Compleat Lexical Tutor

When I first arrived at the Compleat Lexical Tutor at http://www.lextutor.ca/the aesthetic of the site put me off a bit, but after revisiting the site after hearing Professor Harrington's talk about lexical processing I started to get it. The interface is a bit clunky and the tool is not for the language student but for the language instructor. I would think you would need a reasonable background in SLA theory to make full use of the site. Items like the Reaction Time Instrument Builder don't make sense to your average teacher unless you've heard Harrington talk about the correlation between response times and global language ability. Given the limited information on the site, would you even know to use non-words when you are setting up your test? I won't go into details at this point. I invite you to check it out. It does include tools like a concordancer, a page that allows you to locate collocations in any input text, and a page that will search any text for the number and kinds of word families used. This is not for those who are looking for a quick activity or exercise, but for those who want tools to look at the underbelly of the texts they use it is an interesting resource.

Reading with CALL

In comparison to the number of English Language Learner resources available, there is a dearth of resources dedicated to Less Commonly Taught languages like Hindi. In an attempt to make up for the disparity of resources dedicated to Hindi, the US has started what it calls a "flagship" program at the University of Texas at Austin. Part of this effort has been dedicated to providing online student resources that employ techniques based upon recent pedagogical thought that are designed to enhance learning. One of these resources was created by Jishnu Shankar and can be found by clicking here.

Professor Shankar has created a series of slideshow presentations that use realia and enhanced text to teach vocabulary and grammar in context. He provides pre-reading questions, glossaries, comprehension questions, practice exercises, and enhanced text that helps bring learner attention to particular grammatical forms. The site features authentic texts like political cartoons, health posters, advertisements, and magazine articles. It offers materials for a variety of reading levels covering a good variety of topics. The choice to produce the materials in a PowerPoint format allows students or instructors to download particular items for future use.

Using this as a model, one could create slideshows that include audio and video portions. These could be provided within the document or by making hyperlinks to materials on the web. This kind of nonlinear PowerPoint allows learners to seek support when they feel they need it. This kind of interaction with the material should help reinforce the language addressed.

My Experience with CALL

I have used some form of computer for as long as I can remember. In 1981 my dad brought home an Apple II+, and since then I have lived as a digital native. I have always had some form of computer at my disposal (with one significant exception that I will go into later). In terms of my own relationship to technology, I quite often find myself feeling ambivalent. It is likely that this ambivalence will influence my understanding of CALL and its usefulness in a language classroom. The ambivalence stems from a recognition that the digital route is not always the one that is best suited to particular tasks, but that gauging whether it is more effective than conventional routes is not necessarily an easy task either. The question I am faced with is how to determine when the usually front loaded effort of setting up digital media will result in greater dividends in the long run. This in terms of teacher speak would be phrased as when does taking the CALL route result in better learning outcomes.

I work at the Language and Culture Learning Center and have helped develop how-to documents for instructors to use CALL techniques in their classrooms. As teacher, I have yet to use most these techniques in my own classroom. I recognize that using these methods often entails not only providing an example of the kinds of work I would like to see my students produce but also teaching the technology required to produce it. In many cases I can see how this will pay dividends in the long-term, but I feel that in other cases it is less clear.

Does anyone else struggle with this kind of ambivalence? Has anyone established some kind of litmus test to determine whether using CALL techniques will be more likely to result in better learning incomes than more conventional approaches?