Education 2.0: Psycholinguistic Analysis
Introduction. The article presents the results of the investigation of the impact of new information and communication technologies, namely Internet technologies of the social web, on the linguistic consciousness in the learning environment. The term covers a certain concept of the Global Web development, when the main functional task of a web service is aimed at maintaining interaction between network users.
The method of a free and directional associative experiment was chosen as main research technique. It allows most accurately identifying the meaning of the word, seeing what is behind this word in the linguistic consciousness of a person. Associative series were identified for a number of concepts – the most popular social web services and Internet technologies (Internet, Instagram, social media, communication, Twitter, Telegram, WhatsApp, Youtube, Pinterest, Google, selfie).
Results. The associative experiment showed that information, communicative and functional components of the Global net are actualized in the linguistic consciousness of the participants of the educational process most of all. Almost all social media services have both positive and negative connotations. The educational component of social media has been marked little, if at all, in the linguistic consciousness of the recipients which indirectly indicates that their use in the educational process has not become an institutional practice yet.
Conclusions. The results of the research will contribute to the development of a new direction in modern linguistics – psycholinguistics 2.0 which studies psychological and linguistic aspects of human speech in social media, social and psychological aspects of using language in speech communication using web 2.0 platforms and services, and in individual verbal and thinking activity. The study is characterized by an interdisciplinary nature, being at the interface of psycholinguistics 2.0 and education 2.0, which contributes to a better understanding of the polyparadigmatic way of the development of humanitarian knowledge under the influence of technologies in general.
Goroshko, O.I. (2005). Problema provedeniya svobodnogo assotsiativnogo eksperimenta [The problem of conducting a free associative experiment]. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – Izvestiya of Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 3, 53–61 [in Russian].
Leontyev, A.A. (1989). Psikholingvistika [Psycholinguistics]. Tendentsii razvitiya psikhologicheskoy nauki [Trends in the Development of Psychological Science]. Moscow [in Russian].
Leontyev, A.A. (2003). Osnovy psikholingvistiki [Fundamentals of psycholinguistics] (3nd ed.). Moscow: Smysl; Saint Petersburg: Lan [in Russian].
Obrazovaniye 2.0: kak zainteresovat uchenika v 21 veke? [Education 2.0: how to rouse a student`s interest in the 21st century?]. (2017). Retrieved from https://nv.ua/ukraine/goglobal/obrazovanie-2-0-kak-zainteresovat-uchenika-v-21-veke-756793.html [in Russian].
Ufimtseva, N.V. (Ed.). (2000). Yazykovoye soznaniye i obraz mira [Linguistic consciousness and the image of the world]. Moscow: Institute of linguistics Russian Academy of Sciences [in Russian].
Altmann, G. (Ed.). (2002). Psycholinguistics: critical concepts in psychology (Vols. 1–6). London and New York: Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group.
Davis, L. (2018). The Impact of Social Media in Education: Student Engagement Tactics. Retrieved from https://www.schoology.com/blog/impact-social-media-education-student-engagement-tactics
Demirdag, S. (2016). Examining the computer attitudes and Internet attitudes of substitute teachers: self-confidence towards ICT. International journal of psycho-educational sciences, 5(2), 87–98.
Evans, Rh., & Nygaard, C. (2019). E-learning 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 in Higher Education (Learning in Higher Education series). Libri Publishing, Amsterdam.
Harley, T. (2005). The psychology of language. From data to theory (2nd ed.). Hove and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
How tech and social media have changed the face of education. (2018). Independent News for International Students. Retrieved from https://www.studyinternational.com/news/tech-social-media-changed-face-education/
Hussain, F. (2012). E-Learning 3.0 = E-Learning 2.0 + Web 3.0. LIADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA, 2012) (pp. 11–18). Celda.
Internet. Statistics and Market Data about the Internet. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/markets/424/internet/
Internet World Stats. (2019). Usage and Population Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
Jones, V., Jo, J.H., & Philippe, A.M. (2007). Future schools and how technology can be used to support Millennial and Generation-Z Students. ICUT 2007, 1st International Conference of Ubiquitous Information Technology (pp. 886–891).
Keats, D., & Schmidt, J. (2007). The genesis and emergence of Education 3.0 in higher education and its potential for Africa. First Monday, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v12i3.1625
Liu, I.F., & Ko, H.W. (2019). Roles of paper-based reading ability and ICT-related skills in online reading performance. Reading and Writing, 32(4), 1037–1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9892-z
Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of U.S. adults using social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchanged-since-2018/
Preparing 21st century students for a global society. (2012). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Tîrziua, A.M, & Vrabie, C., (2015). Education 2.0: E-Learning Methods. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 376–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.213
Traxler, M.I., & Gernsbacher, M.A. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed.). New York: Academic Press.
Trevisan, P., & Garcia, A. (2019). Systematic functional grammar as a tool for experimental stimulus design: new applicable horizons in psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics. Language sciences, 75, 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2019.101237
Abstract views: 294 PDF Downloads: 243
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.