Apertura

Worldwide, educational reforms are sanctioning two curricular changes. One relates to the learning of English as a foreign/second language (L2) at a very young age (Murray & Chris-tison, 2011; Izquierdo, García, Garza & Aquino, 2016). Reforms acknowledge English has become a global language for communication, and recognize its importance for social and business interaction. Thus, through education learners are expected to develop the necessary competence to communicate efficiently in the L2 (World Bank, 2007; Mexican Ministry of Education [Secretaría de Educación Pública, SEP], 2017).

The second change relates to the integration of information and communication technologies (ICT) in education (OECD, 2015; SEP, 2017). In this way, the reforms sustain the use of technology in education creates valuable learning opportunities and brakes barriers of age, gender and time. Therefore, teachers are expected to enhance the learning process through the use of ICT across all areas of the curriculum, including L2 learning (Coyle & Reverte, 2017; Izquierdo, De La Cruz, Aquino, Sandoval & García, 2017).

The use of technology for English Language learning constitutes an innovative aspect in these curricular changes. Nonetheless, over many years, researchers have argued that technology can be used to promote L2 acquisition, for instance through a multi-sensory experience, integrating images, graphics, videos, audio-recordings and different text types (Izquierdo, 2014; Gimeno-Sanz, 2016). To this end, numerous studies have examined how different types of technologies could enhance L2 education among learners (Macaro, Handley & Walter 2011; Golonka, Bowles, Frank, Richardson & Freynik, 2014), who can be considered digital migrants.

These learners are adolescents or adults who hold limited knowledge of ICT, and they are newcomers to education where they are exposed to the L2 through technologically enhanced input and output tasks (Izquierdo, Simard & Garza, 2015). These studies, for instance, illustrate that with this learner clientele language learning can be facilitated through the use of blogging (Hsu, 2016), mobile devices (Bikowski & Casal, 2018), multimedia (Izquierdo, 2014), technology-mediated environments (Hung & Higgins, 2016), virtual worlds (Newgarden & Zheng, 2016), and Web 2 technologies (Liu, Wang & Tai, 2016), to mention a few ICT examples.

Conversely, the use of technology with very-young digital natives has received less attention. Digital natives are children who have had access to technology during their short lives, and have developed high levels of digital literacy. Different to their older counterparts, digital natives come to L2 education with stronger technological profiles (e.g. Yáñez & Coyle, 2011; Lee, 2012; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014; Liu, Wang & Tai, 2016). For them, technology does not necessarily entail an innovative aspect of the educational experience. With digital natives, a small group of researchers has examined the technologies their teach ers have access to in the classrooms and how teachers maximize the use of these technologies in different types of L2 edu cational contexts (Hwang, Chen, Shadiev, Huang, & Chen, 2014; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014; Izquierdo et al., 2017; Navarro-Pablo, López-Gándara & García-Jiménez, 2019). Another group of researchers has started examining the technologies digital native children have recourse for fun in their free time and whether these technologies facilitate incidental L2 learning (Hannibal, 2019).

With digital natives, however, further research is needed in order to explore the technologies that children purposefully rely on for L2 learning outside of the classroom without guidance. Moreover, there is little information on their attitudes towards the use of technology for L2 learning outside of the classroom, and the technological features that appeal to them in educational resources. With very young digital natives, it is necessary to consider that while they may feel confident using technology (Cartelli, 2013; Hannibal, 2019), when it comes to language teaching, the children: "are not simply small adults and in terms of human development they have very special needs" (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 84). Murray and Christison (2011, p. 70) acknowledge that: "[a]s a group, young learners are very diverse. They come from different backgrounds, have different profiles." The use of various technologies can cater for their differences and enhance their learning experience (Yáñez & Coyle, 2011).

Nonetheless, very young learners need to be able to identify resources that gradually require more logical thinking and problem solving, and help them focus on achievable language learning goals (Moon, 2000; Cameron, 2001; Murray & Christi-son, 2011; Hwang et al., 2014). In this regard, Cameron (2001) and Moon (2000) argue educational resources implicitly rely on conventions that adults have already acquired, such as reading instructions, following logical sequences for task completion, information inferencing, etc.

Young learners, however, may lack those conventions. L2 educational resources, which require creativity, but are demanding in terms of analytical thinking (Campbell & Jane, 2012), may be overwhelming if they do not include appropriate support too (Liu, Wang & Tai, 2016). Thus, Moon (2000), Murray & Christison (2011) indicate children need educational resources that emphasize oral over written guidance, include sequencing and images which help them process the L2 without accessing highly cognitive-demanding processes.

Due to the need of research that explores the L2 ICT resources digital natives rely on outside of the class, this study addressed the following research questions: RQ1. What kind of everyday life technologies do children, classified as digital natives, intentionally use for L2 learning? RQ2. What attitudes do they display towards the use of ICT for L2 learning outside of the classroom? RQ3. What technological features do they prefer in L2 educational resources?

In order to answer these questions, a mixed-method study with a sequential design (Creswell, 2018) was conducted. The quantitative phase was completed using a descriptive design, where data were col lected from a group of Grade 5 learners through a questionnaire. The qualitative phase was completed through the use of a collective case study with a subsample of learners, who exhibited very positive or negative attitudes in the questionnaire. These learners participated in a semi-structured interview. In both phases, these dimensions were explored:

Technological access. It is related to the availability of ICT at school and at home. Through this dimension, we explored the resources available for the participants and aspects, which could limit their exposure to ICT, such as time restriction, parents' prohibition to access ICT and bandwidth.

