Computer tools: looking ahead

Well, let’s take a step away from our traditional approach to blogging as based entirely on the readings and let our imagination soar wildly.

During the last week I might have put a damper on our discussion of the value of computers as tools (as opposed to computers as tutors and mediums). Do you agree with my take on the usefulness of computers in this role for FL education? What computer tool that you are familiar with are you excited about? Or, better yet, think about a concept computer tool for teaching FL that has not been implemented yet but would have the potential for having a beneficial impact on the field.

Soar away!

Innovations in Technology

There was an interesting article on MSN about the breakthroughs in technology. While some tools are not relevant to CALL, the article discusses the future of Web 2.0 and Second Life:

http://www.fastcompany.com/multimedia/slideshows/content/entertainment-tech.html?page=1

as well as yet another social network service Twitter which helps you stay hyper-connected:

http://twitter.com

Computer as Tool… or Tutor?

I have several questions — I guess, technically, one per reading. Answer whichever ones inspire you the most.

Input and learner roles: Gonzalez-Lloret cites different principles (adapted from Doughty and Chapelle, pp. 90-91) governing how input was formulated for En Busca de Esmeraldas. How do these principles differ from the types of input associated with Lafford/Lafford/Sykes’ “design features” (DF) and from Hemard’s hypermedia activities? What affect do these differences have on learner roles?

The wheel and the driver: Salaberry differentiates between two lines of analysis (p. 20): “interaction around the machine” and “interaction around the computer.” How do the readings reflect these two different investigations into the potential of CALL?

Teacher design, teacher intervention, or none of the above: What do the different readings have to say about the teacher role in CALL task design and implementation?

Study abroad or CMC: Salaberry brings this up (p. 24), and the increasing absorption of kids today in CMC makes it even more relevant. Which provides a more authentic learner experience?

Muller v. Belz, et al (a retrospective): Muller seems to illustrate the “swamp fish” version of Belz, et al’s more evolved telecollaboration course design. How did this fish learn to walk on dry land? What changed?

A piece of work… I mean legislature

Dear class,

Here is an issue worth blogging about (separate from the questions on readings that Jonathan is posting for us).
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/pdf/sb497.pdf

Several GA Senators are proposing that all high school FL teachers be moved to elementary schools and then all high school FL classes be taught online. That would land many students in my CALL class But, apart from my egoistic thoughts, I find this piece of legislature ahead of its time- April 1^st is not here yet… What do you think?

Teens and Social Media

Jonathan shared with me a link to the 2007 report on teens and social media by Pew Internet and American Life Project:

http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Social_Media_Final.pdf

We discussed their earlier report in Jan.

Thanks, Jonathan!

Asynchronous approaches to CMC

Dear CALL-ers,

here is a couple of questions for everybody from David and one from me.  Enjoy!

1) Hegelheimer gives us an example of a NS corpus-based project and B & V give us an example of a NNS and NS corpus-based project. What do you think are the benefits or drawbacks of both. Does using the student’s own errors make for better instruction?

2) What are some ways you can use web 2.0 (second generation) applications in your classes?

3) We have read many CMC studies which are IA-driven and focus on turn-taking. How is Belz & Vyatkina’s study different in this respect (i.e. what’s their analytical focus)? We’ve also read studies which voiced a belief that metalinguistic explanations have no direct bearing on learners’ interlanguage development. What’s B&V’s take on the issue?

Article on e-learning

• Gabrielle found a paper on e-learning innovations published by Brigham Young University. Here is a link to the PDF. Thanks for sharing, Gabrielle! http://www.getslearning.com/files/GETS_TALL_WhitePaper.pdf

Blog question: CMC continued

Dear  CALLers,

here are a couple of questions based on our readings. Next week this prerogative of initiating a discussion thread will be all yours!

–Are you convinced by the evidence presented in P&W’s article which suggests a positive connection between the use of written chat and oral production? Why or why not? Additionally, what do you think of P&W’s use of nonword repetition test score, measuring phonological capacity, and the reading span measure as the means for corroborating their argument??

–The literature we have read argues for indisputable advantages of tandem learning. While for the most part the term is used to refer to bilingual interactions between native speakers (NS) and learners (NNS) who switch the roles in a balanced manner during their interactions, in your opinion, would tandem learning preserve its merits in NNS-NNS CMC context? Why or why not?

 See you on Tuesday! Bagels promised

UGA Events

Read on to learn about UGA events relevant to CALL issues

Blog question: CMC

Hello UGA CALLers,

After you’ve read all these articles and book chapters on CMC, which types of CMC appeal to you the most in terms of their modal characteristics, affordances that they create for developing communicative skills and intercultural competence, and, finally, practicality and appropriateness for the academic environment in which you are teaching (planning to teach)?

See you on Super Tuesday! We can cast CMC votes then

Viktoria.