computer assisted language learning

33
Chapter 3 Computer Assisted Language Learning
3.1 Introduction
Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) grew out of the field of Computer Assisted Instruction
(CAI) and draws on other related fields such as Educational Psychology, Artificial Intelligence (AI),
computational linguistics, instructional design, Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and SLA (Second
Language Acquisition). More recently, it has been impacted by developments in the field of WBI (Web
Based Instruction). Indeed, there is a lot of crossover between CALL programs and WELL (Web
Enhanced Language Learning) programs.
This chapter outlines the CALL domain. Section 3.2 provides an introduction to CALL. It describes
some of the more common CALL related acronyms. It presents the interdisciplinary nature of CALL and
outlines the difference between CALL tutors and tools. Section 3.3 reviews the benefits of CALL while
section 3.4 considers its limitations. Section 3.5 looks at CALL development including design,
evaluation and success factors. Culture is very important in language teaching and section 3.6 discusses
CALL and culture. Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs) and CALL are discussed in section 3.7.
Section 3.8 considers the benefits and challenges of CALL in the Endangered Language context. The
impact on the project is outlined in section 3.9 and a summary of the chapter is provided in section 3.10.
3.2 Introduction to CALL
3.2.1 What is CALL?
The field of CALL involves the use of a computer in the language learning process. CALL programs
aim to teach aspects of the language learning process through the medium of the computer. CALL
programs can be (and have been) developed for the many parts of the language learning process. Some of
the factors that determine the characteristics of any CALL program include:
· the language taught,
· the language of instruction,
· the language writing system (both roman and non-roman character based),
· the level of the language to be taught (from absolute beginners to advanced),
· what is to be taught (grammar, informal conversation and pronunciation) and
· how it is to be taught.
CALL straddles the fields of computing and language learning. One of the criticisms that language
teachers generally have about CALL programs is that they are generally driven by the technology (or by
those who have mastered the technology). They argue that in the rush to use the latest “great feature”,
pedagogical considerations are often ignored. Just because a computer can endlessly drill a student about
subjunctive verbs in Spanish does not mean that it is the correct way to teach them. Even if a computer
can have several different flashing images on the screen at once to make a screen “more interesting”, it
does not mean that it enhances the learning process.
3.2.2 CALL Related Acronyms
The field of CALL uses many acronyms. Figure 3.1 shows a list of the main acronyms.
34
CALL Computer Assisted Language Learning
CAI Computer Assisted Instruction
ICALL Intelligent Computer Assisted Language Learning
CELL Computer Enhanced Language Learning
TELL Technology Enhanced Language Learning
WELL Web Enhanced Language Learning
Figure 3.1 List of CALL related acronyms
The main difference between the acronyms is the focus given to the computer as part of the language
learning process. CALL will be used as a general term throughout this chapter to cover all of the above,
unless otherwise stated. CAI refers to the use of the computer for instruction, regardless of what is being
taught. ICALL refers to the integration of techniques from the fields of Artificial Intelligence and
Computational Linguistics to enhance CALL applications. CELL effectively means the same thing as
CALL. TELL is an acronym that is mainly used in North America that covers the same domain as
CALL. WELL refers specifically to the use of the web (or Internet) in the language learning process. It
is more specific than CALL but as computer technology becomes more internet-focused, it will cover a
greater part of the CALL domain.
3.2.3 CALL - an Interdisciplinary Domain
CALL is interdisciplinary in nature. It draws on psychology, Second Language Acquisition (SLA),
Artificial Intelligence (AI), Computational Linguistics, Instructional Technology and Design and Human
Computer Interaction (HCI). This makes CALL an interesting and challenging field – interesting because
of the different perspectives available and challenging because of the vast quantity of knowledge
available. CALL practitioners need to be aware of these other views to use the insights gleaned from
them to enhance CALL and to avoid painful mistakes and reinvention of wheels. Not everything from
other fields can be applied unmodified to CALL but a lot of the main themes and ideas can be helpful.
This section reviews the interdisciplinary nature of CALL, taking a brief look at each of the main
contributory areas and the effect of this on CALL as a whole.
Conclusions from research findings should not be overgeneralised, i.e. just because something was
proven to hold for a particular study, does not mean that it will hold for other studies. Cognisance needs
to be taken of conditions such as factors and environment of the original study. Even when similar
conditions hold, sometimes contradictory findings result. This does not mean, however, that the findings
should be discounted. They all contribute to our understanding of the bigger picture.
Psychology
In Chapter 2, we reviewed the field of Education Psychology. From Skinner’s Behaviourist learning
theory (Skinner, 1968) to Humanism (Briner, 1999), the various theories aim to explain what happens
when learning occurs. While behaviourist theory has fallen out of favour (Curtis et al., 1999), it is still
applicable at the lower end of the learning scale. Although frowned upon by some, drill and practice still
have a place in learning. A humanistic approach can help us understand some of the more complex
elements of (language) learning. CALL practitioners should understand the part played by the different
35
possible elements within the CALL domain so that a suitable one can be chosen to aid the learning
process.
Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is the study of how a second language is acquired. It is a fascinating
field that covers non-first language and foreign language learning. A distinction is made between
learning (a conscious process) and acquisition (a subconscious process).
SLA has much to offer CALL. It has developed research methodologies (both qualitative and
quantitative) that can be applied (with modifications) to CALL (Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991). It
studies interlanguage (IL), which is “the systematic knowledge of an L2 that is independent of both the
target language and the learner’s L1” (Selinker, 1972)) and the effects of L1 on L2 learning. ILs have
been shown to exhibit common acquisition orders and developmental sequences. While “further research
is needed” is often repeated in the SLA literature, such findings ought to be considered by CALL
practitioners. The learner’s linguistic environment has also been studied. It is not just of theoretical
interest, but is also of practical importance, as it is something that can be manipulated. Factors to be
considered when developing curricula and SL materials include (Larsen-Freeman and Long, op. cit.):
· the effect of deviant (ill-formed) input,
· the role of conversation in developing syntax,
· the input frequency (i.e. the exposure to the language) which affects the accuracy order (levels of
correctness),
· input modification and SL comprehension,
· the role of comprehensible input (language that is understandable to the learner).
Another area of mutual interest is that of differential success among SL learners. Factors such as age,
aptitude, social-psychological factors (motivation and attitude), personality, cognitive style, hemisphere
specialisation, and learning strategies have been studied. Often research findings are ambiguous. Some
of the factors cannot be changed (e.g. age), while others can (e.g. high quality instruction may nullify
aptitude differences (Carroll, 1965)). Matching aptitude and methodological approaches (audio-visual,
analytical and functional) was shown to enhance achievement (Wesche, 1981). Instrumental motivation
(in which the learner is motivated to learn an L2 for utilitarian purposes, (such as, furthering a career or
improving social status) can be just as powerful as integrative motivation, i.e. when the learner wishes to
identify with another ethnolinguistic group.
One of the problems of this area of SLA (and CALL) is the difficulty of measuring individual learner
variables. It is agreed that language learning is a complex process. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991)
point out that more complex research designs should be adopted. Multivariate statistical techniques (as
opposed to univariate analysis) can provide a means for examining the relationship among learners’
characteristics. Learner variables inevitably overlap and interact with others and it may not be possible to
isolate a particular factor. One of the current movements in SLA is to explain and not just describe SLA.
36
There are three classes of theories in SLA: nativist, environmentalist and interactionist. Nativist theories
purport to explain acquisition by positing an innate biological endowment that makes learning possible
(cf. Chomsky, 1965). According to environmentalist theories, nurture or experience is more important
than an organism’s nature or innate contributions to development (Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991).
Interactionist theories (Givon, 1984; Pienemann and Johnston, 1987) invoke both innate and
environmental factors to explain language learning, although as Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) point
out, interactionist theories differ greatly from one another.
There are over forty theories in the SLA literature. They differ in scope, the type of data and degree of
abstraction. This makes it hard to evaluate them. While some CALL researchers have reservations about
SLA theories, good theories can provide direction to researchers and practitioners. One of the goals of
SLA research is to provide a sound psycholinguistic basis for SL teaching. SLA research has studied the
potential of formal instruction in four areas: accuracy order/developmental sequences, acquisition
processes, rate of acquisition and the level of ultimate SL attainment. While development sequences
seem impervious to instruction, a focus on form does appear to have beneficial effects in the other three
areas (although caution is advised with the interpretation of the findings, as interpretations must take into
consideration the conditions under which the study took place) (Larsen-Freeman and Long, op. cit.).
