It is widely accepted that meaningful interaction with the target language helps learners develop their L2 in many ways. This interaction allows the learner to not only produce the language, but also manipulate it, in an effort to fully understand its inner workings (Foster, 1998). That is, the learner needs to be able to synthesize new ideas by connecting them to existing information. Carey and Crittenden (2000) investigated the effectiveness of electronic bulletin boards as a tool that supports such meaningful learning with language learners. They argued that language programs generally do not provide an environment for the language learner to engage sufficiently in meaningful communication. Interactive technology, they believe, has the potential for filling this gap by allowing learners to further engage in meaningful interactions of interest to them. The authors came to this conclusion by comparing the benefits of interactive bulletin boards to successful real life models of authentic language exposure, such as immersion programs. They conclude that, today, interactive technology is fully capable of simulating social interaction, which in turn leads to a high degree of interaction among language learners. The authors, however, seem to neglect one major aspect of social interaction which is nonexistent in online interaction: emotions and body language. Communicating via bulletin boards is limited to just text. This is particularly hindering for the language learner who has linguistic constraints and is not able to use body language to overcome these limitations. Podcasting as will be implemented in this research project, on the other hand, could provide a suitable platform for authentic language interaction. As learners develop group podcasts, for example, they gather information, write scripts, do group corrections and read their parts. At the same time, they are interpreting each others’ movements and body language as an additional form of input to help validate their understanding.
Another study, by Wagener (2006), looked at the value of using online digital video to help adult language learners develop independent language skills. According to the researcher, video serves as a helpful instrument for exposing the language learner to authentic language. In addition, digital video facilitates the process of acculturation through socio-cultural information. In the study, participants were required to use the video lab individually for a specific number of hours each week. Video segments were collected from various sources on the Internet and were deemed of particular interest to the learners. The main focus for some students was to improve listening skills and vocabulary development. For others, the aim was to instantly translate video segments. The results of the study indicate that the majority of participants responded positively to the use of online video as an instrument for language learning. Participants found online video to be especially helpful for improving listening skills, expanding vocabulary and widening their knowledge of current affairs. Video, as was used in this study, adds an important dimension to authentic language exposure, and fosters independent learning. A major limitation to this approach, however, is its lack of social interaction as each learner is confined to a separate area in the computer lab, in isolation from other learners and with no opportunity for language exchange. Brown (2001) argues that direct interaction is a critical element in the language classroom that needs to exist at all stages of language acquisition. It is this very limitation that this study aims at addressing vis-à-vis one-teacher and other native-speaker-generated audio, which is the predominant form of podcasting today.
Ayres (2002) investigated how language learners respond to CALL and its relevancy in the context of language learning. The study was conducted at New Zealand’s School of English and Applied Linguistics with 175 non-native undergraduate students enrolled in various language programs. In the study, participants were given the opportunity to use various types of software they had to use but were not instructed on which part of the software to use or how to use it. This flexibility allowed students to freely interact with the software and guide their own learning of the target language. Follow-up surveys were administered to assess participants’ attitudes towards using the software. The study concludes that learners clearly favored classroom language instruction as opposed to strictly CALL instructions. However, most participants reported a high level of motivation with CALL and considered it to be a very useful tool for improving writing and spelling. These results clearly indicate that successful implementation of CALL is dependent on how it is integrated within the existing environment of the language classroom. It is important to understand that computer-based technology by itself is often irrelevant when implemented in isolation from the learning goals and objectives of the class. Implementation, therefore, needs to be aligned with the goals of the existing curriculum in order to provide a meaningful learning environment for the student.
In 2004, a study conducted by the Defense Language Institute looked into the efficacy of CALL in the process of vocabulary acquisition. Tozcu and Coady (2004) hypothesized that there is a universal model for word recognition that applies to both native and non-native speakers of a language. Automaticity, they argue, is an essential variable for successful vocabulary acquisition. A total of 56 intermediate level students were selected to investigate this question. 28 of them were placed in the treatment group using computers and the other 28 in the control group using only print material. A pre-test and a post-test were administered to assess the degree of vocabulary acquisition with both groups. The research concluded that using a computer to learn vocabulary results in faster and more successful acquisition of frequent vocabulary. In addition, students in the treatment group showed major improvement in their reading comprehension skills. The study recognizes, however, that students in the control group showed a level of improvement in vocabulary acquisition using solely print material that is noticeable, although not as significant as that of the experimental group. Even though the results of the study appear to be quite encouraging, they do not provide any evidence of long term retention of vocabulary as the interval between the pre-test and post-test is only two months. Furthermore, all students’ activities were completed in isolation from the environment of the classroom, making it difficult to empirically attribute vocabulary gains strictly to the use of technology.
What do you think about this article?
ReplyDelete