Abstract
This chapter reports on the results of a study undertaken to gauge what difference computer technology makes to grammar learning. Unlike other studies that compare the student performance learning grammar with the aid of technology to performance and without the technology, this work focuses on the impact technology has on student attitudes towards learning grammar through the computer. The chapter outlines how traditional grammar classes have been adapted for delivery in a multimedia situation and assesses the impact, both in terms of students’ perceptions about learning of grammar and in their actual performance that the computer has had on the process. The chapter also draws on the lessons learned in this project to help to maximise the potential of using technology in this type of teaching and learning context in the future.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Handbook of Research on computer-enhanced language acquisition and learning |
| Editors | Felicia Zhang, Beth Barber |
| Publisher | IGI Global |
| Pages | 101-114 |
| ISBN (Print) | 13: 978-1-59904-895-6 |
| Publication status | Published (in print/issue) - 2008 |
Bibliographical note
Reference text: Adamson, R (1998). ‘Modern Language teaching and grammar: an explicit relationship?’ In S Hotho (Ed.), Forum for Modern Languages Studies - Language Teaching and Learning: current trends in Higher Education, 34 (2) St Andrews: Oxford University Press, 170 – 183Barr, D (2004). ‘Students and ICT: an analysis of student reaction to the use of computer technology in language learning.’ In IALLT Journal 36 (2): 19 – 39
Chapelle, C & Hegelheimer, V (2000). ‘Methodological issues in research on learner-computer interactions in CALL’. In Language Learning and Technology, 4 (1): 41 – 59
Conole, G (2006, January). Mediating artefacts to guide choice in creating and undertaking learning activities. Paper presented at E-Learning Conference, University of Ulster
Cuban, L (2001) Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Davies, T & Williamson, R (1998). ‘The ghost in the machine: are ‘teacherless’ CALL programs really possible? In Canadian Modern Languages Review, 55 (1) 8 – 18
Engel, D & Myles, F (1996). ‘Grammar Teaching: The Major Concerns.’ In D Engel and F Myles (eds.) Teaching Grammar: Perspective in Higher Education London: Association for French Language Studies and Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research, 9 – 19
Esch, E & Zähner, C (2000). ‘The contribution of Information and Communication Technology (ICT): to language learning environments or the mystery of the secret agent’. In ReCALL, 12 (1): 5 – 18
Felix, U (2005). ‘What do meta-analyses tell us about CALL effectiveness?’ In ReCALL, 17 (2): 269 – 288
Fry, H, Ketteridge, S & Marshal, S (1999). ‘Understanding Student Learning’. In H
Fry, S Ketteridge and S Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education, London, Kogan Page, 21 – 40
Gillespie, J H (1995). ‘The integration of CALL tools into the Modern Languages Curriculum: a case study’. In: B. Rüschoff & D. Wolff (eds.), CALL & TELL in Theory and Practice: the Proceedings of EUROCALL 1994, 143 – 156
Gillespie, J H & McKee, R J (1999). ‘Resistance to CALL: degrees of student reluctance to use CALL and ICT’. In ReCALL, 11 (1): 38 – 46
Hoven, D (1999). ‘A model for listening and viewing comprehension in multimedia environments’. In Language Learning and Technology, 3 (1): 88 – 103
Kung, S-C & Chuo, T-W (2002). ‘Students' Perceptions of English Learning through
ESL/EFL Websites’ in TESL-EJ, 6 (1). Retrieved on 4 June 2007 from
http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej21/a2.html
Krashen, S (1999). ‘Seeking a Role for Grammar: A Review of Some Recent Studies’. In Foreign Language Annals, 32 (2): 245 – 257
Levy, M (1997). Computer-Based Language Learning: Context and Conceptual¬ization, Oxford: Clarendon
Martinez, P (2001). Improving student retention and achievement: what we know
and need to find out, Learning Skills Development Agency, London
McCarthy, B (1999). ‘Integration: the sine qua non of CALL’. In CALL-EJ online
1 (2). Retrieved 20 January 2006 from http://www.tell.is.ritsumei.ac.jp/callejonline/journal/1-2/mccarthy.html
Newstead, SE & Hoskins, S (1999). ‘Encouraging Student Motivation.’ In: H Fry, S Ketteridge and S Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, London, Kogan Page, 70 – 82
Nutta, J (1998). ‘Is computer-based grammar instruction as effective as teacher-directed grammar instruction for teaching L2 structures?’ In CALICO, 16(1): 49 – 62
Powell, B (1998). ‘The use of computer-assisted language-learning’. In Forum for Modern Language Studies, 34 (2): 184 – 94
Reagan, T (1999). ‘Constructivist epistemology and second/foreign language
pedagogy’. In Foreign Language Annals, 32, (4): 413 – 425
Schulz, R (2001). ‘Cultural Differences in Student and Teacher Perceptions Concerning the Role of Grammar Instruction and Corrective Feedback: USA-Colombia’. In The Modern Language Journal, 85 (2): 244 – 256
Sciarone, A G & Meijer, P J (1993). ‘How free should students be? A case from
CALL: computer-assisted language-learning’. In Computers and Education, 21, (1/2):
95 – 101
Stepp-Greany, J (2002). ‘Student perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millennium.’ Language Learning and Technology, 6 (1): 165 – 180
Tharp, R G & Gallimore, R (1988). Rousing minds to life, New York, Cambridge University Press
Thornbury H., Elder M., Crowe D., Bennett P. & Belton V. (1996). ‘Suggestions for successful integration.’ In Active Learning, 4, 18 – 23
Warschauer M. (1996). ‘Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction’. In Fotos S. (ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching, Tokyo: Logos International 3 – 20
Keywords
- Student attitudes
- Online learning
- Pedagogical development
- Grammar learning
- CALL integration
- Computer-based learning approaches