Embedding technology in translation teaching:evaluative considerations for courseware integration

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article shall discuss a number of factors to be considered in the process ofintegrating computer technology into the student language learning experience. Itexamines research on student attitudes and the factors that affect studentengagement with the technology before looking at the experiences of a projectundertaken at the University of Ulster aimed at integrating computer technologyinto the delivery of undergraduate classes on French translation. By drawing onthe experience and examples in the project, this article shall conclude by outlininga number of issues to be considered in the integration of multimedia technologiesin the delivery of language learning. This will include a range of considerations,
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-16
JournalComputer Assisted Language Learning
Volume26
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Mar 2012

Fingerprint

Teaching
Students
experience
language
learning
multimedia
student
Language Acquisition
Translation Teaching
French Translation
Undergraduate
Ulster
Multimedia
Computer Technology

Keywords

  • integration
  • attitudes
  • motivation

Cite this

@article{2e081c57979d45e18a29e466841ce504,
title = "Embedding technology in translation teaching:evaluative considerations for courseware integration",
abstract = "This article shall discuss a number of factors to be considered in the process ofintegrating computer technology into the student language learning experience. Itexamines research on student attitudes and the factors that affect studentengagement with the technology before looking at the experiences of a projectundertaken at the University of Ulster aimed at integrating computer technologyinto the delivery of undergraduate classes on French translation. By drawing onthe experience and examples in the project, this article shall conclude by outlininga number of issues to be considered in the integration of multimedia technologiesin the delivery of language learning. This will include a range of considerations,",
keywords = "integration, attitudes, motivation",
author = "David Barr",
note = "Reference text: Barr, D. (2004). ICT – Integrating Computers in Teaching: Creating a Computer-Based Language-Learning Environment, Oxford, Bern, New York: Peter Lang. --- (2008). Computer-enhanced grammar teaching. In F Zhang and B Barber (Eds.) Handbook of Computer-Enhanced Language Acquisition and Learning (pp. 101-113) New York: Information Science Reference. Bennett, S., Manton, K. and Kervin, L. (2007). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5) 775-786. Conole, G. (2008). The student perspective: the ever-changing landscape of technology use. ReCALL, 20 (2) 124-140. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. D{\"o}rnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21: 43-59. Felix, U. (2008). The unreasonable effectiveness of CALL: what have we learned in two decades of research? ReCALL 20 (2):141-157. Fischer, G. (2001). User Modelling in Human-Computer Interaction. Journal of User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11 (1/2): 65-86 Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (1999). Understanding student learning’. In H Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice (pp. 21-40) London: Kogan Page. Gillespie, J. (2008). Mastering Multimedia: Teaching Languages through Technology. ReCALL 20 (2):121-123. Gillespie, J.H. and Barr, J.D. (2002). Reluctance, Resistance and Radicalism: A Study of Staff Reaction towards the Adoption of CALL/C&IT in Modern Languages Departments. ReCALL, 