Hi All:)

Like the robot!!! Looks about like me right now I reckon!
Hope you're all well and doing OK. I have to agree with you Alex re the Eurocall link. The photos were amusing too - the whole feel of the site is extremely dated, labourious, sky blue colours, too many useless arrows (?!) And as for the layout...

I agree with Klaus on his note about user friendly citeria. Thinking about it this is probably one of the most imp. things for me when selecting preferred sites, as is design. How attractive is the site? Like book covers I suppose.

Just a quick one from me, as I'm being kicked out of the building right now!!!!

A great b/h w/end to you all!:)

History of CALL (part 1)

'myriad teachers have seen students hauled into language labs, or have seen radios, TVs, film projectors, cassette recorders and programmed teaching machines hauled into the classroom, and hauled out back again, without noting the wondrous learning gains expected'

Dunkel, P. (1987). Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and computer-assisted language learning (CALL): Past dilemmas and future prospects for audible CALL. MLJ, 71, 250-260.

Hi everyone,
please feel free to continue contributing on the topic of autonomy... but it's also time to move on too.

The next topic I'd like to deal with is the history of CALL. This will be very brief - possibly only one or two posts. It is important to be able to look at technology and EAP from a historical perspective. Many of the claims and enthusiatic annoucements that have accompanied the introduction of a new technology have been unfounded. One could say that technology in the classroom can be characteristed as a succession of bitter disappointments. One could also argue that lessons are not being learned from the past - interactive whiteboards, VLEs, mobile technology are all subject to hyberbole and gushing enthusiasm. Drunk on technology? Perhaps, but when sober the results of technology-enhanced language learning seem less promising. Having said that, it seems unfair to single out technology for this type of criticism. One could say the same about methodology ... the silent way, communicative language teaching, task-based learning, the post-method approach, grammar-translation have all been greeted as revolutionising teaching and learning and largely fail to live up the commercial and academic rhetoric.

So, it's important for us to take a brief look at how technology has developed - it should help take a more objective stance toward the technology that is being peddled by companies, promoted by universities and analysed by academics. I'd like you to read the following articles (as and when you have time):

The use of technology for second language learning and teaching: a retrospective

This is a really thoughtful article examining all sorts of technology that has been used in teaching for more than a century.

Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction

Mark Warschauer examines the evolution of CALL in three phases corresponding to changes in educational theory. A very neat and concise history.

EuroCALL: history of CALL

This document provides a visual and textual account of the history of CALL. Worth a look, however, it did strike me that an organisation such as EuroCALL could do much better at using technology when presenting this. It is very poorly presented!

Whoops -apologies to Andy Gillet!

I've just looked at UEFAP again and noticed that Andy Gillet has some unusual and useful resources for listening in way of recorded academic lectures-I'd only used the website for reading and writing material before and had not noticed. Thanks very much to this blog for helping me to find this out-and apologies for my previous ignorance.

Books, independence and websites

As a student myself when looking at a website or more complicated VLE - I do think about independence. For example will this save me the need from going and bothering a tutor for advice? Will it give access to published material that will save me time -so that I have more time for thinking and spend less time rooting around? One really wonderful advance for learner independence at university has been electronic access to journal articles. All that information with just a few clicks incredible. No more rooting around in the dusty basement of the library followed by mammoth and probably illegal photocopying sessions.

Some of the language learning activities found on websites, however,are attractively presented -I'm thinking of 'Using Englsh for Academic Purposes' by Andy Gillett-but do they actually provide any more than a printed text book? Having said that I am aware that if I were in a remote place where there were no text books around I'd be very grateful for Andy Gillet's exercises.

I've just been looking at University of Birmingham-Kibbitzers. I do like the idea of focusing in via a website on small and difficult language points as they come up
and being able to ask questions and contribute opinions about these via the website. I think I like it because it seems so focused, not too ambitious and it is something you wouldn't be able to get from a book.

Alex's suggestion that we get students to evaluate websites is something that appeals to me. i'd like to know what students think about both the websites I've mentioned.

Comment on thoughts from Klaus

Thanks Klaus for posting your thoughts. The questions I posted that might help evaluate technologies are from the perspective of promoting student autonomy. They should act as a kind of prompt when looking at websites. I don’t think any website will meet all the implicit criteria contained in my questions. More to the point, I am suggesting that when analysing sites we could be explicitly searching for ways to use these sites that enhance students’ autonomy. Often CELE tutors suggest to students that they should use the VSAC. All well and good as far as it goes. But, it’s a bit like saying to someone that if you’re hungry, go to the supermarket. It doesn’t help the hungry person much as (s)he might need to know a bit more (how to get there, opening times, nutritional value, costs, currency, never mind how to cook! …). The VSAC is only useful if students can use it in ways which enhance their academic literacy. Therefore, for many students, their use of the VSAC needs to be mediated by teachers and other students. Their experience of using the VSAC needs scaffolding, until they are able to manage their learning more effectively. Students’ starting points in terms of their autonomy will vary (and may also be volatile, autonomy doesn’t develop easily and may, at times, regress) and it is the teacher’s judgement of what the student is capable of achieving that is key. So, any site will, in theory, be promising in terms of supporting autonomy. It is more a question of how it is used and how students learn to use it.
All of the questions that Klaus asks could be asked by students too (and possibly are). To help students develop their meta-cognitive skills and awareness – why not get the students to do the evaluating? What websites do they use to improve their language skills? What do they enjoy using?
Maybe, we make a lot of decisions on behalf of students without really having or finding the time to make these decisions together? This might be one, very simple, way of sharing control in the classroom.
In any case, whatever scheme or construct we use when we decide on technology, it is much better to make that scheme explicit. That’s when we begin to see ways in which we can look at technology differently. With new eyes as it were.

re Autonomy and Evaluation

I'd like to share my initial thought when I saw the list Alex posted. I'll try and comment in more detail at a later time.
In all honesty, the points Alex makes do make a lot of sense to me, but when I look at a website, my criteria for evaluating it (i.e. guessing if it could be of any use to students or myself) are much more limited. Maybe they shouldn't, but what I look for in a website is whether it is user-friendly or not. By that I mean whether the features make sense to me or not, whether it is challenging or inviting to use the website. Now that is in terms of usability/accessiblity. If I don't find my way around, I would not really expect my students to do so.
Another important point of course is the content. Are there any mistakes? Are the comments (given there is a discussion board) sensible/accurate? What type of activities does it allow for? Is it the old gap-fill or is there more to it? Are there any explanations or solely language exercises? Is there an option for exchange (e.g. forum/discussion board)? Would I like using this website? Why/why not? Do I think the activities are simply good - why/why not?
I hope this makes sense, as I am only issuing another list of possible criteria. What I am trying to say is that it seems to me that my evaluation of learning-related web content is a quite more subjective than Alex's approach. I don't think that makes mine a bad approach, but it is certainly worth a thought coming from another angle next time I find a new, or visit an old, website.
There, my first impulse.

An aside

Found this on the Guardian ... the world's first robot teacher ... technology has so much to offer!