LLTI Archives

September 2002, Week 3

LLTI@LISTSERV.DARTMOUTH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LLTI-Editor <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:39:30 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (66 lines)
--- Forwarded Message from Jack Burston <[log in to unmask]> ---

>User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
>Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 14:37:09 -0400
>Subject: Language Lab effectiveness
>From: Jack Burston <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>

Dear Sonia,

Your query about the pedagogical effectiveness of  the language lab, or more
broadly instructional technology, is indeed one that has behind it a vast
research literature. Since the 1960s there have been over 2000 studies
relating to the effectiveness of media on learning, among which
Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) has received particular attention.
Within this domain, there is an abundance of publications dealing
specifically with Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL).

If you are looking for a short answer to the question of whether CAI/CALL
works, I would direct you to the summary in:
Kulik, J. A. (1995). Effectiveness. In A. Melmed,  The Costs and
Effectiveness of Educational technology: Proceedings of a Workshop,
November, DRU-1205-CTI, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
http:www.ed.gov/Technology/Plan/RAND/Costs/index.html

Kulik's findings of positive effects of CAI are based on a statistical
metric known as Effect Size (ES) which is determined by a meta-analysis
procedure, an excellent (and very readable) discussion of which can be found
in:
Roblyer, M. D. (1985). Measuring the Impact of Computers in Instruction.
Washington, D.C.: AEDS.

As Roblyer makes very clear, however, meta-analysis Effect Size at best
provides only a very rough measure of pedagogical effectiveness, which in
any event has proven quite modest overall for CAI.  Contributions by Larry
Frase and Douglas Merrill in A. Melmed cited above also raise questions
about the adequacy of ES measurements. More seriously, other scholars have
called into question the very validity of the entire research base
underlying media effectiveness studies. The most authoritative and
influential criticisms of this research are to be found in:
Clark, R. E. (1985). Confounding in educational computing research. Journal
of Educational Computing Research 1 (2),  137-148.
Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational
Technology Research & Development 42 (2), 21-29.

Similar criticism of CALL effectiveness studies can be found in:
Pederson, K. M. (1987). Research on CALL. In W. F. Smith (ed.), Modern Media
in Foreign Language Education: Theory and Implementation (pp. 99-132).
Lincolnwood, Il: National Textbook Company.
Dunkel, P. (1991). The effectiveness of research on computer-assisted
instruction and 
computer-assisted language learning. In P. Dunkel (ed.), Computer Assisted
Language Learning and Testing-- Research Issues and Practice (pp. 5-36). New
York: Harper & Row-Newbury House.

Lastly, you might want to consult the following article which is to appear
shortly in the next volume of the CALICO Journal: Burston, J.
(2002)."Proving IT works".

I trust this information will be of use to you.  Regards


-- 
Jack Burston, Ph.D.
CALICO Software Review Editor

ATOM RSS1 RSS2