CALL by design: discourse, products and processes

Abstract

Design' is a term that is familiar to many language teachers and CALL practitioners. It is used regularly in relation to curriculum, syllabus, course and task in the general literature and it occurs in all these areas and more in the CALL sphere where instructional design, website design, interface design and screen design are just some of the additional points of focus. This paper aims to look at CALL design in more detail. It places a particular emphasis on describing the discourse, products and processes of design in CALL. It looks at what we have learnt about design and points to areas that remain problematical. It also makes connections with cognate fields whenever these links prove helpful. This study is the second in a series of three complementary papers which look at research, design and evaluation in CALL (see Levy, 2000). All use the same corpus of CALL work as a database and the research design and methodology in each is the same. In this paper the description and discussion is based on 93 articles involving design published in books and journals published in 1999. The descriptive section is followed by analysis and interpretation with special attention given to the relationship between theory and design, and the centrality of the task and the learner in the design process.

How do we Know what Students are Actually Doing? Monitoring Students' Behavior in CALL†

“…2 Chapelle's (2001aChapelle's ( , 2001b six criteria for software evaluation mark an important step in CALL research because foremost among these criteria is the ''language-learning potential'' of software, that is, whether a program actively promotes language learning. 3 In fact, Chapelle has repeatedly argued for the primacy of second language acquisition (SLA) theory as the basis for the design of CALL software (see Chapelle, 1997Chapelle, , 1998Chapelle, , 1999Chapelle, , 2000Chapelle, , 2003Chapelle, , 2005aChapelle, , 2005b; see also Colpaert, 2004;Levy, 2002;Reeder, Heift, Roche, Tabyanian, Schlickau, & Gö lz, 2004).…”

From analysis to training: Recycling interaction data into learning processes

“…Levy, 2002). Yet, combining pedagogy and CALL tool methodology to create a symbiotic relationship that enhances users' experience is often challenged by institutional or program related decisions.…”

“…Levy, 2002). Researchers in educational ergonomics have argued that a holistic approach to learning design will help us better comprehend what learners actually do when they are working with web-based technology (Raby, 2007;Bertin and Gravé, 2010).…”

“…Hémard also believes that CALL design should be centered on developing very user-friendly systems that motivate users to "interact productively and voluntarily instead of simply acting and reacting" (23). In sum, in an ideal learning scenario, all actors involved in the learning processes should take part directly or indirectly in the CALL tool and task development (Colpaert, 2006;Hémard, 2003;Levy, 2002).…”

"Examining Language-Learning Websites: Discourses about Language, Learning, and Learners"

“…Usability, according to them, refers to the "systems [that] are generally regarded as being efficient, easy to learn, effective to use, and enjoyable or engaging from the user's perspective" (p. 349). Levy (2002) addresses usability from the standpoint of design of call materials or environments. The author concludes that successful llws work as integrated learning environments in which users receive "the information and help they need when they need it" (p. 64).…”