Gillian lord and lara lomicka 1
chapter 15calling on Educators:Paving the Way for the Future of Technology and call1
Gillian lord University of Florida
lara lomicka
University of South Carolina
PrEviEW QuEsTions1.Ifyouareaneducator,whatpreparationdidyoureceiveincomputer-as-sistedlanguagelearning(CALL)duringyourtraining?
2.What technologiesdoyoubelieveareessential for language teachers toemployintheirclassrooms,andwhy?
3.Howdoyoukeepupwithyourcurrentunderstandingofthetechnologicaltoolsavailabletolanguageteachers?
1. inTroducTionInarecentarticle,Hubbard(2008)explores thestateof teacher educationandtechnology’sroletherein,andproposesthatthefuturepathsofcomputer assisted language learning(CALL)andteachereducationare–andshouldbe–linked.“ThefutureofCALL…iscloselytiedtothefutureoflanguageteachereducationbecause language teachersare thepivotalplayers: theyselect the tools to sup-porttheirteachinganddeterminewhatCALLapplicationslanguagelearnersareexposedtoandhowlearnersusethem”(p.176).Astheotherchaptersthrough-outthisvolumehaveshown,languageteachersareindeedthesepivotalplayersandare largely responsible formoving thefield forward.Yetseveralquestionsarethenraised:Howwellareteacherspreparedtoplaythiscrucialpart?Whattrainingdotheyreceive?Whattoolsdotheyneedtoknowhowtouse?Howcantheypossiblykeepupwiththeconstantly-changinglandscapeofnewtoolsandtechnologies? Thereisnodoubtthatlanguageteachersmustbeprepared,trained,andsup-portedaccordingly.Theymustbecomeadeptnotonlyatlanguageteachingprac-
2 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
ticesbut also inusing technological tools and, crucially, in the intersectionofthoseskillssothattheyareabletouseemergingtechnologiesintheirlanguageclassesineffective,pedagogicallysoundwaysthatcomplementandenhancetheirmethodologicalapproachtolanguagelearningandteaching. Thegoalof this chapter, generally speaking, is toprovide assistance to lan-guageeducatorsbyofferingguidanceinsomekeyareasoftechnologyincorpora-tionandimplementation.Ofcourseonechapterisinsufficienttoequiplanguageteacherswithallthetoolstheyneedtosucceed.Inthecontextofthischapter,westrivetoprovidefutureteachersnotonlywithasynopsisofthecurrentsituationinteachertrainingandCALL,butalsowithanoverviewofthetoolsavailabletosupporttheirteachingandprofessionaldevelopmentbygivingthemideasforwhat technology tools touse,where tofind those tools, andhow touse them.OrganizedaroundtheTESOL Technology Standards(seeAppendixA),thetoolsdiscussedinthelatterhalfofthischapterencourageteacherstostayconnectedtoothers,continuetheirgeneralprofessionaldevelopment,andstayontopofrecentdevelopmentsinCALL,inadditiontodevelopinginnovative,creativeandpeda-gogically sound tasks for their language classrooms.Those sections direct thereadertowardshowtofindthenewesttechnologiesandhowtousethem,aswellasoffertipsforfindingactivitiesthathavealreadybeencreated. Inthesefirstsections,weofferabriefoverviewoftheroleoftechnologytrain-inginteacherpreparationprograms,aswellasadiscussionofwhatroletechnol-ogyought toplay.The followingsections review recent research investigatingcurrent language teachereducationprogramsandcourses,and the impactsandeffectsoftechnologytrainingandincorporationtherein.
2. TEchnoloGy and TEachEr TraininG ProGramsWhilemanypre-service programs for language educators provide a variety ofpreparationfortheirfutureteachers,trainingintechnologystilloftenfallsshort.Kessler’s(2006)surveyofCALLteachertrainingprogramsrevealedanoveralllackofsatisfactionwith,andgeneralscarcenessof,CALLtraining.Thevastma-jorityof the respondents (88%) indicated that theywouldhavebenefited frommore instruction regarding teaching with technology. Further, those languageteacherswhohadacquiredCALL-specificskillsappearedtohavesoughtthoseskills elsewhere (92%), outside their teacher preparation programs.Hubbard’s(2008)reviewoflanguageteachereducationprogramsfoundsimilarresults. Therearemanyreasonsonecouldofferforwhythereisthislackintechnologytraining.Manyprogramssimplydonothaveenoughtimeandsupporttocoveralltheessentialskills,whileothereducatorsclaimthattheythemselvesarenotknowledgeableenough to transmit theappropriateknowledge.Moreover, tech-nologyorCALLisoftenseenassecondary,supplementalorextraneousinforma-tionforteachers–notpartofthe“basics”theyneedtoknowbeforeheadingintotheclassroom(see, forexample,Hubbard&Levy,2006orHubbard,2008forfurtherdiscussionofthesebarriers).Inanycase,technologyisoftenapproachedasanafterthoughtinmanymethodologycourses,andtoooftenlanguageteachers
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 3
endupintheprofessionwithlittletonotheoreticalorpracticaltraininginwhattoolstouse,howtofindthemoreffectivelyincorporatethemintotheirclasses. Whilethereareincreasingattemptstorectifythesegaps–seeforexampletworecentvolumesaddressingtheintersectionofCALLandlanguageteachertrain-ing(Hubbard&Levy,2006aandKassen,Lavine,Murphy-Judy&Peters,2007)—thesituationremainsnoteworthybecauseoftherelativelackofconnectionbe-tweenthetwofields.Further,thesecircumstancesaresomewhatsurprising,giventwoprimaryfactors:thefirstisthenationalandinternationalemphasisonincor-poratingtechnologyintoteachertrainingprograms,andthesecondisthefactthatlanguageeducators themselveshaveshownthat theyareeager to learnhowtofindandincorporatetechnologicaltoolsintotheirclassrooms.Thenextsectionsbrieflyoutlinethesetwocomplementaryforces–thepullfromthenationallevelandthepushfromtheindividuallevel–thathavecometogetherinrecentyearstoencouragelanguageteacherstobroadentherepertoireofteachingtoolstheyuse.
2.1. national and international standards and recommendationsBothnationalandinternationalorganizationsarecallingforteachers–languageteachersandotherwise–tobepreparedinavarietyoftechnology-relatedfieldsandtoolsbeforeenteringtheirclassrooms. All themajorstandardsdocumentsnowadaysmentiontechnologytosomeextentasitrelatestolanguageeducation.Forexample,ACTFL’sNationalStandardsProjectcameupwithaseriesofguide-lines,whichwehavecometoknowasthe5Cs,forlanguageteaching.Asoneoftheircoreassumptionsthesestandardsholdthatlanguageandcultureeducationshouldbe tied to“programmodels that incorporateeffectivestrategies,assess-mentprocedures,andtechnologies...”(NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1999,p.7).However,thespecificrolethattechnologyplays–andhowitmaydoso–isleftunmentionedandopentovagueinterpretation,dependentuponateacher’sknowledgeandskilllevel,aswellascomfortlevel.Atthesametime,though,asMurphy-JudyandYoungs(2006)pointout,
[i]nforeignlanguageeducation,giventheemphasisoncommunicationandtheopportunitiesforcomputer-assistedlearning,technologiesplayanever-increasingroleinlearningstandards.Thus,appropriateandskillfulintegra-tionofcomputer-assisted language learning (CALL)figures into thestan-dardsfor teacherpreparationandthe institutions thateducate, license,andrecertifyteachers(p.45).
