Clinton- US to Push for Women’s Rights in New Mideast Democracies

Clinton news the event found of the US observant of a national women’s day. The serve know that the statue Obama have administration will make women’s empowerment, a power ship priority in each dealing with emerging democracy in Middle East.

Clinton

“the women in Egypt, Indonesia and other nations have just as much right as the men to remake their government, to make them responsive, accountable, and transparent. The US will stand firmly for opposition that women must be included in whatever process goes forward.”

Clinton said no government can exit even its included have of the people is women for important decision. The same criteria the states join by first lady Michelle Obama persisted at the fifteen of women courage of world ceremony, honoring activist surround the world for implicating for women’s right and the empowerment. The sire of the ten receipt the enceinte include the first female had of states around world, Kyrgyz with public president Roza Otunbayeba, who Clinton said stead her country to democracy last year, after the collapse of the all corny regime.

Clinton

“she decided early on, she will help to set up a new government, have a new constitution and when the time came after the election finish, she’ll return over power to the new prime minister and that government in so doing. She has offered the invaluable lesson to plaguing democracy everywhere.”

In the next acceptance speech of president Otunbayeba set the new Kyrgyz democracy on the first generation might appear cryonic, but the apparent this ray is far approvable to be older reinforce by a dictator.

President Roza Otunbayeba

“Yes, when you are dictator ship, it is very easy to create anti visual picture of stability harmony. When you have a democracy, you must learn to accept many voices. Some of them very critical, some even insulting. To the outsiders, it looks like you are about to collapse every minutes.”

First lady, Michelle Obama, said the common pre blinking on the owner is their great courage to against in justice the sense of discrimination.

Michelle Obama

“It’s time this women speak up their inspire others to use their own voices. Their feel illness and inspire others to overcome viewers. And subsidized in network summarize either for changes soon impossible to rewrite loose to troop or to train for people lies.”

Obama said, some of women activist might not to see the fruit of their previous doing in their lifetimes, but that they carry on with knowledge that they are previewing way for better life for their daughter and their son.

www.voanews.com

To accomplish its goals, CALL-IS…

• Continually updates standards for evaluating computer-based materials and applications as changes in technology warrant.
• Encourages research in computer-mediated language instruction.
• Promotes the development of computer-based activities for English-language instruction.
• Encourages TESOL members to become involved in the dissemination of CALL-related information by presenting at local, regional, and national conferences, serving as a consultant in TESOL’s Electronic Village, and publishing articles and reviews in professional publications.
• Publishes a newsletter.
• Maintains a Software and URL List of language-related software and websites.
• Has developed an extensive CD-ROM library of freeware, shareware and demonstration products, available at cost to TESOL members.
• Is developing a website to provide information about many areas related to CALL for ESOL professionals.
• Organizes a computer lab, called the Electronic Village, at each TESOL Convention, where convention participants can explore language software and Internet applications and discuss computer-mediated instruction with colleagues around the world.
• Organizes four special events at the annual TESOL Convention: Author’s Showcase, Software Fair, Web Fair, and Exhibitor’s Technology Fair.
• Works with TESOL organizers on the logistics of successful computer-based presentations at conferences.
• Serves as a resource to TESOL affiliates on setting up a computer lab for conferences.

The CALL Interest Section archives and website do not constitute endorsement of any particular software. Shareware and commercial registration requires payment to program authors / companies.
]]> http://viozky.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/whats-the-tesol-call-interest-section/feed/ 0 viozky http://viozky.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/introduction-to-computer-assisted-language-learning/ http://viozky.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/introduction-to-computer-assisted-language-learning/#comments Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:35:36 +0000 viozky http://viozky.wordpress.com/?p=29 ]]> WHAT IS CALL?

In general CALL can refer to any language learning or teaching that involves the computer in a significant way. CALL can be

• one student on one computer with interactive software
• two or three students on one computer with interactive software
• students on computers interacting with other students (computer-mediated communication)
• students on computers working with web-based language content
• students interacting with one another and a teacher through a computer (online class)
• a teacher using a single computer and large monitor or data projector for class instruction
• and other options

CALL environments can be a classroom, a computer lab with the teacher present, a computer lab with students working independently, or students working at a public computer, at home, or elsewhere. The microcomputer has been a central element of this for the past few decades, although notebook computers, PDAs, and even cell phones are beginning to be utilized.

