Analysing recent CALL effectiveness research - Towards a common agenda

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Volumn 18, Issue 1-2, 2005, Pages 1-32

  Felix, Uschi ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 22544448958     PISSN: 09588221     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09588220500132274     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-232.
2. Basena, D., & Jamieson, J. (1996). CALL research in second language learning: 1990-1994. CAELL, 7(1/2), 14-22.
3. Becker, H. J. (1994). Mindless or mindful use of integrated learning systems. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 65-79.
4. Bell, F. L., & LeBlanc, L. B. (2000). The language of glosses in L2 reading on computer: Learner's preferences. HISPANIA, 83(2), 274-285.
5. Blok, H., van Daalen-Kapteijns, M. M., Otter, M. E., & Overmaat, M. (2001). Using computers to learn words in the elementary grades: An evaluation framework and a review of effect studies. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(2), 99-128.
6. Bonk, C., & Cunningham, D. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. Bonk & K. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators (pp. 25-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R., & Campione, J. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. Flavel & E. Markman (Eds.), Mussen handbook of child psychology (pp. 77-166). New York: Wiley.
8. Chapelle, C. (1997). CALL in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigms? Language Learning and Technology, 1(1), 19-43.
9. Chapelle, C. C., & Jamieson, J. J. (1991). Internal and external validity issues in research on CALL effectiveness. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning and testing (pp. 37-59). New York: Newbury House.
10. Chikamatsu, N. (2003). The effects of computer use on L2 Japanese writing. Foreign Language Annals, 36(1), 114-127.
11. Christmann, E. P., & Badgett, J. L. (1999). A comparative analysis of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on student achievement in differing science and demographic areas. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18, 135-143.
12. Clarke, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Education Research, 53(1), 445-459.
13. Clarke, R. E. (1985). Evidence for confounding in computer based instruction studies: Analysing the meta-analyses. Educational Technology Research and Development, 33(1), 235-262.
14. Collentine, J. (2000). Insights into the construction of grammatical knowledge provided by user-behavior tracking technologies. Language Learning & Technology, 3(2). Retrieved 12 July 2004, from http://llt.msu.edu/ vol3num2/collentine/.
15. Debski, R. (2003). Analysis of research in CALL (1980-2000) with a reflection on CALL as an academic discipline. ReCALL, 15(2), 177-188.
16. Diamond Bullet (n.d.) Usability glossary. Retrieved 16 April, 2004, from www.usabilityfirst.com/ glossary/main.cgiPfunction=search_p age.
17. Dolle, J., & Enjelvin, G. (2004). Investigating "VLE- ffectiveness" in languages. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(5), 469-490.
18. Dunkel, P. (1991). The effectiveness of research on computer-assisted instruction and computer-assisted language learning. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning and testing (pp. 5-36). New York: Newbury House.
19. Felix, U. (1989). An investigation of the effects of music, relaxation and suggestion in sceond language acquisition in schools. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia. Retrieved May 6th 2005 from www.personal.monash.edu.au/~ufelix/accel.htm.
20. Felix, U. (2001). Beyond Babel: Language learning online. Melbourne: Language Australia.
21. Felix, U. (in press). A multivariate analysis of secondary students' experience of web-based language learning. ReCALL.
22. Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2000). Statistics for the behavioral sciences (5th ed.). London, England: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
23. Hativa, N. (1994). What you design is not what you get (WYDINWYG): Cognitive, affective, and social impacts of learning with ILSC. An integration of findings from six-years of qualitative and quantitative studies. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 81-111.
24. Hoven, D. (2004). Methods in our madness? Re-examining the methodological frameworks of our field. Paper presented at the Eleventh International CALL Conference, University of Antwerp.
25. Hubbard, P. (2003). A survey of unanswered questions in CALL. CALL, 16(213), 141-155.
26. Hubbard, P. (2004). Some subject, treatment, and data collection trends in current CALL research. Paper presented at the Eleventh International CALL Conference, University of Antwerp.
27. Jamieson, J., & Chapelle, C. (2004). Issues in CALL evaluation. Paper presented at the Eleventh International CALL Conference, University of Antwerp.
28. Joy II, E. H., & Garcia, F. E. (2000). Measuring learning effectiveness: A new look at nosignificant-difference findings. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(1), 33-39.
29. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179-211.
30. Kulik, J. A. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in colleges and universities: What controlled evaluation studies say. Arlington: SRI International.
31. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. C., & Cohen, P. A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching: A meta-analysis of findings. Review of Education Research, 50(4), 525-544.
32. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1987). Review of recent literature on computer-based instruction. Contemporary Education Review, 12, 222-230.