Althoughnotintendedforlanguageteachersspecifically,theInternationalSo-cietyforTechnologyinEducation(ISTE)hasalsodevelopedtheirownstandardsforteachers(citedinHubbardandLevy,2006b),inanefforttoensurethateffec-tiveteachersareabletomodelandapplytheNationalEducationalTechnologyStandardsforStudents(NETS-S)“astheydesign,implement,andassesslearn-ing experiences to engage students and improve learning; enrich professionalpractice;andprovidepositivemodelsforstudents,colleagues,andthecommu-
4 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
nity”(np).Accordingtotheseguidelines,allteachers–languageandotherwise–shouldstrivetoaccomplishthefollowingintheirclasses,aidedbytechnologytoolsandapplicationswhenrelevant:
1.Facilitateandinspirestudentlearningandcreativity2.Designanddevelopdigital-agelearningexperiencesandassessments3.Modeldigital-ageworkandlearning4.Promoteandmodeldigitalcitizenshipandresponsibility5.Engageinprofessionalgrowthandleadership
Again, although they are not specifically tied to any language curriculum, theincorporationoftheseISTEstandardsintolanguageclassesseemslogicalgiven,aswehaveseen throughout thisvolume, theaffordancesof technology in thisspecificsetting, thecommunicativeand interactivenatureof language,and thevarietyofrealiaandincreasedinputavailablethroughtechnologicaltools. Similarly,thenationalorganizationPartnershipfor21stCenturySkills(http://www.p21.org) advocates 21st century “readiness” for every student.Citing theUnitedStates’increasingrolesintheglobaleconomy,Partnershipfor21stCen-turySkills(P21)claimsthatstudentsareinasituationthatdemandsinnovation–technologicalandotherwise–andthisorganizationprovidestools,frameworksandresourcestohelpthemkeepup.Again,whiletheorganizationisnotrelatedspecificallytolanguageeducators,itscentralroleingeneraleducationhighlightstheincreasingplacethattechnologyhasandwillcontinuetohaveinourstudents’lives,aswellastherepercussionsthatthesetechnologieshaveonhowstudentslearnandinteract(forexample,thegrowingemphasisoncollaboration).Theor-ganization claims that in order to be effective in the 21st century,wemust beabletoexhibitbothfunctionalskillsandcriticalthinkingskillsrelatednotonlytoinformationbutalsotomediaandtechnology.Suchskillsincludetheabilitytoaccessandevaluatedigitalinformation,analyzeandcreatedigitalmedia,andapplytechnologyeffectively.Thesetaskscannotbetakenaslightlyastheyarepresentedhere;theyaredauntingundertakingstobesure.However,whatisim-portanttorememberisthattheirinclusioninP21’sframeworkisillustrativeoftheincreasingimportanceoftechnologicalliteracyinbothteachers’andstudents’lives. Morerecently,acommitteeofresearchersandteachertrainers(Healeyetal.,2009)cametogethertoestablishtheTESOLTechnologyStandardsforteachersandstudents(seeAppendixA).Thesestandardsaredetailedandofferguidanceregarding three specificgoals for studentsand fourgoals for teachers, rangingfromacquiringfoundationalskillsintechnologytousingtechnologiesforrecordkeeping,communicationandcollaboration,amongothers.TheseStandardsmeritsummaryhereinsofarastheyrelatespecificallytothegoalsofthischapter,andconsideringthatTESOListheonlylanguageteachingorganizationtoofficiallypublishsuchtechnology-relatedteachingandlearningstandards.Thegoalsspec-ifythatlanguageteachersacquireandmaintaintechnologyskillsforprofessionalpurposes to enhance their language teaching and learning, to facilitate record-keepingandassessment,andtoimprovecommunicationandcollaboration.The
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 5
supporting standards speak specifically to theways inwhich teacherswill usetechnologytools,suchastomaintaincontactwithpeers,studentsandadministra-tors,tosupportlanguagelearning,forgrading,andsoforth.Whilethesestandardsdonotpresentanecessarilynovelperspectiveonhowlanguageeducatorsshouldembracetechnologytools,theypresentaninvaluablestepforwardinthattheyareingoalandstandardformat. Lastly,itisworthnotingthatthesemovementstostandardizetechnologyuseandintegrationinourlanguageclasseshavenotexistedexclusivelyintheUnitedStates.Within the last decade, other organizations around theworld have alsobegun heading in the same direction. For example, a fairly recent publication(Kelly,Grenfall,Allan,Kriza&McEvoy,2004)espousedtheidealprofileofaforeignlanguageteacherinEurope.Whilethedocumentfocusesonseveralas-pectsofpreparation,trainingandpractice,technologyfiguresprominentlywithinthesectiondiscussing theknowledgeandunderstandingcentral to foreign lan-guageteaching.Thedocumentcites“Trainingininformationandcommunicationtechnologyforpedagogicaluseintheclassroom”and“Trainingininformationandcommunicationtechnologyforpersonalplanning,organisationandresourcediscovery”(p.5)asimportantcomponentsofthislanguageteacherprofile. There are of coursemanyother national, state and regional standards docu-mentsthatdealwithtechnologyinteacherandlanguageteacherpreparation;thisdiscussionhasonlyscratchedthesurfacewiththepurposeofshowingthatadmin-istratorsandpolicy-makersrecognizetheimportanceandvalueofbeingtechno-logicallysavvyintoday’sworld.Thenextsectionexaminesthisissuefromtheotherendofthespectrum–fromtheteachers’perspective.
2.2. Teacher beliefs and attitudesAswasmentioned above, it is particularly surprising that technology is oftentreatedasanafterthoughtinlanguageteacherpreparationprograms,quitesimplybecausetheseteachersthemselves–bothpre-serviceandin-service–havemadeitclearthattheywanttoincorporatetechnologyintheirclassrooms,andthattheywant tolearnhow.Thefactsandfiguresdiscussedinthissectionarenotnew.In2004,a surveyof teachers inGeorgia (Cooper) regarding theirpreparation forlanguageteachingrevealedthatteachersfelttheywerelessadequatelypreparedinthegeneralareaoftechnologyuseandincorporationthantheycouldhavebeen.Thedatapresentedherearemerelyarepresentativesampletoillustratethefactthatthiswishforincreasedemphasisontechnologyincorporationinteachertrain-ingexistsatalllevels.Thisdesireisnotsurprisingonthepartoftheteachers,asanyonewhohasbeenintheclassroomwillrecognizethat–whetherspokenorunspoken–thereisanexpectationthatweusetechnology.Evenadecadeago,thiswasthecase(Richards,Gallo&Renandya,2001),andtheexpectationsfromstudentsandadministrators,ifnotourselves,haveonlyincreased. A recent survey administered to educators and aspiring educators (ProjectTomorrow, 2010) regarding their use of technology in the classroom confirmsthat there continues tobegreat interest in the roleofnew technologies inour
6 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
classes.Sixty-sixpercentofcurrentteachersindicatedaninterestinincorporatingtechnologyintotheirlessons,afigurethatwasmatched,moreorless,bydistrictadministratorsandprincipalsaswell.Evenmoresupport,however,was foundamongthoseenrolledinpre-servicecollegeprograms:79%ofthoseteachersre-portedaninterestinintegratingdigitalmediaintotheirfutureclasses.Thesurveyfocusedparticularlyontheuseofcollaborative,digitalandmobiletechnologiesandtheirpotentialroleinK-12classrooms.Thefindings,though,caneasilybeextrapolatedtorelatetolanguageclassesbothattheK-12levelandattheuniver-sitylevel.Notonlydoourstudentswantthetechnology,teacherswantittoo,andtheteachersofthefuturewanttolearnhowtouseit. Anotherrecentsurvey(Ossipov,2010)ofstudentsenrolledinaMasterofArtsinTeaching(MAT)programaskedabout their trainingandusewith respect tospecific technological toolsandapplications.A totalof70pre-service teachersresponded, fromavarietyofbackgrounds (52%highschool,33%college/uni-versity,10%communitycollegeteachers;mixtureoflanguagestaught).Thevastmajorityconsideredthemselvesaverage(44%)orgood(44%)usersoftechnol-ogy,buttheyallexpresseddesirestolearnnewanddifferenttools.Forexample,theyindicatedadesiretolearnhowtousedigitalcameras(26%),voicerecorders(57%),iPods(43%),e-bookreaders(38%)andSmartBoards(61%),andsaidtheywanted to learn to create content using applications such aswebpage creators(69%),moviemakingsoftware(58%),exercisesandquizzes(64%),amongoth-erssuchassoundeditingsoftware.Themajorityoftherespondentsshowedgreatinterestinusingtechnologytoolssuchasvideoandphotosharingsites,podcasts,andwikistoconnectandcommunicatewithothers.However,whatmakestheseresultsmoreinterestingisthatthespecificcommentsoftherespondentsindicatethat,morethanwantingtoknowhowtousethesetools,theywanttoknowwhattodowiththeminclassandhowtousethemappropriately.Ossipovconcludesthat teachers are fairly comfortablewith technology butwould like to receivemoretrainingregardinghowtoselecttheappropriatetechnologyandhowtoin-corporatetechnologyintotheirlessonplans.Weshouldnoteaswell,though,thatnotallteacherssharethissenseofcomfortthatOssipovfinds.Basedonpersonalandanecdotalexperience,wecannotdenythatanumberoflanguageteachersfeelintimidatedoreventhreatenedbythevarietyandquantityoftechnologicaltoolsavailable,andtherearemoreeachday.Nonetheless,inspiteofsomeresistance,mosteducatorsthesedaysareawareoftheneed,oratleastthemotivations,forexploringnewtoolsandoptionsintheirteaching. In recognitionof the standards cited above and the teachers’ owndesires tolearnnewtechnologytools,anumberofrecentstudieshavefocusedonthebestwaystotrainteachersinusingandincorporatingemergingtechnologiesintheirclasses.Thereisagrowingbodyofworkinthisarea,withanumberofarticlescomingouteachyearandahandfulofeditedvolumes,allofwhichreflecttheincreasingprofessionalismofthefieldoflanguageteachereducation,aswellasthegrowingrecognitionoftheimportanceoftechnologyinthisendeavor.Tothatend, the next section reviews recent studies related to technology in languageteachereducation inorder tosummarizewhatwehave learnedfromthemand
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 7
wherewestandnow.
3. PrEvious Work incorPoraTinG TEchnoloGy in lan-GuaGE TEachEr TraininGAsmallbutgrowingnumberofstudieshavesoughttodeterminelanguageteach-ers’ practices and outcomes in this quest for linkingCALL and teacher train-ing.Forexample,Egbert,PaulusandNakamichi(2002)examinedhowlanguageteachersapplyCALLpracticesfromtheircourseworkwhentheyentertheirownclassroomsandfound that thosealreadyfamiliarwithCALLweremore likelyto use it. Crucially, they found that the largest obstacles to CALL integrationwere lackof time, fundingdeficienciesand insufficientknowledgeofnewde-velopments.Similarobstacleshavebeencited inotherstudies (e.g.,Goldfield,2001;Hoven,2007),whichrecognizedthesamelimitationsaswellastheneedtoencourageongoingteachertrainingandinitiatives.MorerecentworkbyChen(2008)soughttostudytheparticularfactorsinfluencingteachers’CALLintegra-tion.Bothquantitativeandqualitativeresultsshowedthattrainingiscrucial,andthe author recommends continuousprofessionaldevelopment focusedon tech-nologyapplicationinlanguageinstruction.Theserecommendationsarenotsur-prising,necessarily;fewwoulddisagreethat“ifwewantteacherstouseCMC[computermediatedcommunication] in their classrooms, thenexplicit trainingandpracticeinusingdiscussiontoolsforlanguageteachingneedtobeincludedinteachereducationprograms”(Johnson,2002,p.73).However,thedifficultyliesinhowtocarryouttheserecommendations.Thenextsubsectionsreviewsomeoftheapproachesthathavebeentakentoattempttoaccomplishthisprofessionaldevelopmentand training,simultaneouslyfocusingon teachingpracticeswhileemphasizingCALLskillsaswell.
3.1. Technology courseManylanguageteachersbenefitfromhavinganentirecourseduringtheirstudiesdevotedentirelytoCALLpractices.Thesecoursesoftenemploywhatisknownasthe“experientialmodelingapproach”(Hoven,2007,p.137), in that theyaredesignedtofamiliarizestudentswiththetoolsavailableastheyusetheminreal-istictasksthatcouldbeimplementedinlanguageclassrooms.Thesecourseshaveprovensuccessful(e.g.,Hoven,2007;Lord&Lomicka,2004;Rilling,Dahlman,Dodson,Boyles&Pazvant,2005;Son,2002)inteachingthetoolsandinprovid-ing“languageteacherswithpracticalexperience”(Son,2002,p.127).Inmanycases, however, such a course is not always available to language teachers astheyreceivetheirtraining,andinthesecasestrainershavetoresorttoalternativemethodsofprovidingthenecessaryinformation. It isworthnotingherethat this technologycourseoptionisnotappealingorevenviableinallcontexts.Foronething,manyinstitutionscannotaffordtodedi-catetheresourcesofanentirecoursetothisonetopic,givenbudgetary,space,staffing,curricularorotheradministrativelimitations.Similarly,ifastudentisnotinaspecificCALLtrainingprogram,itmaybedifficulttofindthetimetodevote
8 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
awholecoursetothistopic,especiallyif theirowninterestslieinliteratureorculturalstudies(asisoftenthecasewithgraduatestudentswhoteachlanguageclassesaspartoftheirdegreeprogram,butwhodonotnecessarilyconsidertheirprimarygoalstobeessentiallylinguisticorpedagogical).ItisperhapsforthesereasonsthatinstitutionshaveconsideredotheroptionsofdeliveringCALLtrain-ingtotheirstudents.
3.2. Technology infusion Inthe“programinfusionapproach”(Wildner,2000,pp.230-1),technologyisin-tegratednotinonesolecoursebutratherthroughouttheprogram,inothercourseswhoseprimarycontentisnottechnologybutratherpedagogyoreducation.Alongtheselines,LukeandBritten(2007)advocatefortechnology’sroletobeintegralinteacherpreparationprogramsandtobeacohesiveprogrammaticcomponentoftheirdevelopmentthatisinterwoventhroughouttheirformation.Hoven(2007)agrees,claimingthat“theprocessofbecomingauserofintegratedtechnologyintheclassroomnecessarilyinvolvestheexperienceofsuccessfulusesofdifferenttoolsavailable”(p.35).Giventhevastarrayofapproachestothemethodscoursethatteachersreceiveintheirtraining(seeWilbur,2007),infusingtechnologyintotheprogramhasbeengivenagreatdealofattention,inanefforttodeterminetheprocesses and effects of incorporating a variety of technological tools and ap-proaches. Anumberofresearchershaveexploitedthebenefitsofasynchronouscomputer-mediatedcommunication tools toenable teachers in training to reflecton theirgrowthaseducators,eitherwithamentororwitheachother,whilesimultane-ouslygaininghands-onexperienceusingthesetools.ArnoldandDucate(2006)suggestedthatusingtechnologyinthesecoursestoencourageteachersintrainingto learn the technologyanduse the technologyat thesametime,enables themtobetterteachwithitwhenthetimecomes.Kamhi-Stein(2000)concludedthatweb-baseddiscussion is aviablemeansof integrating technology intoTESOLteachereducationwhilesimultaneouslydevelopingknowledgeandcollaborating.Similarly,Johnson(2002)incorporatedweb-basedconferencingtoenhanceso-cialinteractionandcohesioninteacherpreparationcourses,whileYang’s(2009)teachersintrainingusedblogstocriticallyreflectontheirlearningprocessandtheirgrowthasteachers;bothstudiesfoundsimilarpositiveresults.Aseriesofarticles investigating social and cognitive presence in online forums (Arnold,Ducate,Lomicka&Lord,2005;Lomicka&Lord,2007;Lord&Lomicka,2007)foundthatteachersintrainingappreciatedtheuseofcomputer-mediatedcommu-nication(CMC)toolstoengageinreflection,andwereprovidedwith“valuabletoolsfortheirfutureteachingendeavors”(Lord&Lomicka,2007,p.513). Otherprojectshaveconnectedgroupsoflearnersandteachersfromdifferentcountriestoengageindeeperculturalinteraction,exchangeculturalknowledgeandgrowaseducators.Inadistanceeducationclass,KupetzandZiegenmeyer(2005)takethetacticof“purposefullearning”(p.179)byincorporatingvariousapproaches,methods,andtechnologiesintothecoursetogivestudentsfirst-hand
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 9
technologicalexperience.Liaw(2003)connectedEFLstudentteachersinTaiwanwithESLpre-serviceteachersintheU.S.,whileFuchs’s(2005)workexaminedanexchangebetweenteachereducatorsandpre-serviceforeignlanguageteach-ersintheU.S.andGermany.InArnold,DucateandLomicka(2007),technologywasusedtodevelopcommunitiesofpracticeacrossspaceandtime,specifically“tofacilitateexchangesamongstudentsfromthreegraduatepedagogyseminarsandwithexperts in thefieldof foreign languageeducation/applied linguistics”(p.103).Inallcases,participantsreportedappreciatingtheprojectsandseeingthebenefitsof includingsuch technology-basedprojects in teacherpreparationcourses.Participantsgainedbothcognitiveandsocialbenefitsfromtheseproj-ects,aswellaslearnedhowtousetheparticulartechnologytoolsthroughtheirpersonalexperiencewiththem.
3.3. Embracing the technologyWhatthisbriefoverviewhasshownisthatmosteducatorswanttolearntousetechnology effectively in their language classrooms, and that they can benefitfromexplicittrainingandinstruction.Wemustalsorememberthatsuchformaltrainingopportunitiesarenotavailabletoalleducators,andoftentheonusisonthe teacherher/himself tostayup-to-datewithcurrent technologiesandtrends.Thissituationraisesanumberofinterestingquestions:Howcanwelearnaboutnewtools?Howcanwestayinformedaboutcurrentpracticesandapproaches?Thereareworkshops,conferences,andmanyonlineresourcesavailabletoedu-catorsforthiskindofongoingprofessionaldevelopment,butwehavetoknowwheretofindthem.Thus,self-directedlearningbecomesanimportantaspectofprofessionaldevelopment.Asteachersweneedtotakebothinitiativeandrespon-sibilityforourownlearning. Atthesametime,evenforthosewithtraining,itappearsthatthereremainsagapbetweentrainingandpractice,oftenamongthesesameeducators.Meskill,Mossop,DiAngeloandPasquale (2002)gathered reactions,attitudesandprac-ticesfromnoviceandveteranteachers,aswellasaccomplishedtechnologyusersandthosewhohadnotembracednewtechnologiesintheirclasses.Theyfoundthatthereisaconsensusthattechnologycanbe“transformational”(p.47),buttransformationaltowhat?Thus,otherquestionsoftenstillremain:Whatdoteach-erswanttogetoutoftechnologytools?Whatshouldtheywanttogetoutofthem? Thefollowingsectionsofthischapterfocusontheseveryissues,rangingfromthewhat–findingtools,creatingpersonal learning networks(PLN)–tothehow–howtoimplementthesetoolsinpedagogicallyviableclassroomtasksandactiv-ities–andareorganizedaroundtheTESOLTechnologyStandardsforTeachers.TheStandardsaresummarizedinAppendixA,althoughthereaderisreferredtothepublisheddocumentoftheseTESOLTechnologyStandardsforfurtherdetail,asthespecificstandardsofeachgoalspellouttheskillsandknowledgenecessarytocomplywiththem.Thefirstsectionfocusesonknowledgeandskillsforprofes-sionalpursuits(Goal1),whichpointseducatorstofindingappropriatetoolstousewith technologysuchassearchengines, reference tools,andprofessional tools
10 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
suchasjournals,resourcecentersandpublishersites.Thesecondsectionisorga-nizedaroundtoolsthatintegratepedagogicalknowledgeandskillswithtechnol-ogytoenhancelanguageteachingandlearninginrecord-keeping,feedback,andassessment(Goals2and3).Theintentionofthissegmentistopresentteachingandlearningtoolsinwhichtechnologyisusedtoenhanceone’sskillsasateacherand/or learner.Finallythelastsection(Goal4)focusesonusingtechnologytoimprove communication, collaboration, and efficiency. It discussesnetworkingtoolsandlistserves,aswellasmicrobloggingserviceslikeTwitter.