Computers in language teaching: tutor vs. tool. The field of CALL is split more or less into two camps: those who see the computer as a machine for delivering interactive language learning and practice material–the computer as tutor–and those who see it as a means for learners to experience the authentic language and communication opportunities and enhancements afforded by computers–the computer as tool (Levy 1997). It is of course possible, I would say preferable, to recognize these not as opposing philosophies but as end points along the same language teaching continuum that balances teacher-fronted and group work in a classroom. In other words, effective language learning can include elements of both. Consequently, in this introduction to the field I will try to strike a balance between them so that you come out of this able to recognize the potential advantages of using neither, one, or both  for a given teaching situation.

Acronyms and attitudes. This field has gone by a number of different names as groups of practitioners have attempted to impose their own philosophies. CALL remains the generic term

• CALL: Computer-assisted language learning (the generic term); sometimes Computer-aided language learning
• CALI: Computer-assisted language instruction (more teaching oriented; less learner focused)
• CBLT: Computer-based language training (views elements of language learning as “training”)
• CELL: Computer-enhanced language learning (computer’s  role is less central)
• TELL: Technology-enhanced language learning (accommodates more than just computers)
• ICTinLT: Information and Communication Technologies in Language Teaching (focuses more on tool use)
• NBLT: Network-Based Language Teaching. (focuses on computer-mediated communication and the web

In the late 1980s and early 90s, the Apple Macintosh replace the Apple II in many educational settings and became a favorite among teacher-developers because of the support of HyperCard, a powerful but easy-to-use authoring program. The Mac had built-in sound, making it easier to work with than PCs which had incompatible proprietary boards competing with one another. Early Macs (and HyperCard) did not support color, however, so commercial programs continued to appear for PCs. The PC market was also dominant in most countries outside the US because the machines could be obtained much more cheaply than Macs.

During this period, the use of the computer as a tool increased as teachers developed innovative techniques for using email and word processors became integrated into writing classes. Some teachers helped students develop their own HyperCard projects or ones in similar applications developed for the PC, such as ToolBook. It was noted that building collaborative projects around the computer and using computer mediated communication (CMC) had a strong effect on some students’ motivations and seemed to make it easier for shy students to become involved. Some teachers built assignments around student interactions in multi-user domains (MUDs), the precursors of today’s chat rooms.

Two major changes came starting in the mid-1990s. One was the dramatic increase in commercial multimedia for language learning as CD-ROMs became standard in home computers. The other was the development of the world wide web. Because of the web and increased access to the Internet in general, the past five or six years have seen a major shift toward tool uses, and many newcomers to CALL define the field almost entirely in those terms.

Teachers interested in CALL can get involved in a number of different ways. Here are some possibilities.

• As researchers: into second language acquisition, human-computer interaction, what works for CALL
• As consumers of CALL software for class use or building web activities into course work
• As directors, helping students find and use supplementary CALL materials or web resources
• As managers of computer-mediated communication among learners in and out of class
• As software or web developers, either “from scratch” or adding new materials to existing templates
• As coaches to help students develop software, websites, and general computer literacy
• As CALL experts for your program, helping other teachers and administrators with CALL implementations
• As CALL professionals, consulting on external projects, doing software reviews for journals, making conference presentations, writing papers, interpreting and applying CALL research, and/or  providing input to the field at large.

Those who are more serious about making CALL a specialization can look to link their background in language teaching with an MA in Stanford’s Learning, Design, and Technology program in the School of Education or an MA in CALL itself available from institutions like Carnegie-Mellon.  Other CALL courses are listed on Graham Davies website www.camsoftpartners.co.uk/courses.htm.

Though CALL has developed gradually over the last 30 years, this development can be categorized in terms of three somewhat distinct phases which I will refer to as behavioristic CALL, communicative CALL, and integrative CALL (cf. Barson & Debski 1996). As we will see, the introduction of a new phase does not necessarily entail rejecting the programs and methods of a previous phase; rather the old is subsumed within the new. In addition, the phases do not gain prominence one fell swoop, but, like all innovations, gain acceptance slowly and unevenly. [ICT4LT Editor's Note: See Section 3, Module 1.4, where phases of CALL and CALL typology are discussed further.]

Behavioristic CALL

The first phase of CALL, conceived in the 1950s and implemented in the 1960s and ’70s, was based on the then-dominant behaviorist theories of learning. Programs of this phase entailed repetitive language drills and can be referred to as “drill and practice” (or, more pejoratively, as “drill and kill”).

Drill and practice courseware is based on the model of computer as tutor (Taylor 1980). In other words the computer serves as a vehicle for delivering instructional materials to the student. The rationale behind drill and practice was not totally spurious, which explains in part the fact that CALL drills are still used today. Briefly put, that rationale is as follows:

• Repeated exposure to the same material is beneficial or even essential to learning
• A computer is ideal for carrying out repeated drills, since the machine does not get bored with presenting the same material and since it can provide immediate non-judgmental feedback
• A computer can present such material on an individualized basis, allowing students to proceed at their own pace and freeing up class time for other activities

Based on these notions, a number of CALL tutoring systems were developed for the mainframe computers which were used at that time. One of the most sophisticated of these was the PLATO system, which ran on its own special PLATO hardware, including central computers and terminals. The PLATO system included vocabulary drills, brief grammar explanations and drills, and translations tests at various intervals (Ahmad, Corbett, Rogers, & Sussex 1985).

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, behavioristic CALL was undermined by two important factors. First, behavioristic approaches to language learning had been rejected at both the theoretical and the pedagogical level. Secondly, the introduction of the microcomputer allowed a whole new range of possibilities. The stage was set for a new phase of CALL.

Communicative CALL

The second phase of CALL was based on the communicative approach to teaching which became prominent in the 1970s and 80s. Proponents of this approach felt that the drill and practice programs of the previous decade did not allow enough authentic communication to be of much value.

One of the main advocates of this new approach was John Underwood, who in 1984 proposed a series of “Premises for ‘Communicative’ CALL” (Underwood 1984:52). According to Underwood, communicative CALL:

• focuses more on using forms rather than on the forms themselves;
• teaches grammar implicitly rather than explicitly;
• allows and encourages students to generate original utterances rather than just manipulate prefabricated language;
• does not judge and evaluate everything the students nor reward them with congratulatory messages, lights, or bells;
• avoids telling students they are wrong and is flexible to a variety of student responses;
• uses the target language exclusively and creates an environment in which using the target language feels natural, both on and off the screen; and
• will never try to do anything that a book can do just as well.

Another critic of behavioristic CALL, Vance Stevens, contends that all CALL courseware and activities should build on intrinsic motivation and should foster interactivity – both learner-computer and learner-learner (Stevens 1989).

Several types of CALL programs were developed and used during this the phase of communicative CALL. First, there were a variety of programs to provide skill practice, but in a non-drill format. Examples of these types of programs include courseware for paced reading, text reconstruction, and language games (Healey & Johnson 1995b). In these programs, like the drill and practice programs mentioned above, the computer remains the “knower-of-the-right-answer” (Taylor & Perez 1989:3); thus this represents an extension of the computer as tutor model. But – in contrast to the drill and practice programs – the process of finding the right answer involves a fair amount of student choice, control, and interaction.

In addition to computer as tutor, another CALL model used for communicative activities involves the computer as stimulus (Taylor & Perez 1989:63). In this case, the purpose of the CALL activity is not so much to have students discover the right answer, but rather to stimulate students’ discussion, writing, or critical thinking. Software used for these purposes include a wide variety of programs which may not have been specifically designed for language learners, programs such as Sim City, Sleuth, or Where in the World is San Diego? (Healey & Johnson 1995b).

