Adult education

Adult education is the practice of teaching and educating adults. This often happens in the workplace, through ‘extension’ or ‘continuing education’ courses at secondary schools, at a college or university. Other learning places include folk high schools, community colleges, and lifelong learning centers. The practice is also often referred to as ‘Training and Development’. It has also been referred to as andragogy (to distinguish it from pedagogy). A difference is made between vocational education, mostly undertaken in workplaces and frequently related to upskilling, and non-formal adult education including learning skills or learning for personal development.

Computer-assisted language learning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) is a form of computer-based assisted learning which carries two important features: bidirectional learning and individualized learning. It is not a method. CALL materials are tools for learning. The focus of CALL is learning, and not teaching. CALL materials are used in teaching to facilitate the language learning process. It is a student-centered accelerated learning material, which promotes self-paced accelerated learning.

A Retrospective Overview of CALL

Bax (2003) argues that an in-depth analysis of how CALL was used in the past and how it is used today is necessary to devise “an agenda” for its future use. In 1986, the TESOL Quarterly published its first article related to the effectiveness of CALL in second language instruction. In a study conducted with Arabic and Spanish speaking students enrolled in an intensive ESL program, Chappelle and Jamieson (1986) asked direct questions and looked empirically at important variables such as learner attitudes towards CALL and educational gains attained as a result of using computers for language acquisition. One of the main findings of this study was that learners’ attitude towards CALL had a significant impact on the degree of that learner’s involvement and commitment to using the computer as a learning instrument. The research concludes that cognitive/affective characteristics of the learner directly impact the nature of his/her interaction with CALL. Therefore, in order to effectively judge the effectiveness of CALL within a specific context, it is important to look at the student variable as a critical element in this formula.
Warschauer (2000) distinguishes between three types of CALL. Structural CALL (1970’s-1980’s), Communicative CALL (1980’s-1990’s) and Integrative CALL (21st century) (See Table 1). He argues that “Structural CALL” used what is considered today obsolete technology, as well as a Grammar-Translation and Audio Lingual teaching approach that emphasized drills and repetition in order to achieve accuracy. “Communicative CALL”, he claims, used modern computers and focused on communicative tasks to achieve fluency, but within a narrow context that fails to address the value of content in communication. The alternative, he believes, is 21st century “Integrative CALL”, which embraces all the positive qualities of Communicative CALL, but highlights the importance of content as an essential aspect of interaction. In addition, Warschauer’s Integrative CALL stresses the importance of authentic discourse and learner agency as critical elements for successful application of technology.

Digital stories in the ESL classroom

Digital storytelling is described by some as an art form and a powerful tool for self-expression. Googling the phrase “digital stories” returns thousands of sites that specialize in this unique form of expression. The majority of these websites, however, explore digital storytelling as a learning tool to promote good writing, reflection and most importantly creativity. In this article, we are going to examine how language instructors could incorporate digital storytelling in their teaching and how ESL students could benefit from using this tool.
Digital storytelling uses pictures, videos, text, music and narration to bring life to a particular concept. From a pedagogical perspective, a digital storytelling activity targets all four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) and also promotes research skills, critical thinking and reflection. Furthermore, digital storytelling helps learners improve their technology skills by providing a meaningful environment to interact with technology. Finally, digital storytelling is an excellent tool for informally assessing learners on their language skills as well as their understanding of a specific subject.

Computer-assisted Language Learning

Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) is an approach to language teaching and learning in which computer technology is used as an aid to the presentation, reinforcement and assessment of material to be learned, usually including a substantial interactive element.

History

The History of CALL website traces the development of CALL from it’s origins on mainframe computers in the 1960s to the present day: http://www.history-of-call.org Early CALL favoured an approach that drew heavily on practices associated with programmed instruction. This was reflected in the term Computer Assisted Language Instruction (CALI), which originated in the USA and was in common use until the early 1980s, when CALL became the dominant term. Throughout the 1980s CALL widened its scope, embracing the communicative approach and a range of new technologies, especially multimedia and communications technology. An alternative term to CALL emerged in the early 1990s, namely Technology Enhanced Language Learning (TELL), which was felt to provide a more accurate description of the activities which fall broadly within the range of CALL. The term TELL has not, however, gained as wide an acceptance as CALL. Typical CALL programs present a stimulus to which the learner must respond. The stimulus may be presented in any combination of text, still images, sound, and motion video. The learner responds by typing at the keyboard, pointing and clicking with the mouse, or speaking into a microphone. The computer offers feedback, indicating whether the learners response is right or wrong and, in the more sophisticated CALL programs, attempting to analyse the learners response and to pinpoint errors. Branching to help and remedial activities is a common feature of CALL programs. Wida Software (London, UK) was one of the first specialist businesses to develop CALL programs for microcomputers in the early 1980s. Typical software of the first generation of CALL included Wida’s “Matchmaster” (where students have to match two sentence halves or anything else that belongs together); “Choicemaster” (the classic multiple-choice test format); “Gapmaster” (for gapped texts); “Textmixer” (which jumbles lines within a poem or sentences within a paragraph); “Wordstore” (a learner’s own private vocabulary database, complete with a definition and an example sentence in which the word to be learned is used in a context); and “Storyboard” (where a short text is blotted out completely and has to be restored from scratch). Wida’s packages continue to be popular and are now merged into one general-purpose, multimedia authoring program known as “The Authoring Suite”: http://www.wida.co.uk Another specialist business, Camsoft (Maidenhead, UK), has enjoyed similar success with its “Fun with Texts” authoring package, which was first produced in 1985 and is now available in an updated multimedia version: http://www.camsoftpartners.co.uk Other CALL activities in the early days of computer use in schools included working with generic packages such as word-processors, which revolutionised text production assignments by enabling language learners to continually revise and have peer reviewed what they are writing before printing out the final version of their composition. Current CALL software has embraced CD-ROM and DVD technology, and there is growing interest in Web-based CALL (see Felix 2001).

Pedagogical and methodological considerations

Fascinated by the new technology, many users within the school environment focused on technological issues, neglecting pedagogical and methodological questions and not realising that innovative pedagogy and methodology were required to integrate satisfactorily the use of computers into the languages curriculum. One point of criticism which could easily be refuted was the claim that students tended to be isolated from their classmates when working in a computer lab – the “battery chicken” syndrome. It was found out, however, that using computers in language classes could promote team work among students and, if planned well, could also encourage them to use the target language to communicate in front of their PCs, thus increasing the time they spent practising their oral skills. Whole-class teaching, which was a feature of early CALL – because schools could only afford one computer per classroom – is now making a comeback with the introduction of interactive whiteboards. Generally speaking, however, CALL pedagogy and methodology continue to lag behind the technology.
The current situation
The ICT4LT website contains a wealth of information on CALL that describes the current situation in CALL. The site was set up with the aid of European Commission funding, aiming to provide a comprehensive set of ICT training resources for language teachers: http://www.ict4lt.org

Further reading
See the ICT4LT Resource Centre for a select bibliography on CALL: http://www.ict4lt.org See also EUROCALL’s CALL bibliography: http://www.eurocall-languages.org/resources/bibliography/ This is a comprehensive list of CALL publications, including other bibliographies on the Web. CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) journal, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Oxfordshire: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/ (formerly published by Swets & Zeitlinger). Davies G. (1997) “Lessons from the past, lessons for the future: 20 years of CALL”. In Korsvold A-K. & Rschoff B. (eds.) New technologies in language learning and teaching, Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Also on the Web at: http://www.camsoftpartners.co.uk/coegdd1.htm Egbert J. & Hanson-Smith E. (eds.) (1999) CALL environments: research, practice and critical issues, Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Felix U. (2001) Beyond Babel: language learning online, Melbourne: Language Australia. Fitzpatrick A. & Davies G. (eds.) (2003) “The Impact of Information and Communications Technologies on the Teaching of Foreign Languages and on the Role of Teachers of Foreign Languages”. This is a comprehensive report commissioned by the EC Directorate General of Education and Culture, which can be downloaded in PDF or Word format from the ICC website: http://www.icc-europe.com – click on “Report on ICT in FLL”. Fotos S. & Browne C. (eds.) (2004) New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Language Learning and Technology: A specialist CALL journal available only on the Web: http://llt.msu.edu Levy M. (1997) CALL: context and conceptualisation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL, now published by Cambridge University Press – login at http://www.journals.cup.org. Back numbers are available at: http://www.eurocall-languages.org/recall/r_online.html Warschauer M. (1996) Computer-assisted language learning: an introduction. In Fotos S. (ed.) Multimedia language teaching, Tokyo: Logos International. Also at http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/call.html Warschauer M. & Healey D. (1998) Computers and language learning: an overview, Language Teaching 31:57-71. Also at http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/overview.html
Professional Associations
EUROCALL, Europe-based professional association devoted to CALL: http://www.eurocall-languages.org CALICO, US-based professional association devoted to CALL: http://www.calico.org IALLT, US-based International Association for Language Learning Technology. IALLT is a professional organisation dedicated to promoting effective uses of media centres for language teaching, learning, and research: http://www.iallt.org TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) CALL Interest Section: http://www.uoregon.edu/~call/ WorldCALL, a worldwide association devoted to CALL and embracing other leading professional associations: http://www.upv.es/worldcall/

Theoretical basis for CALL instruction design

Computers have become so widespread in schools and homes and their uses have expanded so dramatically that the majority of language teachers now think about the implications. Technology brings about changes in the teaching methodologies of foreign language unless they are used simply to automate fill-in-the-gap exercises. [5] The use of the computer in and of itself does not constitute a teaching method, but rather the computer forces pedagogy to think in new ways to exploit the computers benefits and work around its limitations. [6] To exploit computers’ potential we need language teaching specialists who can promote a complementary relationship between computer technology and appropriate pedagogic programs. [5]

Problems and criticisms of CALL instruction

The impact of CALL in foreign language education has been modest. [4] Several reasons can be attributed to this.
The first is the limitations of the technology, both in its ability and availability. First of all, there is the problem with cost[6] and the simple availability of technological resources such as the Internet (either non-existent as can be the case in many developing country or lack of bandwidth, as can be the case just about anywhere). [5] However, the limitations that current computer technology has can be problematic as well. While computer technology has improved greatly in the last three decades, demands placed on CALL have grown even more so. One major goal is to have computers with which students can have true, human-like interaction, esp. for speaking practice; however, the technology is far from that point. Not to mention that if the computer cannot evaluate a learner’s speech exactly, it is almost no use at all. [4][6]

2009 CALL software review-Introduction

The 2009 CALL software review explores the pedagogical and technical features of four popular ESL interactive learning solutions. The review is conducted in an academic setting, eliciting direct feedback from learners and instructors. Applications are installed on separate computers “Skill Stations” in a language lab equipped with 20 networked Windows computers. A survey is conducted at the end of the review period to assess how students interacted with the various applications and measure educational gains.
Software Applications:
1- WhiteSmoke- General Writing by WhiteSmoke Inc.
2- Lessons For Life- Practical English Grammar Set by Lessons For Life
3- WordSmart- Accelerated Reading and Comprehension Program by WordSmart Corporation
4- Tell me More- Premium by Auralog

Non-integrative approach to CALL

It is widely accepted that meaningful interaction with the target language helps learners develop their L2 in many ways. This interaction allows the learner to not only produce the language, but also manipulate it, in an effort to fully understand its inner workings (Foster, 1998). That is, the learner needs to be able to synthesize new ideas by connecting them to existing information. Carey and Crittenden (2000) investigated the effectiveness of electronic bulletin boards as a tool that supports such meaningful learning with language learners. They argued that language programs generally do not provide an environment for the language learner to engage sufficiently in meaningful communication. Interactive technology, they believe, has the potential for filling this gap by allowing learners to further engage in meaningful interactions of interest to them. The authors came to this conclusion by comparing the benefits of interactive bulletin boards to successful real life models of authentic language exposure, such as immersion programs. They conclude that, today, interactive technology is fully capable of simulating social interaction, which in turn leads to a high degree of interaction among language learners. The authors, however, seem to neglect one major aspect of social interaction which is nonexistent in online interaction: emotions and body language. Communicating via bulletin boards is limited to just text. This is particularly hindering for the language learner who has linguistic constraints and is not able to use body language to overcome these limitations. Podcasting as will be implemented in this research project, on the other hand, could provide a suitable platform for authentic language interaction. As learners develop group podcasts, for example, they gather information, write scripts, do group corrections and read their parts. At the same time, they are interpreting each others’ movements and body language as an additional form of input to help validate their understanding.

CALL: Pedagogy and Challenges

Successful implementation of CALL depends on its ability to empower the language teacher to implement specific pedagogical tasks that are difficult to execute in other environments (Pederson, 1986).
Salaberry (2001) looked retrospectively at the various technologies by analyzing technology-related articles that have been published in the Modern Language Journal since 1916. He raised concerns about the implications of misusing technology in the language classroom, maintaining that the most important challenge posed by technology is identifying its educational objectives. Wyatt (1987) agrees that it is important to distinguish between the medium and the approach. He claims that in order to successfully use computers in the language classroom, it is vital to view the computer only as a tool not to be associated with a particular