Challenges and other feedback: Integrating intercultural learning in the Digital Age

[EN] This mixed method case study explored globalization and complex relationships through a virtual exchange project between students from Germany and Colombia in upper intermediate level English classes. We believed by providing a space for online conversation, written collaboration and discussion, students would enhance their plurilingual and pluricultural competence as well as their communicative competences through the medium of English as an international language (EIL).  The aim was also to enable students to investigate cultural complexity and to develop cultural curiosity. Taking into account plurilingual and pluricultural competence (PPC) and the efficacy of virtual exchanges for language learning, we used a series of tasks for students to participate in a wide range of activities of varying complexity regarding German and Colombian culture for a six-week exchange.  Students self-assessed their written and spoken online interactions as well as their perceived skills in mediating texts and communication based on the recently added descriptors in the Companion Volume to the CEFR. They also rated their plurilingual and pluricultural competences on a PPC scale at both the beginning and end of the project. Results demonstrate that there is value in implementing virtual exchange projects in which students reflect on and increase their awareness of these concepts also suggesting that pairing students with international students rather than L1 speakers of the language has a potentially positive effect on students’ anxiety level and communicative competences. Bailey, A.; Gruber, A. (2020). Challenges and other feedback: Integrating intercultural learning in the Digital Age. The EuroCALL Review. 28(1):3-14. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.11982OJS314281Abrams, Z.I. (2002). Surfing to cross-cultural awareness: Using Internet-mediated projects to explore cultural stereotypes. Foreign Language Annals, 35(2), 141- 160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb03151.xAvgousti, M. I. (2018) Intercultural communicative competence and online exchanges: a systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 819853. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1455713Belz, J.A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 68-117. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25201Council of Europe (2001), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languagesCouncil of Europe (2018), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volumewith-new-descriptors2018/1680787989Fuchs, C., Hauck, M., & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2012). Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 82-102. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/fuchsetal.pdfGalante, A. (2018). Plurilingual or monolingual? A mixed methods study investigating plurilingual instruction in an EAP program at a Canadian university. (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/91806Gläsman, S. (2004). Communication online. Bedfordbury: CILT.Guarda, M. (2013). Negotiating a transcultural place in an English as a lingua franca telecollaboration exchange. (Unpublished PhD thesis). Retrieved from http://paduaresearch.cab.unipd.it/5337/1/guarda_marta_tesi.pdfHelm, F. (2015). The practices and challenges of telecollaboration in higher education in Europe. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 197-217. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2015/helm.pdfKe, I. C., & Suzuki, T. (2011). Teaching global English with NNS-NNS online communication. Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(2), 169-188. Retrieved from https://waseda.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/teaching-global-english-with-nns-nnsonline-communicationMüller-Hartmann, A., O'Dowd, R., and colleagues from the EVALUATE team (2017). A training manual on telecollaboration for teacher trainers. Retrieved from https://www.evaluateproject.eu/evlt-data/uploads/2017/09/TrainingManual_EVALUATE.pdfPellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In Warschauer, M. & Kern, R. (dir.). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 59-87. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524735.006Schenker, T. (2017). Synchronous telecollaboration for novice language learners: Effects on speaking skills and language learning interests. Alsic, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.4000/alsic.3068Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca, ELT Journal, 59, 339-41. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci064Tian, J. & Wang, Y. (2010). Taking language learning outside the classroom: Learners' perspectives of eTandem learning via Skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4 (3), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.513443UNICollaboration (n.d.). International Conference: Telecollaboration in University Foreign Language Education. Retrieved from http://unicollaboration.unileon.esWarschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic communication in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2), 7-26. Retrieved from http://education.uci.edu/uploads/7/2/7/6/72769947/comparing_face-toface_and_electronic_discussion.pdfYamada, M. (2009). The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers & Education, vol. 52(4), 820-833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.00

Multimodal approach to two types of oral tasks in face-to-face and distance learning in L3 (french)