CALL and Other Fields
CALL is a relatively new field that draws on research from other fields, which in turn are relatively new.
It is sometimes more convenient to apply the findings of this research directly to the CALL field, rather
than having to carry out the research from scratch. Using an established theory from another field can
save time and effort. Sometimes there is positive transfer from a related discipline. Chapelle (1997)
refers to the benefits of SLA research for the field of CALL. For example, SLA research has methods for
evaluating the quality and nature learning of the experience that CALL may lack. However, Levy (1997)
warns that care must be taken with the application of theories and research from other disciplines. For
example, previous applications of theory-driven language teaching technology (audio-lingual
methodology) were not successful (Garton, 1992). Furthermore, it is not immediately obvious which
SLA model should be used.
CALL workers need to be aware of developments in related disciplines. Advances in other fields may not
always filter into the CALL literature. Progress with Natural Language technology or web authoring
tools for example, could have a profound impact on the world of CALL. I believe that this crossfertilisation
works both ways. For example, CALL research could be relevant to SLA and HCI research.
Although CALL still lies on the periphery of language teaching, articles about CALL are “crossing-over”
into the language teaching journals. With a careful approach, CALL can create a symbiotic relationship
with several of its influencing disciplines.
CALL Theoretical Basis/Research Agenda
CALL is not yet a mature field and lacks a theoretical framework. The problems suffered by SLA
researchers and practitioners ring true in the field of CALL. In fact, they are even more acute due to the
relative youth of CALL.
37
A lack of theoretical framework makes it hard for researchers to compare and evaluate findings from
CALL studies. It means that practitioners have no universally accepted theoretical basis to provide
direction for development and implementation of CALL materials (McCarthy, 1999). It means that
mistakes are repeated and wheels reinvented. Scarce resources are diverted (if not wasted) in the process.
According to Myles (1998), CALL items (such as feedback) are overlooked or procedures such as testing
are unreliable because of this. Garrett (1998) states that currently CALL suffers problems in the research
area. She reports that some language teachers say that the use of technology in inevitable and therefore
research is not required as CALL is going to happen anyway. Another issue is that CALL research tends
to try to show that CALL is effective, which is often hard to do (and should not be the only type of
research). A more institutional problem is the fact that CALL research is often not valued by the
institutional powers in terms of promotion in the academic world. CALL workers are often a minority
within university academic environments and there is sometimes little recognition for their work.
Garrett (op. cit.) argues that CALL needs a research agenda, not only to gain more respect for CALL
workers but also to justify current practice and open up new approaches. Technology is going to play a
bigger role in language teaching and up to now there is little solid evidence of the good and bad reasons
for its use. A lot of CALL work is informal and anecdotal – no universally accepted and empirically
valid framework exists. Sussex (1999) points out that there is a need for a framework to help structure
and evaluate Internet sites, software and pedagogy. A theory for CALL must encompass reality, address
aspects of the target domain and be appropriate.
For the world’s major languages (especially English), there are a wide variety of resources already
developed, with plenty of authentic material available. Rather than reduplicate efforts and engage in
reinvention of wheels, Felix (1999) suggests that global co-operation should take place. She
acknowledges that it is hard to identify centres of excellence (given the size of the Internet), but that the
effort spent doing so would be worthwhile. Up to now, most of the research has focused on the teaching
side of CALL (Maingard, 1999) and more research is needed on the learner’s perspective of CALL.
Learners find CALL enjoyable (Levy, 1997: p. 144) and report satisfaction with the CALL process, but
there are still many unknowns.
3.2.4 CALL Tutors and Tools
The computer can act as a tutor or a tool (Levy, 1997). As a tutor, it assumes the role traditionally held
by a teacher in a language learning environment. A tutor evaluates the student input in some way. It is
often designed with an independent learner in mind. As a tool, a CALL program works as an aid to a
teacher in a language learning situation. For example, a program to teach German verbs or Chinese
pronunciation may be used as a tool by a teacher to enhance the learning experience. A tool does not
assess the learner. When evaluating a CALL program, it is important to know if it is a tutor or a tool
because they have different aims and therefore should be judged on different criteria.
CALL Tutor
A CALL tutor offers flexibility on several different levels, including access time, geographical location
and learning pace. It must be reliable, as it is the primary (and sometimes only) learning source. The
38
feedback must be timely, accurate and appropriate. Moreover, currently a tutor can only effectively deal
with certain language skills. For example, the processing of user speech still presents a problem given
current technologies. While technology does offer many opportunities, not everything that can be done
should be done. Reflection is needed on this issue.
CALL Tool
A CALL tool is designed to assist learning - it is part of a larger process. The tool does not have a
methodology and the learner is in direct control. Examples of CALL tools include email, electronic
dictionaries, concordancers, Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and the word processor.
Generally, there is no feedback to the user. More teacher input, both in the planning and usage stages, is
required with a tool.
Computer Mediated Communication (CMC)
Up until relatively recently, CALL programs have existed as an independent entity. A single, stand-alone
program aimed to provide all the knowledge the student needed. Later web-based programs incorporated
links to other sites on the WWW. Now, users could access other language resources on the Internet.
However, initially, no facilities existed for students to communicate with one another or indeed native
speakers of the target language.
Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) is an emerging area within the CALL domain (Warschauer,
1996; Weininger et al., 1998). It occurs when learners use the computer to communicate with each other.
Often it is used in collaborative learning projects, chat groups and tandem learning projects (discussed
later on in this section). There are various possible combinations. CMC can occur between second
language (L2) learners of the same target language (for example, between English and French students of
German). It can also occur between first language (L1) and L2 learners where the L1 learner’s target
language is the first language of the L2 learners and vice versa. An example of this scenario would be
where German students studying English can communicate with English speakers studying German.
Collaborative learning involves learners working with other learners on a joint project. One of the
philosophies behind CMC in general is that learners can learn a lot by working with native language
speakers. As collaborative learning is a relatively new area within the CALL domain, the factors that
contribute to the success of a project are not clearly defined. The PROCall (Project Oriented CALL)
project in the University of Melbourne, Australia highlighted some interesting points (Toyoda, 2001).
The project involved six language departments and more than two hundred students. It incorporated
networking and multimedia composition with project-oriented learning. Toyoda (2001) reports that the
learner’s experience and perception of technology affect the outcomes of the PROCall process, with
experienced and technology-happy learners enjoying the experience, while those not so disposed to
technology had a less positive experience.
Tandem learning projects are a relatively new area within CALL (e.g. Little and Brammerts, 1996; Appel
and Mullen, 2000). They usually involve two learners and can be considered a sub-domain of Computer
Mediated Communication. There are various different formats that can be used and factors such as the
39
competence of each learner in the target language are very important. One of the interesting outcomes of
tandem learning projects to date is the raising of the level of metalinguistic awareness of students. For
example, understanding how plurals are formed in their own L1 and why learners of the L1 might have a
problem with the process, can raise the L1 (and L2) students' metalinguistic awareness.
3.2.5 CALL Materials
CALL materials share many of the characteristics of non-CALL material (Levy, 1997). Materials can
either be authentic, produced locally or commercially. Another commonality is that there is often
dissatisfaction with commercially produced materials. However, the diverse capabilities of computers
mean that differences exist. CALL enables the integration of sound and video into courseware materials.
It adds a dynamic dimension that is impossible with a book (e.g. exercises, links to relevant information,
interactivity and feedback). However, unlike a book, with CALL only a small component can be viewed
at any one time - the learner cannot “flick” through the pages as s/he can with a book to get an overview
of what is available on the course.
