Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

CALL's 5-year plan?

Expand Messages
  • Dennis Newson
    Thinking about COPs as opposed to structured CALL courses in teacher training programs, I was reminded of a moment on the EVO Baw 2006 online course in
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Thinking about COPs as opposed to structured CALL courses in teacher
      training programs, I was reminded of a moment on the EVO Baw 2006 online
      course in podcasting. Someone remarked, I'm writing from memory, that now
      that participants had accounts with Podcaster and had made a simple podcast
      perhaps it was time to examine the pedagogy of podcasting - 'podagogy'.

      At the time, I thought this was a rather quaint order - first acquire the
      tool then decide what you want to do with it - but, on reflection, it seems
      hardly surprising that communities of practice are going to be very tool
      orientated. From the persepctive here, though, CALL and teacher training, it
      would be interesting to hear people's views on the interlocking of
      linguistics, foreign language learning theory and the use of computers. I
      just don't know, personally - but are there areas of CALL that are fairly
      well covered and others that urgently need iextending? What is CALL's agenda
      for the next 5 years?.

      Dennis

      --


      Dennis Newson (retired)
      University Osnabrück
      CETEFL-L, Germany-English,
      EFLTU etc.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Phil Hubbard
      Good questions again, Dennis. First, I don t think anything yet has been well-covered in the field. Some areas, like computer mediated communication and
      Message 2 of 4 , Apr 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Good questions again, Dennis. First, I don't think anything yet has
        been "well-covered" in the field. Some areas, like computer mediated
        communication and certain tasks like WebQuests, are better
        established now than they were a few years ago (or than podcasting
        is at the moment), but there is still a long way to go in these
        areas in terms of both research and practice. As for a CALL agenda,
        given the dynamics of the field it would be hard to look ahead five
        years, and having an agenda sort of suggests we know more about what
        we're doing as an identifiable professional group than is probably
        the case. However, two broad areas I think will continue to be a
        focus of rapid development in that time frame are the current topic
        of teacher education, and the topic brought up by Illya in msg1510
        of online teaching and all the issues surrounding it, including the
        creation of more efficient as well as more effective tools and
        pedagogical procedures to limit the impact on teachers.

        Phil

        --- In IATEFLComputerSig@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Newson" <djn@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Thinking about COPs as opposed to structured CALL courses in
        teacher
        > training programs, I was reminded of a moment on the EVO Baw 2006
        online
        > course in podcasting. Someone remarked, I'm writing from memory,
        that now
        > that participants had accounts with Podcaster and had made a
        simple podcast
        > perhaps it was time to examine the pedagogy of podcasting -
        'podagogy'.
        >
        > At the time, I thought this was a rather quaint order - first
        acquire the
        > tool then decide what you want to do with it - but, on reflection,
        it seems
        > hardly surprising that communities of practice are going to be
        very tool
        > orientated. From the persepctive here, though, CALL and teacher
        training, it
        > would be interesting to hear people's views on the interlocking of
        > linguistics, foreign language learning theory and the use of
        computers. I
        > just don't know, personally - but are there areas of CALL that are
        fairly
        > well covered and others that urgently need iextending? What is
        CALL's agenda
        > for the next 5 years?.
        >
        > Dennis
        >
        > --
        >
        >
        > Dennis Newson (retired)
        > University Osnabrück
        > CETEFL-L, Germany-English,
        > EFLTU etc.
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • s948881
        Dennis, Phil & list, Many interesting questions here to contemplate... by comparison it s interesting to reflect on the way the field of second language
        Message 3 of 4 , Apr 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Dennis, Phil & list,

          Many interesting questions here to contemplate... by comparison it's
          interesting to reflect on the way the field of second language
          acquisition is evolving and changing. For example, in the second
          edition of "Second language learning theories", Mitchell & Myles
          emphasise the importance of recognising as valid a range of
          theoretical perspectives and positions. I think this is the same for
          teacher education and CALL. It not a matter of finding "The one And
          Only Way", but acknowledging a more pluralistic approach.

          In other words, there may well be a number of valid "podogogies"
          depending upon the language learning goals etc. I've always felt it
          problematic to attach a single pedagogy to a specific technology,
          but, having said different technologies may lend themselves to
          particular pedagogical purposes.

          As far as teacher education and CALL is concerned over the next 5
          years, I do feel a more coherent and systematic approach is needed so
          that knowledge about good practice is retained somehow. This is a
          major goal in the book that Phil and I have been working on.

          Cheers,

          Mike


          --- In IATEFLComputerSig@yahoogroups.com, "Phil Hubbard"
          <p12hubbard@...> wrote:
          >
          > Good questions again, Dennis. First, I don't think anything yet has
          > been "well-covered" in the field. Some areas, like computer
          mediated
          > communication and certain tasks like WebQuests, are better
          > established now than they were a few years ago (or than podcasting
          > is at the moment), but there is still a long way to go in these
          > areas in terms of both research and practice. As for a CALL agenda,
          > given the dynamics of the field it would be hard to look ahead five
          > years, and having an agenda sort of suggests we know more about
          what
          > we're doing as an identifiable professional group than is probably
          > the case. However, two broad areas I think will continue to be a
          > focus of rapid development in that time frame are the current topic
          > of teacher education, and the topic brought up by Illya in msg1510
          > of online teaching and all the issues surrounding it, including the
          > creation of more efficient as well as more effective tools and
          > pedagogical procedures to limit the impact on teachers.
          >
          > Phil
          >
          > --- In IATEFLComputerSig@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Newson" <djn@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > Thinking about COPs as opposed to structured CALL courses in
          > teacher
          > > training programs, I was reminded of a moment on the EVO Baw 2006
          > online
          > > course in podcasting. Someone remarked, I'm writing from memory,
          > that now
          > > that participants had accounts with Podcaster and had made a
          > simple podcast
          > > perhaps it was time to examine the pedagogy of podcasting -
          > 'podagogy'.
          > >
          > > At the time, I thought this was a rather quaint order - first
          > acquire the
          > > tool then decide what you want to do with it - but, on
          reflection,
          > it seems
          > > hardly surprising that communities of practice are going to be
          > very tool
          > > orientated. From the persepctive here, though, CALL and teacher
          > training, it
          > > would be interesting to hear people's views on the interlocking of
          > > linguistics, foreign language learning theory and the use of
          > computers. I
          > > just don't know, personally - but are there areas of CALL that
          are
          > fairly
          > > well covered and others that urgently need iextending? What is
          > CALL's agenda
          > > for the next 5 years?.
          > >
          > > Dennis
          > >
          > > --
          > >
          > >
          > > Dennis Newson (retired)
          > > University Osnabrück
          > > CETEFL-L, Germany-English,
          > > EFLTU etc.
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
        • Steven Sharp
          I think the thing that needs to be done most clearly is the integration piece. Too much (in the teacher education level, in the classroom for secondary and
          Message 4 of 4 , Apr 7, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            I think the thing that needs to be done most clearly is the integration
            piece. Too much (in the teacher education level, in the classroom for
            secondary and primari, and elsewhere) of the work is done piece by piece.
            You have the "education courses" and then you have the add on "tech ed
            course". If they are taught separately, there will be no connection made by
            the teacher, and this idea of "Ok, today we're going to the lab" to work on
            what, exactly? Why should today (in the lab) be any different? I'm working
            with my department to try to convince them that whenever there is a
            training, that technology should be included in that training. There should
            be education goals and technology goals for each session. This is a hard
            sell, but it is starting, slowly. Of course, ideally, everything would be
            in the curriculum, so that teachers would have the technology right along
            with what they need to do every day. I'm just waiting (or working) for that
            one.
            ~
            Steve

            On 4/5/06, s948881 <michael.levy@...> wrote:
            >
            > Dennis, Phil & list,
            >
            > Many interesting questions here to contemplate... by comparison it's
            > interesting to reflect on the way the field of second language
            > acquisition is evolving and changing. For example, in the second
            > edition of "Second language learning theories", Mitchell & Myles
            > emphasise the importance of recognising as valid a range of
            > theoretical perspectives and positions. I think this is the same for
            > teacher education and CALL. It not a matter of finding "The one And
            > Only Way", but acknowledging a more pluralistic approach.
            >
            > In other words, there may well be a number of valid "podogogies"
            > depending upon the language learning goals etc. I've always felt it
            > problematic to attach a single pedagogy to a specific technology,
            > but, having said different technologies may lend themselves to
            > particular pedagogical purposes.
            >
            > As far as teacher education and CALL is concerned over the next 5
            > years, I do feel a more coherent and systematic approach is needed so
            > that knowledge about good practice is retained somehow. This is a
            > major goal in the book that Phil and I have been working on.
            >
            > Cheers,
            >
            > Mike
            >
            >
            > --- In IATEFLComputerSig@yahoogroups.com, "Phil Hubbard"
            >
            > <p12hubbard@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Good questions again, Dennis. First, I don't think anything yet has
            > > been "well-covered" in the field. Some areas, like computer
            > mediated
            > > communication and certain tasks like WebQuests, are better
            > > established now than they were a few years ago (or than podcasting
            > > is at the moment), but there is still a long way to go in these
            > > areas in terms of both research and practice. As for a CALL agenda,
            > > given the dynamics of the field it would be hard to look ahead five
            > > years, and having an agenda sort of suggests we know more about
            > what
            > > we're doing as an identifiable professional group than is probably
            > > the case. However, two broad areas I think will continue to be a
            > > focus of rapid development in that time frame are the current topic
            > > of teacher education, and the topic brought up by Illya in msg1510
            > > of online teaching and all the issues surrounding it, including the
            > > creation of more efficient as well as more effective tools and
            > > pedagogical procedures to limit the impact on teachers.
            > >
            > > Phil
            > >
            > > --- In IATEFLComputerSig@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Newson" <djn@>
            > > wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Thinking about COPs as opposed to structured CALL courses in
            > > teacher
            > > > training programs, I was reminded of a moment on the EVO Baw 2006
            > > online
            > > > course in podcasting. Someone remarked, I'm writing from memory,
            > > that now
            > > > that participants had accounts with Podcaster and had made a
            > > simple podcast
            > > > perhaps it was time to examine the pedagogy of podcasting -
            > > 'podagogy'.
            > > >
            > > > At the time, I thought this was a rather quaint order - first
            > > acquire the
            > > > tool then decide what you want to do with it - but, on
            > reflection,
            > > it seems
            > > > hardly surprising that communities of practice are going to be
            > > very tool
            > > > orientated. From the persepctive here, though, CALL and teacher
            > > training, it
            > > > would be interesting to hear people's views on the interlocking of
            > > > linguistics, foreign language learning theory and the use of
            > > computers. I
            > > > just don't know, personally - but are there areas of CALL that
            > are
            > > fairly
            > > > well covered and others that urgently need iextending? What is
            > > CALL's agenda
            > > > for the next 5 years?.
            > > >
            > > > Dennis
            > > >
            > > > --
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Dennis Newson (retired)
            > > > University Osnabrück
            > > > CETEFL-L, Germany-English,
            > > > EFLTU etc.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            >
            > - Visit your group "IATEFLComputerSig<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IATEFLComputerSig>"
            > on the web.
            >
            > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > IATEFLComputerSig-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<IATEFLComputerSig-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
            >
            > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.