THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS USED IN CALL STUDIES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

• Authors: Akayoğlu Sedat
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

In the last three decades, there has been a great interest in the field of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL). As a newly flourished area, CALL borrowed or adapted theories from other disciplines, such as second language acquisition, linguistics, psychology and education; however, it is still questioned how these theories are modified, utilized and integrated into CALL research. In this study, the articles published in Computer Assisted Language Learning, System, British Journal of Educational Technology, and Language Learning and Technology between 1997 and 2018 were analyzed and the suggested theoretical frameworks for the research studies were examined. First, the articles without any explicit theoretical frameworks were eliminated. Second, the articles with specific theories were categorized and discussed in categories. At the end of the study, it was found that the prominent theoretical frameworks used in the last two decades were Social Constructivism, Sociocultural Theory, and Interactionist SLA in CALL studies. As for further studies, it can be claimed that these prominent theories will continue to be adopted by the researchers no matter what kind of new tools and platforms emerge for educational purposes. These findings might help researchers to better understand the past and the present situation of CALL research and to design further studies.

Keywords

EN

Computer Assisted Language Learning; theoretical framework; Social Constructivism; Sociocultural Theory; Interactionist Second Language Acquisition

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 19
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 104-118

Contributors

author

Akayoğlu Sedat

• Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University

References

• Adkins, D., & Guerreiro, M. (2018). Learning styles: Considerations for technology enhanced item design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 574-583. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12556
• Akayoğlu, S., & Seferoğlu, G. (2019). An analysis of negotiation of meaning functions of advanced EFL learners in Second Life: Negotiation of meaning in Second Life. In M. Kruk (Ed.), Assessing the Effectiveness of Virtual Technologies in Foreign and Second Language Instruction (pp. 61-85). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-7286-2.ch003
• Allen, L. K., Crossley, S. A., Snow, E. L., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). L2 writing practice: Game enjoyment as a key to engagement. Language Learning and Technology, 18(2), 124-150.
• Bax, S. (2003). CALL – Past, present, and future. System, 31(1), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00071-4
• Bax, S. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. International Journal of Computer Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcallt.2011040101
• Baydas, O., & Yilmaz, R. M. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ intention to adopt mobile learning: A motivational model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 137-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12521
• Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English Language Learning and Technology: Lectures on Applied Linguistics in the Age of İnformation and Communication Technology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.7
• Chapelle, C. A. (2005). Interactionist SLA theory in CALL research. In J. L. Egbert & G. M. Petrie (Eds.), CALL Research Perspectives (pp. 53-64). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Cheng, K.-H. (2017). A survey of native language teachers’ technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in Taiwan. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(7), 692-708. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1349805
• Choi, H., & Kang, M. (2010). Applying an activity system to online collaborative group work analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), 776-795. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00978.x
• Danan, M. (2010). Dubbing projects for the language learner: A framework for integrating audiovisual translation into task-based instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(5), 441-456. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.522528
• Felix, U. (2002). The web as a vehicle for constructivist approaches in language teaching. ReCALL, 14(1), 2-15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344002000216
• Gilbert, P. K., & Dabbagh, N. (2005). How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00434.x
• Grgurovic, M., & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Help options and multimedia listening: Students’ use of subtitles and the transcript. Language Learning & Technology, 11(1), 45-66.
• Guichon, N. (2017). Sharing a multimodal corpus to study webcam-mediated language teaching. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 56-75.
• Huang, L. S. (2010). Do different modalities of reflection matter? An exploration of adult second-language learners’ reported strategy use and oral language production. System, 38(2), 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.03.005
• Huang, R. T., Jang, S. J., MacHtmes, K., & Deggs, D. (2012). Investigating the roles of perceived playfulness, resistance to change, and self-management of learning in mobile English learning outcome. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 1004-1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01239.x
• Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. (2016). Theory in computer-assisted language learning research and practice. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology (pp. 24-38). Abingdon, Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657899
• Karimi, M. N. (2014). EFL students’ grammar achievement in a hypermedia context: Exploring the role of Internet-specific personal epistemology. System, 42(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.10.017
• Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 182-210. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264516
• Lai, C., & Gu, M. (2011). Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(4), 317-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.568417
• Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2009). Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lau, S. H., & Woods, P. C. (2009). Understanding learner acceptance of learning objects: The roles of learning object characteristics and individual differences. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 1059-1075. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00893.x
• Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
• Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2017). Explaining dynamic interactions in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 96-120. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2017/lizhu.pdf
• Liu, P.-L. (2016). Mobile English vocabulary learning based on concept-mapping strategy. Language Learning & Technology, 20(3), 128-141.
• Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2007). Social presence in virtual communities of foreign language (FL) teachers. System, 35(2), 208-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.11.002
• Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie and T. K. Bhatia (Eds), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Magogwe, J. M., Ntereke, B., & Phetlhe, K. R. (2015). Facebook and classroom group work: A trial study involving University of Botswana Advanced Oral Presentation students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1312-1323. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12204
• Nishioka, H. (2016). Analysing language development in a collaborative digital storytelling project: Sociocultural perspectives. System, 62, 39-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.001
• O’Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 433-466. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v22i3.433-466
• Perraton, H. (2000). Rethinking the research agenda. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 1, 10-19. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v1i1.5
• Reese, D. D., Tabachnick, B. G., & Kosko, R. E. (2015). Video game learning dynamics: Actionable measures of multidimensional learning trajectories. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 98-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12128
• Reinders, H. (2014). Can I say something? The effects of digital game play on Willingness To Communicate. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 101-123. https://doi.org/10125/44372
• Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2005). Task design for audiographic conferencing: Promoting beginner oral interaction in distance language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 417-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500442772
• Şad, S. N., & Göktaş, Ö. (2014). Preservice teachers’ perceptions about using mobile phones and laptops in education as mobile learning tools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 606-618. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12064
• Tan, K. E., Ng, M. L. Y., & Saw, K. G. (2010). Online activities and writing practices of urban Malaysian adolescents. System, 38(4), 548-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.09.014
• Thang, S. M., & Bidmeshki, L. (2010). Investigating the perceptions of UKM undergraduates towards an English for science and technology online course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220903467269
• Tsai, Y. R. & Talley, P. C. (2014). The effect of a course management system (CMS)-supported strategy instruction on EFL reading comprehension and strategy use. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(5), 422-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.757754
• Tsuei, M. (2011). Development of a peer-assisted learning strategy in computer-supported collaborative learning environments for elementary school students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 214-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01006.x
• Üzüm B., Yazan, B., Avineri N., Akayoğlu, S. (2019). Preservice teachers’ discursive constructions of cultural practices in a multicultural telecollaboration. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 21(1), 82-104. https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v21i1.1777
• Vaughan, N., & Cloutier, D. (2017). Evaluating a blended degree program through the use of the NSSE framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(5), 1176-1187. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12537
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wang, Y. S., Lin, H. H., & Liao, Y. W. (2012). Investigating the individual difference antecedents of perceived enjoyment in students’ use of blogging. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01151.x
• Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012970
• Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer Assisted Language Learning: An introduction. In S. Fotos (ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos International.
• Wu, Z. (2018). Positioning (mis)aligned : The (un)making of intercultural asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 22(2), 75-94.
• Yanguas, I. (2009). Multimedia glosses and their effect on L2 text comprehension and vocabulary learning. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 48-67. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/yanguas.pdf
• Yusop, F. D. (2015). A dataset of factors that influence preservice teachers’ intentions to use Web 2.0 technologies in future teaching practices. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 1075-1080. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12330
• Zeng, G., & Takatsuka, S. (2009). Text-based peer-peer collaborative dialogue in a computer-mediated learning environment in the EFL context. System, 37(3), 434-446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.01.003