Language technologies and the FL teacher.

Abstract

This paper examines the changes that have taken place in the past decades of the role of the FL (Foreign Language) teacher in view of the developments in language technologies. There has been much time and space devoted to the role of the student with regards to new technologies in a language learning environment, however, comparatively little has been written about the role of the teacher in such models. Professional development in the form of technology training courses need to be offered to the FL teacher in order to facilitate their changing role in view of new language technologies. We must first look at the role of the teacher in the language classroom where such technologies are to be employed as an integral pedagogic tool. This paper is the first in a series of an ongoing study of teacher/learner attitudes to and perceptions of language technologies at Da Yeh University, Taiwan.

Introductions: The Benefits and Challenges of Language Technologies

Language technologies (e.g. CALL--Computer Assisted Language Learning) have been utilized as a pedagogical tool for language teachers since the 1980's. However, since the 1990's the nature of such technologies has changed dramatically, especially with the integration of the World Wide Web and the Internet into the language classroom. Since that time, language teachers have been placed in a new position in relation to teaching methodologies and technologies. As Laurent Gousie writes, 'No longer were we swept by a wave of methodology; we were swamped by a tidal wave of computer assisted technologies' (1998, p. 2). Suddenly, we had access to a literal world of ideas, but we had no real idea what to do with them or how to employ them effectively into our lessons. The problem was not the arrival of this new 'wave' of technology, but rather, how do we as teachers process and evaluate its effective use for the FL (Foreign Language) classroom. As Langan writes, 'The good news is that we have more information at our fingertips than ever before. The bad news is that we have to figure out what to do with it all' (1995, p. 5).

The Changing Role of the FL Teacher

The role of the language teacher has changed and will undoubtedly experience further development as technology becomes a more integral and permanent feature in the FL classroom. As Meena Singhal writes, citing Jensen, 'without a doubt we are in the center of a "monumental paradigm shift, one which will change the way that all instructors teach and the way that students learn'" (1997, p. 6). In a teaching environment that utilizes computers and the Internet as an integral part of language learning the role of the teacher undergoes a dramatic shift from the bearer of a knowledge that is to be disseminated to the learners, to a position where the teacher is regarded as a guide and where the learner has more control over what she learns. This is a shift in the teacher's role from the instructional, 'sage on the stage', to the more facilitative, 'guide on the side' (McKenzie, 1998). As Peiya Gu writes with regards to a Chinese experience of web-based learning in a language classroom:

It was observed that in this networked learning environment where students were busy working on their own project, the teacher's role underwent a significant shift from a knowledge giver to a facilitator. The students took over the responsibility for their own language learning and for producing finished products that meet high standards. Thus, they became more active and more autonomous learners. (Gu, 2002, p. 15)

In the example cited above, the teacher as facilitator has become the 'guide on the side', a different role to fit a different pedagogical model. What has to be noted here is that now the teacher has the opportunity to teach other additional skills not usually associated as part of the language curriculum, e.g. critical thinking and problem solving. These new skills are, I would argue, necessary skills in the FL classroom that uses language technologies. This aspect of CALL has not yet been addressed and is an area that could lead to interesting and fruitful results.

The teacher, then, is no longer regarded as the sole or primary source of knowledge. This change in the role of the teacher in the CALL classroom must be noted, as the method of teaching in this environment is very different to that of the traditional FL classroom. The nature of the space of the language-learning environment has undergone a paradigm shift--from traditional blackboard classroom to computer labs--and so our position as teachers/learners within that space has changed also. This recognition of the changing nature of the role of the FL teacher in this new space is noted by Mary Ann Lyman-Hager, as she comments that, 'technology must be viewed as an enabler and that faculty are no longer the major source of knowledge.' She also maintains that teachers 'must become "coaches" and "trainers", that there has to be a "mind shift", and that faculty must develop new skills' (Lyman-Hager cited in Gousie, 1998, p. 3). Language technologies not only offer more opportunities for the language learner, but also new challenges for the language teacher

Challenges for the FL Teacher

There are two main challenges that face the FL teacher with regards to using technology and computers in the classroom, technical challenges and the issue of a change in teaching methodologies. The technical challenges can be further broken down into two sub-categories, institutional and personal. The institutional-related challenges that FL teachers may face in attempting an implementation of CALL into their curricula are briefly as follows:

1. Financial barriers--'They include the cost of hardware, software, maintenance (particularly of the most advanced equipment), and extend to some staff development' (Lee, 2000, p. 4).

2. Availability of computer hardware of software--Suitable computer hardware may be available for different reasons without the support of appropriate software, and vice versa.

3. The institution may have introduced a CALL computer laboratory but has not made technology workshops/courses available to the FL faculty to ensure that the potential of such technologies is realized in the classroom, so that both the learner and teacher receives the full benefit of such institutional investment in language technologies.

If institutions do indeed introduce CALL laboratories or networked computer centers intended for the use of language learners, it is imperative and absolutely necessary that faculty are properly trained to make full use of such facilities. Without such a follow-up, such CALL labs are only a superficial nod to the advances of technology without fully engaging with its possibilities and future implications for FL teaching and learning. Again, as Lee remarks, 'not only is there a shortage of knowledge about developing software to promote learning ... but many instructors do not understand how to use the new technologies' (2000, p. 5).

The second challenge to the FL teacher with regards to the use and implementation of CALL in the FL classroom is a more personal one. FL teachers may be reluctant to use technology in whatever guise it comes in for many different reasons. Gilberte Furstenberg outlines some of the main reasons for hesitation in using new technologies in the FL classroom:

   There are good reasons for our confusion and reluctance. Many of
   us have not been trained to use technology and therefore feel
   vulnerable using it in public. It may be unfamiliar to us, and we
   may not have the time or may not want to take the time to learn
   about it. Or we may not perceive its role in the classroom. The
   result is that many of us just don't integrate technology into
   our teaching ... Technology will reach its full potential only
   when we see it as a tool that can assist us and our students in
   our loftier endeavors. (1997, p. 72).

The more teacher-related challenges are thus as follows:

1. Teachers have to first accept that technology is a useful tool in FL teaching.

2. Teachers have not been trained in the use of technology--this accounts for a lack of confidence that teachers may feel in using technology in the classroom.

3. Teachers want to integrate technology into their curricula, but are not sure how to go about it--lack of institutional support, and under-utilization of online resources.

4. Teachers are pressed for time--too many contact hours leave very little time for research to learn about new technologies.

5. Teachers are not aware of or do not see the role of CALL in the FL classroom--teachers are either not aware of the benefits of the use of CALL, or do not perceive its use in any capacity in the FL classroom.

6. Access to the CALL laboratory is restricted--the lab may not be available when the teacher wishes to use it.

7. Awareness of Internet resources is low--teachers, for different reasons, may not be aware of the range of teaching resources available online.

8. The application of new teaching methodologies that are more learner-centered and that require the re-evaluation of the role of the FL teacher in a CALL environment.

The teacher has a responsibility to him/herself to undergo continual professional development, and the decision to do so must primarily come from the teacher, and not from the call to meet institutional requirements to undergo such in-service training/development. As Thomas Farrell comments, 'foreign language teachers [have] responsibilities to develop ... I would also like to add that this growth stems from teachers making their own informed decisions about teaching well beyond the initial teacher education course' (1999, p. 40). This particular aspect of pedagogic professional development with regards to the use of technology in the FL classroom calls out for more extended critical examination, but unfortunately falls outside of the scope of this present paper.

The overall challenge then for the teacher is the integration of computer technologies into the curriculum and their implementation in the language classroom. Eisenberg and Johnson, in reference to Moursund, have noted that, 'In too many schools, teachers and students still use computers only as the equivalent of expensive flash cards, electronic worksheets, or as little more than a typewriter. The productivity side of computer use in the general content area of the curriculum is neglected or grossly underdeveloped' (2002, p. 1). Computer use can only become effectively more productive if teachers use them in the classroom, which presupposes that teachers themselves are effectively and appropriately trained in their usage.

Teacher Development and Language Technologies

'Teacher training also tends to be the single most neglected aspect in CALL as attention is often given more to the selection of hardware and software to be purchased.' (Wyatt cited in Pilus, 1995, p. 2).

While many articles, papers and books have been written that focus on the training of the language learner in the use of CALL, comparatively very little has been written about its counterpart, the training of the teacher. In particular, the issue of teacher training in relation to technology is an area that demands further discussion and scrutiny. Teacher training, specifically in terms of technology (courses/workshops/support centers etc), should be integrated into the more general rubric of continual professional development, both supported by the teachers themselves and the institutions in which they work. It is unrealistic to expect language teachers who as a rule have a very limited technology background to suddenly incorporate technologies such as CALL and the Internet into their everyday lessons. As Pilus observes, 'Failure to provide the necessary training may result in the CALL lab being underutilized' (1995, p.2). How can we expect the teachers to instruct the learners about appropriate and effective use of language technologies if the teacher herself has not learned/been trained to do so? This is surely putting the pedagogical cart before the horse.

