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-2c8nx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-18T15:46:47.937Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Environments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2025

Edited by
Glenn Stockwell  and
Yijen Wang
Glenn Stockwell
Affiliation:
Waseda University, Japan
Yijen Wang
Affiliation:
Waseda University, Japan
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning , pp. 73 - 142
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

Agar, J. (2020). What is technology? Annals of Science, 77(3), 377–382, https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2019.1672788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, H. (2018). Blended basic language courses: Design, pedagogy, and implementation. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). An introduction to rethinking pedagogy for a digital age. In Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 1–10). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A., & Vyatkina, N. (2021). Thirty years of data-driven learning: Taking stock and charting new directions over time. Language Learning & Technology, 25(3), 66–89. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/73450Google Scholar
Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th ed.). Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Carrasco, B., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Hybrid language teaching in practice: Perceptions, reactions, and results. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (2007). Challenges in the evaluation of innovation: Observations from technology research. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (2014). Arguments for technology and language learning: Keynote presentation at the EUROCALL 2014 Conference. University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Douglas Fir Group (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 19–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egbert, J. (Ed). (2010). CALL in limited technology contexts. CALICO.Google Scholar
Garrett, N. (2009). Computer-assisted language learning trends and issues revisited: Integrating innovation. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 719–740. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00969.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrison, R., & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Gleason, J. (2013). An interpretive argument for blended course design. Foreign Language Annals, 46, 588–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godwin-Jones, R. (2020). Building the porous classroom: An expanded model for blended language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 24(3), 1–18. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44731Google Scholar
González-Lloret, M., & Ortega, L. (2014). Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grgurovic, M. (2017). Blended language learning: Research and practice. In Chapelle, C. and Sauro, S. (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 150–168). John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Gruba, P. (2020). What does language testing have to offer multimodal listening? In Ockey, G. and Green, B. (Eds.), Another generation of fundamental considerations in language assessment (pp. 43–57). Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruba, P., & Hinkelman, D. (2012). Blending technologies in second language classrooms. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruba, P., & Nguyen, N. B. C. (2019). Evaluating technology integration in a Vietnamese university language program. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5–6), 619–637. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1527365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruba, P., Cárdenas-Claros, M., Suvorov, R., & Rick, K. (2016). Blended language program evaluation. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grunberg, J., & Summers, M. (1992). Computer innovation in schools: A review of selected research literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 1(2), 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinkelman, D. (2018). Blending technologies in second language classrooms (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hocky, N. (2014). Digital technologies in low-resource ELT contexts. ELT Journal, 68(1), 79–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, T., & Llosa, L. (2015). Design issues and inference in experimental L2 research. Language Learning, 65(S1), 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, and learning: A multimodal approach. Routledge.Google Scholar
Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, K. A., & Sharma, R. S. (2021). Higher education 4.0: The digital transformation of classroom lectures to blended learning. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, R. (2014). Technology as pharmakon: The promise and perils of the internet for foreign language education. The Modern Language Journal, 14, 340–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12065.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knight, J., Dooly, M., & Barberà, E. (2020). Getting smart: Towards critical digital literacy pedagogies. Social Semiotics, 33(2), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2020.1836815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korkealehto, K., Lakkala, M., & Toom, A. (2021). Enrolled or engaged? Student perceptions of engagement and oral interaction in a blended learning language course. The JALT CALL Journal, 17(1), 1–22.https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v17n1.268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kress, G. (2015). Semiotic work: Applied linguistics and a social semiotic account of multimodality. AILA Review, 28(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.28.03kreCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurek, M., & Muller-Hartmann, A. (2017). Task design for telecollaborative exchanges: In search of new criteria. System, 64, 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as design science. Routledge.Google Scholar
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lin, C.-J., & Mubarok, H. (2021). Learning analytics for investigating the mind map-guided AI chatbot approach in an EFL flipped speaking classroom. Educational Technology & Society, 24(4), 16–35.Google Scholar
Lotherington, H., & Jenson, J. (2011). Teaching multimodal and digital literacy in second language settings: New literacies, new basics, new pedagogies. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 226–248. https://10.1017/S0267190511000110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M. (Ed.). (2016). The Cambridge guide to blended learning for language teaching. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mizza, D., & Rubio, F. (2020). Creating effective blended language learning courses: A research-based guide from planning to evaluation. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohan, B., & Luo, L. (2007). A systemic functional linguistics perspective on CALL. In Egbert, J. & Petrie, G. M. (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 87–96). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning: Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344005000224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolson, M., Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (2012). Language teaching in blended contexts. Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can “blended learning” be redeemed? E-Learning, 2(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2005.2.1.17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olteanu, A. (2019). Multiculturalism as multimodal communication: A semiotic perspective. Springer.Google Scholar
Oxford, R. L., & Jung, S.-H. (2006). National guidelines for technology integration in TESOL programs: Factors affecting (non) implementation. In Kassen, M. A., Murphy-Judy, K., Lavine, R. Z., & Peters, M. (Eds.), Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 23–48). Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium.Google Scholar
Palikat, C. N., & Gruba, P. (2022). Sustainability of blended language learning programs. Routledge.Google Scholar
Ragnedda, M. (2020). Enhancing digital equity: Connecting the digital underclass. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinders, H., & Lan, Y. J. (2021). Big data in language education and research. Language Learning & Technology, 25(1), 1–3. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44746Google Scholar
Sharma, P., & Barret, B. (2007). Blended learning: Using technology in and beyond the language classroom. Macmillan.Google Scholar
Statista. (2021). Internet usage in the United States. www.statista.com/topics/2237/internet-usage-in-the-united-statesGoogle Scholar
Stein, J., & Graham, C. R. (2020). Essentials for blended learning: A standards-based guide (2nd ed.). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, J. (2019). Emergent digital discourses: What can we learn from hashtags and digital games to expand learners’ second language repertoire? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 39, 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190519000138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TESOL. (2021). The 6 principles for exemplary teaching of English learners©. TESOL International Association. www.tesol.org/the-6-principles/aboutGoogle Scholar
Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning. Kogan Page.Google Scholar
Valdés, G., Kibler, A., & Walqui, A. (2014). Changes in the expertise of ESL professionals: Knowledge and action in an era of new standards. TESOL International Association. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED560135Google Scholar
van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welker, J., & Berardino, L. (2005). Blended learning: Understanding the middle ground between traditional classroom and fully online instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.2190/67FX-B7P8-PYUX-TDUPCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

