1. Multimedia Call: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA by Carol chapelle Iowa State University Daniel, Rania, Alice

2. Abstract  Design features and evaluation criteria for multimedia CALL, developed on the basis of hypotheses about ideal conditions for SLA.  Theory of SLA and the hypotheses for ideal conditions.

3. Our presentation  Seven hypotheses relevant for developing multimedia CALL.  Implications for multimedia task design.  Evaluations of multimedia CALL activities.

4. The relationship of design and evaluation of CALL learning activities Design learning activities based on relevant hypotheses about SLA design activities  Evaluate learning activities based on focused observation  Observe effectiveness

5. Identifying Relevant Hypotheses about SLA  SLA contains a variety of objectives and approaches, selection of approaches that may relevant to SLA.  Pica (1997) shed her research on the relationships between research and practice  Research and teaching: 1).coexist, little intellectual interface 2).collaborates, teachers and researchers work together toward similar goals 3).research complements L2 instruction (researchers + teachers → materials → impact on Ss’ learning )

6. A Useful Model of SLA  Basic components in the SLA process in interactionist research input Apperception Semantic & syntactic ↑ Semantic Comprehension intake Integration Into the Learner’s linguistic System Output

7. Seven hypotheses relevant for developing multimedia CALL  1. the linguistic characteristics of target language input need to be made salient. salient (obvious) → notice → apperception→ acquire  2. learners should receive help in comprehending semantic and syntactic aspects of linguistic input. help=modification of the input semantic + syntactic → intake → developing linguistic system; Modification of input simplificationelaboration Added redundancy

8. Seven hypotheses relevant for developing multimedia CALL  3. Learners need to have opportunities to produce target language output. Output ≠ mindlessly practice ≈ authentic communication (construction of meanings)→ facilitate acquisition = comprehensible output (Swain)  4. learners need to notice errors in their own output. Noticing of a problem → modify output → syntactic processing mode ↓ internalize new forms & improvement of grammatical knowledge (Pica, Holliday, Lewis&Morgenthaler,1989)

9. Seven hypotheses relevant for developing multimedia CALL  5. learners need to correct their linguistic output. self correction: fragile knowledge → pieces (construction of meanings)  6. learners need to engage in target language interaction whose structure can be modified for negotiation of meaning. ---trying to resolve imperfect aspects which occur in the process of comprehending input (Long, 1996)→ learners’ attention focused → make input comprehensible; --- unknown elements in the process of negotiation → potential intake for acquisition

10. Seven hypotheses relevant for developing multimedia CALL  7. learners should engage in L2 tasks designed to maximize opportunities for good interaction. Categories &featuresdefinition Interactional activity Interactant roles (e.g.:information gap) What are the participants’ roles relative to information exchange? Interactant relationship One way or two way information exchange Interactant requirement Does the task goal require request and suppliance of information? Communication goal Goal orientation Do learner use information to work together to meet goals? Outcome options How many outcome options exist for the task?

11. Expanded model of SLA  Task characteristics→ (extralinguistic task features by developers, separated)  Observed language ↗  Learner’s acquisition processes and knowledge Communication goal Interactional activity Input and output Apperception ↓ Comprehension ↓ Intake ↓ integration→ Learner’s Linguistic System ↑

12. Implications for multimedia task design by Carol A. Chapelle (Dan)  The hypotheses outlined are supported by theory and research on SLA tasks in experimenting settings in which L2 learners interact with other learners or proficient language users.

13. Two hypothetical multimedia CALL activities are used to show how the hypotheses can be implemented in the design of multimedia CALL 1. CALL software as a participant in L2 tasks.  The call developers need to consider how software can provide learners with opportunities believed to facilitate SLA.  View multimedia design in terms of: input it can provide to learners, output it allows them to produce, the interaction they are able to engage in, and the L2 tasks it supports.

14. 2. Suggested criteria for multimedia CALL.  For each of the hypotheses about SLA drawn from the interactionist perspective, a corresponding suggestion for multimedia CALL can be made.

15. 1. Making key linguistic characteristics salient.  This can be done by: highlighting them in different colours on the screen, in aural input they can be transcribed on the screen and the linguistic features can be chosen by Call designer or the teacher.

16. 2. Offering modification of linguistic input.  In multimedia CALL, linguistic input can be provided through either written or aural language.  Modification of input can come in the form of repetition, simplification through statements, non-verbal cues, decreased speed, reference materials, and change of input mode.

17. 3. Providing opportunities for ‘comprehensible out put’ Comprehensible out put-either written or spoken must be produced with the expectation that it is going to be ‘understood’. In this condition: -the learner is expected to attempt to use target language forms that may stretch his/her competence. - Learners expect their response to be comprehended if they are syntactically well formed and pragmatically appropriate. This pushes them to attempt to use the target language forms attentively and constructively

18. 4.Providing opportunities for learners to notice their errors.  The output learners produce in multimedia CALL needs to be analysed by the computer and/or reflected upon by the learner to identify errors.  Output containing error are the key areas in which their attention should be drawn.  They can check in the dictionary in order to notice errors.

19. 5.Providing opportunities for learners to correct their linguistic output.  They might be left with their own device to make the correction, but they might also be provided detailed error-specific help or access to more general reference material.  The program would then need to highlight this form to help the learner notice it and provide another opportunity.  (the hotpotatoes program does this).

20. 6.Supporting modified interaction between the learner and the computer.  This implies that the learner engages in some forms of interaction with the computer.  The interaction need to move the learner toward a task goal and stop progress along the way to focus on the language.  Interaction can be accomplished through mouse click and hypertext links or through the learners linguistic output and the software speech recognition system.

21. 7.Acting as a participant in L2 tasks  Interactions are hypothesized to be valuable when they occur in communication tasks,  Tasks must focus the learners attention on accomplishing a goal through the use of language rather than on solving problems of linguistic form.

22.  Evaluation of instruction activities by Rania.

23. Evaluation as a critical part of design  Evaluation of pedagogical materials  discover success of material  Observation + analysis of L2 classroom practices  Research gives emphasis on the impact that learners themselves make in shaping the character of the task  No clear conception of a task exists, unless it has been carried out

24. Research Methods for Evaluation  A: Process-Oriented observations of learners working on L2 tasks : 1) Record learner’s language during task completion 2) Introspective methods  gain evidence about learner’s goal-oriented strategies while they are working on L2 tasks

25. B: Assessment of learning outcomes  Requires identification of what learners are supposed to acquire as a result of working on task: 1) identifying target linguistic items to be acquired 2) testing learners after task completion

26.  Evaluation is successful when the researcher can identify specific forms that all learners are expected to acquire.

27.  More individualized approach to outcome assessment is required  learners choose to focus on.  Can be achieved by observing learners as they complete the task.

28. Questions for empirical evaluation of Multimedia CALL  1) Is there evidence that learners attend to salient linguistic characteristics of the target language input?  2) Do learners choose to see the modifications of linguistic input?

29.  3) Do learners produce ‘comprehensible output?’  4) Is there evidence that learners notice errors in their output?  5) Do learners correct their linguistic output?

30.  6) To what extent do the learners interact with the computer to engage in modified interaction focusing on form and meaning?  7) Do learners look forward toward communication-oriented goals?