Announcements
BLOG: Kevin and Joe Tomei talk about issues in languages, teaching, culture and politics at languagejapan.com.
NEW: Kevin is National Treasurer of JALT
NEW: ShowaELC.org website for SWU English Language and Communications Dept.
NEW: What's Up Setagaya! radio program.
Student FAQ
1. Q: Where is my class page? A: Use the menu above.
2. Q: Where is Moodle? A: Click on button here.
Updated 2007-01-10
by Kevin Ryan. Originally published in Gakkuen, Showa Women's University.
The explosive growth of computers and multimedia software offers another tool to EFL teachers. This tool allows students to take charge of their own language acquisition outside of the classroom. Knowledge of this new media is important for teachers so that they may effectively use it both as a supplement to their regular course offerings and guide students in home use of purchased software. This paper discusses EFL student interaction with computers, the role of the instructor in this interaction, and explores criteria for evaluating multimedia software for supplementary language education.
Clark (1985) began a controversy that continues, arguing that the media in CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) alone can not be shown to increase learning. As we all know, though, 1985 and present-day computing are literally two different worlds. Instruction in those days often consisted of substitution drills on a text-only screen in mono-color. Similar tasks required little true linguistic ability and used the new technology as ‘an expensive page-turner.’ Computers in those days were, in Alan Maley’s words, “‘space-age technology to purvey stone-age methodology’” (Hardisty and Windeatt, 1989, p. 3). Even then, it was the software and not the hardware that showed a distinct lack of ability to take advantage of strengths of computing power.
“If there was an underlying theme in this criticism [by Higgins, 1988], it was that CALL [Computer Assisted Language Learning], appeared to be headed off in the wrong direction, in two important ways: (1) computer activities were based on questionable (if any) pedagogical principles, harking back to an earlier era in which language tended to be chopped into bite-sized chunks for easy digestion and then presented in a mostly ‘wrong-try-again’ fashion; and (2) CALL (like most other CAI of the time) tended to treat the computer as a one-way system, a purveyor of information, a drillmaster, or tutor which spent more time telling students what they should know than it did encouraging them to discover things for themselves” (Underwood, 1989, p. 72).
“Whenever a new medium comes in,” says Marshall McLuhan, “it takes its initial content from the old” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 16). While computers are still being used as fancy overhead projectors, or video displays with sound, some teachers are adapting methodology to use the computer so that the student achieves a more efficient balance of skills and so that teacher-contact time compliments computer use. As with language laboratories and video capabilities, there will be a surge of enthusiasm for this new technology, the computer. There will be unreal expectations, but in the end, a cautious, critical eye toward new technology will show a realistic maturity as computers take their place alongside the OHP, the cassette recorder and the blackboard as technological supplement to the teaching profession.
We seem to be at the height of the euphoria about computers, what with the Internet (see box) being touted as a cure-all for EFL exposure to foreign cultures and e-mail pen-pals as a way to contact long-distance linguistic informants. But worse than any hype about the Internet is the constant buzz of the word multimedia. One hears it constantly and it seems to be riding this wave of expectations for learning in general, and language learning in particular, especially in Japan.
Amid all of the hype there are impressive gains in technological ability that now allow us to use computers for language learning in many different ways. CD-ROM technology allows us to put copious amounts of information (650 megabytes) on one small disk that fits in a coat pocket. More impressive is that this information can be of many different media: text, sound, graphics, animation and video. Most important to pedagogy is the digital form that is used to encode the information in the CD-ROMs, allowing almost instant access to many different parts of the disk, without the ‘fast-forward’ or ‘rewind’ required in analog presentation such as cassette or video technology.
The focus of this paper is three-fold: (1) to discuss the pedagogical implications of this new technology for EFL students; (2) to discuss how the role of the ‘instructor’ will change; and (3) show different ways this new multimedia software can be evaluated for selection and integration in a language-learning program. Because of limited space here, course software will not be covered, as it required far more detailed inspection and evaluation for effective integration. Supplementary software is an area that multimedia CD-ROM excels in, and should be used for language programs. Before we begin, a short explanation of terms is necessary to make subsequent discussion coherent.
“Multimedia is any combination of text, graphic art, sound, animation and video that is delivered by computer. When you allow the user--the viewer of the project--to control that and when these elements are delivered, it is interactive multimedia. When you provide a structure of linked elements through which the user can navigate, interactive multimedia becomes hypermedia” (Vaughan, 1993, p. 3).
One must be careful of any definition of multimedia as there are many, often conflicting ideas as to what it should entail for the author and the user (note I do not use the word “reader” here). The definition above is one of the most straightforward found in the copious literature today. Still, one must have a tolerance for ambiguity when talking about multimedia. As Georgia McCabe, a director at Eastman Kodak says, “Talking about multimedia is a lot like talking about love. Everybody agrees that it’s a good thing, everybody wants it, wants to participate in it, but everybody has a different idea about what “it” really is.”
