Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T22:03:04.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NEW TRENDS IN USING TECHNOLOGY IN THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

Robert J. Blake
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Language teachers actively seek to provide their students with classroom opportunities to engage in collaborative interactions. Similar opportunities for such interactions can also be created within the context of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and, in particular, in the area of computer-mediated communication (CMC)—whether in real time (synchronous, SCMC) or deferred time (asynchronous, ACMC)—working together with other nonnative- (NNS) or native-speaker (NS) partners. Recent advances in intelligent CALL (iCALL) are also beginning to empower students to engage in online activities with computer applications that provide at least limited levels of feedback, if not some palpable degree of interactivity. This article will review the reported benefits of online language study with particular emphasis on the importance of providing a sound pedagogical framework for the tasks and activities that students are asked to accomplish. In pursuit of effective CALL, researchers have previously stressed the role of online negotiations of meaning via CMC, intercultural communicative competence, and electronic literacy and identity. Although these topics continue to be of great interest for the CALL field, other areas are attracting attention as well: iCALL, distance learning, and teacher training. CALL researchers are increasingly finding that teachers' lack of experience with using technology—that is, their inability to take into account its affordances as well as its engrained cultures of use—can often present the most serious barrier to its successful integration into the language curriculum.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 27 , March 2007 , pp. 76 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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.)

References

ANNOTATED REFERENCES

Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (Eds.). (2006). Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Bauer, B., deBenedette, L., Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., & Waryn, S. (2006). The Cultura Project, (pp. 31–62). In Belz, J. A. & Thorne, S. L. (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education. Boston: Heinle.Google Scholar
Belz, J. A., & Thorne, S. L. (Eds.). (2006). Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education. Boston: Heinle.Google Scholar
Chun, D. (2006). CALL technologies for L2 reading. In Ducate, L. & Arnold, N. (Eds.), Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 69–98). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Heift, T., & Schulze, M. (2007). Parsers and pedagogues: Errors and intelligence in computer assisted language learning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (Eds.) (2006a). Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stickler, U., & Hauck, M. (Eds.). (2006). Special Issue: What does it take to teach online? Towards a pedagogy for online language teaching and learning. CALICO Journal, 23 (3), 463–642.Google Scholar