33. Lesgold, A., Lajorie, S. P., Brunzo, M., & Eggan, G. (1992). Possibilities for assessment using computer-based apprenticeship environments. In J. S. Regian & V. J. Shute (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to automated instruction (pp. 49-80). Hillsdate, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Levy, M. (2002). CALL by design: products, processes and methods. ReCALL, .74(1), 58-85.
35. Levy, M. (2004). Interpretations of context in CALL research: the goals, the data and the methods. Paper presented at the Eleventh International CALL Conference, University of Antwerp.
36. Liao, Y. K. (1992). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing and Education, 24, 367-380.
37. Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., & Lee, S. (2002). A look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from 1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.
38. Lo, J. J., Wang, H. M., & Yeh, S. W. (2004). Effects of confidence scores and remedial instruction on prepositions learning in adaptive hypermedia. Computers & Education, 42(1), 45-63.
39. Ma, L., Nicolas, V. V., Gierts, S., & Vandamme, F. (2002). Evaluation of a virtual environment: The elementary spoken Chinese prototype (ESCvar prototype). Communication and Cognition, 55(3/4), 257-275.
40. Maddux, C. D. (1995). Research in educational computing: Problems of internal and external validity. Computers in the Schools, 11(3), 7-10.
41. McIssac, M. S., & Gunawardana, C. N. (1996). Distance education. In D. Johnassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 403-437). New York: Macmillan.
42. Miech, E. J., Nave, B., & Mosteller, F. (1996). On CALL: A review of computer-assisted language learning in US colleges and universities. Cambridge, MA: Center for Evaluation of the Program Initiatives for Children.
43. Myers, M. J. (2000). Voice recognition software and a hand-held translation machine for second-language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(1), 29-41.
44. Niemiec, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (1987). Comparative effects of computer-assisted instruction: A synthesis of reviews. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 19-37.
45. Niemiec, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (1992). The effect of computers on learning. International Journal of Education, 17, 99-108.
46. Noble, D. F. (1998). Digital Diploma Mills, part III. The bloom is off the rose. Retrieved May 6th 2005 from http://communication.used. edu/dl/ddm3.html.
47. Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
48. Nutta, J. W., Feyten, C. M., Norwood, A. L., Meros, J. N., Yoshii, M., & Ducher, J. (2002). Exploring new frontiers: What do computers contribute to teaching foreign languages in elementary school? Foreign Language Annals, 35(3), 293-306.
49. Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What's the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Retrieved 11 April 2004, from www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Difference.pdf.
50. Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
51. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The "file drawer problem" and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638-641.
52. Rumberger, R. W. (2000). A multilevel, longitudinal approach to evaluating the effectiveness of educational technology. Paper presented at the Design Meeting on Effectiveness in Educational Technology, Menlo Park, California.
53. Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Chapel Hill, NC: Office of Instructional Telecommunications, North Carolina University.
54. Ryan, A. W. (1991). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27, 161-184.
55. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
56. Singleton Jr., R. A., Straits, B. C., & Straits, M. M. (1993). Approaches to social research (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
57. Smith, B., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., & Zhao, Y. (2003). Features of CMC technologies and their impact on language learners' online interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 703-729.
58. Soe, K., Koki, S., & Chang, J. M. (2000). Effect of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) on reading achievement: a meta-analysis. Retrieved 18 February 2004, from www.prel.org/products/ Products/effect-cai.htm.
59. Suh, J. S. (2002). Effectiveness of CALL writing instruction: the voices of Korean EFL learners. Foreign Language Annals, 35(6), 669-679.
60. Van Dusen, L. M., & Worthren, B. R. (1994). The impact of integrated learning system implementation on student outcomes: Implications for research and evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 21(1), 13-24
61. Vincent, J. (2001). The role of visually rich technology in facilitating children's writing. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(3), 242-250.
62. Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Modern Language Journal, 18(4), 470-481.
63. Weasenforth, D., Biesenbach-Lucas, S., & Meloni, C. (2002). Realising constructivist objectives through collaborative technologies: Threaded discussions. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 58-86.
64. Windschitl, M. (1998). The WWW and classroom research: what path should we take? Educational Researcher, 27(1), 28-33.
65. Yeh, S. W., & Lehman, J. D. (2001). Effects of learner control and learning strategies on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning from interactive hypermedia lessons. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(2), 141-159.
66. Zhao, Y. (2001). Recent developments in technology and language learning: A literature review and metaanalysis. Retrieved 18 February 2004, from http://ott.educ.msu.edu/elanguage/about/literatur-e.asp.