1. CHAPTER 37: COMPUTER-
ASSISTED LANGUAGE
LEARNING
EVAGGELIA CHARALAMBOUS
UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS: MA IN TEFL
SPRING SEMESTER 2013
ENG 741 TRENDS IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS

2. OUTLINE
 Introduction: 1. Definitions of CASLA, CALL (*focus)
, CALT, CAI, CMC 2. Issues around CALL and its
implementation in the language classroom 3. Need for the
development of pedagogies and evaluation tools for CALL
programs
 Theory in Instructed SLA and CALL
 Empirical Research on CALL: 1. Product- oriented 2. Process-
oriented
 Principles for CALL Pedagogy
 Research: 1. Computer-Assisted Language Learning as a
Predictor of Success in Acquiring English as a Second
Language 2. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants 3. Digital
Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II: Do They Really Think
Differently?

3. INTRODUCTION
 Computer-Assisted Language Leaning (CALL) is
“the search for and study of applications of the
computer in language teaching and learning” (as
cited in Chapelle, 2010, p. 539).
 Computer-Assisted Second Language Acquisition
(CASLA) is the umbrella term for: CALL &
Computer-Assisted Language Testing (CALT).
Additionally, there are sub-areas for these terms,
such as the Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI),
Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC), etc.
 The main issues in using CALL are the pedagogies
that can be applied through technology and their
evaluation

4. INTRODUCTION
 Varieties of technologies available to the language
teacher: interactive tutorial
programs, webinars, EFL/ESL websites, IWB & IWB
software, Web 2.0, electronic communication
tools, blogs, platforms, social networks, linguistic aids
(programs) which help learners with spelling &
grammar, etc.
 There is a need for development of practices
(pedagogy) that will accompany these programs and
the evaluation of their success after their
implementation in the language classroom.

5. INTRODUCTION
 Underwood (1984), based on the comprehensible
input theory by Krashen (1982), tried to develop
pedagogical principles for designing CALL activities.
These activities must provide students the exposure
to sufficient quantities of comprehensible input. They
must also aim at unconscious acquisition and teach
grammar implicitly.
 Today’s language learners interact with computers
in a variety of ways: they shop online, they
communicate through the use of the internet
(facebook, chat rooms), they receive linguistic help
from the computer (digital dictionaries, error mark-
ups on spelling)
→ In order to motivate our students, it is essential to

6. INTRODUCTION
 In order to integrate computers and technology in
general in our classroom, findings from empirical
research are necessary.
 The question is: “How can our understanding of SLA
inform the design, use, and evaluation of second
language learning activities that make use of
technology?” (Chapelle, 2010, p.540)
→ Note: teachers can use software specifically
designed for teaching or commercially available
programs (Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Outlook, etc.)

7. THEORY IN INSTRUCTED
SLA & CALL
1st change in SLA theory:
 Schmidt (1990), contradicts Underwood (1984), by
claiming that conscious acquisition (attention) is
necessary for the development of the L2. Noticing is
required in all aspects of SLA: lexicon, phonology,
morphology, grammar, syntax, pragmatics, etc.
 The above model reinforces the research findings which
demonstrate that exposure to input must be enhanced
with the appropriate amount of interaction in L2.
 The importance of interaction → selection of pedagogical
materials → CALL pedagogy (select programs which
facilitate interaction with the L2)

8. THEORY IN INSTRUCTED
SLA & CALL
2nd change in SLA theory:
 Introduction of the socially-oriented theoretical
perspectives.
 Sociocultural Theory (SCT) proposes that L2 language
development is a part of the learner’s “participation in
culturally organized practices, life-long involvement in a
variety of institutions, and humans’ ubiquitous use of
tools” (as cited in Chapelle, 2010, p.541).
 Tools in CALL: communication technologies (emails,
blogs, wikis, IM, ipods, tablets, etc.)
 Focus on: why and how certain technologies are chosen
by learners and how effective they are in the course of
SLA.

9. THEORY IN INSTRUCTED
SLA & CALL
3rd change in SLA theory:
 The cognitive and theoretical perspectives that
guide the design and evaluation of learning activities
and material in general.
 These materials can be selected by the teachers
based on their learner’s context, the instruction and
the contribution of these materials to the learning
aims.
 Technological tools must be informed from these
theories in order to achieve the goal of learning a
second language

10. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
The aims of the research are to:
 Evaluate the effectiveness of instruction which is
provided by the computer.
 Decide how and how much technology should be
introduced in the language curriculum.
 Try to enlighten publishers who wish to develop
material which integrate technology, teachers that
wish to know how successful is the integration of
technology and teacher trainers that promote
technology-related pedagogies.
→The area of research is divided into product-oriented
research and process-oriented research.

11. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Product-Oriented Research
 The problem is that research is limited to comparisons
between computer-assisted and non-computer assisted
language instruction.
 This comparison does not help the field to identify the
how, when and why technology can help in the
classroom. There is a need to focus on the pedagogies
around the implementation of technology in the
language curriculum (Dunkel, 1991).
 The purpose of product-oriented research is to examine
whether technology-based tasks increase the learners’
language abilities.
 The methods of these studies are experimental and
quasi-experimental with pre-test and post-test designs.

12. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Product-Oriented Research
 Recent research is comparing classes that are
teacher-led and hybrid classes → some classes are
teacher-led and some are online (Chenoweth &
Murday, 2003; Scida & Saury, 2006).
 However, their results are not generalizable and
cannot apply to all educational contexts.
 The how, when and why technology is effective in
language instruction is the main concern of
developers of CALL tasks and teacher educators.

13. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Product-Oriented Research
 Research around the field found positive results of task
features such as:
1. Subtitles in an interactive listening task (Borras &
Lafayette, 1994)
2. Highlighting linguistic form in texts (Doughty, 1991)
3. Interactive glosses for learning reading and listening
online (Yoshii & Flaitz, 2002)
4. Specific error identification and corrective feedback
(Nagata, 1993)
 Product-Oriented Research provides information on the
benefits of certain CALL activities.

14. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Product-Oriented Research
 CMC tasks that provide student-student interaction have
shown positive effects in the consolidation of vocabulary
knowledge (De la Fuente, 2003) and improvements in
speaking ability (Payne & Whitney, 2002).
 Types of online communication tasks that focus both on
meaning and on form are proven to be effective (Fiori,
2005).
 Research is focused on whether a type of knowledge
that has been taught by using technology, is actually
learned by students → whether students are able to
learn through technology and if technology is a better

15. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Process-Oriented Research investigates the extend
to which learners:
1. Engage in interactions expected to prompts
noticing
2. Produce language providing evidence for
development
3. Expand their access to and engagement with the
target language and culture
 It examines the interactions, discourse and other
aspects of learners performance and the dynamic
contexts of CALL use (Chapelle, 2010, p.543).

16. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Aims & Focus: Understand the use of CALL by
examining what learners do and focus on the
interactions of students with the computer, the other
students and their interlocutors in CMC.
 The question for examining these interactions is to
determine how frequent they are and how successful
they can be in the language learning process → These
interactions are beneficial for learners because they pay
attention to linguistic form, engage in interactional
modifications and correct errors in their linguistic output.
 These kinds of reflective communication and

17. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 In computer-learner interactions, internal modifications
occur when the learner interrupts his language
processing to request for help → for ex. when the
learners read a text on the screen and they click on a
word to receive its definition (Chun & Plass, 1996).
 Bland, Noblitt, Armington & Gay (1990) examined
System-D, a software that enables learners to get
support on the vocabulary and grammar of French while
they are writing.
 Error-correction tools provide error mark-up, spelling
help and online dictionaries & texts available on the
Internet can provide examples (sample essays) of
idiomatic phrases for high proficient learners.

18. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Error correction (modify an unsuccessful attempt to
express something) in CMC tasks can occur through: 1.
feedback from the computer 2. learner’s own reflection
on their linguistic output or peer correction.
 Another focus of process-oriented research: Discourse
used when learners are in front of a computer doing
collaborative work and on the discourse of CMC .
→ Language-for-doing: language for making
decisions, initiate moves and react to the action that the
computer program takes.

19. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Chun (1994) conducted a study to identify the discourse
moves that learners of German used in synchronous
interactive written communication: It “takes place like
a conversation. If your class uses only writing-based
tools to communicate, the only synchronous
communication possible is a chat session. Everyone gets
online in the same chat room and types
questions, comments, and responses in real time.
Synchronous activities may include chat
sessions, whiteboard drawings, and other group
interactive work. If your class involves multimedia
tools, synchronous communication might involve audio or
video feeds to the computer…by conference call, or
through closed-circuit television links”.
(http://academictech.doit.wisc.edu/ideas/otr/communicati
on/asynchronous-synchronous)

20. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
ON CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Kern (1995) examined the discourse of students in a
computer-assisted classroom discussion and found
that learners are involved in meaning-focused
language at their level.
 Warschauer (1995/6) found that in CMC tasks the
level of participation of learners was more even than
the traditional classroom.
→ It is important that the technology chosen to be
used in the classroom includes “contextual affordances
and constraints that affect learning” (Chapelle, 2010,
p.545).

21. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
ON CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Based on the sociocultural theory, research on CALL
should consider the dynamic communication among
learners, the teacher, the language, the technology, the
institution affected by the cultural and power relations.
 Belz (2001) demonstrated that the institutional and
cultural factors affected their communication with their
keypals: a person with whom one becomes friendly
by exchanging emails; an email penfriend
(oxforddictionaries.com)
 Thorne (2003) demostrated that the learner’s prior
experience with technology influenced their choices in

22. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON
CALL
Process-Oriented Research
 Technology in the language classroom offers learner’s
the opportunity for cultural contact and enhances their
intercultural competence.
 The focus of research is to raise our awareness and lead
to the improvement of practices in software development
and technology use in the classroom.
 However, it is important to educate learners on how to
utilize and extend classroom practices (learn strategies)
outside of the classroom context.
 “…how learning can be improved in and out of the class
through technology?” (Chapelle, 2010. p. 546).