14 (1): 129-41. Gillespie, J. and McKee, J. (1999) Resistance to CALL: degrees of student reluctance to use CALL and ICT. ReCALL 11 (1): 38-46. Hawkins, E. (1981). Modern Languages in the Curriculum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hubbard, P. 1988. An Integrated Framework for CALL Courseware Evaluation. CALICO Journal 6 (2): 51-72. Jones, C. (1986). It is not so much the program, more what you do with it: the importance of methodology in CALL. System, 14 (2): 171-178. Leakey J. (2011). Evaluating Computer Assisted Language Learning: an integrated approach to effectiveness research in CALL, Bern: Peter Lang. Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Based Language Learning: Context and Conceptualization, Oxford: Clarendon. Mazer, J., Murphy, R. and Simonds, C. (2007). I'll See You On {"}Facebook{"}: The Effects of Computer-Mediated Teacher Self-Disclosure on Student Motivation, Affective Learning, and Classroom Climate. Communication Education, 56 (1): 1-17. Munday, J. (2001). Introducing Translation Studies, London: Routledge. Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning—parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17 (2): 163–178. Newstead, S.E. and Hoskins, S. (1999). Encouraging Student Motivation. In H Fry, S Ketteridge and S Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (62-74). London: Kogan Page. Nino, A. (2009). Machine translation in foreign language learning: language learners’ and tutors’ perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages. ReCALL 21 (2) 241-258. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5): 1-6. Retrieved from the WWW 12 August 2009, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/ Prensky{\%}20-{\%}20Digital{\%}20Natives,{\%}20Digital{\%}20Immigrants{\%}20-{\%}20Part1.pdf Pym, A. (1992). Translation error analysis and the interface with language teaching. In C Dollerup and A Loddegaard (Eds.), The Teaching of Translation (279-288). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ryan, R., and Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 5 (1): 68-78 Scinicariello, S (1997). ‘Uniting teachers, learners, and machines: Language Laboratories and other choices’. In M Bush and R Terry (Eds.), Technology- Enhanced Language Learning (185-213). Illinois: McGraw-Hill. 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. Stracke, E. (2007). A road to understanding: A qualitative study into why learners drop out of a blended language learning (BLL) environment, ReCALL, 19 (1): 57-78. Talbot, G. (1996). Looking up in anger: translation practice in the CALL lab. ReCALL, 8 (1): 20-23 Tharp, R. G., and Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life, New York: Cambridge University Press. Thornbury H., Elder, M., Crowe, D., Bennett, P. and Belton, V. (1996). Suggestions for successful integration. Active Learning, 4: 18-23. Toner, G., Barr, D., Carvalho Martins, S and Wright, V (2008). Multimedia Language Learning in Higher Education in the UK, University of Ulster. Retrieved from the WWW (17 August 2009) at http://www.cemll.ulster.ac.uk/downloads/survey{\%}20report.pdf Ushida, E. (2005). The Role of Students Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning in Online Language Courses. CALICO Journal, 23 (1): 49-78. Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos International. Winke, P. and Goertler, S. (2008). Did We Forget Someone? Students’ Computer Access and Literacy for CALL. CALICO Journal, 25 (3): 482-509.",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/09588221.2012.658406",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "1--16",
journal = "Computer Assisted Language Learning",
issn = "0958-8221",
number = "1",

