Research on CALL and Distance Learning: A Briefly Annotated ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Handley, Z., & Hamel, M.-J. (2005). Establishing a methodology for benchmarking speech synthesis for computer-assisted language learning (CALL). Language Learning & Technology, 9 (3), 99-119. (http://llt.msu.edu) Keywords: speech synthesis Summary: Establishes criteria for evaluating speech synthesizers for CALL purposes Hanna, D., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Conceicao-Runlee, S. (2000). 147 practical tips for teaching online groups. Madison: Atwood Publishing. Keywords: distance learning, hybrid learning Summary: Provides general, common-sense guidelines for teaching distance or hybrid learners Hanna, B. E., & de Nooy, J. (2003). A funny thing happened on the way to the forum: Electronic discussion and foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (1), 71- 85. (http://llt.msu.edu) Keywords: writing, discourse, French, bulletin boards Summary: Describes the experiences of four learners posting on L2 bulletin boards Hansen, E. G., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., Lee, M., & Forer, D. (2005). Accessibility of tests for individuals with disabilities within a validity framework. System, 33 (1), 107-133. Keywords: assessment, English Summary: Discusses interactions between accessibility and validity raised when computerized tests are adapted for individuals with disabilities Hanson, J. L., Dembovskaya, S., & Lee, S. (2005). CALL research archive: How can an online knowledge base further communication among second language professionals. ReCALL, 17 (2), 245-253. Keywords: CALL research Summary: In order to bridge the gap between teaching and research, the authors describe an online database of CALL articles that allows practicing teachers to comment on published works Hansson, T. (2005). English as a second language on a virtual platform-tradition and innovation in a new medium. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18 (1-2), 63-79. Keywords: writing, English, software Summary: Discusses language interactions through a computer game; takes Vysotskian perspective Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in Web-based distance education. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 3 (1), 68-69. Keywords: distance learning Summary: Finds that technological problems and lack of clarity in instructions lead to most student stress in distance learning Hardison, D. M. (2005). Contextualized computer-based L2 prosody training: Evaluating the effects of discourse context and video input. CALICO Journal, 22 (2), 175-190. (https://www.calico.org/p-5-CALICO Journal.html) Keywords: pronunciation, French Summary: Use of visual feedback shown to be effective in improving L2 prosody Hardisty, D., & Windeatt, S. (1989). CALL. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Keywords: lesson planning Summary: Provides many examples of lesson plans centered around the computer 46
Hardy, I. M., & Moore, J. L. (2004). Foreign language students’ conversational negotiations in different task environments. Applied Linguistics, 25 (3), 340-370. Keywords: German Summary: Analyzes formal and content output of students across multiple tasks and CMC modes Harker, M., & Koutsantoni, D. (2005). Can it be as effective? Distance versus blended learning in a Web-based EAP programme. ReCALL, 17 (2), 197-216. Keywords: English, distance learning, hybrid learning Summary: Similar achievement and satisfaction levels seen between hybrid and distance learning students; better student retention in hybrid format Harrington, M., & Levy, M. (2001). CALL begins with a “C”: Interaction in computer-mediated language learning. System, 29 (1), 15-26. Keywords: CALL research, CMC Summary: Argues that although a coherent and transparent research agenda is needed for CALL, current interactionist approaches are insufficient to handle many modes of CMC currently in use Hart, R. (1995). The Illinois PLATO foreign languages project. CALICO Journal, 12 (4), 15-37. (https://www.calico.org/p-5-CALICO Journal.html) Keywords: CALL history, materials development Summary: Describes an early CALL project conducted at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the 1970s Hartz, Deborah. (2000). Literacy leaps as blind students embrace technology. English Journal, 90 (2), 52. Keywords: English (L1) Summary: Describes technologies used to improve literacy among blind students Hegelheimer, V., & Chapelle, C. A. (2000). Methodological issues in research on learnercomputer interactions in CALL. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 41-59. (http://llt.msu.edu) Keywords: reading, vocabulary, assessment Summary: Explores how modified input can lead to greater noticing, and how noticing can be evaluated Hegelheimer, V., & Fisher, D. (2006). Grammar, writing, and technology: A sample technologysupported approach to teaching grammar and improving writing for ESL learners. CALICO Journal, 23 (2), 257-279. (https://www.calico.org/p-5-CALICO Journal.html) Keywords: writing, grammar, English, corpora Summary: Relates how learner corpora can be used to teach grammar for English for academic purposes Hegelheimer, V., & Tower, D. (2004). Using CALL in the classroom: Analyzing student interactions in an authentic classroom. System, 32 (2), 185-205. Keywords: listening, grammar, assessment, English Summary: Explores ways in which learners utilize (or do not utilize) types of modified input in call tasks Hegelheimer, V., Reppert, K., Broberg, M., Daisy, B., Grgurović, M. Middlebrooks, K., et al. (2004). Preparing the new generation of CALL researchers and practitioners: What nine months in an MA program can (or cannot) do. ReCALL, 16 (2), 432-447. Keywords: teacher training Summary: Documents student learning about CALL issues in an MA-TESL program 47
Page 1 and 2: Research on CALL a
Page 3 and 4: Abrate, J., & Bowling, T. (2000). P
Page 5 and 6: Appel, C., & Mullen, T. (2002). A n
Page 7 and 8: Bangs, P. (2002). Authoring, pedago
Page 9 and 10: Bednar, A. K., & Charles, M. T. (19
Page 11 and 12: Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2005). Commun
Page 13 and 14: Böhlke, O. (2003). Adjective produ
Page 15 and 16: Britsch, S. J. (2005). But what did
Page 17 and 18: Cartes-Enriquez, N., Rodriguez, M.