Grounded in arguments first created for language assessment purposes, Gleason turns a critical eye on the fundamentals needed to construct a solid frame of blended course design. Such arguments, made with colleagues, help ensure that efforts to foster blended approaches are situated in both theory and evidence.

An early adopter of blended approaches, Hinkelman provides clear insights into technology integration through a solid conceptual framework, action research, fresh lesson plans, and a curriculum that stimulates student engagement.

The award-winning book of Mizza and Rubio provides a comprehensive introduction to blended learning for language instructors. Each chapter mixes references with sound advice and presents accessible pathways to successful technology integration.

This book provides a concise introduction to the long-term, or sustained, integration of technology in the form of a device, learning management system, or application. The ethnographic study points to challenges of instructor uptake and acceptability of technology integration. Notably, the book advocates an increased emphasis on program management in leading change, constructing professional development opportunities, and adopting a mindset of evaluative thinking.

Gleason, J. (2013). An interpretive argument for blended course design. Foreign Language Annals, 46(4), 588–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinkelman, D. (2018). Blending technologies in second language classrooms. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizza, D., & Rubio, F. (2020). Creating effective blended language learning courses: A research-based guide from planning to evaluation. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palikat, C. N., & Gruba, P. (2022). Sustainability of blended language learning programs: Technology integration in English for Academic Purposes. Routledge.Google Scholar

