The Analysis of EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of CALL and Variables Influential on Teachers’ Attitudes
While a number of studies have been conducted as regards the impact of computer-assisted language learning on students; EFL teachers’ perceptions and attitudes with respect to CALL have received little attention. Most of the researches carried out on CALL are respectively related to CALL-classroom comparisons, learners’ beliefs, perceptions, readiness and trainings of CALL. Defined by Levy (2008) as “the search for and study of applications of the computer in language teaching and learning“ (p.1); CALL is mostly perceived as a method analysed from the students’ points of view altough teachers’ attitudes and skills in relation to CALL attach much importance as well. Deriving from the need to fill in this gap in the field; this study aimed to investigate EFL teachers’ perceptions of CALL besides their attitudes which have a significant effect on the effectiveness of the method on language learning. What’s more; this study focused on language skills taught by means of CALL, teachers’ preferences with respect to the programmes and their aims in using Computer-assisted language learning method. In frame of the study; quantitative data were gathered by means of the questionnaire through which participants were asked for their demographic information and their attitudes towards CALL. Data taken from the respondents were analyzed via SPSS (version 15) in order to answer three research questions concerning the aim of the study. Overall findings indicated that participants had positive perceptions of CALL altough they had some concerns with respect to their competency in carrying out CALL-based language lesson which mostly derived from the lack of necessary trainings concerning the technological integration into language lesssons, pedagogical necessities to be fulfilled as well as their personal charachteristics and willingness in relation to CALL .
Arnold, N. (2007). Technology-mediated learning 10 years later: Emphasizing pedagogical or utilitarian application? Foreign Language Annals, 40(1), 161-181.
Ayres, R. (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 241-249. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Barr, J. D., & Gillespie, J. H. (2003). Creating a computer-based language learning environment. ReCALL, 15(1), 68-78. doi:10.1017/S0958344003000612
Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited
Bloch, J. (2004). Second language cyber rhetoric: A study of Chinese L2 writers in an online USENET group. Language Learning & Technology, 8(3), 66-82.
Byrne, T. (2007). Marrying two existing software packages into an efficient online tutoring tool. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(5), 459-469.
Burston, J. (2003). Proving IT works. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 219-226.
Chambers, A., & Bax, S. (2006). Making CALL work: Towards normalization. System, 34, 465-479. doi:10.1016/j.system.2006.08.001
Chang, C. C. (2002). Assessing and analyzing the effects of WBLP on learning processes and achievements: Using the electronic portfolio for authentic assessment on university students’ learning. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from ERIC Web Site: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED476984.pdf
Chenoweth, N. A., & Murday, K. (2003). Measuring student learning in an online French course. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 285-314.
Chenoweth, N. A., Ushida, E., & Murday, K. (2007). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 115-145.
Coryell, J. E., & Chlup, D. T. (2007). Implementing E-learning components with adult English language learners: Vital factors and lessons learned. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(3), 263-278.
Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
Fitze, M. (2006) Discourse and participation in ESL face-to-face and written electronic conferences. Language Learning & Technology, 10(1), 67-86.
Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2005). New skills for new classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(4), 311-32. doi:10.1080/09588220500335455
Jimoyiannis, A. (2008). Factors determining teachers’ beliefs and perceptions of ICT in education. In C. Antonio & P. Marco (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Information Communication Technology (pp. 321-334). Hershey, PA: IGI Global
Jones, J. F. (2001). CALL and the responsibilities of teachers and administrators. ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal, 55(4), 360. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Jung, U. (2005). CALL: Past, present, and future – A bibliometric approach. ReCALL Journal, 17(1), 4-17.
Kessler, G., & Plakans, L. (2008). Does teachers’ confidence with CALL equal innovative and integrated use? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 269-282.
Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010). Developing collaborative autonomous learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: Attention to meaning among students in wiki space. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 41-58. doi:10.1080/09588220903467335
Lee, L. (2005). Using web-based instruction to promote active learning: Learners’ perspectives. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 139-156
Levy, M. (2008). Computer-Assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lin, S., Winaitham, W., & Saitakham, K. (2008). The use of websites for practicing listening skills of undergraduate students. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from ERIC Web Site: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED500929.pdf
Lu, D. (2010). A salutary lesson from a computer-based self-access language learning project. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(4), 343-35
Marcinkiewicz, H. (1993). Computers and teachers: Factors influencing computer use in the classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(2), 220. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from Academic Search Complete database
Marriott, R. C. V., & Torres, P. L. (Eds.). (2009). Research on e-learning methodologies for language acquisition. New York: Information Science Reference.
Meagher, M. (1995). Learning English on the Internet. Educational Leadership, 53(2), 88. Retrieved October 15, 2010, from Academic Search Complete database
Meskill, C., Mossop, J., DiAngelo, S., & Pasquale, R. (2002). Expert and novice teachers talking technology: Precepts, concepts, and misconcepts. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 46-57.
Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2005). Foreign language learning with CMC: Forms of online instructional discourse in a hybrid Russian class. System, 33(1), 89-105.
Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and Wiki in an EFL blended learning setting. System, 38, 185-199.
Neri, A., Mich, O., Gerosa, M., & Giuliani, D. (2008). The effectiveness of computer assisted pronunciation training for foreign language learning by children. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(5), 393-408. doi:10.1080/09588220802447651
O’Bryan, A., & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Integrating CALL into the classroom: The role of podcasting in an ESL listening strategies course, 19(2), 162-180. doi:10.1017/S0958344007000523
Raby, F. (2007). A triangular approach to motivation in computer assisted autonomous language learning (CAALL). RECALL, 19(2), 181-201.
Schwienhorst, K. (2003). Learner autonomy and tandem learning: Putting principles into practice in synchronous and asynchronous telecommunications environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(5), 427-443. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College.
Stockwell, G. (2003). Effects of topic threads on sustainability of email interactions between 318 native speakers and nonnative speakers. ReCALL, 15(1), 37-50. doi:10.1017/S0958344003000417
Teo, T. (2008). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards computer: A Singapore survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 413-424.
Wang, Y. (2006). Negotiation of meaning in desktop videoconferencing supported distancE language learning. ReCALL, 18(1), 122-145.
Wang, Y. M. (2002). When technology meets beliefs: Preservice teachers’ perception of the teacher’s role in the classroom with computers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 150-162.
Winke, P. M., Goertler, S., & Amuzie, G. L. (2010). Commonly taught and less commonly taught language learners: Are they equally prepared for CALL and online language learning? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 199-219.
Authors who publish with Journal of Narrarive and Language Studies (NALANS) agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in NALANS.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in NALANS.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.