Informal and deliberate learning

with new technologies

Ruth Trinder

Due to the ready availability of new technologies, opportunities for the

incidental as well as deliberate practice of English have multiplied and far
exceed what can be done in more formal environments. Yet, despite the sizeable
literature on the classroom-based use of specific digital resources, few studies
have investigated how students evaluate increased exposure to English in
terms of learning potential. This article argues that online informal learning
of English deserves more attention, and presents an empirical study surveying
Austrian university students’ practices and preferences related to new media
in independent settings. The participants’ perceptions of the usefulness of a
range of digital resources for the acquisition of language skills are analysed and
juxtaposed with their opinions on in-class use of technology. Results indicate
a clear preference for well-established, time-honoured media (film, online
dictionaries, email) in self-regulated contexts, as well as diverging opinions on
the use of technologies in classroom settings.

Introduction In Austria, the penetration of smartphones and high-speed internet is

above the European average. Students have easy and cheap access to a
wide array of technologies, employing them regularly for entertainment,
personal communication, and information seeking. Downloading services
and streaming have made English-language films and television series
readily available in a country where ‘regular’ television only shows dubbed
programmes, while social media offer membership and interaction
opportunities in international communities. With the proliferation of
mobile internet-enabled devices, this means that students are increasingly
exposed to English in informal settings.
The rise of networked and mobile technologies is a global phenomenon
that causes changes in communication patterns as well as English-
language use. Broadband internet connections and Wi-Fi are ubiquitous
and are used for work, leisure, and shopping. As Sockett (2014) points
out, these activities are frequently conducted in English, so that, for
many young people, the classroom setting represents only one amongst a
multitude of opportunities for contact with the target language. Through
the internet, language learners are morphing into matter-of-course
language users, with language development a welcome by-product of
online practices such as social networking, emailing, and downloading. In

ELT Journal Volume 71/4 October 2017; doi:10.1093/elt/ccw117  401

© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Downloaded from Advance Access publication February 20, 2017
https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 fact, as Toffoli and Sockett (2015) observe, young people spend more time
learning English in online than in formal, institutional settings. Yet, the
question of how the potential of such informal learning opportunities is
assessed by learners—and whether it is deliberately exploited by them—
has received little attention. Notable exceptions are studies by Stevens
(2009), Steel and Levy (2013), and Sockett (ibid.), whose surveys explore
the relative popularity and take-up of various technological tools both in
and out of the classroom, and the work of Jarvis (for example 2014), which
emphasizes the pervasiveness of mobile assisted language use.

Informal learning: Informal learning is learner-controlled, not linked to any course or

from non-intentional institution, and takes place outside the classroom. Stevens (ibid.:
to explicit and 12) defines it as:
deliberate?
Learning resulting from daily life activities related to work, family or
leisure. It is not structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning
time or learning support) and does not lead to certification. Informal
learning may be intentional but in most cases it is non-intentional (or
‘incidental’/random).
However, with the normalization of online applications and the
concomitant frequent exposure of non-native English speakers to English-
language media and communities, the question arises of whether
informal learning is still mainly random and non-intentional. In her
discussion of the concepts, Rieder (2003: 28) clarifies that incidental (or
‘unintentional’) learning can involve both explicit and implicit processes;
incidental explicit learning is distinguished from its counterpart by the
learner’s awareness of both process and product of learning.
In planning this study, one of my fundamental contentions is that the
benefits of informal engagement with online English-language resources
do not go unnoticed by experienced language learners. More than
that, I expect the intentional aspect to gain in importance in informal
environments, with students deciding to access resources such as news
sites in English even though the equivalent content is available in their
native language, simply because it benefits their English.

