INTRODUCTION
Technology has become a very powerful tool in our daily life and it has a uniquely strong way of grabbing people’s attention, especially the attention of the younger generation of kids who have been almost completely surrounded by it their whole lives. Computers have become so widespread in schools and homes and their uses have expanded so dramatically over the past few decades that we, as teachers, must rethink the role computers have in education and the implications of using them in language learning.
Computers can be a great tool for language teaching, they work hard, they never get tired, and most of all, they transform teaching and learning into a fun and stimulating process. In fact, computers have been used for language
…show more content…
It usually includes a substantial interactive element. Except for self-study software, CALL is meant to supplement face-to-face language instruction, not replace it. Computer-assisted language learning requires a convergence of several other related pedagogical fields such as educational psychology, linguistics, web-based instruction, artificial intelligence, and second language acquisition. Over the years it has been known by several other terms such as technology-enhanced language learning (TELL), computer-assisted language instruction and computer-aided language learning, but the field is the same.
The role of computers in language teaching has changed significantly in the last 30 years. Previously, computers used in language teaching were limited to text, simple simulations and exercises such as gap-filling and multiple-choice drills. Technological and pedagogical advancements now allow us to more fully integrate computer technology into the language learning process. With cutting edge software and unlimited online access at our fingertips, we now have a myriad of opportunities to communicate in the target language, access textual and multimedia information, and interact for a global
…show more content…
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, when new personal computers were creating greater possibilities for individual work, supporters of communicative CALL stressed that computer-based activities should focus more on “using forms than on the forms themselves, teach grammar implicitly rather than explicitly, allow and encourage students to generate original utterances rather than just manipulate prefabricated language, and use the target language predominantly or even exclusively.” Communicative CALL corresponded to cognitive theories which stressed that learning is actually a process of discovery, expression, and development. Popular CALL software developed in this period included text reconstruction programs (allowing students to work alone or in groups to rearrange words and texts to discover patterns of language and meaning) and simulations (which stimulated discussion and discovery among students working in pairs or groups). For many proponents of communicative CALL, the focus was not so much on what students did with the machine, but rather what they achieved with each other while working at the
As technology grow and increasingly gets bigger and and better people are finding new ways to harness that information and use it to their advantage and learn from it. Clive Thompson suggests that technology is even helping literacy and this young generation. He states that “Young people write far more than any generation before them”(Source 7). You can thank Twitter and Facebook for the mass amount of posts and writing from teens. Thompson followingly says that “students were remarkably adept at what rhetoricians call kairos - addressing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across.(Source 7)
Next, he supports his claim by addressing how writing changes an individual’s cognitive behavior and the cognitive effort generating text does to one’s memory. Thompson finally introduces the impact of the theory of multiples. In my analysis of Thompson’s text, I will examine, analyze and evaluate his central claims and the evidence he uses to support these claims to prove that the internet has helped us as writers. Thompson’s purpose is to persuade the audience that the internet is a central part of learning in order to improve the quality of
For Professor Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein, online communication is not as devastating as some critics argue that it reduces people 's ability to read, write, and think in a clear, logical and critical way. They point out considerable problems like reductive abbreviations substitute for complete words and sentences in writing and the fast speed message exchange reduce the time for thinking. On the contrary, Graff and Birkenstein argue that the Internet is only another field that can expose some weak and unsophisticated writers (171). The technology itself has nothing to be blamed, but it is essential for people to step back and discuss how to develop new ability to face the challenge of the new technology. After all, technology improvement
In Joelle Renstrom’s article “And Their Eyes Glazed Over”, she makes the argument that the increased use of technology among students limits their cognitive abilities within their classes. As a writing and research professor at Boston University, she witnesses this on a daily basis, and it happens to be her biggest pet peeve. Her personal experience with this issue is one of the ways Renstrom builds credibility, making her argument an effective one. Renstrom’s motivation for writing this piece was to inform and share the information she had discovered with fellow professors and students alike. Throughout the article, she sticks firmly to her exigence, straying from it only once or twice to acknowledge the usefulness of technology or
Data shows that computers have a remediating effect on males. Edwards-Groves, C. J. (2011). The multimodal writing process: changing practices in contemporary classrooms. Language & Education: An International Journal, 25(1), 49-64.