4. FindinG rEsourcEsFindingnewandinnovativetechnologicaltoolsisusuallyachallengeforteach-ers.Weliveinanageofnewresponsibilitiesandtools,andifformaltrainingisnotreadilyavailable,teachersareoftenexpectedtobeindependentlearnerswhenitcomestotechnology.Inaddition,theyarecalledtoremainuptodatewithcur-rentpracticesandtheories.AccordingtoGodwin-Jones(2009),today’sstudentscometouswith“sophisticatedtechnologyskillsandhabits”(p.3); infact, to-day’sstudentscanbeassetstousintheclassroombycollaboratingandsharingtheirtechnologicalknowledge,butasteachers,wealsohaveadutytorespondtoadvancesintechnologyandtoprepareourteacherstoworkintechnologyrichschools.Weintroducesomeofthemostpopularandusefulcurrenttoolsinthesesections,organized loosely around the above-referenced fourgoal areasof theTESOLTechnologyStandardsforTeachers(seeAppendixA).
4.1. language teachers acquire and maintain foundational knowledge and skills in technology for professional purposes (Goal 1)ThefirstTESOLstandardsetsthegoalthatlanguageteachershaveknowledgeofandskillsintechnologyrelatedtotheirprofession.Thisisabroad-reachinggoalthatcouldencompasstheplethoraoftoolsavailableontheInternet.Wehighlightthosethatcouldbehelpfultobothteachersandlearners,subdividedingeneralthemes.
Searching
Searchengines areplentifulbutitmaytaketimetofindaparticularenginethatworkswellforyourgoals.ThewebsiteTeach-nologyoffersseveralpointersforlocatingahelpfulsearchenginetooltouse.Theirsuggestionsincludefindingen-ginesthat(1)arewellestablishedandhavebeenaroundforsometime,(2)filterinappropriatecontent,(3)returnveryrelevantcontent,(4)findhighqualitysites,(5)allowtheusertonarrowsearches,(6)savetimeandenergy,and(7)permitsearchingforspecificmediasuchaspictures,sounds,ormovies. Thereareofcoursemanysearchenginesthatexistbutafewmayofferfeaturesthatareparticularlyinterestingtoeducators.Seethelistbelowforexamples:
• Google-directoryandimagesearchengines.
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 11
• Google Scholar-simplewaytobroadlysearchforscholarlyliterature.• Refseek-accesstojournals,documents,webpages,books,encyclopedias,andnewspapers.
• My Way-similartoYahoo!,butwithoutanybanners,pop-ups,adsorspam.• Education World-educationlinksandoriginalcontentfromtheInternet.• Searchcredibile-facilitatessearching26enginesfromonelocationbyen-teringthesearchtermandclickingonthesearchengineofchoice.
• Ask Jeeves for KidsorKidrex-designedexclusivelyforyoungpeopleages6to12.
Professional Tools and Organizations2
Professional tools suchas journal andorganization resources (seeAppendixBforalistofprofessionaljournalswithafocusonCALL),languagecentersandpublisherwebsites play a pivotal role in educators’ professionalCALL devel-opment.Aiming to provide support and to assist teachers in their professionalgrowth,organizationsmayoffernetworkingopportunities,toolstobetterpreparelearners for today’sworld, scholarships and grants, professional literature andpublications, information on advocacy, workshops, conventions, and positionstatementsonvariousdebatedtopics.SomeoftheprofessionalorganizationsforlanguageteachersaretheAmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguag-es(ACTFL),theModernLanguageAssociation(MLA),andTeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages (TESOL).Tofindoutmoreabout themyriadprofessionalorganizations,theConsortiumforLanguageTeachingandLearningatDartmouthoffersanextensivelist.Professionalorganizationsmayalsobeaf-filiatedwithaprofessionaljournal. LanguageResourceCentersaresupportedbytheU.S.DepartmentofEducationandestablishedinordertoimprovetheteachingandlearningofforeignlanguag-es.Theytypicallyprovideprofessionalservices,offersummerinstitutes,andhavematerialresourcesavailable.The15centersarelistedinAppendixB,includingawebsitewithmoreinformationandwebaddressesforeachcenter. Anotherhelpfulreferencetoolistextbookpublisherwebsites.Thesesitescanbe accessed to obtain information about textbooks, previewbooks, and obtaindeskcopiesofbooksandinformationaboutparticulartextbookbundles.Variousinstructionalresourcesareavailableaswell,suchasPowerpoints,imagebanks,testfilesandotherresourcefilesforteachers.SomepublishersitesareincludedinAppendixB. Oneofthebiggestchallengesthatteachersfaceissimplykeepinguptodateonallof thelatest technological toolsavailableforeducation.Followingblogsorsubscribingtofeedsmightbeausefulwaytolearnaboutthelatesttools.Forexample,RichardByrne, inhisblogentitledFreeTech forTeacherspublishespostsaboutnewtechnologytoolsandhowtheymightserveeducatorswithappli-cationsforeducation.Hisblogisnotlanguagespecificbutitdoesathoroughjobofkeepingteachersupdatedaboutthelatesttechnologicaltoolsforteaching.Onhissite,ashortreviewofthetool,followedbyasectionentitled,“Applications
12 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
foreducation,”areoftenprovided,whichhelptovisualizehowaparticulartoolcouldbeusedintheclassroom.
4.2. language teachers integrate pedagogical knowledge and skills with technology to enhance language teaching and learning, and apply technology in record-keeping, feedback, and assessment (Goals 2 and 3)These two goals of the TESOL Technology Standards are likely the goals that we as teachers tend to focus on more regularly on a day to day basis. We constantly search for new tools to help us plan and teach our classes, to facilitate student communication and learning, and to enhance our ability to connect with and inter-act with our students. This section presents a number of such tools, ranging from general tools for the classroom, to audio and video tools, to other networking tools that can connect students to each other and/or to the instructor.3
General Classroom Tools
Therearemanyfreetoolsavailablethatcanenhancetheteachingandlearningprocess.First,thereareresourcesavailableforgrammarandvocabularybuilding.DictionariesareacommontoolprovidedbydifferentInternetsites.Perhapsthreemorecomprehensivesitesincludedictionary.com,Leo,andwordreference.com;thelatterallowsyoutochooseyourlanguage,andthuscanbeavaluableresourcetothoseneedingtolookupaword.VocabularyBuildersisatooldesignedtohelpstudentslearnnewwords,playgames,andexplorelanguage. Otherapplicationsaredesignedtoenhanceclassroomprojectsandofferacre-ativetwisttolearning.Wikipediaisafreeweb-based,collaborativeencyclopediaprojectthatismultilingualandaffordsstudentstheopportunitytoworktogeth-erincreatingafinalproduct.TheadvantagetoasitelikeWikipediaisnotjustthecollaborativenatureoftheinteractions,butalsothefactthatthestudentsarepublishingforarealaudience.Bighugelabshelpscreativelyshapedigitalphotosintomotivationalormovieposters,magazinecovers,badges,mosaics,collages,calendars,frames,andsoforth.Forweb-basedpresentations,Preziusesamaplayoutandzoomingtoshowrelationshipsincontextandtocreatenonlinearpre-sentations.Ideas(usingpictures,videos,anddrawings)canbepresentedonacan-vas,suchasawhiteboardratherthanthroughtraditionaltypesofslides.Studentscould,forexample,takepicturesofdifferentplacesataschool,providesimpletexttodescribethemandputthemintoaPrezipresentationforotherstovieworuseinthecontextofascavengerhunt.UsingPrezi,studentscancreatestoriesinthetargetlanguagethatareverydynamicandnon-traditionalintheirformat.Tocreatediagrams,onemightuseSimpleDiagrams,afreetoolcombiningclipart,text,andfreehanddrawings.Finally,forinstructorswhouseclipart,freeclipart,coloringpages,fonts,worksheetsandsoundsareavailableatAwesomeClipArt-ForKids.Teacherswhoneedmusicclipsorroyalty-freemusiccansignupforfreemusicclipsforeducationoraccessthefreesoundeffectslibrary.
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 13
Asmentionedabove,theTESOLStandardsalsoencouragetheuseoftechnol-ogy for assessment.A free online quizmaker,QuizStar allows users to createquizzesinmultiplelanguages.HotPotatoes,agrammarandvocabularylearningtool,isfreewareandincludessixcomponentstohelpwithlearning:interactivemultiple-choice, short-answer, jumbled-sentence,crossword,matching/orderingandgap-fillexercisesfortheWorldWideWeb.OnlinetoolsavailabletocreategamesincludesitessuchasPuzzlemaker(wordsearchesandcrosswordpuzzles),Bingo,andJeopardy.Thesetoolscancreateopportunitiesforbothinformalandformaltypesofassessment.
