elements of call methodology: development, evaluation, and implementation presenter: athena bob...
TRANSCRIPT
Elements of CALL Methodology:
Development, Evaluation, and Implementation
Presenter: Athena
Bob
Philip L. Hubbard, 1996
1. Introduction2. The CALL methodological framework3. The Development Module4. The Evaluation Module5. The Implementation Module6. Conclusion
Introduction1. Examples of computers & accompanying software
packages in language teaching:
Introduction
The present work will limit itself to a discussion of methodological issues surrounding the use of software that including content designed or adopted for language learning purposes, what Levy(1993) calls the “tutor” use of CALL, often referred to as CALL “courseware”. (Hubbard 1996)
How do we judge the degree of success or failure of a CALL lesson ? Should we focus only on technical aspects in courseware design?
Often missed is the fact that the field really involves the interplay of humans and technology and that the human end is especially significant. (Hubbard 1996)
2. The CALL Methodological Framework
Players in CALL
The learner
The developer
The evaluator
The classroom teacher
Accept
Produce
Evaluate
Implement
Goal of the framework
The expressed goal of this framework is to provide a neutral instrument for developing, evaluating and using CALL materials.
Hubbard (1992,p.42) offers a set of principles underlying this type of framework.
Hubbard’s(1992, p.24) Principles of CALL Framework
1. The CALL framework should be consistent with established frameworks for language teaching methodology, allowing teachers to link CALL to familiar concepts.
2. The framework should be method-neutral and flexible, describing the logical relationship among learners, teachers, and computers.
3. The framework should explicitly link development, evaluation, and implementation considerations in a consistent fashion.
4. The framework should identify the relevant elements in each area (development, evaluation, and implementation) and describe the interrelationships of those elements.
Richards and Rodgers’ (1982) Framework of Language Teaching
Approach: reflects the theories of language structure and language learning assumed by the method
Design: embodies the goals and objectives of the syllabus and the role of the teacher, learner, and materials consistent with the approach, it provides the guidelines for selecting and structuring classroom activities
Procedure: includes an inventory of the types of exercises, techniques consistent with the approach and design.
Two significant adjustments of Richard and Rodgers’ framework
1. The CALL methodological framework will analyze not CALL methods, but individual piece of packages of courseware.
2. It will consider not only the classroom environment but also the special qualities of the computer environment.
Philips’ Framework of Describing CALL Materials (1985)
Form, content, and implementation of CALL materials
◇Activity type
◇Learning style
◇Classroom management
◇Learner focus
◇Language difficulty
◇Program difficulty
◇Program focus
Text reconstruction
Lexis
Word-based reconstruction activitieseg. Hangman (also Hotpatato session)
CALL Methodology Framework
Richards and Rodgers’ framework& Two adjustments
Phillips’ framework
DevelopmentModule
Figure: CALL Methodology Framework
EvaluationModule
ImplementationModule
3. The Development Module
The essential module in CALL Methodological Framework.
