Abstract:
Interest in technology in language teacher education has grown recently as evidenced by the success of CALICO's Teacher Education SIG and the publication of two edited volumes on the topic in the past 2 years. Here, I explore the current state of technology and teacher education and suggest that the future paths of language teacher education and CALL are linked. I begin with a review of data showing that technology education for language teachers is lacking in the majority of existing training programs but that the institutional demand for technology savvy teachers is increasing. I then speculate on the barriers that are limiting the supply. Next, I briefly discuss two concepts that bear on the future of educational technology, Prensky's "digital nativism" and Bax's "normalization." The remainder is devoted to identifying and discussing issues, approaches, and processes that are emerging in CALL language teacher education, drawing primarily from the two previously mentioned edited volumes. The approaches and processes in particular represent promising directions for future CALL course development. I conclude by noting the importance of having a sufficient number of CALL professionals available to develop novel applications and train the next generation of language teachers.
KEYWORDS
Normalization, Project-based Learning, Reflective Learning, Situated Learning, Teacher Education
INTRODUCTION
As we come to the end of CALICO's first quarter century, it is tempting to look at the past to see where we have been and to congratulate ourselves as a field for all our accomplishments. During that time computer-assisted language learning has gone from small groups of enthusiastic language teacher-programmers to a growing cluster of national and international professional organizations. Increasingly, it is entering the mainstream of foreign and second language teaching.
I will leave the path of reflecting on the past to others, however, and instead in this paper look at the present and down the road toward the future. What will CALICO--and CALL--be like in 10, 15, or even another 25 years? It seems certain that technology will play an increasing role in language education but will there be a place for CALL specialists and professionals and the organizations that bring them together in the pursuit of common goals? Will CALICO and other such organizations still have relevance in, say, 2032?
One can imagine any number of different futures, but providing details is a bold step that I will not take here (but see, e.g., Meskill, 1999, pp. 459-460 for a scenario that begins "It is 2005 ..."). At a broad level, it is possible to foresee the future for CALL as bright, one in
*This article is a revised and expanded version of the banquet keynote address given at CALICO 2007, the Many (Inter)Faces of CALL, May 25, 2007, at Texas State University
0x01 graphic
175
which technology becomes increasingly powerful, useful, and intuitive, where governments and other stakeholders provide needed research funding, where institutions offer the technical infrastructure and support to allow teachers to optimize technology use, and where the unique elements of learning through computer mediation and learning a language are elegantly combined.
It is also possible to see a dismal future for CALL, one in which technology remains weakly integrated, where research remains fragmented, underfunded, and institutionally undervalued thereby discouraging newcomers to the field, where infrastructure and support are incomplete and inconsistent, and where assumptions of the computer as a nonessential learning adjunct and of learning languages as identical to learning anything else dominate.
The future of CALL, I would argue, is closely tied to the future of language teacher education because language teachers are the pivotal players: they select the tools to support their teaching and determine what CALL applications language learners are exposed to and how learners use them. Yet until recently, there have been only sporadic attempts to reconcile the two. Several factors are changing this situation and in the remainder of this paper I will focus on those factors. They center on the content and themes emerging from two recent edited volumes--Teacher Education in CALL (Hubbard & Levy, 2006a) and Preparing and Developing Technology-Proficient L2 Teachers (Kassen, Lavine, Murphy-Judy, & Peters, 2007)--but also involve other forces in the development of teacher education. Before moving on to a discussion of these, however, I would like to set the stage by looking briefly at where CALL and language teacher education seem to be today with respect to one another.
THE PRESENT STATE OF CALL AND LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION
Prior to the publication of the volumes mentioned above, the focus on CALL-based teacher education was largely the production of textbooks and other materials to support CALL courses. In addition to the growing number of monographs and edited volumes aimed at CALL professionals, several books now exist to provide a reasonable overview of the field to teacher candidates (e.g., Beatty, 2003; Butler-Pascoe & Wiburg, 2003; de Szendeffy, 2005; Ducate & Arnold, 2006; Egbert, 2005; Fotos & Browne, 2004; Levy & Stockwell, 2006). Yet despite the presence of these resources, there is evidence that language teachers are leaving their certification and degree programs with little or nothing in the way of formal training in the use of technology in language teaching.
Butler-Pascoe (1997) reported on a survey she conducted in the mid 1990s involving responses from 109 of 153 TESOL MA programs on their integration of technology. Among other results she found that 42% did not utilize any computer technology and only 18% offered a course in CALL. More recent data suggest only modest changes in the past decade. In the introduction to their detailed review of research on technology integration in teacher preparation programs across both general education and TESOL, Oxford and Jung (2007, p. 23) put the situation bluntly, "According to existing research, technology integration is unsatisfactory in teacher education." In a recent online survey of 240 teachers who had graduated from ESL/EFL master's programs in the US and Canada, Kessler (2006) found that more than half had not had any formal training with technology as part of their coursework and more than three quarters felt that their program had not been effective in preparing them to teach with technology. Given that the survey was limited to practicing teachers who were available through professional listservs (through which the call for respondents was made) and thus were technology users at some level, one can imagine that the overall situation in language teacher education may be much worse. In the same article, Kessler reports on a review of 50
176
websites for graduate TESOL programs in North America in early 2004, where he found that "only eight had had any mention of CALL as a component within their coursework. Only three of these included a CALL course among their requirements" (p. 23). Corroborating evidence can be found in Hubbard (2007), showing that of the 172 TESOL MA programs in the US and Canada covered in Christopher (2005), 63% had no mention of technology coursework. Only 13% had a required technology course with an additional 24% offering one as an elective. It is worth noting that in some cases the technology course was taught outside of the department offering the degree and may therefore not have included any relevant pedagogical elements.
One plausible reason for not offering CALL courses is the perception that they do not represent a present need in the field. However, there is evidence against this view at least within TESOL, evidence showing that in fact teachers with technology skills are actively sought after by institutional employers. Hubbard (2007) notes that 39% of the positions listed on the TESOL Career Center site (now at http://careers.tesol.org) on October 29, 2005, mentioned CALL or technology skills as required or desirable. Kessler (2006, p. 23) reports that 60% of those listed on the same site 5 months later (March 22, 2006) "listed training or experience with CALL, online delivery, or educational technology as a required or desirable attribute." Although the data reported here come solely from English language teaching sources, it would not be surprising for similar statistics to be found in training programs and job announcements for foreign language teachers. There is clearly demand for technology-proficient language instructors.
If we assume--as noted by practicing teachers in Kessler (2006) and elsewhere (e.g., Robb, 2006) and echoed in job listings--that there is an established need for CALL courses that teacher education programs are not meeting, the question is why? There seem to be at least seven possible reasons (for a discussion of barriers to success in technology integration, see also Oxford & Jung, 2007).
1. Inertia
It is always easiest to maintain the status quo, and, if institutions--and individual teacher educators--believe they have been successful in the past, they will aim to continue along that path. Ironically, this is the same situation that can happen with language teachers whose language teaching approach becomes fixed during their own student or teacher candidate experiences and then does not change substantially throughout their career, despite opportunities for in-service renewal.
2. Ignorance
It is likely that many teacher education programs, lacking faculty who understand CALL and in some cases populated largely by faculty who themselves may not have fronted a language classroom in quite some time, are unaware of the options available. There may also be an assumption that learning to use technological tools is the task of the teaching institution rather than the one that trains the students.
3. Insufficient time
As the research base for second language acquisition grows and the body of nontechnological options for techniques and materials increases, teacher education programs are hard pressed to find additional space in their curricula for one or more CALL courses, especially in the K-12 domain where general education courses are also required. In addition, faculty at institutions
177
with heavy teaching loads may find it particularly challenging to keep up with developments in education, SLA, and their own specialization as well as in CALL.
4. Insufficient infrastructure
Although this varies widely from institution to institution, sometimes a major stumbling block for a program is the lack of access to technology. Along these lines Partridge (2006, p. 74) notes a case where interactive whiteboards readily available at "a local infants school" were not available at the nearby university where technological teaching aids were supposed to be evaluated. "Visiting school students and teachers were not impressed."
5. Insufficient standards
Technology standards are a relatively new addition to the field of language teaching. Although, as we will see in a later section, there has been some progress in creating and promulgating technology standards specific to language learning, at present these do not have much of an impact (Oxford & Jung, 2007). In the US, the most influential technology standards are those provided by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), and the bulk of these are aimed at the US K-12 domain, with little reference to ESL or foreign languages independent of other educational areas (see Murphy-Judy & Youngs (2006) for a discussion of this as well as standards in the European Union and Colombia). The existence of enforced standards in a field can assist in overcoming the preceding problems, in particular inertia and ignorance, since a program that fails to meet them may encounter difficulty with certification and recruitment of students.
6. Lack of established methodology
For programs exploring the possibility of including CALL, there are at first glance a bewildering number of options. As with other areas, in the absence of experience, the textbook selected may to a large degree determine the content and structure of the course. As we will see below, there are, in fact, certain clear methodological themes emerging in CALL teacher education that should lessen this concern.
7. Lack of experienced, knowledgeable educators
This is arguably the single, most critical obstacle for the field as a whole. If we assume that the standard for most professional education is that it should be taught largely (though not necessarily exclusively) by Ph.D.s to those in master's and Ph.D. programs, then that standard is clearly not being met. Given the relative newness of CALL, a great deal of CALL education is being done by those who are self-taught in this domain, and the number even of those is clearly insufficient.
TEACHER CANDIDATES, DIGITAL NATIVES, AND NORMALIZATION
Let us turn now from the abstractions of obstacles to education to the target of our discussion, the teacher candidates. If we assume candidates complete a master's or even a Ph.D. program as early as their mid to late 20s, then with a full teaching career ahead of them, we could be training them for a 40-year period. Given the generational nature of teaching, there can be a huge span of time involved from the point at which trainers themselves are trained to the end of their direct influence over others. As Figure 1 illustrates, without becoming too
178
extreme, a teacher candidate in 2007 could (potentially) be trained by trainers themselves trained in 1967 and that candidate could still be teaching in 2047.
0x01 graphic
It is also worth pointing out that teacher candidates trained today could themselves be training teachers in 2047 who would then still be teaching in 2087 (if indeed, we still have language teachers then). This figure undercuts any notion that somehow the goal of educators should be to ensure merely that students leave with an understanding of the current view of "best practices," be it with technology or otherwise. We owe them and those whose lives they will touch far more than that. They need the conceptual tools that will enable them to evaluate and engage with subsequent research developments and swings in the methodological pendulum that will inevitably occur, especially in the area of technology where change can be so rapid.
Indeed, one problem with discussing the future in time frames as expansive as these is that the landscape is constantly changing. Along those lines, two recent concepts are worth considering in exploring the possible future of CALL and language teacher education: the "digital native" (Prensky, 2001) and the normalization of CALL (Bax, 2003; Chambers & Bax, 2006).
Prensky (2001, p. 1) describes digital natives as those who "have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age." Prensky further claims that based on this experience it is likely there have been physical changes in their brains and "we can say with certainty that their thinking patterns have changed" (p. 1) and that those changes require a revolutionary shift across the field of educational methodology. There is certainly value in considering that some of the current generation of teacher candidates, and an increasing percentage over time, will have grown up with technology as an integral part of their lives. Although they may be more psychologically attuned to digital devices for entertainment, communication, and expressing a community presence and persona, it is still an open question whether this has in some ways "changed their thinking patterns" in any fundamental sense that would necessitate radical educational reform of the type Prensky promotes. Furthermore, it is not clear to what extent this familiarity would transfer so as to significantly impact their ability to know how to more intuitively use these tools effectively for teaching and learning. If it turns out that the digital native concept has value (and a lot of additional research remains to be done before that can be confirmed) and that training digital natives to be effective technology-using language teachers is less difficult than for their predecessors, that would be a bonus. However, it is not something we should count on at this juncture.
Bax's (2003) view of normalization is a seductive one. He defines the target of CALL development as a state where the technology becomes invisible, where decisions regarding the use or nonuse of technology are made solely on the basis of what is best for a given teaching situation. Normalization is the final step of integrated CALL, the third stage in a revised evolutionary history of CALL (contrasting with Warschauer & Healey, 1998 in particular) in which what Bax calls "restricted" and "open" CALL are the first two stages.
179
While it is appealing to both teachers and teacher-educators to strive toward normalization in Bax's sense, there is a second dimension to his proposal that is considerably more troubling. Noting that earlier nondigital technologies did not require specialized fields--there was no BALL (book-assisted language learning) or PALL (pen-assisted language learning)--Bax (2003, p. 23) concludes that "One criterion of CALL's successful integration into language learning will be that it ceases to exist as a separate concept and field for discussion. CALL practitioners should be aiming at their own extinction." Consider what that means. What would happen to dedicated CALL, to software devoted specifically to language learning and teaching? Where would new breakthroughs come from? Computers are already fantastically complex things, and those of us who have been working with them for a number of years realize increasingly the depths of their potential that we have not yet plumbed. Essentially, a future without a field of CALL means a future without specialists and professionals (Hubbard & Levy, 2006b) who have devoted substantial portions of their careers to understanding how computers mediate learning a language and to creating applications and activities that draw from that experience. In short, while normalization may be the goal for the classroom teacher, and therefore for classroom teacher education, it is not clear why extinguishing CALL as a field is a worthwhile or necessary objective.
ISSUES, APPROACHES, AND PROCESSES IN CALL TEACHER EDUCATION
The prospects of digital natives and normalization notwithstanding, let us return to the previous assumption that the field of CALL will continue as an independently identifiable entity. Let us further assume that a part of its charge is to equip current and future language teachers with the knowledge and skills, both technical and pedagogical, to incorporate technology effectively into their classes. This section will look at a number of themes that have emerged from the two edited volumes discussed above that center on issues, approaches, and processes in language teacher education. Taken together they give a snapshot of the current state of CALL teacher education and provide some promising directions for the future.
Issues
What is the role of technology standards?
As noted above, technology standards have an important role to play in providing a motivation for teacher education programs to incorporate appropriate course work. To date there seem to be two approaches to linking existing standards to CALL. One is to take existing language standards and incorporate technology into them (Gonglewski, 1999). Another is to take an existing set of educational technology standards, such as those provided by ISTE and enhance them to fit the specific requirements of language teaching. A third possible approach is to use existing technology and/or language teacher standards to inform those for language teaching with technology while still allowing those standards to emerge more independently, informed in addition by CALL research. Discussions of standards appear in Murphy-Judy and Youngs (2006) and Oxford and Jung (2007), the latter taking a rather critical view of progress so far. A recent post to the CALICO discussion list invited comment on a draft of technology standards from TESOL aimed at both language learners and language teachers, showing that professional organizations are becoming deeply involved in this issue.
What do we do differently for in-service versus preservice teachers?