While several frameworks have been proposed for CALL materials, none has been formulated that
captures the unique qualities of CALL materials. There are four different types of knowledge that are
necessary for the development of CALL materials: theory of instructional design, theory of language
teaching, theory of language learning and knowledge of applicability of technology. Theories of
instructional design involve linking learning theories with the practice of building instructional systems
(Gros et al., 1997 – see section 2.3, p21). There are many different theories of language teaching which
include behaviourist, explicit learning, comprehension-based, communicative and humanistic approaches
(Hubbard, 1987). The field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) provides many of the theories of
language learning (section 3.2.3). Knowledge of applicability of technology encompasses knowledge of
the different types of technology available and their suitability for their intended process. This includes
awareness of the alternatives available, their ease of application/implementation and their pedagogical
appropriateness.
3.3 Benefits of CALL
While there are those who are still sceptical about the use of a computer to teach language (an inherently
human activity), the many benefits of a CALL program have been generally accepted. Some of these
come from the general field of CAI, while some are specific to language learning.
Learner Autonomy
Probably the most important benefit is that of Learner Autonomy. Learner Autonomy has been discussed
in section 2.5, p24. With a CALL program, learners can work at their own pace. The learner can spend
more time on those topics that are causing difficulty. Information can be reviewed and tasks can be
repeated until the learner is happy to move on to a new topic. The learner feels in control, which usually
enhances satisfaction levels with the learning process. Successful language learners assume responsibility
for their own learning (Naiman et al., 1977).
40
Privacy
Another benefit of CALL programs is the private environment it offers for self-conscious language
learners (Brett, 1996). Many learners are shy in a traditional classroom setting, not participating as much
as they would like, for fear of making mistakes and being the object of ridicule. The computer offers a
forum where learners can lose their self-consciousness. The computer will not expose them when they
make any mistakes (although the errors may be stored for review). The learners can learn within the
sheltered, protected confines of the CALL program. Krashen (1985) notes that this may serve to lower
affective filters.
Feedback
It is generally agreed that the provision of (almost) immediate feedback is beneficial for the learner (Neri,
et al., 2001). Again, in the traditional classroom setting, it may not be possible to provide immediate
feedback to each individual learner. However, the computer can give feedback at the touch of a button.
Thus, learners can test their knowledge and learn from their mistakes. It is important that errors are
corrected before they are converted into part of the learner’s “language knowledge”. CALL programs
can not only correct errors but also reinforce the knowledge shown in correct answers.
Motivation
Motivation is an important factor in language learning (Gardner, 1983; Scarcella and Oxford, 1992;
Okada et al., 1996). Motivation encourages greater learner effort and thus greater language performance
(Clément et al., 1977; Samimy and Tabuse, 1991). When looking at motivation in the field of language
learning, consideration is given to the difference between foreign and second language learning (Au,
1988). Foreign language (FL) learning occurs when the language being learnt is not used as the medium
of communication (e.g. learning French in Ireland). Second language (SL) learning occurs in an
environment where the language being learnt is that used in everyday communication (e.g. learning
English in Ireland). In the FL situation, the learner has to seek opportunities to engage in the target
language.
Although integrative motivation is generally considered very important in language learning (Gardner’s
Socio-Education Model, (Gardner, 1983)), instrumental motivation is increasingly been seen as
important, especially for FL learners. Dörnyei (1990a, 1990b) reports that instrumental goals significantly
contribute to motivation for FL learners. Integrative motivation is more important for SL learners than
FL learners (Oxford, 1996a).
While Gardner’s model has been very influential, researchers are expanding on this model. Oxford
(1996a) identifies other factors, including stimulation and setting a personal challenge. She notes also
that developmental change may occur, where motivational factors may change over time. Culture also
has an affect on motivation (Markus and Kitayama, 1991). CALL generally increases students’ levels of
motivation. Anything that increases motivation will be helpful to the learning process.
41
Access to Information
Another benefit of CALL is the control over access to information. A CALL program has the potential to
provide more information to the learner (via links to electronic dictionaries, more detailed screens and
links to other sites) (Egbert and Hanson-Smith, 1999), while conversely, learners can avoid information
overload if they feel they are being overwhelmed. They can leave a program to give themselves time to
absorb the new knowledge. In a traditional classroom setting, students cannot usually leave if they feel
overloaded. They must wait until the class has ended, possibly not paying attention to what the teacher is
saying and missing out on the topic being taught. With a CALL program, the user can leave when s/he
wishes and come back to where s/he left off and start again. Thus, users have more control over the
cognitive load they bear during a lesson.
Also, non-linear access to that information is possible. The learner does not have to “follow the text
exactly”. Links can be followed and dictionaries can be looked up. A learner may feel more inclined to
read extra information if it is only a click away, as opposed to having to open another book.
Interactivity
Computers promote interactivity. Learners have to interact with the computer and cannot hide behind
their classmates. If the learner does nothing, nothing happens. At the very least, learners have to start the
CALL program. The program can only pass from one section to another with the “consent” of the
learner. Thus learners have to drive the program. Usually they have to use the target language in
exercises within the program. They have plenty of opportunities to practise the language in a one-on-one
situation. They can practise the exercises as many times as they like, until they are satisfied with their
results.
CALL programs promote interactivity using many senses. Not only is text presented, sound can be heard
and videos viewed. Sub-titles to videos can be switched on and off. Videos can be viewed in mute mode,
so that learners can use various strategies to ascertain what is happening. Graphics can be used to
demonstrate not just grammar items (for example, moving words around to form questions) but also for
spatial related language topics (for example, the use of “in front of” and “behind”).
If a sound does not exist in their own language, learners may have difficulty producing it. Alternatively,
learners cannot “hear” the difference between their pronunciation and that of a native speaker. For
example, native Japanese speakers find it very difficult to distinguish between /r/ and /l/. Learners can
practise their pronunciation using visual models of the voice-producing region of the body showing the
required position of the tongue and lips to produce the correct sound. Graphics of their speech output
compared with the ideal can be viewed, so that discrepancies can be identified. This multi-sensory
approach can enrich the learning process for the learner.
Non-Traditional Features
CALL programs should not just imitate what happens in a traditional classroom situation but enhance the
learning process by doing things that are only possible with the use of the computer (Felix, 1999). One
such area is that of examples. New exercise types have been introduced which can not only test the
42
learner’s knowledge, but also avoid the boredom associated with constant repetition of the same types of
exercises. The variety of exercises available helps to maintain the student’s interest. Audio and video are
features possible in CALL that cannot be as smoothly integrated into the more traditional learning
courses.
Repetition
Another benefit of CALL is the ability to repeatedly review information (Brett, 1996). This repetition can
aid reinforcement, which is an important element in learning (Hebb, 1949). This can either be text, audio
or video. Learners can listen to audio portions of a CALL program until they are satisfied that they have
understood what is being said. Video segments can be watched in various modes (with/without sound,
with/without subtitles) as many times as the learner wishes. This is obviously beneficial to the learner
and is a definite advantage over the traditional classroom situation in which it is not that easy to ask the
teacher to repeat something a number of times until it is understood.
3.4 Limitations of CALL
While CALL programs offer many potential benefits, there are also limitations to consider. This section
outlines some of the potential limitations of CALL and how these limitations can be avoided or at least
minimised.
Limited Availability of Resources
CALL is an emerging discipline. Research points out many of the current and potential benefits of
CALL. However, in many learning institutions, the availability of CALL resources is limited. Limited
resources include time and money for development of CALL materials (Levy, 1997), finance to purchase
computers and lack of teacher knowledge. Sometimes there is a mismatch between the CALL program
and the users and/or the setting.
Often, the teacher has just one computer available and the teacher must try to maximise the benefit of a
CALL program for a group of students. User resources must also be taken into consideration. Does the
program assume access to speakers and a microphone? What if the installation does not have access to
the Internet? Obviously, if someone tries to use a tandem learning program on a stand-alone PC with no
connection to the Internet, it will either be impossible or very difficult to fully use the features of the
program. In this case, the program should clarify user expectations. It should make clear to the user what
resources it requires and point out the limitations if these resources are not available. It should also try to
provide alternate ways of interacting with the user. For example, if a program allows the users to select
an option via a microphone, but one is not available, the user should be able to interact with the computer
via the mouse or keyboard.
