Rüschoff, Bernd ; Wolff, Dieter, 1999
use a model of foreign language learning/teaching which incorporates three different goals:
the development of
communicative competence, of
language awareness, and of
language learning awareness.
Language proficiency therefore includes not only the use of a language but also the knowledge about a language and knowledge about learning a language.
This demonstrates that not only the goal of using a language is important, but also the path to achieving this goal, i.e. not only a language is learned but also learning a language is learned.
Connected with these three areas are very different classroom activities.
A similar view can be found e.g. in
Ritter, Markus, 1995, but there are also widely disagreeing ideas about the goals of foreign language teaching, e.g.
Storch, Günther, 1999. It has to be noted that these differing approaches tend to neglect the use of computers for language learning and therefore will not be considered here.
Basic building blocks for language teaching are considered the following (according to
Rüschoff, Bernd ; Wolff, Dieter, 1999):
- Process orientation: All methods for acquiring communicative competence should consider the (psycholinguistic) processes involved in the production of language but also in the understanding of language.
The same is true for processes involved in language awareness and language learning awareness.
As an example one might consider the use of as many "cognitive channels" as possible when presenting language material.
Obviously this supports the memorization of knowledge, i.e. the process of acquiring a foreign language is more "intense".
Another example is the consideration of acquisition steps.
It is well known, that the acquisition of language goes through certain levels independent of the content of the teaching, which are (at least in the early stages) clearly identifyable.
The teaching therefore should be pointing towards the support of the actual stage the learners are in.
- "Action orientation"/Project orientation: The action in a language education scenario should always be directed at the use of the foreign language in communicative situations.
The action in lessons based on acquiring communicative competence used to be limited to simulating the action in role-play, games etc.
Using new technologies, i.e. the internet, this can be changed to having some form of a true, albeit limited communication situation.
Projects are used to enlarge the goals of student action to higher goals than for example doing a certain exercise.
Over a fixed period of time students learning a foreign language are working together on projects about a theme connected with the foreign language.
This aspect is closely connected with social learning and autonomy of the learner.
- Authenticity: This can be understood in two ways: Authenticity of the classroom action and authenticity of the material used in the classroom.
Both are highly desirable.
Of course both have to be used in an appropriately supported way.
The material presented to the learner should on the one hand be a little demanding, and on the other hand the learner must be able to cope with the material.
Excessive demands must obviously be avoided.
With respect to the use of computers in language teaching the rapid development of the WWW has made it very easy to obtain a lot of authentic data.
The teacher does not need to collect and provide the learning material himself anymore, but can delegate this task to the learners themselves.
The "authentic" communication with the computer as a tool is limited to a small set of communication types for obvious reasons.
- Social learning: Working together in small groups has various advantages when learning a foreign language.
"Nur in der Kooperation mit anderen kann es zu einer Angleichung der subjektiven Wissenskonstrukte kommen, können die individuell formulierten Hypothesen getestet und die subjektiven Konzepte aufeinander bezogen werden." (Only in cooperation with others can subjective knowledge be adapted, can individual hypotheses be tested and can the subjective concepts be related to each other.)
Rüschoff, Bernd ; Wolff, Dieter, 1999, page 63.
However it seems questionable, if the use of computers in language learning supports some kind of social learning in any special way.
The mentioned project work, which makes some sort of social interaction necessary, is not dependent on the use of computers.
Social learning not related to language learning therefore might only occur, when learners are working together in front of the computer.
- Autonomy: Learner autonomy should possibly not be understood as the learner using a computer autonomously without the guidance of a teacher.
According to Rüschoff, Bernd ; Wolff, Dieter, 1999 this can lead to a dangerous development, since learners should not be "left on their own in front of a computer".
Learner autonomy should be understood as enabling learners, i.e. students in schools, to act and decide by themselves.
Following these didactic elements the main question for ICALL can be derived: How can these concepts be supported by CL-technology in CALL-programs (if at all)?
On a more abstract level the goals of language teaching must be considered: How can the acquisition of communicative competence, language awareness and language learning awareness be supported by computational linguistics' tools and methods?