Although this issue has not been addressed directly, it appears indirectly in several of the works reviewed here (e.g., Arnold, Ducate, & Lomicka, 2007; Bauer-Ramazani, 2006;
180
Rickard, Blin, & Appel, 2006). Despite the many challenges, the situation in a preservice program is relatively manageable: regardless of the teaching and computer experience candidates may have coming in, the program can determine learning objectives. Unless institutionally mandated or rewarded, in-service training is likely to be not as effective. However, in-service training can be (and usually should be) immediately relevant to the teachers, linked to or situated in their current instructional setting (Egbert, 2006; see also the discussion of situated learning in the Processes section below)
Where do we get the CALL teacher educators?
One of the previously mentioned obstacles to effective CALL teacher training is the lack of experienced, knowledgeable educators. Hubbard and Levy (2006b) note the value in recognizing the institutional roles of CALL specialists and professionals, recognition which to date has all too often been informal and uncompensated (Robb, 2006). Rickard et al. (2006) mention this and other issues in describing a national effort in Ireland to develop a system for "training the trainers" for in-service technology workshops with groups of language teachers. Based on feedback from the trainers who went through this experience, the authors conclude: "A number of issues need to be resolved if the training programme is to be scaled up in the Republic of Ireland or indeed adopted by other small countries or regions: time constraints and limitations, availability of and access to hardware and software, and the trainers' financial and/or academic recognition" (p. 212).
Approaches
There are several ways to approach technology instruction for language teachers and teacher candidates in setting up units within a course, structuring a dedicated course, or integrating technology across a whole program. Each is briefly discussed below.
Breadth first
This is represented by the traditional "survey course," which has the advantage of introducing a wide range of CALL alternatives, placing CALL into perspective vis-à-vis language teaching as a whole and providing a foundation from which to explore specific interests later. A number of the books cited previously are examples of this approach (Beatty, 2003; Butler-Pascoe & Wiburg, 2003; de Szendeffy, 2005; Ducate & Arnold, 2006; Egbert, 2005; Fotos & Browne, 2004; Levy & Stockwell, 2006). Ideally, this sort of course should not be about technology, or even technology in education, but specifically about technology in language education and should help participants to build both technical and pedagogical skills and knowledge (Hubbard & Levy, 2006b).
Depth first
In a depth-first approach, all or part of the CALL course may focus heavily on a single area, allowing students a narrower but much more intensive experience, especially if the objective is a project. Depth-first courses are particularly useful for shorter, in-service training courses since a positive, concrete experience with a single application is more memorable and can motivate the teacher to explore further independently. Chao (2006) gives an example of a course built around development of a WebQuest (for an explanation of WebQuests, see
181
http://webquest.sdsu.edu). In creating their WebQuests, teachers in Chao's course acquired both technical and pedagogical skills and knowledge through firsthand experience, giving them a base on which to explore further uses of the computer in language teaching. Other examples of depth-first would be technology courses that focus primarily on computer-mediated communication or a specific skill area such as technology in writing instruction.
Integrated
An integrated approach to CALL in teacher education is one in which the use of technology appears in multiple places during the teacher candidate's coursework rather than in a single, stand-alone class. The ideal form of this is akin to Bax's view of normalization in CALL itself: the use of technology in language teaching would come up in all classes in situations where technology options make sense. However, a fully integrated program does not yet seem to exist for reasons mentioned above. Support for this approach can be found in Peters (2006) and Desjardins and Peters (2007), both of which report on research into the question of whether a single technology course is effective in providing language teachers in a 4-year program with the necessary foundation. Hegelheimer (2006) provides an example of one developing model for this. He describes a course he teaches in technology skills that aims to provide a foundation during the first semester of the two-year program that faculty in later classes can then build on. However, he also mentions some of the difficulties in bringing other faculty on board, including comments by some in other disciplines that the teaching of "skills" is not appropriate at the graduate level.
Online
The online approach is an example of learning about technology through technology. Online CALL courses may be offered for practical reasons (e.g., because the teacher candidates are not physically in the same location as the course; see Bauer-Ramazani, 2006) or because the objective of the course is to train teachers for online delivery of their own language courses (see the TESOL online certificate at http://www.tesol.org > Education > Online education). In either case, teachers have to use technology regularly to receive instruction, communicate, collaborate, and complete assignments, including tasks and projects. In addition to dedicated online courses, increasingly, we are seeing blended courses where some combination of face-to-face and online instruction or interaction is occurring. Lomicka and Lord (2004), for example, discuss bringing eight "virtual guests," authors of articles that students were reading as part of their course, into online discussions with students.
Processes
Perhaps most important in successful technology education is selecting a learning process appropriate for the content and fitting the needs of those being taught. Each of the processes described below has particular strengths, and they may be combined in various ways to create a coherent and effective course.
Lecture/demonstration
Given the number of CALL textbooks available today, it is likely that many CALL courses rely on this more traditional approach to introduce novices into the field, especially in breadth-first
182
survey courses. Interestingly, none of the papers in the two volumes specifically supports this as the preferred method of instruction, though it is clear that several do incorporate it. In the event this approach is used, it is valuable to follow the demonstration with hands on experience with the technology (e.g., see Eskenazi & Brown, 2006).
Project based
Although it is not unusual for courses to have one or more projects as a part of them, in project-based learning the project is at the center of the course, and learning builds on the basis of accumulating the skills and knowledge necessary to accomplish the project goals. Debski (2006) provides an example of this along with a well articulated rationale for what he calls "project-oriented" learning. In Debski's course, students worked collaboratively to build a website to support the Cultural Programs at the University of Melbourne. In addition to the website itself, students collectively produced a detailed project specification document, wrote essays on issues related to the project (e.g., learner autonomy), and wrote an individual reflection paper describing their contributions to the project and what they had learned (see the Reflective learning section below). Another example of project-based learning can be found in Chao (2006), though in this case the projects are individual rather than collaborative. She describes the development of her CALL course over 2 years. In the first year (2003), designing a WebQuest was the final project, but students in that course felt that it should have been started earlier. The following year the course was more clearly project based; as Chao explains, "Following the teachers' suggestion, work on the WebQuest project for the 2004 group started from the second week. The reading discussion which was originally done before the project, was also carried out side by side with the project" (p. 225).
Situated learning
Situated learning is a concept popularized by Lave and Wenger (1991) among others and focuses on the notion that learning knowledge and skills takes place best in contexts close to those in which they will be used. For teacher education in general, this means providing links to the classroom setting. Egbert (2006) presents two contexts for situated learning. In the first, she uses an evaluation rubric to demonstrate how an online CALL course--where teachers can immediately connect their work in CALL to the classrooms in which they are currently teaching--meets the criteria for a situated learning environment. In the second, she uses the same rubric to show how a case study approach can provide many of the same elements by grounding the teacher candidates in detailed, concrete examples of real-world teaching problems.
Reflective learning
A theme that comes up in many of the courses described in the two edited volumes involves the value of teacher candidate reflection in some form (e.g., Arnold et al., 2007; Hoven, 2007; Meskill, Anthony, Hilliker-VanStrander, Tseng, & You, 2006; Slaouti & Motteram, 2006). Slaouti and Motteram's contribution is the most detailed, discussing not only reflective learning in general but also the transformative nature of a reflection-based program. Central to their view is the role of reconstructive processes, including metacognition, conscious articulation over time, and reflection on apprenticeship.
183
Portfolio based
The final section of Kassen et al. (2007) includes three chapters devoted to the development of digital portfolios in language teacher education, although the last of these (Cummins, 2007) focuses on portfolios for language proficiency rather than CALL. In van Olphen (2007) the portfolios were the outcome of an educational technology course: participants commented favorably on a number of areas, including the value of collaboration and reflection during the course as well as the value of the portfolio as a way to demonstrate to prospective employers what they could actually do with technology. "Overall, students' observations indicated that developing digital portfolios gave them a meaningful context in which to learn how to integrate technology" (p. 280). Tochon and Black (2007) similarly show how electronic portfolios allow teacher candidates to demonstrate their ability to use a wide variety of technologies in classroom situations.
Mentor based
Although several studies mention mentoring, only Meskill et al. (2006) focus on it as the main theme. In their case the mentoring occurred at two levels: (a) in-service teachers mentored preservice teacher candidates implementing technology projects in the in-service teacher classrooms and (b) doctoral students also mentored the preservice teachers. All three sets of participants brought knowledge and skills of value: the preservice teachers brought new teaching approaches and fresh technology skills to their mentors' classrooms; in-service mentors brought pedagogical expertise and experience with technology use in their classrooms; and doctoral students brought in a higher level of technology use, new teaching approaches, and pedagogical expertise. Although this particular format would be impossible to duplicate at institutions without a cadre of doctoral students, Meskill et al.'s study shows how a well crafted mentoring program can help teacher candidates transition from the CALL classroom to the language classroom effectively.
Communities of practice
Beyond the more traditional single class structure is the possibility of teacher education through a community of practice (Wenger, 1998). Arnold et al. (2007) describe how they formed a virtual community of practice among 31 graduate students in three classes at two universities, engaging in discussions and collaborative tasks as well as interacting online with experts. Based on an analysis of discussion transcripts and a student survey, the researchers concluded that students had indeed formed a community of practice: "high amounts of mutual awareness and group cohesion indicate that students did try to connect with and support each other as well as with the expert during their discussions in order to from interpersonal allegiances" (p. 125). However, they acknowledged in a footnote that this community lacked some of the defining characteristics of a community of practice as specified by Wenger (1998), notably voluntary participation and longevity. Hanson-Smith (2006) discusses the development of communities of practice in CALL among practicing teachers around the world. She cites several examples, including most notably Webheads in Action (http://www.webheadsinaction.org), a self described "worldwide, cross-cultural, and vibrant online community of educators with an open enrollment for anyone who wants to join," which regularly offers free 6-week "Electronic Village Online" workshops prior to the annual TESOL convention. In addition to acknowledging their value for in-service professional development, with an eye to the limits of formal education, Hanson-Smith advises teacher training programs to introduce preservice teachers to communities of practice as a way of encouraging life-long learning in their field.
184
Self-directed learning
A final approach found in the literature, and one which represents in some sense a solution to any educational problem, is self-directed learning. Robb (2006) provides an overview of issues for self-directed learning specifically for CALL. Among other points, he argues that an important role for a CALL course today is to prepare teachers for future self-directed learning by providing a sufficient technical and pedagogical foundation. Kolaitis, Mahoney, Pomann, and Hubbard (2006) put a different spin on self-directed learning. Their article describes how a group of ESL faculty at a community college worked collaboratively on a multiyear project to understand and implement CALL learner training in their program and extended their knowledge and experience to other instructors at their institution.
In this section, I have reviewed a number of issues, approaches, and processes related to CALL teacher education. Although this is not an exhaustive list, especially with respect to issues, it offers a starting point and a reasonable range of options for those looking to begin a technology-training course or to revise an existing one.
CONCLUSION
In the preceding sections I have explored a number of areas connecting the future of CALL with that of language teacher education. I began by noting both the apparent lack of sufficient training in the majority of existing teacher preparation programs and the growing interest among institutional employers in CALL proficiency. I then touched on two areas which potentially lessen the impact of CALL as a field, Prensky's digital nativism and Bax's normalization, and argued that neither necessarily ameliorates the need for both CALL teacher training and the continuation of CALL as an independently valid research and practice domain. I concluded with a review of material coming largely from two recent edited volumes.
I believe the future of CALL and teacher education is bright, but as noted earlier in this paper, there are a number of obstacles. The greatest of these is the limited number of qualified personnel able to integrate technology into language education effectively, a situation perhaps causally linked to the institutional reluctance to recognize and reward those who choose to devote their professional lives to this field. If CALL is to survive and prosper, then we need a dedicated cadre of graduate students, especially doctoral students, willing to select CALL as their area of specialization. The paths of CALL and language teacher education will increasingly be determined by such students and those they will educate in the decades to come.
REFERENCES
Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Lomicka, L. (2007). Virtual communities of practice in teacher education. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 103-132). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Bauer-Ramazani, C. (2006). Training CALL teachers online. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.) Teacher education in CALL (pp. 183-200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bax, S. (2003). CALL--Past, present, and future. System, 31 (1), 13-28.
Chambers, A., & Bax, S. (2006).Making CALL work: Towards normalisation. System, 34 (4), pp. 465-479.
185
Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. London: Longman.
Butler-Pascoe (1997, May/June). Technology and second language learners. American Language Review, 1 (3). Retrieved October 22, 2007, from http://www.languagemagazine.com/internetedition/mj97/eets20.html
Butler-Pascoe, M. E., & Wiburg, K. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Chao, C. (2006). How WebQuests send technology to the background: Scaffolding EFL teacher professional development in CALL. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 221-234). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Christopher, V. (Ed.). (2005). Directory of teacher education programs in TESOL in the United States and Canada. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (2004). Using the Internet to train language teachers to use the Internet: A special topics course for teachers of German. In L. Lomicka & J. Cooke-Plagwitz (Eds.), Teaching with Technology (pp. 65-71). Boston: Heinle.
Cummins, P. (2007). LinguaFolio and electronic portfolios in teacher training. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 321-344). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
de Szendeffy, J. (2005). A practical guide to using computers in language teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Debski, R. (2006). Theory and practice in teaching project-oriented CALL. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 99-116). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Desjardins, F., & Peters, M. (2007). Single-course approach versus a program approach to develop technological competencies in preservice language teachers. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 3-21). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Ducate, L., & Arnold, N. (Eds.). (2006). Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Egbert, J. (2005). CALL essentials. Arlington, VA: TESOL.
Egbert, J. (2006). Learning in context: Situating language teacher learning in CALL. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 167-182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Egbert, J., Paulus, T., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology 6 (3), 108-126. Retrieved October 22, 2007, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert/default.html
Eskenazi, M., & Brown, J. (2006). Teaching the creation of software that uses speech recognition. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 135-151). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fotos, S., & Browne, C. (Eds.). (2004). New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gonglewski, M. (1999). Linking the Internet to the national standards for foreign language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 32 (2), 348-362.
Hegelheimer, V. (2006). When the technology course is required. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 117-133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hanson-Smith, E. (2006). Communities of practice for pre- and in-service teacher education. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.) Teacher education in CALL (pp. 301-315). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
186
Hoven, D. (2007). The affordances of technology for student teachers to shape their teacher education experience. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 133-163). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. (Eds.). (2006a). Teacher education in CALL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (2006b). The scope of CALL education. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 3-21). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hubbard, P. (2007). Critical issues: Professional development. In J. Egbert, E. Hanson-Smith, & K. Huh (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice and critical issues (2nd ed.) (pp. 276-292). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
ISTE NETS: National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers. (2005). Available at http://cnets.iste.org/teachers/t_stands.html
Jones, C., & Youngs, B. (2006). Teacher preparation for online language instruction. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 267-280). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kassen, M., Lavine, R., Murphy-Judy, K., & Peters, M. (Eds.). (2007). Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Kassen, M., & Lavine, R. (2007). Developing advanced level foreign language learners with technology. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 233-262). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Kessler, G. (2006). Assessing CALL teacher training: What are we doing and what could we do better? In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 23-42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kolaitis, M., Mahoney, M., Pomann, H., & Hubbard, P. (2006) Training ourselves to train our students for CALL. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 317-332). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2004). Going virtual: Inviting guests into the classroom. In L. Lomicka & G. Cooke-Plagwitz (Eds.), Teaching with Technology (pp. 50-55). Boston: Heinle.
Meskill, C. (1999). 20 minutes into the future. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (pp. 459-469). Alexandria, VA: TESOL
Meskill, C., Anthony, N., Hilliker-VanStrander, S., Tseng, C., & You, J. (2006). Expert-novice teacher mentoring in language learning technology. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 283-299). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Murphy-Judy, K., & Youngs, B. (2006). Technology standards for teacher education, credentialing, and certification. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 45-60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Oxford, R., & Jung, S. (2007). National guidelines for technology integration in TESOL programs: Factors affecting (non)implementation. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 51-66). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Partridge, J. (2006). Managing language & IT skills: The life-cycle of an MA programme. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 63-79). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
187
Peters, M. (2006). Developing computer competencies for pre-service language teachers: Is one course enough? In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 153-165). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6. Retrieved Octobr 22, 2007, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky - Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants - Part1.pdf
Robb, T. (2006). Helping teachers to help themselves. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 335-347). Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Rickard, A., Blin, F., & Appel, C. (2006). Training for trainers: Challenges, outcomes, and principles of in-service training across the Irish education system. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 203-218). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Slaouti, D., & Motteram, G. (2006). Reconstructing practice: Language teacher education and ICT. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 81-97). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tochon, F., & Black, N. (2007). Narrative analysis of electronic portfolios: Preservice teachers' struggles in researching pedagogically appropriate technology integration (PATI). In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 295-320). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
van Olphen, M. (2007). Digital portfolios: Balancing the academic and professional needs of world language teacher candidates. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 265-294). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31 (1), 57-71.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
AUTHOR'S BIODATA
Philip Hubbard is Senior Lecturer in Linguistics and Director of English for Foreign Students at Stanford University's Language Center. A CALL professional for the past 25 years, he is the author of over 20 disk-based and CD-ROM programs for ESL and has published articles across a range of CALL areas, including methodology, research, software development, software evaluation, teacher education, and learner training. He is the co-editor with Mike Levy of Teacher Education in CALL. He currently serves on the CALICO Executive Board and the CALICO Journal Editorial Board. He is also on the editorial board of Language Learning & Technology and is Associate Editor of the CALL Journal. His current interests center on using technology in developing listening proficiency and expanding CALL as an independent field of inquiry and practice.
AUTHOR'S ADDRESS
Philip Hubbard
Linguistics Department
Stanford University
MC2150
Stanford, CA 94305-2150
Email: phubbard@stanford.edu
Retrieved on December 20, 2010 from https://www.calico.org/memberBrowse.php?action=article&id=683
Minggu, 19 Desember 2010
Teaching approaches: computer assisted language learning By Tim Bowen
Level: Starter/beginner, Elementary, Pre-intermediate, Intermediate, Upper intermediate, Advanced Type: Reference material
* Print
* Email
*
Share
* Comment
* Rate
An article discussing the development of computer assisted language learning.
In terms of the wider picture of language teaching and learning, it is sometimes easy to forget that computers have been available as a resource in language teaching for little more than twenty years. During this relatively short time, there has been a dramatic change in the number of options open to language teachers and learners. Initially, computers were mainly used as sophisticated typewriters, allowing learners to write and to correct and amend easily and effectively. Some basic interactive software was available in the early years, but this was generally restricted to the type of exercise found in grammar practice books with the added feature of a sound to indicate a correct or incorrect answer.
The real advance in the use of computers in language teaching came with the transition from floppy-disc to compact discs (CDs) as the basic form of software, the proliferation of e-mail as a means of communication and, most importantly, with the arrival of the Internet as a widely available resource. Today there is a vast array of language teaching material available on CD ROM or DVD, ranging from self-study materials to supplement published course-books, to ESP-based courses and culture-based materials. Many learners of English have access to e-mail and the Internet at home as well as at school and this presents teachers with a range of useful options in terms of setting writing tasks, communicating with learners by e-mail, giving learners research tasks and setting up project work based on researching the Internet. Where previously such tasks would have involved a great deal of letter writing on the part of both teacher and learners, on the one hand, and a potentially time-consuming visit to the local library on the other, they can now be accomplished quickly and easily without the learner ever having to leave his or her PC.
Although many learners seem to be much more familiar with the use of computers than a lot of teachers appear to be, there is still plenty of scope for some input in class related to computers. Basic terminology is a good starting point and a useful exercise may be the pronunciation of e-mail and internet addresses, such as jbloggs@newmail.com or www.onestopenglish.com. Similarly, there may be some value in teaching the meta-language of word processing (e.g. copy, cut, paste, insert), writing e-mails (e.g. reply, forward, delete) and surfing the Internet (e.g. search, link, key-word and so on). Many UK language schools are now responding to the specific needs of learners and offering computer-based options leading to word-processing qualifications such as the UK-based CLAIT, validated by the RSA, and the American MOUS qualification, validated by Microsoft. In both cases certificates are offered for different levels of competence from basic user to proficient user and both practice activities and examinations are offered “on-line”.
In terms of practical classroom activities to exploit the Internet, if teachers have access to several Internet-linked computers for use with their classes, there are numerous possibilities. Learners can fill-in on-line questionnaires, research specific topics, prepare presentations using on-line information, graphs and diagrams, find the answers to questions set by the teacher, do interactive grammar, vocabulary and even pronunciation exercises, read and summarize the latest news, and contribute to on-line discussions and debates. With technology advancing at breakneck speed, it sometimes seems difficult for teachers to keep up but remaining informed is crucial. Our learners may already be several steps ahead in this area and to retain credibility we need to be familiar with the latest developments in computer technology and to be able to integrate computers confidently into our everyday classroom practice.
Retrieved on December 20, 2010 from http://www.onestopenglish.com/support/methodology/teaching-approaches/teaching-approaches-computer-assisted-language-learning/146490.article
*
Share
* Comment
* Rate
An article discussing the development of computer assisted language learning.
In terms of the wider picture of language teaching and learning, it is sometimes easy to forget that computers have been available as a resource in language teaching for little more than twenty years. During this relatively short time, there has been a dramatic change in the number of options open to language teachers and learners. Initially, computers were mainly used as sophisticated typewriters, allowing learners to write and to correct and amend easily and effectively. Some basic interactive software was available in the early years, but this was generally restricted to the type of exercise found in grammar practice books with the added feature of a sound to indicate a correct or incorrect answer.
The real advance in the use of computers in language teaching came with the transition from floppy-disc to compact discs (CDs) as the basic form of software, the proliferation of e-mail as a means of communication and, most importantly, with the arrival of the Internet as a widely available resource. Today there is a vast array of language teaching material available on CD ROM or DVD, ranging from self-study materials to supplement published course-books, to ESP-based courses and culture-based materials. Many learners of English have access to e-mail and the Internet at home as well as at school and this presents teachers with a range of useful options in terms of setting writing tasks, communicating with learners by e-mail, giving learners research tasks and setting up project work based on researching the Internet. Where previously such tasks would have involved a great deal of letter writing on the part of both teacher and learners, on the one hand, and a potentially time-consuming visit to the local library on the other, they can now be accomplished quickly and easily without the learner ever having to leave his or her PC.
Although many learners seem to be much more familiar with the use of computers than a lot of teachers appear to be, there is still plenty of scope for some input in class related to computers. Basic terminology is a good starting point and a useful exercise may be the pronunciation of e-mail and internet addresses, such as jbloggs@newmail.com or www.onestopenglish.com. Similarly, there may be some value in teaching the meta-language of word processing (e.g. copy, cut, paste, insert), writing e-mails (e.g. reply, forward, delete) and surfing the Internet (e.g. search, link, key-word and so on). Many UK language schools are now responding to the specific needs of learners and offering computer-based options leading to word-processing qualifications such as the UK-based CLAIT, validated by the RSA, and the American MOUS qualification, validated by Microsoft. In both cases certificates are offered for different levels of competence from basic user to proficient user and both practice activities and examinations are offered “on-line”.
In terms of practical classroom activities to exploit the Internet, if teachers have access to several Internet-linked computers for use with their classes, there are numerous possibilities. Learners can fill-in on-line questionnaires, research specific topics, prepare presentations using on-line information, graphs and diagrams, find the answers to questions set by the teacher, do interactive grammar, vocabulary and even pronunciation exercises, read and summarize the latest news, and contribute to on-line discussions and debates. With technology advancing at breakneck speed, it sometimes seems difficult for teachers to keep up but remaining informed is crucial. Our learners may already be several steps ahead in this area and to retain credibility we need to be familiar with the latest developments in computer technology and to be able to integrate computers confidently into our everyday classroom practice.
Retrieved on December 20, 2010 from http://www.onestopenglish.com/support/methodology/teaching-approaches/teaching-approaches-computer-assisted-language-learning/146490.article
Sabtu, 18 Desember 2010
Teaching ESL Reading Using Computers
Saad AlKahtani
alkahtan [at] pilot.msu.edu
Indiana University of Pennsylvania (USA)
Introduction
Using computers in ESL classroom is important for both teachers and learners. Computers can handle a range of activities and carry out programmed functions at amazing speed. They can check exercises after they are done, move students gradually from easier to more difficult exercises according to their levels and abilities. When students fail to answer questions correctly or perform activities, the computer can simulate, drill, or explain the phenomenon in a way that makes it easier for the learner to understand (Hoffman, 1996). However, technology, especially computers, has not yet gotten to the point where it can make a real difference in language instruction in ESL classroom. This paper will focus on the question of how ESL reading can be facilitated with computer applications for language teaching and learning. First, the paper will go over some of the available research on computers and ESL reading, and then discuss some programs and software that can be used in teaching and learning ESL reading for intermediate students. The chart below shows how far technology is involved in the ESL curriculum. It is a comparison of the field of ESL to some other disciplines in humanities in terms of technology integration into the curriculum.
graph
Previous Research
The development of computer-based reading curricula had been taking place before the existence of microcomputers in the late 1970s. Central mainframe computers dispatched instructional lessons to individual terminals in different locations. The relative difficulty in using mainframe computers for educational applications led developers to consider the more practical and affordable microcomputers. The availability of such computers encouraged stand-alone programs designed for a single reading skill (Reinking & Bowles, 1996).
The first major computer-based reading curriculum was the work of Richard Atkinson in 1964 at Stanford University which was supported by a grant from the U.S. Office of Education. The project was a first-grade reading curriculum aimed to lessen the need for classroom teachers (Atkinson, 1974).
Computer-based reading curricula continued to develop but were of a commercial nature. Though some research, primarily evaluative, was conducted, most computer-based reading curricula studies have been sponsored by the companies marketing them (Reinking et al, 1996).
These research attempts were exclusively for L1 reading. Only during the past ten years has the use of computers in the field of teaching second language reading been increasing. A variety of studies have shown the importance of using computers in ESL reading (Willet, 1992). Chun & Plass (1996) investigated how reading comprehension can be facilitated with a multimedia application for language learning. They studied the effects of a dynamic visual advance organizer on the macro level and the effects of multimedia annotations for single vocabulary items on the micro level. Furthermore, they examined the relationship between vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension. The results of their study indicated that the visual advance organizer does aid in overall comprehension and that annotations of vocabulary items consisting of both visual and verbal information help more than verbal information only. Also, a moderate correlation between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension was found. Chun & Plass claimed that the results support the dual coding theory and its extension to multimedia learning and emphasize the significance of visual information in addition to verbal information to support both top-down and bottom-up processing in reading in a foreign language.
In another study to improve reading speed and comprehension of ESL students using computers, Culver (1991) implemented a computer reading program to determine the exit and entrance scores of ESL college students and to find out if their reading speed and comprehension would improve. The results showed some improvements for the majority of students in the target group with an overall increase of 3.9 grade level in reading rate. The results show important information about the effect of increasing reading speed on student comprehension as a result of employing computers. It was concluded that the computer was a good tool for improving students' reading rate despite the fact that increased speed did not lead to increased levels of comprehension for some students.
Chun D. & Plass J. (1997) based on underlying theories of L2 reading comprehension and text comprehension with multimedia, discussed "how L2 reading research is focusing increasingly on the cognitive processes involved in reading, that is, the interaction of lower-level, bottom-up processes such as vocabulary acquisition with higher level, top-down processes such as activating prior knowledge" (p.60). They merged this understanding with existing research on learning with technology to find out how students with different learning abilities put together "verbal and visual information". Their goal, in this study, was not to determine the effectiveness of multimedia on reading comprehension, but rather the learners who may benefit from multimedia instruction.
Whereas Chun & Plass used the underlying theory of L2 reading comprehension with multimedia, Preisinger, R. et al., (1988) used the schema theory as a basis to evaluate reading software programs. They developed criteria and questions to evaluate: 1) interactive capabilities of reading software (e.g. its flexibility, response to student errors, and ability to make a distinction between major and unimportant errors), 2) information processing (e.g. support of the use of prediction and problem solving strategies, use of text-based activities in the context of a reading passage, and encouragement of analyzing texts), 3) background knowledge (e.g. building schemata through pre-reading activities), and 4) general software construction and implementation. The goal of this study was to develop an evaluation tool based in light of a theory to help teachers choose the right reading programs for their students.
In drawing conclusion about the use of computers for reading instruction, previous research clearly supported the idea that computer-based instruction facilitates students' reading comprehension and increases their reading speed. This conclusion is supported by the results of the preceding studies and a series of other studies conducted by Kulik, Bangert, & Williams, 1983 who found significant increases in students' reading speed and comprehension across studies of computer-assisted reading instruction. These results should encourage ESL reading teachers to use computers in their classrooms not because they are "new technology" as reported by Wellington, 1995, but rather because of the positive results they bring to students' achievements.
Design
After examining the previous research that dealt with computers and reading, it was found that computers were very useful in many aspects of literacy instruction. Using computers in teaching ESL reading, however, did not get the attention it deserved. Most studies and software in the field were conducted and designed for L1 reading instruction. As a result, these activities aim to contribute to the field of second language reading instruction. The activities are designed for ESL students who are at the 450-500 TOEFL range and have previously had some type of beginning-level of ESL reading instruction and some basic computer literacy. This group of students may have difficulties with their reading comprehension and need to be prepared for freshman-level English reading or other college-level courses upon completion.
This paper will discuss three software programs that help ESL intermediate teachers to have their students practice reading using computers. The three software programs are: Mac Reader , StoryBoard, and Reading Galaxy. These activities are not meant to be used in one class period but rather in different classes depending on the type of reading we want to teach.
The first program, MacReader, is more concerned with sentences and paragraphs structures. Teacher scrambles the text and student reconstructs it. The teacher should choose the text to be centered from simple language resources that are suitable for ESL intermediate students. Once the text is entered, the program automatically shuffles it so that the students need to reconstruct it. There is a newer software called New Reader published by Hyperbole Software.
The second program, Storyboard, is concerned with text completion and vocabulary building. Learners enter words that are missing from the text by guessing them from the context. Both of these programs provide change to the classes regular activities and are used to train students to use reading strategies and become better readers. MacReader and Storyboard do not have any multimedia capabilities. There are no buzzes, beeps, sounds, colors, or any type of multimedia (AlKahtani & Abalhassan, 1999).
Reading Galaxy, on the other hand, has what the two programs lack in terms of interaction, sound, and music effects. students are interacting with the program while reading; they listen to the computer and follow the directions. Unlike, the other two programs, the teacher cannot add or remove any of the program contents. Thus, the role of the teacher is to "construct" the content in the first two programs and "facilitate" the content in the third program. The student's role is to reconstruct the content in the first two, and construct the meaning in the third one.
Activities
1-MacReader
Mac Reader by John McVicker, 1992 is Macintosh based and mainly teaches reading. It can be used for many other purposes such as using it for exams, homework, or group projects. It is the teacher who decides what the program should be used for. The program is a great supplement for ESL teachers and can provide a tremendous benefit to ESL intermediate students when they use it in their free time or when assigned by teacher. The skills that this software can be used for are reading, vocabulary building and writing. Other skills could indirectly be targeted by the use of this program (i.e. listening). For example, students can take notes while the teacher reads the text and start the exercise using notes took down during listening.
As for the reading exercises, when students click on "exercises", a pop up window gives six options: Read, timed reading, paced reading, cloze, sentence jumble, and paragraph jumble. The program is based on one group of exercises that are accessed by two icons found under the group "MacReader". One of these two icons is a glossary for adding vocabulary. Teachers need to have a password to access control programs that are used to author the texts or add to the vocabulary lists. The "Notes" icon accesses students' scores and is available for students as well as for teachers.
Exercises:
1-Read:
This exercise is previously authored. The teacher can choose the topics and decide the level of difficulty of texts. The student is assigned a text, prepared by the teacher or randomly chooses a text that is part of the software. Here, the student reads through the text and when the first page is finished, two arrows lead to turning the page to continue the reading until the text is finished. The back arrow allows students to go back to revise or relate the text parts. The title of the text is shown at the top of the new page as: " Current Text "Title...".. The session name ''Read'' is shown at the top left corner of the program. If students complete the text and click on the right button, a pop up message asks if they are interested in another exercise. Another feature of this program is the capability of defining new vocabulary by just clicking on any of them.
2-Timed Reading:
This exercise is for reading speed. Certain topics are provided and students can choose what interested them the most.
3-Paced Reading:
This exercise enables students to choose the pace that fits their reading ability using a bar indicating the numbers of words per minute. Another button appears beside the bar to stop the reading. It will be indicated in the notes that the reader stopped the paced reading. As a result, the round will not be counted but canceled. students might experiment until an appropriate speed is found.
4- Cloze:
This exercise is a reading comprehension exercise, which asks students to replace missing words. When students select CLOZE from the exercise button, they should see the dialog box below:
Delete one word every HOW MANY?
Enter a number between 2 and 15
(OK) (Cancel)
Student may type a number between 2 and 15 in the dialog box and click ''OK''. CLOZE exercises replace words from the text with numbers. If a student chooses the number 5, for instance, every fifth word in the text will be replaced with a number. Thus, the bigger the number, the easier the exercise. To work on the exercise, students will need to click a number in the text to select it, then will type the missing word. students can press the 'return' key or click the 'answer' button to check their work. If students need help, they can click the "Hint" button, which will show three options:
* By number of letters
* By showing the first letter
* By definition
5- Sentence Jumble:
This exercise is also for reading comprehension. It automatically mixes up the sentences from any paragraph a student selects. As with most of this program activities, the paragraph which is used can be from the software or be prepared by the teacher before hand. The computer does the jumble of sentences automatically and randomly.
6- Paragraph Jumble:
Paragraph Jumble is a similar exercise to the Sentence Jumble above. It just handles paragraphs. This exercise requires more advanced students unless the texts are abridged or chosen from simple language resources.
7- Glossary:
Besides authoring the texts to be used for the exercise, teachers can also add vocabulary to the program using the icon "Glossary" in the program group. This feature helps teachers customize the program to fit their students' needs. EAP programs could utilize this feature to serve their goals like teaching their students certain lists of vocabulary. This feature adds a great deal to the merits of this program
2-StoryBoard
Another program that is effective when used as an ESL reading activity is a program called Storyboardpublished by Wida Software. The program is a classical text reconstruction. Teacher scrambles the text, and learners rebuild it by guessing words. In doing so, a wide range of language skills are involved.
Storyboard is a popular and flexible activity, equally at home, in the classroom, and at the computer lab center. It is part of a software package including nine other different programs like: Spell Master, Match Master, Choice Master...etc.
Storyboard is a program that teachers can use to improve their students' reading strategies, build up their vocabulary, and help them practice prediction and guessing. It a is good supplement for teachers to reinforce their regular activities. Like many CALL programs, this program provides change to the class's regular activities. Teachers can use this program to support their reading classes and train students to use reading strategies. students become better readers using their guessing abilities.
Each word in the text is replaced by small squares; one square representing each letter. Learners, working individually or in a small group, reconstruct the text, one word at a time. If they guess correctly, all the occurrences of the word in the text appear. There is no need to start at the beginning of the text. Learners start by entering the words they feel sure about, such as 'grammar words', like "the". As each word is found, the structure of the text becomes clearer and further guesses become easier. Teachers can save and access their students' files. Unlike Mac Reader, students' scores are saved and cannot be changed by students. If a student for example decides to look at the text as a whole, the program will automatically detect that action and save it for teacher to notice.
Program Overview:
Storyboard consists of two programs. The first program is called "The student Program" which is designated for the students' use. The second program is for the teacher to author the texts and all the relevant functions like the introduction, hints, and help. Following is a brief description of how these programs work.
1. The student program (sb):
When the student runs the program, a list of titles, which are supposedly prepared by the teacher or included in the software, appears on the screen entitled: "open file". When a topic is chosen, another screen is displayed showing the introduction for the chosen topic. The student will then choose one of the following choices:
* Hide all Words
* Show given words
* Cancel
The first choice, displays the text with only squares (representing words) and circles (for words about which a hint can be provided. All words are hidden but the punctuation marks. Small windows show the following in the margin of the hidden text:
Last guess ....... Words found ........... Guess a word: .........
The second choice "Show given Words" shows the text with all the words, which the teacher has decided to show to the students according to the lesson plan. The same interface will be displayed.
The students write the word in the space provided after clicking the hidden word to be guessed. Four options are listed vertically on the right of the screen showing:
1. Letter: to know a certain letter after assigning it by the cursor.
2. Word: to know a certain word after choosing it by the cursor.
3. Hint: to know more about a word that is replaced by circles.
4. Text: to show the whole text.
The main Menu:
File, See, Options, Window, and Configure are the items that appear in the main menu. Under each of those items, the student should find different functions needed to run the exercise and check results.
Any move that the student makes is saved automatically and could be checked by the student or the teacher at any time. To review the scores, a student can choose "score" from "see" in the main menu.
2. The Teacher Program (sbt) :
This program is basically for the teacher to author the texts and prepare lessons. The program allows teachers to do the following:
1. Text authoring:
2. Teacher can import authentic material or just type and save them in the program.Help:
3. Three help options (help 1, help 2, help 3) are written by the teacher in a way that fits the lesson topic and purpose.Given words:
4. In order to allow some flexibility to the lesson, the teacher may show some words to the students according to the lesson plan.Hints.
The teacher can provide some hints to help students complete the exercises.
The main Menu:
The main menu includes: files, edit, authoring, search, window, and configure. This menu is different from the student program's menu. The authoring item is the main difference. student files could be saved and reviewed under the item "File".
3-Reading Galaxy
Reading Galaxy is another program that can be used for ESL intermediate students. In this program, students explore great literature while developing important reading and thinking skills. The program states the following uses :
Reading Comprehension: students construct meaning by interacting with a text, for example:
* reading the text to answer multiple choice questions (in Ganymede Squares Game)
* reading the text to determine the accuracy of alien claims (in To Tale the Truth Game).
* reading about authors (alien authors) to answer questions about them (in Metro Match Game).
Vocabulary Building: students understand new words in context and remembering them, for example:
* selecting correct answers (in Ganymede Squares Game).
* decoding secret phrases (in Stump the Human Game).
* decoding hidden phrases (in Meteor Match Game).
Reading for detail: students identify supporting information in a text, for example:
* reading alien claims first, and then going to the text for the answer (in To Tale the Truth).
* reading texts to answer questions (in Beat the Krok).
Literary Appreciation: Students understand and appreciate literary conventions such as character, setting, and plot, for example:
* answering questions about characters (in Charlotte's Web in Ganymede Squares).
* answering questions about the setting of the Wizard of OZ (in Beat the Krok).
* answering questions about the plot of secret of the Andes (in To Tale the Truth).
Using Context Clues: students use surrounding words and sentences to guess the meaning of new words, for example:
* matching answers to clues (in Ganymede Squers).
* filling in blanks in hidden phrases (in Beat the Krok)
* completing secret phrases (in Stump the Human).
Follow Directions: students attend to detail in order to accomplish tasks, for example :
* reading and following game instructions (in Ganymede Squares).
* following audio instructions (in Meteor Match)
* reading clues (in To Tale the Truth).
Logical Thinking: students use deductive reasoning and inference to understand meaning, for example:
* determining the accuracy of alien claims (in To Tale the Truth).
* figuring out what's wrong with the picture (in Stump the Human).
Though this program is not designed for ESL students, ESL reading teachers can make use of it with ESL intermediate students. The program can be used for various types of reading purposes such as vocabulary building, reading for specific information, and problem solving. It can be also used for listening comprehension where students listen to a passage read by the computer and then answer questions asked by the computer. Though this program can tackle these skills, the main purpose of the program is to develop the reading comprehension skill in the first place.
In a reading lesson, the Reading Galaxy program can be used as pre-reading, reading, and post reading activities. For the pre-reading activity, the teacher may need to connect the computer to an LCD panel to project the text for students. The teacher then chooses one of the passages that are available among the program options such as the (Warst of the Wurst ) which has a passage of four episodes. By clicking the buttons Read Passage and then Voice, the computer will start reading the text highlighting each sentence as it reads. students may take notes while listening. The teacher then asks students to talk about what they understood from the passage using their notes. This would stimulate students' interest and activate their prior knowledge of the content.
For the reading activity, students will have four minutes to skim the four episodes, one minute for each episode, to find out the main idea. They will be given another 10 minutes to read it again slowly and carefully. The teacher then commands the computer to test students' comprehension by asking them questions related to the passage they have been reading. Clicking the button where it reads "BEGIN" can do this.
For the post reading activity, students can play games related to the reading passage. Such activities would facilitate the students' reading and comprehension of a text. Activities like these can be done from time to time by taking students to the laboratory or by bringing a portable computer to the classroom connected to an LCD panel which would allow the class to see the text to be read. students can practice these activities and other similar activities individually in the lab. The teacher can assign one of the laboratory computers to be used for this purpose
Conclusion
Little has been achieved on computer integration into ESL curricula in general and ESL reading in particular. Some promising research in the field, however, is already showing some progress. The findings of such research efforts are encouraging and should be of great benefit to teachers who choose to use computers in their classrooms. Today's teachers cannot let technological revolution pass by without using it to serve their language teaching goals. Having said that, teachers are advised to consider what the computer industry offers for their classrooms, and should, consequently, seek the necessary training to use them efficiently. ESL reading software programs should not be restricted to only classroom use. Since teachers seek to help their students become independent learners, these programs are very useful for teachers as well as students to achieve that goal.
Notes
* An evaluation of the MacReader & Storyboard programs in ESL reading and vocabulary building appeared in CALL-EJ, Vol. 3 (2), 1999 by AlKahtani, S. & Abalhassan, K.
* There is a newer version of MacReader by John McVicker called "New Reader" published by Hyperbole Software.
Acknowledgement
* I am indebted to my colleague Khalid Abalhassan for his careful review of an earlier version of this article.
References
* AlKahtani, S. & Abalhassan, K. (1999). MacReader and Storyboard Programs in ESL Reading Classrooms. CALL-EJ Online, 3(2).
* Atkinson, R. C. (1974). Teaching children to read with a computer. American Psychologist, 29, 169-178.
* Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Facilitating reading comprehension with multimedia. 24(4), 503-519.
* Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1997). Research on text comprehension in multimedia environments. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 60-81.
* http://polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/vol1num1/chun_plass/Culver, L. C. (1991). Improving reading speed and comprehension of ESL students with the computer. (Practicum Papers ): Nova University.
* Hoffman, S. (1996). Computer and instructional design in foreign language/ESL instruction. TESOL Journal, 5(2), 24-29.
* Kulik, J. A., Bangert, R. L., & Williams, G. W. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational psychology, 75, 19-26.
* Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? Educational psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
* Preisinger, R., Sargeant, K., & Weibel, K. (1988). An evaluation of reading software according to schema theory. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 298761).
* Reinking, D., & Bowles, L. B. (Eds.). (1996). Computers in reading and writing. (Vol. 2). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
* Wellington, J. J. (1995). The role of new technology in teacher education: A case study of hypertext in a PGCE course. Journal of Education for Teaching, 21, (1), 37-50.
* Willetts, K. (1992). Technology and second language learning (Information analysis-ERIC Clearinghouse Products (071) EDO-FL-92-07). Washington, D. C.: Eric Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
* Willis, J. W., Stephens, E. C., & Matthew, K. L. (1996). Technology, reading, and language arts: Allyn and Bacon.
The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. V, No. 11, November 1999
http://iteslj.org/
alkahtan [at] pilot.msu.edu
Indiana University of Pennsylvania (USA)
Introduction
Using computers in ESL classroom is important for both teachers and learners. Computers can handle a range of activities and carry out programmed functions at amazing speed. They can check exercises after they are done, move students gradually from easier to more difficult exercises according to their levels and abilities. When students fail to answer questions correctly or perform activities, the computer can simulate, drill, or explain the phenomenon in a way that makes it easier for the learner to understand (Hoffman, 1996). However, technology, especially computers, has not yet gotten to the point where it can make a real difference in language instruction in ESL classroom. This paper will focus on the question of how ESL reading can be facilitated with computer applications for language teaching and learning. First, the paper will go over some of the available research on computers and ESL reading, and then discuss some programs and software that can be used in teaching and learning ESL reading for intermediate students. The chart below shows how far technology is involved in the ESL curriculum. It is a comparison of the field of ESL to some other disciplines in humanities in terms of technology integration into the curriculum.
graph
Previous Research
The development of computer-based reading curricula had been taking place before the existence of microcomputers in the late 1970s. Central mainframe computers dispatched instructional lessons to individual terminals in different locations. The relative difficulty in using mainframe computers for educational applications led developers to consider the more practical and affordable microcomputers. The availability of such computers encouraged stand-alone programs designed for a single reading skill (Reinking & Bowles, 1996).
The first major computer-based reading curriculum was the work of Richard Atkinson in 1964 at Stanford University which was supported by a grant from the U.S. Office of Education. The project was a first-grade reading curriculum aimed to lessen the need for classroom teachers (Atkinson, 1974).
Computer-based reading curricula continued to develop but were of a commercial nature. Though some research, primarily evaluative, was conducted, most computer-based reading curricula studies have been sponsored by the companies marketing them (Reinking et al, 1996).
These research attempts were exclusively for L1 reading. Only during the past ten years has the use of computers in the field of teaching second language reading been increasing. A variety of studies have shown the importance of using computers in ESL reading (Willet, 1992). Chun & Plass (1996) investigated how reading comprehension can be facilitated with a multimedia application for language learning. They studied the effects of a dynamic visual advance organizer on the macro level and the effects of multimedia annotations for single vocabulary items on the micro level. Furthermore, they examined the relationship between vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension. The results of their study indicated that the visual advance organizer does aid in overall comprehension and that annotations of vocabulary items consisting of both visual and verbal information help more than verbal information only. Also, a moderate correlation between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension was found. Chun & Plass claimed that the results support the dual coding theory and its extension to multimedia learning and emphasize the significance of visual information in addition to verbal information to support both top-down and bottom-up processing in reading in a foreign language.
In another study to improve reading speed and comprehension of ESL students using computers, Culver (1991) implemented a computer reading program to determine the exit and entrance scores of ESL college students and to find out if their reading speed and comprehension would improve. The results showed some improvements for the majority of students in the target group with an overall increase of 3.9 grade level in reading rate. The results show important information about the effect of increasing reading speed on student comprehension as a result of employing computers. It was concluded that the computer was a good tool for improving students' reading rate despite the fact that increased speed did not lead to increased levels of comprehension for some students.
Chun D. & Plass J. (1997) based on underlying theories of L2 reading comprehension and text comprehension with multimedia, discussed "how L2 reading research is focusing increasingly on the cognitive processes involved in reading, that is, the interaction of lower-level, bottom-up processes such as vocabulary acquisition with higher level, top-down processes such as activating prior knowledge" (p.60). They merged this understanding with existing research on learning with technology to find out how students with different learning abilities put together "verbal and visual information". Their goal, in this study, was not to determine the effectiveness of multimedia on reading comprehension, but rather the learners who may benefit from multimedia instruction.
Whereas Chun & Plass used the underlying theory of L2 reading comprehension with multimedia, Preisinger, R. et al., (1988) used the schema theory as a basis to evaluate reading software programs. They developed criteria and questions to evaluate: 1) interactive capabilities of reading software (e.g. its flexibility, response to student errors, and ability to make a distinction between major and unimportant errors), 2) information processing (e.g. support of the use of prediction and problem solving strategies, use of text-based activities in the context of a reading passage, and encouragement of analyzing texts), 3) background knowledge (e.g. building schemata through pre-reading activities), and 4) general software construction and implementation. The goal of this study was to develop an evaluation tool based in light of a theory to help teachers choose the right reading programs for their students.
In drawing conclusion about the use of computers for reading instruction, previous research clearly supported the idea that computer-based instruction facilitates students' reading comprehension and increases their reading speed. This conclusion is supported by the results of the preceding studies and a series of other studies conducted by Kulik, Bangert, & Williams, 1983 who found significant increases in students' reading speed and comprehension across studies of computer-assisted reading instruction. These results should encourage ESL reading teachers to use computers in their classrooms not because they are "new technology" as reported by Wellington, 1995, but rather because of the positive results they bring to students' achievements.
Design
After examining the previous research that dealt with computers and reading, it was found that computers were very useful in many aspects of literacy instruction. Using computers in teaching ESL reading, however, did not get the attention it deserved. Most studies and software in the field were conducted and designed for L1 reading instruction. As a result, these activities aim to contribute to the field of second language reading instruction. The activities are designed for ESL students who are at the 450-500 TOEFL range and have previously had some type of beginning-level of ESL reading instruction and some basic computer literacy. This group of students may have difficulties with their reading comprehension and need to be prepared for freshman-level English reading or other college-level courses upon completion.
This paper will discuss three software programs that help ESL intermediate teachers to have their students practice reading using computers. The three software programs are: Mac Reader , StoryBoard, and Reading Galaxy. These activities are not meant to be used in one class period but rather in different classes depending on the type of reading we want to teach.
The first program, MacReader, is more concerned with sentences and paragraphs structures. Teacher scrambles the text and student reconstructs it. The teacher should choose the text to be centered from simple language resources that are suitable for ESL intermediate students. Once the text is entered, the program automatically shuffles it so that the students need to reconstruct it. There is a newer software called New Reader published by Hyperbole Software.
The second program, Storyboard, is concerned with text completion and vocabulary building. Learners enter words that are missing from the text by guessing them from the context. Both of these programs provide change to the classes regular activities and are used to train students to use reading strategies and become better readers. MacReader and Storyboard do not have any multimedia capabilities. There are no buzzes, beeps, sounds, colors, or any type of multimedia (AlKahtani & Abalhassan, 1999).
Reading Galaxy, on the other hand, has what the two programs lack in terms of interaction, sound, and music effects. students are interacting with the program while reading; they listen to the computer and follow the directions. Unlike, the other two programs, the teacher cannot add or remove any of the program contents. Thus, the role of the teacher is to "construct" the content in the first two programs and "facilitate" the content in the third program. The student's role is to reconstruct the content in the first two, and construct the meaning in the third one.
Activities
1-MacReader
Mac Reader by John McVicker, 1992 is Macintosh based and mainly teaches reading. It can be used for many other purposes such as using it for exams, homework, or group projects. It is the teacher who decides what the program should be used for. The program is a great supplement for ESL teachers and can provide a tremendous benefit to ESL intermediate students when they use it in their free time or when assigned by teacher. The skills that this software can be used for are reading, vocabulary building and writing. Other skills could indirectly be targeted by the use of this program (i.e. listening). For example, students can take notes while the teacher reads the text and start the exercise using notes took down during listening.
As for the reading exercises, when students click on "exercises", a pop up window gives six options: Read, timed reading, paced reading, cloze, sentence jumble, and paragraph jumble. The program is based on one group of exercises that are accessed by two icons found under the group "MacReader". One of these two icons is a glossary for adding vocabulary. Teachers need to have a password to access control programs that are used to author the texts or add to the vocabulary lists. The "Notes" icon accesses students' scores and is available for students as well as for teachers.
Exercises:
1-Read:
This exercise is previously authored. The teacher can choose the topics and decide the level of difficulty of texts. The student is assigned a text, prepared by the teacher or randomly chooses a text that is part of the software. Here, the student reads through the text and when the first page is finished, two arrows lead to turning the page to continue the reading until the text is finished. The back arrow allows students to go back to revise or relate the text parts. The title of the text is shown at the top of the new page as: " Current Text "Title...".. The session name ''Read'' is shown at the top left corner of the program. If students complete the text and click on the right button, a pop up message asks if they are interested in another exercise. Another feature of this program is the capability of defining new vocabulary by just clicking on any of them.
2-Timed Reading:
This exercise is for reading speed. Certain topics are provided and students can choose what interested them the most.
3-Paced Reading:
This exercise enables students to choose the pace that fits their reading ability using a bar indicating the numbers of words per minute. Another button appears beside the bar to stop the reading. It will be indicated in the notes that the reader stopped the paced reading. As a result, the round will not be counted but canceled. students might experiment until an appropriate speed is found.
4- Cloze:
This exercise is a reading comprehension exercise, which asks students to replace missing words. When students select CLOZE from the exercise button, they should see the dialog box below:
Delete one word every HOW MANY?
Enter a number between 2 and 15
(OK) (Cancel)
Student may type a number between 2 and 15 in the dialog box and click ''OK''. CLOZE exercises replace words from the text with numbers. If a student chooses the number 5, for instance, every fifth word in the text will be replaced with a number. Thus, the bigger the number, the easier the exercise. To work on the exercise, students will need to click a number in the text to select it, then will type the missing word. students can press the 'return' key or click the 'answer' button to check their work. If students need help, they can click the "Hint" button, which will show three options:
* By number of letters
* By showing the first letter
* By definition
5- Sentence Jumble:
This exercise is also for reading comprehension. It automatically mixes up the sentences from any paragraph a student selects. As with most of this program activities, the paragraph which is used can be from the software or be prepared by the teacher before hand. The computer does the jumble of sentences automatically and randomly.
6- Paragraph Jumble:
Paragraph Jumble is a similar exercise to the Sentence Jumble above. It just handles paragraphs. This exercise requires more advanced students unless the texts are abridged or chosen from simple language resources.
7- Glossary:
Besides authoring the texts to be used for the exercise, teachers can also add vocabulary to the program using the icon "Glossary" in the program group. This feature helps teachers customize the program to fit their students' needs. EAP programs could utilize this feature to serve their goals like teaching their students certain lists of vocabulary. This feature adds a great deal to the merits of this program
2-StoryBoard
Another program that is effective when used as an ESL reading activity is a program called Storyboardpublished by Wida Software. The program is a classical text reconstruction. Teacher scrambles the text, and learners rebuild it by guessing words. In doing so, a wide range of language skills are involved.
Storyboard is a popular and flexible activity, equally at home, in the classroom, and at the computer lab center. It is part of a software package including nine other different programs like: Spell Master, Match Master, Choice Master...etc.
Storyboard is a program that teachers can use to improve their students' reading strategies, build up their vocabulary, and help them practice prediction and guessing. It a is good supplement for teachers to reinforce their regular activities. Like many CALL programs, this program provides change to the class's regular activities. Teachers can use this program to support their reading classes and train students to use reading strategies. students become better readers using their guessing abilities.
Each word in the text is replaced by small squares; one square representing each letter. Learners, working individually or in a small group, reconstruct the text, one word at a time. If they guess correctly, all the occurrences of the word in the text appear. There is no need to start at the beginning of the text. Learners start by entering the words they feel sure about, such as 'grammar words', like "the". As each word is found, the structure of the text becomes clearer and further guesses become easier. Teachers can save and access their students' files. Unlike Mac Reader, students' scores are saved and cannot be changed by students. If a student for example decides to look at the text as a whole, the program will automatically detect that action and save it for teacher to notice.
Program Overview:
Storyboard consists of two programs. The first program is called "The student Program" which is designated for the students' use. The second program is for the teacher to author the texts and all the relevant functions like the introduction, hints, and help. Following is a brief description of how these programs work.
1. The student program (sb):
When the student runs the program, a list of titles, which are supposedly prepared by the teacher or included in the software, appears on the screen entitled: "open file". When a topic is chosen, another screen is displayed showing the introduction for the chosen topic. The student will then choose one of the following choices:
* Hide all Words
* Show given words
* Cancel
The first choice, displays the text with only squares (representing words) and circles (for words about which a hint can be provided. All words are hidden but the punctuation marks. Small windows show the following in the margin of the hidden text:
Last guess ....... Words found ........... Guess a word: .........
The second choice "Show given Words" shows the text with all the words, which the teacher has decided to show to the students according to the lesson plan. The same interface will be displayed.
The students write the word in the space provided after clicking the hidden word to be guessed. Four options are listed vertically on the right of the screen showing:
1. Letter: to know a certain letter after assigning it by the cursor.
2. Word: to know a certain word after choosing it by the cursor.
3. Hint: to know more about a word that is replaced by circles.
4. Text: to show the whole text.
The main Menu:
File, See, Options, Window, and Configure are the items that appear in the main menu. Under each of those items, the student should find different functions needed to run the exercise and check results.
Any move that the student makes is saved automatically and could be checked by the student or the teacher at any time. To review the scores, a student can choose "score" from "see" in the main menu.
2. The Teacher Program (sbt) :
This program is basically for the teacher to author the texts and prepare lessons. The program allows teachers to do the following:
1. Text authoring:
2. Teacher can import authentic material or just type and save them in the program.Help:
3. Three help options (help 1, help 2, help 3) are written by the teacher in a way that fits the lesson topic and purpose.Given words:
4. In order to allow some flexibility to the lesson, the teacher may show some words to the students according to the lesson plan.Hints.
The teacher can provide some hints to help students complete the exercises.
The main Menu:
The main menu includes: files, edit, authoring, search, window, and configure. This menu is different from the student program's menu. The authoring item is the main difference. student files could be saved and reviewed under the item "File".
3-Reading Galaxy
Reading Galaxy is another program that can be used for ESL intermediate students. In this program, students explore great literature while developing important reading and thinking skills. The program states the following uses :
Reading Comprehension: students construct meaning by interacting with a text, for example:
* reading the text to answer multiple choice questions (in Ganymede Squares Game)
* reading the text to determine the accuracy of alien claims (in To Tale the Truth Game).
* reading about authors (alien authors) to answer questions about them (in Metro Match Game).
Vocabulary Building: students understand new words in context and remembering them, for example:
* selecting correct answers (in Ganymede Squares Game).
* decoding secret phrases (in Stump the Human Game).
* decoding hidden phrases (in Meteor Match Game).
Reading for detail: students identify supporting information in a text, for example:
* reading alien claims first, and then going to the text for the answer (in To Tale the Truth).
* reading texts to answer questions (in Beat the Krok).
Literary Appreciation: Students understand and appreciate literary conventions such as character, setting, and plot, for example:
* answering questions about characters (in Charlotte's Web in Ganymede Squares).
* answering questions about the setting of the Wizard of OZ (in Beat the Krok).
* answering questions about the plot of secret of the Andes (in To Tale the Truth).
Using Context Clues: students use surrounding words and sentences to guess the meaning of new words, for example:
* matching answers to clues (in Ganymede Squers).
* filling in blanks in hidden phrases (in Beat the Krok)
* completing secret phrases (in Stump the Human).
Follow Directions: students attend to detail in order to accomplish tasks, for example :
* reading and following game instructions (in Ganymede Squares).
* following audio instructions (in Meteor Match)
* reading clues (in To Tale the Truth).
Logical Thinking: students use deductive reasoning and inference to understand meaning, for example:
* determining the accuracy of alien claims (in To Tale the Truth).
* figuring out what's wrong with the picture (in Stump the Human).
Though this program is not designed for ESL students, ESL reading teachers can make use of it with ESL intermediate students. The program can be used for various types of reading purposes such as vocabulary building, reading for specific information, and problem solving. It can be also used for listening comprehension where students listen to a passage read by the computer and then answer questions asked by the computer. Though this program can tackle these skills, the main purpose of the program is to develop the reading comprehension skill in the first place.
In a reading lesson, the Reading Galaxy program can be used as pre-reading, reading, and post reading activities. For the pre-reading activity, the teacher may need to connect the computer to an LCD panel to project the text for students. The teacher then chooses one of the passages that are available among the program options such as the (Warst of the Wurst ) which has a passage of four episodes. By clicking the buttons Read Passage and then Voice, the computer will start reading the text highlighting each sentence as it reads. students may take notes while listening. The teacher then asks students to talk about what they understood from the passage using their notes. This would stimulate students' interest and activate their prior knowledge of the content.
For the reading activity, students will have four minutes to skim the four episodes, one minute for each episode, to find out the main idea. They will be given another 10 minutes to read it again slowly and carefully. The teacher then commands the computer to test students' comprehension by asking them questions related to the passage they have been reading. Clicking the button where it reads "BEGIN" can do this.
For the post reading activity, students can play games related to the reading passage. Such activities would facilitate the students' reading and comprehension of a text. Activities like these can be done from time to time by taking students to the laboratory or by bringing a portable computer to the classroom connected to an LCD panel which would allow the class to see the text to be read. students can practice these activities and other similar activities individually in the lab. The teacher can assign one of the laboratory computers to be used for this purpose
Conclusion
Little has been achieved on computer integration into ESL curricula in general and ESL reading in particular. Some promising research in the field, however, is already showing some progress. The findings of such research efforts are encouraging and should be of great benefit to teachers who choose to use computers in their classrooms. Today's teachers cannot let technological revolution pass by without using it to serve their language teaching goals. Having said that, teachers are advised to consider what the computer industry offers for their classrooms, and should, consequently, seek the necessary training to use them efficiently. ESL reading software programs should not be restricted to only classroom use. Since teachers seek to help their students become independent learners, these programs are very useful for teachers as well as students to achieve that goal.
Notes
* An evaluation of the MacReader & Storyboard programs in ESL reading and vocabulary building appeared in CALL-EJ, Vol. 3 (2), 1999 by AlKahtani, S. & Abalhassan, K.
* There is a newer version of MacReader by John McVicker called "New Reader" published by Hyperbole Software.
Acknowledgement
* I am indebted to my colleague Khalid Abalhassan for his careful review of an earlier version of this article.
References
* AlKahtani, S. & Abalhassan, K. (1999). MacReader and Storyboard Programs in ESL Reading Classrooms. CALL-EJ Online, 3(2).
* Atkinson, R. C. (1974). Teaching children to read with a computer. American Psychologist, 29, 169-178.
* Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Facilitating reading comprehension with multimedia. 24(4), 503-519.
* Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1997). Research on text comprehension in multimedia environments. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 60-81.
* http://polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/vol1num1/chun_plass/Culver, L. C. (1991). Improving reading speed and comprehension of ESL students with the computer. (Practicum Papers ): Nova University.
* Hoffman, S. (1996). Computer and instructional design in foreign language/ESL instruction. TESOL Journal, 5(2), 24-29.
* Kulik, J. A., Bangert, R. L., & Williams, G. W. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational psychology, 75, 19-26.
* Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? Educational psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
* Preisinger, R., Sargeant, K., & Weibel, K. (1988). An evaluation of reading software according to schema theory. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 298761).
* Reinking, D., & Bowles, L. B. (Eds.). (1996). Computers in reading and writing. (Vol. 2). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
* Wellington, J. J. (1995). The role of new technology in teacher education: A case study of hypertext in a PGCE course. Journal of Education for Teaching, 21, (1), 37-50.
* Willetts, K. (1992). Technology and second language learning (Information analysis-ERIC Clearinghouse Products (071) EDO-FL-92-07). Washington, D. C.: Eric Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
* Willis, J. W., Stephens, E. C., & Matthew, K. L. (1996). Technology, reading, and language arts: Allyn and Bacon.
The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. V, No. 11, November 1999
http://iteslj.org/
Using computers in language teaching
Computers have made a triumphal entry into education in the past decade, and only a dyed-in-the wool Luddite would deny that they have brought significant benefits to teachers and students alike. However, an uncritical use of computers can be just as disadvantageous to students as a refusal to have anything to do with them. In this article I discuss some of the ways that computers can be used in English language teaching, with a view to helping colleagues make the most of the opportunities they offer to ESL students.
It is helpful to think of the computer as having the following main roles in the language classroom:
* teacher - the computer teaches students new language
* tester - the computer tests students on language already learned
* tool - the computer assists students to do certain tasks
* data source - the computer provides students with the information they need to perform a particular task
* communication facilitator - the computer allows students to communicate with others in different locations
Computer as teacher. In the early days of computers and programmed learning, some students sat at a terminal for extended periods following an individualized learning program. Although we have come a long way from the rather naïve thought, held by some at that time, that the computer could eventually come to replace the teacher, there has been a return to a much more sophisticated kind of computerized teaching using multimedia CD ROMS. In such programs, students can listen to dialogues or watch video clips. They can click on pictures to call up the names of the objects they see. They can speak into the microphone and immediately hear a recording of what they have said. The program can keep a record of their progress, e.g. the vocabulary learned, and offer remedial help if necessary. Many of these CD ROM programs are offered as complete language courses. They require students to spend hours on their own in front of the computer screen, usually attached to a microphone headset. For this reason alone I prefer not to use them in my language teaching. Another of their serious drawbacks, in my view, is the fact that in many cases the course content and sequence is fixed. The teacher has no chance to include materials that are of interest and importance to the particular students in his or her class.
As an alternative to large CD ROM packages, there is an increasing number of useful sites on the World Wide Web, where students can get instruction and practice in language skills such as reading, listening and writing. Some examples.
Computer as a tester. The computer is very good at what is known as drill and practice; it will tirelessly present the learner with questions and announce if the answer is right or wrong. In its primitive manifestations in this particular role in language teaching, it has been rightly criticised. The main reason for the criticism is simple: many early drill and practice programs were very unsophisticated; either multiple-choice or demanding a single word answer. They were not programmed to accept varying input and the only feedback they gave was Right or Wrong. So for example, if the computer expected the answer "does not" and the student typed "doesn't" or " doesnot" or " does not ", she would have been told she was wrong without any further comment. It is not surprising that such programs gave computers a bad name with many language teachers. Unfortunately, there are now very many of these primitive drill and kill programs flooding the Internet.
Despite their obvious disadvantages, such programs are nevertheless popular with many students. This is probably because the student is in full control, the computer is extremely patient and gives private, unthreatening feedback. Most programs also keep the score and have cute animations and sounds, which many students like.
There are some programs which do offer more useful feedback than right or wrong, or that can accept varying input. Such programs blur the role of the computer as teacher or tester and can be recommended to students who enjoy learning grammar or vocabulary in this way. If two or more students sit at the same computer, then they can generate a fair amount of authentic communication while discussing the answers together.
Computer as a tool. It is in this area that I think the computer has been an unequivocal success in language teaching. Spreadsheets, databases, presentation slide generators, concordancers and web page producers all have their place in the language classroom, particularly in one where the main curricular focus is task-based or project-work. But in my opinion, by far the most important role of the computer in the language classroom is its use as a writing tool. It has played a significant part in the introduction of the writing process, by allowing students easily to produce multiple drafts of the same piece of work.. Students with messy handwriting can now do a piece of work to be proud of, and those with poor spelling skills can, after sufficient training in using the spell check, produce a piece of writing largely free of spelling mistakes.
Computer as a data source. I'm sure I don't need to say much about the Internet as a provider of information. Anyone who has done a search on the World Wide Web will know that there is already more information out there than an individual could process in hundred lifetimes, and the amount is growing by the second. This huge source of information is an indispensable resource for much project work, but there are serious negative implications. I shudder to think of how much time has been wasted and will continue to be wasted by students who aimlessly wander the Web with no particular aim in mind and with little or no guidance. I generally do not turn my students free to search the web for information. Instead, I find a few useful sites beforehand and tell the students to start there; anyone who finishes the task in hand can then be let loose!
As an alternative to the Web, there are very many CD ROMs, e.g. encyclopaedias, that present information in a more compact, reliable and easily accessible form.
Computer as communication facilitator. The Internet is the principal medium by which students can communicate with others at a distance, (e.g. by e-mail or by participating in discussion forums). In fact at Frankfurt International School the single most popular use of computers by students in their free time is to write e-mails to their friends. Some teachers have set up joint projects with a school in another location and others encourage students to take part in discussion groups. There is no doubt that such activities are motivating for students and allow them to participate in many authentic language tasks. However, cautious teachers may wish to closely supervise their students' messages. Recent research has shown up the extremely primitive quality of much of the language used in electronic exchanges!
.............................
Computers in education have been disparaged as: Answers in search of a problem. And certainly many computer activities of dubious pedagogical value have been devised in the past simply to justify the existence of an expensive computer in the classroom. Nowadays, however, I think it is much more clearly understood that the computer can play a useful part in the language class only if the teacher first asks: What is it that I want my students to learn today, and what is the best way for them to learn it? In most cases, the answer will probably not involve the computer, but there will be occasions when the computer is the most suitable and, for the students, most enjoyable way to get the job done.
References
* The Internet and ELT Eastment, D. 1999 The British Council
This is a brief but useful overview of the issues concerning the use of the Internet in English language teaching.
* CALL Environments Egbert, J & Hanson-Smith, E (eds.) 1999 TESOL, Va.
Despite the unpromising title, this is a good and very comprehensive account of the use of computers in language teaching. It contains detailed discussions of the pedagogical value of the entire spectrum of computer-based language activities.
* Dave Sperling's Internet Guide Sperling, D. 1998 Prentice Hall, New Jersey
This is a comprehensive listing of Internet sites for English language learners and teachers. Sperling also runs a very good ESL website called Dave's ESL Café at http://www.eslcafe.com.
Retrieved on December 19, 2010 from http://esl.fis.edu/teachers/support/teach.htm
Kamis, 16 Desember 2010
Using CALL as Media in Teaching and Learning Language Posted on February 23, 2010 by vinaagustinasyah
Teaching foreign language especially English must have good method or technique to make the English material can be delivered and comprehended well by students.
A professional teacher must be able to find out what is the suitable teaching method for his students. Various kinds activities have to be conducted by a techer in order to create exciting and attractive English class.
Utilizing computer is one of the best choice in teaching and learning English. Since, computer has many programs to be implemented to assist teachers and students to learn English.
In many school in many countries, computer has been utilized to help students to understand the material they learn. For example, when a teacher wants to teach about color and if he teaches for pre – school students, using computer are very demanded. As it is known, children in early age cannot sit in proper for such hours, so it is important for teachers to utilize the computer in teaching and learning process. Since, The computer has various interactive and interesting programs which can make children feel excited and fun.
The unique property of the computer as a medium for education is its ability to interact with the student.Books and recordings can tell a student what rules are and what the right solutions are, but they can notanalyze the specific mistakes the student has made and react in a manner which leads him not only correctsolution (Nelson, et al, 1976).
In a certain condition, the computer can subtitute a teacher to provide material, assist a student how to comprehend the material, and give more information. Another good things of the computer are effective and effecient in delivering material.
In a particular case, the computer may act as a teacher or tutor, providing material, guiding a student how tolearn it, and giving more information and explanations. Another significant benefit obtained from the computer is that can be a very effective and effecient reference book. It can also be utilised to communicate visuallywith students (Hartoyo, 2006).
In addition to above statement, Kenny, et al, (1984) said
Acting as a tutor, however, is only on of the computer’s possible roles. The computer can be a partner for the learner to play educational games with, or, less glamorously, it can be a very efficient reference book.Or it can be used to generate example, to illustrate cwertain operations, or to stimulate conversation.
1. Learning by playing
In recent years, many software companies have developed a great new way to learn – computer games. These programs are amazing for learning many different languages, including English, since the games are a fun and interactive way to learn all factors of the language. With these new advances, reading language books and listening to boring cassette is no longer the only way to learn English.
The best thing to do when searching for one of these programs is to look for a complete software suite. Most of these games will start out with basic sounds and will use fun flash animated games to help you learn English. You can begin on the elementary level or start with a more advanced level if you already have some experience with English. Choose a system that includes vocabulary, grammar, writing, games, and projects, so that you’ll be able to cover every aspect of the learning process. Start with a simple vocabulary learning game, then advance to grammar lessons, and finally practice putting together the words you have learned.
One of the biggest advantages of computer-based English programs is that there are many different types of games, from traditional “Hang Man” to advanced memorization games. And although they may sound like fun, users are often amazed at how much they can learn just by seeing the words over and over. In fact, games that offer repetition in viewing words usually work better in developing a core set of English words to build on.
When it comes to games, you may not even realize that you’re learning! The games in many “learn English” software programs go to a very advanced level – including character and role playing games. Many people become so involved in the games that they no longer realize the point is to find words or build them – it becomes just like any other game. However, while you’re busy playing, your brain is storing away all the words, sounds, and grammar rules you’re seeing.
Games are also an excellent way for children to learn English. If you start them at a young age, many kids won’t even realize they’re playing educational games. There are games geared for any interest children may have – you may be able to find fun games that allow your children to “feed” words to colorful dinosaurs, or others where your children practice clothing terms by dressing their computer characters.
2. Advatages and disadvanteges of using Computer
2. 1. The Advantages
Together with significant technological improving, computer network technology is now expanding its influence on various aspects of life including government, business, economics, and undoubtedly, education as well. Under such a circumstance, there has been a great increase of interest in using computers and its applications not only in Information Technology classrooms but also in the field of language teaching and learning. The role of computers in language instruction has become an important matter involving language teachers around the world. In order to have a more perspective on this issue, let us discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of using computer network technology in language teaching.
In terms of advantages, first of all, computer network technology tools such as the Internet, e-mail, chat rooms, and the Word Wide Web can be used to provide students with a strong motivation for learning the language. Since motivation is considered as playing a key role in the success of language learners (Gardner and Lambert, 1972), one of the language teachers’ responsibilities is to provide activities which the learners will find intrinsically motivating. Supporting the students to use the Internet in their learning process, meanwhile, is a motivational push to students who get bored with the traditional classroom teaching method in which they have information spoon-fed to them. The Internet can help language teachers povide motivation for the students as stated by Chun & Brandl, 1992, “the interactive and multimedia capabilities of the Internet make it a motivating learning tool”. E-mail and Internet chat rooms are interactive and allow students to communicate quickly and easily with their classmates, their teacher, and even with native speakers of the target language through “keypal projects” (Robb, 1996), or collaborative projects. Besides, with an abundance of interactive activities on the Internet and the World Wide Web, our students can now play games and learn the language at the same time. This kind of learning experience was impossible before the development of the computer network technology.
Next, computer network technology provides students with opportunities to have access to authentic materials and information about the target language culture, which may be missing from many course books. As an understanding of culture is vital in language learning and may help enhance understanding of the target language, current pedagogical theories stress the importance of integrating culture into the language classroom (Canale & Swain, 1981). In this circumstance, computer network technology offers great advantage as it allows easier access to the target language and culture. It has the potential to bring people and places to the classroom, thus adding realism, authentic sociocultural and sociolinguistic information and help students have a real sense of immersion. It also provides students with a multimedia mirror on the target culture in that “it can bring the sounds, words, and images of the foreign language, embedded in their culture, into the classroom” (Atkinson, 1992, cited in Hackett, 1996, p. 17), and thus, can help expose students to international communication and new cultures as well as break down stereotypes. Computer Mediated Communication (CMC), and particularly e-mail and tele-conferencing in the language classroom can “provide authentic communication, which helps develop students’ communicative, literacy, and critical thinking skills” (Kelm, 1992; Kern, 1995, in Singhal, 1998).
Besides, the emergence of computer network technology has also made a significant contribution to language teaching and learning. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) software and programs have the potential to improve learner autonomy in that they provide students with the power to control the speed, rate, timing, and order of tasks in a language program, and allows students to work at their own level. Furthermore, Little (1996) states that information technology can play an important role in the development of learner autonomy as it facilitates the students’ learning and provides students with the opportunity to use what they have learned. CALL software programs have been designed for the purpose of language teaching while other tools such as the Internet, e-mail, etc. also promote student-centered language learning (Gonglewski, Meloni, & Brandt, 2003) and help students develop their communicative skills as well. What is more, CALL programs also provide learners with a variety of choice in terms of which aspects of the target language such as grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc. they want to practise or what skills (listening, speaking, reading, writing) they want to develop, and which topics they are interested in. Thanks to this kind of new technology, learners can manage their own learning at their own speed and based on their own choice. This helps learners to take more responsibility for their own learning, which leads to greater autonomy and a more learner-centred language classroom.
Another advantage is that computer network technology also provides both teachers and students with easier access to information all over the world through the use of the Internet and the World Wide Web. The World Wide Web can be considered the library at one’s fingertip as stated by Mills (1995), “there are tremendous search capabilities of the Web which allow instant access to up-to-date information on just about any topic imaginable”. The Internet and the World Wide Web also provide supplemental language activities which can help students with additional practice in specific areas of language learning. These include reading tests and comprehension questions, grammar exercises, pronunciation exercises possible thanks to multimedia capabilities of the Internet, vocabulary tests, cloze tests, and so forth. Students can search the Web for such web sites, or teachers can recommend good ones for them. In addition, language teachers can also post lecture notes and handouts on the Web so that students can easily have access to them either at the university or at home if they have computers and internet connections. This allows students to keep up with materials on the Web while they are unable to attend classes. What is more, the World Wide Web allows teachers with web design skills to put up a website containing information and content of their choice for the purpose of language teaching. For example, teachers can design web sites with texts for the students to read through and with tasks they are encouraged to perform so as to enhance their language skills if they have the appropriate training or inclination.
In the field of language teaching, the computer network technology also offers language teacher a significant advantage in that it gives teachers a better chance for professional development. Beside the tremendous search capability, the computer network technology helps language teachers develop their knowledge and keep up with trends in language teaching. Teachers can read online newsletters, journals, papers and publications related to the field of language teaching, join discussion groups, mailing lists, audio and video conferencing so that they can share ideas, discuss concerns and exchange resources with other colleagues all over the world. So as to keep up with new trends of professions, language teachers can also join professional organizations, read the publications, and attend their conferences. Therefore, the computer network technology in general, and the Internet and the World Wide Web in particular, is a very useful tool for language teachers to improve their language teaching skills.
Up to this point, the above discussion has described some of the potential benefits and advantages brought about by the computer network technology and how it can be used in language teaching and learning.
2.2. The Disadvantages
However, such discussion will not be enough if we do not tell the disadvantages and problems related to the use of the computer network technology in the language classroom as the use of the computer network for education is not without problems. The following are some of the possible problems language teachers and students may encounter when trying to use computer network technology and its tools for the purpose of language teaching and learning.
First of all, given the nature of the Web, the reality that anyone with access to it can upload information on it, it is inevitable that there is room for incorrect information which we may somehow and sometimes come across. This means that users should always question the reliability of the available information on the Web. If students do not realize this problem, they may learn wrong facts or data. Besides, as the Internet provides access to all types of issues and topics, there are also inappropriate sites that students may visit accidentally or deliberately, particularly the pornographic sites. This is very dangerous as it may result in various problems especially among kids and adolescents. It is therefore the teacher’s responsibility to teach students to be critical in their judgment of the material available on the Web so as to make it a useful tool for their research and study.
Another thing is the problem of information overload. Finding the information we want is not an easy task at all. Searching for material online can sometimes be quite time-consuming and frustrating. As previously stated, the World Wide Web is one great big, wonderful library. However, once we enter it, we can easily get lost and do not know which way to go. This is due to the fact that there is no cataloguing system for the Web. Search engines can be of great help, but if we search for a common word or term, we can end up with more references than we can manage. Consequently, teachers should provide students with addresses of good and useful web sites so that they can know what to look for and save their time.
Another issue to consider is that teacher’s knowledge of information technology is also crucial in determining the success of implementing computer network technology in language teaching. A certain level of technical expertise is required from teachers in order to use this technology in teaching. However, language teachers, especially those in my country including myself, usually feel an anxiety for the computer due to little experience with computers and insufficient computer skills. As a result, we usually do not feel confident enough to use the Internet and the web-based teaching and learning programs in our teaching. This is worth taken into consideration and also requires school administrators to support and set budget for training in this area so as to successfully apply computer network technology into the field of language teaching and learning.
Also, we should take into account the problem of face-to-face interaction. Teaching and learning, especially language teaching and learning, involves a lot of human interactions. Although the computer network technology and the Internet can provide students with interactive activities as stated above, it is very difficult for learners to learn a language successfully by interacting with machines like computers only. Human interactions not only rely on speech, but also on other factors such as facial expressions, gestures, eye contacts, body language, context and situation, etc. The inanimate computers certainly cannot provide students with this kind of human interaction whereas a teacher can do so with ease. If the teacher stands in front of a class, he or she can easily recognize students who do not understand certain parts of the lecture or the lesson by their facial expressions and thus, can go back and re-explain those points to the student whereas a computer cannot do so.
In addition, technology is not always as reliable as it should be. As we all know, technical considerations for Internet based instruction include computer types, network connections, data transfer rates, etc. The nature of the network systems and computers themselves can sometimes be a disadvantage. Accessing the Web is sometimes very slow as in the case of my own teaching context in Vietnam. Sound, video, or animations may take an eternity to download. There may be a time when even though the teacher has an optimal server and connection, he/ she may still be limited in the sort of graphics and files that can be presented due to the learner’s setup and access. As the students may have slow connection to the Internet, the teacher has to limit the designs to keep it useable by the lowest common access method. What is more, in some countries or some remote areas, computer network technology is a luxury that is not easily affordable. Costs related to training, as well as on-line costs of using a provider are issues that can affect the implementing such a technology in schools, especially when there is little funding (Singhal, 1997).
Last but not least, we should also consider the fact that computer network faults, especially when attacked by viruses such as the recent virus Sasser, can cause loss of data, and even leads to loss of resources. This will be a problem to teachers and students if our teaching depends too much upon the network.
Those are some of the disadvantages that I think should be taken into account if computer network technology is to be successfully implemented into the language classrooms.
Despite its own limitations and disadvantages, it should be realized that the educational potential of the computer network technology is immense with the benefits as previously mentioned. However, it is the responsibility of language teachers to fully understand its assets as well as liabilities so as to make the most of the computer technology and its tools in enhancing the language teaching and learning process.
Filed under: ICT Assignment, Mid test
Retrieved on December 16, 2010 from http://vinaagustinasyah.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/using-call-as-media-in-teaching-and-learning-language/
A professional teacher must be able to find out what is the suitable teaching method for his students. Various kinds activities have to be conducted by a techer in order to create exciting and attractive English class.
Utilizing computer is one of the best choice in teaching and learning English. Since, computer has many programs to be implemented to assist teachers and students to learn English.
In many school in many countries, computer has been utilized to help students to understand the material they learn. For example, when a teacher wants to teach about color and if he teaches for pre – school students, using computer are very demanded. As it is known, children in early age cannot sit in proper for such hours, so it is important for teachers to utilize the computer in teaching and learning process. Since, The computer has various interactive and interesting programs which can make children feel excited and fun.
The unique property of the computer as a medium for education is its ability to interact with the student.Books and recordings can tell a student what rules are and what the right solutions are, but they can notanalyze the specific mistakes the student has made and react in a manner which leads him not only correctsolution (Nelson, et al, 1976).
In a certain condition, the computer can subtitute a teacher to provide material, assist a student how to comprehend the material, and give more information. Another good things of the computer are effective and effecient in delivering material.
In a particular case, the computer may act as a teacher or tutor, providing material, guiding a student how tolearn it, and giving more information and explanations. Another significant benefit obtained from the computer is that can be a very effective and effecient reference book. It can also be utilised to communicate visuallywith students (Hartoyo, 2006).
In addition to above statement, Kenny, et al, (1984) said
Acting as a tutor, however, is only on of the computer’s possible roles. The computer can be a partner for the learner to play educational games with, or, less glamorously, it can be a very efficient reference book.Or it can be used to generate example, to illustrate cwertain operations, or to stimulate conversation.
1. Learning by playing
In recent years, many software companies have developed a great new way to learn – computer games. These programs are amazing for learning many different languages, including English, since the games are a fun and interactive way to learn all factors of the language. With these new advances, reading language books and listening to boring cassette is no longer the only way to learn English.
The best thing to do when searching for one of these programs is to look for a complete software suite. Most of these games will start out with basic sounds and will use fun flash animated games to help you learn English. You can begin on the elementary level or start with a more advanced level if you already have some experience with English. Choose a system that includes vocabulary, grammar, writing, games, and projects, so that you’ll be able to cover every aspect of the learning process. Start with a simple vocabulary learning game, then advance to grammar lessons, and finally practice putting together the words you have learned.
One of the biggest advantages of computer-based English programs is that there are many different types of games, from traditional “Hang Man” to advanced memorization games. And although they may sound like fun, users are often amazed at how much they can learn just by seeing the words over and over. In fact, games that offer repetition in viewing words usually work better in developing a core set of English words to build on.
When it comes to games, you may not even realize that you’re learning! The games in many “learn English” software programs go to a very advanced level – including character and role playing games. Many people become so involved in the games that they no longer realize the point is to find words or build them – it becomes just like any other game. However, while you’re busy playing, your brain is storing away all the words, sounds, and grammar rules you’re seeing.
Games are also an excellent way for children to learn English. If you start them at a young age, many kids won’t even realize they’re playing educational games. There are games geared for any interest children may have – you may be able to find fun games that allow your children to “feed” words to colorful dinosaurs, or others where your children practice clothing terms by dressing their computer characters.
2. Advatages and disadvanteges of using Computer
2. 1. The Advantages
Together with significant technological improving, computer network technology is now expanding its influence on various aspects of life including government, business, economics, and undoubtedly, education as well. Under such a circumstance, there has been a great increase of interest in using computers and its applications not only in Information Technology classrooms but also in the field of language teaching and learning. The role of computers in language instruction has become an important matter involving language teachers around the world. In order to have a more perspective on this issue, let us discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of using computer network technology in language teaching.
In terms of advantages, first of all, computer network technology tools such as the Internet, e-mail, chat rooms, and the Word Wide Web can be used to provide students with a strong motivation for learning the language. Since motivation is considered as playing a key role in the success of language learners (Gardner and Lambert, 1972), one of the language teachers’ responsibilities is to provide activities which the learners will find intrinsically motivating. Supporting the students to use the Internet in their learning process, meanwhile, is a motivational push to students who get bored with the traditional classroom teaching method in which they have information spoon-fed to them. The Internet can help language teachers povide motivation for the students as stated by Chun & Brandl, 1992, “the interactive and multimedia capabilities of the Internet make it a motivating learning tool”. E-mail and Internet chat rooms are interactive and allow students to communicate quickly and easily with their classmates, their teacher, and even with native speakers of the target language through “keypal projects” (Robb, 1996), or collaborative projects. Besides, with an abundance of interactive activities on the Internet and the World Wide Web, our students can now play games and learn the language at the same time. This kind of learning experience was impossible before the development of the computer network technology.
Next, computer network technology provides students with opportunities to have access to authentic materials and information about the target language culture, which may be missing from many course books. As an understanding of culture is vital in language learning and may help enhance understanding of the target language, current pedagogical theories stress the importance of integrating culture into the language classroom (Canale & Swain, 1981). In this circumstance, computer network technology offers great advantage as it allows easier access to the target language and culture. It has the potential to bring people and places to the classroom, thus adding realism, authentic sociocultural and sociolinguistic information and help students have a real sense of immersion. It also provides students with a multimedia mirror on the target culture in that “it can bring the sounds, words, and images of the foreign language, embedded in their culture, into the classroom” (Atkinson, 1992, cited in Hackett, 1996, p. 17), and thus, can help expose students to international communication and new cultures as well as break down stereotypes. Computer Mediated Communication (CMC), and particularly e-mail and tele-conferencing in the language classroom can “provide authentic communication, which helps develop students’ communicative, literacy, and critical thinking skills” (Kelm, 1992; Kern, 1995, in Singhal, 1998).
Besides, the emergence of computer network technology has also made a significant contribution to language teaching and learning. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) software and programs have the potential to improve learner autonomy in that they provide students with the power to control the speed, rate, timing, and order of tasks in a language program, and allows students to work at their own level. Furthermore, Little (1996) states that information technology can play an important role in the development of learner autonomy as it facilitates the students’ learning and provides students with the opportunity to use what they have learned. CALL software programs have been designed for the purpose of language teaching while other tools such as the Internet, e-mail, etc. also promote student-centered language learning (Gonglewski, Meloni, & Brandt, 2003) and help students develop their communicative skills as well. What is more, CALL programs also provide learners with a variety of choice in terms of which aspects of the target language such as grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc. they want to practise or what skills (listening, speaking, reading, writing) they want to develop, and which topics they are interested in. Thanks to this kind of new technology, learners can manage their own learning at their own speed and based on their own choice. This helps learners to take more responsibility for their own learning, which leads to greater autonomy and a more learner-centred language classroom.