Face-to-face Technology pervades so many aspects of modern life that the division
environments between face-to-face and technologically mediated learning environments
include technology is becoming blurred. Formal, institutional learning spaces now exist in
a variety of hybrid forms such as blended or flipped classrooms which
combine face-to-face and online instruction (Gruba, Hinkelman, and
Cárdenas-Claros 2016). What is more, teacher-fronted classrooms
have become increasingly ‘porous’ (Blake 2009: 831). Internet access,
PowerPoint, and digital projectors are employed in an ad hoc or principled
way to present authentic materials to students, who in turn (overtly or
covertly, encouraged or discouraged by teachers) consult dictionaries and
web sources on mobile devices.
Also, outside the classroom, face-to-face communication does not
necessarily mean technology-free. Conversations in the target language
are expedited with the help of digital dictionaries. Many casual
interactions revolve around input obtained from mobile devices, be

402 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 they online postings, videos, or shopping sites. However, despite the
preponderance of technology-enhanced input and communication, it
is still not sufficiently clear how often student-initiated online activities
take place in English, whether their potential is realized and deliberately
exploited by learners, and in what way the easy access to technology
outside affects students’ views on the desirability of in-class use of
technology.

The study I aim to address at least some of these points by presenting the findings
Research questions of an empirical, questionnaire-based study conducted with students at
Vienna University of Economics. I will focus on the following areas of
student behaviour and attitudes:
1 frequency of use and perceptions of usefulness of technologies for the
acquisition of language skills;
2 explicit/intentional learning in informal contexts;
3 reasons behind technology choices; and
4 attitudes towards technology use in class.
The first section surveys students’ experiences with a variety of digital
applications. It investigates how frequently a number of technologies are
used, how helpful they have been for language learning in general, and
how useful they are considered to be for the development of a range of
language competencies (reading, writing, speaking, listening, communicative
competence, vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and Business English).
Section two explores the overlaps between informal, explicit, and
deliberate learning. After all, technology use in informal settings is
primarily driven by the intention to communicate (Toffoli and Socket
op.cit.) rather than the intention to learn. Consequently, it is not
necessarily to be expected that the technologies students like using in
English for leisure purposes will be the same as those they consider to
be highly beneficial for learning. On the other hand, if we credit students
with the metacognitive skills required to reflect on their own strengths
and shortcomings as language learners, it is reasonable to assume that
they may engage in informal activities with the express purpose of
improving certain language skills.
Section three first focuses on television series/films as the most highly
ranked resource in terms of both frequency of use and skills acquisition.
Drawing on student comments in the form of open-ended questionnaire
responses, reasons that make this medium such an attractive learning
resource are subsequently identified. Second, students’ practices and views
on the relative merits of communication media (in particular, Facebook and
chat) will be addressed. Respondents’ previously ascertained belief in the
central role of communication (Trinder 2013) was not borne out by high
rankings (relating to skills acquisition) of communication media in the
current study. Potential reasons behind this conundrum will be discussed.
In the final section, having established participants’ favourite media for
informal learning (see above), their views on the ‘teacher-controlled’ use of
technology will be explored. Given the improved access to target language
resources beyond the classroom, students do not depend on teachers

Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies 403

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 anymore to provide authentic audiovisual or written materials. More
experienced learners in particular are able to make informed judgements
about what best serves their needs and goals in independent contexts,
and believe themselves similarly capable of assessing the effectiveness of
classroom practices.

Participants and For the study, quantitative and qualitative data were collected by means
procedure of a questionnaire including Likert-type ratings and free text responses
to open questions. The data were interpreted through a combination of
descriptive statistics and a thematic analysis of open-response questions.
The sample consists of 175 Austrian university students. Results provide
a broad indication of how young adults—in this case, business students
with intermediate to advanced-level English—practise informal learning
and blend digital tools with more traditional resources.

Learning context Regarding the wider context in which the respondents in this study learn
and use English, as indicated, Austria is quite privileged concerning the
availability and cost of digital resources. All the questionnaire respondents
own smartphones and at least one other portable device (for example
a notebook, netbook, iPad). As far as the learning environment in its
narrower sense is concerned, the participants are undergraduates at the
Vienna University of Economics. They attend face-to-face English for
Specific Purposes (ESP) language classes as part of their studies, which are
complemented by the university’s e-learning platform and customized online
activities (referred to below as BE (Business English) e-learning modules).

Learner contributions Students tend to bring their individual attributes (for example learner
beliefs, learning experiences, expectations) to the classroom, and
evaluate the extent to which courses meet their requirements. In turn,
the perceived affordances and deficiencies of classes can be expected to
influence the choice of independent resources. Thus, students often note
that, due to class sizes and an emphasis on specialist (business) language,
there is not enough oral interaction or opportunity to practise general
English (Trinder op.cit.). For such practice, they may turn to online
resources and interlocutors outside the classroom.

Findings and The results attest to regular online activity in English. Tables 1 and 2 each
discussion show eight technologies, ranked according to reported frequency of use
Quantitative data (columns 1 and 3). Column 4 details students’ views on how useful the
technology has been in terms of improving their English; column 5 lists
the applications rated amongst the top three for their potential to develop
specific skills and domains.

Technologies aimed Noteworthy are, first of all, the low rankings of discipline-specific
at language learning applications (online grammars and language learning sites, ranks 12
and 16, respectively) in terms of their regularity of use and perceived
usefulness. This suggests that for deliberate study, either more
conventional material and social resources (for example books, teachers,
native speakers) or technologies with a different primary focus (for
instance news sites) are preferred. Exceptions are digital dictionaries and,
a little more surprisingly, the course-specific e-learning modules. The

404 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 1 Rank 2 Technology 3 Frequency: technology 4 Usefulness: 5P
 otential usefulness
(frequency) used regularly (daily or has helped very for specific skill
frequently) much (rank 1, 2, 3)
1 Online dictionaries 94% 74% V, W
2 TV/radio/video clips/ 73% 67% L, P, S, CC
series
3 Social networking: e.g. 58% 23% CC
Facebook
4 Company or informational Company websites 45% 18% R, BE, V
websites Informational websites 71%
5 Online news sites/journals 45% 51% BE, R
6 Email 43% 23% W, R, G
7 BE e-learning modules 42% 38% G, BE, V, W
8 Films, etc. on DVD/Blu-ray 41% 60% L, P, S
Notes: W = writing, L = listening, S = speaking, R = reading, V = vocabulary, P = pronunciation, G = grammar, CC = communicative
competence, BE = business English); bold lettering in column five indicates top ranking.

ta b l e  1
Technologies used regularly
by more than 40% of
respondents

1 Rank 2 Technology 3F
 requency: technology 4 Usefulness: 5 Potential usefulness
(frequency) used regularly (daily or has helped very for specific skill
frequently) much (rank 1, 2, 3)
9 Written chat (e.g. Skype, 36% 23%
Messenger)
10 Text messages/SMS 27% 9%
11 E-books/books E-books 9% 41%
Books 35%
12 Online grammars 18% 22% G
13 Voice chat (e.g. Skype, 14% 15% S, L, P, CC
Messenger)
14 Discussion forums 12% 7%
15 Blogs 9% 7%
16 Language learning sites/ Online 5% 7%
courses DVD 1%
Notes: W = writing, L = listening, S = speaking, R = reading, V = vocabulary, P = pronunciation, G = grammar, CC = communicative
competence, BE = business English); bold lettering in column five indicates top ranking.

ta b l e  2
Technologies used regularly
by less than 40% of
respondents

Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies 405

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 figure 1
Comparison of perceived
learning potential for five
language areas (absolute
numbers)

latter are assessed as the best application for developing grammatical

competence as well as being amongst the top three for three other skills.
The fact that the e-learning tool offers streamlined and presumably
effective practice activities for the formal written assessment may explain
its good ratings.

