Introduction

CALL has been studied from different perspectives and with diverse approaches, practically

as well as theoretically driven (Stockwell, 2012). The emphasis of some of these enquiries

has been on second language acquisition (Bower, 2011) and on the language produced within

the CALL setting (Chun, 1998).

Other studies have contributed to an understanding of students behaviour while they were

engaged in a CALL task, for example discovering their look-up behaviour when reading

hypertext (De Ridder, 2002), and accessing glosses (Laufer & Hill, 2000; Lomicka, 1998).

Some studies have focused on student behaviour in general, as observed by the researcher

and with the help of tracking software (Collentine, 2013; Fischer, 2007; Hwu, 2003; Leahy,

2008; Levy & Michael, 2011; Roed, 2003). This article contributes to the body of research

which concerns itself with tracked student behaviour during a CALL activity. An open

qualitative research approach was chosen, rather than testing specific hypotheses. The article

reports on a case study which set out to answer the following research question: What does

an advancedi language learner do when engaged in a collaborative problem-solving task

involving information and communication technologies (ICTs)?

The project represents practitioner research (cf. Lamy & Hampel, 2007), and has at its core a

task which was created in order to address identified learner needs and this specific language

modules aims and objectives, one of which is to improve and consolidate cognitive and

linguistic skills. In particular, the task addressed the modules aim to provide bridges

between the world of business and broader socio-political issues, and to capitalise on the

knowledge and understanding the students had gained during the (previous) year they stayed

abroad.

1
The article outlines the pedagogical and motivational considerations which led to

the specific CALL task, which is embedded in task-based learning theory. When

analysing the data, the initial open research question which looked at student behaviours

during engagement with a CALL task became a more specific question which incorporated

potential motivational factors which could have led to the student behaviours identified and

described in this article.

First, information about the project and its participants will be given, followed by details

concerning the task design and motivational factors which were considered when designing

the task. Thereafter, the data and the methods of analysis are introduced, followed by the

projects findings, which revealed some unexpected patterns of student behaviour.

This research was designed to answer the research question without pre-conceived ideas, for

example without a hypothesis which can be tested within a controlled framework. No

attempt was made to control the number of variables influencing the language learning

situation in the computer room. Instead, this research represents an open enquiry into student

behaviour using the qualitative research method of grounded theory (GT), which is embedded

in the overall methodology of an explorative case study. Data is interrogated with a view to

learning more about what advanced language learners do when they are engaged in a

collaborative problem-solving task. The analysis of the data showed that a students

underlying motivation can be a driving force for their actions, which should be looked at

closely.

The paper concentrates on a case study of one student, unlike other motivation studies which

often involve a large number of participants (e.g., Busse, 2013; Islam, Lamb & Chambers,

2
2013; Oakes, 2013; as well as CALL-related studies e.g., Collins & Hunt, 2011; Normand-

Marconnet & Cordella, 2012; Rubesch & McNeil, 2010). Rather than taking a quantitative

approach, the findings below are interpreted using a situated, qualitative, interpretive

approach, viewing motivation as part of the individual learners thought processes (Drnyei

& Ushioda, 2009, p.350).

The project and its participants

The article relates to a project involving ten non-specialist, advanced learners of German

studying at a British university. Seven students were on an undergraduate international

business course with German. Three students were joining this business language class

through the institution-wide language learning route. The participants were six women and

four men. In terms of their age, nine of the ten students were in their early twenties and one

mature student was of retirement age.

Students were engaged in an electronic role-play (ERP) which consisted of a collaborative

problem-solving task embedded in a business language context.

The task relied on electronic transmission of information in the form of authentic material

researched on the Internet and semi-synchronousii computer-mediated communication (CMC)

through email contact between groups. Email communication represents a form of

established CALL (Levy & Stockwell, 2006) which was purposely chosen for this task

because it is an authentic method of communication in companies, thereby simulating the use

of communication to solve problems in a real business context.

The students worked in five pairs, each pair completing different sub-tasks which were

designed to facilitate negotiation of meaning and teamwork. The goal of the task was to

3
outline a collaboratively created marketing strategy for a product of the students choice

which they supposedly had to launch on the market of their target language, i.e., Germany.

Over a period of 4 weeks and for 2 hours per week, the students engaged in the ERP in the

computer room during class time, with each student having access to one computer. In

advance of the project all the participants gave their permission for the gathered data to be

used for research purposes. They were aware of the tracking software and had agreed to its

use. Every so often, pop-up windows would also remind them that recording was taking

place.

The task design

The task was anchored in open task-based learning (Ellis, 2003; Willis, 2004) and took the

form of an electronic role-play activityiii. Task-based learning is usually focused primarily on

the performance of meaningful tasks. Practising the target language (L2) at an advanced

level within a subject-specific context allows students to activate prior subject-specific

knowledge and skills, and to apply those to meaning-focused tasks.

The task involved all four language skills and served a communicative and collaborative

purpose in order to achieve an outcome, which was also informed by the students' subject-

specific knowledge. The learners themselves negotiated and determined their learning paths

and content within the given framework of the task. Specifically, the task was divided into

five sub-tasks which were designed to stimulate communication among and collaboration

between the pairs. A lead-role was allocated to one pair which could instruct other dyads to

provide specific information. The pair who acted as project-leaders had to provide the basic

information for the project, namely the product and target market for which the marketing

4
strategy was to be developed. Collaboration between dyads was essential in order to

complete the task. Without collaboration, in particular without decision-making on the part

of the leaders and subsequent communication of these decisions to others, the solving of the

task would be hindered. Collaboration between pairs was therefore a constituent part of the

task, not only regarding content development, but also in order to facilitate opportunities for

L2 practice and L2 learning (Chapelle, 2001; Long, 1996; Swain, 1993; Willis, 2004).

Situating the task in the framework of a role-play stimulated free text production in

accordance with the different roles. The framework of an electronic rather than traditional

role-play provided several advantages to the language class: Access to the Internet facilitated

students subject-specific research in relation to their sub-task and thereby gave them access

to rich, current, and authentic L2 input. Comprehensible but stretching input is seen as a

prerequisite for language learning (Krashen, 1985; Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991).

When designing the task, motivational factors which could potentially enhance student

engagement were considered in some depth.

Designing for motivation

Most task designs consider factors which may enhance learner motivation or tap into

assumed existing student motivation. It is generally accepted that motivation can have a

positive effect on language learning (Benson, 2001; Drnyei, 1997; Drnyei & Ushioda,

2009, 2011; Gardner, 1985; Oxford & Shearin, 1994; Willis, 2004). It can help the learner to

engage in the learning process and to maintain the engagement until the task is solved. It is

seen as a contributing factor to successful learning and to reaching higher levels of language

5
proficiency. Therefore the question needs to be considered how student motivation can be

enhanced and how students can be supported in motivating themselves (Ushioda, 1996) so as

to improve their learning.

Motivation can be seen from different perspectives. It can reflect factors inherent in the

learner, for example Gardners (1985) paradigm of integrative and instrumental motivation,

or factors which are inherent in the curriculum and which can be more motivational than the

prospect of enhanced future employability (Fischer, 1998). The learning mode may also have

an impact on learner motivation, for example whether it is teacher- or learner-centred,

involves multimedia or more traditional forms of delivery. Such factors are less learner-

inherent, but rather include elements which are introduced to the learning situation from

outside the learner. Seen from this extended perspective, motivation is as much a product of

good teaching as its prerequisite (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 21).

Drnyei incorporates such factors into his analysis of motivation in instructed L2 learning

when he argues

that the motivational complex underlying instructed L2 learning is a

multidimensional construct comprising at least three fairly independent levels: (a)

the language level (concerning ethnolinguistic, cultural-affective, intellectual, and

pragmatic values and attitudes attached to the target language and its speakers); (b)

the learner level (concerning various fairly stable personality traits that the learner

has developed in the past); and (c) the learning situation level (concerning situation-

specific motives rooted in various aspects of language learning in a classroom

setting) [] (Drnyei, 1997, p. 48).

6
Here, in addition to the language and learner levels, Drnyei highlights the learning situation

as a motivational element, which can contribute from the outside to learner motivation. For

example, the use of technology in otherwise traditionally delivered language classes may

have a motivating or de-motivating effect (Leahy, 2001).

In relation to higher education at university level in general rather than language learning

specifically, Biggs and Tang (2007, p. 32) refer to the expectancy-value theory of

motivation. This consists of two elements: what is to be learned must have some value to

the learner, and the expectation of success that the learner needs to feel when engaging in

the learning task [italic in original].

As stated above, the task for the particular project considered here had been designed for a

group of undergraduate students, taking their L2 needs and motivational aspects into account.

Different motivational factors were assumed to have an influence on the specific learner

group.

Even though the task was primarily a language learning task, it purposely linked the language

activity with the main degree course, thereby emphasising the connection between content

and language learning, and facilitating the incorporation of the students subject specific

knowledge and skills. These factors were anticipated to have a motivational effect on some if

not all of the students.

Furthermore, the task encouraged students to take full control of the development, and to

construct the outcome collaboratively. Learner control is seen as promoting intrinsic

motivation (Benson, 2001).

7
The data

Four weekly 2-hour sessions were recorded and analysed. This paper focuses on the

recordings of one student, Aliceiv, during the first two weeks.

When engaged in the ERP, students communicated orally with their immediate partner, and

via email (semi-synchronous CMC) with the other groups. The screen capturing and tracking

software (Camtasia) recorded all voices and other noises that were audible in the vicinity of

the computer.

It also recorded all screen movements visually, thereby providing a record of the students

manipulation of the computer environment, their Internet searches, their written text

composition which consisted of summaries, reports and their email communication with

fellow studentsv. The recordings produced multifaceted or multimodal data which was only

partly text-based, but which could be transcribed and described, and provided a basis for

analysis. Visual representations of actions the students took, for example their interaction

with the computer, constitute an important part of the data for this project.

Flewitt, Hampel, Hauck & Lancaster (2009) use the term multimodal to refer to data which

includes the context in which communication takes place, taking into consideration the

movements and expressions of the body of the participants. They state that

from a multimodal perspective, embodied, representational activity includes language,

rather than is language; the ways in which we direct our gaze, use facial expressions,

gesture, move, stand, and manipulate things are an integral part of communicative

activity (ibid; italics added for emphasis).

8
The analysis of the transcripts of the students communication together with the analysis of

the visual clues to the students actions as reflected on screen leads to a much more

comprehensive picture of student behaviour.

Methodology and methods for analysis

The study represents an exploration, rather than a directed investigation of specific student

behaviour. The applied methodology of case study and analysis with grounded theory

methods matches this open approach.

Explorative case study (Yin, 2009) as a methodology opens the opportunity to literally

explore the case, to discover what is important about that case in its own world and to

develop its own issues, contexts and interpretations, its thick description (Stake 2005, p.

450).

The use of GT methods for analysis facilitates close scrutiny of the data with the help of

guiding, but general questions, for example seeking to discover what is going on, in speech as

well as actions. By questioning the data and then coding it, GT can help in structuring and

organizing data [] analysis (Charmaz, 2004, p. 497). In particular, GT aids the creation

of analytic codes and categories developed from the data, not from pre-conceived hypothesis,

[] (ibid).

Interrogating the data repeatedly in order to understand what is going on, what the

protagonists do, and say they do, can be instrumental in discovering contradictions between

their talk and their actions. Charmaz (2005, p. 513) explains that

9
 [c]ritical inquiry attends to contradictions between myths and realities, rhetoric and

practice, and ends and means. Grounded theorists have the tools to discern and analyze

contradictions revealed in the empirical world. We can examine what people say and

compare it to what they do []. Focusing on words or deeds are ways of representing

people; however, observed contradictions between the two may indicate crucial priorities

and practices [emphasis in original].

This quote emphasises that existing discrepancies between an actors behaviour and their

spoken statements may indicate crucial priorities (ibid).

Through a careful analysis and coding process, student behaviour will come to the fore which

reflects these priorities and the underlying motivation which appears to be guiding their

conduct.

Alices actions could not be easily coded by looking at the transcripts alone. In-depth analysis

and comparison between messages sent and received, and the oral communication recorded

between partners, showed up discrepancies within this pair between their oral communication

on one hand and, on the other hand, the messages Alice sent to and received from other

groups. In order to discover the cause of the discrepancies, in addition to the transcripts, the

screen recordings were revisited repeatedly, as both data sets provided rich access to the

visual and audible representations of the communication process.

Discussion of findings

10
Alice frequently appeared to delay sharing information with her fellow students. Through

revisiting the screen recordings it became apparent that she did not comply with the task brief

during the first week; she failed to disseminate relevant information to all other groups. This

was a problem as she belonged to the project leader group and their dissemination of vital

information was of paramount importance for the task development. When other pairs did not

receive this information, they sent emails to the leader group requesting information.

Requests for clarification were sent repeatedly; one pair sent the same request four times.

Alice embodied the contradiction of assuring her tutor that she knew her role, including the

need to disseminate key information, while not acting in accordance with this knowledge.

When prompted by email requests from fellow students to provide information, Alice

commented repeatedly to her partner that (a) she believed the tutor would pass the

information to others, or (b) that she had already provided the information, or (c) she was

apparently in the process of providing it, while at the same time, she was very slow and

inefficient in her responses.

The data also showed that Alice did not follow the task brief to copy her email messages to

all interested parties. Instead, she replied only to the individual who had sent each incoming

email, and even then in some cases only when prompted repeatedly.

The emails Alice sent contained very little information or lacked any explanatory text. For

example attachments were frequently sent without any text added to the message box. At

other times, she sent emails with a single line of text, which sometimes did not include any

relevant information for the recipient. She also appeared occasionally to hide the responses

she wrote, for example by adding her answers to an incoming email next to the questions

11
posed, without either entering an introductory text to her reply first, or adjusting the title line,

or colour-coding the answer. This had the effect that the recipient could have overlooked any

new information contained in the reply, since there was no indication that a response text had

been inserted into the original message.

Revisiting the actual screen recordings revealed further evidence of delay. For example, on

five occasions, Alice forwarded an important attachment simply by clicking the reply button

only. On two occasions the screen recording clearly shows her considering distributing the

information more widely, as it shows her cursor hesitating above the option to send the email

as reply-to-all or copy to. By deciding to send the email only to one recipient instead of

all the people who had been copied into the incoming email, she seemed to be deliberately

denying the other students the information they needed in order to continue with their task.

The hesitation visible in the recording supports the impression that this was not a careless

oversight, but a conscious decision on the students part.

In-depth study of the original transcripts did not provide any convincing answers to this

puzzling behaviour, which held up the progress of the task and clearly irritated her fellow

students. The cause could not be interpreted as a lack of literacy in computing skills since the

student showed competence in the use of ICT on other occasions, for example by switching

confidently between windows to access emails, attachments and internet sites, retrieving

previously sent messages and editing them. It is possible that she did not like the task or the

learning mode (or both) and that this dislike led to her not engaging with the task.

Furthermore, the dynamics in classrooms are always complex and the relationship between

students as well as between students and teacher may have an impact on behaviourvi. The

motivation for a specific behaviour on the part of any participant may not be overtly

12
expressed, but may show in their actions. In this case it appears that the student used her

position, as one of the project leaders to withhold and delay information which was crucial

for the project development.

However, it is noteworthy that the student changed her behaviour during the second week of

the project. She abandoned these delaying tactics and, instead, complied with the

requirements of the task brief and engaged with her role. Preceding this change, the tutor had

appealed to her and her partner to take their roles seriously and lead the project properly.

Alice was reminded that she should make full use of her subject-specific knowledge, and as

an expert and leader should be assertive towards her fellow students, instructing them to

provide the information she required in order to move the whole group towards their goal of

developing the marketing strategy. This moment constituted an observable turning point in

the behavioural pattern of Alices participation.

This case study shows that relying entirely on transcripts of the conversations between

participants in order to make sense of the student communication would not have revealed a

full picture. Having access to the visual recording of their behaviour as displayed in their use

of ICT, highlights the differences between the verbal messages and the actual action taken:

Alice considered disseminating information to all, as requested by the task brief and

evidenced by her hesitation to use the reply-to-all-button. However, she decided quietly

not to comply, while repeatedly stating that she did, as was evident in the transcripts of the

conversations between her and her partner, her and the tutor, and some of her email replies to

fellow students.

13
It could be argued that the change of behaviour in Alice may have been due to the realisation

that she could assert her personal authority in a different way, in other words the more

destructive power used to hinder the project was replaced by the constructive power to direct

fellow students in their endeavours to fulfil the task. Using her influence to hinder the project

was clearly increasingly stressful for Alice, because her fellow students were noticeably

getting impatient with her behaviour and not only sending emails asking for required

information, but also addressing her directly in class with the same request. Tensions were

growing between Alice and her fellow students. It may have appeared to her less stressful to

drop the withholding of information from other groups and replace that behaviour with a

more positive one of directing and leading them.

During the second week Alice decided to play her part. It could be argued that the

intervening talk with the tutor during the second week of the project convinced Alice of the

relevance of the project to improving her L2 practice in the subject-specific context and

stimulated instrumental (Gardner, 1985) or intrinsic (Benson, 2001; Biggs & Tang, 2007)

motivation to comply with the task. The relationship between task and motivation does not

need to be seen as purely linear, i.e., a cause-and-effect pattern (Ushioda, 2009) but could be

seen as relational, viewing the person in their context and viewing motivation as an organic

process that emerges through the complex system of interrelations (Ushioda, 2009, p. 220).

Seen in this light, Alices change in behaviour may be interpreted as a shift in the students

motivation towards a positive expression of her possible future self (Ushioda, 2011). The

mediating intervention may have succeeded in engaging the Alice with the task and thereby

shifting her motivation towards seeing her L2 engagement in a way which Ushioda (2011, pp.

203-204) describes as a medium of self-expression and a means of communicating,

14
constructing and negotiating who we are and how we relate to the world around us that is,

of giving ourselves voice and identity. In this understanding, tutor intervention would not

have directly caused the change in Alices motivational response, but it would possibly have

acted as a catalyst which reminded the student that there were other options than her

negative motivational outlook. This realisation may have given her the space to decide on the

different L2 self, the person who successfully took on a leading role in the ERP.

In summary, within the context of this 4-week project, the initially destructive behaviour of

one student was successfully transformed into a positive contribution to the rest of the CALL

task.

While the exact cognitive and emotional processes which took place in Alice can only be

guessed, the moment of teacher mediation can clearly be identified as a turning point in

changing her motivational response to the project. The change in her actions, as she stopped

hindering the project, were observable on the screen recordings.

Conclusion

The emerged case story of this student who initially hindered the CALL task raised some

questions regarding student motivation.

The combined use of screen recording software as a data collection method, and grounded

theory as data analysis method, opened a window which revealed contradictory and

seemingly inexplicable behaviour of this student. Revisiting the screen recordings facilitated

the opportunity to expand the gathered data to multimodal data: to the originally transcribed

data of mainly either spoken (between partners) and written language (emails and reports),

information on student actions within the ICT environment could be added. This multimodal

data exposed the students intentional behaviour to hinder the project, while she

15
simultaneously expressed incomprehension when confronted by evidence of the problems

which were created by her actions. However, a definitive explanation for her initially

negative actions and subsequent change in behaviour cannot be inferred solely on the basis of

such data.

On a task-design level, the project showed that this open task embedded in social

constructivism can produce unexpected and possibly destructive student behaviour. Social

constructivism involves students in the construction of knowledge, rather than being based on

a notion of knowledge transfer. Constructivism has an impact on the role of the teacher who

transfers some control of the learning situation to the students.

On a theoretical level, this research has highlighted the suitability of case study methodology

to accommodate methods which facilitate a qualitative approach to the research object. It

thereby contributes to L2 motivation research which views motivation as an intricate and

multilevel construct which can only benefit from the increased adaptation of qualitative

research methods (Drnyei and Ushioda, 2011, p. 237).

The combined research methodology of a case study approach and GT methods applied to

multimodal data, led to the discovery of a previously invisible motivational orientation. As

was shown, the case study approach does not only facilitate thick descriptions (Stake,

2005) of what is going on, it can also bring out the particulars (Lincoln & Guba, 2002). The

method of GT, applied to the whole set of data, highlighted details of student behaviour and

gave insights into actions which may otherwise have remained obscured.

Outlook

16
This case study concentrated on one student only. The unexpected student behaviour

reported on may act as a catalyst to rethinking student activities within the CALL

environment and educators common assumptions about student behaviours and their chosen

pathways (cf Chun 2013).

Ideally, multimodal data analysis at this detailed level should take place as close to the

teaching event as possible in order to facilitate a follow-up of such findings through

interviews with the students, even though the students may not disclose all the reasons for

their behaviour in an interview. However, interviews combined with the multi-level analysis

described here may lead to more insights into students motivation for their actions which

could then inform future task design.

17
iNotes

Advanced L2 learner in this context means upper B2 level as to Common European Framework of

Reference for Languages. The global scale descriptor can be found on p.24.

ii All communication took place during class time. However, since the main task included sub-tasks

for individual groups, e.g., researching information while simultaneously communicating with

others, email responses could be delayed, therefore represent semi-synchronous CMC.

iii An outline of the task can be found in the appendix.

iv Alice is not her real name.

v This included messages which were subsequently deleted, thereby also giving an insight into

distraction, and allowing the researcher to re-construct information which otherwise would have

become lost data.

vi It is not possible to find conclusive evidence why this student did not disseminate the requested

information to her fellow students even though she had apparently considered it.

References

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow: Pearson

Education Ltd.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does (3rd

ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Bower, J. (2011). Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese / English eTandem.

Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 41-71.

Busse, V. (2013). An exploration of motivation and self-beliefs of first year students of German.

System 41 (2013), 379-398.

Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. Foundations for

teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century. Applications for advancing social justice

studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd

edition, pp. 505-536). London: Sage Publications.

Charmaz, K. (2004). Grounded theory. In S. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to

qualitative research. A reader on theory and practice (pp. 496-521). New York / Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Chun, D. (2013). Contributions of tracking user behaviour to SLA research. In P. Hubbard, M.

Schulze & B. Smith (Eds.), Learner computer interaction in language education: A

Festschrift in Honor of Robert Fischer (pp. 256-262). Texas State University: CALICO.

Chun, D. (1998). Using computer-assisted class discussion to facilitate the acquisition of interactive

competence. In J. Swaffar et al. (Eds.), Language learning online. Theory and practice in

the ESL and L2 computer classroom (pp. 57-80). Austin. Texas: Labyrinth Publication.

Collentine, K. (2013). Using Tracking technologies to study the effects of linguistic complexity in

CALL input and SCMC output. In P. Hubbard, M. Schulze & B. Smith (Eds.), Learner

computer interaction in language education: A Festschrift in Honor of Robert Fischer (pp.

46-65). Texas State University: CALICO.

Collins, W., & Hunt, J. (2011). Improved student motivation and confidence through self-access

listening, video forums and talking journals. The JALT CALL Journal, 7(3), 319-333.

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_en.pdf

De Ridder, I. (2002). Visible or invisible links: Does the highlighting of hyperlinks affect incidental

vocabulary learning, text comprehension, and the reading process? Language Learning and

Technology, 6(1), 123-146.

Drnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. London: Longman.
Drnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identities and the L2 self: Future research

directions. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self

(p.350). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Drnyei, Z. (1997). Psychological processes in cooperative language learning: Group dynamics and

motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 81(iv), 482-493.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: OUP.

Fischer, R. (2007). How do we know what students are actually doing? Monitoring students

behavior in CALL. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 20(5), 409-442.

Fischer, G. (1998). Email in Foreign Language Teaching. Toward the Creation of Virtual

Classrooms. Tbingen: Stauffenburg.

Flewitt, R., Hampel, R., Hauck, M., & Lancaster, L. (2009). Multimodal data collection and

transcription. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 40

53). London: Routledge.

Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning. The role of attitudes and

motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.

Hwu, F. (2003). Learner's behaviours in computer-based input activities elicited through tracking

technologies. Computer-assisted language learning, 16(1), 5-30.

Islam, M., Lamb, M., & Chambers, G. (2013). The L2 motivational self system and national

interest: A Pakistani perspective. System, 41, pp. 231-244.

Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. Harlow: Longman.

Lamy, M., & Hampel, R. (2007). Online communication in language learning and teaching.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Laufer, B., & Hill, M. (2000). What lexical information do L2 learners select in a CALL dictionary

and how does it affect word retention? Language Learning & Technology, 3(2), 58-76.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1991). An introduction to Second Language Acquisition

Research. London: Longman Group UK Ltd.

Leahy, C. (2008). Learner activities in a collaborative CALL task. Computer Assisted Language

Learning, 21(3), 253-268.

Leahy, C. (2001). Bilingual negotiation via email. An international project. Computer Assisted

Language Learning, 14(1), 15-42.

Levy, M. & Michael, R. (2011). Analyzing students multimodal texts. The product and the process.

In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing Digital Natives. Young people, technology and the new

literacies (pp. 83-98). New York / London: Routledge.

Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL Dimensions. Options and issues in computer-assisted

language learning. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2002). The only generalization is: There is no generalization. In R. Gomm,

M. Hammersley, & P. Foster (Eds.), Case study method (pp. 27-44). London: Sage.

Lomicka, L. (1998). To gloss or not to gloss: An investigation of reading comprehension.

Language Learning and Technology, 1(2), 41-50.

Long, M. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in SLA. In W. Ritchie, & T. Bhatia (Eds.),

Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press.

Normand-Marconnet, N., & Cordella, M. (2012). Spanish and French foreign learners blogging

experience: Motivation and attitude. The JALT CALL Journal, 8(1), 3-16.

Oakes, L. (2013). Foreign language learning in a monoglot culture: Motivational variables

amongst students of French and Spanish at an English university. System 41, 178-191.

Oxford, R., & Shearin, G. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical

framework. The Modern Language Journal, 78(1), 12-28.

Roed, J. (2003). Language learner behaviour in a virtual environment. Computer-assisted language

learning, 16(2-3), 155-172.

Rubesch, T., & McNeil, M. (2010). Online vs face-to-face: Motivating and demotivating factors in

an EAP writing course. The JALT CALL Journal, 6(3), 235-250.

Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of

qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-466). London: Sage Publications.

Stockwell, G. (2012). Diversity in research and practice. In: G. Stockwell (Ed). Computer-assisted

language learning. Diversity in research and practice (pp.147-163). Cambridge: CUP.

Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian

Modern Language Review, 50(1), 158-164.

Ushioda, E. (2011). Language learning motivation, self and identity: current theoretical

perspectives. Computer-assisted language learning, 24(3), 199-210.

Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In

Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.215-228).

Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner autonomy 5. The role of motivation. Dublin: Authentik Language

Learning Resources.

Willis, J. (2004). A framework for task-based learning (8th ed.). Harlow: Longman.

Yin, R. (2009). Case study research. Design and methods (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Appendix

Task outline ERP

The task was based on the scenario that a British company wanted to launch a new product on the

German market. In 5 groups, students worked towards the mutual goal of developing the outline of

a marketing strategy for the product of their choice, taking the following points into consideration:

Possible economic problems and cultural differences between the countries.

The five groups consisted of the British producer of the chosen product (group 1), an advisory

German market research company (group 2) and 3 research groups who were instructed by groups 1
and 2.

All communication was to be conducted in German, in form of oral communication among partners

of each group and CMC via email between different groups.

During the four weeks, emphasis was put on different language skills, ranging from initial emphasis

on receptive skills to increasing output in form of presentations and a written report.