|
Classroom Teaching Technology in the language classroom has undergone little change over the last fifteen years. The main technologies used in the classroom are still overhead projectors, cassette player/recorders, video recorder/ players, video cameras, slides, etc. The main exceptions being CD players, frequently used for music (learning songs), and also video disk players. However, these new additions generally only fulfil a minor role. Language Laboratories Historically, language laboratories have continued to follow the same path as most other forms of educational technology. Each one is seen as a quick technological-fix to an existing learning/teaching issue. This is the impression given (naturally) by those who have vested interests in the acceptance of the technology (the marketers). The overhead projector for instance has been used in all sectors of education for over twenty five years, but how often is it used effectively? The next time that you are at a seminar or lecture notice how often overhead transparencies are made directly from printed text which is barely readable and cluttered. Little or no planning has gone into the design of the transparency as a "learning aid". In fact poor overhead transparencies tend to distract or even de-motivate audiences. Notice also how well the overhead projector has been set-up. Often there is severe keystoning (distorting of the images) which can cause a misrepresentation, especially of diagrams. These problems can be addressed with a little planning and preparation (yes, even the keystoning). Overhead projectors are excellent educational tools if they are used correctly for the correct purpose. However, they need to be carefully integrated into your presentation along with your other presentation strategies. Similarly, language laboratories are also excellent educational tools provided that they are reliable and used correctly for their intended purpose. Conventional language laboratories are still being manufactured and distributed throughout the world by Sony, Tandberg, Panasonic, and many other smaller manufacturers. Some manufacturers have integrated text displays, computer terminals, and other options into the student units. However, there is little evidence to suggest that these additions greatly enhance the ability of the language laboratory to perform its main function of developing student listening and speaking skills. I believe that very few language laboratories (like overhead projectors) are really maximised and this, together with a fear of technology, often leads to negative attitudes amongst many teachers.
Computers
The rapid increase in computer memory system capacities, and the greatly increased access and processing speeds have enabled modern computers to perform previously unimaginable functions at a relatively low cost. The multitude of applications of computers is now so widespread that computer literacy is rapidly becoming a prerequisite in most vocational areas. For the past ten years I have been directly associated with the application of most forms of technology for the purpose of language learning and there have been many claims for the benefits of computers in language learning. Upon my return to Australia in 1988 (after working with language technology in Indonesia for five years) I was amazed by the frequency of statements about how quickly it was envisaged that computers were going to make major inroads into all areas of language learning. For instance at my own Institution, a major Queensland university, it was often stated that computers were expected to replace the existing language laboratories within a year or two. Whereas in fact, this same department just recently (1997 - nine years later) replaced one of its older Tandberg language laboratories with a new Sony cassette based conventional language laboratory (replacement only). Computers are increasingly being used to provide teachers with options for both task specific, and self-access extension learning applications. With the relatively low cost of full multimedia systems, and the wide range of software now available on CD ROMs, computers are certainly playing a role in assisting language learning in many institutions. However, based upon my recent personal experience in two institutions, and some research I conducted in the use of technology in Australian universities in 1996, there appears to be many issues which still need to be addressed. Many of these issues directly reflect upon the appropriateness of the technology in the context of this consultancy. I will include an extract from that research for the purpose of highlighting many of the issues which need to be addressed before leaping onto another new technological-quick-fix. We must always carefully consider the ramifications of introducing new technologies. Consider this quote while you read through my research notes. "As Rogers notes in his classic, Diffusion of Innovations, "A system is like a bowl of marbles: move any one ofits elements and the positions of all the others are inevitably changed also" (Rogers, 1995, p. 419). Whentechnology is introduced "in isolation" (as a piecemeal change), it disturbs the rest of the system. The resultinginstability reduces the system's overall effectiveness."(James B. Ellsworth, http://horizon.unc.edu/projects/monograph/CD/Change_Innovation/Ellsworth.asp) The following extracts are from a piece of research that I conducted in 1996. I have 'edited-out' the names of the institutions involved, data tables, and most of the academic discussion relating to the research itself (I hope it still makes some sense), however, I believe that it raises some important issues (particularly for administrators) affecting technological changes in teaching. Computer Aided Language Learning High levels of rhetoric, supported by the reported abandonment of conventional Audio Active Comparative (AAC) learning laboratories in some major Australian language teaching institutions, proposes that:
