Evaluating automatic detection of misspellings in German

his study investigates the performance of a spell checker designed for native writers on misspellings made by second language (L2) learners. It addresses two research questions: 1) What is the correction rate of a generic spell checker for L2 misspellings? 2) What factors influence the correction rate of a generic spell checker for L2 misspellings? To explore these questions, the study considers a corpus of 1,027 unique misspellings from 48 Anglophone learners of German and classifies these along three error taxonomies: linguistic competence (competence versus performance misspellings), linguistic subsystem (lexical, morphological or phonological misspellings), and target modification (single-edit misspellings (edit distance = one) versus multiple-edit misspellings (edit distance > 1)). The study then evaluates the performance of the Microsoft Word® spell checker on these misspellings. Results indicate that only 62% of the L2 misspellings are corrected and that the spell checker, independent of other factors, generally cannot correct multiple-edit misspellings although it is quite successful in correcting single-edit errors. In contrast to most misspellings by native writers, many L2 misspellings are multiple-edit errors and are thus not corrected by a spell checker designed for native writers. The study concludes with computational and pedagogical suggestions to enhance spell checking in CALL

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

Guidelines on Conducting and Reporting on CALL Research

These slides are based on workshops presented at CALICO Conferences by (current and previous) editors of LLT

Drag or Type, But Don’t Click: A Study on the Effectiveness of Different CALL Exercise Types

Abstract This paper reports on the comparative effects on learning outcomes and learner behaviour noted using three different CALL exercise types for German word order practice: multiple-choice (click), re-ordering (drag), and completion (type). Twenty-seven students of introductory German participated. For all exercise types students received error-specific feedback. Results indicate that students using the drag-and drop interface performed significantly better than those using multiple choice, and marginally better than the typed-entry group. Themore flexible word-order practice afforded by the drag-and-drop interface in addition to other benefits such as eliminating typing errors and ease of use may argue in its favour

Intelligent language tutoring systems for grammar practice

The amount of on-line grammar exercises has been increasing steadily since the inception of the World Wide Web. Over the past years, a number of useful authoring tools have been developed that allow instructors to design Web-based student tasks quickly and without extensive computer programming knowledge