Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:04:14.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The monolingual problem of computer-assisted language learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2020

Judith Buendgens-Kosten Open the ORCID record for Judith Buendgens-Kosten [Opens in a new window]
Judith Buendgens-Kosten*
Affiliation:
Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany (buendgens-kosten@em.uni-frankfurt.de)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper sets out to discuss the monolingual problem within computer-assisted language learning (CALL) research and CALL product development, namely a lack of knowledge about how CALL products and projects can support learners in using all their linguistic resources to achieve language-learning- and language-using-related goals, and a lack of CALL products and projects that realize this potential, or that support specific plurilingual skill development. It uses an analysis of CALL-related papers to demonstrate how far CALL is impacted by a monolingual bias that it inherited from language learning pedagogy. An analysis of articles from four CALL journals across 10 years shows that although the words bilingual and multilingual appear in these journals fairly regularly, terms such as plurilingual, third language, tertiary language, L3, translanguaging, and translingual are extremely rare. Also, only eight articles could be identified that use any of these eight keywords in their title. Trends across those papers are identified. In a discussion of existing CALL products and projects that incorporate more than one language, it is argued that while commercial products often include more than one language, this is frequently in a behaviorist or grammar-translation tradition, while innovative plurilingual products and projects tend to be non-commercial and often EU/EC-funded initiatives. The article argues that CALL research and product development can not only avoid this monolingual bias, but also actively contribute to our knowledge of how all linguistic resources can be used for language learning. It makes suggestions for relevant future research areas related to multilingual computer-assisted language learning (MCALL).

Keywords

computer-assisted language learningmultilingualismplurilingualismbiasmultilingual turn
Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 307 - 322
Check for updates
Copyright
© European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alvarez, J. M. (2018) Über die Grenzen des einsprachigen Habitus: Application of computer assisted language learning through home language content in secondary level classrooms. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 95–114. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Androutsopoulos, J. (2015) Networked multilingualism: Some language practices on Facebook and their implications. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(2): 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913489198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bax, S. (2003) CALL—past, present and future. System, 31(1): 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00071-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2009) Bilingualism: The good, the bad, and the indifferent. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(1): 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blyth, C. & Dalola, A. (2016) Translingualism as an open educational language practice: Raising critical language awareness on Facebook. Alsic, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.4000/alsic.2962Google Scholar
Brunsmeier, S. & Kolb, A. (2018) ‘I like the character, weil er so richtig funny ist’: Reading story apps in the primary EFL classroom. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 41–58. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2016) “Please check for grammar.”: Code-alternations in a language learning blogging community. Journal of Language Contact, 9(1): 71–100. https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-00901004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (2018a) Multilingual CALL: Introduction. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, xi–xxiii. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (2018b) Playful plurilingualism? Exploring language(s) with the multilingual serious game MElang-E. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 115–131. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buendgens-Kosten, J., Lohe, V. & Elsner, D. (2019) Beyond the monolingual habitus in game-based language learning: The MElang-E and EU·DO·IT projects in the interstices between linguistics, pedagogy, and technology. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 11(1): 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw.11.1.67_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bündgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (2014) Rezeptives Code-Switching ein- und mehrsprachiger Lerner/innen in multilingualen Settings. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 43(2): 56–73.Google Scholar
Butzkamm, W. (1973) Aufgeklärte Einsprachigkeit: Zur Entdogmatisierung der Methode im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2013) Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203073889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Candelier, M. (2003) L’éveil aux langues à l’école primaire: Evlang: Bilan d’une innovation européenne. Bruxelles: De Boeck Supérieur. https://doi.org/10.3917/dbu.cande.2003.01Google Scholar
Candelier, M., Camilleri-Grima, A., Castellotti, V., de Pietro, J.-F., Lőrincz, I., Meißner, F.-J., Noguerol, A. & Schröder-Sura, A. (2012) FREPA: A framework of reference for pluralistic approaches to languages and cultures: Competences and resources. https://www.ecml.at/Resources/ECMLPublications/tabid/277/PublicationID/82/language/en-GB/Default.aspxGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001) Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (1997) CALL in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigms? Language Learning & Technology, 1(1): 19–43. http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/chapelle/default.htmlGoogle Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. & Sauro, S. (eds.) (2017) The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H.-I. (2013) Identity practices of multilingual writers in social networking spaces. Language Learning & Technology, 17(2): 143–170. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44328Google Scholar