The third model of computers in communicative CALL involves the computer as tool (Brierley & Kemble 1991; Taylor 1980) or, as sometimes called, the computer as workhorse (Taylor & Perez 1989). In this role, the programs do not necessarily provide any language material at all, but rather empower the learner to use or understand language. Examples of computer as tool include word processors, spelling and grammar checkers, desk-top publishing programs, and concordancers.

Of course the distinction between these models is not absolute. A skill practice program can be used as a conversational stimulus, as can a paragraph written by a student on a word processor. Likewise, there are a number of drill and practice programs which could be used in a more communicative fashion – if, for example, students were assigned to work in pairs or small groups and then compare and discuss their answers (or, as Higgins 1988, students can even discuss what inadequacies they found in the computer program) In other words, the dividing line between behavioristic and communicative CALL does involves not only which software is used, but also how the software is put to use by the teacher and students.

On the face of things communicative CALL seems like a significant advance over its predecessor. But by the end of the 1980s, many educators felt that CALL was still failing to live up to its potential (Kenning & Kenning 1990; Pusack & Otto 1990; Rüschoff 1993). Critics pointed out that the computer was being used in an ad hoc and disconnected fashion and thus “finds itself making a greater contribution to marginal rather than to central elements” of the language teaching process (Kenning & Kenning 1990: 90).

These critiques of CALL dovetailed with broader reassessments of the communicative approach to language teaching. No longer satisfied with teaching compartmentalized skills or structures (even if taught in a communicative manner), a number of educators were seeking ways to teach in a more integrative manner, for example using task- or project-based approaches . The challenge for advocates of CALL was to develop models which could help integrate the various aspects of the language learning process. Fortunately, advances in computer technology were providing the opportunities to do just that.

Steps toward integrative CALL: multimedia

Integrative approaches to CALL are based on two important technological developments of the last decade – multimedia computers and the Internet. Multimedia technology – exemplified today by the CD-ROM – allows a variety of media (text, graphics, sound, animation, and video) to be accessed on a single machine. What makes multimedia even more powerful is that it also entails hypermedia. That means that the multimedia resources are all linked together and that learners can navigate their own path simply by pointing and clicking a mouse. [ICT4LT Editor's Note: See Module 2.2, Introduction to multimedia CALL.]

Hypermedia provides a number of advantages for language learning. First of all, a more authentic learning environment is created, since listening is combined with seeing, just like in the real world. Secondly, skills are easily integrated, since the variety of media make it natural to combine reading, writing, speaking and listening in a single activity. Third, students have great control over their learning, since they can not only go at their own pace but even on their own individual path, going forward and backwards to different parts of the program, honing in on particular aspects and skipping other aspects altogether. Finally, a major advantage of hypermedia is that it facilitates a principle focus on the content, without sacrificing a secondary focus on language form or learning strategies. For example, while the main lesson is in the foreground, students can have access to a variety of background links which will allow them rapid access to grammatical explanations or exercises, vocabulary glosses, pronunciation information, or questions or prompts which encourage them to adopt an appropriate learning strategy.

An example of how hypermedia can be used for language learning is the program Dustin which is being developed by the Institute for Learning Sciences at Northwestern University (Schank & Cleary 1995). The program is a simulation of a student arriving at a U.S. airport. The student must go through customs, find transportation to the city, and check in at a hotel. The language learner using the program assumes the role of the arriving student by interacting with simulated people who appear in video clips and responding to what they say by typing in responses. If the responses are correct, the student is sent off to do other things, such as meeting a roommate. If the responses are incorrect, the program takes remedial action by showing examples or breaking down the task into smaller parts. At any time the student can control the situation by asking what to do, asking what to say, asking to hear again what was just said, requesting for a translation, or controlling the level of difficulty of the lesson.

Yet in spite of the apparent advantages of hypermedia for language learning, multimedia software has so far failed to make a major impact. Several major problems have surfaced in regarding to exploiting multimedia for language teaching.

First, there is the question of quality of available programs. While teachers themselves can conceivably develop their own multimedia programs using authoring software such as Hypercard (for the Macintosh) or ToolBook (for the PC), the fact is that most classroom teachers lack the training or the time to make even simple programs, let alone more complex and sophisticated ones such as Dustin. This has left the field to commercial developers, who often fail to base their programs on sound pedagogical principles. In addition, the cost involved in developing quality programs can put them out of the market of most English teaching programs.

