Realizing the Potential of Mobile Phone Technology for Language Learning

This paper focuses on the exploitation of mobile phone technology for thelearning of foreign languages. It begins by considering the obstaclesfacing the effective use of mobile phone technology for language learning.In doing so, the paper describes four challenges that have to be overcomefor mobile phone technology to become an effective pedagogical tool.Specifically: Intrusiveness, Cost, Practical technological constraints andPedagogical methodologies. Having defined the issues that need to beaddressed, the paper then proceeds to describe how these challenges havebeen met in the design of MobLang, an EU funded Lifelong Learningproject

Looking for a Needle in a Haystack: CALL and Advanced Language Proficiency

The goal of this meta-analysis is to evaluate how instructional technology has impacted advanced second language (AL2) development. Although numerous meta-analyses have been conducted within the CALL literature over the past two decades, they primarily focus upon learning outcomes and related effect sizes. None focus on advanced learning per se. Where AL2 is even mentioned, which is only rarely, little or no attention is paid to critical research parameters within the studies that are analyzed. Most notably, in summarizing learning outcomes, the linguistic competence of learners claimed to be at advanced level is simply taken at face value. So, too, no consideration is given to the difficulty level of tasks undertaken by students or their appropriateness to students’ claimed proficiency. It is the intent of this general overview of the contribution of CALL to AL2 to address these issues through a comprehensive analysis of the publications in four prominent CALL journals (CALICO, CALL, Language Learning & Technology, and ReCALL) over some 30 years. In so doing, the Performance Descriptors (PD) and NCSSFL- Can-Do Statements (CDS) of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages’ (ACTFL) are adopted as external criteria for establishing student competence level, task difficulty and appropriateness. This study concludes that not only are CALL AL2 studies extremely limited in number and focus, but also that they suffer from serious design flaws that call into question a great portion of the claims made regarding the contribution of instructional technology to the furthering of advanced-level foreign language competence

The Future of Foreign Language Instructional Technology: BYOD MALL

[EN] This paper describes trends in instructional technology that are influencing foreign language teaching today and that can be expected to increasingly do so in the future. Though already an integral part of foreign language instruction, digital technology is bound to play an increasing role in language teaching in the coming years. The greatest stimulus for this will undoubtedly be the accessibility of Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL), made possible through the exploitation of mobile devices owned by students themselves. The ubiquitous ownership of smartphones and tablet computers among adolescents and adults now makes a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) approach a feasible alternative to desktop computer labs. Making this work, however, especially in a financially and technologically restricted environment, presents a number of challenges which are the focus of this paper.Burston, J. (2016). The Future of Foreign Language Instructional Technology: BYOD MALL. The EuroCALL Review. 24(1):1695-2618. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2016.4431.SWORD1695261824

Lessons Learned in Designing and Implementing a Computer-Adaptive Test for English

[EN] This paper describes the lessons learned in designing and implementing a computer-adaptive test (CAT) for English. The early identification of students with weak L2 English proficiency is of critical importance in university settings that have compulsory English language course graduation requirements. The most efficient means of diagnosing the L2 English ability of incoming students is by means of a computer-based test since such evaluation can be administered quickly, automatically corrected, and the outcome known as soon as the test is completed. While the option of using a commercial CAT is available to institutions with the ability to pay substantial annual fees, or the means of passing these expenses on to their students, language instructors without these resources can only avail themselves of the advantages of CAT evaluation by creating their own tests. As is demonstrated by the E-CAT project described in this paper, this is a viable alternative even for those lacking any computer programing expertise. However, language teaching experience and testing expertise are critical to such an undertaking, which requires considerable effort and, above all, collaborative teamwork to succeed. A number of practical skills are also required. Firstly, the operation of a CAT authoring programme must be learned. Once this is done, test makers must master the art of creating a question database and assigning difficulty levels to test items. Lastly, if multimedia resources are to be exploited in a CAT, test creators need to be able to locate suitable copyright-free resources and re-edit them as neededBurston, J.; Neophytou, M. (2014). Lessons Learned in Designing and Implementing a Computer-Adaptive Test for English. The EuroCALL Review. 22(2):19-25. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2014.3632.SWORD1925222Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302. doi:10.1037/h0040957Hambleton, R., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, J. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.LAWSHE, C. H. (1975). A QUANTITATIVE APPROACH TO CONTENT VALIDITY. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.xRasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedagogiske Institut, 1960. Reprint, Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication