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

Re: CALL's 5-year plan?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 4 , Apr 4 6:42 AM
    • 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 2 of 4 , Apr 4 10:37 PM
      • 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 3 of 4 , Apr 7 11:24 AM
        • 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.