Elements of CALL Methodology: Development, Evaluation, and Implementation

1. Elements of CALL Methodology: Development, Evaluation, and Implementation Philip L. Hubbard, 1996 Presenter: Athena Bob

2. Introduction • The CALL methodological framework • The Development Module • The Evaluation Module • The Implementation Module • Conclusion

3. Introduction 1. Examples of computers & accompanying software packages in language teaching:

4. 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)

5. 2. The CALL Methodological Framework

6. Players in CALL The learner The developer The evaluator The classroom teacher Accept Produce Evaluate Implement

7. 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.

8. Hubbard’s(1992, p.24) Principles of CALL Framework • The CALL framework should be consistent withestablished frameworks for language teaching methodology, allowing teachers to link CALL to familiar concepts. • The framework should be method-neutral and flexible, describing the logical relationship among learners, teachers, and computers. • The framework should explicitly link development, evaluation, and implementation considerations in a consistent fashion. • The framework should identify the relevant elements in each area (development, evaluation, and implementation) and describe the interrelationships of those elements.

9. 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.

10. Two significant adjustments of Richard and Rodgers’ framework • The CALL methodological framework will analyze not CALL methods, but individual piece of packages of courseware. • It will consider not only the classroom environment but also the special qualities of the computer environment.

11. Philips’ Framework of Describing CALL Materials (1985) Form, content, and implementation of CALL materials ◇Activity type Text reconstruction ◇Learning style ◇Program focus Lexis ◇Learner focus ◇Language difficulty Word-based reconstruction activities eg. Hangman (also Hotpatato session) ◇Program difficulty ◇Classroom management

12. CALL Methodology Framework Richards and Rodgers’ framework & Two adjustments Phillips’ framework Figure: CALL Methodology Framework Development Module Evaluation Module Implementation Module

13. 3. The Development Module The essential module in CALL Methodological Framework.

14. Development Module Approach Design Procedure Linguistic Assumptions Learning Assumptions Learner Profiles Syllabus Control options Language Difficulty Program Difficulty Content Input Judging Language Teaching Approach Courseware Production Program Materials Documentation Utilities Implementation Presentation Scheme Screen Layout Activity Type Approach-Based Design Criteria Feedback Help Options Learning Style Program Focus Classroom Management Learner Focus Computer Delivery System Hardware and Programming Language Considerations Documentation Tutorial Completed Courseware Record Keeping Textbook Other utilities Courseware Package

15. 4. The Evaluation Module The determination of fit is the goal of the process.

16. EvaluationModule Operational 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 Learner Fit (Design) Teacher Fit (Approach) Learning style Classroom Management Program Focus Learner Focus Approach-Based Evaluation Criteria Language Teaching Approach Computer Delivery System Language Difficulty Program Difficulty Content Linguistic Assumptions Learning Assumptions Learner Profiles Syllabus Appropriateness Judgments Implementation Schemes

17. 5. The Implementation Module Using software entails more than just sending the students to the lab and waiting for learning to occur. (Hubbard 1996)

18. Accompanying Preparatory Materials Authoring Teaching Approach Assignment Control Settings Learner Use Of Courseware Teacher Control Accessibility Classroom Management Site Monitoring Syllabus Learner Profiles Student Records Follow-up Activities Accompanying or Authored Follow-up Materials

19. 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)

20. Conclusion • CALL courseware is most properly viewed not as computers teaching people but as people teaching people through the medium of computers. • 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. • 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.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.)

24. 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.

25. Approach-based Design Criteria • Providing important guidelines to a development team to assure a high degree of consistency in the final product. • Making an informed decision regarding language teaching approach and then remaining true to that decision throughout the development process.

26. Approach-based Design Criteria • The criteria of Communicative approaches • The courseware provides meaningful communicative interaction between Ss and computers. • The courseware promotes a positive self-image in the learner. • The courseware provides a challenge but does not produce frustration or anxiety. • The courseware just right to a particular level.

27. 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.

28. Learning style • Phillips (1985) describes the type of learning supported by the activity. Five general types of CALL activities: • recognition, • Recall, • Comprehension, • Experiential learning • Constructive understanding Kemmis, Atkin, and Wright (1997)

29. Types of Feedback • an indication of the correctness or incorrectness of the answer; • a comment as to the reasons for an answer being correct or incorrect; • a score, grade, or other cumulative evaluation; • tutorial information, such as a suggestion to review information internal or external to the program.

30. Activity Type ◇ Game ◇ Quiz ◇ Text construction ◇ Text reconstruction ◇ Simulation ◇ Problem solving ◇ Exploratory