Electronic Learning Environments and Language Learning

advertisement
Computer-Assisted Language Learning:
Changing Perspectives, Changing Uses
LANSPAN Presentation
22 February 2005
Sake Jager
University of Groningen
Overview
 Introduction
 Research domain
 Model for technology implementation
 Hologram
 Current perspective
 CALL implementations and projects
Introduction
 Faculty co-ordinator ICT and (Language) Learning
 Research into implementation of CALL
 CALL not yet integrated into the mainstream of
language teaching and learning
 Develop a framework for implementation
 Presentation of some essential components of the
framework
Research domain
 University setting for language learning
 Computer-assisted language learning alongside face-to-face
opportunities for language learning; ‘blended’ environment
 CALL increases the number of options for language learning
 CALL must provide ‘added value’ in e.g.



Effectiveness: The use of CALL increases the extent to which specific
outcomes are achieved.
Efficiency: The use of CALL decreases the amount of resources used to
achieve specific outcomes.
Appreciation: The use of CALL is rated positively by those using it.
 Interest in which options are chosen and why
Key components technology-enhanced
learning
Institution
Implementation
Pedagogy
Technology
Based on Collis &
Moonen (2001)
Hologram
 Started 1993, still used today
 Designed for grammar teaching

German, English, French, Spanish
 Addressed following problems:




students did not get enough practice
very few exercises could be dealt with in class
students were poorly motivated, came to class
unprepared
lacked knowledge of grammatical structure, concepts,
terminology
Hologram: Exercise
Ellips
Hologram implementation

Technology



Pedagogy





Compliance with language teachers’ beliefs
No changes to grammar teaching
Not a replacement of class-based instruction, textbook, exams
No claims about grammar in relation to language learning
Implementation





Clear pay off: Immediate feedback, adaptation to student weaknesses and endless practice
Primarily tutorial use: replaces teacher in a number of respects
Teacher produced their own materials
Saved teaching time, required development time
Exchange of materials between institutions
Bottom-up approach
Institution


Payment for use of program (up to this very date!)
Permanent support
Acceptance of technology
 Predictors for acceptance: 4 E’s (Collis &
Moonen 2001):




Environment (institutional context)
Educational effectiveness (perceived or
expected)
Ease of use
Engagement (personal response to technology
and change)
4-E Model
Environmental vector 1
Threshold
(success)
Educational
Effectiveness
Ease of use
Engagement
3-E Vector sum
Current perspective
 Technology:




Rise of the Internet / WWW
Emphasis on Communication: ICT
Increased performance, access
Standardization: shake-out of technology; course management systems
(Blackboard, etc)
 Pedagogy:


Shift from interaction with computers to interaction through computers
SLA-basis (e.g. Chapelle, 2001; Doughty & Long, 2003; Ellis, 2003; Felix,
1998).







Task-based learning
Meaning focus
Focus on form
Comprehensible input and pushed output
Co-operative and collaborative learning
Authenticity
Learner fit
Current CALL implementations
 Many CMC-based applications:


Direct support for SLA-based principles
Ideal for SLA-research
 Reported effects





Processes similar to oral communication
Meaningful communication, incidental focus on form
Implicit feedback, self-correction, correction of others
Less teacher control, more student participation
More time to think (communication in ‘slow motion’): greater accuracy, syntactic
variety
 Pedagogically effective
 Different spectrum of technology options than tutorial programs such as
Hologram
 Findings based on experimental settings
Current projects
 Points of interest from latest projects


VLE’s (Blackboard) well-suited for CMC-supported
task-based learning; CMC-based CALL not frequently
used
Exception: Webquests (University of Tilburg)


Interesting new possibilities


E.g. http://kubnw8.uvt.nl/dtk/Webquest%204/
Horizon Wimba (spoken communication in Blackboard)
Continued demand for tutorial-like applications

Ellips consortium
Current perspective cont’d
 Implementation




Shift to the university level; top down orientation
Technology instruments at central level
Teaching and learning support units at central level.
ICT-services at central level
 Institutional framework




Strategy focus on differentiation (excellence), internationalization
Emphasis on learning outcomes, competences
Use of Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
Testing and training of staff and students in English Proficiency
Challenges for implementation
 Pedagogically motivated CALL, taking into
account implementation strategies and institutional
frameworks
 Implementing for change, building on existing good
practices
 Setting up projects which relate directly to
institutional environment:


Language innovation programme Faculty of Arts
Flexible learning for staff and students participating in
English language learning programs
References (1)










Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: a window on L2 Spanish interlanguage.
Language Learning & Technology, 4, 120-136.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for
teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, T. (2003). Reticence in class and on-line: two ESL students' experiences with communicative
language teaching. System, 31, 259-281.
Collis, B. & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible Learning in a Digital World. Abingdon, Oxon:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Corda, A. & Jager, S. (2004). ELLIPS: providing web-based language learning for Higher Education in
the Netherlands. ReCALL, 16, 225-236.
Doughty, C. & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign learning.
Language Learning & Technology, 7, 50-80.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Felix, U. (1998). Virtual Language Learning: Finding the Gems among the Pebbles. Melbourne:
Language Australia.
Jager, S. (1996). HOLOGRAM: A Fully Interactive Environment for Grammar Teaching and Learning.
In A.Gimeno (Ed.), Proceedings EUROCALL '95 (pp. 195-203). Valencia, Spain: Universidad
Politécnica de Valencia.
Jager, S. (1998). HOLOGRAM - Computer-Assisted Academic Grammar Learning. In S.Jager, J.
Nerbonne, & A. Van Essen (Eds.), Language Teaching & Language Technology (pp. 82-87). Lisse:
Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
References (2)









Jager, S. (2001). From Gap-Filling to Filling the Gap: A Re-Asssessment of Language Engineering in
CALL. In A.Chambers & G. D. Davies (Eds.), Information and Communications Technology in
language learning: a European perspective (pp. 101-110). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Jager, S. (2004). Learning management systems for language learning. In A.Chambers, J. E. Conacher,
& J. Littlemore (Eds.), ICT and Language Learning: Integrating Pedagogy and Practice (pp. 33-48).
Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press.
Jager, S. & Wekker, H. (1997). Aarts and Wekker hologrammed: contrastive grammar in the computer
age. In J.Aarts, I. De Mönnink, & H. Wekker (Eds.), Studies in English Language and Teaching - In
honour of Flor Aarts (pp. 257-273). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring Classroom Interaction with Networked Computers - Effects on
Quantity and Characteristics of Language Production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.
Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In
M.Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and Practice (pp. 1-19).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kitade, K. (2000). L2 Learners' Discourse and SLA Theories in CMC: Collaborative Interaction in
Internet Chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13, 143-166.
Leahy, C. (2004). Observations in the computer room: L2 output and learner behaviour. ReCALL, 16,
124.
Lee, L. (2002). Enhancing learners' communication skills through synchronous electronic interaction
and task-based instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 35, 16-24.
Payne, J. S. & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 Oral Proficiency through Synchronous CMC:
Output, Working Memory, and Interlanguage Development. CALICO JOURNAL, 20, 7-32.
References (3)








Pellettieri, J. L. (2000a). Why-Talk? Investigating the Role of Task-Based Interaction through
Synchronous Network-Based Communication among Classroom Learners of Spanish. DISSERTATION
ABSTRACTS INTERNATIONAL SECTION A HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 60, 2469.
Pellettieri, J. (2000b). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of
grammatical competence. In M.Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-base Language Teaching:
Concepts and Practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pennington, M. C. (1996). The Power of the Computer in Language Education. In M.C.Pennington
(Ed.), The Power of CALL (pp. 1-14). Houston, TX: Athelstan.
Salaberry, M. R. (2000). Pedagogical design of computer mediated communication tasks: learning
objectives and technological capabilities. Modern Language Journal, 84, 28-37.
Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous
communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4, 82-119.
Toyoda, E. & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and
native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6, 82-99.
Tudini, V. (2003). Using Native Speakers in Chat. Language Learning & Technology, 7, 141-159.
Warschauer, M. & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and Practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Websites





Common European Framework of Reference:
http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Cooperation/education/Languages/Language_Policy/Common_Framework_of_Ref
erence
Digitalenklas:
http://www.let.uu.nl/digitalenklas (to be replaced by
http://www.ellipsconsortium.nl)
Ellips:
http://ellips.let.uu.nl/ (user: owletteren1 [2-3]; pwd: ellips)
Hologram (description):
http://www.rug.nl/let/voorzieningen/ictol/projecten/eerdereprojecten/hologram
Webquest University of Tilburg:
e.g. http://kubnw8.uvt.nl/dtk/Webquest%204/
Download