Conteh, J. & Meier, G. (eds.) (2014) The multilingual turn in languages education: Opportunities and challenges. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. J. (1997) Monolingual bias in second language acquisition research. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 34: 35–50.Google Scholar
Cook, V. (2001) Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3): 402–423. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdfGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2018) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment: Companion volume with new descriptors. https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (2008) Teaching for transfer: Challenging the two solitudes assumption in bilingual education. In Cummins, J. & Hornberger, N. H. (eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Volume 5: Bilingual education. New York: Springer, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_116Google Scholar
Cutrim Schmid, E. (2018) Developing plurilingual competence in the EFL primary classroom through telecollaboration. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 171–188. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dausend, H. (2018) This is how I say it! Discourse with tablets among multilingual learners. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 78–94. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, G., Otto, S. E. K. & Rüschoff, B. (2013) Historical perspectives on CALL. In Thomas, M., Reinders, H. & Warschauer, M. (eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning. London: Bloomsbury, 19–38.Google Scholar
Doyé, P. (2005) Intercomprehension: Guide for the development of language education policies in Europe: From linguistic diversity to plurilingual education: Reference study. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, Language Policy Division. http://rm.coe.int/intercomprehension/1680874594Google Scholar
Dube, J. & Gürsoy, E. (2018) Sprachintegrierte Leseförderung mit mehrsprachigen Bilderbüchern und digitalen Hörstiften im Unterricht mit neu zugewanderten Schülerinnen und Schülern. In Kutzelmann, S. & Massler, U. (eds.), Mehrsprachige Leseförderung: Grundlagen und Konzepte. Tübingen: Narr, 131–145.Google Scholar
Egbert, J. & Hanson-Smith, E. (eds.) (1999) CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.Google Scholar
Elsner, D. (2014) Multilingual Virtual Talking Books (MuViT): A project to foster multilingualism, language awareness, and media competency. In Abendroth-Timmer, D. & Hennig, E.-M. (eds.), Plurilingualism and multiliteracies: International research in identity construction in language education. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 175–190.Google Scholar
Elsner, D. & Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2018) Awareness of multilingual resources: EFL primary students’ receptive code-switching during collaborative reading. In Buendgens-Kosten, J. & Elsner, D. (eds.), Multilingual computer assisted language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 59–77. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788921497-006Google Scholar
EURYDICE. (2012) Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe 2012. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/key_data_series/143EN.pdfGoogle Scholar
Farr, F. & Murray, L. (eds.) (2016) The Routledge handbook of language learning and technology. Basingstoke: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, O. & Kleyn, T. (2016) Translanguaging with multilingual students: Learning from classroom moments. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315695242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, N. (2009) Computer-assisted language learning trends and issues revisited: Integrating innovation. The Modern Language Journal, 93(s1): 719–740. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00969.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, J. P. (2008) Learning and games. In Salen, K. (ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 21–40.Google Scholar
Gierlinger, E. (2015) ‘You can speak German, sir’: On the complexity of teachers’ L1 use in CLIL. Language and Education, 29(4): 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2015.1023733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillespie, J. (2018) CALL research: Where are we now? Part III. EUROCALL 2018. Future-proof CALL. University of Jyväskylä, 22–25 August.Google Scholar
Gogolin, I. (1988) Erziehungsziel Zweisprachigkeit: Konturen eines sprachpädagogischen Konzepts für die multikulturelle Schule. Hamburg: Bergmann + Helbig.Google Scholar
Gogolin, I. (1994) Der monolinguale Habitus der multilingualen Schule. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B. (ed.) (2009) Processes in third language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hanson-Smith, E. (2003) A brief history of CALL theory. The CATESOL Journal, 15(1): 21–30.Google Scholar
Hlas, A. C. (2018) Grand challenges and great potential in foreign language teaching and learning. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1): 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howatt, A. P. R. & Widdowson, H. G. (2004) A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbard, P. (2008) Twenty-five years of theory in the CALICO Journal. CALICO Journal, 25(3): 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v25i3.387-399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hufeisen, B. (2011) Wie sich mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktische Ideen in Lehrmaterialien umsetzen lassen: Vorstellung einiger konkreter Beispiele. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 40(2): 106–119.Google Scholar
