Learning Management Systems for Language Learning: The Groningen Case

1
Learning Management Systems for Language
LearningThe Groningen Case

• ELC Workshop Berlin
• 14-15 December 2001
• Sake Jager
• University of Groningen

2
Presentation

• The introduction of a general-purpose learning
  management system at the University of Groningen
• Strengths and weaknesses of such a system for
  language learning
• Future directions for web-based language learning
  environments

3
Need for strategy

• ICT active field of top-down and bottom-up
  initiatives
• ICT for language learning largely bottom-up
• Top-down introduction of LMS
• Why introduced? General advantages?
• Benefits for language learning?
• What strategies are needed?
• Nestor project Blackboard as the standard
  virtual learning environment

4
The Nestor project

• Reasons for introduction
• More flexible learning methods (time and place
  independent)
• More student-centred learning activities
• Enhancing the use of ICT by staff
• Focus for ICT-related training and support
• Using it because others are doing it!
• No explicit learning philosophy or pedagogy

5
Implementation at Faculty of Arts

• Leading role in introduction
• Integral use
• Development along four lines
• Infrastructure
• Staff training
• Integration into the curriculum
• ICT Management

6
Staff training plan

• All staff (600) are to be trained by 2003
• Directors of Study responsible for getting staff
  trained
• Training in operation and didactic applications
• Training on the basis of real courses taught
• Training on faculty computer networks
• Assistance available faculty co-ordinator,
  servicedesk, student-assistants
• Extra assistance for innovative applications

7
Basic features LMSs

• Presentation Areas
• Discussion Forums
• E-Mail
• Chat and Whiteboard
• Group Activity Areas
• Web Resource and Linking Areas
• Assessment
• See also Online Educational Delivery
  Applications A Web Tool for Comparative Analysis
  (http//www.ctt.bc.ca/landonline/)

8
Screenshot Nestor
9
Screenshot startpagina
10
Screenshot documents
11
Screenshot arabische tekst
12
Screenshot Executable
13
Results after one year

• Over 125 staff trained since last January
• Over 150 courses launched
• Used by experienced and inexperienced in ICT
• Also used for language learning in spite of
  certain restrictions
• Not a replacement for CALL packages

14
Acceptance of ICT as learning tool

• Great interest
• No steep learning curve
• Actual use
• Useful for increasing computer-literacy and focal
  point for training cf Gillespie (2000)
• computer-based social context for staff and
  students
• human connectivity
• reinforcement of computer-skills
• Primary motivation for Nestor project

15
Use by experienced and inexperienced staff

• Also used by HTML-proficient staff and
  programmers
• Combination of features appealing
• Individual components less powerful than
  stand-alone counterparts
• Standard program with appropriate support
• Automated enrollment students, backups, helpdesk
• Possibility for integration with other web
  resources

16
Support for languages

• Essential for language learning Siekmann
• Possible through external formats
• Word documents
• HTML
• Platform dependent fonts
• Results unpredictable, certain areas do not allow
  use of foreign languages
• General lack of Unicode support (interface,
  scripting, database levels)

17
Specific CALL functionality

• Not up to CD Rom-based courseware
• Limited feedback and branching
• Lower quality/low speed multimedia
• Interactive exercises primarily for assessment,
  not training
• Emphasis on information, communication,
  collaboration
• Putting people in touch with each other, not with
  a machine.
• Complementary to CALL, no replacement
• Use in addition to CALL
• Develop CALL to be integrated into these
  environments

18
Perspectives on web-based language learning

• True potential of the web largely unexplored
• Open-ended, student-centred, task-based learning
  activities
• Authentic materials, real-life tasks and
  real-life problems
• Self-directed learning, collaboration
• Project-based work

19
Integrative CALL

• Warschauer In contrast, integrative CALL is
  based on a socio-cognitive view of language
  learning. From this viewpoint, learning language
  involves apprenticing into new discourse
  communities. The purpose of interaction is to
  help students learn to enter new communities and
  familiarize themselves with new genres and
  discourses. From this point of view, the content
  of the interaction and the nature of the
  community are extremely important. It is not
  enough to engage in communication for
  communications sake.
• The Death of Cyberspace and the Rebirth of CALL
  

20
LMSs and integrative CALL

• Support for integrative, task-based CALL
• E.g. for setting up tasks related to finding a
  job
• Same can be done using separate tools
• HTML Editor, Discussion Board, E-mail, etc.
• Preferred by some over Swiss-Army Knife type
  learning environments
• Difficult to provide training and support for

21
Further points to consider

• Labour intensive
• Time for course development
• Time for running the course
• Largely teacher-controlled
• Access to publishing functions mainly for
  teachers
• Students must use other authoring tools

22
Enforcement of pedagogy

• No enforcement of pedagogy
• Not based on a particular learning philosophy
• May lead to substition, rather than
  transformation of learning process
• Familiarization with pedagogic and didactic
  principles needed

23
Directions for future work

• Strong emphasis on didactic uses
• Institution-wide strategies are needed, with a
  sensible mix of top-down and bottom-up approaches
• Combine the best features of LMSs with the
  strong points of dedicated CALL programs
• Assess the potential of emerging technologies for
  language learning

24
Conclusion

• LMSs not the be all and end all for web-based
  language learning.
• Catalyst for change, esp. acceptance of ICT as
  learning tool
• Didactic changes most important
• No substitution, but transformation
• Additional training in didactic use necessary

25
Some references

• Chizmar J.F. and D.B. Williams (2001). What Do
  Faculty Want?, Educause Quarterly 1, pp. 18-24.
• Debski, R. (2000). Exploring the Re-creation of
  a CALL Innovation, Computer-Assisted Language
  Learning 134-5, pp. 307-332.
• Felix, U. (1998). Virtual Language Learning
  Finding the Gems among the Pebbles. Melbourne,
  Language Australia.
• Felix, U. (1999). Web-Based Language Learning A
  Window to the Authentic World in R. Debski and
  M. Levy (eds), World CALL Global Perspectives on
  Computer-Assisted Language Learning (Lisse, Swets
  and Zeitlinger), pp. 85-98.
• Gillespie, J. (2000). Towards a computer-based
  learning environment a pilot study in the use of
  FirstClass, ReCALL 121, pp. 19-26.

26
References (contd)

• Hogan-Brun, G. and H. Laux (2001). Specialist
  Gateways through Chaos a Changing Learning
  Environment, System 29, pp. 253-265.
• Siekmann, S. (2001). Calico Software Report
  Which Web Course Management System is Right for
  Me? A Comparison of WebCT 3.1 and Blackboard
  5.0, CALICO Journal 183 , pp. 590-617.
• Warschauer, M. (2000a). The Changing Global
  Economy and the Future of English Teaching,
  TESOL Quarterly 343, pp. 511-535.
• Warschauer, M. (2000b). The Death of Cyberspace
  and the Rebirth of CALL, available
  http//www.gse.uci.edu/markw/cyberspace.html
  (downloaded 30 October 2001).

27
Siekmann (2001)

• In a foreign language learning context, it is
  important to create a target language environment
  that motivates students to use the second
  language. Ideally, it should be possible to
  present a language course site entirely in the
  target language. Both systems fall short of this
  goal at the time, but WebCT offers more
  opportunities to create a target language
  environment (for many western European languages)
  than Blackboard. (CALICO Journal 18 3, 593)