Anti-Social Behaviour
CALL programs may promote anti-social behaviour (Pennington, 1996). Learners may get “wrapped-up”
in the program and focus on learning the language in isolation. Except in certain situations (learning a
language for reading purposes only or for the pure mental stimulation of doing so), the whole reason
behind learning a language is to be able to communicate with others. If someone learns a language for
43
the purposes of interacting with another human in the same language and yet s/he only “speaks” to a
computer, surely that is missing the whole point of learning the language. Although the computer cannot
force learners to speak with other speakers of the language, it can suggest to learners that they practise
with other speakers at various points throughout the program.
Learning Content
Another possible problem with CALL programs is that sometimes misleading, oversimplified
explanations are provided. Not only will this waste the students’ time, it will confuse them and will not
meet their learning needs. Care must be taken to ensure that this is avoided in the design process. One
further issue to consider is correctness – it is important that the linguistic elements of the language are
reviewed with a native speaker to ensure correctness. This may be more difficult in the CALL situation
than when dealing with more traditional learning media as the content provider may be more removed
from the courseware production process than may be the case in the traditional production process.
Underutilisation of Resources
Often CALL programs provide learners with a whole variety of resources to make the learning process
more stimulating and enriching. However, users may not make full use of the software (Chapelle et al.,
1996; Cobb and Stevens, 1996). No matter what wonders a program contains, if the users do not use
them, they will not be of benefit. This can be partly overcome with user training. If users are made
aware of the features and their benefits, they will be more likely to use them. Also, if they are given
guidance about when to use what feature, they will feel more confident with the use of these resources.
Ineffective Deployment
If there is a mismatch between the perceived and the actual setting of a CALL program, its effectiveness
may be limited. Is it for a single user or for group use? Will the program be a tutor or a tool? Hubbard
(1996) points out the importance of effective deployment of CALL programs. While the design of a
CALL program can try to encompass as many different learning situations as possible, it will not be
possible to cater for every situation.
Limitations in the deployment of CALL materials
There are still some drawbacks that exist in terms of the deployment of CALL materials. These will have
to be addressed and include:
· slow access,
· server complications,
· end-user configuration unknown,
· potential need for plug-ins,
· technophobic students/teachers.
3.5 CALL Development
CALL development is challenging and difficult. In an ideal situation, a CALL program will be developed
by a team of experts. There will be linguists, language specialists, teachers and software engineers. Each
person will bring his/her own expertise to the process to ensure that the final product does what it is
44
meant to do. Those with the pedagogical and language knowledge will make sure that the program is not
technology-driven and that pedagogical and language issues are to the fore. Several large corporations
have managed to produce CALL programs developed by a multidisciplinary team. However, such is the
range of options, teaching strategies and learning items in the language learning domain, that not all
possible combinations of languages and learning tasks can be covered. (For example, a package may
exist to teach Thai verbs to English speakers, but not to Hindi speakers).
The interdisciplinary nature of CALL contributes to the difficulty of CALL development, which often
expensive and time-consuming (Felix, 1998). CALL development uses linguistics, pedagogical theory,
graphics, sound, video programming and interactivity design (McCarthy, 1999). Ideally, a team of people
will work together to develop CALL materials (project manager, language instructors/tutors, curriculum
advisor, Internet expert, graphics designer, audio-visual team, computer programmer and evaluator
(Curtis et al., 1999)). Additionally, if a commercial product is being developed, a market researcher and
advertising agent will be involved in production and promotion of CALL materials.
However, such multidisciplinary teams do not always exist. Also, while there are many CALL programs
available (“for profit”, shareware and freeware), many teachers find that they cannot find exactly what
they are looking for in an already developed package. When a Spanish teacher wants to teach Central
American Spanish to Dutch students, there may not be a package already available to do so. One for
European Spanish may exist but it might not cover the particular feature that the teacher wishes to teach
(for example, the use of vos1 in Central America).
Sometimes, a teacher will work with a software developer to come up with a CALL program to teach a
particular topic, but sometimes the teacher will try to develop something on his/her own. However, in the
past, the whole process was not entirely straightforward. A language teacher had to learn something on
the computing side (for example, a programming language or an authoring tool that was rather limited in
its capabilities) before s/he could start to develop a package. Occasionally, a software developer with an
interest in language would write a program to teach some part of a language, possibly without the
background knowledge of language pedagogical issues. Sometimes, good programs were developed, but
other times the outcome was not so successful. CALL practitioners need to know how to convert the
theory into practice, as this is a non-trivial process (Zhao et al., 2000).
With the arrival of more user-friendly web authoring packages, teachers from the language “side of the
fence” can design their own CALL programs. They can decide what they want to teach and how they
want to teach it. As time progresses, more and more CALL programs will be developed by teachers and
this should further advance the whole CALL field. Not only will there be more programs that cater for
previously unaddressed topics, there will be more language students using CALL programs. Thus it will
be possible to determine more precisely what are the “good” features of CALL and what are the ones to
avoid.
1 vos is used in some Central American countries instead of tu for the second personal singular. The
conjugation for vos is also slightly different than the conjugation for tu.
45
3.5.1 The Design of a CALL Program
There are many different starting points for the design of a CALL program. These include theories of
instruction, theories of learning, curriculum imperatives, experiments with a new technology, exercise
types, learning problems, language skills and the delivery of materials to a large number of students
(Levy, 1997). The design used in the present project is discussed in more detail in chapter 6, but it
basically follows that of Hubbard (1996). Hubbard’s Methodological Framework is comprehensive yet
flexible and builds on previous models. It is not constraining and provides CALL developers with a map
of the CALL process from design to deployment. Hubbard's Framework provides a useful checklist and
guide for CALL development. In all, there are more than 40 items mentioned, each of which can be
further broken down and expanded. The Framework is helpful when designing CALL courseware and is
neither prescriptive nor restrictive.
Chapter 6 outlines the elements of the Framework and the fit between it and the template. Culture is one
facet of the language learning process that is not addressed in Hubbard's Framework (Levy, personal
communication). The template overcomes this by incorporating a section on culture and by the flexible
file structure enables cultural information to be provided with most courseware elements.
Some of the general elements in the CALL design process are considered here, while chapter 6 deals with
the template design in more detail. The order is not significant, as each CALL development project will
have a different starting point. For example, if PCs are already available, the issue of what hardware to
use may not arise. As detailed analysis of each element would fill many chapters in itself, a brief
summary of the key points of each is provided.
Hardware
In an ideal world, a CALL developer would be able to customise the hardware to the needs of the
proposed system. However, this is hardly ever the case. Time-Shared Interactive Computer-Controlled
Television (TICCIT, 2001; Levy, 1997) is an exception which had specific hardware developed for the
project. Most projects use commercially available hardware for their systems. Currently, that implies
that an IBM PC or compatible or a Macintosh computer would be used. The hardware decision is an
important one, as it can often determine what software is available or possible. In the platform
independent world (cf. Java, XML) that is fast becoming a reality, this may not be as much an issue in the
future as before.
Software
In CALL terms, software development can range from making minor modifications to an existing
program, using an authoring package to writing a program from scratch in a High Level Language (HLL).
Using an authoring package is much easier than programming with a HLL. Authoring packages are one
of the easiest ways for language teachers to construct CALL programs (Ahmad et al., 1985). Some
packages have an authoring language with a small set of instructions available to the users to produce
CALL programs. A disadvantage of authoring tools is that the developer is tied into a particular structure
and there can be a lack of flexibility.
46
HLLs offer the user more control over what the program does (Underwood, 1984). They are more
difficult to learn and it usually takes longer to produce the desired outcome. However, the more recent
authoring packages are quite flexible and accessible for language teachers, with some providing access to
a scripting facility or allow the integration of HLL code. Usually there is some component that allows the
incorporation of multimedia technologies into the application. One widely available option that is
increasingly being used is the World Wide Web and markup languages such as HTML and XML. There
are now many sophisticated packages that developers can use to develop creative pages to enhance the
learning process.
Authoring Packages
Obviously, not everyone will have a multidisciplinary development team at their disposal. Teachers often
find commercially produced materials (both CALL and non-CALL) unsuitable in terms of pedagogic
content. On the other hand, it is not feasible to convert content writers into programmers (Bangs and
Shield, 1999).
One approach adopted is the use of authoring packages. Authoring packages enable teachers to develop
CALL materials without having to learn how to program. Templates are provided which courseware
developers (teachers) can modify or populate with their own data. Web pages with various different
language exercises and lessons can be created with authoring packages. A teacher can develop material
that is locally relevant and based on student needs and, importantly, can keep material up to date and add
new material.