}

Embedding technology in translation teaching:evaluative considerations for courseware integration. / Barr, David.

In: Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 26, No. 1, 02.03.2012, p. 1-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Embedding technology in translation teaching:evaluative considerations for courseware integration

AU - Barr, David

N1 - Reference text: Barr, D. (2004). ICT – Integrating Computers in Teaching: Creating a Computer-Based Language-Learning Environment, Oxford, Bern, New York: Peter Lang. --- (2008). Computer-enhanced grammar teaching. In F Zhang and B Barber (Eds.) Handbook of Computer-Enhanced Language Acquisition and Learning (pp. 101-113) New York: Information Science Reference. Bennett, S., Manton, K. and Kervin, L. (2007). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5) 775-786. Conole, G. (2008). The student perspective: the ever-changing landscape of technology use. ReCALL, 20 (2) 124-140. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Dörnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21: 43-59. Felix, U. (2008). The unreasonable effectiveness of CALL: what have we learned in two decades of research? ReCALL 20 (2):141-157. Fischer, G. (2001). User Modelling in Human-Computer Interaction. Journal of User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11 (1/2): 65-86 Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (1999). Understanding student learning’. In H Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice (pp. 21-40) London: Kogan Page. Gillespie, J. (2008). Mastering Multimedia: Teaching Languages through Technology. ReCALL 20 (2):121-123. Gillespie, J.H. and Barr, J.D. (2002). Reluctance, Resistance and Radicalism: A Study of Staff Reaction towards the Adoption of CALL/C&IT in Modern Languages Departments. ReCALL, 14 (1): 129-41. Gillespie, J. and McKee, J. (1999) Resistance to CALL: degrees of student reluctance to use CALL and ICT. ReCALL 11 (1): 38-46. Hawkins, E. (1981). Modern Languages in the Curriculum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hubbard, P. 1988. An Integrated Framework for CALL Courseware Evaluation. CALICO Journal 6 (2): 51-72. Jones, C. (1986). It is not so much the program, more what you do with it: the importance of methodology in CALL. System, 14 (2): 171-178. Leakey J. (2011). Evaluating Computer Assisted Language Learning: an integrated approach to effectiveness research in CALL, Bern: Peter Lang. Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Based Language Learning: Context and Conceptualization, Oxford: Clarendon. Mazer, J., Murphy, R. and Simonds, C. (2007). I'll See You On "Facebook": The Effects of Computer-Mediated Teacher Self-Disclosure on Student Motivation, Affective Learning, and Classroom Climate. Communication Education, 56 (1): 1-17. Munday, J. (2001). Introducing Translation Studies, London: Routledge. Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning—parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17 (2): 163–178. Newstead, S.E. and Hoskins, S. (1999). Encouraging Student Motivation. In H Fry, S Ketteridge and S Marshall (Eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (62-74). London: Kogan Page. Nino, A. (2009). Machine translation in foreign language learning: language learners’ and tutors’ perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages. ReCALL 21 (2) 241-258. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5): 1-6. Retrieved from the WWW 12 August 2009, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/ Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf Pym, A. (1992). Translation error analysis and the interface with language teaching. In C Dollerup and A Loddegaard (Eds.), The Teaching of Translation (279-288). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ryan, R., and Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 5 (1): 68-78 Scinicariello, S (1997). ‘Uniting teachers, learners, and machines: Language Laboratories and other choices’. In M Bush and R Terry (Eds.), Technology- Enhanced Language Learning (185-213). Illinois: McGraw-Hill. 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. Stracke, E. (2007). A road to understanding: A qualitative study into why learners drop out of a blended language learning (BLL) environment, ReCALL, 19 (1): 57-78. Talbot, G. (1996). Looking up in anger: translation practice in the CALL lab. ReCALL, 8 (1): 20-23 Tharp, R. G., and Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life, New York: Cambridge University Press. Thornbury H., Elder, M., Crowe, D., Bennett, P. and Belton, V. (1996). Suggestions for successful integration. Active Learning, 4: 18-23. Toner, G., Barr, D., Carvalho Martins, S and Wright, V (2008). Multimedia Language Learning in Higher Education in the UK, University of Ulster. Retrieved from the WWW (17 August 2009) at http://www.cemll.ulster.ac.uk/downloads/survey%20report.pdf Ushida, E. (2005). The Role of Students Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning in Online Language Courses. CALICO Journal, 23 (1): 49-78. Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos International. Winke, P. and Goertler, S. (2008). Did We Forget Someone? Students’ Computer Access and Literacy for CALL. CALICO Journal, 25 (3): 482-509.

PY - 2012/3/2

Y1 - 2012/3/2

N2 - This article shall discuss a number of factors to be considered in the process ofintegrating computer technology into the student language learning experience. Itexamines research on student attitudes and the factors that affect studentengagement with the technology before looking at the experiences of a projectundertaken at the University of Ulster aimed at integrating computer technologyinto the delivery of undergraduate classes on French translation. By drawing onthe experience and examples in the project, this article shall conclude by outlininga number of issues to be considered in the integration of multimedia technologiesin the delivery of language learning. This will include a range of considerations,

AB - This article shall discuss a number of factors to be considered in the process ofintegrating computer technology into the student language learning experience. Itexamines research on student attitudes and the factors that affect studentengagement with the technology before looking at the experiences of a projectundertaken at the University of Ulster aimed at integrating computer technologyinto the delivery of undergraduate classes on French translation. By drawing onthe experience and examples in the project, this article shall conclude by outlininga number of issues to be considered in the integration of multimedia technologiesin the delivery of language learning. This will include a range of considerations,

KW - integration

KW - attitudes

KW - motivation

U2 - 10.1080/09588221.2012.658406

DO - 10.1080/09588221.2012.658406

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 1

EP - 16

JO - Computer Assisted Language Learning

T2 - Computer Assisted Language Learning

JF - Computer Assisted Language Learning

SN - 0958-8221

IS - 1

ER -