Many different ways of presenting information can be combined to increase the effect of that information for the learner. One of the main tenets of Korzybski’s General Semantics was the non-additive principle, where each increased element in a system increases the interconnections between those elements (and therefore their inherent complexity) approaching a multiplicative or even exponential level. Simply put, 2+2=more than four. “People retain 10 percent of what they see, 20 percent of what they hear, half of what they see and hear (the multimedia advantage), and 80 percent of what they see, hear and do (the interactive edge)” (Begley, 1994, p. 47).
The greatest concern that multimedia raises for current methodologies is the role of knowledge. In traditional teaching, knowledge is seen as some kind of substance, perhaps a fluid, that the instructor doles out or pours into the student receptacle, or vessel. CALL in general, but multimedia in particular sees knowledge as an open field awaiting exploration. The student is seen as a builder of his own set of principles and content (the “constructivist” view). This may require larger initial investment of time, and continued active participation.
Roger Shank, head of Northwestern’s ILS (Institute of Learning Sciences) is a critic of school systems everywhere. “Children and adults, he argues, learn best when they receive information at the moment they need it. This makes classroom teaching an oxymoron” (Williamson, 1994, p. 84). He argues (as many others do in the field) that there is no provision for different learning styles (see Howard Gardner’s work on multiple intelligences). “Shank has a vastly different view of how people learn: They learn by doing, making mistakes, and having experts share experiences to show people what has gone wrong” (Williamson, 1994, p. 84).
Shank has just finished a multi-million-dollar project for Arthur Andersen, one of the largest management consultant companies in the world. His multimedia software, driven by an artificial intelligence engine, saves AA $8 million a year in training costs because of increased efficiency (plus $2 million in travel costs saved because the software “experts” can be mailed to the trainee, instead of the trainee going to headquarters). Many of the trainees are not native speakers of English. Shank has found that the combination of the ability to repeat the ‘stories’ by the experts (a non-threatening way to teach and one of the basic ways memory is organized (Shank, 1990). The fact that there are consequences to selections that the trainees make in the software while they are solving problems leads to active assimilation of the processes that are required for completing the job-related tasks.
Student interaction patterns with the computer can and should be varied. Computers with multimedia software are good at providing feedback, presenting situation that are difficult or impossible to do in a regular class situation such as solving a murder mystery or exploring Africa. Students can explore by themselves at their own pace, and expect non-threatening guidance from the software. The technology in multimedia software can now accomplish these tasks.
“John Sculley (1987), [past] chairman of Apple Computer, speaks of the three ‘core technologies’ of educational computing: artificial intelligence, hypermedia and simulation” (Underwood, 1989, p. 72). Artificial intelligence is a computer program that tries to simulate learning and anticipate the directions the learner will take when using a program. It can “decide” to make the material more or less challenging, suggest ways to accomplish tasks, give hints and feedback or lead the student to additional information to accomplish the task at hand. Hypermedia is a non-hierarchical linking of media in a kind of cross-referencing of the material so that student scan choose different paths though the web of knowledge presented (and even cover the same material in different orders to enhance review). Simulation is the creation of a “virtual world” where consequences can be controlled but random factors can be introduced to mimic a real or imaginary situation.
Research on student interaction with the computer for EFL is woefully rare. Carol Chapelle (1990) advocates a type of research that focuses on linguistic interaction with the computer. Instead of using Underwood’s (1984) dichotomy of communicative/ non-communicative interactions with the computer (see figure),
she suggests taking a model created by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) that involves a “precise description of the interaction” on a discourse level. This involves a hierarchy of ranks of analysis of the interaction. A teacher asking a question is on the level of an act. This particular act is part of the next level, a move. Moves might include initiation, response and feedback. These three moves together might comprise the next level of analysis, an exchange, which is in turn part of a transaction, of which many make up a lesson (from Chapelle, 1990, p 204).
This could be seen as a serious attempt to neutralize Clark’s (1985) criticism. John Hall writes,
“I am a firm believer in Richard Clark’s 1985 article which did a meta-analysis of media studies across situations and found that there is no way to separate out the confounds of the local situations and to make any claims about the intrinsic value of any medium. In other words, no medium or cluster of media has been shown (without spurious correlations to other factors) to be more effective than live teaching, all else being equal. Of course , all else is never equal and there are good reasons why multimedia can be justified” (jhall@ccit.arizona.edu--e-mail communication).
Further research of the type selected by Chapelle could lead to a more precise evaluation and then to a clearer knowledge of how multimedia computers fit best into the curriculum.