Page 19 and 20: Chapelle, C. A. (2004). Technology
Page 21 and 22: Chun, D. M., & Payne, J. S. (2004).
Page 23 and 24: Corbeil, G. (2007). Using the Frenc
Page 25 and 26: Cziko, G. A., & Park, S. (2003). In
Page 27 and 28: Davies, G. (2003b). ICT and modern
Page 29 and 30: Delmonte, R. (2003). Linguistic kno
Page 31 and 32: Dooly, M. (2007). Joining forces: P
Page 33 and 34: Egbert, J., & Yang, Y.-F. D. (2004)
Page 35 and 36: Farmer, R., & Gruba, P. (2006). Tow
Page 37 and 38: Finkbeiner, C. (2001). One and all
Page 39 and 40: Fuentes, A. C. (2004). The use of c
Page 41 and 42: Gillespie, J. H., & Barr, J. D. (20
Page 43 and 44: Gray, C., Hagger-Vaughan, L., Pilki
Page 45: Hager, M., Rieper, A., Schmitt, E.,
Page 49 and 50: Hemard, D., & Cushion, S. (2000). F
Page 51 and 52: Holmberg, B. (2003). A theory of di
Page 53 and 54: Huifen, L., Tsuiping, C., & Dwyer,
Page 55 and 56: Jancewicz, B., & MacKenzie, M. (200
Page 57 and 58: Jones, L. C., & Plass, J. L. (2002)
Page 59 and 60: Kawai, G., & Hirose, K. (2000). Tea
Page 61 and 62: Kitajima, R. (2002). Enhancing high
Page 63 and 64: Kupetz, R., & Ziegenmeyer, B. (2005
Page 65 and 66: Larson, J. W. (2000). Testing oral
Page 67 and 68: Lee, L. (2005). Using web-based ins
Page 69 and 70: Lewis, T. (2006). When teaching is
Page 71 and 72: Littlemore, J. (2001). Learner auto
Page 73 and 74: Luke, C. L., & Britten, J. S. (2007
Page 75 and 76: Martin, B. (2006). Using a tablet P
Page 77 and 78: Menzel, W., Herron, D., Moton, R.,
Page 79 and 80: Mills, N., Herron, C., & Cole, S. P
Page 81 and 82: Muniandy, A. V. A. (2002). Electron
Page 83 and 84: Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik,
Page 85 and 86: Nikolova, O. R. (2004). Effects of
Page 87 and 88: O’Hara, K., & Sellen, A. (1997).
Page 89 and 90: Parks, S., Huot, D., Hamers, J., &
Page 91 and 92: Peterson, M. (2001). MOOs and secon
Page 93 and 94: Potts, D. (2005). Pedagogy, purpose
Page 95 and 96: Reinhardt, J., & Nelson, B. K. (200
Page 97 and 98:
Rogerson-Revell, P. (2005). A hybri
Page 99 and 100:
Saba, P. (2005). Critical issues in
Page 101 and 102:
Sawaki, Y. (2001). Comparability of
Page 103 and 104:
Seferoglu, G. (2005). Improving stu
Page 105 and 106:
Shaughnessy, M. (2003). CALL, comme
Page 107 and 108:
Simpson, J. (2005). Learning electr
Page 109 and 110:
Smith, B. (2005). The relationship
Page 111 and 112:
Sotillo, S. (2005). Corrective feed
Page 113 and 114:
Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & de G
Page 115 and 116:
Sullivan, K., & Lindgren, E. (2002)
Page 117 and 118:
Teeler, D., & Gray, P. (2000). How
Page 119 and 120:
Torlakovic, E., & Deugo, D. (2004).
Page 121 and 122:
Tsubota, Y., Dantsuji, M., & Kawaha
Page 123 and 124:
Verdugo, D. R., & Belmonte, I. A. (
Page 125 and 126:
Wade-Stein, D. & Kintsch, E. (2004)
Page 127 and 128:
Warner, C. N. (2004). It’s just a
Page 129 and 130:
Web-based Education Commission .(20
Page 131 and 132:
Winkler, B. (2001). English learner
Page 133 and 134:
Young, S., & Bloothooft, G. (Eds.).
Page 135:
Zic Fuchs, M. (2002-2003). Communic
show all

Research on CALL and Distance Learning: A Briefly Annotated ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?