Skip to main content

Facebook

Je ne suis pas adonné à Facebook (étant plutôt attiré par certains forums), mais j'ai l'impression que beaucoup de mes élèves le sont. J'ai entendu dire également qu'il existe une corrélation entre l'usage de Facebook et les résultats aux examens. Quoi qu'il en soit, voici un reportage intéressant:

Article tiré de Maxisciences:

"Qu'importe la cote de popularité de certains sur Facebook : la science prouve que nous sommes tous logés à la même enseigne en ce qui concerne notre réseau social. 
Le professeur Rubin Dunbar, de l'Université d'Oxford, vient contrarier quelque peu l'idéologie des inconditionnels de Facebook. Le scientifique vient de rendre les conclusions de son étude sur les groupements sociaux à travers les siècles. Celle-ci s'attarde sur le phénomène Facebook et démontre qu'il est impossible, pour le cerveau humain, d'entretenir un lien social avec plus de 150 amis, quel que soit le niveau de sociabilité.
Selon lui, le néocortex, zone du cerveau qui gère la pensée consciente et le langage, serait responsable de cette restriction. Il n'y aurait donc aucune différence entre les membres du site qui posséderaient des milliers d'amis et ceux qui n'en auraient "que" quelques centaines.
D'autre part, les femmes seraient plus douées pour les relations sociales sur Facebook que les hommes. Ces messieurs auraient en effet davantage besoin de se rencontrer physiquement pour maintenir le contact.Les conclusions du Pr. Dunbar, qui devraient être publiées cette année, sont attendues par les psychologues qui souhaitent prévenir les utilisateurs des effets néfastes du site. Ce dernier serait, en effet, à l'origine de conduites addictives et causerait un sentiment d'insécurité chez certaines personnes."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).
Post a Comment
Read more

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,
4 comments
Read more

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics
5 comments
Read more