Audio and Video Tools
Audioandvideo aretwowaysinwhichtheInternetcanextendlearningbeyondthefourwallsoftheclassroomforteachersandlearnersalike.Teacherscanfindavarietyof audio andvideo sources that areup todate and language specificfortheirparticularteachingneeds.WhileKidsTubeisamonitoredvideosharingwebsitedesignedforkids,YouTubeandTeacherTubehaveawidevarietyofcon-tentavailablefrommusicvideostohow-tovideos.TeacherTube,awaytoshareinstructionalvideo,offersvideosharingsimilar toYouTube,but isparticularlydesignedforthoseineducation.Oneresourceworthnotingisthedownloaderof-feredbyTeacherTubetorecordvideoforpersonalorclassroomuse.Anotherser-vice,Vixy,alsoprovidesuserswithatooltodownloadYouTubeorTeacherTubevideos.VixycanalsoembedvideointovariousformatsandgeneratevideoRSSfeedsorpodcasts.IfteachersdonothaveaccesstotheInternetduringclass,theseoptionscanbeespeciallyhelpfulforbringingInternetclipstostudents. Tocreatepresentationsorscreencasts,Jingcantakesnapshotsandvideo(freefor5minutesorless)ofwhatisonyourscreenandaddthemtoyourblog,web-site, presentations, andword processing documents. In a similarway, ScreenrisequallysimpleandeasytouseforthosewhohaveTwitteraccounts.Itisfreeandregistrationisnotnecessary,buthavingaTwitteraccountallowsyoutosaveyourrecordingsandpublishthemtoTwitter.RecordingscanalsobepublishedtoYouTubeordownloadedtoyourcomputer.Offeringvoiceandvideo,Sketchcastallowsusers to combinewritten andvisual explanations.Users candraw (andrecord)sketchesonlineand(ifdesired)accompanythemwithvoiceinstructions.Userswillneedascreencastingtoolaswellasadrawingprogramtomakesketch-es.AtabletPCisrecommendedforeaseofdrawing. Therearemanytoolsthatallowuserstheoptionofrecordingvideoand/orau-dio.TokBoxisawebapplicationthatallowsuserstomakemulti-partyvideochatcallsovertheInternetwithoutadownload.Forrecordingvideosandsharingthemwithothersviaemail,teachersmaywanttotrySnapyap’sfreeservice.Studentsfromdifferentcountriescanchatinrealtimeorexchangevideoemailswitheachotherbyusingthesefreetools.Anotheraudioapplication,Vocaroo,offersaquickandeasywaytorecordyourselfdirectlyontheweb.Studentscanrecordanswers,responses,ordialoguewithothersintheL2andsendrecordingstotheirteacherorotherstudentsbye-mail.Aneditingoptionisnotavailableandrecordingcan
14 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
besaveddirectlytoacomputerinlimitedformats.Youmayalsosavethee-mailthathasthelinktotherecording.AnotherfreeserviceisAnimotowhichisawebapplicationthatproducesvideosfromuser-selectedphotos,videoclipsandmu-sic.Finally,Vokiisarecordingtoolthatallowsuserstoexpressthemselvesusingvoice(theirvoiceorvoicesofferedbythetool)andatalkingcharacteroranava-tar.Thisapplicationhasbeenverypopularwithlanguageclassesandallowsformoreanonymityforyoungerlearnersastheycancreatetheirownvisualappear-ance.Ifuserstypeintext,theVokitoolscanspeakthelanguagefromdifferentvoices(male,female,etc.)andwithdifferentaccentsfromaparticularlanguage.
Other Networking Tools
Networkingtoolsaregrowingineducationandrepresentavirtualwaytoconnectwithotherteachersforprofessionaldevelopment,whichwillbediscussedbelow,andwithstudentstoextendlearningbeyondtheclassroom.Socialnetworksspe-cifictolanguagelearningarenowavailablethatprovideacommunityoflearn-erswithwhomthelearnerscaninteract,receivefeedback,provideconstructiveconversation,stimulateinterculturaldialogue,andlearnanewlanguage(accesstocertainfeaturesisfreebutmanyimposeamonthlyfeeforfulluse).Manysitesoffercoursecontent,audioflashcards,chat,correctionandfeedbackfromnativespeakers. Some examples of language learning networks includeWordchamp,LiveMocha,Palabea,Busuu,italki,LingQandHello-Hello. Other sites are not language learning networks but still allow users to con-nectwithotherswhosharetheirinterests,theirlanguages,oranythingelse.Forexample,Twitter,apopularmicrobloggingservice,allowsforsocialnetworkingandenablesitsuserstosendandreadotherusermessagescalledtweets.Userscanfollowothersandaccumulatefollowers.Tweetersgenerallyanswerthequestion“what’shappening”or share informationonparticular topicsor askquestions.Flickr,animageandvideohostingwebsite,allowsuserstostore,sort,searchandsharephotosandvideosandprojectscanbedonecollaborativelyasaclass.Allofthesetoolscanbeimplementedinthetargetlanguageclassbetweenteachersandstudentstoshareresources,buildcommunityorexchangeinformation.Onecouldusethemultimediasitesfortellingstories,doingashow-and-tellinthetargetlan-guage,takingvirtualtoursofatarget-language-speakingarea,etc.,anduserscanleavecommentsandnotesonallentries.Studentsandteacherscouldpostupdatesandpictureswhentravelingabroadandusethemtocontributetodatabasesthattheysharewithothereducatorsandinstitutions.
4.3. language teachers use technology to improve communication, collaboration, and efficiency (Goal 4)Teachers, just likeanyotherprofessionals,needtofindwaystosavetime,im-proveefficiency,andsharebestpractices.Thissection,basedonGoal4of theTESOLTechnologyStandards, addresses tools available tohelpusmeet thesegoals.Acrucialpartofourprofessionaldevelopmentinvolvesconnectingwithothereducators.Educationalnetworkingisatermthatdesignatestheuseofsocial
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 15
networksforeducation.Avarietyofservicesforeducationalnetworkingexistsandincludesoptionssuchaslistserves,socialnetworkingsitesandmicrobloggingsites.AfewresourceswillbedescribedbelowbuttheEducationalNetworkingWiki(seeAppendixB)offersamoreextensivelistofnetworkingsitesavailablespecificallyforteachersandforthoseineducation. Forthosewhowishtouseanonlineorganizertofacilitatemeetingsorconfer-ences,Meet-o-matic is an easy and freemeeting scheduler that uses a simplewebform,emailsparticipantsandallowsfortheviewingofresults.AnotherfreeschedulertosetupmeetingsandappointmentsonlineisDoodle.OneoftheperksofDoodle.comisthatnoregistrationisrequiredsoitisbothquickandeasytouse.LikeDoodle,Flistiisaneasyandfreetooltocreatepollsthatrequiresnoregistra-tion.Pollscanbeembeddedintoblogs,wikisandwebsites.AnotherfreeservicetosetuppollsisPollDaddywhichallowsupto10pollquestionsfreeofcharge. Allofthetoolsdiscussedintheupcomingsectioncanbehelpfulinconnectingwithothers,inprovidingsupportandanswers,advertisingprofessionalopportuni-tiesandevenemploymentventures;howevertheyarenotspecificallyreservedforeducators.Forexample,LinkedInisapopularbusinesssocialnetworkingcom-munitydesignedasaresourcetoconnectandcommunicatewithotherprofession-als,toincreaseone’svisibilityandtoimproveone’sconnections.Userscancreateprofiles,joingroups,addapplicationsandproviderecommendationsforothers.Perhapslessbusinessoriented,socialnetworkingsitessuchasBeboandFace-bookofferopportunities tokeep in touch,network,makefriendsandestablishrelationships.Withinbothcommunities,groupscanbecreatedanduserscanbe-comefansorjointhegroup.OnFacebook,forexample,manyprofessionalorga-nizations,suchasACTFL,AATF(AmericanAssociationofTeachersofFrench)andAATSP(AmericanAssociationofTeachersofSpanishandPortugeuse)havegrouppages,allowinguserstoconnectvirtually.Plaxoisanonline,automaticallyupdated,addressbookandsocialnetworkingservicethatallowsyoutokeepintouchwithyourcontacts.Italsoremindsyouoftheirbirthdays,offersportabil-ityforaccessingyourcontacts,andtracksanychangeintheirinformation,suchasamovefromone institution toanother.EdModo isaprivatemicrobloggingplatform thatwas designed as a safe alternative to traditional social networksforclassroomuse.Thisplatformallowsteachersandstudentstoexchangenotes,links,files,alerts,assignments,andeventswitheachother. Othertoolscateruniquelytoeducators.Createdwithteachersinmind,Class-room2.0 is an interactive space for educators usingWeb2.0 and collaborativetechnologies.Freetothosewhouseit,Classroom2.0offerssocialnetworkingaswellassupportforthosenewtoWeb2.0.Userscanestablishapersonalpage,joingroups,andparticipateinforums.Ningisanonlineplatformthatuserscanusetocreatetheirowneducationalnetworks.Ateachercouldcreateanetworkforaclasstouseduringtheacademicsemesteroryearforexamplewherestudentsandteachercaneasilyconnectwitheachother.NingisnolongerafreesitebutPear-sonEducationoffersaNingminiforfreetoeducatorswithregistration(subjecttoapproval).Teacher9isawebsiteexclusivelyavailabletoteachersthatallowsthemtointeractwithfellowteachers,exchangelessonplansandnetwork.Their
16 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
websitedescribestheresourceasaplacetointeract“withouthavingtowaitforanin-serviceday”(http://www.teacher9.com,¶1). Availabletoolsandresourcesthathelptoconnectteachersincludelistservs,mi-crobloggingandmediasharing.Sinceitscreationin1994,FLTeachhasservedasaresourceforteachersbothseasonedandnew.Awebsitedesignedtohaveeduca-torsconnectwithotherteachers,FLTeachisalsoalistservthatconnectslanguageteachersontopicssuchasclassroomactivities,curricularissuesandarticulation,resources,andmuchmore.