As time progresses into the 21st century, so too does the meaning of literacy. With the rise of what is considered ‘new literacies’ such as the Internet, more students are increasingly using the Internet and other electronic technologies such as computers and smartphones to engage in and access various new age prints, and visual and digital texts, using and modifying language to create context which have been created as new forms of literacy (Tompkins, Campbell and Green, 2012). Blog posting websites, emailing, playing online games and multimodal stories all require different genres of language in order to convey meaning, which has had an influence of the changing social view of language, which can be seen embedded in the
Since the developments of computers and other newly developed technologies, children are now adapting to new ways in which they write and learn to write. In two separate articles by Emily Yoffe and Josh Geisbrecht, they discuss the way in which children are now learning to write in school, and furthermore, the types of technologies they are using. These adaptations are steadily changing the ways in which newer generations of children learn to write. In the article “How the Ballpoint Pen Killed Cursive” by Josh Geisbrecht, He discusses the introduction of new technologies like the ballpoint pen.
Carr and Turkle both use their essays to explain that although computers can lead to a lack of patience and depth, they can also increase productivity, build knowledge, and encourage acceptance of people from all different walks of life.
All of these factors combine and work well together to form a well-executed argument within Cullington’s essay. Cullington begins her essay by addressing her opposition: “It’s taking over our lives” (pg. 361). She cites studies done that suggest that a decline in the quality of students’ formal writing has occurred since the advent of text messaging, and she also cites teachers who believe that their own students’ works are influenced for the worse by the students’ being accustomed to texting and using textspeak. Cullington then proposes her opposing position that the writing of students is unaffected by their use of texting and text speak. She also cites studies that support her thesis that text messaging and textspeak do not have an effect on
The article does a significant job of providing evidence. The narrator gives experiences with students and compares and contrast students from the fifties to students now. The narrator talks about how writing is different and how students imaginations are not as good as they once were. The purpose for the article is to show how technology is slowly starting to rupture to imaginations of children.
In her study, Lunsford collected thousands of student writing samples from a five-year period, specifically from 2001-2006 (Thompson 157). The findings of her study are gripping. She found that because young people do much of their communicating via online forums, the additional keystrokes are fundamental in reviving their ability to write (Thompson 157). A whopping thirty-eight percent of all writing done by Stanford students during this study occurred outside of the classroom (Thompson 157). This piece of information alone may be indication enough that her logic was strategic.
In the world today, the internet, social media, and other technology have given rise to plethora of new diction, that is why it is now evermore important to be using experiences in and outside of the classroom to promote the expansion of new language and
Not So Fast” Andrea Lunsford researched students’ writing for 30-plus years to see what effect new technology has on how students learn. Lunsford discovered that students are actually improving their own writing skills with the help of mass media. Not only does it allow students more access to educational resources and information, but it also encourages students to do more creative thinking and writing outside of class which Lunsford refers to in her article as “life writing.” In her research she recalls the account of a student who sent a friend a text message which was completely informal and would be considered unprofessional by most piers. However, the same student also sent a very formal and professional report to her faculty adviser later on.
As I relate back to this, I have had experiences where using new technology—the typewriter compared to the Net in this example-- where it has put efficiency and productivity in the front lines, creating a more comfortable environment for me to learn and to understand a subject to its fullest
Not So Fast”, conducts her own study with a few colleagues to take notes on how students writing skills are changing. She decides to conduct another one twenty five years later to see how much the writing skills have changed since technology has been updated and became more available to students. She found that “students today are writing more than ever before.” Although we still have the same amount of writing errors as before, the patterns of errors are different. Many people argue that technology is only making our writing skill worse, this study helps to prove a different theory.