Communication Second, apart from Facebook and email, communication media

technologies (for example chat, discussion forums) are neither used all that much in
English nor seen as particularly beneficial for learning. The data indicate
that chat, texting, and discussion forums play a very minor role in students’
personal learning environments. Though social media (i.e. Facebook) has
gained the top ranking for communicative competence, this is the skill
least well-catered for by any technology: only two-thirds (111) agree that
social networking enhances communicative competence (see Figure 1).
As the only medium facilitating synchronous oral communication with an
interlocutor (and consequently most resembling face-to-face conversations),
voice chat has a special position amongst the technologies investigated.
Figure 1 depicts the promise it holds for students in those skills areas it
could reasonably be expected to benefit, comparing it to Facebook and film/
television. Yet notably, though participants acknowledge its potential to
improve five language areas, film/television gets better ratings for vocabulary
acquisition, listening, and pronunciation. What is more, voice chat does not
have a high uptake (one-third do not use it at all in English, only 14 per cent
regularly), a striking contradiction given the sample’s previously expressed
aim to become ‘fluent’ speakers of English (Trinder op.cit.).
A sizeable literature attests to the benefits of computer-mediated
communication, summarized in a recent meta-synthesis by Lin (2015).
Yet though chat facilitates ‘conversation in slow motion’ (Beauvois 1992:
445), and is said to have ‘loosened the tongues and the writings of even
the shyest students’ (Kramsch 2014: 296), the advanced learners in this
study experience things differently. They assess such pared-down virtual

406 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 environments as less useful for listening and pronunciation than immersing
themselves in the richer, if no less artificial, world of film, and television,
which to them appears to be offering more authentic, worthwhile language.

Audiovisual technologies The top rankings of films and television series in terms of utility and
popularity mirror the results of previous studies (Conole 2008; Stevens
op.cit.; Steel and Levy op.cit.) surveying students’ technology preferences.
The ready availability of English-language television series via the internet
is a relatively recent phenomenon in Austria and enjoys enthusiastic
uptake, with about two-thirds of the sample regularly watching online.
Moreover, film in its different online guises is considered the most useful
medium for improving listening skills and pronunciation, and though it
offers no opportunities for language production, it is amongst the three
best-ranked technologies for developing pronunciation and communicative
competence. Viewing current series seems to provide a rich learning
experience akin to immersion, with plentiful examples of the kind of
English students miss in their formal classes (cf. Trinder op.cit.), i.e. an
optimal form of effortless learning whilst enjoying an everyday pastime.
In order to flesh out this quantitative account of students’ technology
choices, qualitative data were collected and analysed. Students’ reasons for
preferring to watch film and television as an informal, but in many cases
intentional, learning activity will be discussed below.

Intentional learning Seventy-two per cent of respondents confirmed that they deliberately
in informal contexts engage in online activities with the explicit aim of improving certain
aspects of their English. When asked to name the technology they
preferred to use for intentional skills development, two types of
technologies were mentioned most frequently.
On the one hand, for these business students, online news sites and journals
were the obvious choices for deliberate advancement of professional or ESP
vocabulary. Yet, not surprisingly given the positive ratings so far, references
to television series, films, and videos were even more common. These
audiovisual media are not only credited with the ability to enhance a number
of skills but are consciously used for that purpose. Although the primary
focus of viewing is clearly entertainment rather than, say, picking up new
vocabulary, the comments below (quoted verbatim) illustrate that there has
been a shift towards dual purpose engagement:
I started out watching US TV Series when I was studying for my oral
A-levels and do that nearly every day ever since. It helps you a lot with
your pronunciation, vocabulary and listening skill. I don’t use subtitles
as most US series are really easy to understand and subtitles just
distract you from trying to understand what was said.
What I really like is watching movies and series in English. I do not
just have fun watching these movies, I also improve my vocabulary,
grammar and pronunciation.
That’s the good thing about streaming tv series and movies, you
improve your vocabulary and can decide for yourself when you learn.

Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies 407

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 Personally I like the idea to watch films, documentaries, etc. If you listen to
it very attentive, you will benefit a lot in view of communication in real life.
I like watching news or films because that way one can pick up the
language seemingly without effort.
The comments suggest that respondents find viewing films and series not
only engaging and motivating, but also an (effortless) way of developing
a number of language skills. The fact that this positive side effect is
recognized and appreciated by the majority of respondents supports my
hypothesis that when students choose to interact (or watch, or listen) in
English rather than their native language, learning stops being a negligible
by-product and becomes a deliberate, even if usually secondary, aim.
On the basis of this data, informal learning is understood to have
the following characteristics: it is learner- (or peer-) rather than
teacher-initiated, takes place outside class, and combines other goals
(entertainment, information search, communication) with language
acquisition. Particularly in the case of experienced learners, it tends to
involve awareness of the acquisition process and the resulting knowledge
(i.e. to be explicit), and may well be intentional.

Reasons behind The following points were extrapolated from students’ answers as well as
preferences for film from the inherent characteristics of the media. They are interpretative in
and television series nature, aiming to highlight the factors that make film and television such
popular and potentially effective learning resources:
ππ motivational factors (inherent interest; effortless learning; peer group
interest);
ππ deliberate/noticeable language development;
ππ high-context exposure; social and cultural insights; pragmatics;
ππ familiarity of characters; repetitive dramatic situations;
ππ repeated exposure to chunks, idioms, everyday language, domain-
specific lexis;
ππ different accents, registers, styles, levels of formality; and
ππ fast speech (help through visual clues, plot).

Reasons behind Reasons for the surprisingly lukewarm attitudes towards voice chat could
lack of uptake for be identified by means of open-ended questions. Students were asked
voice chat to explain whether (and if yes, why) they found computer-mediated
communication inferior to face-to-face talk.
First, poor sound quality, inferior acoustics, and disruptions/delays in
transmission make it harder to pick up the finer points of language and
pronunciation. As adding the video function tends to impair the transmission
quality, voice chat becomes a purely aural/oral form of communication, and
the most frequently expressed disadvantages concerned the missing cues
of facial expressions and body language which students consider a vital aid
towards understanding. Furthermore, students reported getting distracted by
other applications; thus, the multifunctionality of networked/mobile devices
represents a disadvantage here. Additionally, constant access to dictionaries
‘allows cheating’. Despite the fact that students appear to spend so much
time communicating in virtual rather than face-to-face environments, the

408 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 former were repeatedly referred to as ‘somehow artificial’ and lacking in
context. Overall, computer-mediated communication is experienced as less
authentic, less focused on the interlocutor and language, and less likely to lead
to long-term learning than face-to-face interaction. Thus, to quote just one
respondent: ‘Talking face-to-face to a person is different than video chatting.
Emotions, little hints and other subconscious things can be better transmitted
by direct face-to-face communication’.
These vague feelings about the ‘artificiality’ of the situation, which
students express in layman’s terms, find support in a fascinating study
by Kern (2014). Kern (ibid.: 341) uncovers the ‘significant mediational
issues that underlie videoconferencing’ by drawing attention to the
decontextualizations and distortions taking place during telecollaborative
exchanges.

In-class use of The physical classrooms of respondents’ face-to-face Business English

technology classes are equipped with smartboards, projectors, and internet access,
potentially facilitating the presentation of authentic, up-to-date websites
as well as audio, video, and discipline-specific resources. Teachers avail
themselves of these opportunities to differing degrees, but pressure
to cover everything in the curriculum means that time spent on
supplementary rather than core materials is generally limited.
Students’ opinions on whether the limited contact time should integrate
new technologies were rather diverse, ranging along a continuum from
‘online is state of the art’ to ‘the old ways are best’:
Any use of technology in class increases variety, which in turn makes
class more interesting and therefore eases the language learning process.
I like using technology in class, for example radio or TV, because you get
used to listen to the language and learn to distinguish between accents.
However, technology is sometimes used just to keep students busy
during class, which is not meaningful, since I can study that way on my
own at home as well and do not have to go to class.
Technology is used better after class for the independent study, because
in-class there should be more speaking, reading and listening instead of
using technologies.
I don’t really like a lot of technology in class because I think it is better to
use it at home when I don’t have a teacher who can explain things to me.
Clearly, the fact that students have such easy continuous access to all types
of technology outside class strongly colours their views; this sample does
not need the teacher to provide resources. However, it could be discerned
that while some students were happy to look independently for online
resources that would help with their studies, others would prefer the
teacher to recommend and thus validate materials for out-of-class use.

Summary of findings Steel (2012: 875) observed that ‘as we consider learning for the future, it is
crucial to partner with students to build a picture of emergent technology
practices beyond the classroom’. Exploring the applicability of technologies
for specific language learning aims from the bottom-up rather than

Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies 409

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 top-down (i.e. from students rather than from teachers) may provide
important insights for teachers. Finding out more about how students
use available media and juxtaposing their preferences/strategies with
available research (that focuses, for example, on the effects of subtitling on
the uptake of vocabulary) is a first step towards making classrooms more
relevant and private learning environments more effective for learners.
The study reported on here has shed light on two developments. First,
due to the ready availability and cheap access to internet technologies,
the focus of technology-mediated learning has shifted from teacher- to
student-initiated use. While all respondents use new media as a matter
of course for leisure and work, they have diverging opinions about its
integration in face-to-face classroom contexts. Some welcome variety in
teaching tools, others claim that technology use does not represent the
most effective use of contact time.
Second, students have clearly formed conceptions about which technologies
promote language learning, and use them accordingly. Media that are not
strictly speaking new—film and television series—can now be easily viewed
in English via the internet and represent the most popular technology for
informal learning. In this case, informal learning involves an element of
language choice and is intentional rather than implicit. This is in contrast
to communication via email or chat, the primary aim of which is exchange
of information. Such interactions often take place in English as a Lingua
Franca (ELF) environments, are constrained regarding visual stimuli, and
are consequently regarded as less authentic, motivating, and effective virtual
learning spaces. In other words, students often watch films, but rarely write
emails with the deliberate aim of improving their English.

Conclusion The focus of this article has been on the personal learning environments
of fairly advanced students. Yet, the shift from language learner to
language user discussed earlier is clearly a global reality that affects
classrooms regardless of specific context and level. Students have become
‘digital residents living out at least part of their life with and through
mobile devices’ (Jarvis op.cit.: 24) in the L2. Choosing to address rather
than ignore this changed reality may actually create more student-centred,
relevant, and authentic classrooms as well as contribute to more deliberate
and effective use of technology beyond the classroom setting.
For instance, by asking students to find and share digital resources (news
articles, forum comments, videos, etc.) that relate to content/topics on the
curriculum, to post them on learning management systems or in closed
Facebook groups, and to comment on the contributions of others, teachers
would bridge informal and formal environments. Such an approach
reflects the ‘sharing’ nature of Web 2.0, and lends itself well to classroom
discussions on the topic being dealt with as well as on a meta level.
Encouraging students to contribute resources that they find appropriate
offers opportunities to foster indispensable digital literacy skills such as
evaluation of resources concerning pertinence and credibility amongst
less experienced learners. According to Jarvis (op.cit.), helping students to
become more insightful and responsible digital residents—for example
by devising tasks that require them to reflect on issues of security,