4.4. creating a personal learning network
Foruseducatorsitiscrucialthatwenetworkandinteractwithothers.Technol-ogyoffersusavirtualpresenceandawaytoconnectwithothereducatorsfromaroundtheworld.PLNscouldconsistofgoals,practices,andtechniquesthatarerelatedtoaparticulartopicandthatassistinaccomplishingprofessionalgoalsorpersonalinterests.Theyareaspaceinwhichweshare,learn,impact,transform,connect,andinteracttogether;theyhaveaprofoundimpactonhowwelearn.Asweconsider the importanceof self-directed learning toextendandexpandourownknowledgebasesinourownprofessionalcareers,itmightbehelpfultocre-ateaPLN.Todothis,educatorscouldtakeintoconsiderationandusemanyoftheabovementionedresourcesandtools.Afirststepmightbetojoinaprofessionalsocialnetwork(suchasLinkedIn)tomakepersonalandprofessionalconnections.Then,onemightfindotherblogsorfeedstofollowinordertoenhanceone’sownknowledgebase.Theseresourcescouldbeconnectedtogetherinapersonalizedstartpageorwebportal (e.g.,Netvibes, iGoogleorPageflakes).Thenext stepwouldbeforeducatorstoparticipateandcontribute,interactwithothersbycom-mentingonblogs,sharingresourcesonTwitter,andconnectingwithcolleaguesaroundideasthatwearepassionateaboutinordertobeginconversationstoen-hanceandtotransformourownlearningandprofessionaldevelopment.Buildingabaseofpeopleandresourcescanhelptoguideourownlearningandpointustofurtherresourcestoenhanceourprofessionalgrowthanddevelopment.
5. conclusionArecent issueof theLanguage Educator (“SoYouSay,”2010)askedteachershowtheymightadapttheirlanguageclassroomtoappealtothemillennialgen-eration.Everyresponsethatwaspublishedmentionedsomeformoftechnology,fromSkypetosocialnetworkingtoYouTubetoVoicethread.Tothatend,Wiki-pediastates thatmillennial learnersarecharacterizedby“an increaseduseandfamiliaritywithcommunications,media,anddigitaltechnologies”(«GenerationY,»2005,«Definition,»¶2).Theseresponsessuggestthatwemustconsiderourlearners–whotheyareandwhatcharacterizesthem.Thesurveyresponsesindi-catethattoday’sstudentsembraceadifferenttypeoflearning—onethatinte-gratestechnologywithcollaboration. Although this chapter has presented a variety of tools that are available forteachingand learning, thechallenge that liesbeforeus isknowingwhen these
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 17
toolsaremosteffectivetouseandhowtousethemwithtoday’slearners.It isimportanttoevaluateeachtoolandtotakeintoconsiderationforwhichpurposesweareusingaparticulartool.Wemustconsiderthecharacteristicsofthelearners,thegoalsofthetask,andtheavailabletoolsforimplementationofthetask.Be-causetechnologyplayssuchacrucialroleinthemillennialgenerationoflearners,itisimportantforteacherstostayuptodate,remaininformed,andbecompetenttechnologyusers. Consideringteachers’needs,forexampletraining,support,time,mentoringandsoforth,wemustrealizethatnoneoftheseneedsexistsinavacuum–rathertheymustbedevelopedsimultaneouslyinordertobegintopavethewayforfutureed-ucators.Weshouldrememberthattechnologycanbe“transformational”(Meskilletal.,2002,p.47),ifpedagogydrivesthetechnology,whichinturnmotivatesthelearner. Inthischapterwehavediscussedhoweducatorscanmovetheprofessionfor-wardandexaminedsometoolstoassistthemalongtheway.Areteacherspre-pared tomoveforward?Is their trainingadequate?What toolsareavailable tothemandhowcantheykeepupwiththenewtoolsandtechnologies?Itisafactthatmanyeducatorswanttolearntousetechnologyeffectivelyintheirlanguageclassrooms,andthattheycanbenefitfromexplicittrainingandinstruction.ItisourhopethatbyprovidinganoverviewofthesituationofteachereducationandCALLandbyprovidingsomepossibletoolstohelpteacherswithteachingandlearning,wecancontinuetopavethewayforthefutureofCALLandencourageteacherstotakeresponsibilityfortheirownongoingprofessionaldevelopment.
noTEs1Bothauthorscontributedequallytothispaper.2PleaseseetheAppendixBforalistofresourcesandURLsforthissection.3Whendiscussingweb-basedoptions,oneconcernthatshouldbeconsideredisaccesstopersonalinformationandsafety.Teachersmaymaintainaprofileonasocialnetworkwithpersonalinformationthattheydonotwishforstudentstoviewandlikewise,theymaynotwishtoviewstudents’information.Manynetworkingtoolshavesettingsthatallowuserstohidefeatures(suchaspersonalinformation,photos,etc.)fromselectedcontacts.Anoth-eroptionwouldbeforaneducatortosetuptwodifferentprofiles–onefortheclassroomandoneforprivateuse.OrganizationssuchasWiredSafetyandSafeKidsaredesignedtoprovidetipsforkeepingkidssafeonline.Wiredsafety.orgrecognizesthatthegreatestriskchildrenfaceisbeingdeniedonlineaccesstotheInternet.Thatsaid,itisabsolutelycrucialthateducatorsunderstandhowchildrenusetheInternetsothattheycanmaketheexperienceasafeoneforthem.
QuEsTions For rEFlEcTion1.ConsiderthedisparitybetweenteachertrainingprogramsandCALLprep-arationdiscussedinthefirstsectionsofthischapter.Whatfactorsdoyou
18 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
thinkcontributetothecurrentsituation?Whatchangesmightweseeinthefuturethatcouldhelpremedythesituation?
2.Choose a toolmentioned in this chapter that you are not familiarwith.Afterexperimentingwithitonyourown,provideashortreviewtoyourclassmates.
3.What are some challenges that teachers face in using technology tools? Compare ideas across levels of instruction (elementary, middle, highschool,university).Whatideasdoyouhavetoovercomethesechallenges?
4.Arecertaintechnologiesmorereadilyoreasilyincorporatedintolanguageclassesthanothers?Arecertainagesorlevelsoflanguageinstructionmoreappropriatethanothersfortechnologyincorporation?Explainandjustifyyouropinions.
kEy TErmsCALLpersonallearningnetwork(PLN)teachereducation/trainingtechnologicaltoolsTESOLTechnologyStandards
casE sTudyAnewcolleagueinyourlanguagedepartmentclaimsthattechnologyalwaysfailshim,andthatthere’snothingtechnologicaltoolscandothathecan’tdowithaplainoldpaper-and-pencilapproach.Asaresult,hedoesn’tuseanytechnologyinhisteachingorprofessionaldevelopment.
Discussion questions
1.Whatdoyouthinkhisreasonsreallyareforavoidingtechnology?2.Howwouldyoutrytoconvincehimofthebenefitsofincorporatingnewtools?Consideryourownexperienceaswellaswhatpreviousresearchcantellus.
3.Whattool(s)wouldyousuggesthestartwith?Why?
idEas For acTion rEsEarch ProjEcTs1.Analyze a colleague’s use of technology in her/his language classroomoverthecourseofasemesteroryear.Coupletheseobservationswithinter-viewswiththeinstructorandfeedbackfromher/himontheeffectivenessofthetechnologyincorporation.Howwellisthiseducatorpreparedtoef-fectivelyintegratecurrenttechnologytoolsinher/hisclass?Howeffectiveisthetechnologyintegration?Whatistherelationshipbetweentheinstruc-
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 19
tor’sattitudesandher/histechnologyuse?2.Createaquestionnairetodistributetoyourcolleaguesthatwouldprovidedataonwhatteachersperceiveasthegreatestchallengestousingtechnol-ogy.Analyzetheresultsandcomparethemtootherpublishedliterature.
3.Survey a class of language learners to determinewhat technology toolstheythinkwouldbebeneficialintheireducation.Comparetheirattitudestothoseoftheirteachers.Arestudents’expectationsrealistic?Areteach-ers’?
4.Designapilot study to investigate theoutcomesof technology incorpo-rationinalanguageclassbystudyingtwoclasses:onethat incorporatesa technological tool insomeway,andanother thataccomplishessimilargoalsthroughmoretraditionalmethods(buttheclassesshouldotherwisebecomparableinallotheraspects).Analyzetheoutcomesintermsofstu-dentandinstructorattitudes,languageacquisition,culturalawareness,orthelike.
BiBlioGraPhyArnold,N.,&Ducate,L.(2006).Futureforeignlanguageteachers’socialandcognitive
collaboration in an online environment. Language Learning & Technology,10(1),42-66.Availableathttp://llt.msu.edu/vol10num1/pdf/arnoldducate.pdf
Arnold,N.,Ducate,L.&Lomicka,L.(2007).Virtualcommunitiesofpracticeinteachereducation.InM.A.Kassen,R.Lavine,K.A.Murphy-Judy,&M.Peters(Eds.),Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers(pp.103-132).SanMarcos,TX:CALICO.
Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2005). Using computer-mediatedcommunication to establish social and supportive environments in teachereducation. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 537-566. Available at https://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Chen, Y-L. (2008).A mixed-method study of EFL teachers’ Internet use in languageinstruction.Teaching and Teacher Education,24,1015-1028.
Cooper, T. C. (2004). How foreign language teachers in Georgia evaluate theirpreprofessionalpreparation:Acallforaction.Foreign Language Annals,37(1),37-48.
