Elements of CALL Methodology:

Development, Evaluation, and Implementation

Philip L. Hubbard, 1996

Presenter: Athena

Bob
1. Introduction
2. The CALL methodological framework
3. The Development Module
4. The Evaluation Module
5. The Implementation Module
6. Conclusion
 Introduction
1. Examples of computers & accompanying software packages in
language teaching:
 Introduction
The present work will limit itself to a discussion of
methodological issues surrounding the use of software that
including content designed or adopted for language learning
purposes, what Levy(1993) calls the “tutor” use of CALL, often
referred to as CALL “courseware”. (Hubbard 1996)

How do we judge the degree of success or failure of a CALL lesson ?

Should we focus only on technical aspects in courseware design?

Often missed is the fact that the field really involves the interplay of
humans and technology and that the human end is especially
significant. (Hubbard 1996)
2. The CALL Methodological Framework
 Players in CALL

The learner Accept

The developer Produce

The evaluator Evaluate

The classroom teacher Implement

Goal of the framework

The expressed goal of this framework is to provide a

neutral instrument for developing, evaluating and
using CALL materials.

Hubbard (1992,p.42) offers a set of principles

underlying this type of framework.
Hubbard’s(1992, p.24) Principles of CALL Framework

1. The CALL framework should be consistent with

established frameworks for language teaching methodology, allowing
teachers to link CALL to familiar concepts.

2. The framework should be method-neutral and flexible, describing the logical

relationship among learners, teachers, and computers.

3. The framework should explicitly link development, evaluation, and

implementation considerations in a consistent fashion.

4. The framework should identify the relevant elements in each area

(development, evaluation, and implementation) and describe the
interrelationships of those elements.
Richards and Rodgers’ (1982) Framework
of Language Teaching
Approach: reflects the theories of language structure and
language learning assumed by the method

Design: embodies the goals and objectives of the syllabus and

the role of the teacher, learner, and materials consistent with
the approach, it provides the guidelines for selecting and
structuring classroom activities

Procedure: includes an inventory of the types of exercises,

techniques consistent with the approach and design.
Two significant adjustments of Richard and
Rodgers’ framework

1. The CALL methodological framework will analyze

not CALL methods, but individual piece of packages
of courseware.

2. It will consider not only the classroom environment

but also the special qualities of the
computer environment.
Philips’ Framework
of Describing CALL Materials (1985)
Form, content, and implementation of CALL materials

◇Activity type Text reconstruction

◇Learning style

◇Program focus Lexis

◇Learner focus

◇Language difficulty Word-based reconstruction activities

eg. Hangman (also Hotpatato session)
◇Program difficulty

◇Classroom management
 CALL Methodology Framework
Richards and Rodgers’ framework Phillips’ framework
& Two adjustments

Figure: CALL Methodology Framework

Development Evaluation
Module Module

Implementation
Module
 3. The Development Module

The essential module in CALL Methodological

Framework.
 Development Module
Approach Design Procedure
Linguistic Learning Learner Syllabus
Control
Profiles
Assumptions Assumptions options

Language Program Content

Difficulty Difficulty Input
Language Te
aching Appro Judging
ach
Courseware Production
Presentation
Program Screen Activity
Layout Scheme Type
Materials
Approach-Ba
sed Design C Documentation
riteria
Utilities
Implementation Feedback

Help
Learning Program Classroom Learner
Computer Style Focus Management Focus Options
Delivery
System Hardware and
Programming Language
Considerations

Documentation
Tutorial
Completed
Record Keeping
Courseware
Textbook
Other utilities
Courseware Package
 4. The Evaluation Module

The determination of fit is the goal of the process.

 Evaluation Module
Operational Description (Procedure)

Accompanying
Activity Type
Text
Presentation Scheme(a)
Documentation
Screen Control Input Feedback Help
Tutorial
Layout options Judging options
Record Keeping
Other Utilities
Materials Instructions

Learner Fit (Design) Teacher Fit (Approach)

Learning Classroom Program Learner Approach-Based

style Management Focus Focus Evaluation Criteria

Language Computer
Language Program Teaching Delivery
Content
Difficulty Difficulty Approach System

Linguistic Learning
Learner
Syllabus Assumptions Assumptions
Profiles

Appropriateness Judgments Implementation Schemes

 5. The Implementation Module

Using software entails more than just sending the students to

the lab and waiting for learning to occur. (Hubbard 1996)
 Accompanying
Preparatory
Materials
Preparatory
Activities Authoring

Tutorial/ Content Teaching

Approach
Training Preparation
Assignment

Control
Settings

Teacher
Learner Use Control
Of Courseware
Accessibility
Classroom
Management

Site
Monitoring
Learner
Syllabus
Profiles
Student
Follow-up Records
Activities
Accompanying or
Authored
Follow-up Materials
 A piece of good courseware implemented poorly can
be rendered almost useless, and conversely, dull or
mediocre courseware can be given greater value by
informed and imaginative implementation.
Hubbard(1996)
 Conclusion
1. CALL courseware is most properly viewed not as computers
teaching people but as people teaching people through the
medium of computers.

2. The understanding and attending to the elements involved in CALL

will lead to more informed and consistent development, more
informative and insightful evaluation, and more appropriate
and creative implementation.

3. This framework doesn’t create methods or materials: it is a lens

through which to interpret them, a tool to assist developers,
reviewers and teachers in the challenging task of providing a
learning environment that is enhanced rather than degraded by
the use of computer software.
 Linguistic Assumptions

Linguistic assumption provide a set of guiding principles

based on the developer’s understanding of the nature of
language and the relative importance of structural, social,
and cultural aspects.
 Learning assumptions

Learning assumption provide a set of guiding principles

based on the developer’s understanding of the nature of
the second language learning process and the role
the learning environment plays in the process.
 Language teaching approach
Developing for the classroom environment
 Behaviorist approaches

 Explicit learning approaches

 Humanistic approaches

(Some of these focus on language form, some on meaning, and

some on human interaction. Some are more or less consistent with
contemporary theory and empirical research, while others are not.)
 Computer Delivery System

 …bring the users into contact with other humans in

a more dynamic way than other media such as book
s or videos.
 the possibility of anticipatory interaction (Hubbard,
1988b)
=> developers and teachers are partners.
 Approach-based Design Criteria

1. Providing important guidelines to a development

team to assure a high degree of consistency in the
final product.

2. Making an informed decision regarding language

teaching approach and then remaining true to that
decision throughout the development process.
Approach-based Design Criteria
 The criteria of Communicative approaches
1. The courseware provides meaningful
communicative interaction between Ss and
computers.
2. The courseware promotes a positive self-image in
the learner.
3. The courseware provides a challenge but does not
produce frustration or anxiety.
4. The courseware just right to a particular level.
 Learner Profiles & Syllabus
The area of learner profiles is concerned with the int
ended audiences for the courseware.
◇ Learners’ proficiency level
◇ Age
◇ Native language
◇ Needs
◇ Interests
◇ Cognitive styles (inductive/ deductive, visual/ orthographic/ auditory)

The syllabus is concerned with the learning

objectives and the means by which they are
reached.
Learning style
 Phillips (1985) describes the type of learning
supported by the activity.

Five general types of CALL activities:

1. recognition,
2. Recall,
3. Comprehension,
4. Experiential learning
5. Constructive understanding
Kemmis, Atkin, and Wright (1997)
 Types of Feedback
1. an indication of the correctness or incorrectness of
the answer;

2. a comment as to the reasons for an answer being

correct or incorrect;

3. a score, grade, or other cumulative evaluation;

4. tutorial information, such as a suggestion to review

information internal or external to the program.
 Activity Type

◇ Game

◇ Quiz

◇ Text construction

◇ Text reconstruction

◇ Simulation

◇ Problem solving

◇ Exploratory