Language Learning and Computers

When discussing the educational challenge posed by new information and communication technologies (IT), it is often said that we need a radical change in our approaches to teaching and learning in order to best prepare future generations for living and working in the information society. The French philosopher Pierre Levy also pointed out that the advent of information technologies should initiate a process of rethinking educational procedure, but uses the term 'knowledge society' to describe the outcome of recent technological and social developments. This seems only logical, because, even though we live in a society in which information is becoming more widely available and globally networked and more freely accessible than ever before, information technologies and global access to information are only one aspect of the changing times we live in. Information needs to be processed and translated into knowledge. Therefore, traditional skills of information gathering and storing as well as the mere learning of facts will no longer be sufficient in order to live, work, and learn in the coming centuries. Consequently, the ultimate aim of teaching and learning will be to assist learners in their need to develop strategies of knowledge construction. This paper will outline some of the theoretical aspects that need to be considered when thinking about the implementation of technology-enhanced resources in a language learning environment.

From what has been said so far, it becomes quite clear that we need to rethink some of the strategies and concepts of teaching and learning in terms of enriching classroom activities, reorganizing course structures, and providing learners with more autonomous or learner-centred opportunities for learning. New technologies are already playing an important role in this process and can be regarded as an enriching element for the learning environment of the future. And all aspects of such an technology-enriched learning environment need to be considered when designing multimedia courseware and resources for language learning. Let me try to visualize this with the following graph:

As the above graph suggests, both the context of use and the content of materials and courseware for language learning need to be considered when discussing technology-enhanced resources. This automatically leads to a careful consideration as to which modes of learning are most relevant within a technology-enhanced learning environment. Right from the start, one needs to consider (and justify) whether and why such materials are needed and if they are intended for a classroom setting, for self-study, or as part of a telecooperative learning scenario. In addition, the effectiveness of tutorial strategies and navigational procedures integrated into the courseware must be considered. These aspects must be regarded in view of the changing role of (technology-enhanced) materials. The focus should no longer be the development of teaching materials: the terms 'learnware' and 'learning materials' need to be the guiding principles of materials development, particularly in view of the fact that "learning to learn" is an important issue when discussing pedagogical concepts for the future.

Furthermore, learner autonomy is one of the key competences needed in the knowledge society. However, learner autonomy does not imply simple self-access tutorials or individualized learning. As Benson and Voller stated in 1997:

Learner autonomy is a concept which goes much further than simply "offering the possibility of self-study", as Henri Holec has pointed out repeatedly (e.g. Holec 1988); technology-enhanced resources can only be supportive of autonomy if learnware or other materials permit the learner to proactively participate in the process of language learning and accquisition and knowledge construction, thus enabling him/her to gradually decide individually upon the materials and strategies of learning best suited to a given aim. And finally, the roles of both learner and teacher need to be newly defined and thought of when designing learnware truly suitable for helping learners develop the strategies of knwledge construction mentioned above. Learners need to be regarded as partners in a process of learning, not as mere recipients of instruction or tuition in the traditional sense. And teachers must redefine their role as that of an advisor and moderator or facilitator of learning, as has been pointed out repeatedly over the past years.

It has already been stated that the advent of technology-enhanced learning materials requires a rethinking of the methodological framework of language learning. Furthermore, it must be assumed that computer tools will facilitate the implementation of such a framework and solve a large number of practical problems, particularly in the area of exploiting authentic resources. This brings me to a further important principle to be followed when designing learnware: authenticity in learner-software interaction as well as tutorial strategies and navigational procedures. After all, authenticity in content, task, and classroom interaction is "a crucial issue" in language learning methodology (cf. van Lier 1996:123). It is therefore argued that new technologies are the perfect aid to assist teachers in their "need to broaden their scope for creative pedagogical initiatives" (Little et al. 1989: I). As far as language learning and language acquisition are concerned, these must be regarded as interactive and dynamic processes in the sense that "studying, learning, reviewing and recalling are not simple input - output activities any more than using language is" (DiVesta 1974: 28). Consequently, the development of traditional concepts of computer-assisted tutorials and instructional software should not be the main thrust of using new technologies in language learning.

To continue my reflections as to new concepts of foreign language learning methodology with relation to new technologies in what is often referred to as a "post communicative" era (cf. Wolff 1994), I would like to present a brief quote from a novel by Ian St. James, which as early as 1978 predicted the potential role of new technologies in education in an almost prophetic manner at a time when most educators regarded the potential role of computers in terms of instructional and tutorial systems:

This quote is by no means taken from a science-fiction novel or from a campus novel or any other kind of educational background. It is, in fact, the statement by a computer engineer in an economics thriller, who has to explain to his company's board of directors why an investment in computing and IT will be extremely profitable for the company. Even though the text is lacking in political correctness and is full of uncritical and little reflected enthusiasm as to the advantages of computers for learning, it still reflects one of the key statements of this paper as to the role of new technologies for language learning.

I have already stated that future generations will need to be given the chance to work and learn more and more by means other than traditional text-books and learning scenarios based solely on classroom tuition. An integrated approach to the exploitation of local and globally networked technology-enhanced resources will become the key to successful education in the 21st century. Such a scenario, in which learners tap into resources and acquire knowledge rather than function as receipients of instruction, comes rather close to cognitive-constructivist approaches to foreign language learning. Such approaches are meeting with growing approval and are regarded by many educational thinkers as a suitable theoretical framework for the learning environment of the future. As far as traditional concepts of CBT (Computer Based Training) are concerned, such instructivist ideas are not even referred to in the above quote, which might be a coincidence but relects the line of thinking of a great many of the advocates of an intensive use of electronically published materials in education in general.

As far as foreign language learning is concerned, research into language learning and acquisition processes suggests that simple training in structural (grammatical) and vocabulary knowledge will not result in real linguistic competence and language proficiency. However, apart from basic communicative competences, favoured in the communicative classroom of the 80s, developing strategies of language processing and learning competence as well as language awareness and skills in knowledge perception and knowledge construction are needed for the successful outcome of any language curriculum. Such comptences, often discussed in the context of learner autonomy, are of the utmost importance for language learning, particularly in a professional context. However, those suggesting a rethinking of a purely communicative methodology (cf. Wolff 1994) discuss the post-communicative era of FL not in terms of a return to traditional concepts of drill (and kill) practice: quite the contrary. Apart from simply rejecting a traditional instructivist paradigm, the cognitive-constructivist paradigm is seen as an important methodological basis for real innovation in foreign language learning.

A methodology based on such principles focusses on "learner orientation, process orientation and learner autonomy" (Wolff 1994: 407), all of which are to regarded as extremely important in the context of VOLL (Vocationally Oriented Language Learning). Learning should be regarded as a process of information gathering and knowledge processing. In such a process the interaction between knowledge previously acquired and new information gathered leads to the acquisition of new knowledge. Language learning should, therefore, be described as an interactive, dynamic process, in which new knowledge is often acquired when learners are placed in a situation where they can explore sources and resources rather than in a context of formal instruction. In such a scenario, learners combine new information with previous factual (declarative) and procedural knowledge and draw new conclusions from this process. Such a process-oriented approach to learning will not simply lead to a better understanding of linguistic facts (e.g. structure and vocabulary) and more effective acquisition of language proficieny, it will also lead to more learning competence and learning awareness. By means of problem-solving tasks, hypothesis formation and hypothesis validation, both the content of learning materials and the learning process itself become more transparent and perceivable. In addition, a constructivist approach puts a lot of emphasis on task-based learning. It has been stated time and again that the best learning results are achieved if learners work as much as possible with authentic and semi-authentic materials in the context of authentic, real-world-based tasks. As a result, a tools-enhanced approach to the exploitation of new technologies must be regarded as the most promising approach to the integration of such technologies into the language curriculum. The effectiveness of traditional computer-assisted tutorials and CALL teachware should be regarded with more scepticism than in the past. Technology-enhanced language learning, however, in the form of using such tools to assist learning processes, must be regarded as part of a constructivist scenario of language learning particularly suitable for VOLL. Therefore, it is claimed that the use of technological tools of the real world, such as word processing and data processing, as well as electronic publications and so-called cognitive tools, will contribute significantly to a successful implementation of these tools into more effective curricula for (vocationally oriented) language learning.

The following graph summarizes the methodological principles discussed so far:

The last item listed in the arrows pointing out important aspects is of particular importance: all our efforts need to be guided by the desire to provide learners with the opportunity to learn in a rich, open, and multi-modal learning environment. I deliberately use the term multi-modal as opposed to multi-media, because this refers back to what has been said earlier about context of use and content of materials as well as to the need to carefully consider the form of delivery of learning materials. An integration of existing forms of delivery and materials with new technologies and multi-media learnware is what we should aim for in order to provide learners the the opportunity to approach a learning task from various angles and experiment with various modes of learning.

