Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Enhancement for Language Acquisition
- natewynne1982
- Jan 26, 2016
- 3 min read
It goes without saying that nearly all of the future developments predicted in Warschauer’s article (2004) have come to pass. Computers and technology are more efficient and and connected than ever before. It’s not surprising then that CALL continues to be seen as having a strong potential to enhance second language acquisition. One enormously useful way that CALL can enhance second language acquisition in classrooms is stated in Warschauer’s conclusion. Here he makes it clear that an advantage of using CALL through computers in the classroom is the ability to assist students by encouraging them to “perform the most real tasks possible” (p. 13). One of the most real tasks possible is the use of CALL to communicate in real time via video conferencing with members of communities who are thousands of miles away who speak the target language of the students. In the Hubbard (2009) article, the author mirrors Warschauer’s support for this particular use of CALL by noting that it is “a way for learners to connect directly with the local culture of the language they are studying” (p. 6). This option, speaking directly with native speakers made available through CALL, is something language instructors in the past did not have available as a tool to help their students.
While using technology to facilitate language learning through direct communication in the form of Skype type programs has the potential to enhance second language acquisition classes, Dooly (2010) counters this assumption in her article. According to her, language learning thorough this method can become trite for students who are already familiar with video conferencing technologies and furthermore it cannot create learning necessities such as “individual accountability” and “positive interdependence” (p. 283). Dooly’s negative stance on the use of video conferencing or telecomputing, seems to fly in the face of this week’s other two authors’ opinions.
As recently as 3 years ago I took a 200 level course in Spanish at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) and this experience, I feel, is best suited to answer the question “where are we now?” In that course, the use of CALL was supplementary, but not an integral part of the curriculum. I feel that the tools were available at the time to incorporate more CALL into the course, but for whatever reason the instructor was unable or chose not to utilize it. One tool that I feel would have been useful for the class would be an online component that provided interactive homework assignents as opposed to just paper homweork. Another tool would be access to language audio coaching that could be listened to in the car or with headphones. As the types of CALL increases as well as their effectiveness, I feel that all too often CALL is being underutilized in classrooms today. That said, I have only minimal experience in second language accusation classes so I cannot speak for the majority of them.
Resources
Dooly, M. (2010) Teacher 2.0. In Telecollaboration 2.0. Language, Literacies and Intercultural Learning in the 21st Cenury, S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.) in Telecollaboration in Education Series, pp. 277-303. Bern: Peter Lang.
Hubbard, P. (Ed.) (2009). Computer Assisted Language Learning: Vol 1 (Critical Concepts in Linguistics). London: Routledge.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technological change and the future of CALL. In S. Fotos & C. Brown (Eds.), New Perspectives on CALL for Second and Foreign Language Classrooms (pp. 15-25). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Comments