1
|
- Kazunori Nozawa
- College of Information Science and Engineering / Graduate School of
Language Education and Information Science, Ritsumeikan University=
li>
- E-mail: nozawa@is.ritsumei.ac.jp
- HP:http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/is/~nozawa/index.html
|
2
|
|
3
|
- The Use of learning technologies (LT) in language Education has been
influencing the nature and pedagogy of ELT more than two decades in
Japan.
- However, the explosion of interest in LT in foreign language educati=
on has
not been unanimously accepted.
- Optimists (Sakamoto, 1992; Van Duesen, 1997; Bennett, 1999) vs Real=
ists
(Knobel, Lankshear, et al., 1998; Selwyn, 1999)
|
4
|
- CALL researchers (Laurillard & Marullo, 1993; Kuramoto, 1999) ar=
gue
that LT provide a means to facilitate the L2 learner’s internal
thought process.
- It also acts as a psychological tool, enabling the individual to eng=
age
in the higher mental functioning that comes from interactions with
social life a la Vygotsky (1978).
|
5
|
- It is argued that LT has the potential to become the medium within t=
he Zone
of Proximal Development (ZPD) that promotes learning.
- The ZPD refers to the cognitive development that occurs in a social
nature with cognitive support from a more capable person (Jones &
Mercer, 1993).
|
6
|
- An issue of teaching approaches and pedagogy with CALL is the confli=
ct
of providing only computer-mediated instruction and not an environme=
nt
of collaborative communication.
- Marjonavic (1999) argued that “rather than adopting old teachi=
ng
methods along with new information technologies, it is necessary to
investigate new previously unknown possibilities offered by new
technologies and design new methodologies for learning and teaching&=
#8221;(p.
138)
|
7
|
- In Japan, LT in EFL has seemingly been overlooked under a plan calle=
d, E-Japan
Strategy (2001-05) and current New IT Reform Strategy.
- A reason for such an oversight could be as Bachnik (1999) has explai=
ned,
…ICT poses such a challenge to Japan because the system itself=
is
precisely what is at stake here…
- Against such obstacles, CALL is not always widely supported.
|
8
|
- Additional issues have provided an excellent spring board for CALL t=
eachers
to conduct more research.
- A positive development of CALL research has been a transformation fr=
om
youthful awe and excitement about new LT to a mature and directed
pedagogical and philosophical focus with questions raised and answers
sought. Learner autonomy is one of the major concerns.
|
9
|
- Some of the most well known definitions in present literature are:=
li>
- 'Autonomy is the ability to take charge of one's own learning' (Hen=
ri
Holec)
- 'Autonomy is essentially a matter of the learner's psychological
relation to the process and content of learning' (David Little)
- 'Autonomy is a situation in which the learner is totally responsible
for all the decisions concerned with his [or her] learning and the
implementation of those decisions'. (Leslie Dickinson)
- 'Autonomy is a recognition of the rights of learners within educati=
onal
systems'. (Phil Benson)
- Taken from Gardner and Miller, Establishing Self-Access from theory=
to
practice. CUP (1999)
|
10
|
- A definition of autonomy in language learning is based on Dickinson's
(1987) in referring to the instructional framework: the degree of
independence the learner is given in setting language learning goals,
the path to the goal, the pace of learning, and the measurement of
success.
|
11
|
- The terms "self-direction" and "independent learning&=
quot;
will be used to refer to learner attitudes. In looking at autonomy, =
the self-access
setting can offer learners choices in time, location, and pace of
learning; the path through the material to be chosen; and the topics=
of
interest. LT can play a role in all of these.
|
12
|
- Today, language teachers see independent learning as a goal. It is p=
art
of Rubin's (1979) definition of the "good" language learne=
r: one
who sets his or her own direction and takes responsibility for his or
her own learning. Certain metacognitive skills are necessary for ind=
ependent
learning, including awareness of learning styles and the ability to
track one's own progress.
|
13
|
- EFL learners have certain cultural expectations about teacher and
student roles. For many, the teacher has the duty to impart knowledg=
e to
them, and their duty as learners is to memorize it. This attitude is
clearly not conducive to self-direction.