As stated earlier, it is felt that the theoretical framework outlined here is not only particularly suitable when it comes to innovation through TELL (Technology- Enhanced Language Learning), it is also ideally suited for innovative forms of learning in the context of VOLL. As far as language training for vocational purposes is concerned, two aspects are of particular relevance when discussing the potential of TELL resources. First of all, language proficiency and related competences as well as all the other skills and levels of linguistic awareness are of the utmost importance in VOLL for various reasons. This is due partly to the restricted timeframe available for VOLL, but even more to the fact that a great deal of learner autonomy needs to be developed in order to prepare professionals for language use in a vocational capacity. This must include not just communicative competences, but also a much needed ability to handle new foreign language challenges and a capacity to build on existing competence when faced with new job-related developments and constantly changing language materials. Secondly, therefore, the kind of strategies and competences discussed above are of particular relevance for the development of language skills for professional applications. The need for life-long learning and a growing globalization of professional tasks not just at management levels but at all levels of professional life require special skills that enable learners to continuously expand or reactivate existing language competences.

As a result, TELL resources will not simply facilitate the kind of flexibilty in which VOLL curricula need to be organized, as they have to fit in with professional training and/or job-related contraints. Such resources are particularly suited for this kind of language training. Learners do not only work with the kind of materials and tools which occupy an increasingly dominant part of their professional life, thus complying with the requirement of authenticity at the task and content levels in the language learning process. They also learn in the context of project-based and process-oriented learning scenarios, thus facilitating an increase in self-directed forms of learning and learner autonomy.

Considering what has been said so far, it could be argued that TELL resources should only be used in the form of authentic electronically published materials and cognitive tools (cf. Wolff 1994). After all, "effective tools are those that support cognitive processes ... or allow learners to generate and test hypotheses in meaningful problem-solving tasks" (Jonassen 1992: 6). Nevertheless, it is my feeling that a broader view is needed and that positive adaptations of concepts of traditional tutorial software should also be considered when discussing TELL resources for VOLL. Obviously, a full description of exemplary software and examples of good practice is beyond the scope of this paper. However, a few of the key issues on the subject of technology-enhanced resources in VOLL need to be summarized, as they reflect issues and aspects that need to be considered when designing such materials.

As far as the actual use of such resources in VOLL is concerned, the following aspects should be considered and investigated. With regard to a possible tutorial function of the New Technologies, it should be noted that, despite evident limitations in such traditional designs and some scepticism based on Second Language Acquisition research as to the effectiveness of formal exercises, tutorial software which complies with certain criteria as to flexibility in content, input analysis and design might still be of some use in foreign language learning. Criteria for this kind of software can be summarized as follows:

1. Such software must permit learners to "interact" with language data in order to modify acquired linguistic knowledge on the basis of analysis and testing.
2. Consequently, such software should not put the learner into the role of testee, but rather facilitate his/her role as an experimenter and researcher.
3. Furthermore, control over what the software does or what one wants to do with the software has to be left to the learner to a much higher degree than in most examples to date.
4. With regard to language processing, most traditional CALL and TELL exercises so far focus too much on the linguistic aspect of declarative knowledge. In allowing the learner to work with learning materials in different modes, such software should consider procedural knowledge to a much higher degree.

The criteria listed here are relevant for multimedia-enhanced learnware and authoring tools.

Apart from the benefits authoring software can offer both to teachers and learners, the real contribution to innovation in foreign language learning lies in the tool function of TELL resources. Research has shown that even the use of straightforward word processors can enhance the acquisition of writing and text comprehension and processing skills. This is particularly true when other "real-world" tools are integrated into word processing packages, such as thesauri, grammar and vocabulary checkers and tools for putting together multimedia and hypertext presentations. Learning scenarios focussing on project work resulting in electronic dossiers in a hypertext format can greatly enhance strategic (learning) knowledge and competences in information processing and knowledge construction. Databases and CD-ROM resources in the form of subject related or general knowledge encyclopaedias are equally beneficial to the learning process. In addition, software for setting up individual or classroom- related databases, such as classroom dictionaries or curriculum-related encyclopaedias, can be good tools for learners as well. Finally, concordancing tools, as one of the most obvious cognitive tools, are perfect for putting learners in a position where they can discover forms and structures or patterns of meaning and principles of word formation on the basis of their own research.

As far as hypermedia are concerned, these are particularly useful concepts for learnware which puts some of the theoretical aspects discussed in this paper into practice. Here, navigational procedures and the design of user interfaces, navigational metaphors and assistance in learner orientation need to be considered very carefully. After all, "... the transformation of knowledge ... is the litmus test we should use in judging both exploratory and constructive hypertexts." Such tools engage "... learners in looking at material in new ways ..." (Jackson 1988: 12), thus drawing on and hopefully restructuring and adding to their knowledge base.

Lastly, telecommunication seems to be developing into a global platform which can be of tremendous help when language learning attempts to go beyond the restrictions of isolated classrooms, thus overcoming some of the the limitations of a communicative approach in such a traditional organization of learning. Access to global information networks, communication with native and non-native peers or tutors, telecooperative project work which trascends the confines of the traditional classroom and the use of telematics in distance learning are just of few of the possibilities the Internet and the World-Wide Web have to offer to language learning in general and VOLL in particular.

An important feature to be stressed once again at the end of this paper is the fact that the integration of any technology-enhanced resource into a language curriculum must be firmly based on an "informatique pedagogique utilitaire" (Pelfrêne 1986). This means that tools and resources do not confront learners with traditional "drill and kill" exercises and comprehension tests but rather with tools to enhance the acquisition of language processing and language production strategies and competences.

The following aspects should be integrated into the design of technology-enhanced resources:

Knowledge construction with the aim of allowing learners to develop greater flexibility and awareness on communicative, linguistic, and learning levels needs to be part of materials design. In addition, traditional tutorial concepts with a view to developing communicative skills in the traditional sense do not exploit the full potential of new technologies for language learning. Linguistic competence and the acquisition of learning strategies are of equal if not more importance.

If such systems are well designed or concepts for their application well thought out, the use of new technologies in language learning can provide both teachers and learners with powerful utilities to handle a number of the tasks involved in the learning and teaching of a foreign language more effectively: effective not in the sense of simply solving a given task, but in the sense of adding to learning scenarios in which the interactive construction of new knowledge and the acquisition of skills and strategies are of equal importance.

As far as methodological and pedagogical theory is concerned, the limitations and restrictions of learning scenarios with a purely communicative or instructivist bias have become more and more evident. This appears to be particularly true in ther context of VOLL where the promotion of learner autonomy and aspects of "learning to learn" are of even greater importance than in foreign language learning in general. In consequence, cognitive constructivist scenarios for language learning, embedded in a post-communicative language classroom focussing on more authentic forms of learning in the context of task-based, project-based and process-oriented learning, appear to be sound pedagogical principles upon which concepts for designing and exploiting any type of technology-enhanced resource for language learning can be based.

In this context, I see the potential of the hopefully not too brave new world of technology-enhanced language learning: powerful tools that are available not just to facilitate task handling but to facilitate the application and acquisition of strategies of language processing and language production in a technology-enriched multi-modal "learning to learn" environment.

1. A detailed investigation of this issue has just been published in: B. Rüschoff and D. Wolff (1998), Fremdsprachenlernen in der Wissensgesellschaft: Zum Einsatz der Neuen Technologien in Schule und Unterricht. Hueber, München.

Benson, P. and P. Voller. (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning. Longman, London.

Di Vesta, F.J. (1974). Language, learning, and cognitive processes. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Monterey.

Holec, H. (1988). Autonomy and self-directed learning: present fields of application. Council of Europe, Strasbourg.

Jackson, M.J. (1988). Siren shapes: exploratory and constructive hypertexts. Academic Computing, Nov. 1988, 10-42.

Little, D., S. Devitt and D. Singleton. (1989). Learning foreign languages from authentic texts: theory and practice. Athentik, Dublin.

Pelfrêne, A. (1986). Lecticiel. Triangle 6: 135-142

Rüschoff, B. and D. Wolff. (1998). Fremdsprachenlernen in der Wissensgesellschaft: Zum Einsatz der Neuen Technologien in Schule und Unterricht. Hueber, München.

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: awareness, autonomy & authenticity. Longman, London.

Wolff, D. (1994). Der Konstruktivismus: Ein neues Paradigma in der Fremdsprachendidaktik? Die Neueren Sprachen 93(4): 407-429.

Download this paper as a doc-file.

Download this paper as a rtf-file.