Beyond these lies perhaps a more fundamental problem. Today’s computer programs are not yet intelligent enough to be truly interactive. A program like Dustin should ideally be able to understand a user’s spoken input and evaluate it not just for correctness but also or appropriateness. It should be able to diagnose a student’s problems with pronunciation, syntax, or usage and then intelligently decide among a range of options (e.g. repeating, paraphrasing, slowing down, correcting, or directing the student to background explanations).

Computer programs with that degree of intelligence do not exist, and are not expected to exist for quite a long time. Artificial Intelligence (AI) of a more modest degree does exist, but few funds are available to apply AI research to the language classroom. Thus while Intelligent CALL (Underwood 1989) may be the next and ultimate usage of computers for language learning, that phase is clearly a long way down the road. [IC4LT Editor's Note: See Module 3.5, Human Language Technologies.]

Multimedia technology as it currently exists thus only partially contributes to integrative CALL. Using multimedia may involve an integration of skills (e.g. listening with reading), but it too seldom involves a more important type of integration – integrating meaningful and authentic communication into all aspects of the language learning curriculum. Fortunately, though, another technological breakthrough is helping make that possible – electronic communication and the Internet.

Steps toward integrative CALL: the Internet

Computer Mediated Communication (CMC), which has existed in primitive form since the 1960s but has only became wide-spread in the last five years, is probably the single computer application to date with the greatest impact on language teaching. [ICT4LT Editor's Note: See Section 14, Module 1.5, for more information on CMC.] For the first time, language learners can communicate directly, inexpensively, and conveniently with other learners or speakers of the target language 24 hours a day, from school, work, or home. This communication can be asynchronous (not simultaneous) through tools such as electronic mail (email), which allows each participant to compose messages at their time and pace, or in can be synchronous (synchronous, “real time”), using programs such as MOOs, which allow people all around the world to have a simultaneous conversation by typing at their keyboards. It also allows not only one-to-one communication, but also one-to-many, allowing a teacher or student to share a message with a small group, the whole class, a partner class, or an international discussion list of hundreds or thousands of people.

Poetry perhaps pre-dates other forms of literature: early known examples include the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh (dated from around 2700 B.C.), parts of the Bible, the surviving works of Homer (the Iliad and the Odyssey), and the Indian epics Ramayana and Mahabharata. In cultures based primarily on oral traditions the formal characteristics of poetry often have a mnemonic function, and important texts: legal, genealogical or moral, for example, may appear first in verse form.

Some poetry uses specific forms: the haiku, the limerick, or the sonnet, for example. A traditional haiku written in Japanese must have something to do with nature, contain seventeen onji (syllables), distributed over three lines in groups of five, seven, and five, and should also have a kigo, a specific word indicating a season. A limerick has five lines, with a rhyme scheme of AABBA, and line lengths of 3,3,2,2,3 stressed syllables. It traditionally has a less reverent attitude towards nature. Poetry not adhering to a formal poetic structure is called “free verse“

Language and tradition dictate some poetic norms: Persian poetry always rhymes, Greek poetry rarely rhymes, Italian or French poetry often does, English and German poetry can go either way. Perhaps the most paradigmatic style of English poetry, blank verse, as exemplified in works by Shakespeare and Milton, consists of unrhymed iambic pentameters. Some languages prefer longer lines; some shorter ones. Some of these conventions result from the ease of fitting a specific language’s vocabulary and grammar into certain structures, rather than into others; for example, some languages contain more rhyming words than others, or typically have longer words. Other structural conventions come about as the result of historical accidents, where many speakers of a language associate good poetry with a verse form preferred by a particular skilled or popular poet.

Works for theatre (see below) traditionally took verse form. This has now become rare outside opera and musicals, although many would argue that the language of drama remains intrinsically poetic.

In recent years, digital poetry has arisen that takes advantage of the artistic, publishing, and synthetic qualities of digital media.