References

Amoraga-Piqueras, M., Comas-Quinn, A., & Southgate, M. (2011). Teaching through assessment. In Nicolson, M., Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (Eds.), Language teaching in blended contexts (pp. 75–92). Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bax, S. (2003). CALL: Past, present and future. System, 31(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346–251X(02)00071-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bax, S. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 1(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcallt.2011040101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaven, A. (2013). Using MOOCs in an academic English course at university level. In Beaven, A., Comas-Quinn, A., & Sawhill, B. (Eds.), Case studies of openness in the language classroom (pp. 217–227). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2013.000122Google Scholar
Cambre, M. A. (1991). The state of the art of instructional television. In Anglin, G. J. (Ed.), Instructional technology, past, present, and future (pp. 267–275). Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., Gallen, A. M., Jones, M. H., & Walshe, A. (2019). The perceptions of STEM tutors on the role of tutorials in distance learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 34(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1544488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. A. (2009). Why the British do not learn languages: Myths and motivation in the United Kingdom. Language Learning Journal, 37(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730902749003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comas-Quinn, A. (2011). Learning to teach online or learning to become an online teacher: An exploration of teachers’ experiences in a blended learning course. ReCALL, 23(3), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comas-Quinn, A. (2016). Blended teaching and the changing role of the tutor: The need for a review of teacher professional development. In McCarthy, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge guide to blended learning for language teaching (pp. 68–82). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comas-Quinn, A., de los Arcos, B., & Mardomingo, R. (2012). Virtual learning environments (VLEs) for distance language learning: Shifting tutor roles in a contested space for interaction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.636055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de los Arcos, B., & Arnedillo Sánchez, F. (2006). Ears before eyes: Expanding tutors’ interaction skills beyond physical presence in audio-graphic collaborative virtual learning environments. In Zaphiris, P. & Zacharia, G. (Eds.), User-centered computer aided language learning (pp. 74–93). Idea Group, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-750-8.ch004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de los Arcos, B., Coleman, J. A., & Hampel, R. (2009). Learners’ anxiety in audiographic conferences: A discursive psychology approach to emotion talk. ReCALL, 21(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344009000111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Toro, M., & Furnborough, C. (2018). Evaluating alignment of student and tutor perspectives on feedback on language learning assignments. Distance Education, 39(4), 548–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1520043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Toro, M., & Hurd, S. (2014). A model of factors affecting independent learners’ engagement with feedback on language learning tasks. Distance Education, 35(1), 106–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.891434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furnborough, C. (2012). Making the most of others: Autonomous interdependence in adult beginner distance language learners. Distance Education, 33(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gimeno-Sanz, A. (2016). Moving a step further from “integrative CALL”: What’s to come? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(6), 1102–1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1103271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampel, R. (2003). Theoretical perspectives and new practices in audio-graphic conferencing for language learning. ReCALL, 15(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344003000314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampel, R., & Hauck, M. (2004). Towards an effective use of audio conferencing in distance learning courses. Language Learning and Technology, 8(1), 66–82. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25230Google Scholar
Harper, F., Green, H., & Fernandez-Toro, M. (2018). Using screencasts in the teaching of modern languages: Investigating the use of Jing® in feedback on written assignments. The Language Learning Journal, 46(3), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1061586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herodotou, C., Heiser, S., & Rienties, B. (2017). Implementing randomised control trials in open and distance learning: A feasibility study. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 32(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2017.1316188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurd, S. (2006). Towards a better understanding of the dynamic role of the distance language learning: Learner perceptions of personality, motivation, roles, and approaches. Distance Education, 27(3), 303–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600940406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurd, S. (2008). Affect and strategy use in independent language learning. In Hurd, S. & Lewis, T. (Eds.), Language learning strategies in independent settings: Second language acquisition (pp. 218–236). Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurd, S., Beaven, T., & Ortega, A. (2001). Developing autonomy in a distance language learning context: issues and dilemmas for course writers. System, 29(3), 341–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346–251X(01)00024-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IET Student Statistics and Survey Team. (2014). What reasons do students give for not completing modules? Non-returners research findings and outcomes. [Report]. The Open University.Google Scholar