Apart from the constraints that may be imposed by the authoring packages (e.g. what is doable given the
design), there are other problems that may occur. Occasionally, due to the fact that authoring may be a
new skill for the teacher, the material produced lacks academic rigour, as most of the effort is spent on
getting something produced. The final products are often text-based and materials are mainly aimed at
the lower-proficiency levels. If something is produced in collaboration with an IT department, it will
often be software driven.
The CALL author is not always to blame. It is technologically easier to produce text-based materials, as
the integration of sound, images and video is often not straightforward. A lack of a clearly defined
theoretical framework robs the author of “ammunition” when dealing with the IT department. Another
problem that arises is that the knowledge gained and the material produced often stay local. Even within
the same university, there may be little sharing of CALL skills and resources produced. Materials are
rarely used in other universities and often there is little or no impact at a higher (i.e. outside) level.
Bangs and Shield (1999) outline two projects that aim to address this problem. The Open University has
developed authoring tools that allow externally held resources to use a central engine. They use a
combination of scripts, node labels and data, hyperlinking and formatting to produce CALL materials.
Content (sound, image, text) is separated from logic (scripts and templates). It is proving successful at
achieving economies of scale. The MALTED (Multimedia Authoring for Language Tutors and
Educational Development) (Malted, 2000) project is a European-wide project that not only aims to
47
provide user-friendly authoring tools, but also to avoid duplication of previous development efforts. An
asset database is being set up so that CALL materials can be shared and reused. Curtis et al. (1999) point
out that CALL development requires capital investment, a systems development approach (which is
expensive) and that there is no guarantee of return.
The Internet and Email
The Internet has made access to authentic language materials easier. For the world’s major languages,
there are online newspapers and news services with up-to-the-minute information. Email, chat and
message boards are all available to the learner of one of these languages.
It has been stated that assigning a tutor role to the computer frees up a teacher to work on the more
creative aspects of language teaching (Levy, 1997). However, this may actually place a greater burden on
the teacher. Also, it assumes that the computer actually successfully completes its side of the bargain
(undertaking the ‘more tiresome labours of language teaching’). The use of the Internet creates an
additional workload for the language teacher. Suitable web sites will have to be researched in advance.
If long-distance collaboration projects are being worked on (for example, between different universities),
organisational and curricular challenges must be faced.
3.5.2 CALL Evaluation
It is difficult for CALL authors to evaluate their work as there is no reliable conceptual framework or
yardstick available. It is hard for CALL workers to know if they are comparing the same things. As of
yet, no metalanguage for describing CALL methodologies and materials has emerged. This causes
confusion and hampers the sharing of knowledge and experience. In evaluating a CALL program,
factors such as ease of use, quality of the user interface, screen design and organisation must be
considered.
The following checklist is recommended by Rüschoff (1998):
· functional aspects and content appropriateness need to be established,
· linguistic aspects, both in terms of effective presentation of content and in terms of fruitful learnersoftware
interaction, must be investigated,
· learner and tutor satisfaction are further important issues of any significant evaluation,
· the effectiveness of tutorial strategies and navigational procedures integrated into the courseware
must be considered,
· levels of progress and results achieved by learning with a given item of courseware are to be
examined but difficult to measure,
· guidelines for the most effective learning scenarios in view of different types of courseware need to
be part of evaluation and testing, i.e. whether courseware is best used in a classroom setting, for selfstudy,
or as part of a telecooperative learning scenario.
48
3.5.3 CALL Success Factors
It would be too simplistic to assume that a magic formula exists for the success of CALL. Too many
factors and variables need to be considered. The following general guidelines should be taken into
account.
Needs
· appropriate expertise, hardware, software, administrative and technical support (Felix, 1998),
· CALL practitioners need to keep abreast of development in related fields,
· consideration to methodology and all the other elements applied in a non-CALL situation,
· teacher training (McCarthy, 1999) (teachers are often more technophobic than their students),
· student training (keyboard skills, navigation skills and general IT awareness (McCarthy, 1999)).
Things not to do
· do not assume that students are excited by CALL (McCarthy, 1999),
· do not underestimate the confusion and disorientation that may be experienced by novices,
· do not create unstructured materials (assuming that the students will “figure it out”),
· do not just reproduce what could be in a book (Felix, 1999).
Things to do
· do place emphasis on interactive strategies for feedback and teaching (Felix, 1998),
· (for tutors) do include friendly discourse, different activities, cultural information, exercises with
feedback, interactive exercises and links (Felix, 1998),
· do provide good front pages (Felix, 1998),
· do provide a mental map of the site (unlike a book, the totality of a site cannot be easily
viewed/grasped at once) (McCarthy, 1999),
· do promote self-regulated learning (Zhao et al., 2000),
· do be responsive to learner’s needs, capabilities and interests (Zhao et al., 2000).
Language learning is generally eclectic in nature. No one theory covers all aspects of the learning
process. The same is true of CALL (Curtis et al., 1999; McCarthy, 1999).
3.6 CALL and Culture
3.6.1 Language and Culture
Culture is often seen as mere information conveyed by language and as separate from language.
However, Halliday (1990) argues that culture dictates grammar, vocabulary and metaphors. Culture in
language learning is not an expendable fifth option that comes after the four skills of reading, writing,
listening and speaking (Kramsch, 1993). Kramsch points out that there are limitations of communicative
competence and that just knowing the rules of a language may not be sufficient if the necessary cultural
knowledge is not also present.
49
Language and culture are inextricably intertwined and culture naturally plays an important role in the
language learning process. Paige et al. (2001) provide a review of the literature on this subject. The
register and vocabulary to be used and the implicit assumptions used in a language are influenced by the
cultural knowledge and metaphors of its speakers (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Lakoff, 1987). Learners
must be aware of the linguistic choices that exist, how they are to make those choices and the significance
of those choices when studying a language. It is not just a matter of learning the rules - the language
learner must also aim to understand the culture of the speaker to gain an insight into a native speaker's
thought process so that s/he can deal with those situations where the rules are undefined. Learners should
be aware of the similarities and differences between their culture and the L2 culture. For example,
students studying Japanese need to know that there are different levels of politeness and these vary based
on the relationship between the speakers. While native English speakers may initially find this unusual, it
is not an uncommon feature in Asian languages. It may be of interest to native English speakers to realise
that English has different registers and that an English speaker will use different vocabulary when dealing
with different people (e.g. an interviewer or a friend).
A language is inherently imbued with cultural references. It is difficult for a beginning language learner
to understand or sometimes to even notice them. However, exposure to the L2 culture can help the
learner understand these initially obscure references. Language and culture are never frozen in time -
words and linguistic structures disappear and evolve. For example, in English, the use of the subjunctive
is declining while new words relating to technology (e.g. Internet) are emerging.
The traditional end target for the language learner is to achieve near native speaker fluency. However,
Kramsch (1993) points out that there is no one stereotypical native language speaker. This holds true
even in a relatively homogenous society such as Japan, where a middle-aged housewife will speak
differently than a schoolgirl. Even though a language learner may be aware of the cultural differences,
s/he may not be comfortable with adopting the culture of the L2 speakers. Jordan (1992) reports on a
Japanese man studying English who did not want to be addressed by his first name (as he felt more
comfortable with the Japanese custom of addressing people by their family name).
3.6.2 Issues for the language learning process
Learner cultural background
Where possible, it is important to take the cultural background of the learner into consideration when
developing CALL and language learning materials. The similarities and differences between the L1 and
L2 cultures can determine how easy or difficult it is for the learners to understand the target culture (this
is not to imply a direct correlation). The native culture of the language learner can also shape the
explanations required by the learner. Items that are common between the learner's own culture and the
target culture often do not require an explanation, but those elements that are different must be explained.
For example, Nawat uses the word taha for you second person singular in English and the English version
of the courseware simply provides a translation of the word. However, the Spanish version of the
courseware needs to explain that taha is used for both usted and tu, as Central American Spanish uses
both words for the second person singular. Another example occurs with the word zacat, which means
grass in English or césped in European Spanish. However, the word used in El Salvador is zacate, a
50
borrowing from Nawat. Therefore, the translation provided in the Spanish version of the courseware is
zacate, which is culturally and pedagogically more appropriate.
Language Learners level and environment
The issue of culture and language is more challenging for foreign language learners than it is for second
language learners, although it is not entirely straightforward for the second language learners either. In
the foreign language classroom, learners can learn about the L2 culture by looking at cultural rules that
differ from their own culture. L2 beginners usually enjoy the language learning process as they have an
opportunity to talk about themselves, but intermediate learners find that they have less to say. Their study
often involves the use of texts which are more challenging for the learner as they contain unknown sociohistorical
connotations (Kramsch, 1993). She also points out that silences (i.e. what is not written) vary
from language to language and the language learner must be aware of this.
One interesting aspect of the issue of culture and language in the language learning situation, is the
impact of the education system on the learning goals and approaches. Europeans may be more interested
in meta-communication (i.e. how best to learn to communicate (Breen, 1985)), while people in the United
States of America may value action and communication (e.g. Omiggio, 1986). The native culture of the
L1 classroom may inhibit understanding of the L2 classroom culture. For example, it is challenging for
Japanese students of English, who are used to a hierarchical education system, to be comfortable with the
more open environment of a European or North American classroom.
Authenticity
Authenticity is an issue in the language learning process. Widdowson (1979) argues that authenticity has
to do with the use of a text rather than what is in the text. For example, although a menu in German
might be an authentic text, using it to teach superlatives may be not an authentic use of the text. The
challenge for the language teacher is to make the authentic text accessible to the language learner, not by
altering it substantially, but by providing backup information for the learner.
3.6.3 CALL and Culture
CALL can contribute to enhancing the learner's grasp and understanding of the L2 culture. The
hypermedia aspects of CALL (via links) provide the learner with multiple access points to the same
material and can enable the learner to read cultural information about language in the material. This
information may be presented on several different levels. For example, padiux is Nawat for thanks. An
accompanying cultural note might state that this comes from borrowing por causa de (for the cause of)
and Dios se lo pague (God will pay you back) from Spanish, meaning that "(I hope) that God will reward
you". More detailed information about other Spanish borrowings or the cultural and linguistic effects of
the Spanish arrival on the Pipils could be provided via a link to another page which, in turn, could have
more information on other related topics.
For the world's Most Commonly Taught Languages (MCTLs) and Less Commonly Taught Languages
(LCTLs), there is now a wealth of different material available on line. This includes newspapers, videos,
51
radio and television shows, chat rooms and discussion groups. These materials are directed at the native
speakers and provide the language learner with a unique insight in to the L2 culture.
Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) provides a unique opportunity for language learners to
interact with native speakers of the L2. In tandem learning projects, learners use both their L1 and L2 in
communication with other learners. Learners can learn a lot from the cultural feedback and corrections of
their tandem learning partners. Müller-Hartmann (2000) reports on a tandem learning project in which
involved German, Canadian and USA students. He outlines the benefits for the participants including the
development of positive attitudes and an awareness of the other culture, increased factual knowledge of
the other culture, the acquisition of interpretive skills and improved intercultural communication skills.
He states that a task-based approach has potential for initiating and sustaining intercultural learning
processes in an electronic learning environment and points out that close monitoring of the learning
process is important in order to enhance intercultural learning.
Kramsch and Andersen (1999) report on the use of multimedia technology to teach language in an
authentic cultural setting. They state that authentic video recordings and other cultural information can
help learners grasp the socio-cultural setting of the language use. However, care must be paid to how the
material is interpreted and the learner must be able to observe the context and know how to blend the
linguistic features of what is being said with the context in which it is being said. They present an
example of a multimedia Quechua language program (Ucuchi: Quechua Live and in Color! (Andersen,
1987, 1996; Andersen and Daza, 1994)) that is based on a two-hour ethnographic film taped in Bolivia in
1989. The courseware could use the video as a rich semiotic text that could be interpreted in many ways
and could be used to develop a learner's socio-cultural competence. Herron et al. (2000) report on the
effectiveness of using instructional video to teach culture to beginning foreign language students,
particularly with regard to cultural practices.
While CALL has several potential benefits for the teaching of culture in the language learning process,
care must be taken to ensure that culture is not compartmentalised as a separate, optional or ancillary
component of CALL courseware. Kramsch (1993) points out that culture is not an expendable, extra
option in the language learning process. Also, learners may feel overwhelmed at the quantity and level of
material available online. If CALL courseware provides links to external, authentic sites, it would be
helpful to the learner to provide background information on the site, even thought there may always be
some level of frustration for the learner. While culture is recognised as very important, time limitations
constrain the amount of time available/allocated to the study of culture in the language learning process.
CALL may stretch that time by providing cultural information in an enticing and appealing manner that
may encourage the learner to explore the culture of their L2 community.
3.6.4 CALL, Culture and Endangered Languages
Culture and Endangered Languages
ELs are disadvantaged in most aspects of CALL. However, they may have a unique advantage when
considering culture. While second and foreign language learners may be unfamiliar with the culture of
the L2 community, EL learners, who come from the EL community, live in (almost) the same culture as
52
the EL speakers. They can understand many of the cultural references in the CALL courseware and most
of the materials and settings will be familiar to them. For example, learners from Santo Domingo de
Guzmán will be familiar with the lifestyle portrayed in the Nawat courseware, as it is also their culture.
There is no need to explain why people get up early or why women walk around with baskets on their
head. Even learners one or two generations removed from the EL community will have a greater
understanding of the target culture than a learner from a different culture. They may still share some of
the EL culture and may recall other aspects of the culture via remembrances of things their parents or
grandparents said or did.
Challenges and Opportunities
Developing CALL materials can be more challenging for ELs than MCTLs and LCTLs. It may also be
difficult to provide cultural information as the culture of the EL community may not have been previously
documented or may have been documented a long time ago and may no longer reflect current culture.
However, the act of developing CALL materials may spur cultural documentation efforts. CALL
courseware can also provide a forum for the publication of cultural material. For example, lecturers in the
Universidad de El Salvador have documented aspects of the Pipil culture but they lacked a medium of
public dissemination. They have expressed an interest in augmenting the cultural information available in
the courseware with their own material.
The development of CALL materials also provides members of the EL community with a method of
recording and presenting their culture. For example, the song provided with the courseware is an original
song by Paula López, who is probably the youngest remaining competent speaker of Nawat (see section
5.6, p90). Paula composes songs and poems that generally go undocumented and unrecorded and are
therefore inaccessible to those outside the community. The CALL courseware provides an outlet for
Paula and other members of the community to express their culture. This is one of the benefits of CALL
in the EL context (see section 3.8.1).
3.7 CALL and Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs)
From the point of view of this project, it is interesting to consider the position of LCTLs. This includes
all the world’s languages except English, French, German and Spanish (which are the MCLT – Most
Commonly Taught Languages). Languages range from Amharic to Zulu, from Chinese to lesser-spoken
languages.
Morahg (1996) reports that considerations of heritage were pre-eminent motivations for the study of
many of the LCTLs. He notes that the survival and legitimisation of ethnicity as a form of communal
identity in the United States has been one of the great sociological surprises of the post-modern age. He
points out that the integration of culture is very important to the curriculum of LCTLs. Given the limited
resources available, teachers of LCTLs have expressed the need for co-operation among teachers, both
with and across individual languages, particularly with regard to technology. Native speakers need
training in language pedagogy. Courses that offer an overview of teaching methodologies and SLA
theory could be helpful.
53
LCTL teachers are aware of the fact that they could make more use of the research on language
acquisition and the need to prepare students to be life-long learners. Cross-language communication and
training is viewed as beneficial. One interesting idea is to integrate native speakers from the community.
In the LCTL Summit (CARLA, 1996), 58% of the participants wanted materials that potentially involve
the use of the computer. The issue of resource development (knowledge necessary to exploit the
technology and materials) is a real one. LCTL teachers want basic templates that are not based on a
specific language but can be used by all. Not everyone has the technology skills necessary and thus help
is required.
While some of these items may not be directly applicable to ELs, it is instructive to review LCTL issues,
as they could be considered to be a “half-way house” between MCTL and ELs. Considerations of
heritage would probably be the pre-eminent motivation for the study of an EL also. Along with this, the
integration of culture into the language learning program is especially important with ELs. It is
pedagogically sound, it provides a means to teach and preserve the culture and it may enable the use of
latent cultural/linguistic knowledge of the learner. For example, words for local foods and places may
have come from the EL.
When people have moved beyond worrying about basic survival, they may focus on other matters, such
as ethnic identity. With EL communities, it may be the case that the people most interested in learning
the EL may not necessarily be those who reside in the community. They may be people whose parents,
grandparents or ancestors originally come from the community. The issue of who “belongs” to the
community is a contentious issue is some parts of the world. For example, in some tribal communities in
North America, membership of the tribe is determined by blood lines. To be a member of the community
a person must have a specified percentage of tribal blood e.g. a person must have at least one tribal
grandparent or great-grandparent.
If the LCTL teachers feel that they have limited resources, the situation for EL teachers is surely more
acute. Co-operation may be possible within language families and geographically close regions,
especially considering the increasing organisational skills of indigenous groups. Even if the languages
are very different, most EL communities face the same issues with regard to CALL development (e.g.
limited resources– see chapter 4, p61 for more details). LCTL teachers have expressed the need for basic
templates for the development of CALL materials and one would image that a similar need exists for EL
teachers.
However, some of the LCTL features do not carry over to ELs. For example, those involved with LCTLs
would have more access to computers than those who work with ELs would. I believe that Computer
Mediated Communication (CMC) can be especially powerful for LCTLs but it may not be as feasible
(initially) for ELs. Also, like MCTLs, LCTLs have access to a plethora of authentic material – something
that is lacking for ELs. Furthermore, the limited number of native speakers of ELs imposes extra
constraints. Native speakers of ELs (who often have little formal education) will have significant
involvement in the production of language learning materials (and not just CALL materials). They will
have to be trained, not just in computer usage, but in language pedagogy also.
54
While there are plenty of CALL materials available for MCLTs, this is not the case for LCTLs. Felix
(1999) notes that collaboration is very important in the CALL/LCTLs context, given the scarcity of
resources. She suggests that complementary development be seen as the way forward for LCTLs and
CALL.
3.8 CALL and Endangered Languages
Chapter 4 discusses Endangered Languages in detail. This section presents some of the benefits and
challenges of developing CALL courseware for ELs.
3.8.1 Benefits
Mainstream CALL benefits (such as Learner Autonomy, privacy, feedback, motivation and interactivity)
can also be available to Endangered Languages. However, CALL can provide extra benefits in the EL
context.
Language documentation
In many cases, there is very limited printed information available about an EL and almost no information
available online. Developing a CALL program for an EL means that printed material will have to be
sought out and supplemented with oral material provided by its remaining speakers. This provides a
language documentation forum for the language that may otherwise not exist. CALL materials can be put
online and made available to a wider audience than is often possible with printed materials. This
increases the pool of possible contributors and may encourage others to help in the language and culture
documentation efforts.
For some ELs, currently available language materials may only document the language as it was spoken
at some time in the past and may not document that language as it is currently spoken. Developing CALL
materials for ELs now means that a current snapshot can be taken of the language. For example, most of
the limited material available on Nawat (with the exception of Campbell (1985) - see section 5.4, p79)
documents Nawat in the first half of the 20th century. The process of developing CALL materials for
Nawat meant that words for previously undocumented objects (e.g. bus) and references to time of day
could be recorded for the first time.
Online documentation
Another important aspect of CALL in the EL context, is the ability to put language information online.
This bestows several benefits including making the information available online for the first time, making
it available to a wider audience and improving the perception of the language amongst the EL community
members and the wider community by showing that it can be part of the digital age. For example, when
the Nawat courseware was put online, it was the first time such language information on Nawat had been
electronically available. People who were interested in finding out more about Nawat, but who could not
travel to Santo Domingo de Guzmán, were able to go to the Nawat courseware website and learn more
about the language.
55
Online publication also means that information previously available only in printed form that was not
widely distributed for economic reasons, can now be distributed without too much cost. For example,
lecturers in the Universidad de El Salvador expressed an interest on adding cultural information to the
Nawat language learning courseware. They told me that they had information available about the Pipil
(Nawat) culture but had no forum in which to publish it. Traditional printed materials were not
considered appropriate as the expenses involved would have meant that only a limited number of copies
could be produced. However, as there were limited material costs involved in making the information
available in electronic format, they felt providing the information on the Internet via the Nawat
courseware was now a viable option.
Multimedia documentation
CALL permits the multimedia presentation of information about language and culture. In the case of
ELs, it may be the first time the language has been presented publicly in a format other than a printed one.
Audio, image and video elements can all serve to document the language in a more holistic way. It can
also make the information more available to those with low levels of literacy (which is often the case in
EL communities). For example, the audio portion of the courseware was the first time Nawat was
recorded in a format that would be publicly disseminated and that Nawat was made available to those
with no literacy skills. The use of video in CALL materials can further enhance the delivery of cultural
information by showing the typical scenes for the daily life of its speakers. This would be of use to those
several generations removed for their ancestral community but also to those from within the community
to demonstrate that video is not something that is only appropriate for non-ELs.
Community involvement
It is very difficult, if not impossible (or unethical), to develop CALL materials for an EL without the
support of the members of the EL community. The development of CALL materials could potentially
foster a sense of importance within a community concerning its EL and possibly make community
members aware that they are the custodians of valuable information (about the language) that is of
interest to others and not just something without value. For example, Genaro Ramírez (one of my Nawat
informants) is well aware of the benefits of being a Nawat speaker and tries to impress upon the youth of
the community the potential benefits to them of being Nawat speakers. There are various ways that
community members can be involved in the development of courseware, even if they are not language
speakers. These include drawing images of local scenes and informing about the cultural life and arts and
crafts of the community.
Care must be taken when working with EL communities on language materials. Obviously community
support is essential and care must be taken to ensure that as many community members as possible feel
involved in the project rather than excluded. As in any society, it is impossible to please all of the
members all of the time, but inclusion rather than exclusion should be the aim where possible.
Opportunities for Expression of Culture
Language and culture are inherently intertwined. Communicative competence in a language is limited if
the cultural application of that language is unknown. The development of CALL materials provides a
56
forum for the public and external presentation of cultural information. Communities can have a platform
for publicising their songs and stories. Anecdotes and phrases that community members may have felt
where not of much interest can be sources of useful information in the language learning context.
Cultural items permeate the language used in CALL courseware, even if they are not explicitly identified.
For example, in the Nawat courseware, most time references are in relation to the sun (rather than a
specific time of day), there is little formality between speakers and various references to the family appear
throughout the courseware. This reflects the way of life of the Pipil people, whose daily life revolves
around the natural time determinants and who tend to live with or close to other family members. For
example, to get to Genaro Ramírez's house, you have to pass through his daughter's small garden, while
another daughter lives on the other side of his house and most his children live within walking distance of
his house. During my stay there, his many grandchildren were constantly dropping in or passing by the
house and were constantly made welcome each time.
3.8.2 Challenges
Assumptions that do Not Hold
Endangered Languages present unique challenges in CALL. Mainstream CALL makes several
assumptions that do not hold in the case of ELs. For example, in mainstream CALL, it assumed that
those working on the courseware are fluent in the language and that support materials (e.g. dictionaries
and grammars) are available in case of doubt. Mainstream CALL assumes that there are plenty of
available speakers and it can choose whom it wants to work with for the audio portion of the CALL
courseware. It generally assumes that a standard alphabet or writing system exists. It usually assumes
that a standard dialect exists and is aware of the common differences between other widely spoken
dialects (if they exist). Often, these assumptions do not hold in the case of ELs.
Lack of Available Material
In the EL situation, there may be no previous material available on the language. The remaining speakers
are usually not linguists with knowledge of language structures and may often not be fully competent in
the language. CALL courseware developers do not have the luxury of choosing some clear-spoken
member of the community to do the audio recordings and often have to accept whoever is able and
willing to work with them. If the language has never been written or no formal alphabet has been
established for it, CALL practitioners will have to agree on a writing system with the community. In
other situations, where several alphabets or writing systems have been used for the language, one alphabet
or writing system should be chosen for the courseware (unless, of course, agreement cannot be reached, in
which case the courseware may be developed for two writing systems).
Cultural Acceptability
Mainstream CALL assumes that the development of CALL courseware is culturally acceptable for the
speakers of the language. However, in the EL situation, this may not always be the case. While some EL
communities may welcome the development of modern CALL courseware for their language, other EL
communities may not wish to disseminate information about their language to outsiders. Some EL
communities may have cultural reservations about having recordings and images of those who have died
57
(as is the case with Aboriginal people in some Native Australian communities). Section 4.7, p71 has
more information about ELs, CALL and the web.
Lack of resources
While mainstream CALL practitioners may not have sufficient computers and money to implement
CALL courseware, it is especially challenging in the EL context. The EL community may not even have
electricity, let alone a computer or computers. Even when electricity is available, it may not be very
reliable. Furthermore, financial resources are generally very limited in EL communities, with many
members of the community living on meagre resources. It is very rare indeed that EL communities could
afford computers without external support. In many parts of the world, EL community members are
subsistence farmers or have to work long hours. They may not have the time or the energy to work on the
development of CALL materials. The lack of resources is a far more critical and challenging issue in the
EL context compared with mainstream CALL.
Syllabus Design
For the world's MCTLs there is a wealth of syllabus information available. Much research has been
carried out into different types of syllabus design and, for certain languages, the order in which linguistic
items should be taught. If the language being studied uses a writing system different from the one used in
the learner's native language, this will have an impact on the selected syllabus. Most of the information
available on syllabus design pertains to languages that are well known by the syllabus designer and often
have a rich literary tradition. With the exception of some ELs (e.g. Irish and other lesser-endangered
languages), this is generally not the case.
The most basic aspect of syllabus design is to know what the learner profile is and to decide what goes
into the syllabus (see sections 6.6.2.1, p102 and 6.6.2.2, p102 for more information on learner profile and
syllabus design). There are various approaches to syllabus design but ultimately the contents of a
language course must be specified. In the case of ELs, there are several problems to consider. Firstly,
there may be no one person fluent in the language and syllabus design principles. This means that the
syllabus designer and native speaker must work together as best they can to arrive at a syllabus that
presents the linguistic information correctly and in a coherent manner. Secondly, a native speaker may
consider some linguistic feature important that is difficult to present to the learner without prior linguistic
information. Thus, the issue of ordering of syllabus items must be dealt with. Even amongst researchers
of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL), there is no clear
consensus as to what is the optimum order of presentation of linguistic information. It is unreasonable to
expect that such an order could be selected for EL learners, at least, in the first few drafts of the syllabus.
Thirdly, if the underlying linguistic structure is unclear or unknown, it makes it more difficult to structure
the presentation of the limited information that is known.
A syllabus normally deals with a language learner at a particular level, be it beginner, intermediate or
advanced (with several layers in between). A syllabus for one level can draw on the knowledge learnt in
the previous level and expand on it. Ideally, a comprehensive language course will contain a suite of
syllabi that takes the learner from the ab initio stage to the advanced level. In the case of ELs, initially
58
only an ab initio syllabus will be designed (as it may be considered unnecessary initially or too optimistic
to develop further syllabi for more advanced learners). It is important therefore, that the syllabus can
easily be enhanced and extended if required.
Typical language syllabi include general information about greetings, the family and work. These
elements are also quite suitable for EL syllabi. However, there are some elements from syllabi that are
not immediately relevant in the EL context. For example, writing a job application or preparing a phone
conversation would be alien things to do in many EL environments. In the case of Nawat and the Pipil
community in Santo Domingo de Guzmán, most jobs do not require an interview, let alone a written
application. Furthermore, most homes in Santo Domingo de Guzmán do not have a telephone, so a phone
etiquette has not emerged and is not yet required learning.
3.9 Project Impact
Learner Profile
SLA research shows that motivation and attitude are important. One of the aims of the present project is
to encourage younger members of the community to take an interest in learning the Nawat language.
Crookes and Schmidt (1991) identified some ways of relating motivation factors to classroom techniques,
curriculum and syllabus design. These include personalising material and focusing on the concrete rather
than the abstract. Thus, the syllabus will concentrate on concrete items and the CALL program will
provide puzzles for the learner. The material can be personalised by using references to relevant place
names and realistic and known settings (e.g. the local village, rather than an anonymous town or city).
Motivation
EL community members generally lack instrumental reasons for learning the EL. However, instrumental
motivation could be fostered (e.g. awarding diplomas for achieving a certain level of course completion).
In the Pipil community of El Salvador (in Santo Domingo), Genaro Ramirez (one of my principal
informants – see chapter 5, p75) tries to (instrumentally) motivate the learners by telling them of all the
opportunities that have come his way by virtue of the fact that he is a Nawat speaker. These include his
current position as director of the cultural centre in Santo Domingo and various trips to international
conferences.
Attitude
Attitude towards the target language and proficiency may be correlated (Savignon, 1972). Okada et al.,
(1996) point out that negative attitudes toward the target language can be detrimental to learning. If a
positive attitude can be fostered, it will help the learners. Showing that the EL can be part of the digital
age can help create a more positive attitude to the language. Parents, peers, the learning situation,
teachers and ethnicity can have a positive effect also. The present project aims to ensure that the learner
enjoys the courseware, has a desire to use it and does not feel threatened by overly technical language or
very difficult exercises.
59
Learner Autonomy
It is rare that students learn how to learn. Learner autonomy is an important part of the learning process,
but often students do not know how to learn. Oxford (1990) outlines different language learning
strategies (both direct and indirect). The template will provide the learner with a set of language learning
tips to help them be more effective language learners. Several writers have pointed out the importance of
technical support. This is not something that an EL community may have available to it. This means that
the software produced must be very reliable (a non-trivial task). Felix (1998) has pointed out that CALL
workers should avoid reinventing wheels. The present project aims to learn from other sites and projects,
using successful ideas where appropriate.
CALL Benefits
CALL seems to offer many potential benefits in the EL context. While such mainstream CALL benefits
as learner autonomy and privacy may not be so important in the EL setting, other benefits such as
language documentation (general, online and multimedia) and cultural expression may be more important
in the longer term. Thus, the template aims to make the language information available in different
formats (print, online and audio) so as to facilitate multiple ways of expression. It also aims to make it
easy for non-technical people to add information to the template so that they will be encouraged to
contribute to the courseware.
Syllabus
Given the difficulty in designing an appropriate syllabus for a well-studied language (e.g. English), the
template does not pretend to present a perfect syllabus. However, the template aims to present an outline
syllabus that is a guideline to those who will use the template to develop CALL courseware. Appendix C
(p185) contains the syllabus provided by the template and gives information on the course objectives and
content. It takes the ab initio learner through the basics of a language, using the communicative approach
grounded in everyday speech situations. Not all EL communities live in the same environment, but
humans, regardless of where they live, have several things in common, such as friends and family, eating
and work. The template is very flexible and users of the template can easily change the order of teaching,
remove or add new items as their situation demands. The syllabus provided with the courseware is based
on the learning needs of a rural EL community in Central America, but it could also be suitable for
similar EL communities.
3.10 Summary
This chapter gave an outline of the CALL domain. It provided an introduction to CALL including an
overview of its multidisciplinary nature, the CALL development process and the tutor/tool distinction.
Both the benefits of CALL (e.g. learner autonomy, privacy, feedback, motivation and interactivity) and its
limitations (e.g. limited availability of resources, anti-social behaviour and ineffective deployment) were
outlined. CALL development is a non-trivial task and issues involved in the design and evaluation of
CALL materials were highlighted, along with CALL success factors. Culture is important in the
language learning process and the interaction of CALL and culture was reviewed, including the unique
advantages that EL learners may have over the mainstream language learner when culture is considered.
CALL and Less Commonly Taught Languages were reviewed as they can been seen as a “half-way
60
house” between ML (Majority Languages) and ELs. The benefits (e.g. documentation and cultural
expression) and challenges (e.g. lack of knowledgeable speakers, money, time, computers and resources
in general as well as competing priorities) of CALL in the EL context were outlined. Finally, the impact
of these topics on the project and the design and development of proposed template were discussed