View Content #24482

By Julie Sykes, CASLS Director

(adapted from Sykes, 2014)

Concurrent with general shifts in educational trends, economic realities, and the desire on the part of learners to access coursework anytime and anywhere, we have seen a drastic shift toward more online courses (i.e., courses offered independently of face-to-face environments). Nationally, student enrollment in at least one online course grew steadily from 9.6% in 2002 to 32% in 2012 (Allen and Seaman 2013). However, this growth is not necessarily indicative of widespread acceptance by faculty and instructors. In fact, a great deal of skepticism remains with many concerned that online courses do not allow for the type of personal interactions needed to reach necessary levels of proficiency (Allen and Seaman 2013; Blake 2009). Despite this skepticism, initial empirical research demonstrates that compared with face-to-face courses, online courses can be equally if not more successful at helping students achieve necessary levels of proficiency (Vorobel and Kim, 2012).

It is not the tools themselves, or the fact that the space is digital,  that makes online learning transformative, or even useful. As noted by Blake,

No one should think that the mere use of technology by itself would create educational change in the foreign language classroom and improve the curriculum . . . only social forces (i.e., teachers and students working together) can create curriculum change and innovation. (Blake, 2013: 131–132)

Thus, examination of the key elements of digital learning contexts must be driven by the desire to improve pedagogical practice and solve problems that have been previously impractical to address. Drawing on SLA theory and her historical examination of the evolution of the field of CALL, Butler-Pascoe (2011: 28) ambitiously synthesized the needs of language learners and suggested them as critical considerations for the implementation of any technological tools in the service of language learning:

• Focus on communication and interaction.
• Representation of specific professional environments.
• Constructivist learning environment that includes modeling, contextualizing, and metacognitive activities.
• Student-centered environment to encourage autonomy and responsibility.
• Development of critical thinking, reading, writing, listening, speaking, computer, and information literacy skills.
• Real-world task-based and inquiry-based strategies.
• Content-based learning that includes authentic audiences and materials.
• Understanding of the cultural and pragmatic aspects of the target language.
• Multiple modalities.
• Appropriate feedback including summative and formative assessment.
• Authentic audiences for interaction and publication of students’ work.
• A positive affective environment to motivate and lower anxiety.

The list is complex and represents what many consider to be best practices for any language learning context, not just online language learning. With thoughtful implementation of a variety of emerging technological tools, online courses can, and do, offer a meaningful learning context for each of these elements to occur. 

References

Blake, R. (2009). ‘The use of technology for second language distance learning’. Modern Language Journal 93 (s1): 822–835.

Blake, R. (2013). A brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign langauge learning (2nd ed.). Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Butler-Pascoe, M. (2011). ‘The history of CALL: The intertwining paths of technology and second/ foreign language teaching.' International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 1 (1): 16–32.

Sykes, J. (2014). Emerging Technological Resources for Teaching Spanish. In Methodological Approaches and Realities, Routledge Handbook in Applied Linguistics. M. Lacorte (Ed.). Routledge. 238-257.

Vorobel, O. and Kim, D. (2012). ‘Language teaching at a distance: An overview of research.' CALICO Journal 29 (3): 548–562.