OTHER REFERENCES

Abrams, Z. I. (2006). From theory to practice: Intracultural CMC the L2 classroom. In Ducate, L. & Arnold, N. (Eds.) Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 181–209). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade: Online education in the United States, 2006. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved January 11, 2007, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/index.aspGoogle Scholar
Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (2006). CALL: Where are we and where do we go from here? In Arnold, N. & Ducate, L. (Eds.) Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 1–20). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Belz, J. A. (2002). Social dimensions of telecollaborative foreign language study. Language Learning & Technology, 6 (1), 60–81. Retrieved on December 10, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/belz/Google Scholar
Belz, J. A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 68–117. Retrieved on July 18, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/belzGoogle Scholar
Belz, J. A., & Thorne, S. L. (Eds.). (2006). Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education. Boston: Heinle.Google Scholar
Bañados, E. (2006). A blended-learning pedagogical model for teaching and learning EFL successfully through an online interactive multimedia environment. CALICO Journal, 23 (3), 533–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Hakuta, K. (1994). In other words. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Blake, R. (forthcoming). Brave new digital classroom: Technology in service of the foreign language curriculum. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, R. (in press). From Web pages to distance Learning: Technology in the foreign-language curriculum. In Lancashire, I. (Ed.), Teaching literature and language online(Options in Teaching Series). New York: MLA Press.Google Scholar
Blake, R. (2005). Bimodal chatting: The glue of a distance language learning course. The CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 497–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, R. (2006). Two Heads as Better Than One: C[omputer] M[ediated] C[communication] for the L2 Curriculum. In R. P. Donaldson & M. A. Haggstrom, Changing language education through CALL (pp. 229–248). Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Blake, R., & Delforge, A. (2007). Online language learning: The case of Spanish Without Walls. In Lafford, B. & Salaberry, R. (Eds.), The art of teaching Spanish: Second language acquisition from research to praxis (pp. 127–147). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Blake, R, & Zyzik, E. (2003). Who's helping whom?: Learner/heritage speakers’ networked discussions in Spanish. Applied Linguistics, 24 (4), 519–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burston, J. (1998). Antidote 98. CALICO Journal, 16 (2), 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Byram, M., Gribkova, B., & Starkey, H. (2002). Developing the intercultural dimension in language teaching: A practical introduction for teachers. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Byrnes, H. (2006). Perspectives. Modern Language Journal, 90 (2), 244–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. (2005). CALICO at center stage: Our emerging rights and responsibilities. CALICO Journal, 23 (1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., Jones, C. M., & G. Richard Tucker, G. R. (2006). Language online: Principles of design and methods of assessment. In Donaldson, R. P. & Haggstrom, M. A., Changing language education through CALL (pp. 146–167). Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., & Murday, K. (2003). Measuring student learning in an online French course. CALICO Journal, 20 (2), 285–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., Ushida, E., & Murday, K. (2006). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24 (1), 115–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, D. (2007). Come ride the wave: But where is it taking us? CALICO Journal, 24 (2), 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A., & Sykes, J. (2006). Dancing with words: Strategies for learning pragmatics in Spanish. Retrieved May 11, 2006, from http://www.carla.umn.edu/speechacts/sp_pragmatics/home.htmlGoogle Scholar
Colpaert, J. (2006). Pedagogy-driven design for online language teaching and learning. CALICO Journal, 23 (3), 477–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program. (2005). Global Competance & National Needs. Retrieved December 17, 2007, from http://www.lincolncommission.org/Google Scholar
Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1995). Brave new schools: Challenging cultural literacy through global learning networks. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. (2007). Study abroad and outcomes measurements: The case of Russian. Modern Language Journal, 91 (2), 276–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darhower, M. (2007). A tale of two communities: Group dynamics and community building in a Spanish-English telecollaboration. CALICO Journal, 24 (3), 561–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, G. (Ed.). (2006). Information and communication technologies for language teachers (ICT4LT). Slough: Thames Valley University. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.ict4lt.orgGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, R. P., & Haggstrom, M. A. (2005). Changing language education through CALL. Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (3), 50–80. Retrieved March 4, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/doughtyGoogle Scholar
Dubreil, S. (2006). Getting perspective on culture through CALL. In Ducate, L. & Arnold, N. (Eds.), Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 237–268). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Echávez-Solano, N. (2003). A comparison of student outcomes and attitudes in technology-enhanced vs. traditional second-semester Spanish language courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Egbert, J. (2005). CALL essentials: Principles and practice in CALL classrooms. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Google Scholar
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), 106–126. Retrieved June 25, 2007 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ehsani, F., & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (1), 54–73. Retrieved January 1, 2007, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Epps, M. (2004). CALL: How does it make you feel? Unpublished master's thesis, Federal Language Training Laboratory, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.Google Scholar
Eskenazi, M. (1999). Using automatic speech processing for foreign language pronunciation tutoring: Some issues and a prototype. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (2), 62–76. Retrieved January 2, 2007, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num2/article3/Google Scholar
Felix, U. (Ed.). (2003). Language learning online: Towards best practice. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Fleming, S., & Hiple, D. (2004). Distance education to distributed learning: Multiple formats and technologies in language instruction. CALICO Journal, 22 (1), 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freinet, C. (1994). Les oeuvres pédagogiques [The pedagogical works]. Paris: Edition Seuil.Google Scholar
Fryer, L, & Carpenter, R. (2006). Emerging Technologies: Bots as language learning tools. Language Learning & Technology, 10 (3), 8–14.Google Scholar
Fukkink, R. G., Hulstijn, J., & Simis, A. (2005). Does training of second-language word recognition skills affect reading comprehension? An experimental study. The Modern Language Journal, 89 (1), 54–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, W. (2004). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 44–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grgurovic, M., & Chapelle, C. A. (2007). Database of comparison studies: Computer-assisted vs. classroom second/foreign language instruction. Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://tesl.engl.iastate.edu:591/comparison/main.htmGoogle Scholar
