The Influence of L2 Teachers' Use of CALL Modes on Language Learners' Reactions to Blended Learning

Authors

  • Kwang Hee Hong
  • Keiko K. Samimy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.2.328-348

Keywords:

Blended Learning (BL), BL implementation

Abstract

Previous research on blended learning (BL) implementation in L2 instructional settings considers L2 teachers' use of the incorporated CALL modes and learners' attitudes toward the CALL modes as critical factors, among other factors, for achieving successful BL implementation. In the literature, these two factors are suggested to be strongly associated. Although these findings have laid the foundation for us to see what happens in the process of BL implementation, few studies have examined the relationship between the two factors while simultaneously considering other factors which potentially influence learners' attitudes toward the incorporated CALL modes. Given the multidimensional aspects of BL implementation, the relationship between the two cardinal factors and their interrelation with other factors involved in BL implementation needs to be further examined. The present study addresses this gap in the literature. It examines the relationship between 244 Korean EFL students' attitudes toward the incorporated CALL modes under BL and the teachers' use of the CALL modes while taking into account students' other characteristics, such as computer literacy skills, gender, age, time spent on internet surfing and devoted to English study online, and prior BL experience.

References

An, Y.-J., & Frick, T. (2006). Student perceptions of asynchronous computer-mediated communication in face-to-face courses. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2). Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue2/an.html

Ayres, R. (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 241-249.

Bateson, G. (1977). Vers une écologie de l’esprit. Paris: Seuil.

Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. London: Pearson Education.

Blin, F. (2004). CALL and the development of learner autonomy: Towards an activity-theoretical perspective. ReCALL, 16, 377-395.

Bunz, U. (2004). The Computer-Email-Web (CEW) fluency scale: Development and validation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 476-506.

Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 80, 183-198.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coryell, J. E., & Chlup, D. T. (2007). Implementing e-learning components with adult English language learners: Vital factors and lesson learned. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 263-278.

Dubreil, S., Herron, C., & Cole, S. P. (2004). An empirical investigation of whether authentic web sites facilitate intermediate-level French language students’ ability to learn culture. CALICO Journal, 22, 41-61. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Ducate, L. C., & Lomicka, L. L. (2005). Exploring the blogosphere: Use of web logs in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 410-421.

Dunkel, P., & Zubovic, Y. (1992). Regression models in an ESL context: Issues in construction and interpretation: Two other researchers comment. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 194-196.

Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 108-126. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert

Esch, E., & Zähner, C. (2000). The contribution of information and communication technology (ICT) to language learning environments or the mystery of the secret agent. ReCALL, 12, 5-18.

Felix, U. (2001). The web’s potential for language learning: The student’s perspective. ReCALL, 13, 47-58.

Felix, U. (Ed.). (2003). Language learning online: Towards best practice. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2002). Technology for prospective language teachers. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 10-14. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/emerging/default.html

Goertler, S., & Winke, P. (Eds.) (2008). Opening doors through distnce language education: Principles, perspectives, and practices. San Marcos, TX: CALICO

Godwin-Jones, R. (2003). Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 12-16. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/emerging/default.html

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning (pp. 3-21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Harker, M., & Koutsantoni, D. (2005). Can it be as effective? Distance versus blended learning in a webbased EAP programme. ReCALL, 17, 197-216.

Hart, N. (2002). Intra-group autonomy and authentic materials: A different approach to ELT in Japanese colleges. System, 30, 33-46.

Hegelheimer, V. (2006). Helping ESL writers through a multimodal, corpus-based, online grammar resource. CALICO Journal, 24, 5-32. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Heins, B., Duensing, A., & Stickler, U. (2007). Spoken interaction in online and face-to-face language tutorials. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 279-295.

Hertel, T. J. (2003). Using an e-mail exchange to promote cultural learning. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 386-396.

Hubbard, P. (2004). Learner training for effective use of CALL. In S. Fotos & C. Browne (Eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms (pp. 45-68). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (Eds.). (2006). Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quality and characteristics of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.

Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 243-260.

Kerres, M. (2001). Multimediale und telemediale Learnumgebungen. München: Oldenburg.

Kim, C.-J., & Santiago, R. (2005). Construction of e-learning environments in Korea. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 108-115.

Lam, Y. (2000). Technophilia vs. technophobia: A preliminary look at why second language teachers do or do not use technology in their classrooms. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 389-420.

Lam, Y., & Lawrence, G. (2002). Teacher-student role redefining during a computer-based second language project: Are computers catalysts for empowering change? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 295-315.

Lanahan, L., & Boysen, J. (2006). Computer technology in the public school classroom: Teacher perspectives. Educational Statistics Quarterly, 7(1&2). Retrieved March 18, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_7/1_2/4_6.asp

Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Logan, R. K. (1995). The fifth language. Toronto: Stoddart Publishing.

Luke, C. L. (2006). Fostering learner autonomy in a technology-enhanced, inquiry-based foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 71-86.

Mishan, F. (2005). Designing authenticity into language learning materials. Bristol, UK: Intellect.

Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning—Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17, 163-178.

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 October 11, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/ortega

Payne, J. S., & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7-32. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Pellettieri, J. (2000). 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.

Prinsen, F. R., Volman, M. L. L., & Terwel, J. (2007). Gender-related differences in computer-mediated communication and computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 393-409.

Sanders, R. (2006). A comparison of chat room productivity: In-class versus out-of-class. CALICO Journal, 24, 59-76. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Scida, E. E., & Saury, R. E. (2006). Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23, 517-531. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Stockwell, G. R., & Levy, M. (2001). Sustainability of email interactions between native speakers and nonnative speakers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14, 419-442.

Stracke, E. (2007). A road to understanding: A qualitative study into why learners drop out of a blended language learning (BLL) environment. ReCALL, 19, 57-78.

Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning: How to integrate online & traditional learning. London: Kogan Page.

Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 82-99. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/toyoda

Ushida, E. (2005). The role of students’ attitudes and motivation in second language learning in online language courses. CALICO Journal, 23, 49-78. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Van Deusen-Scholl, N., Frei, C., & Dixon, E. (2005). Coconstructing learning: The dynamic nature of foreign language pedagogy in a CMC environment. CALICO Journal, 22, 657-678. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Warschauer, M. (1996a). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13, 7-26. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5

Warschauer, M. (1996b). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and communication. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawai’i symposium (pp. 29-46). Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.

Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies: Language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Warschauer, M. (2002). A developmental perspective on technology in language education. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 453-475.

Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zeiss, E., & Isabelli-García, C. L. (2005). The role of asynchronous computer mediated communication on enhancing cultural awareness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 151-169.

Zhang, S. (1992). Regression models in an ESL context: Issues in construction and interpretation: A researcher comments. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 191-194.

Downloads

Published

2013-01-14

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Hong, K. H., & Samimy, K. K. (2013). The Influence of L2 Teachers’ Use of CALL Modes on Language Learners’ Reactions to Blended Learning. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 328-348. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.2.328-348

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>