Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:10:15.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collaborative research projects in the technology-enhanced language classroom: Pre-service and in-service teachers exchange knowledge about technology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2014

Euline Cutrim Schmid  and
Volker Hegelheimer
Euline Cutrim Schmid
Affiliation:
University of Education Schwäbisch Gmünd, Germany (email: euline.cutrim.schmid@ph-gmuend.de)
Volker Hegelheimer
Affiliation:
Iowa State University, USA (email: volkerh@iastate.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents research findings of a longitudinal empirical case study that investigated an innovative Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) professional development program for pre-service English as Foreign Language (EFL) teachers. The conceptualization of the program was based on the assumption that pre-service language teachers learn better in situated contexts (Egbert, 2006). Therefore, a key component of the program was the development of school-based research projects, in which the student teachers needed to design, implement, and evaluate technology-enhanced EFL lessons in collaboration with in-service teachers. Data were collected via field notes, video recordings of lessons, academic research reports produced by the pre-service teachers, and in-depth interviews with the pre-service and in-service teachers. Our findings indicate that the field experiences provided professional learning opportunities that supported the student teachers’ development as CALL practitioners. The participating pre-service teachers especially emphasized the important role played by school-based experiences in allowing them to use technology in authentic language teaching scenarios and to evaluate the impact of technology on language teaching and learning. The paper concludes with a discussion of important principles and guidelines that should underlie and inform such collaborative efforts and a summary of the implications of the findings for the design of CALL pre-service teacher education programs.

Keywords

teacher educationreflective practicesituated learningteacher cognition
Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 315 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2014 

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

Allwright, D. and Hanks, J. (2009) The developing language learner: An introduction to exploratory practice. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Akbari, R. and Dadvand, B. (2011) Does formal teacher education make a difference? A comparison of pedagogical thought units of B.A. versus M.A. Teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 95: 44–59.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
Brown, D. and Warschauer, M. (2006) From the university to the elementary classroom: Students' experiences in learning to integrate technology in instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3): 599–621.Google Scholar
Burns, A. (2001) Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comas-Quinn, A. (2011) Learning to teach online or learning to become an online teacher: an exploration of teachers’ experiences in a blended learning course. ReCALL, 23(3): 218–232.Google Scholar
Debski, R. (2006) Theory and practice in teaching project-oriented CALL. In: Levy, M. and Hubbard, P. (eds.), Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 99–114.Google Scholar
Dooly, M. (2009) New Competencies in a New Era? Examining the Impact of a Teacher Training Project. ReCALL, 21(3): 352–369.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. and Long, M. (2003) Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3): 50–80.Google Scholar
Egbert, J. (2006) Learning in context: Situating language teacher learning in CALL. In: Hubbard, P. and Levy, M. (eds.), Teacher education in CALL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 167–182.Google Scholar
Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M. and Nakamichi, Y. (2002) The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning and Technology, 6(3): 108–126.Google Scholar
Farrell, T. S. C. (2009) The novice teacher experience. In: Burns, A. and Richards, J. C. (eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 182–189.Google Scholar
Freeman, D. (1993) Renaming experience/Reconstructing practice: Developing new understandings for teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(5–6): 485–497.Google Scholar
Fuchs, C., Hauck, M. and Müller-Hartmann, A. (2012) Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Language Learning and Technology, 16(3): 82–102.Google Scholar
Gillen, J. (2006) Kompetenzanalysen als berufliche Entwicklungschance. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.Google Scholar
Guichon, N. and Hauck, M. (2011) Editorial: Teacher education research in CALL and CMC: more in demand than ever. ReCALL, 23(3): 187–199.Google Scholar
Hanson-Smith, E. (2006) Communities of Practice for pre- and inservice teacher education. In: Hubbard, P. and Levy, M. (eds.), Teacher education in CALL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 300–315.Google Scholar
Hegelheimer, V. (2006) When the technology course is required. In: Hubbard, P. and Levy, M. (eds.), Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia. PA: John Benjamins, 117–133.Google Scholar
Hong, K. H. (2010) CALL teacher education as an impetus for L2 teachers in integrating technology. ReCALL, 22(1): 53–69.Google Scholar
Hoven, D. (2006) Designing for disruption: Remodeling a blended course in technology in (language) teacher education. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Ascilite Conference: Who’s learning? Whose technology? Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Hubbard, P. and Levy, M. (2006) Teacher education in CALL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Legutke, M., Mueller-Hartmann, A. and Schocker-von Ditfurth, M. (2007) Preparing Teachers for Technology-Supported English Language Teaching. In: Cummins, J. and Davison, C. (eds.), Kluwer Handbook on English Language Teaching. (Kluwer International Handbooks of Education). New York: Springer, 1125–1138.Google Scholar
Legutke, M. and Schocker-von Ditfurth, M. (2009) School-Based experience. In: Burns, A. and Richards, J., The Cambridge Guide to Second Language Teacher Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 209–217.Google Scholar
Meskill, C., Mossop, J., DiAngelo, S. and Pasquale, R. K. (2002) Expert and Novice Teachers Talking Technology: Precepts, Concepts and Misconcepts. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3): 46–57.Google Scholar
Meskill, C., Anthony, N., Hilliker, S., Tseng, C. and You, J. (2006) Expert-novice teacher mentoring in language learning technology. In: Hubbard, P. and Levy, M. (eds.), Teacher Education in CALL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 283–298.Google Scholar
Mills, N. (2011) Teaching assistants' self-efficacy in teaching literature: Sources, personal assessments, and consequences. The Modern Language Journal, 95: 61–80.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. (1998) Language teacher education. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Schulman, L. (1986) Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2): 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E. and Allwright, D. (2005) Second language teacher learning and student second language learning: shaping the knowledge Base. In: Tedick, D. J. (ed.), Second Language Teacher Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 5–23.Google Scholar
Wallace, M. J. (1991) Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar