CALICO Journal, Vol 34, No 2 (2017)

Situated Learning for Foreign Language Teachers in One-to-One Computing Initiatives

Pamela M. Wesely, Elizabeth Plummer
Issued Date: 6 Apr 2017


This study focuses on how Spanish teachers in four different rural US high schools use computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in their classrooms, and the nature of the relationship between their use of CALL and their experience of learning about CALL. A situated learning framework was used to evaluate the teachers’ learning opportunities in light of their CALL implementation. Teacher interviews, classroom observations, and class documents and websites suggested that the teachers rarely altered their pedagogy or their curriculum to integrate technology. Crucial elements of a situated learning environment were missing, and they corresponded to areas where teachers’ usage was not consistent with CALL principles. The study concludes with implications for practitioners, researchers, and theorists.

Download Media

PDF Subscribers Only

DOI: 10.1558/cj.26907


Argueta, R., Huff, J., Tingen, J., & Corn, J. O. (2011). Laptop initiatives: Summary of research across six states. Raleigh: Friday Institute for Educational Innovation, North Carolina State University.

Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Computers & Education, 50, 475–490.

Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. New York: Continuum.

Bustamante, C., & Moeller, A. (2013). The convergence of content, pedagogy, and technology in online professional development for teachers of German: An intrinsic case study. CALICO Journal, 30, 82–104.

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

Chinnery, G. (2008). Biting the hand that feeds me: The case for e-language learning and teaching. CALICO Journal, 25, 471–481.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cutrim Schmid, E. C. (2011). Video-stimulated reflection as a professional development tool in interactive whiteboard research. ReCALL, 23, 252–270.

Cutrim Schmid, E. C., & Hegelheimer, V. (2014). Collaborative research projects in the technology-enhanced language classroom: Pre-service and in-service teachers exchange knowledge about technology. ReCALL, 26, 315–332.

Cutrim Schmid, E. C., & Whyte, S. (2012). Interactive whiteboards in state school settings: Teacher responses to soci-constructivist hegemonies. Language Learning & Technology, 16(2), 65–86.

Dooly, M. (2009). New competencies in a new era? Examining the impact of a teacher training project. ReCALL, 21, 352–369.

Dooly, M., & Sadler, R. (2013). Filling in the gaps: Linking theory and practice through telecollaboration in teacher education. ReCALL, 25, 4–29.

Ducate, L., & Arnold, N. (2011). Technology, CALL and the Net Generation: Where are we headed from here? In N. Arnold and L. Ducate (Eds.), Present and future promises of CALL: From theory and research to new directions in language teaching (pp. 1–22). San Marcos, TX: CALICO Publications.

Ebsworth, M. E., Kim, A. J., & Klein, T. J. (2010). Projections: From a graduate TELL class to the practical world of L2 teachers. CALICO Journal, 27, 349–375.

Egbert, J. (2006). Learning in context: Situating language teacher learning in CALL. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 166–181). New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Egbert, J., Paulus, T., & 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.

Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Research on learning and teaching with Web 2.0: Bridging conversations. Educational Researcher, 38, 280–283.

Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23–48.

Hong, K. H. (2010). CALL teacher education as an impetus for L2 teachers in integrating technology. ReCALL, 22, 53–69.

Hubbard, P. (2008). CALL and the future of language teacher education. CALICO Journal, 25, 175–188.

Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (2006). The scope of CALL education. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher Education in CALL (pp. 3–22), New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Inserra, A., & Short, T. (2012). An analysis of high school math, science, social studies, English, and foreign language teachers’ implementation of one-to-one computing and their pedagogical practices. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 41, 145–169.

Kárpáti, A. (2009). Web 2 technologies for the net native language learners: A “social CALL.” ReCALL, 21, 139–156.

Kessler, G. (2006). Assessing CALL teacher training: What are we doing and what could we do better?. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher Education in CALL (pp. 23-44), New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Kessler, G. (2007). Formal and informal CALL preparation and teacher attitude toward technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 173–188.

Kessler, G. (2010). When they talk about CALL: Discourse in a required CALL class. CALICO Journal, 27, 379–382.

Klette, K., & Carlsten, T. C. (2012). Knowledge in teacher learning. In K. Jensen, L .C. Lahn, & M. Nerland (Eds.), Professional learning in the knowledge society (pp. 69–84). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Leakey, J. (2011). Evaluating computer-assisted language learning. New York: Peter Lang.

Levy, M., & Kennedy, C. (2010). Materials development in three Italian CALL projects: Seeking an optimal mix between in-class and out-of-class learning. CALICO Journal, 27, 529–539.

Loveless, A. (2011). Technology, pedagogy and education: Reflections on the accomplishment of what teachers know, do and believe in a digital age. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20, 301–316.

Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Ross, S. M., & Strahl, J. D. (2012). Do one-to-one initiatives bridge the way to 21st century knowledge and skills? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46, 1–30.

Maftoon, P., & Shahini, A. (2012). CALL normalization: A survey on inhibitive factors. The JALT CALL Journal, 8, 17–32.

McNeil, L. (2013). Exploring the relationship between situated activity and CALL learning in teacher education. ReCALL, 25, 215–232.

National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project (NSFLEP). (2015). World-readiness standards for learning languages (W-RSLL). Alexandria, VA: The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Retrieved from:

O’Dowd, R., & Ware, P. (2009). Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22, 173–188.

Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT Observation Scheme. Sydney, Australia: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Ware, P., & Hellmich, E. (2014). CALL in the K-12 Context: Language Learning Outcomes and Opportunities. CALICO Journal, 31, 140–157.

Wesely, P. M. (2013). Investigating the community of practice of world language educators on Twitter. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 305–318.

Williams, L., Abraham, L. B., & Bostelmann, E. D. (2014). A discourse-based approach to CALL training and professional development. Foreign Language Annals, 47, 614–629.

Wong, L., & Benson, P. (2006). In-service CALL education: What happens after the course is over? In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL (pp. 251–266). New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Equinox Publishing Ltd - 415 The Workstation 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)114 221-0285 - Email:

Privacy Policy