[EN] This article is at the crossroads of the fields of computer-mediated oral interaction and Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) in foreign language learning. From an experimental study, we aim to analyse the effects of a videoconferencing environment in the production of two types of learning tasks (jigsaw and ranking) in French (L3) from the perspective of verbal communication and nonverbal communication.[FR] La présente contribution s’inscrit au croisement des champs de la description de l’interaction orale à distance et de l’apprentissage par tâches (TBLT) dans l’enseignement des langues étrangères. À partir d’une étude expérimentale, nous nous proposons d’analyser l’impact du dispositif visiophonique en ligne sur la réalisation de deux types de tâches pédagogiques (jigsaw et ranking) en langue française (L3) du point de vue de la communication verbale et la communication non verbale.Delgar-Farrés, G. (2017). Approche multimodale de deux types de tâches orales réalisées de face à face et à distance en L3 (français). Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas. 12:23-32. doi:10.4995/rlyla.2017.6542.SWORD233212Chun, D., Kern, R., & Smith, B. (2016). Technology in Language Use, Language Teaching, and Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 64-80. doi:10.1111/modl.12302Cosnier, J. et Brossard, A. (1984). La communication non verbale : co-texte ou contexte ? In : J. Cosnier et A. Brossard (éds.), La communication non verbale. Neuchâtel : Delachaux et Niestlé, 1-29.Cosnier, J. et Develotte, C. (2011). Le face à face en ligne, approche éthologique. In : C. Develotte, R. Kern et M.-N. Lamy (éds.), Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel. Lyon : ENS Éditions, 27-50.Delgar Farrés, G. (2015). L'interaction orale en présentiel et à distance : une étude de cas en classe de français. Synergies Espagne, 8, 111-122.Develotte, C., Guichon, N., & Kern, R. (2008). «Allo Berkeley ? Ici Lyon… Vous nous voyez bien ?» Étude d’un dispositif de formation en ligne synchrone franco-américain à travers les discours de ses usagers. Alsic, (Vol. 11, n° 2). doi:10.4000/alsic.892Develotte, C., Kern, R. et Lamy, M.-N. (2011). Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel. Lyon : ENS Éditions.Develotte, C. (2012). L’analyse des corpus multimodaux en ligne : état des lieux et perspectives. SHS Web of Conferences, 1, 509-525. doi:10.1051/shsconf/20120100213Eckerth, J. (2003). Fremdsprachenerwerb in aufgabenbasierten Interaktionen. Tübingen : Narr.Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford : University Press.González-Lloret, M. et Ortega, L. (2014). Technology-mediated TBLT. Researching Technology and Tasks. Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company.HAMPEL, R. (2006). Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL, 18(01), 105. doi:10.1017/s0958344006000711Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2012). The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL, 24(2), 116-137. doi:10.1017/s095834401200002xKeim, L. et Tortadès, À. (2015). Comparación de la interacción oral de estudiantes de alemán L3 presenciales y online en una tarea de aula. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 18/2, 325-353.Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2011). Conversations en présentiel et conversations en ligne : bilan comparatif. In : C. Develotte, R. Kern et M.-N. Lamy (éds.), Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel. Lyon : ENS Éditions, 173-195.Kern, R. (2014). Technology asPharmakon: The Promise and Perils of the Internet for Foreign Language Education. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 340-357. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12065.xLai, C., & Li, G. (2011). Technology and Task-Based Language Teaching: A Critical Review. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 498-521. doi:10.11139/cj.28.2.498-521Long, M. H. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language training. In: K. Hyltenstam et M. Pienemann (éds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters.Marcelli, A., Gaveau, D., & Tokiwa, R. (2005). Utilisation de la visioconférence dans un programme de FLE : tâches communicatives et interactions orales. Alsic, (Vol. 8, n° 3). doi:10.4000/alsic.354Pica, T., Kanagy, R. et Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and Using Communication Tasks for Second Language Instruction and Research. In : G. Crookes et S. Gass (éds.), Tasks and Language Learning. Integrating Theory and Practice. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters, 9-34.Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive Complexity and Task Sequencing: Studies in a Componential Framework for Second Language Task Design. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1), 1-32. doi:10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1Robinson, P. (Ed.). (2011). Second Language Task Complexity. Task-Based Language Teaching. doi:10.1075/tblt.2Rubio, F., Thoms, J. J. (2012). AAUSC 2012 Volume - Issues in Language Program Direction. Hybrid Language Teaching and Learning: Exploring Theoretical, Pedagogical and Curricular Issues. Boston : Cengage Learning.Samuda, V., & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in Second Language Learning. doi:10.1057/9780230596429Sauro, S. (2009). Strategic Use of Modality during Synchronous CMC. CALICO Journal, 27(1), 101-117. doi:10.11139/cj.27.1.101-117Seedhouse, P., & Almutairi, S. (2009). A holistic approach to task-based interaction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 311-338. doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00243.xSmith, B. (2003). Computer?Mediated Negotiated Interaction: An Expanded Model. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 38-57. doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00177Smith, B. (2004). COMPUTER-MEDIATED NEGOTIATED INTERACTION AND LEXICAL ACQUISITION. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(03). doi:10.1017/s027226310426301xSmith, B. (2010). Employing Eye-Tracking Technology in Researching the Effectiveness of Recasts in CMC. Directions and Prospects for Educational Linguistics, 79-97. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-9136-9_6Stockwell, G. (2010). Effects of multimodality in computer-mediated communication tasks. In : M. Thomas et H. Reinders (éds.), Task-based language teaching and technology. Londres : Continuum, 83-104.Yamada, M., & Akahori, K. (2007). Social presence in synchronous CMC-based language learning: How does it affect the productive performance and consciousness of learning objectives? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(1), 37-65. doi:10.1080/09588220601118503Yanguas, I. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: it's about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14/3, 72-93