The following sections present the quantitative and qualitative results. In both cases, first the analysis procedures are described; then, the results are presented.

This study explored the technologies that very young, digital native, learners intentionally prefer for L2 learning outside of the L2 class and the technological features of educational resources which are appealing to them. RQ1 examined what kind of everyday life technologies children use. In line with recent ICT exploratory research with the newer generations of young L2 learners (e.g. Hannibal, 2019), our results indicate the children have access to a wide array of technologies inside and outside of the L2 class. Nonetheless, our results also indicate that access and use of technology for L2 learning do not equate. Both the qualitative and quantitative data revealed that many of the resources available to these children are not being used for L2 learning purposes.

One factor that explains this finding relates to their cognitive maturity, and in turn, a possible lack of ability to identify technologies which might be useful for language learning. Murray and Chris-tison (2011, p. 79) argue, between seven and eleven years old, children need to learn how to learn. In terms of ICT, this implies that children need guidance to identify resources that are both learning-oriented and interesting (Hwang et al., 2014; Edwards, Pemberton, Knight & Monaghan, 2002). In fact, the participating children in the qualitative instrument iterated the need for to guidance. Interestingly, however, the parents' and teachers' guidance of these children are mostly concerned with the risks and dangers that children can face while using the net.

RQ2 explored children's attitudes towards the use of different technologies for L2 learning, and RQ3 explicitly inquired about the ICT features of educational resources that appeal to children. In the qualitative and quantitative data, children demonstrated good attitudes towards using technology in different ways. This is congruent with previous research, which indicates that technology can render the L2 learning process enjoyable for very young learners (Campbell & Jane, 2012; Cartelli, 2013). The data revealed the multimodality that digital materials provide could influence children's perceptions about both the ICT and resources they like (Edwards et al., 2002; Yáñez & Coyle, 2011). In this multimodality, learners exhibited a listening-with-visual support preference that is congruent with the theory of multimedia L2 learning and age maturity.

In regard to multimodal learning, with adult L2 learners, Izquierdo (2014) demonstrates that the combination of verbal and non-verbal input is particularly beneficial for L2 acquisition; in this combination, verbal language provides learners with the linguistic resources they need in their emerging L2 systems while non-verbal input, in the form of images, supports comprehension of verbal language which might be beyond the learners' current stage of language development. Our results further reveal that, in this combination, children prefer aural over written language.

Murray & Christison (2011) explain that, for children, reading in comparison to listening is a more cognitively, demanding process that slows them down and prevents them from predicting narrative content, and isolating main ideas. For children, listening, however, is more enjoyable, as it allows them to draw on their creativity (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 79; see also Edwards et al., 2002).

As for children's little interest in instructions and feedback, our results are congruent with children's cognitive maturity. Murray and Christison (2011) state that feedback is important for learners as it indicates progress, gives confidence to continue and is a step to foster autonomy. Nonetheless, young learners have difficulty following instructions and attending to feedback, since logical thinking is still in the process of development (Murray & Christison, 2011). This raised questions about the design of effective technology-enhanced L2 resources (Hémard, 2006).

While the answer to this question could ignite a full discussion paper, on the bases of our participants' responses and literature on language learning tasks for children (Moon, 2000; Murray & Christison, 2011; Campbell & Jane, 2012), two principles can be put forward. The resources needs to present simple tasks in terms of the executable processes, yet with increasing levels of challenge. In these tasks, learners need to have extensive L2 input or output exposure, as in games (Sundqvist, & Sylvén, 2014), communication devices (Hwang et al., 2014; Hung & Higgins, 2016), and resources that they also use during their spare time (Hannibal, 2019).

Our study provides original quantitative and qualitative empirical data, which suggest children have clear intuitions on the kinds of ICT they like. Furthermore, they revealed that children opt for ICT features that fostered L2 learning in line with the cognitive processes that characterize their age: creativity, curiosity, and oral input-dependence, for instance. Nonetheless, they rarely associate the use of ICT to L2 learning outside of the class.

This could relate to their level of cognitive development, as at their age, they may not be able to identify ICT which could help them achieve specific L2 learning goals. It could also be that they do not recognize the opportunity to practice and learn a L2 through ICT that they associate with their daily life. Therefore, young learners cannot be treated as adults, and thus, face their own challenges. The realization of this study also brought about challenges regarding what instruments to use, and how to control factors which could affect data collection.

One problem that needed attention related to the children's ability to provide reliable quantitative data (Butler, 2018). To overcome this issue, different strategies were put forward. First, a mixed method design became very valuable, as the qualitative results helped us compensate for the quantitative instrument's moderate reliability coefficients. In the interview, the children were able to elaborate upon their quantitative answers. Second, an interview is intimidating for a child; thus, the first author, who had been their former teacher, conducted the interviews.

Third, during the pilot, we used instructions that these children were familiar with when they answer school surveys. The findings in this study then raise questions for future research not only about the empirical and theoretical issues, which deserve attention when examining digital natives' use of ICT for L2 learning. They also set the bases for research questions regarding methodologies and instruments that lead to the collection of reliable data from very young learners.