Technology in TEFFL - Case Study Example

MA TEFL Technology in TEFFL Assignment: Part one: Rational about the program ID: 12095379 08/08 Number of pages: 27 Table of content: 1. Introduction ………………………………………. 4 2. Learning Context ………………………………… 5 3. Rationale ………………………………………… 8 4. Conclusion………………………………………… 22 5. References………………………………………... 23 Declaration I declare that this assignment is entirely my own work, and that I have not used other peoples ideas, images, or words without making this clear and giving a full reference. Signature: 12095379 Introduction Technology is a powerful and important tool in almost all spheres of operation in the world today. Its rapid evolution coupled with the ever increasing demands for efficiency in a similarly evolving world has placed it among global necessities. Technology has had a significant impact in education especially when incorporated as an assistant tool for academic instruction (Leakey 2011, p. 55; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 4). Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is one of the most widely used technological enhancements in language learning (Pennington 1999, p. 276). CALL operates on a wide range of technological tools in order to assist language teachers, as well as their learners a learning process that is effective (Leakey 2011, p. 56). Technology in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) refers to CALL–based teaching methods (Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 15). Numerous technological tools exist that can work as CALL enhancements for TEFL, such as computer programs like PowerPoint and Hot Potatoes, online interactive systems like Skype, internet social networks like Twitter and Face book, web blogs and wikis among others (Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 23; Nadia 2013, p. 3). All these technological tools get skepticisms from a wide array of analysts with divergent ideas, and as such, play an important role in improving the overall TEFL process both to the teacher and to the students (Leakey 2011, p. 96). The following essay details a critical analysis on the use of CALL tools for TEFL with specific reference to the tools I used. I chose the Microsoft software, PowerPoint to design materials for my TEFL lesson and Hot Potatoes for student exercises and activities. Learning context Type of lesson: Grammar and vocabulary The grammar section is short and focuses on verb tenses. The lesson dwells primarily on present continuous tenses and explains the rules that govern them. The vocabulary part detail characteristics of vocabularies and then goes on to explain and illustrate the different processes of creating the necessary vocabularies. Level: Intermediate Time: I hour Class profile: This lesson was designed for intermediate level students in Saudi Arabia. The class is composed of young children between the ages of 12 years and 16 years (International Bureau of Education 2011, p. 21). These kids have just completed their primary school level. The class is composed of both girls and boys who have learned Arabic as their first language. The class has 25 pupils. Needs: Students must break the communication barrier in order to improve and enhance the learning process. The students need CALL resources such as laptops and computers to use for the presentation and subsequent tasks. The internet is also needed for this lesson mainly for the Hot Potatoes testing program. Strengths and weaknesses The first strength is that, after my graduation, I will become a highly trained professional in the fields of TEFL and in CALL implementation. This will ensure that I execute my responsibilities effectively to impart English skills to my students. This is because I will be armed with suitable CALL tools which will assist me to achieve a productive teaching task. Finally, the interactive and appealing nature of my lesson materials is bound to attract the attention of the students. The first weakness in this context is cultural and language barrier. Some of my students might be Arabs who are steeped in Saudi culture, while the other batch of my students might be from an English-speaking culture. Even though I am psychologically trained and prepared for this setting, the actual presentation appears challenging. The other weakness is that some of the students do not have the required resources for CALL tools. This includes computers, the internet and basic computer skills (Egbert, Paulus and Nakamichi 2002, p. 110). This might hinder the appropriate implementation of the lesson but I will assist them to catch up with time. Finally, some of the students have a negative attitude towards the learning process and the materials used. This will require some time for them to familiarize with the whole process. This is because some of them already had access to the material through the internet. Aims: I will employ SMART analysis - Self Monitoring, Analysis And Reporting Technique First, I aim to educate the students on rules that govern English grammar and as such, teach them ways of how to monitor their improvement and mistakes. Secondly, I aim to educate the students about vocabulary formation and construction thereby enabling them to undertake a comprehensive analysis of their language and learning process. Finally, I aim to test their understanding on both topics using a series of questions that will report their development. Language analysis and L1 contrast: The English language is different from the LI language of the