This study examined the coherence between pre-service language teachers' stated beliefs about language teaching and their actual productions of websites for language learning. The researchers analyzed student essays, websites, and questionnaires from 17 students in a CALL course. They found that while students' approaches to teaching with CALL aligned with their stated beliefs, the students' beliefs seemed more influenced by their own experiences as language learners rather than by their teacher training. The researchers suggest improving instruction by better integrating knowledge from pedagogy courses into the CALL elements and exposing students to more in-depth examples of CALL.

1. Teacher beliefs underlying novice CALL productions. A study of websites produced by pre-service language teachers/trainers Denyze Toffoli Geoff Sockett DLADL Université de Strasbourg

14. Another example of task

16. SC: comparing production to beliefs Essay: "There are however no tools to explain the grammar points that need then to be applied to each exercise. ... It would be better to add explanations of grammar points presented before the exercises." "Athough a help function is a necessary pedagogical tool, answers [to the exercises] should never be given."

18. AC: contrasting production with beliefs Essay "… the presentation of 'authentic' and diversified situations" "communicative obectives (greetings, ordering, leave-taking in a restaurant), …" "Communicative goals of the site include lexical coherency, an ability to use rules of politeness. ...the site develops socio-cultural as well as linguistic skills." "the exercises concern both pragmatic and linguistic knowledge."

23. Bibliography Borg, S. 2006. Teacher cognition and language education: research and practice. New York: Continuum. Bravard S. 2005. USAGES PEDAGOGIQUES DES QCM : Un guide pour la mise en place d’un questionnaire à choix multiple. http://www.paristech.org/pratiques_tice/article.php3?id_article=93 Chapelle, C. & Jamieson, J. (2008). Tips for teaching with CALL . White Plains, NY: Pearson Longman. Duchiron, E. 2003. Les TIC dans l’enseignement / apprentissage des langues : Atouts, limites & exploitations potentielles du choix fourni. Juin 2003. http://www.sigu7.jussieu.fr/AEM/doc_pdf/memo_dea_ed.pdf Higgins, E. & Tatham, L. 2003, 2, 1. Exploring the potential of Multiple-Choice Questions in Assessment, Learning and Teaching in Action. Manchester: http://www.ltu.mmu.ac.uk/ltia/index.htm Hirschprung, N. 2005. Apprendre et enseigner avec le multimédia . Paris: Hachette. Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. 2006. Teacher Education in CALL. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: CUP. Johnson, K. 1992. "Teachers' Beliefs Inventory – approaches to ESL instruction" in Richards, J. & Lockhart, C. 1994. Reflective teaching in second language classrooms . Cambridge: CUP. Puren, C. 2009. "Nouvelle perspective actionnelle et (nouvelles) technologies éducatives : quelles convergences… et quelles divergences ?" Cyber-langues / APLV-Langues modernes : http://www.cyber-langues.asso.fr/spip.php?rubrique45