2005). The cross-linguistic development of address form use in telecollaborative language learn-

ing: Two case studies. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 59 (2),

189–214.

Castañeda, D. (2011). The effects of instruction enhanced by video/photo blogs and wikis on learning the distinctions of the

Spanish preterite and imperfect. Foreign Language Annals, 44 (4), 692–711.

Chapelle, C. (2007). Technology and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 1–17.

Chapelle, C., & Jamieson, J. (2008). Tips for teaching with CALL: Practical approaches to computer-assisted language

learning. White Plains, NY: Pearson-Longman.

Chun, D. M. (2001). L2 reading on the web: Strategies for accessing information in hypermedia. Computer Assisted Lan-

guage Learning, 14 (5), 367–403.

Chun, D. M. (2008). Computer-mediated discourse in instructed environments. In Magnan, S. S. (Ed.), Mediating discourse

online (pp. 15–45). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Elola, I., Rodríguez-García, V., & Winfrey, K. (2008). Dictionary use and vocabulary choices in L2 writing. Estudios de

lingüística inglesa aplicada (ELIA), 8, 63–89.

Goertler, S. (2009). Using computer-mediated communication (CMC) in language teaching. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching

German, 42 (1), 74–84.

Hobrom, A. I. (2004) Online resources and learner autonomy: A study of college-level students of Arabic. Unpublished doc-

toral dissertation. University of Texas, Austin.

Hockly, N. (2011). Technology for the language teacher: The digital generation. ELT Journal, 65 (3), 322–325.

Itakura,H. (2004).Changing cultural stereotypes through e-mail assisted foreign language learning.System,32 (1), 37–51.

Karabulut, A., Levelle, K., Li, J., & Suvorov, R. (2012). Technology for French learning: A mismatch between expectations

and reality. CALICO Journal, 29 (2), 341–366.

Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 183–210.

Lee, L. (2002). Synchronous online exchanges: a study of modification devices on non-native discourse. System, 30 (3),

275–288.

Lee, L. (2011). Blogging: Promoting learner autonomy and intercultural competence through study abroad. Language

Learning & Technology, 15 (3), 87–109.

Levy, M. (2009). Technologies in use for second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93, Focus Issue,

769–782.

Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Loucky, J. P. (2002). Improving access to target vocabulary using computerized bilingual dictionaries. ReCALL, 14 (2),

293–312.

Loucky, J. P. (2005). Combining the benefits of electronic and online dictionaries with CALL websites to produce effective

and enjoyable vocabulary and language learning lessons. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18 (5), 389–416.

Loucky, J. P. (2010). Comparing electronic dictionary functions and use. CALICO Journal, 28 (1), 156–174.

Luton,L. (2003). If the computer did my homework,howcome I didn’t get an “A”? The French Review,76 (4), 766–770.

Magnan, S. (Ed.). (2008). Mediating discourse online. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Niño, A. (2008). Evaluating the use of machine translation post-editing in the foreign language class. Computer Assisted

Language Learning, 21 (1), 29–49.

Niño A. (2009). Machine translation in foreign language learning: Language learners’ and tutors’ perceptions of its advan-

tages and disadvantages. ReCALL, 21 (2), 241–258.

O’Dowd, R. (2011) Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the core of foreign language educa-

tion? Language Teaching, 44 (3), 368–380.

Oxford, R., & Oxford, J. (Eds.) (2009). Second language teaching and learning in the net generation. Manoa, HI: National

Foreign Language Resource Center.

Pasfield-Neofitou,S. (2009).Paper, electronic or online? Different dictionaries for different activities.Babel,43 (2), 12–18.

Peters, M., Weinberg, A., Sarma, N., & Frankoff, M. (2011). From the mouths of Canadian university students: Web-based

information-seeking activities for language learning. CALICO Journal, 28 (3), 621–638.

Schueller, J. (2007). One good turn deserves another: Sustaining an intercultural e-mail exchange. Die

Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 40 (2), 183–196.

Stickler, U. & Hampel, R. (2010). CyberDeutsch: Language production and user preferences in a Moodle virtual learning

environment. CALICO Journal, 28 (1), 49–73.

72 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

Steding, S. (2009). Machine translation in the German classroom: Detection, reaction, prevention. Die

Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 42 (2), 178–189.

Thorne, S., & Payne, J. S. (2005). Evolutionary trajectories, Internet-mediated expression, and language education. CAL-

ICO Journal, 22 (3), 371–397.

Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press.

Williams, L. (2006). Web-based machine translation as a tool for promoting electronic literacy and language awareness. For-

eign Language Annals, 39 (4), 565–578.

Appendix A. URLs for Sites Used by Survey Participants.

http://dict.leo.org

http://dict.tu-chemnitz.de

http://dictionary.reference.com

http://dwb.uni-trier.de/de/

http://www.freetranslation.com

http://www.babelfish.com

http://translate.google.com

http://translate.reference.com

http://www.wordreference.com

http://www.online-translator.com

http://www.wikipedia.org

http://about.com

http://www.verbix.com

http://www.canoo.net

http://www.wordchamp.com

http://www.welt.de

http://www.spiegel.de

http://www.bundesliga.de

http://www.youtube.com

http://woerterbuchnetz.de

http://www.oed.com

http://www.sparknotes.com

Appendix B. Online Resources Survey

*Please note: This survey is voluntary and will remain anonymous. Should you decide to participate in a fol-

low-up interview, confidentiality will be ensured.

Course: GER _________ Time _________

Age ______ Male / Female Fr So Jr Sr Other/Grad

Probable or declared major and/or program of study:

First Language(s):

Have you taken other foreign languages at the university level? Yes No

If yes, which one(s)?

Have you ever used any of the following?

Online dictionary/thesaurus Yes No

If yes, which ones?


Online translator sites/programs Yes No

If yes, which ones?

Other online resources: Yes No

If yes, which ones?

Did you use any of the above in

your previous semester? Yes No

If yes, how often?

For which written assignments or activities did you consult online resources?

What are your primary motivations or intentions for using online resources?

Have you ever used online dictionaries and/or translators for any of the following?

Single words Yes No

Phrases, clauses, sentences Yes No

Paragraphs Yes No

Entire texts Yes No

*Would you be willing to share your experiences in greater detail

with me in a face-to-face interview? Yes No

If yes, how may I contact you?

74 UP 46.1 (Spring 2013)

“it's just reflex now”: german language learners’ use of online resources

Documents