Egbert,J.,Paulus,T.,&Nakamichi,Y.(2002).TheimpactofCALLinstructiononlanguageclassroomtechnologyuse:AfoundationforrethinkingCALLteachereducation?Language Learning & Technology,6(3),108-126.Availableathttp://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/pdf/egbert.pdf
Fuchs,C.(2005).CMC-basedlearninginlanguageteachereducation:AGerman-Americancollaborativeproject.InI.Thompson&D.Hiple(Eds.),Selected papers from the 2004 NFLRC symposium: Distance education, distributed learning and language instruction. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National ForeignLanguageResourceCenter.Availableathttp://nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW44
GenerationY.(2005,October2).InWikipedia,thefreeencyclopedia.RetrievedAugust20,2010,fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y
20 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
Godwin-Jones, R. (2009). Emerging technologies: Personal learning environments.Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 3-9.Available at http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/emerging.pdf
Goldfield, J. D. (2001). Technology trends in faculty development, preprofessionaltraining,andthesupportoflanguageandliteraturedepartments.ADFL Bulletin, 32(3),102-115.
Healey, D., Hegelheimer, V., Hubbard, P., Iannou-Georgiou, S., Kessler, G., &Ware,P. (2009). TESOL Technology Standards Framework. TESOL Publications:Alexandria, VA. Available at https://iweb.tesol.org/Purchase/ProductDetail.aspx?Product_code=EBK1
Hoven,D.L. (2007).The affordances of technology for student teachers to shape their teacher education experience.InM.A.Kassen,R.Lavine,K.A.Murphy-Judy,&M.Peters(Eds.),Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers(pp.133-162).SanMarcos,TX:CALICO.
Hubbard,P.(2008).CALLandthefutureoflanguageteachereducation.CALICO Journal,25(2),175-188.Availableathttps://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (Eds.) (2006a). Teacher education in CALL. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
Hubbard,P.,&Levy,M.(2006b).ThescopeofCALLeducation.InP.Hubbard&M.Levy(Eds.),Teacher education in CALL(pp.3-20).Amsterdam:Benjamins.
International Society for Technology in Education (ITSE). (2008). National EducationTechnology Standards. Available at http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=NETS.
Johnson,E.M.(2002).Theroleofcomputer-supporteddiscussionfor languageteachereducation:Whatdothestudentssay?CALICO Journal,20(1),59-79.Availableathttps://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Kahmi-Stein,L.D.(2000).LookingtothefutureofTESOLteachereducation:Web-basedbulletinboarddiscussionsinamethodscourse.TESOL Quarterly,34(3),423-455.
Kassen,M.A.,Lavine,R.Z.,Murphy-Judy,K.,&Peters,M.(Eds.)(2007).Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers.SanMarcos,TX:CALICO.
Kelly,M.,Grenfall,M.,Allan,R.,Kriza,C.,&McEvoy,W.(2004).Europeanprofileforlanguage teachereducation–Aframeof reference.AReport to theEuropeanCommissionDirectorateGeneralforEducationandCulture.Availableathttp://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/pdf/doc477_en.pdf
Kessler,G.(2006).AssessingCALLteachertraining:Whatarewedoingandwhatcouldwedobetter?InP.HubbardandM.Levy(Eds.),Teacher education in CALL(pp.23-44).Amsterdam:Benjamins.
Kupetz, R.,& Ziegenmeyer, B. (2005). Blended learning in a teacher training course:Integratedinteractivee-learningandcontactlearning.ReCALL,17(2),179-196.
Liaw, M-L. (2003). Corss-cultural email correspondence for reflective EFL teachereducation.TESL-EJ,6(4).Availableathttp://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume6/ej24/ej24a2/
Lomicka,L.,&Lord,G.(2007).Socialpresenceinvirtualcommunitiesofforeignlanguageteachers.System,35,208-228.
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 21
Lord,G.,&Lomicka,L.(2004).Developingcollaborativecybercommunitiestopreparetomorrow’steachers.Foreign Language Annals,37(3),401-408.
Lord,G.,&Lomicka,L.(2007).ForeignlanguageteacherpreparationandasynchronousCMC: Promoting reflective teaching. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,15(4),513-532.
Luke, C., & Britten, J. (2007). The expanding role of technology in foreign languageteacher education programs. CALICO Journal, 24(2), 253-267. Available athttps://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Meskill,C.,Mossop,J.,DiAngelo,S.&Pasquale,R.K.(2002).Expertandnoviceteacherstalking technology: Precepts, concepts and misconcepts. Language Learning and Technology¸6(3):46-57.Availableathttp://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/meskill/
Murphy-Judy,K.,&Youngs,B.L.(2006).Technologystandardsfor teachereducation,credentialing, and certification. In P. Hubbard and M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL(pp.45-61).Amsterdam:Benjamins.
NationalEducationalTechnologyStandards.(2008).International Society for Technology in Education.Availableathttp://www.iste.org.
NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject.(1999).Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century.Yonkers,NY:ACTFL.
Ossipov,H.(2010,June).Languagelearningtechnology:Technologicaldesiderata.TalkpresentedattheCALICOConference,Amherst,MA.
Partnershipfor21stCenturySkills(2004).Frameworkfor21stCenturyLearning.Availableat http://www.p21.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=254&Itemid=120.
ProjectTomorrow. (2010).Unleashing the future: Educators ‘SpeakUp’ about the useof emerging technologies for learning.Available at http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU09UnleashingTheFuture.pdf
Richards,J.C.,Gallo,P.B.,&Renandya,W.A.(2001).Exploringteachers’beliefsandtheprocessesofchange.PAC Journal,1(1),41-64.
Rilling,S.,Dahlman,A.,Dodson,S.,Boyles,C.,&Pazvant,O.(2005).ConnectingCALLtheoryandpracticeinpreserviceteachereducationandbeyond:Processesandproducts. CALICO Journal, 22(2), 213-235. Available at https://calico.org/journalTOC.php
SoYouSay.(2010,August).Language Educator, 5(4),32-33.Son, J-B. (2002).Online discussion in aCALL course for distance language teachers.
CALICO Journal, 20(1), 127-144.Available at https://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Wilbur,M. (2007).Howforeign language teachersget taught:Methodsof teaching themethodscourse.Foreign Language Annals,40(1),79-101.
Wildner, S. (2000). Technology integration into preservice foreign language teachereducation programs. CALICO Journal, 17(2), 223-250. Available at https://calico.org/journalTOC.php
Yang,S.-H.(2009).Usingblogstoenhancecriticalreflectionandcommunityofpractice.Educational Technology & Society,12(2),11–21.
22 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
aPPEndix aTEsol TEchnoloGy sTandards
(summary From hTTP://iWEB.TEsol.orG)
TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS FOR LANGUAGE LEARNERS Goal 1: language learners demonstrate foundational knowledge and skills in technology for a multilingual world.Standard1:LanguagelearnersdemonstratebasicoperationalskillsinusingvarioustechnologicaltoolsandInternetbrowsers.
Standard2:Languagelearnersareabletouseavailableinputandoutputde-vices(e.g.,keyboard,mouse,printer,headset,microphone,mediaplayer,electronicwhiteboard).
Standard3:Languagelearnersexerciseappropriatecautionwhenusingon-linesourcesandwhenengaginginelectroniccommunication.
Standard 4: Language learners demonstrate basic competence as users oftechnology.
Goal 2: language learners use technology in socially and culturally appropriate, legal, and ethical ways.Standard1:Languagelearnersunderstandthatcommunicationconventionsdifferacrosscultures,communities,andcontexts.
Standard2:Languagelearnersdemonstraterespectforothersintheiruseofprivateandpublicinformation.
Goal 3: language learners effectively use and critically evaluate technology-based tools as aids in the development of their language learning competence as part of formal instruction and for further learning.Standard1:Languagelearnerseffectivelyuseandevaluateavailabletechnol-ogy-basedproductivitytools.
Standard2:Languagelearnersappropriatelyuseandevaluateavailabletech-nology-basedlanguageskill-buildingtools.
Standard3:Languagelearnersappropriatelyuseandevaluateavailabletech-nology-basedtoolsforcommunicationandcollaboration.
Standard4:Languagelearnersuseandevaluateavailabletechnology-basedresearchtoolsappropriately.
Standard5:Languagelearnersrecognizethevalueoftechnologytosupportautonomy,lifelonglearning,creativity,metacognition,collaboration,per-sonalpursuits,andproductivity.
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 23
TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS FOR LANGUAGE TEACHERS
Goal 1: language teachers acquire and maintain foundational knowledge and skills in technology for professional purposes.Standard1:Language teachers demonstrate knowledge and skills in basictechnologicalconceptsandoperationalcompetence,meetingorexceedingTESOLtechnologystandardsforstudentsinwhateversituationtheyteach.
Standard2:Languageteachersdemonstrateanunderstandingofawiderangeoftechnologysupportsforlanguagelearningandoptionsforusingtheminagivensetting.
Standard3:Languageteachersactivelystrivetoexpandtheirskillandknowl-edgebasetoevaluate,adopt,andadaptemergingtechnologiesthroughouttheircareers.
Standard4:Languageteachersusetechnologyinsociallyandculturallyap-propriate,legal,andethicalways.
Goal 2: language teachers integrate pedagogical knowledge and skills with technology to enhance language teaching and learning.Standard1:Languageteachersidentifyandevaluatetechnologicalresourcesandenvironmentsforsuitabilitytotheirteachingcontext.