Effect of Gamification on students’ motivation and learning achievement in Second Language Acquisition within higher education: a literature review 2011-2019

[EN] This paper focuses on a fairly new motivational technique, the so-called Gamification, which consists of introducing game mechanics in non-game environments to promote motivation and engagement. By the turn of the 21rst century, Gamification took off in the business field and soon after became an attractive concept for researchers and professionals in education as it appears to be an increasingly popular method to motivate learners. Nevertheless, it is still a nascent field in terms of empirical evidence available to firmly support its educational benefits. This paper intends to shed some more light on this topic through a comprehensive review of literature published in the most prominent journals. The present study is framed within the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) in higher education and Computer-Assisted Language Learning, and focuses on the effects of gamified learning environments on student’s motivation and learning. A Meta-analysis method was used to explore relevant empirical research published between 2011 and 2019. After reviewing a corpus of 68  papers drawn from the leading databases Scopus and Web Of Science, and from which only 15 could be included in the study, we can point out two main findings: (i) there is still very limited literature in the field of SLA and, (ii) results seem to be predominantly positive in terms of motivation and engagement but only a few studies confirm clear interconnections with learning outcomes. The results suggest a lack of solid correlations between Gamification, motivation and cognitive processes. Azzouz Boudadi, N.; Gutiérrez-Colón, M. (2020). Effect of Gamification on students’ motivation and learning achievement in Second Language Acquisition within higher education: a literature review 2011-2019. The EuroCALL Review. 28(1):40-56. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.12974OJS4056281Bandura, A. (2012). Social cognitive theory. In P. A. Van Lange A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins Handbook of theories of social psychology: volume 1 (pp. 349-374). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n18Barcena, E., & Sanfilippo, M. (2015). The audiovisual knowledge pill as a gamification strategy in second language online courses. Circulo de Linguistica Aplicada a La Comunicacion, 63, 22- 151. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CLAC.2015.v63.50172Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1(1), 19-42. Retrieved from https://urlzs.com/HTjvG%0ABeatty, K. (2013). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning, second edition. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833774Berns, A., Isla-Montes, J.-L., Palomo-Duarte, M., & Dodero, J.-. (2016). Motivation, students' needs and learning outcomes: A hybrid game-based app for enhanced language learning. SpringerPlus, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2971-1Bustillo, J., Rivera, C., Guzmán, J., & Ramos, L. (2017). Benefits of using a mobile application in learning a foreign language. Sistemas & Telemática, 15(40), 55- 68. https://doi.org/10.18046/syt.v15i40.2391Cardoso, W., Rueb, A., & Grimshaw, J. (2017). Can an interactive digital game help French learners improve their pronunciation? In K. Borthwick, L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds), CALL in a climate of change: adapting to turbulent global conditions - short papers from EUROCALL 2017 (pp. 67-72). Researchpublishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2017.eurocall2017.691Castañeda, D. A., & Cho, M.-H. (2016). Use of a game-like application on a mobile device to improve accuracy in conjugating spanish verbs. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(7), 1195-1204. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1197950Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English Language Learning and Technology: Lectures on applied linguistics in the age of information and communication technology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.7Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer-assisted language learning. Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 741- 753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00970.xChapelle, C. A. (2016). Call in the year 2000: A look back from 2016. Language Learning and Technology, 20(2), 159-161. https://doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44468Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, USA: Academy of Management Review.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Self-Determination. In The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0834Deterding, S., Khaled, R., Nacke L.E. and Dixon, D. (2011). Gamification: Toward a Definition. In CHI 2011 Gamification Workshop Proceedings, Vancouver, 2011 (pp. 1215.). https://doi.org/978-1-4503-0268-5/11/0Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in education: A systematic mapping study. Educational Technology and Society, 18(3), 75- 88. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2014.6826129Domínguez, A., Saenz-De-Navarrete, J., De-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J. J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. Routledge. New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315779553Figueroa Flores, J. F. (2015). Using gamification to enhance second language learning. Digital Education Review, 27, 32-54. Retrieved from http://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/11912/pdfGafni, R., Biran Achituv, D., & Rahmani, G. (2017). Learning Foreign Languages Using Mobile Applications. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 301- 317. https://doi.org/10.28945/3855Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.Godwin-Jones, R. (2015). Emerging technologies the evolving roles of language teachers: trained coders, local researchers, global citizens. Language, Learning and Technology, 19(1), 10-22.Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025-3034). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377Hew, K., Huang, B., Wah Samuel Chu, K., & Chiu, D. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: Findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92-93, 221- 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.010Hubbard, P. (2008). CALL and the Future of Language Teacher Education. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 175. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.25.2.175-188Hung, H.-T. (2017). Clickers in the flipped classroom: bring your own device (BYOD) to promote student learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(8), 983-995. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1240090Iaremenko, N. (2017). Enhancing English language learners' motivation through online games. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 59, 126-133. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v59i3.1606Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. San Francisco, USA: Pfeiffer & Company. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207270.2211316Kétyi, A. (2016, September 1). From Mobile Language Learning to Gamification: an Overlook of Research Results with Business Management Students over a Five-Year Period. Innovating in the Didactic Second Language Scenario Innovating in the Didactic Second Language Scenario: New Mobile, Open and Social Model, Edition: Monográfico I., 45-59. Retrieved from https://urlzs.com/iZXtMLi, L. (2016). Benefits of CALL in lexico-grammatical acquisition. The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching (p. 463). London and New York: Routledge.Liu, Y., Holden, D., & Zheng, D. (2016). Analyzing students' Language Learning Experience in an Augmented Reality Mobile Game: An Exploration of an Emergent Learning Environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 228, 369-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.055MacIntyre, P. D. (2002). Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning, 2, 45-68. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.05macMarczewski, A. (2019). Introduction to Gamification Part 4: Motivation (R.A.M.P, Maslow, SDT and more). Retrieved from https://www.gamified.uk/2019/01/30/introduction-to-gamification-part4-motivation-r-a-m-p-maslow-sdt-and-more/Mateo-Gallego, C., & Ruiz Yepes, G. (2018). Terapias de errores con aprendizaje móvil y gamificación: estudio comparativo en español de los negocios. Folios, 48, 121-135. https://doi.org/10.17227/folios.48-8139Munday, P. (2016). The case for using Duolingo as part of the language classroom experience. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 19 (1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.19.1.14581Palomo-Duarte, M., Berns, A., Cejas, A., Dodero, J. M., Caballero, J. A., & Ruiz-Rube, I. (2016). Assessing Foreign Language Learning Through Mobile Game-Based Learning Environments. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 7(2), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJHCITP.2016040104Perry, B. (2015). Gamifying French Language Learning: A Case Study Examining a Quest-based, Augmented Reality Mobile Learning-tool. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2308- 2315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.892Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of Game-Based Learning. Educational Psychologist, 50, 258-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533Purgina, M., Mozgovoy, M., & Blake, J. (2019). WordBricks: Mobile Technology and Visual Grammar Formalism for Gamification of Natural Language Grammar Acquisition. Journal of Educational Computing Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119833010Rickinson, M., & May, H. (2009). A Comparative Study of Methodological Approaches to Reviewing Literature. UK : Higher Education AcademySeverengiz, M., Roeder, I., Schindler, K., & Seliger, G. (2018). Influence of Gaming Elements on Summative Assessment in Engineering Education for Sustainable Manufacturing. In Procedia Manufacturing (pp. 429-437). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.141Sheldon, L. (2012). The Multiplayer Classroom: Designing Coursework as a Game. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Skinner, B. F. (1958). Teaching machines. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.128.3330.969Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012a). For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Digital Press.Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012b). The Gamification Toolkit Game Elements. In For the Win: How Game Thinking Can Revolutionize Your Business. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004Zichermann, G. (2011). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Gamification. Retrieved from https://www.gamification.co/2011/10/27/intrinsic-and-extrinsic-motivation-in-gamification

