--- Forwarded Message from LeeAnn Stone <[log in to unmask]> ---

>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:49:56 -0700
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
<[log in to unmask]>
>From: LeeAnn Stone <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #7634.5 Computer-assisted language learning
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>References: <[log in to unmask]>

Or how about C. Jones (1986) "It's not so much the program, more what you
do with it: The importance of methodology in CALL" System, 14 (2) pp.171-178.



At 01:17 PM 9/28/2004, you wrote:
>--- Forwarded Message from "Doug Worsham" <[log in to unmask]> ---
>
> >Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 16:25:42 -0500
> >From: "Doug Worsham" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Re: #7634.1 Computer-assisted language learning (!)
>
>In response to Valli's post questioning the merits of CALL (or TELL, as
>the case may be), Tracy Dingess makes a good point when saying that "It
>is not the tool and its limitations," but the way we use the tool for
>instruction.
>
>I've made much the same argument several times when other instructors
>tell me that their students don't communicate enough when they are
>working in computer labs. These instructors say that this is because
>Internet activities result in limited interaction. For me, this limited
>interaction is not at all an essential characteristic of computer labs
>or Internet activities. Instead, it is a result of how the labs and the
>Internet are being used as teaching tools.
>
>In the case of activities involving accessing online content, making
>good decisions about how to set up the task often determines how much
>interaction will come out of the activity. Simply setting up an activity
>so that there are two students for each computer, rather than one, is
>often enough to turn dull mouse-clicking into an opportunity for
>communication and negotiation. Giving the students a compelling task
>that allows them to manipulate, analyze, and discuss the online
>materials, and then allowing them to report on their findings, is
>another way to ensure that an Internet activity includes meaningful
>social interaction between learners.
>
>Facilitating successful CALL or TELL activities requires the teacher to
>use the same teaching principles and techniques s/he would use in a
>traditional classroom. These principles shouldn't be left at the door
>when we walk into the computer lab.
>
>Doug
>
>
>
>
>---
>Doug Worsham
>Foreign Language Technologist
>AV Services Coordinator
>L&S Learning Support Services
>246 Van Hise Hall, UW-Madison
>Madison, WI  53706
>608/262-4965
>[log in to unmask]
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 9/21/2004 2:45:03 PM >>>
>--- Forwarded Message from LeeAnn Stone <[log in to unmask]> ---
>
> >Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:12:50 -0700
> >To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
><[log in to unmask]>
> >From: LeeAnn Stone <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Re: #7634 Computer-assisted language learning
> >In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >References: <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Valli,
>
>          If we limit our range of applications of technology for
>language
>learning to CALL, or computer-delivered language learning materials,
>then
>we indeed are not making use of the incredible wealth of interactive
>learning opportunities that new technologies can provide our students.
>Europeans have been ahead of the U.S. in shifting the conceptualization
>of
>the role of technology in language learning from computer assisted
>(often
>conceptually limited with same the assumption you made that this means
>solely computer-delivered) to technology-enhanced language learning
>(TELL).
>          Within the umbrella concept of technology-enhanced language
>learning, those computer labs can provide an incredible breadth of
>interactive learning opportunities which entail students doing
>research
>that they share via discussion boards, through email exchanges, in
>MOOs,
>with online audio exchanges, and many other functionalities. One
>advantage
>of some of these types of activities is that, unlike many interactive
>activities in the classroom, they can be captured for discussion,
>feedback,
>evaluation, and correction.
>          But the delivery of content with such resources as Hot
>Potatoes is
>not insignificant either. These types of CALL materials can provide
>students with often much-needed practice and reinforcement, freeing
>classroom time for those activities that make the best use of student
>and
>teacher time together-- such as face-to-face paired and small-group
>activities.
>          I would look forward to discussing this further with you (and
>anyone else!) at any time!
>
>LeeAnn Stone
>
>
>Dr. LeeAnn Stone
>(Past IALLT President & former Language Lab Director)
>
>
>
>
> > >Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:27:43 +0100 (BST)
> > >From: valli subramaniam <[log in to unmask]>
> > >Subject: Computer-assisted language learning
> > >To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >Everyone I have talked to have been saying some wonderful things
>about
> >computer-assisted language learning. The schools here (in Malaysia)
>are also
> >being equipped with computers so that language learning is more
>effective.
> >However, I am a little sceptical about this. If language learning is a
>social
> >activity and so it is most effective if there is interaction between
>people.
> >However, lessons on the web allow limited interaction for the
>learners. For
> >example, lessons using the Hotpotatoes programme only allow the
>learners to
> >carry out activities and limited feedback is given. There is no
>genuine
> >interaction. How can this promote language learning? I hope those who
>have
> >used
> >this programme or others can respond to this. Thank you.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >   Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends
>today!
> > Download
> >Messenger Now