Jones, K. O., & Bartlett, R. (2004). Towards providing distance learning students with a comparable learning experience. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on computer systems and technologies (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1145/1050330.1050416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, O. (2019). Assessing language student interaction and engagement via Twitter. In Comas-Quinn, A., Beaven, A., & Sawhill, B. (Eds.), New case studies of openness in and beyond the language classroom (pp. 129–143). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2019.37.971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. (2014). Learner autonomy and the theory of sociality. In Murray, G. (Ed.), Social dimensions of autonomy in language learning (pp. 37–59). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137290243_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. (2020). From tandem learning to e-tandem learning: How languages are learnt in tandem exchanges. In Gola, S., Pierrard, M., Tops, E., & Van Raemdonck, D. (Eds.), Enseigner et apprendre les langues au XXIe siècle: Méthodes alternatives et nouveaux dispositifs d’accompagnement. GRAMM-R. P. I. E. Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b16391Google Scholar
Liu, Z. (2018). The impact of distance learning on foreign language education. In 2018 International Conference on Social Science and Education Reform (ICSSER 2018) (pp. 237–239). Atlantis Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/icsser-18.2018.56Google Scholar
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2019). Second language learning theories. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motzo, A. (2016). Evaluating the effects of a “student buddy” initiative on student engagement and motivation. In Goria, C., Speicher, O., & Stollhans, S. (Eds.), Innovative language teaching and learning at university: Enhancing participation and collaboration (pp. 19–28). Research-publishing.net. http://dx.doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2016.000401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, L., & Hurd, S. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy and motivation in blended teaching. In Nicolson, M., Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (Eds.), Language teaching in blended contexts (pp. 43–56). Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nicol, D. (2021). The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 756–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielson, K. B., & González-Lloret, M. (2010). Effective online foreign language courses: Theoretical framework and practical applications. The EuroCALL Review, 17, 48–65. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2010.16326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pleines, C. (2020). Understanding vicarious participation in online language learning. Distance Education, 41(4), 453–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2005). Task design for audiographic conferencing: Promoting beginner oral interaction in distance language learning. Computer assisted language learning, 18(5), 417–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500442772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2006). Online tutorial support in open distance learning through audio-graphic SCMC: Tutor impressions. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(2), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v2n2.25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2015). Podcasting as a language teaching and learning tool. In Borthwick, K., Corradini, E., & Dickens, A. (Eds.), 10 years of the LLAS elearning symposium: Case studies in good practice (pp. 31–39). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2015.000265Google Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2018). Autonomous language learning through a mobile application: A user evaluation of the busuu app. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1456465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2020). Twitter as a language learning tool: The learners’ perspective. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 10(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2020100101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2021). Locked down, but not isolated: Twitter collaboration among teachers in response to COVID-19. In Plutino, A., & Polisca, E. (Eds.), Languages at work, competent multilinguals and the pedagogical challenges of COVID-19 (pp. 71–77). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2021.49.1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovagnati, V., Pitt, E., & Winstone, N. (2022). Feedback cultures, histories and literacies: International postgraduate students’ experiences. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(3), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1916431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherry, L. (1995). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337–365.Google Scholar
Shield, L. (2000, September). Overcoming isolation: The loneliness of the long-distance language learner. Keynote address at the EADTU Paris Millennium Conference “Wiring the Ivory Tower,” France.Google Scholar
Shield, L., Hauck, M., & Hewer, S. (2001). Talking to strangers: The role of the tutor in developing target language speaking skills at a distance. In Proceedings of UNTELE 2000 (2) (pp. 75–84). Technological University of Compiègne.Google Scholar
Simpson, O. (2004). The impact on retention of interventions to support distance learning students. Open Learning, 19, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051042000177863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, O. (2013). Supporting students for success in online and distance education. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, P. (2012). Conceptualizing feedback literacy: Knowing, being, and acting. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.647781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, P., & Gill, W. (2010). Engaging feedback: Meaning, identity and power. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 4(1), 3–13.Google Scholar
Ushioda, E. (2011). Why autonomy? Insights from motivation theory and research. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2011.577536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance education. Ernst Klett Sprachen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C. (2007). Innovation and identity in distance language learning and teaching. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt45.0Google Scholar
White, C. J. (2017). Distance language teaching with technology. In Chapelle, C. A. & Sauro, S. (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 134–148). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winstone, N. E., Mathlin, G., & Nash, R. A. (2019, May). Building feedback literacy: Students’ perceptions of the Developing Engagement with Feedback Toolkit. Frontiers in Education, 4, 39. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, J. (2012). Successful and unsuccessful distance language learners: An “affective” perspective. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 27(2), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2012.678611CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

In this book chapter, Marta González-Lloret provides an overview of different technologies ranging from the basic (blogs, wikis) to the complex (multiplayer online games, virtual environments), and argues that, despite their many affordances, their use for language teaching and learning purposes must be informed by evidence from SLA research. González-Lloret identifies task-based language teaching as the optimal approach to achieve this goal and provides examples of the integration of technology-mediated tasks into language teaching.

This chapter by Cynthia White is essential reading for anyone interested in distance language learning. It focuses on the available technologies for facilitating language learning online and discusses required changes to curriculum and materials design, assessment, and teacher training in the incorporation of these technologies into various learning processes. White underlines the importance of obtaining evidence through research into the use of these technologies.

González‐Lloret, M. (2017). Technology for task‐based language teaching. In Chapelle, C. A. & Sauro, S. (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 234–247). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C. J. (2017). Distance language teaching with technology. In Chapelle, C. A. & Sauro, S. (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 134–148). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch10CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aidinopoulou, V., & Sampson, D. G. (2017). An action research study from implementing the flipped classroom model in primary school history teaching and learning. Educational Technology & Society 20(1), 237–247. www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.20.1.237Google Scholar
Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Samarraie, H., Shamsuddin, A., & Alzahrani, A. I. (2020). A flipped classroom model in higher education: A review of the evidence across disciplines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1017–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09718-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amiryousefi, M. (2019). The incorporation of flipped learning into conventional classes to enhance EFL learners’ L2 speaking, L2 listening, and engagement. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2017.1394307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, J. W. (2000). The “classroom flip”: Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side. In Chambers, J. A. (Ed.), Selected papers from the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning (pp. 9–17). Florida Community College at Jacksonville.Google Scholar
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement. International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
Chen Hsieh, J. S., Huang, Y. M., & Wu, W. C. V. (2017). Technological acceptance of LINE in flipped EFL oral training. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Ekmekci, E. (2017). The flipped writing classroom in Turkish EFL context: A comparative study on a new model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.306566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estriegana, R., Medina-Merodio, J. A., & Barchino, R. (2019). Analysis of competence acquisition in a flipped classroom approach. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flipped Learning Network. (2014). What is flipped learning? http://flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdfGoogle Scholar
González-Gómez, D., Jeong, J. S., & Rodríguez, D. A., & Cañada-Cañada, F. (2016). Performance and perception in the flipped learning model: An initial approach to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching methodology in a general science classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(3), 450–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9605-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62–66. www.jstor.org/stable/43631584Google Scholar
Huang, Y. N., & Hong, Z. R. (2016). The effects of a flipped English classroom intervention on students’ information and communication technology and English reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9412-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hung, C. Y., Sun, J. C. Y., & Liu, J. Y. (2019). Effects of flipped classrooms integrated with MOOCs and game-based learning on the learning motivation and outcomes of students from different backgrounds. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1028–1046. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1481103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hung, H. T. (2017). The integration of a student response system in flipped classrooms. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 16–27. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44593Google Scholar
Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0043-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, M. Y. C., Jong, M. S. Y., Lau, W. W. F., Chai, C. S., Liu, K. S. X., & Park, M. (2020). A scoping review on flipped classroom approach in language education: Challenges, implications and an interaction model. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(5–6), 1218–1249. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1789171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/1183338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students’ learning performance in a mathematics course. Computers & Education, 100, 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lo, C. K. (2018). Grounding the flipped classroom approach in the foundations of educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 793–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9578-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203831076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahnama, M., Ghonsooly, B., & Shirvan, M. E. (2021). A meta-analysis of relative effectiveness of flipped learning in English as second/foreign language research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(3), 1355–1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09996-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, P., Hayes, S., Smith, S. U., Vickers, J., Bidjerano, T., Pickett, A., Gozza-Cohen, M., Wilde, J., & Jian, S. (2012). Learning presence: Additional research on a new conceptual element within the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shyr, W. J., & Chen, C. H. (2018). Designing a technology-enhanced flipped learning system to facilitate students’ self-regulation and performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spector, J. M. (2015). Foundations of educational technology: Integrative approaches and interdisciplinary perspectives (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315764269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonkin, K., Page, S., & Forsey, M. (2019). Managing cognitive load with a flipped language class: An ethnographic study of the student experience. Foreign Language Annals, 52(3), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turan, Z., & Akdag-Cimen, B. (2020). Flipped classroom in English language teaching: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(5–6), 590–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1584117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4Google Scholar
Wang, Y. H. (2016). Could a mobile-assisted learning system support flipped classrooms for classical Chinese learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(5), 391–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Han, X., & Yang, J. (2015). Revisiting the blended learning literature: Using a complex adaptive systems framework. Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 380–393. www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.2.380Google Scholar
Wu, W. C. V., Hsieh, J. S. C., & Yang, J. C. (2017). Creating an online learning community in a flipped classroom to enhance EFL learners’ oral proficiency. Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 142–157. www.jstor.org/stable/90002170Google Scholar
Yang, J., Yin, C. X., & Wang, W. (2018). Flipping the classroom in teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10125/44575Google Scholar
Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2019). Exploring students’ competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped classroom pedagogical model. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1356916Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(86)90027-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zou, D., Luo, S., Xie, H., & Hwang, G. J. (2020). A systematic review of research on flipped language classrooms: Theoretical foundations, learning activities, tools, research topics and findings. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(8), 1811–1837. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839502CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

