Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-5mwv9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-18T22:07:45.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Adaptive Instruction

from Part III - Tools

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2025

By
Mathias Schulze ,
Catherine Caws ,
Marie-Josée Hamel  and
Trude Heift
Edited by
Glenn Stockwell  and
Yijen Wang
Glenn Stockwell
Affiliation:
Waseda University, Japan
Yijen Wang
Affiliation:
Waseda University, Japan
Get access

Summary

Learning takes place in social interaction. In social interaction, participants co-adapt to reach a commonn goal. Adaptive instruction describes a pedagogic paradigm, in which both learners and the learning technology co-adapt. This chapter provides an overview of the research on and the development of adaptive instruction in CALL.

Keywords

adaptivityadaptive instructionICALLonline language learningsociocultural theorycomplex dynamic systems
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning , pp. 195 - 212
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Amaral, L., Meurers, D., & Ziai, R. (2011). Analyzing learner language: Towards a flexible natural language processing architecture for intelligent language tutors. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.520674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertin, J.-C., & Gravé, P. (2010). In favor of a model of didactic ergonomics. In Bertin, J.-C., Gravé, P. & Nancy-Combes, J.-P. (Eds.), Second language distance learning and teaching: Theoretical perspectives and didactic ergonomics (pp. 1–36). IGI Global USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blin, F. (2016). The theory of affordances. In Caws, C. & Hamel, M.-J. (Eds.), Learner–computer interactions: New insights on CALL theories and applications (pp. 41–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blin, F., Caws, C., Hamel, M.-J., Heift, T., Schulze, M., & Smith, B. (2013). Data and elicitation methods in interaction-based research. Proceedings of WorldCALL 2013 (pp. 21–28). Glasgow.Google Scholar
Bull, S., & McKay, M. (2004). An open learner model for children and teachers: Inspecting knowledge level of individuals and peers. In Lester, J. C., Vicari, R. M., & Paraguaçu, F. (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 469–478). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30139-4_61Google Scholar
Bury, M. (2012). Activity system. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Activity_system.pngGoogle Scholar
Calabria, T. (2004). An introduction to personas and how to create them. KM Column. www.steptwo.com.au/papers/kmc_personasGoogle Scholar
Caws, C. (2013). Evaluating a web-based video corpus through an analysis of user-interactions. ReCALL Journal, 25(1), 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caws, C., & Hamel, M.-J. (2013). From analysis to training: Recycling interaction data into learning. OLBI Working Papers, 5, 25–36. https://doi.org/10.18192/olbiwp.v5i0.1116Google Scholar
Caws, C., & Hamel, M.-J. (2016). (Eds). Learner computer interactions: New insights on CALL theories and applications. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chau, H., Labutov, I., Thaker, K., He, D., & Brusilovsky, P. (2021). Automatic concept extraction for domain and student modeling in adaptive textbooks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 31(4), 820–846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-020-00207-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, D. M. (2013). Contributions of tracking user behavior to SLA research. CALICO Journal, 30, 256–262. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v30i0.256-262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colpaert, J. (2006). Toward an ontological approach in goal-oriented language courseware design and its implications for technology-independent content structuring. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(2), 109. www.informaworld.com/10.1080/09588220600821461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conole, G., & Dyke, M. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication technologies? ALT-J, 12(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968776042000216183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates are running the asylum: Why high-tech products drive us crazy and how to restore the sanity. Macmillan Computer Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desmarais, L., Duquette, D., Renié, D., & Laurier, M. (1997). Evaluating learning and interactions in a multimedia environment. Computer and the Humanities, 31(4), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001062407103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Researching complex dynamic systems: “Retrodictive qualitative modeling” in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 47(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics – Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 558–589. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Sabagh, H. A. (2021). Adaptive e-learning environment based on learning styles and its impact on development students’ engagement: Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00289-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit Oy.Google Scholar
Felix, U. (2005). What do meta-analyses tell us about CALL effectiveness? ReCALL, 17(2), 269–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R. (2007). How do we know what students are actually doing? Monitoring students’ behavior in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(5), 409–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220701746013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R. (2012). Diversity in learner usage patterns. In Stockwell, G. (Ed.), Computer assisted language learning: Diversity in research and practice (pp. 14–32). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertz, C. (2017). The interpretation of cultures (3rd ed.). Basic Books.Google Scholar
Granger, S. (2003). Error-tagged learner corpora and CALL: A promising synergy. CALICO Journal, 20(3), 465–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamel, M.-J. (2012). Testing aspects of the usability of an online learner dictionary prototype: A product- and process-oriented study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(4), 339–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.591805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamel, M.-J. (2013a). Analyse de l’activité de recherche d’apprenants de langue dans un prototype de dictionnaire en ligne. Revue ALSIC, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.4000/alsic.2613Google Scholar