Upon looking at the issues closely, I chose to divide the research into two separate papers because of the differing inherent natures of the issues, and the type of data that I was seeking. Paper 1 In this paper I have attempted to ascertain some basic statistics pertaining to *change in the use of language learning technologies. The data was collected by surveying (using a questionnaire) eighteen (18) Australian universities which I selected on the basis of the size of their language faculties. Thirteen (13) institutions responded by the deadline for submission of the paper. The data obtained from the survey certainly did not support the notion that `Most Australian institutions are changing to CALL technologies', based upon their existing commitments. All respondents, with the exception of one, employ conventional language laboratories, with the total number of installations being twenty nine (29). By comparison, only seven (7) of the institutions have CALL laboratories, with a total of twelve (12) installations. The main significance of the data was that with only one exception CALL technologies appear to be playing a supportive role. The importance of this role may be indicated by the fact that only four institutions out of the thirteen are utilising CALL for assessment purposes. Eleven (11) of the institutions surveyed clearly identify an intent to upgrade or extend their computer aided learning facilities. However, only two institutions identify an intention to replace conventional facilities with computer laboratories. There was no clear evidence to support the hypothesis that "Most Australian institutions are 'changing' to CALL technologies" and abandoning the use of conventional technologies. However, the evidence does suggest that the use of CALL is escalating, and that it is increasingly `supplementing' conventional technologies. Paper 2 The focus for this qualitative research was primarily upon examining the 'benefits of CALL technologies'. The research was conducted at two Queensland universities between September 9 and October 28, 1996. Hypothesis:
In this piece of research I attempted to address the two issues seperately; `improvement to quality of learning' and `the benefits of CALL for teachers and students'. It was certainly not within my means to attempt to perform a comparative measurement of student learning outcomes or personal advantage using various learning mediums. However, I believe that analysis of the key institutional factors which contribute to `quality', and data collected on `perceived benefits', in fact shone some valuable light on these issues. There were three main areas which I examined in attempting to explore these issues. 1. Research which has already been conducted by these institutions to establish:
2. The technology itself is only a medium. To investigate the factors pertaining to `quality of learning' we first need to examine the overall infrastructure and its potential for the development of quality learning materials which will maximise the medium.
3. Perceived advantages and disadvantages of the technology for faculty managers, teachers, and students. No substantial general comparative research appears to have been conducted in the area of CALL within either institution so as to confirm a position of superiority as a learning medium. The main 'individual' evidence offered supporting CALL methodologies was anecdotal. I have briefly addressed some of statements below, purely because they are representative of most of the comments that I received. The accompanying questions/ statements attempt to highlight the limitations of the assumptions which can be drawn from this frequently cited anecdotal evidence: "I am running a record-keeping function together with the software. Students who use it do better on tests + high interest level promotes motivation" (Questionnaire No.8 ) "Students seem to be able to achieve high grades after practising on 'Test Practice' prior to exams" (Questionnaire No.10) "No experiments have been done, but nearly all the students feel it enhances their learning + introduces them to important skills" (Questionnaire No. 15). 2. Current Potential For High Quality Outcomes (responses from Administrators and Teachers) Management generally acknowledged that time was currently inadequate for the preparation of CALL materials. Of special significance in raising this question with faculty management personnel was to identify what strategies have been implemented to address it. It was suggested by one of the respondents that a `policy document was under development' and another identified that `departments must budget for teaching relief and expertise from specialised centres'. However, in the light of current budget cuts, and staff reductions, how are these strategies really going to address present needs? An expectation that teachers will somehow manage to learn new skills, continually update those skills with changing technology, and maximise the new technologies to develop innovative and better teaching approaches appears unrealistic and not substantiated by the responses from the teaching staff themselves. They clearly identified that currently there is insufficient time to develop quality CALL materials. Availability of Assistance It was identified that structured teacher training and assistance being provided by the institutions or departments was generally inadequate. Budgets These were identified as (currently) Inadequate. Inter-Departmental/ Institutional Collaboration A low (reported) level of collaboration among teachers was a major concern because of the inadequate time teachers currently have available for materials development and research. Perhaps the sharing of resources and information could significantly improve materials development efficiencies and address some of the problems confronting issues of quality. Perceived Advantages and Disadvantages of CALL There were many interesting claims for the wizardry of the technology itself, however, none of these claims were linked directly to evidence of enhanced language skills acquisition. The fascination appears to be in the technology itself, not in actual 'proven enhanced outcomes'. The quality of the teaching materials and the `proven' strengths of the strategies employed will determine the `quality' of the learning. I was searching for positive statements asserting `proven' benefits, there were none. 3. Student Perceptions of CALL Materials Despite many sessions in the computer laboratories (due to the scheduling of this research late in the semester), I was unable to actually observe students using CALL materials. Upon investigation it was revealed that most of the CALL materials were designed for lower level or introductory language skills development. Many of the students were utilising the wordprocessing features of the computers to complete assignments, and a number were using Netscape (the Internet) to communicate with friends overseas in the language they were studying. Assignments had been set in this format for assessment purposes (I was impressed by this strategy). From the results of the surveys it would appear that students overall do not appear to be drawn to one particular medium. However, from the comments associated with their responses to various mediums, like; materials "too lower level" (basic), "poor audio is offputting", "can be boring", it was clear that the level of interest, the appropriateness, and the quality of the materials is paramount. There appears to be little or no evidence from within these institutions which supports the notions that general`Improvement to quality of learning is achieved by the use of computers, and that 'there are many advantages to both the students and lecturers from CALL', therefore the hypothesis would appear to be unproven. The main points arising from this research which are particularly relevant to the Indonesian context are:
Reflecting upon the existing technology management situation in Indonesia, and current economics, I believe that computer laboratories for language training are currently inappropriate. However, on a small scale in libraries or self-access centers I believe they can be utilized to improve the motivation of some students to participate in language learning activities. The model defined within this consultancy must reflect the specific context of the language learners, and appropriateness of the technology, however, it must also leave options open for future potential upgrading with minimal obsolescence. Conventional language laboratories can be used for communication in conjunction with free standing or networked computers and need not become obsolete. Many SMU schools do have computer laboratories for mathematics and business studies and I certainly encourage language teachers to utilize these laboratories to experiment with language learning materials and programs.
The Internet By contrast if we consider that: "Information technology has infiltrated our lives at an unprecedented rate during the last half-century. Initially, in education, it took the form of "audiovisual aids." Ever since, much has been said about the potential for technology to "revolutionize" teaching and learning. It's ironic, then, that these same years have produced equally strident laments concerning the state to which American education has sunk." (James B. Ellsworth, ellsworthj@huachuca-emh1.army.mil) I commenced this section with these quotations because I wanted to illustrate that we must be cautious about over enthusiastic expectations. The Internet, like all other technologies, is just a tool. I enjoy using the Internet and I spend at least two hours per day on "The Net". I have about 45 homepages and about the same number of e-mail addresses. The Internet, creating homepages, and helping other users is my primary hobby. It is an excellent research and communication tool, but as an independent second language learner (in the early days) I can not say that I found it particularly useful. (my personal perspective). However, as a second language teacher I found the contrary to be true. There are many excellent language teaching/ learning sites on the Internet. You can find links to some of these sites from my language technology page or by using one of the many "search engines" which can be found by clicking "Net Search" or "Search" on your Internet browser. The Internet provides a wealth of current and authentic teaching materials (newspapers are probably the most useful). There are many different types of communication games, quizzes, grammer exercises, etc. which can be accessed through the Internet and "downloaded" to your computer for student practice. There are also many sites which provide basic courses in foreign/ second languages. For language practice you can direct students to sites which are created in the target language, or to daily newspapers and magazines from around the world. The possibilities for using the medium as a teacher are only limited by your imagination. What then are the factors which can render the use of the Internet so different from the perspectives of the independent learner as opposed to the language teacher? Management. As an independent learner I was not focussed upon specific objectives, the learning was very haphazard and I was frequently distracted by the diversity of options which are available on the medium. As a teacher I managed the use of the Internet, and I was focussed upon what I wanted to get from it. Chapelle (1995) claims that "when technological innovations succeed in a language program, it is because students, teachers, administrators and support staff of that program have worked together to make them succeed" (Chapelle, 1995, p.4). The use of the Internet during class time must be carefully managed. Student time connected to the Internet during classes should be minimal. Their time should be focussed upon the learning objectives, not waiting for Web pages to download. Teachers should as much as possible download the material and prepare it for the students in advance. The main exceptions to this are student research (reading/writing) tasks, Web-based assignments for external students, and e-mail. E-mail (electronic mail) is one of the most frequently cited Internet aids for the language learner. Having taught Internet principles, Web page construction, and how to use e-mail to English as a Second Language (ESL) students (hoping that this would open up a new world of communicating in Englsh for them), I can say confidently that unless structured tasks are assigned to the students they generally revert to using the e-mail for communicating with their friends in their native language. All applications of technology to teaching require clearly set appropriate tasks, good preparation, and good teacher facilitation skills. I would eventually like to see at least one Internet connected computer in every SMU library. Placing the computer in the library means that it can be accessed by the whole school community. I would eventually like to see the Internet play a significant role in enhancing staff development, facilitating resources sharing, and improving school communications.
 Learning Systems Institute |