This book aims to provide a practical guide for teachers who are learning how to flip a language course. It begins with the fundamental principles of the flipped classroom approach, followed by descriptions of successful applications from practitioners in the field. Exemplars are broadly organized by skills-based courses and content-based courses, in which lesson objectives, learning activities, technology use, student outcomes, and possible challenges are discussed to demonstrate the procedures, benefits, and limitations of flipping the language classroom.

This review sets out to examine the overall effectiveness of flipped learning research in the field of English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL). A meta-analysis method was employed to systemically analyze sixty-nine empirical studies published between 2004 and 2019. The results revealed a large and positive effect of flipped learning on students’ language learning achievements by comparison with lecture-based instruction.

This article is a systematic review adopting a meta-analysis method to synthesize L2 flipped learning interventions. A total of fifty-six research reports were included in this review. The results demonstrated a positive effect of the flipped learning approach over traditional lecture-based approach and identified several significant moderators, such as L2 proficiency levels and learning outcomes.

Mehring, J., & Leis, A. (Eds.). (2018). Innovations in flipping the language classroom: Theories and practices. Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6968-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahnama, M., Ghonsooly, B., & Shirvan, M. E. (2021). A meta-analysis of relative effectiveness of flipped learning in English as second/foreign language research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 1355–1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09996-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitta, J. P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2020). The flipped classroom in second language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820981403CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Aghajani, M., & Adloo, M. (2018). The effect of online cooperative learning on students’ writing skills and attitudes through Telegram application. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11330aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ali, J. K. M., & Bin-Hady, W. R. A. (2019). A study of EFL students’ attitudes, motivation and anxiety towards WhatsApp as a language learning tool. Arab World English Journal Special Issue on CALL, 5, 289–298. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/call5.19Google Scholar
Alshammari, R., Parkes, M., & Adlington, R. (2017). Using WhatsApp in EFL instruction with Saudi Arabian university students. Arab World English Journal, 8(4), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol8no4.5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alsop, T. (2021). Share of households in Africa with a computer at home from 2005 to 2019. Statista. www.statista.com/statistics/748549/africa-households-with-computerGoogle Scholar
Arifani, Y., Asari, S., Anwar, K., & Budianto, L. (2020). Individual or collaborative “WhatsApp” learning? A flipped classroom model of EFL writing instruction. Teaching English with Technology, 20(1), 122–139. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1242659.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ashiyan, Z., & Salehi, H. (2016). Impact of WhatsApp on learning and retention of collocation knowledge among Iranian EFL learners. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(5), 112–127. www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/alls/article/view/2620Google Scholar
Bucher, B. (2020, October 30). WhatsApp, WeChat and Facebook Messenger Apps: Global usage of messaging apps, penetration and statistics. Messenger People. www.messengerpeople.com/global-messenger-usage-statistics.Google Scholar
Budiu, R. (2015, April 19). Mobile user experience: Limitations and strengths. Nielsen Norman Group. www.nngroup.com/articles/mobile-uxGoogle Scholar
Business of Apps (2020). WhatsApp revenue and usage statistics. www.businessofapps.com/data/whatsapp-statisticsGoogle Scholar
Caboz, J. (2020, April 19). COMPARED: SA video calls on Zoom, Skype, Teams, Hangouts and WhatsApp. Business Insider South Africa. www.businessinsider.co.za/heres-why-your-video-conference-app-keeps-acting-up-recommended-bandwidth-speeds-of-zoom-microsoft-teams-skype-google-hangouts-met-and-whatsapp-2020-4Google Scholar
Chen, D. W., (2020, March 29). Teachers’ Herculean task: Moving 1.1 million children to online school. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2020/03/29/nyregion/coronavirus-new-york-schools-remote-learning.htmlGoogle Scholar
Compton, L. K. L. (2009). Preparing language teachers to teach language online: A look at skills, roles, and responsibilities. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 73–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802613831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elkington, S., & Bligh, B. (2019). Future learning spaces: Space, technology and pedagogy. Research Report. Advance HE. hal-02266834. https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02266834/documentGoogle Scholar
Gonglewski, M., Meloni, C., & Brant, J. (2001). Using e-mail in foreign language teaching: Rationale and suggestions. TESL Journal, 7(3). http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Meloni-Email.htmlGoogle Scholar