23. PRINCIPLES FOR CALL
PEDAGOGY
 CALL pedagogies must be informed by the research on
SLA and technology, the technologies that are available to
the learners and successful teaching strategies in
implementing technology in the classroom.
 Learning materials that involve technology should give
learners the potential of learning the language: 1. direct
learner’s attention to linguistic forms 2. help them with
comprehension and production 3. error-correction
opportunities.
 Technological learning materials should also be at the
students’ level, appropriate for their age and interests and
meaning-focused.
 Tasks that involve technology should have a positive
impact on the learners: 1. enhance their intercultural

24. PRINCIPLES FOR CALL
PEDAGOGY
 CMC and computer-learner interaction provide
opportunities for learner’s to develop and enhance their
vocabulary, grammar, reading, writing, listening,
speaking, communication and content-based skills
(Chapelle & Jamieson, 2008).
→ communication skills (focus on the language): face-
to-face conversation, synchronous interactive written
communication (learners have more time to reflect on their
language use).
→ reading: electronic texts & reading comprehension.
→ listening: aural input enhanced with subtitles or focus
on specific aspect of the language

25. CALL AS A PREDICTOR OF
SUCCESS IN ENGLISH AS A
SECOND LANGUAGE
 Purpose of the study by Chapelle & Jamieson (1986): to
examine the effectiveness of CALL in the acquisition of
English as a Second Language.
 Participants: Arabic and Spanish-speaking students
(N=48) enrolled in an intensive program offered by the
University of Illinois.
 Their proficiency in English was measured by their
TOEFL results.
 ESL PLATO courseware was the curriculum that involved
CALL: focus on grammar, reading and listening.
 Variables: Cognitive affective characteristics such as
Field Independence and Dependence (FI/D), time spend
using CALL (PLATO) and learner’s attitudes towards

26. CALL AS A PREDICTOR OF
SUCCESS IN ENGLISH AS A
SECOND LANGUAGE
 Results: 1. FI students did not like CALL lessons on
PLATO, possibly because their learning style does
not match the software → accommodate the needs
FI students by finding out which kind of instruction
and the lesson they benefit from → importance of
matching CALL activities with their
learning/cognitive style 2. Time spend on CALL
activities and learners’ attitudes are related to FI and
how motivated they were.
 Software developers and teachers should take into
account learner and context variables when
designing or using CALL in the language classroom.

27. DIGITAL NATIVES VS.
DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS
 Prenksy (2001) discusses the issue of radical change in
education: “Today’s students are no longer the people
our educational system was designed to teach” (p.1).
 Singularity: technology’s advances are a break in history
→ we cannot revert back to how we were without the
technology, but what we have to embrace the fact that
our students have changed in a way that traditional
instruction cannot teach them.
 Digital Natives: this generation of students who were
exposed to technology really early on in their lives.
 Digital Immigrants: the generation that was exposed to
technology at a later stage of their lives.

28. DIGITAL NATIVES VS.
DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS
 Characteristics of today’s learners: they multi-task, prefer
instant gratification, like games and rewards, they are
audiovisual types and they are constantly networked.
 Changes that are necessary in order to help these
natives acquire a language: in the content and the
teaching methodology.
 Include more games in our classroom, adapt textbook
materials and worksheets (digitalize them), include
audiovisual stimuli, interactive books, interactive
whiteboards, ebooks, tablets, laptops, blogs, pods, etc.
 Edutainment: entertainment and education combined.

29. DIGITAL NATIVES VS.
DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS:
PART II
 Children of today spend most of their time playing
videogames, socializing, watching TV…
 The way today’s learner think is different because it is
influenced by the culture they experience and the input
they receive.
 Children cannot follow the traditional way of learning as
it does not accommodate their needs and that is why
they have shorter attention spans→ they need
stimulation and interactivity.
 Digital Game-Based Learning: Gamification → cutting
edge technique of using educational games to produce
and demonstrate knowledge.

30. DIGITAL NATIVES VS.
DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS:
PART II
Gamification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2N-5maKZ9Q

31. CONCLUSIONS &
PEDAGOGICAL
IMPLICATIONS
 Innovative learning environment that offers benefits to
both learners and teachers and improves the language
learning experience.
 Teachers need to acquire a new set of skills and develop
new teaching strategies that will facilitate the use of
technology in the classroom. They also need to be
selective and evaluate the materials that are using so as
for learners to succeed in and out of the classroom
(Hauck & Stickler, 2006).
 Pedagogies around CALL will keep changing, as new
technologies are developed.
 Learners’ language use and knowledge and strategies
will be improved so as to help them deal with the modern
technological word.

32. REFERENCES
 Chapelle, C. A. (2010). Computer-Assisted Language Learning. In
R.B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (2nd
ed.) (pp.539-547). New York: Oxford University Press
 Chapelle, C. A. & Jamieson, J. (1986). Computer-Assisted Language
Learning as a Predictor of Success in Acquiring English as a Second
Language, TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 27-46.
 Prensky M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II: Do
they really think differently?. On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-9. Retrieved
from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20-
%20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part2.pdf
 Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the
Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Retrieved from
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20-
%20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part1.pdf