- Oxford (1990) notes, "Just teaching new strategies to students =
will
accomplish very little less students begin to want greater
responsibility for their own learning" (p. 10; italics in
original).
|
14
|
- On the other hand, studies in Japan (Usuki, 2001) and Hong Kong (Cha=
n,
2001) indicate that some students realize that they could take better
advantage of resources by being more independent. If we want to
encourage independent learning, we will need to give learners good
reasons for moving in that direction.
|
15
|
- LT’s role in fostering autonomy has been vaunted over the year=
s,
with a number of claims made in favor of technology-enhanced language
learning. Those claims include that LT, especially multimedia, suppo=
rts
different learning styles; that computers and the Internet provide a
wealth of resources to independent learners; and that certain softwa=
re
packages can offer a complete curriculum for language learning. These
claims need to be put into the context of learner needs to see how f=
ully
they match.
|
16
|
- EFL Learners have a number of needs for effective language learning,
including linguistic, metacognitive, and psychological and social.=
li>
- In the linguistic area, people must have language data and an
opportunity for practice in order to acquire or learn language.
Sequencing instruction, offering language data at Krashen's i+1 leve=
l of
comprehensibility, providing rules for deductive learners, and
sheltering practice all enhance learning.
|
17
|
- On the metacognitive level, learners do well by knowing their learni=
ng
styles, understanding their path through the material to be learned,=
and
having a way to see and assess their own progress toward learning go=
als.
|
18
|
- LT offers a great deal on the linguistic side: huge amounts of data,
including authentic text, graphics, audio, and video online.
- Software and online exercises can provide rules to begin with or as
glosses for data. A few major software packages offer a structured p=
ath
through their material and record-keeping. .
|
19
|
- Another area where LT are useful is in providing practice in various
ways. While the practice is often repetitive, much more is possible.=
- Variety and playfulness of language games improve the fun factor. Co=
ncordancers
allow learners to explore language and develop their own hypotheses =
for
how language works, based on large textbases.
- LT provides tools for learners to create newsletters, web pages, and=
multimedia
presentations, as well as to create online communities of interest.<=
/li>
|
20
|
- CALL activities are designed to develop a comprehensive range of ski=
lls
and attitudes including motivation, learning strategies, self-monito=
ring
and cooperation. The activities can be easily integrated into the
regular curriculum as almost all serve some linguistic purpose in
addition to learner development. While productive practice is possib=
le,
repetition is easier to automate and so is far more prevalent in both
software and online activities.
|
21
|
- A curricular path that links past with present information and helps
learners self-assess is rarely found outside of software, and not
frequently in software, either. Very little of what is available in
off-the-shelf form develops learners' metacognitive skills, helping =
them
understand how to learn and how to be reflective learners.
|
22
|
- Very importantly, ready-made LT solutions rarely provide any engagem=
ent
with the local community.
- It is up to facilitators and teachers to make the links between what=
the
learner is doing independently and what is going on in the classroom=
or
the home.
|
23
|
- Other drawbacks exist as well. A concern frequently expressed in the
hypertext literature is that EFL learners can get lost when working
through material with hypertext links. Given a wealth of choices, EFL
learners can feel overwhelmed and unable to decide what to do. Aimle=
ss
clicking often results. Repetitive practice or a repetitive interface
can be boring. They can benefit from language software, certainly, b=
ut
have other needs as well. LT can provide a too simple solution.
|
24
|
- LT can do much more within an environment designed to enhance indepe=
ndent
learning. EFL learners don’t necessarily know how to learn
efficiently on their own, so guidance has to come from somewhere.
- Independent work can be linked closely to EFL curriculum. Where EFL
learners are working on their own, they will need suggested paths
through material as well as language data to work with.
|
25
|
- Facilitators serve an important role by helping learners assess where
they are and understand where they need to go next, helping EFL lear=
ners
organize their learning and be motivated to continue.
- It's easy to be passive, so EFL learners may need help setting and
accomplishing tasks that require production. Facilitators also help
organize community, setting up groups, providing logistics for group
projects, and making the links between independent study and classro=
om
and home.
|
26
|
- Creating a good autonomous learning environment is difficult. It tak=
es
thought and planning initially and an ongoing commitment to adjustin=
g to
EFL learners’ needs.