Development ModuleApproach Design Procedure
Linguistic
Assumptions
Learning
Assumptions
Language Teaching Approach
Approach-Based Design Criteria
Computer Delivery System
Learner Profiles
Syllabus
Language Difficulty
Program Difficulty
Content
Courseware Production
Program
Materials
Documentation
Utilities
Implementation
Learning Style
Program Focus
Classroom Managemen
t
Learner Focus
Hardware and Programming
Language Considerations
Control options
Input Judging
Presentation
Scheme
Feedback
Help
Options
Screen
Layout
Activity Type
Completed
Courseware
Tutorial
Textbook
Documentation
Record Keeping
Other utilitiesCourseware Package
4. The Evaluation Module The determination of fit is the goal of the process.
Evaluation ModuleOperational Description (Procedure)
Accompanying Text
Documentation
Tutorial
Record Keeping
Other Utilities
Activity Type
Presentation Scheme(a)
Screen Control Input Feedback Help
Layout options Judging options
Materials Instructions
Learning style
Learner Profiles
Classroom Manageme
nt
Program Focus
Learner Focus
Program Difficulty
Language Difficulty
Content
Syllabus
Appropriateness Judgments
Approach-Based Evaluation
Criteria
Language
Teaching Approach
Computer Delivery System
Linguistic Assumption
s
Learning Assumption
s
Learner Fit (Design)
Teacher Fit (Approach)
Implementation Schemes
5. The Implementation Module
Using software entails more than just sending the students to
the lab and waiting for learning to occur. (Hubbard 1996)
PreparatoryActivities
Tutorial/ Training
ContentPreparation
Accessibility
Learner UseOf Courseware
Follow-upActivities
AccompanyingPreparatory
Materials
Authoring
ClassroomManagement
Site Monitoring
StudentRecords
Accompanying orAuthored
Follow-up Materials
Assignment
ControlSettings
TeachingApproach
TeacherControl
SyllabusLearnerProfiles
A piece of good courseware implemented poorly can be rendered almost useless, and conversely, dull or mediocre courseware can be given greater value by informed and imaginative implementation.
Hubbard(1996)
Conclusion
1. CALL courseware is most properly viewed not as computers teaching people but as people teaching people through the medium of computers.
2. The understanding and attending to the elements involved in CALL will lead to more informed and consistent development, more informative and insightful evaluation, and more appropriate and creative implementation.
3. This framework doesn’t create methods or materials: it is a lens through which to interpret them, a tool to assist developers, reviewers and teachers in the challenging task of providing a learning environment that is enhanced rather than degraded by the use of computer software.
Linguistic Assumptions
Linguistic assumption provide a set of guiding principles based on the developer’s understanding of the nature of language and the relative importance of structural, social, and cultural
aspects.
Learning assumptions
Learning assumption provide a set of guiding principles based on the developer’s understanding of the nature of the second language learning process and the role the learning environment plays in the process.
Language teaching approach
Developing for the classroom environment Behaviorist approaches Explicit learning approaches Humanistic approaches
(Some of these focus on language form, some on meaning, and some on human interaction. Some are more or less consistent with contemporary theory and empirical research, while others are not.)
Computer Delivery System
…bring the users into contact with other humans in a more dynamic way than other media such as books or videos.
the possibility of anticipatory interaction (Hubbard, 1988b)
=> developers and teachers are partners.
Approach-based Design Criteria
1. Providing important guidelines to a development team to assure a high degree of consistency in the final product.
2. Making an informed decision regarding language teaching approach and then remaining true to that decision throughout the development process.
Approach-based Design Criteria
The criteria of Communicative approaches1. The courseware provides meaningful
communicative interaction between Ss and computers.
2. The courseware promotes a positive self-image in the learner.
3. The courseware provides a challenge but does not produce frustration or anxiety.
4. The courseware just right to a particular level.
Learner Profiles & Syllabus
The area of learner profiles is concerned with the intended audiences for the courseware.
◇ Learners’ proficiency level
◇ Age
◇ Native language
◇ Needs
◇ Interests
◇ Cognitive styles (inductive/ deductive, visual/ orthographic/ auditory)
The syllabus is concerned with the learning objectives and the means by which they are reached.
Learning style
Phillips (1985) describes the type of learning supported by the activity.
Five general types of CALL activities:1. recognition,2. Recall,3. Comprehension,4. Experiential learning 5. Constructive understanding Kemmis, Atkin, and Wright
(1997)
Types of Feedback
1. an indication of the correctness or incorrectness of the answer;
2. a comment as to the reasons for an answer being correct or incorrect;
3. a score, grade, or other cumulative evaluation;
4. tutorial information, such as a suggestion to review information internal or external to the program.
Activity Type
◇ Game
◇ Quiz
◇ Exploratory
◇ Text reconstruction
◇ Simulation
◇ Problem solving
◇ Text construction