Literature review on technology and
language
This
literature review addresses several important points:
1.
Technology is
important for teaching and learning today.
2.
Language
teaching (CALL) has been relying on Technology for many years.
3.
Learning outcomes
must be enhanced by the incorporation of technology in the learning context
4.
Language
teaching requires face-to-face as well as computer assisted teaching and
learning
Over
the years technology has become more important in teaching and learning. This
is mainly because of the important role of technology in the world of today. It
has become essential that any teaching and learning context should prepare
students of all ages for the demands of technology.
As pointed out by Czerniewicz and Brown (2012) higher
education is not static and is “influenced by the practices of those who
comprise it” and the lecturer or teaching and learning specialist should be
able to assist in this process to enhance opportunities for digital interaction
between students and knowledge. Levy
(2009), points out that the introduction of multimedia, mobile technologies and
the Internet, have led to new forms of communication, writing, and social
networking. He identified several initiatives which were developed in each of
the areas of language teaching, namely grammar, vocabulary, reading, writing,
listening, speaking and even culture.
Students are referred to as digital strangers (Czerniewicz
and Brown (2012). However, it is often the lecturer who is a stranger to the practices,
which are common to the student. Even students from so-called disadvantaged
backgrounds who might not have had access to computers or technology to the
same extent as their fellow students, are very open to technology and most
students at least use cell phones. As pointed out by Czerniewicz and Brown
(2012), cell phones have narrowed the gap for students in a South African
context more than ever before and “ pushing the boundaries of the field itself”
(Czerniewicz and Brown (2012).
In
this specific study, computer based language programmes are added as a form of blended
learning. Blended learning has been
identified as digitally integrating the learner, teacher and content in a
combination of face-to-face and virtual online learning environments. Collis
and Moonen (2001) described blended learning as "a hybrid of traditional
face-to-face and online learning so that instruction occurs both in the
classroom and online, and where the online component becomes a natural
extension of traditional classroom learning." Blended learning emerged to close gap left by the learning
environments where instructional materials are transferred electronically or
through the Internet or through course software with the help of computer
technologies in teaching and learning environments and where the teacher and
the learner are in different physical environments i.e. e-learning.
The most significant characteristics of e learning
are that the teacher and the learner are in different physical environments and
that the communication throughout the teaching/learning process is carried out
via e-mail, forums, through the Internet. However, e-learning environments pose
such disadvantages as hindrance of the socialization process of individuals,
lack of sufficient recognition between the teacher and the learner and
limitations concerning the communication among learners. Blended learning combines
the advantages of e-learning and traditional learning environments (Akkoyunlu
& Soylu 2008).
What makes blended learning particularly effective is
its ability to facilitate a community of inquiry. Community provides the
stabilizing, cohesive influence that balances the open communication and
limitless access to information on the Internet. Communities also provide the
condition for free and open dialogue, critical debate, negotiation and
agreement—the hallmark of higher education. Blended learning has the
capabilities to facilitate these conditions and adds an important reflective
element with multiple forms of communication to meet specific learning
requirements (Garrison & Kanuka 2004).
The Pearson MyFoundationsLab software programme is a
digital platform to create a learning experience where the learners can enhance
their language abilities at their own pace. The content is made accessible during
face-to-face sessions. The programme aims to enhance reading and writing skills
of students. Assessment is embedded throughout the programme in the form of
exercises and homework tasks where the learner is expected to assume
responsibility for his or her own learning.
However,
Barrett and Sharma (2007) point out that technology in language teaching is
controversial. Arguments against technology include the following; it is
expensive, based on an outdated, stimulus-response approach and might not cater
for all types of learning styles and students. Some students prefer face-to-face
sessions and not computer based teaching. He further argues that computer based
language learning might prohibits fluency. It encourages plagiarism and could expose
learners to unsuitable materials. It is not clear whether teaching language
through a machine has more benefits than teaching face to face. According to
Sharma, online testing may favour some learners and disadvantage others. But then,
so could other test types.
Four key principles identified by
Barrett and Sharma (2007), which can help teachers, implement technology. These
are:
- Separate the role of
the teacher
It is important to understand the respective roles played by the teacher and the technology in the learning process; the teacher could deal with the ‘fuzzy’ areas mentioned above, for instance. - Teach in a principled
way
Whenever a new technology emerges (such as, say, podcasting), it is important to go beyond the ‘wow’ factor and think about the pedagogical reasons for using it. - Use the technology to
complement and enhance what the teacher does
- 'It’s not what it is,
it’s what you do with it.' So it is not the interactive whiteboard per se
which could improve the learning experience, but how it is used.
Kittle (2009) writes
on digital story telling and multimodality. Students seem more involved in
their own teaching and learning if lecturers create opportunities for
multimodality. This study needs to explore these possibilities in more depth. However,
as pointed out by Levy (2009:777), it is essential to select an appropriate
tool to match the task for which it is needed. The question to be explored is
whether the Pearson tool s the most appropriate tool to develop academic
literacy amongst 1st year chemistry students. Levy furthermore
points out that the effectiveness of the tool depends on the users’
understanding and application of the tool; more so than the tool itself. If not
it can become an exercise in futility and much lecturing time can be wasted.
Bibliography
Akkoyunlu,
B., & Soylu, M. Y. (2008). A study of student’s perceptions in a blended
learning environment based on different learning styles. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (1), 183-193.
Barrett, B and Sharma, P (2007) Blended Learning – using technology inside and beyond the language classroom.
London: Macmillan
Czerniewicz, L and Brown, C.
2012. The habitus of digital “strangers” in higher
education. British Journal of Educational Technology (2012)
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01281.x
Collis,
B. and Moonen, J. 2001. Flexible learning
in a digital world experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page
Limited.
Garrison,
D. R. and Kanuka, H. 2004. Blended learning: uncovering its transformative
potential in higher education. Internet
and Higher Education, 7: 95–105.
Kittle,
P. 2009. Student Engagement and Modality. (In) Herrington, A, Hodgson K and Moran
C (eds). Teaching the New writing.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Levy,
M. 2009. Technologies in Use for Second Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal. 93:769-782
Marsh,
D. 2012. Blended learning creating learning opportunities for language learners.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