Hamel, M.-J. (2013b). Questionnaires to inform a usability test conducted on a CALL dictionary prototype. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 3(3), 56–76. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijcallt.2013070104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamel, M.-J., & Caws, C. (2010). Usability tests in CALL development: Pilot studies in the context of the Dire autrement and the Francotoile projects. CALICO Journal, 27(3), 491–504. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.3.491-504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampel, R., & Hauck, M. (2006). Computer-mediated language learning: Making meaning in multimodal virtual learning spaces. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(2), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v2n2.23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauck, M. (2005). Metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive strategies, and CALL. In Egbert, J. L. & Petrie, G. (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 65–86). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Heift, T. (2002). Learner control and error correction in ICALL: Browsers, peekers, and adamants. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 295–313. https://doi.org/0.1558/cj.v19i2.295-313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2007). Learner personas in CALL. CALICO Journal, 25(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v25i1.1-10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2008). Modeling learner variability in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(4), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802343421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2010). Developing an intelligent language tutor. CALICO Journal, 27(3), 443–459. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.3.443-459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T., & Schulze, M. (2015). Research timeline: Tutorial CALL. Language Teaching, 48(4), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hémard, D. (2003). Language learning online: Designing towards user acceptability. In Felix, U. (Ed.), Language learning online: Towards best practice (pp. 21–42). Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Hornbaek, K. (2006). Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, P. (1996). Elements of CALL methodology: Development, evaluation and implementation. In Pennington, M. C. (Ed.), The power of CALL. Athelstan.Google Scholar
Hubbard, P., & Bradin-Siskin, C. (2004). Another look at tutorial CALL. ReCALL, 16(2), 448–461. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344004001326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2012). Affordances in HCI: Toward a mediated action perspective. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on human factors in computing Systems (pp. 967–976). ACM. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2208541Google Scholar
Kelsey, S., & St. Amant, K. (Eds). (2008). Handbook of research on computer mediated communication. Information Science Reference.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265–299. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543060002265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lafford, B. A. (2009). Toward an ecological CALL: Update to Garrett (1991). The Modern Language Journal, 93(S1), 673–696. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00966.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian Praxis and the research/practice divide. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/18.2.141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, J., & Park, O. (2007). Adaptive instructional systems. In Spector, J. M., Merril, M. D., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Driscoll, M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 469–484). Routledge.Google Scholar
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer assisted language learning. L. Erbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lilley, M., Pyper, A., & Attwood, S. (2012). Understanding the student experience through the use of personas. Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Science, 11(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2012.11010004Google Scholar
Lorenz, E. N. (1993). The essence of chaos. University of Washington Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mödritscher, F., Gütl, C., García-Barrios, V. M., & Maurer, H. (2004). Why do standards in the field of e-learning not fully support learner-centred aspects of adaptivity? In Proceedings of EDMEDIA 2004 (pp. 2034–2039). AACE.Google Scholar
Nagata, N. (2009). Robo-Sensei’s NLP-based error detection and feedback generation. CALICO Journal, 26(3), 562–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, D. A. (1991). Cognitive artifacts. In Carroll, J. M. (Ed.), Designing interaction: Psychology at the human–computer interface (pp. 17–38). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Raby, F. (2005). A user-centered ergonomic approach to CALL research. In Egbert, J. L. & Petrie, G. M. (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 179–190). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Regian, J. W., & Shute, V. J. (2013). Cognitive approaches to automated instruction. Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, J., & Chisnell, D. E. (2008). Handbook of usability testing: How to plan, design, and conduct effective tests (2nd ed.). Wiley Publishing.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, S. L. (1984). Grundlagen der allgemeinen Psychologie (Übersetzung der Originalausgabe Moskau 1946 von H. Hartmann). Volk und Wissen.Google Scholar
Scholz, K., & Schulze, M. (2017). Digital-gaming trajectories and second-language development. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 99–119. https://doi.org/10125/44597Google Scholar
Schulze, M. (2008). Modeling SLA processes using NLP. In Chapelle, C. A., Chung, Y.-R., and Xu, J. (Eds.), Towards adaptive CALL: Natural language processing for diagnostic assessment (pp. 149–166). Iowa State University.Google Scholar
Schulze, M. (2024). Tutorial CALL: Language practice with the computer. In Hampel, R. & Stickler, U. (Eds.), Bloomsbury handbook of language learning and technologies (pp. 35–47). Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Schulze, M., & Scholz, K. (2016). CALL theory: Complex adaptive systems. In Caws, C. & Hamel, M.-J. (Eds.), Learner-computer interactions: New insights on CALL theories and applications (pp. 65–87). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shute, V. J., & Zapata-Rivera, D. (2007). Adaptive technologies. In Spector, J. M., Merril, M. D., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Driscoll, M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 277–294). Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Thorne, S. L. (2005). Epistemology, politics, and ethics in sociocultural theory. Modern Language Journal, 89(iii), 393–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Computer-mediated communication. In Hornberger, N. H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1415–1426). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandewaetere, M., Desmet, P., & Clarebout, G. (2011). The contribution of learner characteristics in the development of computer-based adaptive learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 118–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Cognition and artifacts: A contribution to the study of thought in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10(77). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., De Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (2011). A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Further Reading

This co-edited book collects insightful papers centered around the theme of “smart CALL,” which focuses on the adaptation of technologies within language education across three dimensions: personalization, contextualization, and socialization.

This article reviews adaptivity in educational systems for language learning from various aspects related to adaptivity, including adaptive learning environments, adaptive feedback, adaptive assessments, and adaptive content selection.

Colpaert, J., & Stockwell, G. (2022). Smart CALL: Personalization, contextualization, & socialization. Castledown. https://doi.org/10.29140/9781914291012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slavuj, V., Meštrović, A., & Kovačić, B. (2017). Adaptivity in educational systems for language learning: A review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1–2), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1242502CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×