Oral interaction around computers in the project-oriented call classroom

Language Learning and Technology

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 121-145

  Jeon Ellis, Gumock ^a   Debski, Robert ^a   Wigglesworth, Gillian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 24944544229     PISSN: 10943501     EISSN: 10943501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Allright, R. L. (1984). The importance of interaction in classroom language learning. Applied Linguistics 5, 156-171.
2. Anton, M., & DiCamilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 314-342.
3. Atkinson, D. (2002). Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 86(4), 525-545.
4. Barson, J. (1997). Space, time and form in the project-based foreign language classroom. In R. Debski, J. Gassin, & M. Smith (Eds). Language learning through social computing (Occasional Papers 16; pp. 3-37). Parkville, Victoria: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
5. Beiz, J. A. (2002). The myth of the deficient communicator. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 59-82.
6. Breen, M., & Candlin, C. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics 1, 89-112.
7. Candlin, C. (1987). Towards task-based language learning. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds). Language Learning Tasks (pp. 5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
8. Candlin, C., & Murphy, D. (1987). Language learning tasks. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
9. Chapelle, C. (1997). Call in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigm? Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 19-43. Retrieved April 23, 2003, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/chapelle/
10. Coughlan, P., & Duff. P. A. (1994). Same task, different activities: Analysis of SLA task from an activity theory perspective. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 173-193). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
11. Debski, R. (2000). Exploring the re-creation of a CALL innovation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(4-5), 307-332.
12. Debski, R., Gassin, J., & Smith, M. (Eds.). (1997). Language learning through social computing (Occasional Papers 16). Parkville, Victoria: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
13. nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33-56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
15. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
16. Ewing, M. (2000). Conversations of Indonesian language students on computer-mediated projects: Linguistic responsibility and control. Computer Assisted language Learning Journal, 13(4-5), 333-356.
17. Goodfellow, R., & Lamy, M-N. (1999). "Reflective conversation" in the virtual language classroom. Language Learning and Technology, 2(2), 43-61. Retrieved November 5, 2004, http://llt.msu.edu/ vol2num2/article2/
18. Gu, P. (2002). Effects of project-based CALL on Chinese EFL learners. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching 12, 195-210.
19. Hall, J. K., & Verplaetse, L. S.(2000). The development of second and foreign language through classroom interaction. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp.1-20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Lantolf, J. P. (2002). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 104-114). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
21. Lantolf, J. P. (2003). Intrapersonal communication and internalisation in the second language classroom. In A. Kozulin, G. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context (pp. 349-370). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
22. Leahy, C. (2004). Observations in the computer room: L2 output and learner behavior. ReCALL, 16(1), p. 124-144.
23. Lee, L. (2004). Learners' perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the US. Language Learning and Technology, 5(1), 83-100. Retrieved March 21, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/ vol8num1/lee/
24. Legutke, M., & Thomas, H. (1991). Process and experience in the language classroom. New York: Longman.
25. Long, M. H. (1997). Focus on form in task-based language teaching. Text from the McGraw-Hill videoconference: Grammar in the communicative classroom. Retrieved June 15, 2004, from http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/foreignlang/top.htm
26. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. London: Sage Publications.
27. Meskill, C. (1999). Computers as tools for sociocollaborative language learning. In K. Cameron (Ed.), Computer assisted language learning: Media, design and applications (pp. 141-162). Exton, PA: Swets & Zeitlinger.
28. Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching English language learners with computers. Language Learners & Technology, 9(1), 46-59. Retrieved May 20, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num1/meskill/
29. Mueller-Hartmann, A. (2000). The role of tasks in promoting intercultural learning in electronic learning networks. Language Learning & Technology, 4(2), 129-147. Retrieved November 6, 2004, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/ muller/
30. Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centred curriculum. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
31. Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Piper, A. (1986). Conversation and the computer: A study of the conversational spin-off generated among learners of English as a foreign language working in groups. System, 14(2), 187-198.
33. Prabhu (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
34. Rogoff, (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. Storch, N. (2002). Patters of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119-158.
36. nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Sullivan, P. (2000). Practicing safe visual rhetoric on the World Wide Web. Computers and composition 18, 103-121.
38. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
39. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal 82, 320-337.
40. Thorne, S. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 38-67. Retrieved January 9, 2004, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/thorne/
41. Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 82-99. Retrieved November 6, 2004, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/TOYODA/
42. Turnbull, M., & Arnett, K. (2002). Teachers' uses of the target and first language in second and foreign language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 204-218.
43. van Lier, L. (2002). An ecological-semiotic perspective on language and linguistics. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition and language socialization (pp. 140-164). New York: Continuum.
44. Warschauer, M. (2000). On-line learning in second language classrooms. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 41-58). New York: Cambridge University Press.
45. Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.