Hegelheimer, V. (2006). Helping ESL writers through a multimodal, corpus-based online grammar resource. CALICO Journal, 24 (1), 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegelheimer, V., & Fisher, D. (2006). Grammar, writing, and technology: A sample technology-supported approach to teaching grammar and improving writing for ESL learners. CALICO Journal, 23 (2), 257–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2001). Intelligent language tutoring systems for grammar practice. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht [Online], 6 (2), 15 pp. Retrieved December 28, 2006. from http://www.spz.tu-darmstadt.de/projekt_ejournal/jg-06-2/beitrag/heift2.htmGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2002). Learner control and error correction in ICALL: Browsers, peekers and adamants. CALICO Journal, 19 (3), 295–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heift, T. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in CALL. ReCALL, 16 (2), 416–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, B., Shelley, M., & White, C. (2005). Distance education and languages: Evolution and change. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, P., & Bradin Siskin, C. (2004). Another look at tutorial CALL. ReCALL, 16 (2), 448–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (2006b). The scope of CALL education. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy, Teacher education in CALL (pp. 3–20). Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassen, M. A., Lavine, R. Z., Murphy-Judy, K., & Peters, M. (2007). Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 6). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2000). Social discursive construction of self in L2 learning. In Lantolf, J. (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 133–154). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kramsch, C., A'Ness, F., & Lam, W. S. E. (2000). Authenticity and authorship in the computer-mediated acquisition of L2 literacy. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (2), 78–104. Retrieved June 7, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/kramsch/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Lafford, B. (2004). Review of Tell Me More. Language Learning & Technology, 18 (3), 21–34. Retrieved January 1, 2007, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol8num3/review1Google Scholar
Lafford, B., Lafford, P., & Sykes, J. (2007). Entre dicho y hecho . . .: An assessment of the application of research from second language acquisition and related fields to the creation of Spanish CALL materials for lexical acquisition. CALICO Journal 24 (3), 497–529.Google Scholar
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, C., & Zhao, Y. (2005). Introduction: The essence of second language education and technology integration. In Zhao, Y. (ed.) Research in technology and second language learning: Developments and directions (pp. 401–409). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
Lee, L. (2004). Learners’ perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the U.S. Language, Learning, & Technology, 8 (1), 83–100. Retrieved July 20, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol8num1/leeGoogle Scholar
LeLoup, J. W., & Ponterio, R. (2005). On the net: Vocabulary support for Independent online reading. Language Learning & Technology, 9 (2), 3–7. Retrieved August 30, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/net/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lomicka, L. (2006). Understanding the other: Intercultural exchange and CMC. In Ducate, L. & Arnold, N. (Eds.), Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 211–236). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar
Lomicka, L., & Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (Eds.). (2004). The Heinle professional series in language instruction: Volume 1: Teaching with technology. Boston: Heinle.Google Scholar
Magnan, S. (2007). Reconsidering communicative language teaching for national goals. Modern Language Journal, 91 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching English language learners with computers. Language Learning & Technology, 9 (1), 46–59. Retrieved June 12, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num1/meskill/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Meskill, C. (2006). Notes from the special issue editor: special issue on electronic literacy. CALICO Journal, 10 (2), 2–3.Google Scholar
Nagata, N. (1996). Computer vs. workbook instruction in second language acquisition. CALICO Journal, 14 (1), 53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagata, N. (2002). An Application of natural language processing to Web-based language learning. CALICO Journal, 19 (3), 583–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Dowd, R. (2003). Understanding “the other side”: Intercultural learning in a Spanish-English e-mail exchange. Language Learning and Technology, 7 (2), 118–144.Google Scholar
O'Dowd, R. (2005). Negotiating sociocultural and institutional contexts: The case of Spanish-American Telecollaboration. Language and Intercultural Communication, 5 (1), 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Dowd, R. (2006). Telecollaboration and the development of intercultural communicative competence. Munich, Germany: Langenscheidt ELT GmbH.Google Scholar
O'Dowd, R., & Ritter, M. (2006). Understanding and working with “failed communi-cation” in telecollaborative exchanges. CALICO Journal, 23 (3), 623–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 433–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K. (2003). Talking text: Reflections on reflection in computer-mediated communication. In Little, D. Ridley, J., & Ushida, E. (Eds.), Learner autonomy in foreign language teaching: Teacher, learner, curriculum, assessment (pp. 47–60). Dublin: Authentik.Google Scholar
Payne, S. (2007). The BodoBot project. Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://spayne.ats.amherst.edu/index.php?section=homeGoogle Scholar
Schulze, M. (2001). Human language technologies in computer-assisted language learning. In Chambers, A. & Davies, G. (Eds.), ICT and Language Learning: A European Perspective (pp. 111–132). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Scida, E., & Saury, R. E. (2006). Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23 (3), 517–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Bryan. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (1), 38–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, J. (2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 399–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorne, S. L. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 38–67. Retrieved July 18, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/thorne/Google Scholar
Thorne, S. L., & Payne, J. S. (2005). Evolutionary trajectories, Internet-mediated expression, and language education. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 371–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, J. (1989). On the edge: Intelligent CALL in the 1990s. Computers and the Humanities, 23 (1), 71–84.Google Scholar
Ushida, E. (2007). Robo-Sensei personal Japanese tutor, version 1.0. CALICO Journal, 24 (2), 408–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walczynski, S. (2002). Applying the job characteristics model to Mallard Web-based classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University, Normal.Google Scholar
Ware, P. D., & Kramsch, C. (2005). Toward an intercultural stance: Teaching German and English through telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal, 89 (2), 190–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warschauer, M., & De Florio-Hansen, I. (2003). Multilingualism, identity, and the Internet. In Hu, A. and De Florio-Hansen, I. (Eds.), Multiple identity and multilingualism (pp. 155–179). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Wildner-Bassett, M. E. (2005). CMC as written conversation: A critical social-constructivist view of multiple identities and cultural positioning in the L2/C2 classroom. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 635–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: a literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 21 (1), 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Y., Alvarez-Torres, M.J., Smith, B., & Tan, H. S. (2005). The non-neutrality of technology: A theoretical analysis and empirical study of computer mediated communication technologies. In Zhao, Y (Ed.), Research in technology and second language learning: Developments and directions (pp. 281–316). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar