Integración del ALAO a través de tareas basadas en las TICs

  1. Fernández Fontecha, Almudena 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Revista:
Didáctica. Lengua y literatura

ISSN: 1130-0531 1988-2548

Año de publicación: 2014

Número: 26

Páginas: 147-169

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5209/REV_DIDA.2014.V26.46835 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Didáctica. Lengua y literatura

Resumen

The present article addresses the integration into the syllabus of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL), and particularly of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), as a measure to achieve full normalization. After reviewing distinct phases in the history of CALL, we briefly describe a model of an ICT-task within a Content and Languate Integrated Learning (CLIL) framework. The task is conceptualized here as a means for syllabus organization into which the new technologies are naturally integrated.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Al-SEGHAYER, Khalid (2001): “The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study”, in Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-232. Retrieved 25 April 2012 from http://www.llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/alseghayer/default.pdf
  • ANDERSON, Lorin. W. & KRATHWOHL, David R. (Eds.), (2001): A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational Objectives, New York, Longman.
  • BAX, Stephen (2003): “CALL – past, present and future”. System, 31(1), 13-28, doi: 10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00071-4
  • BOWER, Jack & KAWAGUCHI, Satomi (2011): “Negotiation of Meaning and Corrective Feedback in Japanese/English eTandem”, in Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 141-71. Retrieved 2 June 2013 from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2011/bowerkawaguchi.pdf
  • CANDLIN, Christopher (1987): “Towards task-based language learning”, in Candlin & Murphy (Eds.), Lancaster Practical Papers in English Language Education, Vol. 7. (pp. 5-22). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  • CHAMBERS, Andrea & BAX, Stephen (2006): “Making CALL work: Towards normalisation”, in System, 34(4), 465-479, doi: 10.1016/j.system.2006.08.001
  • COBB, Paul (1994): “Where is the mind? Constructivist and socio-cultural perspectives on mathematical development”, in Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20, doi: 10.3102/0013189X023007013
  • CRONJÉ, Johannes C. (2006): “Paradigms regained: Towards integrating objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and the learning sciences”, in Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(4), 387–416, doi: 10.1007/s11423-006-9605-1
  • CROOKES, Graham (1986): Task classification: A cross-disciplinary review (Tech. Rep. No. 4). Honolulu: Social Science Research Institute, Center for Second Language Classroom Research, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
  • DODGE, Bernie (2001): “FOCUS: Five rules for writing a great WebQuest”, in Learning & Leading with Technology, 28(8), 6-9. Retrieved 15 January 2013 from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/focus/focus.pdf
  • DOUGIAMAS, Martin (1998): A Journey into Constructivism. Retrieved from http://dougiamas.com/writing/constructivism.html
  • ELLIS, Rod (2003): Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  • FERNÁNDEZ FONTECHA, Almudena (2010): "The CLILQuest: a Type of Language WebQuest for Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)", in CORELL: Computer Resources for Language Learning, 3, 45-64. Retrieved 20 May 2012 from http://www.ucam.edu/sites/default/files/corell/AFernandez.pdf
  • FERNÁNDEZ FONTECHA, Almudena (2012): "CLIL in the Foreign Language Classroom: proposal of a Framework for ICT Materials Design in Language-Oriented Versions of Content and Language Integrated Learning", in Revista alicantina de estudios ingleses, 25, 317-334, Retrieved 25 June 2013 from http://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/27463/1/RAEI_25_22.pdf
  • GILLESPIE, Jone & MCKEE, Jane (1999): “Does it fit and does it make any difference? Integrating CALL into the curriculum”, in Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(5), 441-455, doi: 10.1076/call.12.5.441.5692
  • HEWER, Sue (2007): “CALL methodology: Integrating CALL into study programmes. Module 2.1”, in DAVIES (Ed.), Information and communications technology for language teachers (ICT4LT), Slough, Thames Valley University. Retrieved 12 April 2013 from http://www.ict4lt.org/en/en_mod2-1.htm
  • KOENRAAD, Ton L. M. & WESTHOFF, Gerard J. (2003): “Can you tell a LanguageQuest when you see one? Design critera for TalenQuests”. Paper presented at the 2003 Conference of the European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning: EUROCALL 2003, Limerick, University of Limerick, Ireland, 3-6 September 2003. Retrieved 3 June 2012 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.113.9371&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  • JONASSEN, David H. (1991): “Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?”, in Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14, doi: 10.1007/BF02296434