Gousie remarks, 'Without the proper hardware, the proper software and the proper training, it is practically impossible for a teacher to integrate new technology into the traditional classroom or into foreign language programs' (1998, p. 3, emphasis added). Here the important question to ask is what kind of teacher training is needed in order to integrate technology successfully, with the appropriate methodologies as its theoretical rationale, into language programs? First of all, language teachers need a foundation course in basic computer operations, word-processing, databases, functions of the keyboard etc. This is to ensure that teachers have the confidence to use computers more competently, efficiently and independently. Second, following on from the foundation courses, technical training in how to use CALL and the Internet as tools for the FL classroom can then be put into operation. Thirdly, the methodological rationale for using language technologies in the first instance must be examined and discussed--this can be done through a series of workshops/talks generated for and by the teachers themselves (see LeLoup, 1997). The above suggestions, of course, do not have to run necessarily in that order. They can be run side-by-side, or threaded through the workshop modules. Pilus comments on the importance of such workshops, and writes:

'To initiate thinking and discussion in that line, workshops may have to be conducted to give the teachers an overview of possible applications of CALL programs, the practice in authoring their own texts in the programs and the chance to analyse the pedagogical effectiveness of certain programs. The sharing of opinions and resources during the workshops could increase the teachers' awareness of other means of exploiting the readily accessible CALL programs and stimulate their interest in developing CALL.' (Pilus, 1995, p. 4).

This aspect of teacher development demands a questioning and interrogation of appropriate pedagogical skills and methods to employ in the language classroom that utilizes such technologies.

Levy points to the multi-pronged approach that we have to take in examining and using language technologies in the classroom, 'it is a complex, multi-faceted process that involves a great deal of organizational and technical expertise' (1992, p. 25). Teachers must be aware of the re-organization of their role in the CALL classroom, but they must also be aware of the conceptual re-organization that the classroom has undergone (from the real to the virtual) in response to the advances of such technologies.

Conclusions

It has been seen in this paper that the role of the teacher, in view of their implementation and advances of language technologies, has changed dramatically and will most likely continue to do so for the immediate future. One theoretically-based solution is that more qualitative and quantitative studies need to be conducted to evaluate the situation to provide working hypotheses as the language and technology field develops. If CALL and other such language technologies are to be employed effectively and efficiently in the FL classroom, then teachers need to be sufficiently informed in order that they can use the available technological tools in an appropriate and methodologically sound way. Another more pragmatic and immediate solution is that institutes of education need to take responsibility by aiding and promoting the further development of their staff through workshops, courses and other such facilities that suit the changing needs of the FL practitioner. Learning communities are not only of importance to the language learner, but also to the language teacher. We have seen that there are challenges involved in any attempt to utilize such language technologies, but these are challenges to be met and with which to be successfully engaged. To recall Jensen, we are indeed in the center of a "monumental paradigm shift", a pedagogical shift whose impetus is technology and results of which largely remain to be seen.

References

Eisenberg, E. B., Johnson, D. (2002) 'Learning and Teaching Information Technology: Computer Skills in Context', Eric Digest, September. URL: www.ericit.org/digests/EDO-IR-2002-04.shtml

Farrell, T. (1999) 'ESL/EFL Teacher Development: Top-down or Bottom-up?', Proceedings of the 1998 Korea TESOL Conference.

Furstenberg, G. (1997), 'Teaching with Technology: What is at Stake?" ADFL Bulletin.

Gousie, L. (1998) 'New Methods and Tools for Teaching Foreign Languages', T.H.E. Journal Online, August. URL: www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/articleprintversioncfm?aid=1981

Gu, P. (2002) 'Web-based Project Learning and EFL Learners: A Chinese Example', Teaching English with Technology A Journal for Teachers of English, Vol. 2, Issue 4, August. URL: www.iatefl.org.pl/call/j-article10.html

Langan, M. (1995), 'Surfing the Internet', Education News,10:3, 1-16

Lee, K. (2000) 'English Teachers' Barriers to the Use of Computer-assisted Language Learning', The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. 6, No. 12, December. URL: www.iteslj/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html

LeLoup, J.W. (1997) 'A Communications Technology Module for the Foreign Language Methods Module'. URL: www.cortland.edu/flteach/methods/main.html

LeLoup, J. W., Ponterio, R. (2000) 'Co-operative Learning Activities for the Foreign Language Classroom', Language Learning and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, January. URL: www.llt.msu.edu/vol3num2/onthenet/index.html

McKenzie, J. (1998) 'The Wired Classroom', From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal, Vol. 7, No. 6, March. URL: www.fno.org/mar98/flotilla2.html

Pilus, Z. (1995) 'Teachers interest in CALL and their level of computer literacy: some implications', ON-CALL, Vol. 9, No. 3. URL: www.cltr.uq.edu.au/oncall/pilus93.html

Singhal, M. (1997) 'The Internet and Foreign Language Education: Benefits and Challenges', The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. 3, No. 6, June. URL: www.iteslj.org/Articles/Singhal-Internet.html

Nessa Cronin, Da Yeh University, Taiwan

Nessa Cronin reads English and Philosophy at Trinity College and University of Warwick, England. She lectures in English and French at Da Yeh University, Taiwan.