- It is important to kee=
p psychological
and social factors in mind to be sure that individual learning is wi=
thin
a supportive community context. LT provides a wealth of resources and
potential, but is not a solution on its own.
|
27
|
- To be successful for an academic work while studying EAP and ESP,
students need to have the basic study skills and strategies with act=
ive
learning attitude in advance. Unfortunately most Japanese high school
graduates coming into universities are not well-prepared.
- They need to take some study skills and strategies training at the
beginning of the first semester in a variety of styles such as small
class seminars in each department or a part of CALL program. (e.g.,
Ritsumeikan University CISE)
|
28
|
- There are many online study skills and strategies programs or their
textbooks designed and available to native speakers of English stude=
nts,
but they are not appropriate for EFL learners to use under the curre=
nt
curriculum.
- Such study skills and strategies training programs must be implement=
ed
at the beginning of the 1st semester to be academically
successful at Japanese universities.
|
29
|
- While studying EAP and ESP contents, to promote learner autonomy=
, for
example, RU CISE students are given a partial training through CALL =
to
understand their own learning styles and computer literacy skills:=
li>
- What successful students have done;
- What each student should do to be successful;
|
30
|
- For online tasks on ESP contents which supplement the textbooks, mot=
ivated
students can access to the original ESP Website and complete them in
advance or later review them.
- Also being accessible to students’ grade system (php + MySQL
database) for registered EFL classes, they can check their weekly
performance results on line and motivate themselves to get better fi=
nal
grades.
|
31
|
|
32
|
- Online quizzes, tests, exercises and puzzles via the Internet and/or=
Intranet
or CD/DVD technology can help students learn or improve the basics
(listening, vocabulary, reading, grammar, writing, speaking, cultural
awareness) for EFL.
- Hardware changes quickly with LT advancement: Desktop PC -> Laptop
PC/PDA/mobile phone/iPod
|
33
|
- Learner Autonomy with LT helps learners realize that their contribut=
ion
to the teaching-learning process is crucial and also encourages them=
to
take an active role in their own learning.<- Self-Access Resource
Center should be established.
- Rather than advocating radical changes in classroom management, it
should be focused on the gradual process of changing learner attitud=
es.
|
34
|
- EFL students should be given learner autonomy training sessions R=
20;before”
and “during” the program with three key kinds of
preparations:
- Psychological preparation,
- Methodological preparation and
- Practice in self-direction.
|
35
|
- As Little (1996) pointed out to be autonomous “learners need to
establish a personal agenda for learning, taking some of the initiat=
ives
that shape the learning process, and developing a capacity to evalua=
te
the extent and success of one’s learning” thus, there is=
a
direct need to come up with innovative programs that will promote au=
tonomy
among Japanese students. The implementation of an online
language-learning program is a “must” effort in this
direction.
|
36
|
- Bachnik, J.M. (1999). Do IT yourself: Accessing the information R=
20;revolution”
in Japanese higher education, National Institute of Multimedia Educa=
tion’s
International Symposium, 1999, Japan. Retrieved
www.open-ed.net/library/RR2201.doc
- Bennett, F. (1999). Education and the future. Educational technology=
and
society, 2(1). Retrieved from
http://ifets.massey.ac.nz/periodical/vol_1_99/fbennett_short_article=
.html.
- Benson, P. (1997). The semiotics of self-access language learning in=
the
digital age. In V. Darleguy, et al. (eds.) Educational technology in
language learning: Theoretical considerations and practical applicat=
ions.
Lyon, France: INSA (National Institute of Applied Sciences), pp. 70-=
78.
- Bordonaro, Karen. (2003). Perceptions of Technology and Manifestatio=
ns
of Language Learner Autonomy, Call-ej online, 5(1). Retrieved
http://www.tell.is.ritsumei.ac.jp/callejonline/journal/5-1/bordonaro=
.html
- Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learners
tell us? Teaching in Higher Education, 6 (4), 505-519.
- Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English language learning and technology. Jo=
hn
Benjamins B.V.
- Davies, Graham.(2003/2006). Computer Assisted Language Learning: Whe=
re
are we now and where are we going? Retrieved
http://www.camsoftpartners.co.uk/docs/Futurelab_CALL_Article.htm
- Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambrid=
ge:
Cambridge University Press.
|
37
|
- Egbert, J., Chao, C., & Hanson-Smith, E. (1999). Computer-enhanc=
ed
language learning Environments: An overview. In J. Egbert & E.
Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and crit=
ical
issues (1-13). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Ot=
her
Languages, Inc.
- Field, Malcolm H. (2002). Towards a CALL pedagogy: Student use and
understanding, in P. Lewis (ed.) The changing face of CALchubu Nihon
Kyouiku Bunkakai.L: A Japanese perspective, Swets & Zeitlinger
Publishers, 3-17.
- Harrison, R. (2000). Learner managed learning: Managing to learn or
learning to manage? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19 =
(4),
312-321.
- Hirata, Yoko. (2002). A self-access English learning system for Japa=
nese
university students, JALT CALL 2002 proceedings, JALT CALL SIG, 93-9=
7.
- Jones, A. & Mercer, N. (1993). Theories of learning and informat=
ion
technology. In P. Scrimshaw (ed.) Language, classrooms, and computers
(143-165), London & New York: Routledge.
- Jones, Jeremy. (2001).Technology and autonomy: A word of caution.
Learning learning, 8(1) Retrieved
http://coyote.miyazaki-mu.ac.jp/learnerdev/LLE/8.1/jonesE.html
- Kuramoto, A. (1999). A cognitive psychological study of L2 learning
environments. In P. Lewis (ed.) Calling Asia: The proceedings of the=
4th
annual JALT CALL SIG conference, Kyoto, Japan, May 1999 (115-118).
Nagoya:
- Laurillard, D. & Marullo, G. (1993). Computer based approaches to
second language learning. In P. Scrimshaw (ed.) Language, classrooms,
and computers (143-165), London & New York: Routledge.
- Lewis, P. (ed.) (2002). The changing face of CALL: A Japanese
perspective. Swetz & Zeitlinger Publishers.
|
38
|
- Little, D. (1996). Freedom to learn and compulsion to interact:
promoting learner autonomy through the use of information systems and
information technologies. In R. Pemberton & E.S.L. Li & W.W.=
F.
Or & H.D. Pierson (Eds.), Taking Control: Autonomy in Language L=
earning
(pp. 193-209). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
- Motteram, G. (1997). Learner autonomy and the Web. In V. Darleguy, et
al. (eds.) Educational technology in language learning: Theoretical
considerations and practical applications. Lyon, France: INSA (Natio=
nal
Institute of Applied Sciences). Retrieved http://www.insa-lyon.fr/De=
partements/CDRL/learner.html.
- Okuyama, Yoshiko. (2005). Autonomy and L2 learning in a hybrid langu=
age
course, JALT CALL 2005 proceedings, JALT CALL SIG, 65-67.
- Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher
should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle
- Reinders, H.W. (2000). Fortress or bridge? A learners' perspective on
learner autonomy and self-access language learning. MA thesis.
- Rubin, J. (1979). What "the good language learner" can tea=
ch
us. In J.B. Pride (Ed.), Sociolinguistic aspects of language learning
and teaching (pp. 17-26). London: Oxford University Press.
|
39
|
- Sakamoto, T. (1992). Impact of informatics on school education syste=
ms:
National strategies for the introduction of Informatics into schools=
–
Nonsystematic but systematic. Education and computing, 8, 129-135.=
li>
- Slaouti, D. (1997) Designing a technology-based learning/resource
centre: Some thoughts and implications. In V. Darleguy, et al. (Eds.=
), Educational
technology in language learning: Theoretical considerations and
practical applications. Lyon, France: INSA (National Institute of
Applied Sciences). Retrieved from http://www.insa-lyon.fr/Departemen=
ts/CDRL/designing.html.
- Thanasoulas, Dimitrios. (2000). What is learner autonomy and how can=
it
be fostered? The Internet TESL Journal, 6(11). Retrieved
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Thanasoulas-Autonomy.html
- Usuki, M. (2001). From the learners' perspectives: The needs for
awareness-raising towards autonomy and roles of the teachers. ERIC
document number ED455694.
- Van Dusen, G.C. (1997). The virtual campus: Technology and reform in
higher education. ASHE-Eric higher education report, 2(5). Washingto=
n,
DC: The George Washington University.
- Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
|