A lot has been said about collaborative learning, but what about collaboration among teachers. There are so many language teachers around the world! We need places like this to collaborate worldwide. CALL needs curricular integration models and to define those models we must share experience and knowledge, which is now possible with the new web tools. As Chris has said in the forum, teacher collaboration is critical.
I strongly recommend to register and join CALLSIG , where you can find sample courses and applications (the speaking journals idea is wonderful), 20 hot minutes workshops and a CALLSIG Lounge with a growing forum.
How about meeting in Asia?
- EUROCALL's Bibliography is a list of selected further reading, online and in print, for those interested in computer assisted language learning . Last updated May 26, 2006. There are sections about books, discussion lists, journals, online articles and other bibliographies (most of them dated before the year 2000 or not regularly updated).
- ICT4LT CALL Bibliography (UK). In the Resources section of the great ICT4LT website. Last updated November 15, 2006. Created and maintained by Graham Davies. It includes books, articles, software distributors and some other just for fun links.
- Literature on CALL and language learning online . List created by Vance Stevens, it includes online bibliographies (not updated) and articles. Last updated November 4, 2006.
Many language teachers remain skeptical or indifferent about the new technological possibilities, or even see them as an enemy instead of an ally. There are teachers who still relate language labs to old audiolingual drill and kill methods. The audiolingual methodology was dominant since the 1950s, as the modern alternative to grammar and translation methods, and stressed memorization of structures and vocabulary through repetition (drilling) where the teacher was the language modeler and drill leader and the student a pattern practicer and accuracy enthusiast.
Since the 1960s there was an expansion of descriptive work on discourse, pragmatic and functional properties of language. Language had to be examined in natural contexts, either oral or written, not in sentences made up by the linguist. The functional-notional approach (Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983) to language teaching was one of the first results of the evolution in linguistic theory . In the European framework the Threshold Level was issued as a specific list of contents, competences and communicative functions to be developed by the learner.
The old analog lab was rejected in the 1980s with the arrival of CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) and because of its poor technological possibilities. Not only the technology differentiates an analog lab from a CALL or digital lab. The classroom dynamic is also different and the interactive possibilities of Internet connected computers affect the way contents are learnt. In the audiolingual lab students were delivered predetermined audio or video material as a model to repeat or decipher in comprehension questions. As Szendeffy (2005, Using Computers in Language Teaching, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan) puts it:
Using computers as tools to produce collaborative projects shifts the focus to the relationship between students working together and away from a student working alone with a machine.
Where the analog lab broadcasted information in one direction, the computer serves more as a pliable tool displaying a vast array of information and stimuli on demand while also providing constant opportunity for input and more creative expression. Teachers can tap into this power to orchestrate challenging activities that involve and empower students, stimulate thought and production, and create more instances of authentic interaction between students using the target language than might be the case in the analog lab or conventional classroom.
There are several reasons to think that a modern CALL environment can improve learning:
- Combination of different sources and media (texts, images, audio, video, recording, Internet).
- Wider diversity of activities.
- A greater variety of linguistic input in context with authentic language models.
- Access to enormous linguistic corpora and databases.
- Inner interactivity with materials that make autocorrection and negotiation of meaning possible and external interactivity with other channels of communication between class members and distant learners.
- Possibility of creating different itineraries of learning and tutorial feedback.
- Autonomous independent learning and individual control.
- Tools for the creation of individual and group projects.
- Learning comes out of the classroom and teaching adquires an ubiquitous dimension.
- A friendlier environment of learning is provided, where there are fewer risks of failing and learners can develop self-confidence with greater freedom to experiment and repeat as many times as needed.
- Students can publish their writings or podcasts with an authentic audience.
- They can share their learning and knowledge with students from other countries and become part of the global web community by improving their digital literacy.
CALL is now perceived as something that is inherently different and/or complementary to classroom teaching. (K. Beatty, 2003)
Ken Beatty (Teaching and Researching CALL, Pearson, 2003) gives a broader definition of CALL that takes into consideration its changing nature: "any process in which a learner uses a computer and, as a result, improves his or her language".
A further definition for CALL can be found in the Wikipedia article:
Posted by José Luis Cabello at 6:30 pm