Another advantage is that computer network technology also provides both teachers and students with easier access to information all over the world through the use of the Internet and the World Wide Web. The World Wide Web can be considered the library at one’s fingertip as stated by Mills (1995), “there are tremendous search capabilities of the Web which allow instant access to up-to-date information on just about any topic imaginable”. The Internet and the World Wide Web also provide supplemental language activities which can help students with additional practice in specific areas of language learning. These include reading tests and comprehension questions, grammar exercises, pronunciation exercises possible thanks to multimedia capabilities of the Internet, vocabulary tests, cloze tests, and so forth. Students can search the Web for such web sites, or teachers can recommend good ones for them. In addition, language teachers can also post lecture notes and handouts on the Web so that students can easily have access to them either at the university or at home if they have computers and internet connections. This allows students to keep up with materials on the Web while they are unable to attend classes. What is more, the World Wide Web allows teachers with web design skills to put up a website containing information and content of their choice for the purpose of language teaching. For example, teachers can design web sites with texts for the students to read through and with tasks they are encouraged to perform so as to enhance their language skills if they have the appropriate training or inclination.
In the field of language teaching, the computer network technology also offers language teacher a significant advantage in that it gives teachers a better chance for professional development. Beside the tremendous search capability, the computer network technology helps language teachers develop their knowledge and keep up with trends in language teaching. Teachers can read online newsletters, journals, papers and publications related to the field of language teaching, join discussion groups, mailing lists, audio and video conferencing so that they can share ideas, discuss concerns and exchange resources with other colleagues all over the world. So as to keep up with new trends of professions, language teachers can also join professional organizations, read the publications, and attend their conferences. Therefore, the computer network technology in general, and the Internet and the World Wide Web in particular, is a very useful tool for language teachers to improve their language teaching skills.
Up to this point, the above discussion has described some of the potential benefits and advantages brought about by the computer network technology and how it can be used in language teaching and learning.
2.2. The Disadvantages
However, such discussion will not be enough if we do not tell the disadvantages and problems related to the use of the computer network technology in the language classroom as the use of the computer network for education is not without problems. The following are some of the possible problems language teachers and students may encounter when trying to use computer network technology and its tools for the purpose of language teaching and learning.
First of all, given the nature of the Web, the reality that anyone with access to it can upload information on it, it is inevitable that there is room for incorrect information which we may somehow and sometimes come across. This means that users should always question the reliability of the available information on the Web. If students do not realize this problem, they may learn wrong facts or data. Besides, as the Internet provides access to all types of issues and topics, there are also inappropriate sites that students may visit accidentally or deliberately, particularly the pornographic sites. This is very dangerous as it may result in various problems especially among kids and adolescents. It is therefore the teacher’s responsibility to teach students to be critical in their judgment of the material available on the Web so as to make it a useful tool for their research and study.
Another thing is the problem of information overload. Finding the information we want is not an easy task at all. Searching for material online can sometimes be quite time-consuming and frustrating. As previously stated, the World Wide Web is one great big, wonderful library. However, once we enter it, we can easily get lost and do not know which way to go. This is due to the fact that there is no cataloguing system for the Web. Search engines can be of great help, but if we search for a common word or term, we can end up with more references than we can manage. Consequently, teachers should provide students with addresses of good and useful web sites so that they can know what to look for and save their time.
Another issue to consider is that teacher’s knowledge of information technology is also crucial in determining the success of implementing computer network technology in language teaching. A certain level of technical expertise is required from teachers in order to use this technology in teaching. However, language teachers, especially those in my country including myself, usually feel an anxiety for the computer due to little experience with computers and insufficient computer skills. As a result, we usually do not feel confident enough to use the Internet and the web-based teaching and learning programs in our teaching. This is worth taken into consideration and also requires school administrators to support and set budget for training in this area so as to successfully apply computer network technology into the field of language teaching and learning.
Also, we should take into account the problem of face-to-face interaction. Teaching and learning, especially language teaching and learning, involves a lot of human interactions. Although the computer network technology and the Internet can provide students with interactive activities as stated above, it is very difficult for learners to learn a language successfully by interacting with machines like computers only. Human interactions not only rely on speech, but also on other factors such as facial expressions, gestures, eye contacts, body language, context and situation, etc. The inanimate computers certainly cannot provide students with this kind of human interaction whereas a teacher can do so with ease. If the teacher stands in front of a class, he or she can easily recognize students who do not understand certain parts of the lecture or the lesson by their facial expressions and thus, can go back and re-explain those points to the student whereas a computer cannot do so.
In addition, technology is not always as reliable as it should be. As we all know, technical considerations for Internet based instruction include computer types, network connections, data transfer rates, etc. The nature of the network systems and computers themselves can sometimes be a disadvantage. Accessing the Web is sometimes very slow as in the case of my own teaching context in Vietnam. Sound, video, or animations may take an eternity to download. There may be a time when even though the teacher has an optimal server and connection, he/ she may still be limited in the sort of graphics and files that can be presented due to the learner’s setup and access. As the students may have slow connection to the Internet, the teacher has to limit the designs to keep it useable by the lowest common access method. What is more, in some countries or some remote areas, computer network technology is a luxury that is not easily affordable. Costs related to training, as well as on-line costs of using a provider are issues that can affect the implementing such a technology in schools, especially when there is little funding (Singhal, 1997).
Last but not least, we should also consider the fact that computer network faults, especially when attacked by viruses such as the recent virus Sasser, can cause loss of data, and even leads to loss of resources. This will be a problem to teachers and students if our teaching depends too much upon the network.
Those are some of the disadvantages that I think should be taken into account if computer network technology is to be successfully implemented into the language classrooms.
Despite its own limitations and disadvantages, it should be realized that the educational potential of the computer network technology is immense with the benefits as previously mentioned. However, it is the responsibility of language teachers to fully understand its assets as well as liabilities so as to make the most of the computer technology and its tools in enhancing the language teaching and learning process.
Filed under: ICT Assignment, Mid test
Retrieved on December 16, 2010 from http://vinaagustinasyah.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/using-call-as-media-in-teaching-and-learning-language/
CALL Use in the ESL/EFL Classroom By Kenneth Beare, About.com Guide
There has been much debate over the use of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the ESL/EFL classroom over the past decade. As you are reading this feature via the Internet (and I am writing this using a computer), I will assume that you feel that CALL is useful to your teaching and/or learning experience.
There are many uses of the computer in the classroom. In today's feature I would like to provide some examples of how I like to use CALL in my teaching. I find that CALL can be successfully employed not only for grammar practice and correction, but also for communicative activities. As most of you are familiar with the programs that offer help with grammar, I would like to focus on the use of CALL for communicative activities.
Successful communication learning is dependent on the student's desire to participate. I'm sure most teachers are familiar with students who complain about poor speaking and communication skills, who however, when asked to communicate, are often reluctant to do so. In my opinion, this lack of participation is often caused by the artificial nature of the classroom. When asked to communicate about various situations, students should also be involved in the actual situation. Decision making, asking for advice, agreeing and disagreeing, and compromising with fellow students are all tasks that cry out for "authentic" settings. It is in these settings that I feel CALL can be used to great advantage. By using the computer as a tool to create student projects, research information and provide context, teachers can employ the computer to help students become more involved in the task at hand, thereby facilitating the necessity of effective communication within a group setting.
Exercise 1 Focus on Passive Voice
Generally, students coming from around the world are more than happy to speak about their native country. Obviously, when speaking about a country (city, state etc.) the passive voice is required. I have found the following activity using the computer to be of great assistance in helping students focus on the correct use of the passive voice for communication and reading and writing skills.
* Inductively review the passive structures in class (or introduce the passive structures)
* Provide a text example, focusing on a specific location, that includes many passive voice structures
* Have students read through the text
* As a follow up, have students separate passive voice and active voice examples
* Using a program such as Microsoft Encarta or any other multimedia encyclopaedia, (or the Internet) have students working in small groups find information about their own nation (or any city, state etc.)
* Based on the information they have found, students then write a short report together at the computer (using a spell check, communicating about formatting etc.)
* Students then report back to the class presenting their report created at the computer
This exercise is a perfect example of involving students in an "authentic" activity that focuses on communication skills while at the same time including a grammar focus, and uses the computer as a tool. Students have fun together, communicate in English and are proud of the results they achieve - all ingredients for successful inductive learning of the passive voice in a communicative manner.
Exercise 2 Strategy Games
For younger learners of English, strategy games can be one of the most effective ways to get students to communicate, agree and disagree, ask for opinions and generally use their English in an authentic setting. Students are asked to focus on the successful completion of a task such as solving riddles (Myst, Riven) and developing strategies (SIM City).
* Choose a strategy game such as a SIM or mystery
* Have students divide into teams
* Create a specific task in the game itself, such as the completion of a certain level, the creation of a certain type of environment, the solving of a specific riddle. This is important for providing a framework and specific language needs/goals for a common ground in the classroom.
* Have students complete the task.
* Have students come together in the classroom and compare strategies.
Once again, students who find it difficult to participate in a classroom setting (Describe your favourite holiday? Where did you go? What did you do? etc.) generally become involved. The focus is not on their completing a task which can be judged as correct or incorrect, but rather on the enjoyable atmosphere of team work which a computer strategy game provides.
These are just a two examples of the various ways in which a computer can be used as a tool with which students are encouraged to participate in satisfying communicative experiences. Below are further links providing information on the use of the computer in the classroom
Q & A Using Software in the Adult ESL Classroom
Written by Susan Gaer Santa Ana College, School of Continuing Education, this article "addresses basic CALL questions". Provided by the ERIC Digest at the National Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education (NCLE).
C.A.L.L. Links
Links to CALL journals and information on line from your About.com Guide.
FAQ about CALL
An introductory discussion concerning some of the most commonly asked questions and opinions about Computer Assisted Language Learning by your About.com Guide.
Teaching Resources
* Teaching English as a Second Language Teaching Theories and Techniques
* Teaching English - ESL Teaching Theory, Resources, Employment and Techniques
* Top English Teaching Materials - Teacher Resource Books for K - 12 ESL Learners
Alternate Teaching Methods
* Multiple Intelligences in the ESL Classroom
* Whole brain learning, suggestopedia and NLP - Overview of various brain funct...
* Using Music in the ESL Classroom
Related Articles
* Computer Use in the ESL Classroom
* How To Use a Computer in Class
* Learning Disabilities - Teaching Strategies for Learning Disabled Students
* Use a Computer in Class
* Gifted Children and Computers - Helping Gifted Children Work Smart
Kenneth Beare
Guide since 1997
Kenneth Beare
ESL Guide
Retrieved on December 16, 2010 from http://esl.about.com/od/esleflteachingtechnique/a/t_usecall.htm
There are many uses of the computer in the classroom. In today's feature I would like to provide some examples of how I like to use CALL in my teaching. I find that CALL can be successfully employed not only for grammar practice and correction, but also for communicative activities. As most of you are familiar with the programs that offer help with grammar, I would like to focus on the use of CALL for communicative activities.
Successful communication learning is dependent on the student's desire to participate. I'm sure most teachers are familiar with students who complain about poor speaking and communication skills, who however, when asked to communicate, are often reluctant to do so. In my opinion, this lack of participation is often caused by the artificial nature of the classroom. When asked to communicate about various situations, students should also be involved in the actual situation. Decision making, asking for advice, agreeing and disagreeing, and compromising with fellow students are all tasks that cry out for "authentic" settings. It is in these settings that I feel CALL can be used to great advantage. By using the computer as a tool to create student projects, research information and provide context, teachers can employ the computer to help students become more involved in the task at hand, thereby facilitating the necessity of effective communication within a group setting.
Exercise 1 Focus on Passive Voice
Generally, students coming from around the world are more than happy to speak about their native country. Obviously, when speaking about a country (city, state etc.) the passive voice is required. I have found the following activity using the computer to be of great assistance in helping students focus on the correct use of the passive voice for communication and reading and writing skills.
* Inductively review the passive structures in class (or introduce the passive structures)
* Provide a text example, focusing on a specific location, that includes many passive voice structures
* Have students read through the text
* As a follow up, have students separate passive voice and active voice examples
* Using a program such as Microsoft Encarta or any other multimedia encyclopaedia, (or the Internet) have students working in small groups find information about their own nation (or any city, state etc.)
* Based on the information they have found, students then write a short report together at the computer (using a spell check, communicating about formatting etc.)
* Students then report back to the class presenting their report created at the computer
This exercise is a perfect example of involving students in an "authentic" activity that focuses on communication skills while at the same time including a grammar focus, and uses the computer as a tool. Students have fun together, communicate in English and are proud of the results they achieve - all ingredients for successful inductive learning of the passive voice in a communicative manner.
Exercise 2 Strategy Games
For younger learners of English, strategy games can be one of the most effective ways to get students to communicate, agree and disagree, ask for opinions and generally use their English in an authentic setting. Students are asked to focus on the successful completion of a task such as solving riddles (Myst, Riven) and developing strategies (SIM City).
* Choose a strategy game such as a SIM or mystery
* Have students divide into teams
* Create a specific task in the game itself, such as the completion of a certain level, the creation of a certain type of environment, the solving of a specific riddle. This is important for providing a framework and specific language needs/goals for a common ground in the classroom.
* Have students complete the task.
* Have students come together in the classroom and compare strategies.
Once again, students who find it difficult to participate in a classroom setting (Describe your favourite holiday? Where did you go? What did you do? etc.) generally become involved. The focus is not on their completing a task which can be judged as correct or incorrect, but rather on the enjoyable atmosphere of team work which a computer strategy game provides.
These are just a two examples of the various ways in which a computer can be used as a tool with which students are encouraged to participate in satisfying communicative experiences. Below are further links providing information on the use of the computer in the classroom
Q & A Using Software in the Adult ESL Classroom
Written by Susan Gaer Santa Ana College, School of Continuing Education, this article "addresses basic CALL questions". Provided by the ERIC Digest at the National Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education (NCLE).
C.A.L.L. Links
Links to CALL journals and information on line from your About.com Guide.
FAQ about CALL
An introductory discussion concerning some of the most commonly asked questions and opinions about Computer Assisted Language Learning by your About.com Guide.
Teaching Resources
* Teaching English as a Second Language Teaching Theories and Techniques
* Teaching English - ESL Teaching Theory, Resources, Employment and Techniques
* Top English Teaching Materials - Teacher Resource Books for K - 12 ESL Learners
Alternate Teaching Methods
* Multiple Intelligences in the ESL Classroom
* Whole brain learning, suggestopedia and NLP - Overview of various brain funct...
* Using Music in the ESL Classroom
Related Articles
* Computer Use in the ESL Classroom
* How To Use a Computer in Class
* Learning Disabilities - Teaching Strategies for Learning Disabled Students
* Use a Computer in Class
* Gifted Children and Computers - Helping Gifted Children Work Smart
Kenneth Beare
Guide since 1997
Kenneth Beare
ESL Guide
Retrieved on December 16, 2010 from http://esl.about.com/od/esleflteachingtechnique/a/t_usecall.htm
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)