Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:45:21.455Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploratory teaching of grammar rules and CALL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Patricia Manning
Patricia Manning
Affiliation:
The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Manning argued that exploratory teaching is well suited to learning with computers, as it increases the learners' autonomy and motivation. The main thrust of this paper is to evaluate the merits of exploratory teaching of grammatical rules as opposed to the more traditional explicit or implicit approaches. It provides a brief description of tests carried out on a group of learners of French in the UK, working on gender agreement rules, using a specifically designed CALL program and presents and analyses the results of the testing, which favour the Exploratory approach.

Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , May 1996 , pp. 24 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 1996

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

1.Manning, P. E. ‘Methodological considerations in the design of CALL programs’, in Language Learning with Computers: An educational challenge. Hall, A. and Baumgarten, P. (eds.), WISL. Klagenfurt, Austria, 1991 (also in: Cite report no 131. Milton Keynes, Open University, Institute of Educational Technology).Google Scholar
2.Cook., V. J.Second Language Learning and Language Teaching, Edward Arnold, London, 1991.Google Scholar
3.Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T. S.Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Cambridge, CUP, 1985.Google Scholar
4.Krashen, S. and Terrell, T.The Natural Method: Language Acquisition in the Classroom, Pergamon, Oxford, 1983.Google Scholar
5.Krashen, S.The Input Hypothesis, Longman, London, 1985.Google Scholar
6.S E G Chief examiner's report for Modern Foreign Language Examination (June 1991), Guildford, Surrey.Google Scholar
7.Metcalfe, P. ‘CALL, the foreign language graduate and the teaching of grammar’, Recall No 7, CTI Centre for Modern Languages, University of Hull, 1992.Google Scholar
8. D E S‘Modern Foreign languages for ages 11 to 16’, National Curriculum document, Cardiff: Welsh Office. 1990.Google Scholar
9.Ellis, R. ‘Instructed Second Language Acquisition’, in Crystal, D and Johnson, K. (eds), Applied Language Studies, Blackwell, Oxford, 1990.Google Scholar
10.Ellis, R.Second Language Acquisition and Language Pedagogy, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, 1991.Google Scholar
11.Higgins, J.Language, Learners and Computers, Longman, London, 1987.Google Scholar
12.Manning, P. E.op.cit.Google Scholar
13.Carroll, S. ‘Second-Language Acquisition and the Computational Paradigm’, Language Learning, vol 39, no 4,1989, pp 535–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Corbett, G.Gender, Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics, Cambridge, CUP, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Surridge, M. E. ‘Gender Assignment in French: the hierarchy of rules and the chronology of acquisition’, 1RAL 16, vol 2, Heidelberg, Germany, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Manning, P. E. ‘Computers, Learners and Teaching Strategies’, EUROCALL 1991 (Savolainen, H. ed.), 1991, pp 249–257, Helsinki School of Economics, Helsinki.Google Scholar
17.Manning, P. E., ‘Learner data collection and interpretation in the design of intelligent CALL programs’. Computers and Education vol. 22. 1991, pp 3–14.Google Scholar
18.Laurillard, D. and Manning, P. ‘Categorisation of Learner Performance Data for CALL Design’, ReCALL no 9, CTI Centre for Modem Languages, University of Hull, UK, 1993.Google Scholar