| Sumario: | Background study: Although the number of computer‐based instruction has increased drastically, the understanding of how design features of learning modality can affect learning remains incompelte. This partly stems from studies' heavy focus on modified output. Therefore, how interactive nature of computer‐mediated learning feeds into learning is under examined. Objectives: This study examined the potentials of multimodal and text‐based computer‐mediated communication (CMC) to support learner communication repair, co‐regulation patterns and engagement dimensions. Method: To this end, collaborative online writing performance of 30 English as a Foreign Language learners in Moodle and online writing forum was analysed via conversation analysis. Data from stored conversation of Moodle and chat logs of writing forum were coded for communication repair to trace language related episodes (LREs), co‐regulation patterns and students' engagement dimensions. Results: The frequency analysis of coded data on LREs indicated while multimodal CMC involved students in global and organisational and content LREs, text‐based computer‐mediate communication involved students in morphosyntactic and lexical LREs. Results also indicated significant differences in co‐regulation patterns in multimodal and text‐based computer‐mediated communication. While students enacted planning, monitoring co‐regulation practices in multimodal computer‐mediated communication, students in text‐based CMC executed evaluation and elaboration co‐regulation practices. Findings also indicated that students were differentially engaged in learning. Students were more emotionally and socially engaged in multimodal CMC and cognitively and behaviourally engaged in text‐based computer‐mediated writing. Conclusions: The results posit dual function for CMCs, as a mean for communication and cognitive co‐regulation. However, dynamics of interaction is influenced by the mode of interaction. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Computer‐mediated communications (CMCs) in education reveal significant variability in research on online educational spaces, making it challenging to provide a definitive answer regarding CMC efficacy.The variation in cognitive processing across modalities can impact memory and perceptions of content and news stories.The existing literature reveals tendency predominantly centres on easily observable aspects such as student achievement within online learning spaces, while neglecting the documentation of students' personalised strategies for regulating their learning, improving communication repair, and fostering overall engagement with the learning process (Mohammadi Zenouzagh et al., 2023). What this paper adds: Current efforts often apply established mediated communication principles to digital discourse without recognising the unique affordances of digital modalities and their impact on learner outcomes and interaction.The research makes significant contributions by addressing the limited exploration of technology‐enhanced curriculum in mediating students' communication and negotiation repair, offering insights into the diverse potentials of e‐learning environments.Additionally, it provides valuable perspectives on how different e‐learning modalities can engage students in varied co‐regulation patterns.Notably, the study employs an emic perspective through conversation analysis, avoiding reliance on questionnaires and self‐reports susceptible to reliability and social desirability issues. Implications for practice and/or policy: Our study's results propose a dual role for social interaction, serving both as a means of communication and as a cognitive mechanism for co‐regulation in co‐regulated learning, which is deemed essential for L2 development.The results imply that teaching professionals must make principled considerations about which CMC medium to use and choose based on priorities of outcome, patterns of co‐student management and regulations, and student engagement dimension in main, complementary, and remedial curricula.The findings of the study suggest that development of interactional practices is variant with respect to the learning context. Instructional designs that maxim learning opportunities through establishment of learning context that sponsors co‐regulated learning is essential. Interactional features of CMCs and their structural affordances can help teachers to make decisions that best fit their instructional purposes. Learning environments that embrace technological interfaces, provide resources, enable peer interaction, and include a variety of means to create communities that can foster knowledge construction are highly valuable.The practical implications drawn from the findings suggest that teachers should consider the choice between text‐based and multimodal CMC based on specific instructional needs. Text‐based CMC is advantageous when real‐time, on‐task learner engagement is a priority, as it tends to more effectively involve learners in actual performance. In contrast, multimodal CMC is valuable when scaffolding through emotional engagement and collaboration is required. Multimodal CMC offers benefits such as richer communication cues, instant feedback, and the use of natural language.
|
|---|