Hufeisen, B. & Lindemann, B. (eds.) (1998) Tertiärsprachen: Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Hufeisen, B. & Neuner, G. (eds.) (2004) The plurilinguism project: Tertiary language learning: German after English. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Jessner, U. (2006) Linguistic awareness in multilinguals: English as a third language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619139.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, Y. (1994) Monolingual bias in SLA research. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4): 795–800. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirsch, C. & Bes Izuel, A. (2019) Emergent multilinguals learning languages with the iPad app iTEO: A study in primary schools in Luxembourg. The Language Learning Journal, 47(2): 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1258721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, H. G. (2004) L’eurocompréhension (eurocom), une méthode de compréhension des langues voisines. Éla: Études de linguistique appliquée, 136(4): 403–418. https://doi.org/10.3917/ela.136.0403Google Scholar
Kulavuz-Onal, D. & Vásquez, C. (2018) “Thanks, shokran, gracias”: Translingual practices in a Facebook group. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1): 240–255. https://doi.org/10125/44589Google Scholar
Levy, M., Hubbard, P., Stockwell, G. & Colpaert, J. (2015) Research challenges in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.987035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lew, R. & Szarowska, A. (2017) Evaluating online bilingual dictionaries: The case of popular free English-Polish dictionaries. ReCALL, 29(2): 138–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344016000252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohe, V. (2018) Die Entwicklung von Language Awareness bei Grundschulkindern durch mehrsprachige digitale Bilderbücher: Eine quasi-experimentelle Untersuchung zum Einsatz von MuViT in mehrsprachigen Lernumgebungen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Marx, N. (2008) Is it necessary to train learners in interlingual comprehension strategies? In Gibson, M., Hufeisen, B. & Personne, C. (eds.), Mehrsprachigkeit: Lernen und lehren: Selected papers from the L3 conference in Freiburg/Switzerland 2005. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, 135–150.Google Scholar
May, S. (ed.) (2014) The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203113493Google Scholar
Meissner, F.-J. & Reinfried, M. (eds.) (1998) Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik: Konzepte, Analysen, Lehrerfahrungen mit romanischen Fremdsprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2014) Intercomprehension between Romance languages and the role of English: A study of multilingual chat rooms. International Journal of Multilingualism, 11(1): 120–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2012.679276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2015) Blogs and the development of plurilingual and intercultural competence: Report of a co-actional approach in Portuguese foreign language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(3): 220–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.818556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
New London Group. (1996) A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1): 60–93. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160uCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odlin, T. & Jarvis, S. (2004) Same source, different outcomes: A study of Swedish influence on the acquisition of English in Finland. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(2): 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710408668183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R. & Waire, P. (2009) Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(2): 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220902778369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L. (2017) New CALL-SLA research interfaces for the 21st century: Towards equitable multilingualism. CALICO Journal, 34(3): 285–316. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.33855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, S. E. K. (2017) From past to present: A hundred years of technology for L2 learning. In Chapelle, C. A. & Sauro, S. (eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell, 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papin, K. (2018) Can 360 virtual reality tasks impact L2 willingness to communicate? In Taalas, P., Jalkanen, J., Bradley, L. & Thouësny, S. (eds.), Future-proof CALL: Language learning as exploration and encounters: Short papers from EUROCALL 2018. Dublin: Research-publishing.net, 243–248. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priego, S. & Liaw, M.-L. (2017) Understanding different levels of group functionality: Activity systems analysis of an intercultural telecollaborative multilingual digital storytelling project. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(5): 368–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1306567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiser, R. A. (2001a) A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(1): 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiser, R. A. (2001b) A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(2): 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauro, S. (2016) Does CALL have an English problem? Language Learning & Technology, 20(3): 1–8. https://doi.org/10125/44474Google Scholar
Schreiber, B. R. (2015) “I am what I am”: Multilingual identity and digital translanguaging. Language Learning & Technology, 19(3): 69–87. https://doi.org/10125/44434Google Scholar
Singleton, D. & Aronin, L. (2007) Multiple language learning in the light of the theory of affordances. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1): 83–96. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt44.0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M., Reinders, H. & Warschauer, M. (eds.) (2013) Contemporary computer-assisted language learning. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Van Deusen-Scholl, N. (2018) The negotiation of multilingual heritage identity in a distance environment: HLA and the plurilingual turn. CALICO Journal, 35(3): 235–256. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.36723CrossRefGoogle Scholar