Computers are not very good teachers. They don’t think, they just run programs. They can be incredibly obtuse. It is up to the instructor to be a buffer in this interaction, at least at the beginning. Then it is important for that instructor to stand aside and let the student explore and make mistakes, waste time and create an answer out of the knowledge discovered. It is important not to abandon the student at this point, but to show the student a constant readiness and willingness to give support when the student asks for it. Feedback should be given in short doses but often. Comfortable shoes should be worn if there are many students at terminals at the same time. Constant movement by the teacher during class time is necessary. I suggest squatting or sitting next to the student to level eye contact. Instructors should refrain from using the student’s keyboard or mouse unless it is absolutely necessary. Oral instructions can increase student comprehension as an additional benefit. Above all, the instructor should be familiar with each piece of software presented to the student. This should not only be on the usage level (which keys to push), but on the conceptual level (how the activities are organized or interrelated).
Hardisty and Windeatt (1989) divide software into four types.
Label |
Role |
Category |
Description |
‘School' |
teacher |
exercises |
cognisant |
‘Office’ |
worker |
applications |
assistant |
‘Library’ |
librarian |
page turning |
informant |
‘Home’ |
family |
entertaining |
stimulant |
Since the scope of this paper only covers supplementary software (not courseware), we will only be dealing with the final two categories. There are a number of good journals that evaluate software on a regular basis. These include The Computing Teacher or Scholastic’s Electronic Learning for K-12 students (which can be extrapolated to EFL students). The best source of information on a program is someone that has used it before. Many electronic bulletin boards (tesl-l@cunyvm.cuny.edu or jaltcall@clc.hyper.chubu.ac.jp are excellent examples) often discuss software currently available and more importantly, how some instructors use it.
Without access to these, there is the possibility of getting a review copy, but this often is only a demonstration version, and usually only for courseware. Some CD-ROMs are currently being produced that have a reference database with reviews of many of the CD titles available.
When searching for appropriate multimedia software, the first step is to decide how that software will be used. Currently, most of the software available on CD is large textual databases, good for reference, but difficult for the language learner to manage. Multimedia references are now increasing in popularity, with encyclopedias and multiple reference works (usually called a “bookshelf”) that integrate collections of quotations, thesaurii, almanacs and atlases. These often have verbal pronunciation through speakers for the dictionaries.
Other common multimedia software are games, which can include complex mysteries or simulations (build your own city, for example). Adventures like treks across he Australian desert are richly documented and beautiful to watch, as well as being informative. A third area of software increasingly common is one called “edutainment,” a hybrid of entertainment and education that usually falls short on both counts. Be especially careful with programs that purport to teach reading to youngsters, as there is a lot of bad software out there.
EFL instructors will often find themselves using a piece of software for other than its intended purpose. This is fine, if the students realize these limitations and can remain “on task.” The students should be clear on what is expected of them before they load the software.
There are many more considerations to be applied to particular kinds of software, but these general guidelines above are a starting point. When evaluating software, it is easy to looks at the superficial “look and feel” of a program only to find that the navigation and follow-up resources are less than adequate. It is important to “play” with the software for a considerable amount of time. Better yet, is to get a student to try out the software and watch that student as they navigate the program elements to see if it is worthy of using. Money aside, it can be an incredible waste of time to use software inappropriate to your needs if there is something available that will fit them better.
The Internet is a network of networks, all networked together to form a web of information and communications that touches more than 20 million people. It is primarily about information, and usually uses computers to hold and send that information quickly and at any time. Look for it to change your life in the next ten years (unless you don’t have a telephone).
The reason we have five-inch CDs is because when Sony and Phillips were developing the audio standard, they needed 72 minutes--enough for a slow rendition of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. The neat thing about digital CDs is that it can access audio and visual and text at virtually the same time.
Ask not what a computer can do to students, but what students can do with a computer.-David Thornburg.
Any teacher that can be replaced by a computer should be. -Anonymous
The role of the instruction is changing from ‘the sage on the stage’ to ‘the guide on the side.’ -Anonymous
Begley, S. (1994). Teaching minds to fly with discs and mice. Newsweek, May 31, 1994, 47.
Chapelle, C. (1990). The discourse of computer-assisted langauge learning: Toward a context for descriptive research. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 199-225.
Hardisty, D, and Windeatt, S. (1989). CALL. Oxford, Oxford.
Higgins, J. (1988) Language, learners and computers. Longman, London.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The extensions of man. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Shank, R.C. (1990). Tell me a story: A new look at real and artificial memory. Scribners, New York.
Sinclair, J. McH. & Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards and analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London, Oxford.
Underwood, J. (1984). Linguistics, computers and the language teacher: A communicative approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Underwood, J. (1989). On the edge: Intelligent CALL in the 1990s. Computers and the Humanities, 23, 71-84.
Williamson, M. (1994) High-tech training. Byte 19, 12, 74-88.
Back
to Kevin's Home Page