  • LAUFER, Batia & HILL Monica (2000): “What lexical information do L2 learners select in a CALL dictionary and how does it affect word retention?”, in Language Learning & Technology3(2), 58-76. Retrieved 12 May 2012 from http://www.llt.msu.edu/vol3num2/laufer-hill/
  • LIN, Huifen & CHEN, Tsuiping (2007): “Reading authentic EFL text using visualization and advance organizers in a multimedia learning environment”, in Language Learning & Technology, 11(3), 83-106. Retrieved 27 April 2012 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol11num3/pdf/linchen.pdf
  • LONG, Michael H. (1985): “A role for instruction in second language acquisition”, in HYLTENSTAM & PIENEMANN, (eds.), Modelling and Assessing Second Language Learning (pp. 77-99), Clevedon, Multilingual Matters.
  • LONG, Michael H. & CROOKES, Graham (1993): Units of analysis in syllabus design: The case for task. In Crookes, G. & S. Gass (eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 77-99), Philadelphia, Multilingual Matters.
  • MA, Qing & KELLY, Peter (2006): “Computer assisted vocabulary learning: Design and evaluation”, in Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 15-45, doi: 10.1080/09588220600803998
  • MARCH, Tom (2003): “What WebQuests are (really)”. Retrieved 11 December 2008 from http://tommarch.com/writings/what-webquests-are/ MARSH, David (2002): CLIL/EMILE – The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential, DG Education & Culture, European Commission.
  • MCCARTHY, Brian (1999): “Integration: The sine qua non of CALL”, in CALL-EJ Online, 1(2). Retrieved 14 January 2011 from http://callej.org/journal/1-2/mccarthy.html
  • MISHRA, Punya, KOEHLER, Matthew J. & HENRIKSEN, Danah (2011): “The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: extending the TPACK Framework towards 21st century learning”, in Educational Technology, 51(2), 22-28.
  • MURPHY, Dermont F. (1993): “Evaluating language learning tasks in the classroom”, in CROOKES & GASS (Eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 139-161), Philadelphia, Multilingual Matters.
  • NELSON, Theodor (1999): “Ted Nelson’s Computer Paradigm, expressed as one-liners”. Retrieved 15 February 2013 from http://xanadu.com.au/ted/TN/WRITINGS/TCOMPARADIGM/tedCompOne Liners.html
  • NUNAN, David (1989): Syllabus design, Oxford, Oxford University Press.NUNAN, David (1993): “Task-based syllabus design: Selecting, grading, and sequencing tasks”, in CROOKES and GASS (eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 237-262), Philadelphia, Multilingual Matters.
  • OLIVER, Ron (2001): “Developing e-learning environments that support knowledge construction in higher education”, in STONEY & BURN (eds.), Working for Excellence in the E-conomy (pp. 407-416). Churchlands: Australia, We-B Centre.
  • POLAT, Nihat, MANCILLA, Rae & MAHALINGAPPA, Laura (2013): “Anonymity and motivation in asynchronous discussions and L2 vocabulary learning”, in Language Learning & Technology, 17(2), 57–74. Retrieved 27 March 2013 from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2013/polatetal.pdf
  • PUENTEDURA, Rubén (2012): “Ruben R. Puentedura's Weblog. Ongoing thoughts on education and technology”. Retrieved 10 May 2013 from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/
  • RICHARDS, Cameron (2005): “The design of effective ICT-supported learning activities: Exemplary models, changing requirements, and new possibilities”, in Language Learning & Technology, 9(1), 60-79. Retrieved 25 April 2012 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num1/pdf/richards.pdf
  • ROCA, Julio, VALCÁRCEL, María Soledad & VERDÚ, Mercedes (1990): “Hacia un nuevo paradigma en la enseñanza de idiomas modernos: El enfoque por tareas”, in Revista Interuniver-sitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 8, 25-46.
  • RÜSCHOFF, Bernd & RITTER, Markus (2001): “Technology-enhanced language learning: Construction of knowledge and template-based learning in the foreign language classroom”, in Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(3-4), 219-232, doi: 10.1076/call.14.3.219.5789
  • SKEHAN, Peter (1998). The Cognitive Approach to Language Learning, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  • VRASIDAS, Charalambos (2000): “Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education”, in International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4), 339-62.
  • WARSCHAUER, Mark (1996): “Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction”, in FOTOS (Ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo, Japan, Logos International.
  • WARSCHAUER, Mark & HEALEY, Deborah (1998): “Computers and language learning: an overview”, in Language Teaching, 31(2), 57-71, doi: 10.1017/S0261444800012970
  • WOOD, Julie (2001): “Can software support children’s vocabulary development?”, in Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 166-201. Retrieved 20 November 2011 from http://www.llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/wood/default.pdf