Saudi students which is Arabic. The main difference between the two languages lies in their roots. English has its roots in Europe while Arabic is based on African and Asian languages (Al-Muhtaseb and Mellish 1998, p. 1). The two languages have different numbers of alphabets, which is English has 26 letters, 22 vowel phonemes and 24 consonant phonemes (Al-Muhtaseb and Mellish 1998, p. 2). Arabic has 28 consonants, 28 consonant phonemes, 8 vowel phonemes and no short vowels (Al-Muhtaseb and Mellish 1998, p. 2). Arabic is read and written from right to left. It has no lower case or uppercase letters. The two languages also differ in various vocabulary and grammatical contexts such as punctuation, word use and arrangement (Al-Muhtaseb and Mellish 1998, p. 3-9). However, English language contains both the lower and uppercase letters interchanged from time to time in texts or prose. The writing and reading of English language is from left to right. Materials I will use Microsoft Power point for lesson presentation. Hot Potatoes program to give exercises and activities. I will use JMatch and JQuiz options for creating tests. RATIONALE The most basic learning process centers on a systematic objective-based development of the learner’s skills by the teacher. The teacher trains a student on a certain subject pedagogically with the intention of achieving success by imparting skills and knowledge on the subject matter (Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 34-45; Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1323). The learning process is affected by many factors which if not handled effectively, may affect the final outcomes of the learning process (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p. 135). The teacher is tasked with implementing a successful learning process to ensure that the process achieves the desired objectives (Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 127). The teacher has the commanding role in the learning environment and he or she should incorporate every appropriate resource to ensure that the learning process comes to fruition (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p. 136; Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1325). Technology is one of the resources available for promoting the learning process in various ways (Nadia 2013, p. 5; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 74-92). TEFL like other learning processes requires technology to enhance pedagogy and improve learning outcomes (Cameron 1999, p. 11; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 6). I used technological tools to optimize the learning context described above. The following is a justification of my choice of design materials, technological tools and overall presentation of the lesson in regard to core TEFL doctrines. Theories and principles of learning The learning process is mainly based on two methodologies or approaches depending on several factors including; the subject matter, the teacher, the student, learning resources, projected outcomes and in other instances set curriculum guidelines (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p. 143; Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1327). The two methodologies are: instructivism and constructivism (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p. 145; Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 176). The two approaches are based on different theories and application principles in their implementation (Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 67). TEFL is also based on these approaches and their accompanying theories and principles (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p. 147; Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 76). The following is a critical evaluation of these learning approaches or methodologies relative to the materials I used for this lesson, the learners involved, learning environment, learning resources and also my skills. Instructive learning Instructive learning assigns the whole learning process to the teacher while the student assumes a passive role (Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1326). This is the traditional method of learning whereby knowledge and information is passed from the teacher to the student (Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 112; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 22). This method is based on the principle that information or knowledge should not be influenced or altered by the student (Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1327). This method is entrenched in the traditional belief that the teacher has authority and controls the learning process fully. According to Dudeney and Hockley (2007, p. 35), this approach is supported by many traditional scholars citing the need for control and management of learning, as well as my teaching materials which emphasize on the teacher taking the lead and control of the classroom. This process has several limitations to the desired learning objectives. The first limitation of this method is that it hinders student participation in the learning process (Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 27; Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1330). Education researchers have established that active involvement of students in the learning process has positively impacted the outcomes of the learning process in various contexts (Bygate, Skehan and Swain 2001, p. 