Individual Learner Differences in CALL
The Field Independence/Dependence (FID) Construct
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v26i2.246-266Keywords:
Measure of Field Independence/Dependence, Individual Learner Differences, Student Use of CALL Programs, GermanAbstract
In Spring semester 2006, we conducted a study with 50 learners of German to investigate the use of a new measure (Cárdenas-Claros, 2005) for research on the field independent/dependent (FID) cognitive style and CALL use. After the measure was administered, students worked on a CALL program for German that logs interaction. This paper reports the reliability and item analysis of the FID-CALL measure in addition to its relationship with learners' behaviors in the CALL program. With the goal of understanding how FID intersects with satisfaction and success in learning through CALL, we suggest areas for future development of the measure.
References
Abraham, R. (1985). Field independence-dependence and the teaching of grammar. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 689-702.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Cárdenas-Claros, M. (2005). Field dependence/field independence: How do students perform in CALLbased listening activities? Unpublished master’s thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
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, 27-46.
Chapelle, C. A., & Green, P. (1992). Field independence dependence in second language acquisition research. Language Learning, 42, 47-83.
Chapelle, C. A. (1995). Field independence/dependence in the L2 classroom. In J. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 158-168). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Construct definition and validity inquiry in SLA research. In L. F. Bachman & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp. 32-70). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003) Questionnaires in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in L2 learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589-630). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Hansen, J., & Stansfield, C. (1981). The relationship between field dependent-independent cognitive styles and foreign language achievement, Language Learning, 31, 349–367.
Hegelheimer, V., & Chapelle, C. A. (2000). Methodological issues in research on learner-computer interactions in CALL. Language Learning & Technology, 4, 41-59. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/hegchap/default.html
Heift, T. (2006). Context-sensitive help in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19, 243-259.
Heift, T. (2001). Error-specific and individualized feedback in a web-based language tutoring system: Do they read it? ReCALL Journal, 13, 129-142.
Heift, T., & Nicholson, D. (2001). Web delivery of adaptive and interactive language tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 310-325.
Jamieson, J. M. (1992). The cognitive styles of reflection/impulsivity and field independence/dependence and ESL success. The Modern Language Journal, 76, 491-501.
Jamieson, J. M., & Chapelle, C. A. (1987). Working styles on computers as evidence of second language strategies. Language Learning, 37, 523-544.
Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Liou, H. (1997). Research on on-line help as learner strategies for multimedia CALL evaluation. CALICO Journal, 14, 81-96. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5
Liu, M., & Reed, W. M. (1994). The relationship between the learning strategies and learning styles in a hypermedia environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 10, 419-434.
Payne, 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 19, 2008, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5
Pujolà, J.-T. (2002). CALLing for help: Researching language learning strategies using help facilities in a web-based multimedia program. ReCALL, 14, 253-262.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
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 19, 2008, from https://calico.org/page.php?id=5
Witkin, H., & Goodenough, D. (1981). Cognitive styles, essence and origins: Field dependence and field independence. New York: International Universities Press.
Witkin, H., Oltman, P., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. (1971). A manual for the embedded figures test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Witkin, H., Moore, C., Goodenough, D., & Cox, P. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47, 1-64.
