CMC Technologies for Teaching Foreign Languages
What's on the Horizon?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v22i3.679-709Keywords:
CMC, Task-based Language Learning, Asynchronous Communication, Synchronous Communication, Wired Versus Wireless Technology, Wi-Fi, 802.11Abstract
Computer-mediated communication (CMC) technologies have begun to play an increasingly important role in the teaching of foreign/second (L2) languages. Its use in this context is supported by a growing body of CMC research that highlights the importance of the negotiation of meaning and computer-based interaction in the process of second language acquisition (SLA) (Chapelle, 1998; Payne & Whitney, 2002). Recent research has also pointed out the importance of situated cognition (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and the use of task-based activities (Doughty & Long, 2003) to allow students to acquire language in meaningful contexts for specific purposes. In this paper, various CMC technologies will be described and critically evaluated for their possible applications in task-based foreign language learning activities. First, general issues of connectivity will be defined and discussed (e.g., wired, wireless, and infrared technologies; dial-up vs. broadband, etc.). Then various asynchronous and synchronous CMC technologies will be described and evaluated, pointing out their strengths and drawbacks for use in a L2 learning environment. The authors then compare and contrast the use of a task-based language-learning activity within wired versus wireless environments. The paper concludes with an overall discussion that focuses on the challenges facing the implementation of these technologies (e.g., accessibility, compatibility, financial considerations), some possible solutions to those problems, and some speculation about future uses of these technologies to enhance the L2 learning experience.
References
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Write to speak: The effects of electronic communication on the oral achievement of fourth semester French students. In J. A. Muyskens (Ed.), New ways of learning and teaching: Focus on technology and foreign language education (pp. 93-116). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 120-136. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake/default.html
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-42.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2-27). New York: Longman.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1 (1), 1-47.
Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (1), 22-34. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article1/index.html
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of a theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chun, D. M. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. System, 22 (1), 17-31.
Cziko, G. A., & Park, S. (2003). Internet audio communications for second language learning: A comparative view of six programs. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (1), 15-27. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num1/review1/ default.html
Doughty, C., & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (3), 50-80. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/doughty/default.html
Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the silent language of culture: The Cultura project. Language Learning & Technology, 5 (1), 55-102. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/ furstenberg/default.html
Galloway, A. (1993). Communicative language teaching: An introduction and sample activities. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ ERICServlet?accno=ED357642
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16 (3), 283-302.
Gates, B. (with Myhrvold, N., & Rinearson, P.) (1995). The road ahead. New York: Viking Penguin.
Godwin-Jones, B. (2002). Wireless networks. Language Learning and Technology, 6 (1), 6-10. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/emerging/ default.html
Godwin-Jones, B. (2003a). E-books and the Tablet PC. Language Learning and Technology, 7 (1), 4-8. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num1/emerging/default.html
Godwin-Jones, B. (2003b). Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 12-16. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http:// llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/emerging/default.html
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics III: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Hadley, G. (2004). A task-based approach to teaching English for science and technology. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.ecp.com.cn/in2004/ca1986.htm
Hatch, E. (1978). Acquisition of syntax in a second language. In J. Richards (Ed.), Understanding second and foreign language learning: Issues and approaches (pp. 34-70). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-93). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
Kern, R .G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79 (4), 457-76.
Kötter, M. (2003). Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Language Learning & Technology 7 (2), 145-72. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/ vol7num2/kotter/default.html
Leaver, B. L., & Willis, J. (2004). Task-based instruction in foreign language education: Practices and programs. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Lee, L. (2004). Learners’ perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the US. Language Learning & Technology, 8 (1), 83-100. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol8num1/lee/default.html
Lenhart, A. (2003). Generation IM: Teens and technology. PowerPoint presentation given at Hommoks Middle School PTA, Larchmont, NY. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/14/presentation_display.asp
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-278). New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Science.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. (1999). Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen.
Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1 (1), 82-93. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu. edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html
Palm, Inc. (2001). Bluetooth: Connecting palm powered handhelds. Bluetooth White Paper. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://palmos.com/dev/tech/bluetooth/palm_ bluetooth_mwp_r1.pdf
Payne, S., & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 Oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20 (1), 7-32.
Pellettieri, J. (1999). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap between Internet-savvy students and their schools. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, Vol. 1 (pp. 9-34). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Salaberry, M. R. (1996). The theoretical foundation for the development of pedagogical tasks in computer mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 14 (1), 5-34.
Salaberry, M. R. (2000). Pedagogical design of computer mediated communication tasks: Learning objectives and technological capabilities. Modern Language Journal, 84 (1), 28-37.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 1730). Oxford: Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 26886.
Smith, B. (2003a). The use of communication strategies in computer-mediated communication. System, 31 (1), 29-53.
Smith, B. (2003b). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. Modern Language Journal, 87 (1), 38-57.
Sotillo, S. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82-119. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/default.html
Thorne, S. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 38-67. Retrieved May 27, 2005, from http://llt. msu.edu/vol7num2/thorne/default.html
Tudini, V. (2003). Using native speakers in chat. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (3), 141-159. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/tudini/ default.html
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning. Modern Language Journal, 81 (4), 470-481.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford: Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Willis, J. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: Understanding our practices, acknowledging different practitioners. In B. L. Leaver & J. Willis (Eds.), Taskbased instruction in foreign language education: Practices and programs (pp. 3-44). Washington, DC.: Georgetown University Press.
