1887
Volume 19, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

CALL has been promoted for nearly 30 years essentially on the basis, not of fact, but of the myth, that it demonstrably produces positive language learning outcomes. In reality, there is no reliable evidence to support such claims. If the effectiveness of CALL is to move beyond the stage of myth to that of demonstrably “certified” fact, development in the field needs a clear theoretical base from which to operate. SLA theory can provide insights and help ensure that we are at least asking the right questions. Likewise, it has reliable research methodologies available to properly frame hypotheses and evaluate the results of CALL efforts. No less so, however, SLA theory very much needs the kind of “hard” language learning input which CALL can deliver. Collaboration in the design of CALL programmes offers a valuable means of eliciting linguistic data essential to the testing of SLA hypotheses. Even more importantly for SLA theory construction, the ability of computer-based programmes to unobtrusively track the behaviour of learners, offers a unique “window of observation” on the processes underlying observed performance. Despite much promise, and nearly three decades of efforts by CALL enthusiasts, effective exploitation of educational technology in language teaching remains to be achieved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.19.2.02bur
1996-01-01
2019-08-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Chun, D. and J-L. Plass
    (1995) Project CyberBuch: A hypermedia approach to Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Journal of Educational and Hypermedia4,1:95–116.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Clark, R.
    (1983) Reconsidering research on learning from the media. Review of Educational Research53,4:445–459. doi: 10.3102/00346543053004445
    https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445 [Google Scholar]
  3. (1991) When researchers swim upstream: Reflections on an unpopular argument about learning from media. Educational Technology, Feb.:34-40.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Larsen-Freeman, D. and M. Long
    (1991) An Introduction to second language acquisition research. London and New York, Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Liddell, P.
    (1994) Learners and second language acquisition: A union blessed by CALL?Computer Assisted Language Learning7.2:163–173.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Marty, F.
    (1981) Reflexions on the use of computers in second language acquisition-I. System9,2:85–98. doi: 10.1016/0346‑251X(81)90023‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(81)90023-3 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ng, K. and W. Olivier
    (1987) Computer Assisted Language Learning: An investigation on some design and implementation issues. System15,1:1–17. doi: 10.1016/0346‑251X(87)90043‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(87)90043-1 [Google Scholar]
  8. Otto, S. and J. Pusack
    (1988) Calculating the cost of instructional technology: An administrator’s primer. ADFL Bulletin19,3:18–22. doi: 10.1632/adfl.19.3.18
    https://doi.org/10.1632/adfl.19.3.18 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.19.2.02bur
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error