43-87; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 29). Some of the benefits identified by researchers include student motivation; this is because they feel they have a role to play in the learning process. Others are; information retention and enhancement of pedagogical skills such as knowledge application and critical thinking (Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1331; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 8). According to Carlson (2007, p. 69), this teacher-centered approach produces passive students who lack the necessary creativity skills for independent learning (Levy and Stockwell 2006, p. 49). However, I will use it as a tool to get around the learning difficulties of the students. Constructivism learning This is an interactive and collaborative learning approach that involves active student participation in the learning process (Cameron 1999, p. 39; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 19). Constructivism learning is founded on principles supporting student learning preferences (Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich 2010, p. 263). These principles are entrenched in the theory that students can develop or create their own knowledge. This theory states that students need teachers for guidance only and aims at creating a dynamic learning process (Cameron 1999, p. 41; Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich 2010, p. 264). This method uses various tools and methods to promote interactive and collaborative learning such as; student discussions, group tasks and even modern technological applications for information acquisition (Cameron 1999, p. 54; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 19). I support my students to do their private research in order to improve their learning process. The two methods offer different practical approaches for a learning process. Technology in TEFL can be used to optimize the learning process as illustrated by the justification below (Cameron 1999, p. 56). Benefits of using Power Point in lesson delivery The two approaches described above offer different practical, approaches for implementing the learning process and also different outcomes. According to Carlson (2007, p. 72), the most appropriate method of learning is constructivism because it increases the pedagogical skills of a learner as well as easing the work of the teacher (Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al., 2010, p. 1332). This method makes the learning process more appealing, motivating both the students and the teachers (Pennington 1999, p. 279; Adams and Brindley 2007, p. 22). I chose a Power Point presentation to present my lesson. This CALL tool offers a platform for interactive learning and collaboration (Pennington 1999, p. 280; Dudeney and Hockley 2007, p. 23). Power Point is an efficient, easy to use program to use and it develops a high level of enthusiasm among young students (Koehler and Mishra 2005, p.123). I intent to do some exercises that were discussed by students ensuring they interacted in my presentation. Power Point has many features which arouse the curiosity of students and persuade them to delve deeper into independent probes on the program. This creates an incentive for the students to gain pedagogical skills of research and evaluation and in the process learn new information through appropriate application of PowerPoint technology in the learning process (Leakey 2011, p. 114; Nadia 2013, p. 7). The main issue of technology use in education is its integration with pedagogy. This issue is mainly raised by traditional teachers who feel that education and technology cannot be combined (Lee 2000, p. 2; Okojie, Olinzock and Okojie-Boulder 2006, p. 66; Carlson 2007, p. 73; Leakey 2011, p. 27; Nadia 2013, p. 7; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 13). According to Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, et al. (2010, p. 1333), it is important to impart technological skills to the English learner. Technology skeptics maintain that technology will complicate the learning process hence tamper with core pedagogical benefits of learning (Lee 2000, p.4; Leakey 2011, p. 29). However, if these students develop both linguistic skills and technological skills concurrently they are bound to have more pedagogical skills when they complete the learning process (Okojie, Olinzock and Okojie-Boulder 2006, p. 67; Carlson 2007, p. 75; Nadia 2013, p. 8; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 15). Concerning those supporting the assertion that technology will complicate academic pedagogy I can confidently declare that these are those teachers that are afraid of change, whether it is for a good cause or a bad cause (Bygate, Skehan and Swain 2001, p. 29; Leakey 2011, p. 76). My materials impart technological knowledge to my students by providing them an opportunity to apply new concepts and technologies in learning. As for my opinion, I have also noted that most of these teachers who oppose technology in education are not adequately skilled in CALL tools. While this should not be used as basis for discrimination, I still feel that it is their duty to gain the relevant skills considering their work entails pedagogy (Cameron 1999, p. 65). I further justify my choice of design materials considering that Power Point offers the students a window into the content rich internet where they will advance their knowledge levels. Hot Potatoes for exercises Hot Potatoes is an online assessment software that was developed by a Research and Development team in University of Victoria. This program is free for public educational users and it is easy to download and install. The program has several modules for different types of assessments. I chose three types of question formats that are JMatch-matching questions to answers and JQuiz for normal tests which can either have multiple choice answers or short answers because they were simple and easier for my students to learn and understand The choice for this testing program is based on its ease of use and its accessibility. Most of my EFL students cannot afford or do not have the online expertise to subscribe to other programs. This ensures that all students develop an interest regarding the internet (Egbert, Paulus and Nakamichi 2002, p. 116). This is because students must be connected to the internet to take the tests. Considering that my students are not well exposed to the internet, this experience will expose students to the internet and also eliminate the stigma perceived by some students regarding the internet (Lee 2000, p. 5; Leakey 2011, p. 74). Considering my two choices of materials design, I can assert with confidence that they promote constructivism as an interactive and collaborative study method (Dudeney and Hockley 2007, p. 67; Leakey 2011, p. 78). However, it is important to note that these programs do not eliminate the elementary role of the teacher which is control and management of the learning process as advocated by proponents of instructivism (Carlson 2007, p. 75). This is illustrated by the fact that, although the Power Point presentations are available for all students to upload in their computers the material was designed and presented according to my professional understanding of TEFL (Leakey 2011, p. 83). The students are allowed to discuss the materials and ask questions ensuring that I offer the necessary pedagogical guidance they require for an objective study analysis (Nadia 2013, p. 11). In the case of Hot Potatoes, the teacher is able to control and manage the tests using various tools in the program. The tests are equipped with a timer and the student can only access the exam once. Therefore, these programs ensures that although my role as a tutor and an examiner is simplified I do not play a passive role in the learning process but instead guide the students using appropriate and recommended pedagogy by creating tests in the exams (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 53). Theories and principles of materials design The other factor that affects the outcomes of the learning process is learning materials. According to Tomlinson (2012, p. 147), learning materials refer to the academic and non academic resources, also known as authentic materials, are sources of information and knowledge for the subject matter (Oura 2001, p. 67). In order to understand the importance of learning materials to the learning process it is necessary to define them in detail. Academic learning materials are scholarly articles, books, journals and other English manuscripts that are written for the specific reason of teaching English language (Oura 2001, p. 68; Tomlinson 2012, p. 149). The appropriate academic materials for TEFL are chosen by the teacher and issued or recommended; however, students are also encouraged to source independently. Authentic materials refer to all non-academic materials that contain English syntax (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 54; Tomlinson 2012, p. 154). These are not written for educational purposes and they include newspapers, magazines, song lyrics, newscasts, movies and English conversations (Oura 2001, p. 70). Power Point Presentation The Power Point presentation lesson discussed vocabularies and grammar. This lesson was derived or sourced from academic materials as indicated in the references section at the end of the presentation. According to Tomlinson (2012, p. 148), academic materials contain concise and important guidelines in the implementation of TEFL. Considering the delicate nature of my students, due to their limited level of English conception, these materials are bound to build a foundation for pedagogical development in linguistics, especially the section that detailed creation of vocabularies from root words (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 53). Authentic materials are aimed at imparting a practical and realistic linguistic pedagogy on ESL students (Oura 2001, p. 73). Students are advised to look for raw English information from real life situations in order to develop their pedagogical skills of English language application (Cameron 1999, p. 113; Oura 2001, p. 74; Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich 2010, p. 273). This is enabled by relating real life objects and situations with classroom linguistic inferences (Oura 2001, p. 76; (Alm 2006, p. 32). The Power Point presentation contains several images. These images were carefully chosen by considering the most common images for my students, for example the tree or the lion (Tomlinson 2012, p. 161; Nadia 2013, p. 6). These images are common and they will help my students to relate academic materials with real life objects (Oura 2001, p. 73). Hot Potatoes This evaluation program has two advantages in sustaining the academic materials needs’ of my students. The first advantage is that the program has an online database that contains many academic materials for research and study by my students. This will develop their English command and