Standard 2: Language teachers coherently integrate technology into theirpedagogicalapproaches.
Standard3:Languageteachersdesignandmanagelanguagelearningactivi-tiesandtasksusingtechnologyappropriatelytomeetcurriculargoalsandobjectives.
Standard4:Languageteachersuserelevantresearchfindingstoinformtheplanningoflanguagelearningactivitiesandtasksthatinvolvetechnology.
Goal 3: language teachers apply technology in record-keeping, feedback, and assessment.Standard1:Languageteachersevaluateandimplementrelevanttechnologytoaidineffectivelearnerassessment.
Standard 2: Language teachers use technological resources to collect andanalyzeinformationinordertoenhancelanguageinstructionandlearning.
Standard3:Languageteachersevaluatetheeffectivenessofspecificstudentusesoftechnologytoenhanceteachingandlearning.
Goal 4: language teachers use technology to improve communication, collaboration, and efficiency.Standard1:Languageteachersusecommunicationtechnologiestomaintaineffective contact and collaboration with peers, students, administration,andotherstakeholders.
24 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
Standard2:Language teachers regularly reflecton the intersectionofpro-fessionalpracticeandtechnologicaldevelopmentssothattheycanmakeinformeddecisions regarding theuseof technology to support languagelearningandcommunication.
Standard 3: Language teachers apply technology to improve efficiency inpreparingforclass,grading,andmaintainingrecords.
Appendix BGuide to resources
Resource Name URLSearchEngines Google http://google.com
Refseek http://www.refseek.com/
MyWay http://myway.com
EducationWorld http://www.education-world.com
AskJeevesforKids http://www.askkids.com
Kidrex http://www.kidrex.org/
ProfessionalJournals CALICOJournal(CALICO-The
ComputerAssistedLanguageInstructionConsortium)
http://calico.org/
TeachingEnglishwithTechnology(IATEFLPoland)
http://iatefl.org.pl/call/callnl.htm
CALL-EJ On-line(OnlineJournal) http://callej.org/
Computer Assisted Language Learning: An International Jour-
nal(TaylorandFrancis)
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/ti-tles/09588221.asp
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 25
ProfessionalJournals CALL Review: the SIG Journal
(TheIATEFLSpecialInterestGroup›sNewsletter)
http://ltsig.org.uk/news-letter.html
IALLTJournal(InternationalAs-sociationforLanguageLearning
Technology)
http://www.iallt.org/iallt_journal
JALT-CALL Journal(JapanAs-sociationofLanguageTeaching-Computer-AssistedLanguageLearningSpecialInterestGroup)
http://jaltcall.org/news/index.php
Language Learning and Technol-ogy(OnlineJournal)
http://llt.msu.edu/
ReCALL(EuropeanAssociationforComputerAssistedLanguage
Learning)
http://www.eurocall-languages.org/recall/
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning(Blackwell-ComputerAssistedLearningingeneralrather
thanCALL)
http://www.blackwell-publishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0266-4909
LanguageResourceCenters
CenterforAdvancedLanguageProficiencyEducationandResearch(CALPER)/PennStateUniversity
http://calper.la.psu.edu/
CenterforAdvancedResearchonLanguageAcquisition(CARLA)/
UniversityofMinnesota
http://carla.acad.umn.edu/
CenterforAppliedSecondLan-guageStudies(CASLS)/University
ofOregon
http://casls.uoregon.edu/home.php
26 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
LanguageResourceCenters
CenterforLanguageEducationandResearch(CLEAR)/MichiganState
University
http://clear.msu.edu/
CenterforLanguagesoftheCentralAsianRegion(CELCAR)/Indiana
University
http://www.indiana.edu/~celcar/
ForeignLanguageResourceCentersHomePage
http://nflrc.msu.edu/
LanguageAcquisitionResourceCenter/SanDiegoStateUniversity
http://larcnet.sdsu.edu/
NationalAfricanLanguagesRe-sourceCenter(NALRC)/University
ofWisconsin
http://african.lss.wisc.edu/nalrc/
NationalCapitalLanguageRe-sourceCenter(NCLRC)/George-
townUniversityCenterForAppliedLinguistics
http://www.nclrc.org/
NationalEastAsianLanguageResourceCenter(NEALRC)/Ohio
StateUniversity
http://nealrc.osu.edu/
NationalForeignLanguageRe-sourceCenter(NFLRC)/University
ofHawaiiatManoa
http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/
NationalK-12ForeignLanguageResourceCenter(NFLRC)/Iowa
StateUniversity
http://www.educ.iastate.edu/nflrc
NationalMiddleEastLanguageRe-sourceCenter(NMELRC)/Brigham
YoungUniversity
http://nmelrc.byu.edu/
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 27
LanguageResourceCenters
SlavicandEastEuropeanLanguageResourceCenter(SEELRC)/DukeUniversity&UniversityofNorth
Carolina
http://seelrc.org/
SouthAsiaLanguageResourceCenter(SALRC)/Universityof
Chicago
http://salrc.uchicago.edu/
TextbookPublisherWebsites
CengageLearning http://www.cengage.com/us/
HoltMcDougal http://holtmcdougal.hmhco.com
McGraw-Hill http://www.mheducation.com/
Pearson http://www.pearsonhighered.com/
VistaHigherLearning http://vistahigherlearning.com/
Wiley http://www.wiley.com/
OtherTools
Teach-nology http://www.teach-nology.com
Wikipedia http://www.wikipedia.org
Meet-o-matic http://www.meetomatic.com
Doodle http://www.doodle.com
Flisti http://flisti.com
PollDaddy http://polldaddy.com
NationalForeignLanguageResourceCenters
http://nflrc.msu.edu/lrcs.php
Educationalnetworkingwiki http://www.educationalnetworking.com
LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com
Bebo http://www.bebo.com
FaceBook http://www.facebook.com
28 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
Plaxo http://www.plaxo.com
EdModo http://www.edmodo.com
Classroom2.0 http://www.classroom20.com
Ning http://www.ning.com
Teacher9 http://www.teacher9.com
FLTeach http://www.cortland.edu/flteach/
Searchcredible http://www.searchcredible.com
Wordchamp http://www.wordchamp.com
LiveMocha http://www.livemocha.com
Palabea http://www.palabea.com
Busuu http://www.busuu.com
Italki http://www.italki.com
LingQ http://www.lingq.com
Hello-Hello http://www.hello-hello.com
Twitter http://www.twitter.com
Flickr http://www.flickr.com
Freetechforteachers http://www.freetech4teachers.com
Wiredsafety http://www.wiredsafety.org
SafeKids http://www.safekids.com
Kidstube http://www.kidstube.com
Teachertube http://www.teachertube.com
Teachertubedownloader http://www.downloadtoolz.com/teachertube/
Vixy http://vix.net
Jing http://www.jingproject.com
Screenr http://screenr.com
Sketchcast http://sketchcast.com
TokBox http://www.tokbox.com
Snapyap http://www.snapyap.com
Vocaroo http://vocaroo.com
Gillian lord and lara lomicka 29
Animoto http://animoto.com
Voki http://voki.com
Dictionary.com http://dictionary.com
Leo http://dict.leo.org
Wordreference.com http://wordreference.com
VocabularyBuilders http://www.vocabulary.com
QuizStar http://quizstar.4teachers.org
HotPotatoes http://hotpot.uvic.ca
Puzzlemaker(wordsearch,crossword)
http://www.puzzlemaker.com
Bingo http://print-bingo.com
Jeopardy http://www.superteachertools.com/jeopardy
Bighugelabs http://bighugelabs.com
Prezi http://prezi.com
SimpleDiagrams http://www.simplediagrams.com/home
AwesomeClipArtForKids http://www.awesomeclipartforkids.com
Royaltyfreemusic http://www.royaltyfreemusic.com/free-music-program
Freesoundseffectslibrary http://www.freesfx.co.uk
LanguageTeachingandLearningatDartmouth
http://consortium.dartmouth.edu/node/70
30 callinG on EducaTors: PavinG ThE Way For call
about the authorsGillianLord([email protected])isAssociateProfessorofSpanishandLinguisticsattheUniversityofFlorida,whereshedirectstheLowerDivisionSpanishProgramandisChairoftheDepartmentofSpanishandPortugueseStudies.ShecurrentlyservesontheCALICOExecutiveBoard.Herresearchinterests includesecondlanguageacquisition,particularlyofphoneticsandphonology;learningenviron-ment;andtechnologyinlanguageteachingandlearning.Dr.Lord’sresearchhasappeared in refereed venues such as theCALICO Journal,Foreign Language Annals,HispaniaandSystem,amongothers,andsheandLaraLomickaco-editedthe2009CALICOvolumeonWeb2.0tools.
LaraLomicka([email protected])isAssociateProfessorofFrenchattheUniver-sityofSouthCarolina,wheresheservesasDirectorofBasicCoursesforFrenchand theAssistant Director of Teacher Education. She currently serves as theCALICOsoftwarerevieweditorandtheCo-ChairoftheAATFCommissiononTechnology.Her research interests include teacher education, intercultural andtelecollaborativelearning,teachereducation,andtechnologyinlanguageteach-ingandlearning.Dr.Lomicka’sresearchhasappearedinrefereedvenuessuchastheCALICO Journal,Language Learning & Technology,Foreign Language Annals,The French Review,andSystem,amongothers,andsheandGillianLordco-editedthe2009CALICOvolumeonWeb2.0tools.