410 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 plagiarism, and digital footprints—is one of the emergent new challenges
facing the ELT profession.
Furthermore, as younger or lower-level learners may be less aware of
the potential which their everyday digital activities offer for deliberate
learning, they might benefit from having this link made explicit. Focusing
class time on learner practices not only validates informal learning, but
simultaneously presents opportunities to discuss listening/viewing/
reading strategies and to address common misconceptions. With more
experienced students sharing their know-how and teachers acting as
‘learning facilitators’ (Sockett op.cit.: 137), the convergence of virtual and
real learning spaces can be promoted, and autonomous learning fostered.
To sum up, gaining insights into how students engage with technology
might enable teachers to tap into the motivating potential of preferred
technologies and assist learners in making more informed choices.
Though it may not always be feasible to accommodate student preferences
directly by integrating popular media such as video into the classroom,
some simple measures represent valuable steps towards promoting
optimal use of technology for language learning. These include discussing,
validating, and encouraging informal language learning, raising awareness
about the benefits of underused resources, exploring reasons for use and
rejection, and fostering strategies to better exploit digital tools.
Final version received November 2016

References Lin, H. 2015. ‘A meta-synthesis of empirical

Beauvois, M. H. 1992. ‘Computer-assisted classroom research on the effectiveness of computer-mediated
discussion in the foreign language classroom: communication (CMC) in SLA’. Language Learning &
conversation in slow motion’. Foreign Language Technology 19/2: 85–117.
Annals 25/5: 455–64. Rieder, A. 2003. ‘Implicit and explicit learning in
Blake, R. 2009. ‘The use of technology for second incidental vocabulary acquisition’. Views 12/2: 24–39.
language distance learning’. The Modern Language Available at www.univie.ac.at/Anglistik/views/03_2/
Journal, focus issue 93: 822–35. RIE_SGLE.PDF (accessed on 5 July 2016).
Conole, G. 2008. ‘Listening to the learner voice: Sockett, G. 2014. The Online Informal Learning of
the ever-changing landscape of technology use for English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
language students’. ReCALL 20/2: 124–40. Steel, C. 2012. ‘Fitting learning into life: language
Gruba, P., D. Hinkelman, and M. Cárdenas-Claros. students’ perspectives on the benefits of using
2016. ‘New technologies, blended learning and the mobile apps’ in M. Brown, M. Hartnett, and
“flipped classroom” in ELT’ in G. Hall (ed.). The T. Stewart (eds.). Future Challenges, Sustainable
Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. Future. Proceedings of Ascilite Conference, 25–28
London: Routledge. November, Wellington.
Jarvis, H. 2014. ‘Digital residents: practices and Steel, C. and M. Levy. 2013. ‘Language students and
perceptions of non-native speakers’. The Asian EFL their technologies: charting the evolution 2006–
Journal 75/April: 21–35. 2011’. ReCALL 25/3: 306–20.
Kern, R. 2014. ‘Technology as pharmakon: the Stevens, A. (ed.). 2009. Study on the Impact of
promise and perils of the internet for foreign Information and Communications Technology (ICT)
language education’. The Modern Language Journal and New Media on Language Learning: Final Report No
98/1: 340–57. EACEA 2007/09. Brussels: European Commission.
Kramsch, C. 2014. ‘Teaching foreign languages in Available at http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/LLp/studies/
an era of globalization: introduction’. The Modern study_impact_ict_new_media_language_learning_
Language Journal 98/1: 296–311. en.php (accessed on 11 August 2016).

Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies 411

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018
 Toffoli, D. and G. Sockett. 2015. ‘University teachers’ The author
perceptions of Online Informal Learning of English Ruth Trinder is Associate Professor in the Department
(OILE)’. Computer-Assisted Language Learning 28/1: of English Business Communication at Vienna
7–21. University of Economics and Business (WU). Her
Trinder, R. 2013. ‘Business students’ beliefs about main research interests include ICT in language
language learning in a university context’. English for learning, learner beliefs, and SLA theory.
Specific Purposes 32/1: 1–11. Email: [email protected]

412 Ruth Trinder

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/71/4/401/3038073
by guest
on 29 January 2018