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

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