proficiency achieving the primary pedagogy of TEFL (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 52; Oura 2001, p. 77; Tomlinson 2012, p. 153). Secondly, the tests are taken in English language hence as the students acquaint themselves with the program they will have to learn a wide range of vocabularies that are used in the program’s instructions. Research has shown that students tend to understand something more easily and speedily if it poses a threat to a bigger accomplishment (Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich 2010, p. 276). The students will have to understand all instructional words in the program boosting their linguistic prowess and pedagogy (Oura 2001, p. 74). The program offers a channel for attaining authentic English materials because it is online based (Dudeney and Hockley 2007, p. 89; Tomlinson 2012, p. 165). Naturally and out of curiosity, students will browse the internet for other interesting information after academic rigor and this will offer an opportunity for non-academic materials (Cameron 1999, p. 119; Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich 2010, p. 277). Complementing Pedagogy with CALL tools Pedagogy refers to the practical role of a teacher during the learning process. It involves instructing and educating students with an aim of imparting skills and knowledge on them (Bygate, Skehan and Swain 2001, p. 24). According to Gillespie (1998, p. 42), CALL tools are used to assist teachers in their pedagogical tasks (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 53; Okojie, Olinzock and Okojie-Boulder 2006, p. 70). However, informed choices must be made in order to ensure that this objective is achieved otherwise they can become a barrier to the learning process (Gillespie 1998, p. 45). Some of the considerations that must be made when choosing CALL tools for pedagogy include: technological skills of the teacher, availability of CALL resources, student proficiency with the CALL tool, accessibility and suitability for the learning process (Okojie, Olinzock and Okojie-Boulder 2006, p. 68; Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 12). Power Point Presentation I chose the Power Point presentation after considering all these factors. The first consideration is the teacher’s skills. This consideration does not pose any problem because I am adequately skilled in CALL tools. The next consideration is availability or accessibility of this CALL tool in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia mainly imports its technology from America and Microsoft and Apple products are readily available in the country (Alabbad, Gitsaki and White 2010, p. 92). The issue of student proficiency posed a problem but the interactive nature of Power Point and it’s easy to use interface influenced my approval (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 54; Nadia 2013, p. 10). The final issue was the functional application of Power point in the lesson. The presentation offers sufficient evidence regarding the effective nature of Power Point especially to young computer novices. This is because the presentation is interesting and appealing. Hot Potatoes Hot Potatoes program was also chosen based on these deliberations of CALL tools as pedagogy complements (Cameron 1999, p. 16; Gillespie 1998, p. 48). The program requires little skills for both the teacher and the student. The program is available for free on the internet ensuring accessibility (Lee 2000, p. 6). The program is effective for conducting tests and exercises because of its interactive nature and immediate feedback to students (Alabbad, Gitsaki and White 2010, p. 94). The most important consideration when choosing these CALL tools was their impact on pedagogy (Alabbad, Gitsaki and White 2010, p. 97). These tools if properly integrated with traditional pedagogy will greatly improve the learning process (Buckner and Kim 2013, p. 19). Layout and presentation The layout of academic materials and the overall presentation of a lesson affect the outcomes of the learning process (Dooey 2008, p. 22). A teacher must organize his or her lesson suitably in order to maintain the interest of the class, ensure flow of ideas and enhance student recall of the lesson details (Dooey 2008, p. 22). Power Point Presentation The Power Point presentation had an interesting layout and was organized in a meaningful way. I ensured that I reduced the text on the slides and used large fonts to capture the attention of my young students. The topics of discussion were discussed sequentially and all topics and sub-topics were interrelated. The ideas discussed were relevant to the topics and I also included relevant text at the bottom of the slide to assist the young students understand the discussed topics more effectively (Felix 2008, p. 143). This layout engages the students’ concentration and delivers the desired knowledge and pedagogy on the students (Schmidt, et al., 2009, p. 135; Jugovich and Reeves 2006, p. 55). The presentation also contained images which made the presentation moiré interesting, colorful and realistic (Brown and Burns 1999, p. 22). Images conjure memory interpretations ensuring memory recall of discussed topics on the young students (Dooey 2008, p. 23; Felix 2008, p. 148). The presentation contained images that were easy to remember and relate with for the young students (Dooey 2008, p. 23). Hot Potatoes The Hot Potatoes program has an interesting and simplified interface which will ensure ease of use for the young