Egbert (2005) outlines Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in his book CALL Essentials: Principles and Practice in CALL Classrooms. To begin with, CALL is defined as any use of computers, particularly the use of software on computers and the Internet, to support language learning. Within the field of CALL, Egbert (2005) notes three themes: (1) the students and the learning, not the technology, should remain the center of language learning in a CALL classroom, (2) CALL can occur in any language learning situation, and (3) CALL is interdisciplinary and draws from a number of fields.
Egbert (2005) presents four principles associated with CALL in Chapter One of his text. The first principle focuses on eight conditions that create a well-structured language learning classroom. The principles focus on a learner-centered classroom that encourages authentic learning in a supportive environment. Similarly, the second principle extends these conditions by adding in ESL standards. Specifically, Egbert (2005) discussed TESOL standards, ESL Standards for Pre-K - 12 Students, which extends the eight conditions. Within these two principles, it is extremely important, says Egbert (2005), to keep the students' learning goals, not standards, at the center of the lessons.
Focusing on CALL, the third principle presents five guidelines for using CALL in the classroom. The guidelines state that technology must be used as an effective and efficient tool that is accessible to all students and that enhances the learning objectives of the course. To assist in bridging the use of computers in the language classroom, Egbert (2005) states his fourth principle, which is to integrate the National Education Technology Standards into the curriculum. (For more information on NETS, see: http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=NETS).
The author reflects on her principles through the eyes of a teacher and not a researcher. She talks about having a back-up plan in case the technology does not work, she discusses the need to also teach the students how to the technology, and she poses a question regarding the condition of not using technology purely to use technology.
It is this question that causes me to pause for thought. Egbert (2005) writes, "When deciding whether or not to use software, I think it is important to evaluate if technology would be better than other methods" (p. 16). She also states that she once agreed with the statement, "if the computer doesn't support learning, then it should not be used just to be used" (Egbert, 2005, p. 16). She states that she now is not sure that she agrees because students can learn something by just playing around on the computer.
Yes, students can learn just by playing around on the computer - they can learn how to use technology. However, all lessons should be focused around the learning objectives of the course and the learning objectives of the student. Students might learn something by playing around with a computer, but we must ask whether or not they are meeting their personal and educational goals. Students can learn something "valuable" (as Egbert puts it) by going shopping. The students might learn that baggy jeans are a thing of the past. The students will find this to be a "valuable" lesson because the students will be fashionable at school. We must pose the questions: to whom is it valuable and to what degree is it valuable?
Therefore, I do think that Egbert is correct in questioning the statement. Technology should be used for a purpose and in order to meet a goal - it should not be used just to be used.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tara,
ReplyDeleteI very much agree with you when you say, "we must ask whether or not they are meeting their personal and educational goals." I have found that schools frequently pressure or require teachers to use a certain amount or type of technology per term, regardless of the needs or goals of the course. Sometimes it is easy to incorporate a specific program or technique into a class, othertimes not at all. But, like you and Egbert said, with each assignment, we must ask, "what is the ultimate goal of this work and how will my students' learning (in this language class) benefit?"
Tara,
ReplyDeleteI very much enjoyed reading your summary and your reflection of Egbert's article.
I understand Egbert's uncertainty on whether or not students can learn something from just playing with a computer. No matter what, using technology in the target language will contribute to students learning about the target language and/or culture. The trick is to find the best way to optimize the students' use of technology in foreign language learning by guiding them in their use.
Tara,
ReplyDeleteThe question you are asking "to whom is it valuable and to what degree is it valuable?" is an important question not only for CALL but also for education in general.
I think many people would answr your first part of the question without difficulty: students. However, for the second part of the uqestion, I think people are still debating, although there are many promising results of using technology for langauge education--assuming that "valuable" meaning effectiveness and efficacy. Did you mean something else???