Guo, M., & Wang, M. (2018). Integrating WeChat-based mobile-assisted language learning into college English teaching. EAI Endorsed Transactions on E-Learning, 5(17), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.25-9-2018.155646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines, P. (2016). 25 ideas for using WhatsApp with English language students. Oxford University Press English Language Teaching Global Blog. https://oupeltglobalblog.com/2016/05/17/25-ideas-for-using-whatsapp-with-english-language-studentsGoogle Scholar
Hamad, M. (2017). Using WhatsApp to enhance students’ learning of English language: Experience to share. Higher Education Studies, 7(4), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v7n4p74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayati, A., Jalilifar, A., & Mashhadi, A. (2013). Using short message service (SMS) to teach English idioms to EFL students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01260.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456. www.jstor.org/stable/42856294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaviani, M., & Mashhadi, H. D. (2017). The social impact of Telegram as a social network on teaching English vocabulary among Iranian intermediate EFL learners (Payam Noor Center). Sociological Studies of Youth, 7(23), 65–76. https://ssyj.babol.iau.ir/article_529813.htmlGoogle Scholar
Kemp, S. (2021, January 27). Digital 2021: Global overview report. Datareportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-global-overview-reportGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, C., & Levy, M. (2008). L’italiano al telefonino: Using SMS to support beginners’ language learning. ReCALL, 20(3), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344008000530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, R., Basu, B. L., Bashir, A., & Uddin, M. E. (2021). Online instruction during COVID-19 at public universities in Bangladesh: Teacher and student voices. Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal, 25(1). https://tesl-ej.org/pdf/ej97/a19.pdfGoogle Scholar
Lee, V., & Yeo, S. (2020, April 18). How home-based learning shows up inequality in Singapore: A look at three homes. The Straits Times. www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/how-home-based-learning-hbl-shows-up-inequality-in-singapore-a-look-at-three-homesGoogle Scholar
Moran, K. (2016, December 11). Reading content on mobile devices. Nielsen Norman Group. www.nngroup.com/articles/mobile-contentGoogle Scholar
Motteram, G., Dawson, S., & Al-Masri-N, . (2020). WhatsApp supported language teacher development: A case study in the Zaatari refugee camp. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 5731–5751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639–020-10233-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naderi, S., & Akrami, A. (2018). EFL learners’ reading comprehension development through MALL: Telegram groups in focus. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 339–350. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11223aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nature Editorial. (2017). Homo zappiens: The tech-savvy generation may not be so different after all. Nature, 547, 380. www.nature.com/articles/547380a.pdfGoogle Scholar
New York Times (2020, September 5). When learning is really remote: Students climb trees and travel miles for a cell signal. New York Times. https://tinyurl.com/1agtn5qlGoogle Scholar
Speedguide.net. FAQ: What internet speed is needed for video conferencing with Zoom, Skype, or Teams? www.speedguide.net/faq/what-internet-speed-is-needed-for-video-conferencing-513Google Scholar
Stanford, D. (2020, March 16). Videoconferencing alternatives: How low-bandwidth teaching will save us all. IDDblog. www.iddblog.org/videoconferencing-alternatives-how-low-bandwidth-teaching-will-save-us-allGoogle Scholar
Talaee, E., & Noroozi, O. (2019). Re-conceptualization of “digital divide” among primary school children in an era of saturated access to technology. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(1), 27–35 https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkan, S., Timpe-Laughlin, V., & Papageorgiou, S. (2017). An exploratory study of teaching tasks in English as a foreign language education. Research Report No. RR-17–56. Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNCTAD. (2018). Policy Brief: Leapfrogging: Look before you leap. (UNCTAD/PRESS/PB/2018/8 No. 71). United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/presspb2018d8_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
UNESCO. (2020, June 2). Learning through radio and television in the time of COVID-19. https://en.unesco.org/news/learning-through-radio-and-television-time-covid-19Google Scholar
UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia. (2020, May). Guidance on distance learning modalities to reach all children and youth during school closures: Focusing on low- and no-tech modalities to reach the most marginalized. www.unicef.org/rosa/reports/guidance-distance-learning-modalities-reach-all-children-and-youth-during-school-closuresGoogle Scholar
WhistleOut. (2020, December 10). How much data does YouTube use? www.whistleout.ca/CellPhones/Guides/How-Much-Data-Does-YouTube-UseGoogle Scholar
Wonders of the World. (2020, August 14). Boy was playing on a tablet in a store when an employee realized what he was doing and made a video. YouTube. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbzukgo8mmEGoogle Scholar
World Bank. (2020). Connecting for inclusion: Broadband access for all. Brief. The World Bank IBRD-IDA. www.worldbank.org/en/topic/digitaldevelopment/brief/connecting-for-inclusion-broadband-access-for-allGoogle Scholar
Zayed, N. M. (2016). Special designed activities for learning English language through the application of WhatsApp! English Language Teaching, 9(2), 199–204. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1095562.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

