We are very proud to share with you the special issue of Language Learning & Technology journal on ‘Learner Autonomy and New Learning Environments’. You can find the special issue here.

|
|||
Posts Tagged ‘technology’special issue of Language Learning & Technology on ‘Learner Autonomy and New Learning Environments’Sunday, October 9th, 2011We are very proud to share with you the special issue of Language Learning & Technology journal on ‘Learner Autonomy and New Learning Environments’. You can find the special issue here.
Google Transliteration toolMonday, May 30th, 20115 tools for focusing on your writingTuesday, November 23rd, 2010Just stumbled across this Lifehacker article which discusses word processing tools designed to offer an environment free of distractions, that lets you focus entirely on your writing.
New issue of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching out!Monday, October 4th, 2010Coming to a newsstand near you soon! INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING CONTENTS Articles ‘It’s not necessary to have this board to learn English, but it’s helpful’: Student and teacher perceptions of interactive whiteboard use Factors limiting learners’ success in achieving task outcomes in CALL Distance language learners’ perceptions of assessed, student-led speaking tasks via a synchronous audiographic conferencing tool Elicitation of language learners’ personal goals as design concepts
Eurocall symposium presentation on ‘the learner in changing CALL environments’Monday, September 13th, 2010These are the slides as presented during a panel at Eurocall 2010 in Bordeaux. Presenters were Glenn Stockwell, Hayo Reinders, Cynthia White, Phil Hubbard and Jozef Colpaert. For more information visit www.callandthelearner.info Eurocall 2010 panel on call and the learner
View more presentations from hayoreinders.
New book out now: Task-based Teaching & TechnologyTuesday, September 7th, 2010It’s arrived, our edited book on ‘Task-Based Language Teaching and Technology’, published by Continuum in New York. The book is available here. The popularity of Web 2.0 technologies (blogs, wikis, social networking sites, podcasting, virtual worlds), as well as practical applications of mobile learning, place a fresh emphasis on creating project-orientated language learning tasks with a clear real-world significance for learners of foreign languages. This book examines the widespread interest in these new technology-enhanced learning environments and looks at how they are being used to promote task-based learning. This book will appeal to practioners and researchers in applied linguistics, second language acquisition and education studies. Table of Contents ‘Though task-based and technology-mediated language instruction are a natural match, no works before this edited collected have explained the relationship so clearly. Highly recommended for researchers and practitioners alike who are interested in how authentic interaction via digital media can improve second language learning.’
Here is the foreword written by Rod Ellis: Foreword Task-based language teaching (TBLT) is currently attracting enormous interest as reflected in the number of books published on this topic in the last few years. An obvious question, then, is ‘Why do we need another book on TBLT?’ In fact, there is a very good answer to this question. The current literature deals almost exclusively with TBLT as practised in face-to-face classrooms. There is still relatively little published about TBLT in technology-mediated contexts. This book, therefore, fills a clear gap. I personally welcome this book because my own knowledge of how technology can be used in TBLT is very limited. One line of research that I do have some familiarity with is the study of synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) and its role in second language (L2) acquisition. Much of this work has been informed by interactionist theories of L2 acquisition. These hypothesize that negotiation-of-meaning sequences support learning by providing comprehensible input, feedback and opportunities for learners to self-correct. Smith’s (2003, 2005) studies investigated whether negotiation in a CMC context resulted in the same pattern of interaction as that reported to occur in face-to-face task-based interactions. Smith found that they differed. He identified what he called ‘split negotiation routines’, where the response to an indication of a communication problem only occurred after one or more repeat indications of the problem. He also reported that there was no relationship between learners’ uptake of feedback (with or without repair) and the acquisition of L2 vocabulary items. Loewen and Erlam (2006) investigated the effect of corrective feedback on acquisition in L2 learners’ performance of a task in a synchronous learning environment. They reported that the feedback had no effect on the learning of regular past tense. This result differs from that of Ellis, Loewen and Erlam (2006) who found significant effects for corrective feedback on the acquisition of the same grammatical feature in a classroom-based study. These studies suggest that interaction in a synchronous computer-mediated environment may not afford the same learning opportunities as a face-to-face environment. Clearly, though, there is a need for further studies. There are theoretical perspectives on tasks other than that afforded by the Interaction Hypothesis. Skehan (1998), for example, proposed a theory based on a dual-mode model of linguistic representation. This states ‘two systems co-exist, the rule-based analytic, on the one hand, and the formulaic, exemplar-based on the other’ (p. 54). The rule-based system consists of powerful ‘generative’ rules and is required to compute well-formed sentences. The exemplar-based system is capacious, with the contents organized in accordance with the ‘idiom principle’ (Sinclair, 1991), and is required for fast, fluent language use. Skehan argued that ‘language users can move between these systems, and do so quite naturally’ (1998, p. 54). Skehan draws on this theory in his own work on tasks to investigate how various design features of tasks (e.g. whether the task is tightly or loosely structured) and implementation features (e.g. whether learners have the opportunity to plan before they perform the task) impact on three aspects of language production – fluency, complexity and accuracy. In a similar mode, Robinson (2001) has advanced his Cognition Hypothesis to explain how task complexity affects L2 production. To date, these theories have been tested on tasks performed in face-to-face interaction so there is a clear need for studies that investigate their claims in relation to technology-mediated L2 production. Increasingly, tasks are also being investigated from the perspective of sociocultural theory. This views tasks as artefacts that can mediate language learning through interaction. Accordingly, a distinction is made between ‘task’ and ‘activity’, with the former referring to the workplan that is given to learners (i.e. the artefact) and the latter to the communication that results from the performance of the task. The point is made that learners inevitably interpret the workplan in terms of their own needs, motives and histories, and thus the same task can result in very different kinds of activity when performed by different learners or even by the same learners on different occasions and in different contexts. This is clearly fertile ground for the study of how learners construct tasks in technological environments. Some work has already been undertaken here (see, for example, Thorne & Black, 2007) but much more is needed. We cannot assume that tasks work the same way in face-to-face classrooms and in technology-mediated environments. Nor can we assume that they work in the same way in the highly varied environments that technology now affords. Given the current advocacy of TBLT and the increasing use of technology in language teaching it is important that we develop a fuller understanding of how to design tasks for use with different technologies and how best to implement them in ways that will foster language learning. This book makes a notable contribution to this agenda and is very welcome. References Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–68. Professor Rod Ellis Journal: Multiliteracies and technology-enhanced educationThursday, July 8th, 2010Looks to be an interesting journal: Recently, educators have begun to consider what is required in literacy curricula and best teaching practices given the demands placed on the educator sector and on literacy in general. Multiliteracies and Technology Enhanced Education: Social Practice and the Global Classroom features theoretical reflections and approaches on the use of multiliteracies and technologies in the improvement of education and social practices. Assisting educators at different teaching levels and fostering professional development and progress in this growing field, this innovative publication supports practitioners concerned with teaching at both a local and global level. More information here.
New article online: Teaching (with) technologyTuesday, January 26th, 2010I just had an article appear in Prospect about teacher education for CALL. If you are interested in this subject you may want to download the article from the Prospect website. Reinders, H. 2009 ‘Teaching (with) technology. The scope and practice of teacher education for technology. Prospect, 24(3), 15-23. You can read the article here.
| |||
| © Innovation in Teaching 1998-2009. All rights reserved. |