Developing cross‐cultural communicative competence via computer‐assisted language learning: The case of pre‐service ESL/EFL teachers

Based on a qualitative research project, this article presents a view on the use of computer technology to develop a critical cross‐cultural communicative competence in English as a Second Language (ESL) / English as a Foreign Language (EFL) for pre‐service teachers. The article includes a brief critical theoretical framework, some classroom pedagogical implications, and a data‐based discussion of pre‐service teachers’ views. These views included: (1) critical views and an awareness of cultural power relations in computer‐assisted language learning (CALL), (2) uncritical views and a lack of awareness of cultural power relations in CALL, and (3) uses of metaphors in CALL. The powerful contribution of CALL can be found in its potential for providing ways to connect people and build communities, for offering opportunities for cross‐cultural communicative competence to be developed and used, and for improving processes of democratization via computer‐mediated communication. However, a socio‐cultural criticism revealed that this powerful tool, like any other media, is non‐neutral because it can serve to reinforce further the hegemonic aspects of education, that is, the dominant culture will be strengthened and protected via computer technology. Computer‐based technologies and software are increasingly incorporated into the curricula of ESLIEFL teacher education programmes. However, this integration is often done in ways that seem to leave unquestioned the potential cultural and hegemonic ramifications of such technology. Hence there is a need for a more critical technological competence

Computer-based materials: a study of learner autonomy and strategies

This paper reports on a study which examines the extent to which specified cognitive, social, and metacognitive strategies, are used by language students when working with computer-based materials (CBMs), in self-study contexts outside of the language classroom; particularly in a self-access centre (SAC). Data were collected using questionnaires, interviews and snap-shot observations from English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students enrolled on a summer course at a British Higher Education Institution (HEI). The data identify the frequency with which students use a SAC and the value they attach to computers for language learning. The data then examine the types of strategies students use and the extent to which learner autonomy is being fostered. The vast majority of participants were found to have positive attitudes towards computer-based material (CBMs) and language learning despite frequent use of L1, furthermore they were found to use cognitive strategies and to apply metacognitive awareness in their use of such CBMs. Students believed CBMs assisted with learning and demonstrated conscious applications of a range of strategies while learning in an electronic environment. However, the study also found that less than half the students used social strategies in the target language and this raises a number of issues