Saudi kids. The program also has a name and identification that is appealing and funny for kids. This eliminates the risk of intimidation for the young kids who may be turned off by program names such as Object Oriented Examination Program (Gillespie 1998, p. 49; Alm 2006, p. 35). Advantages of using Power Point presentation For the learner It is interesting in learning and easy to use. Power Point is easy to use even for novices and the kids will find it even more accommodating because of Windows Help menu and other helpful tips. The program is interesting in learning especially when text is combined with images and other multimedia objects (Felix 2008, p. 153; Nadia 2013, p. 7). This will increase motivation and concentration of the young students during slide shows improving their performance and their pedagogical skills of application (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 51; Jugovich and Reeves 2006, p. 56). Power Point also presents a lesson clearly, interactively and concisely by summarizing the main points for ensuring ease of understanding (Dooey 2008, p. 25). The physical layout of the Power Point presentation coupled with multimedia integration boosts recall for the Saudi students and also enhances their understanding (Dooey 2008, p. 25; Nadia 2013, p. 8). Finally, Power Point is a component program of the Microsoft office Suite and hence the students do not have to purchase it separately. The program is readily available increasing accessibility. For the teacher Easy to design and develop lesson materials. Requires little time and skill to create a Power point presentation if the materials are ready. Enhances the learning process and simplifies the pedagogical tasks of a teacher that involve traditional written or typed handouts (Diaz and Bontenbal 2000, p. 52; Jugovich and Reeves 2006, p. 58). Advantages of Hot Potatoes To the learner It is interactive and offers immediate feedback to the students. The program ensures that slow learners among the students can acquire knowledge at their own pace through repetition. It offers a chance for independent learning developing the pedagogical skills of students. It is also interesting (Lee 2000, p. 3; Alm 2006, p. 35). To the teacher The program has many features that ensure you can accommodate different educational levels in a single teaching group, create for specific categories and add suitable varieties to teaching materials. It reduces time resource consuming tasks such as photocopying, typing, and marking. The program has many teaching and learning resources. Conclusion Technology in TEFL assists both teachers and students to realize a successful learning experience (Schmidt, et al., 2009, p. 138). There are many technological tools that can be used to improve TEFL but I picked the most basic. The main consideration when choosing the technology for this lesson was on the students (Dooey 2008, p. 27). In order to ensure that the CALL tool chosen for TEFL is effective one must consider suitability for both the learner and the teacher (Felix 2008, p. 155; Brown and Burns 1999, p. 25). When analyzing both the students, you must consider the learning environment, availability of the CALL tool for the student (accessibility), familiarization with the CALL tool, ease of use or complexity of the CALL tool and its practical application to the learning process (Schmidt, et al., 2009, p. 129; Nadia 2013, p. 9). In this analysis, one must avoid generalizations and uninformed assumptions. In this context, I considered the accessibility of the two programs in Saudi Arabia and also the fact that they did not require subscriptions for use. Technological integration with pedagogy is necessary in order to create a dynamic and global learning environment (Schmidt, et al., 2009, p. 131). The current surge in mobile devices and social media interaction offers an effective tool for interactive and collaborative learning. Mobile devices unlike traditional personal computers ensure that learners and teachers can interact almost anywhere at any time (Felix 2008, p. 157). This will transform the formal learning process into a round-the-clock affair ensuring that information and knowledge is shared throughout which will produce a highly developed pedagogy both educationally and technologically References Adams, A. and Brindley, S. eds., 2007. Teaching secondary English with ICT. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Alabbad, A., Gitsaki, C., and White, P., 2010. CALL Course Design for Second Language Learning: A case study of Arab EFL learners. In: Pullen, D. L., Gitsaki, C. and Baguley, M., eds. Technoliteracy, Discourse and Social Practice: Frameworks and Applications in the Digital Age. [pdf]. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Available at: http://www.igi-global.com/chapter/call-course-design-second-language/41456 [Accessed 1 July 2014] Al-Muhtaseb, H. and Mellish, C., 1998. Some differences between Arabic and English: A step towards an Arabic upper model. In 6th International Conference on Multilingual Computing[pdf].Availableat:http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/ics/muhtaseb/Research/UKPAPER.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Alm, A., 2006. CALL for autonomy, competence and relatedness: Motivating language learning environments in Web 2.0. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(3), pp.29-38. Brown, K. and Burns, A., 1999. Using new technology in the classroom. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research. [pdf]. Available at: http://www.ameprc.mq.edu.au/docs/research_reports/professional_development_collection/Using_new_technology_in_classroom.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Buckner, E. and Kim P., 2013. Integrating technology and pedagogy for inquiry-based learning: The Stanford Mobile Inquiry-based Learning Environment (SMILE). [pdf]. Springer. Available at: http://elizabethbuckner.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/10-1007_s11125-013-9269-7.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Bygate, M., Skehan, P. and Swain, M., 2001. Researching Pedagogic Tasks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cameron, K. ed., 1999. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL): media, design, and applications. Exton, PA : Swets and Zeitlinger. Carlson, K., 2007. How do CALL programs affect the literacy skills of English language learners? Accents Asia. [pdf]. 1(3), pp.68-79. Available at: http://www.accentsasia.org/1-3/carlson.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Diaz, D. P. and Bontenbal, K. F., 2000. Pedagogy-based technology training. In: P. Hoffman and D. Lemke, eds. Teaching and Learning in a Network World, [pdf]. pp. 50-54. Amsterdam, Netherlands: 105 Press. Available at: http://home.earthlink.net/~davidpdiaz/LTS/pdf_docs/teched2K.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Dooey, P., 2008. Language testing and technology: Problems of transition to a new era. ReCALL, 20(1), 21-34. Dudeney, G. and Hockley, N., 2007. How to Teach English with Technology. Harlow: Pearson. Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M. and Nakamichi, Y., 2002. The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology, [pdf] 6(3), 108-126. http://bnn.ueh.edu.vn/SOFTWARE_STORE/VOL6NUM3.PDF [Accessed 1 July 2014] Ertmer, P. A. and Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., 2010. Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of research on Technology in Education, [pdf] 42(3), 255-284. Available at: http://www.edci.purdue.edu/ertmer/docs/aera09_ertmer_leftwich.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Felix, U., 2008. The unreasonable effectiveness of CALL: What have we learned in two decades of research?. ReCALL, 20(2), 141-161. Gillespie, F., 1998. Instructional design for the new technologies. New directions for teaching and learning, [pdf] 1998(76), 39-52. Available at: http://edtech.uvic.ca/edci335/files/2014/01/Gillespie_1998_Instructional_Design.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] International Bureau of Education, 2011. World Data on Education: Saudi Arabia. [pdf] UNESCO. Available at: http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/WDE/2010/pdf-versions/Saudi_Arabia.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Jugovich, S. M. and Reeves B., 2006. IT and Educational Technology: What’s Pedagogy Got to Do with IT? [pdf] Educause Quarterly. 55-60. Available at: https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0649.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Koehler and Mishra. 2005. What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research. [pdf] 32(2), 131-152. Available at: http://www.punyamishra.com/publications/journal_articles/Koehler_Mishra_JECR05.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Leakey, J., 2011. Evaluating Computer-Assisted Language Learning: An Integrated Approach to Effectiveness Research in CALL. Peter Lang Publisher Inc. Lee, K. W., 2000. English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal, [online] 6(12), 1-8. Available at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html [Accessed 1 July 2014] Levy, M. and Stockwell, G., 2006. CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Nadia, I., 2013. Using Multimedia Labs In Enhancing Efl Students’ Research Methods. [pdf] Bejaia. A. Mira University. Available at: http://www.univ-bejaia.dz/documents/multilinguales/7%20IDRI%20Nadia.PDF [Accessed 1 July 2014] Okojie, M. CPO., Olinzock, A. A. and Okojie-Boulder, T., 2006. The Pedagogy of Technology Integration. The Journal of Technology Studies. [pdf] 66-71. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ847571.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Ottenbreit-Leftwicha, A.T., Glazewskib, K.D., Newbyc, T.J. and Ertmerc, P.A., 2010. Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. In: Computers & Education, 55(3), pp. 1321-1335. Oura, G. K., 2001. Authentic Task-Based Materials: Bringing the Real World Into the Classroom. [pdf] 65-79. Available at: http://www.jrc.sophia.ac.jp/kiyou/ki21/gaio.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Pennington, M.C., 1999. The missing link in computer-assisted writing. In: K. Cameron, ed. 1999. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL): Media, Design and Applications (pp. 271-292). Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger Publishers. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J. and Shin, T. S., 2009. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, [pdf] 42(2), 123-149. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ868626.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Tomlinson, B., 2012. Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, [pdf] 45(02), 143-179. Available at: http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/servlet/file/store7/item6925339/version1/Materials%2520development%2520for%2520language%2520learning.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2014] Read More