In this chapter Gonzalez and St. Louis provide an overview of low-tech contexts, exploring the challenges and opportunities that arise when integrating technologies into educational contexts with limited access to advanced technology. The authors discuss various strategies and approaches that can be employed to overcome these limitations and effectively integrate CALL into low-tech settings. The chapter offers insights and practical guidance for educators and practitioners who seek to leverage CALL tools and techniques in low-tech environments.

This guidance published by UNICEF builds upon the valuable insights gained from the COVID-19 response. It provides practical guidance on implementing effective distance learning strategies to ensure inclusive education for children and youths during school closures. The report highlights the importance of ensuring continuity of learning during such periods and places particular emphasis on low-tech and non-tech educational settings.

Gonzalez, D., & St. Louis, R. (2012). CALL in low-tech contexts. In Thomas, M.,Reinders, H., & Warschauer, M. (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 217–241). Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia. (2020, May). Guidance on distance learning modalities to reach all children and youth during school closures: Focusing on low- and no-tech modalities to reach the most marginalized. www.unicef.org/rosa/reports/guidance-distance-learning-modalities-reach-all-children-and-youth-during-school-closuresGoogle 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.

  • Environments
  • Edited by Glenn Stockwell, Waseda University, Japan, Yijen Wang, Waseda University, Japan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning
  • Online publication: 15 June 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009294850.006
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.

  • Environments
  • Edited by Glenn Stockwell, Waseda University, Japan, Yijen Wang, Waseda University, Japan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning
  • Online publication: 15 June 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009294850.006
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.

  • Environments
  • Edited by Glenn Stockwell, Waseda University, Japan, Yijen Wang, Waseda University, Japan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning
  • Online publication: 15 June 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009294850.006
Available formats
×