Initial experiences with CALL
Jon Clenton（Graduate School of Language and Culture）

This was my first semester with CALL, andinstance, when students read from printed materials

I have been invited to write a paper about my(or textbooks) they use skills such as skimming,

experiences with CALL.

Given that I’m still

scanning and inferring words from within a given

unearthing the minefield that CALL appears to be I

context. However, when presented with a monitor,

suppose I should start by explaining why I opted tostudents needed to decode graphics, audiovisualteach in one of the CALL rooms. Well, and in short, I

images, and different texts from their screens. In

wanted to understand how to use a computer assisted

addition, when students chose information fromlanguage laboratory largely because I expect all futurecomputers, they needed to critically evaluate materials

language teaching environments will offer it.

Thisin order to find appropriate information. Hence, theorstudents learned rapidly to negotiate a multiplicity ofmightbesomewhatof

anoverstatement

exaggeration so I’ll restrict this to perhaps thosemedia and discourse.

In this sense, CALL involved

universities with sufficient funds available to offer

not only passive learning as one would associate withCALL rooms. In short then, this paper summarizes myconventional printed materials, but also involved

impressions of having first used CALL this semester.

active and genuine decision making processes.

The

In my non-CALL conventional classrooms

student learning therefore became individualized, andmy students appear to acquire language skills throughvery much student-centered, compared to morea variety of different (and conventional) practices I’ve

traditional and linear textbook-based instruction and,developed over the years. Faced with CALL for thein this sense, CALL appeared to supplement myfirst time I assumed that the use of technology per setraditional teaching with the aid of this wonderful new

wouldn’t necessarily lead to effective learning in thetechnology. Also the CALL room appeared to offer asame way. I soon realized that I needed to develop

genuine array of learning choices. The students

some activities in order for students to benefit from

benefited from being able to progress at their ownthis technology. I wanted to learn, with the students,

pace and select materials or options based on their

how to maximize the potential of CALL. In anown individual needs. This was in stark contrast to theimmediate impression, I began to notice that theconventional classroom which is restricted by many

learning environment created was different from myfactors such as peer pressure, restricted interaction,

regular teacher-orientated classroom.

The CALLphysical environment, and teacher initiation. It seems

appeared to change the dynamics of classroomthat faced with a computer as the base ofinteraction. Students appeared to interact with peers

communication, the students appeared to feel lessand give feedback and support each other (more) inpressure. I wonder if it is an overestimation to assert

the CALL classroom. As a result and at the beginningthat the students felt more comfortable working

I could see that, as a teacher, my role was somewhat

individually with their computers given the likelihood

subordinate in the CALL environment.

of not wanting to make mistakes in front of their

As the semester progressed I began to noticeother benefits over conventional classrooms. Forpeers.
In summary, some brief conclusions after•my first semester:

Choice of teaching material is crucial inorder to offer meaningful practice

I found a number of other related benefits, and•

there are numerous others of course, but in short:•Student and teacher need to become
familiar with the new learning technology

Responses and feedback with CALL arequickly
immediate and anonymous••

CALL doesn’t always work! (i.e. theCALL appears to accommodate different
technology can let you down)
learning processes and learning styles•

Students can review material at their own
Overall I have thoroughly enjoyed using CALLpace•

Students can initiate interaction withCALL appears to offer genuine information exchanges

meaningful outcomes••

this semester in spite of the above stated pitfalls.

that conventional language teaching classrooms

Information gap activities appear genuine

cannot. Nevertheless, I assume, the level of success ofand offer multiple practices (anda CALL class will always depend on the students andreinforcement) compared to a conventional

teacher.

(textbook-based) teaching environment

result of the particular group of students I taught. I

CALL offers a variety of learning exercises

My successes this semester may be as a

may have been blessed by a particularly adaptableclass. However, whatever the makeup of the student

by using the technology

group, CALL appears to offer a tremendous array ofopportunities over and beyond the conventional
That said, and in response to the above benefits,language teaching classroom. I’m hoping that I canusing CALL is not without its pitfalls; again, in short:

understand how to use it fully over the following•Feedback / effective monitoring of allsemesters in order to create an effective CALL

students varies – I felt it was difficult tolearning environment.

listen to all the members in my48 students during
information•

class ofa 3-5 minuteexchange

Need to revise syllabi in order toaccommodate different learners’ responses
to the technology (my syllabus changed
significantly as my understanding
improved!)•Individual students can work at their own
pace – but there are problems with pairs orgroups of students having finishedactivities