Revisión tecnológica del aprendizaje de idiomas asistido por ordenador: una perspectiva cronológica

El presente artículo aborda la evolución y el avance de las tecnologías del aprendizaje de lenguas asistido por ordenador (CALL por sus siglas en inglés, que corresponden a Computer- Assisted Language Learning) desde una perspectiva histórica. Esta revisión de la literatura sobre tecnologías del aprendizaje de lenguas asistido por ordenador comienza con la definición del concepto de CALL y otros términos relacionados, entre los que podemos destacar CAI, CAL, CALI, CALICO, CALT, CAT, CBT, CMC o CMI, para posteriormente analizar las primeras iniciativas de implementación del aprendizaje de lenguas asistido por ordenador en las décadas de 1950 y 1960, avanzando posteriormente a las décadas de las computadoras centrales y las microcomputadoras. En última instancia, se revisan las tecnologías emergentes en el siglo XXI, especialmente tras la irrupción de Internet, donde se presentan el impacto del e-learning, b-learning, las tecnologías de la Web 2.0, las redes sociales e incluso el aprendizaje de lenguas asistido por robots.The main focus of this paper is on the advancement of technologies in Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) from a historical perspective. The review starts by defining CALL and its related terminology, highlighting the first CALL attempts in 1950s and 1960s, and then moving to other decades of mainframes and microcomputers. At the final step, emerging technologies in 21st century will be reviewed

Mobile Learning Revolution: Implications for Language Pedagogy

Mobile technologies including cell phones and tablets are a pervasive feature of everyday life with potential impact on teaching and learning. “Mobile pedagogy” may seem like a contradiction in terms, since mobile learning often takes place physically beyond the teacher's reach, outside the walls of the classroom. While pedagogy implies careful planning, mobility exposes learners to the unexpected. A thoughtful pedagogical response to this reality involves new conceptualizations of what is to be learned and new activity designs. This approach recognizes that learners may act in more self-determined ways beyond the classroom walls, where online interactions and mobile encounters influence their target language communication needs and interests. The chapter sets out a range of opportunities for out-of-class mobile language learning that give learners an active role and promote communication. It then considers the implications of these developments for language content and curricula and the evolving roles and competences of teachers

Can you teach me to speak? Oral practice and anxiety in a language MOOC

The present chapter examines learners’ beliefs and attitudes with regard to speaking in a learning environment that is neither formal nor informal. The main research question is whether learners perceive Massive Open Online Language Courses (LMOOCs) as a completely informal context that is free of anxiety or rather as a virtual classroom where Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLA) (Horowitz et al., 1986) is present. Data was obtained from over 200 beginner learners on self-reflective questionnaires and forum discussions. Results indicate that learners have a positive attitude towards language learning on LMOOCs, but FLA is present in this asynchronous speaking environment too and needs to be addressed by the course instructors

E/Valuating new media in language development

This paper addresses the need for a new approach to the educational evaluation of software that falls under the rubric "new media" or "multimedia" as distinct from previous generations of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) software. The authors argue that present approaches to CALL software evaluation are not appropriate for a new genre of CALL software distinguished by its shared assumptions about language learning and teaching as well as by its technical design. The paper sketches a research-based program called "E/Valuation" that aims to assist language educators to answer questions about the educational effectiveness of recent multimedia language learning software. The authors suggest that such program needs to take into account not only the nature of the new media and its potential to promote language learning in novel ways, but also current professional knowledge about language learning and teaching