Metaphors that shape and guide CALL research

CALL Research Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 25-40

  Meskill, Carla ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 71849098776     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410613578     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. Adamson, H., Herron, J., & Kaess, D. (1995). An experiment in using multimedia to teach language through content. Journal of Intensive English Studies, 9, 24-37.
2. Burbules, N., & Callister, T. (2000). Watch it: The risks and promises of information technology for education. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
3. Bush, C., & Larson, J. (1983). Montevidisco [Computer software] (Version 1.0.). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
4. Chen, C. (2003). The use of email for interpersonal communication in a second language: A comparative case study of two Chinese speakers' email practices in English. Unpublished dissertation, State University of New York at Albany.
5. Crookall, D., Coleman, D., & Oxford, R. (1992). Computer-mediated language learning environments: Prolegomenon to a research framework. Computer Assisted Language Learning Journal, 5, 93-120.
6. Daily, B., & Steiner, R. (1998). The influence of group decision support systems on contribution and commitment levels in multicultural and culturally homogeneous decision-making groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 14, 147-162.
7. Darhower, M. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19, 249-277.
8. Furstenberg, G., & Malone, S. (1993). A la rencontre de Philippe. New Haven: Yale University Press.
9. Gale, L. (1983). Montevidisco: An anecdotal history of an interactive videodisc. CALICO Journal, 1, 42-46.
10. Garner, R., & Gillingham, M. (1996). Internet communication in six classrooms: Conversations across time, space and culture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11. Hawisher, G., & Selfe, C. (Eds.). (2002). Passions, pedagogies and 21st century technologies. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
12. Hawisher, G., & Sullivan, P. (1999). Fleeting images: Women visually writing the Web. In G. Hawisher &C. Selfe (Eds.), Passions, pedagogies and 21st century technologies (pp. 268-291). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
13. Higgins, J. (1988). Language, learners and computers. New York: Longman.
14. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Jonassen, D. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.
16. Jones, G. (1986). Computer simulations in language teaching-The KING DO Mexperiment. System, 14, 179-186.
17. Kulik, J. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say. Arlington, VA: SRI International. Retrieved October 3, 2003, from http://www.sri.com/policy/csted/reports/sandt/it/Kulik_ITinK-12_Main_Report.pdf
18. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
19. Lam, W. (2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 457-482.
20. Laurel, B. (1991). Computer as theatre. New York: Addison-Wesley.
21. Lelouche, R. (1998). Influence of communicative situation variables on linguistic form. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 11, 523-541.
22. Levy, M., & Hinkfuss, J. (1990). Program design and student talk at computers. CALL Journal, 1, 21-26.
23. Lévy, P. (2001). Cyberculture (P. Bonommo, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
24. Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25. Meskill, C. (1991). The role of strategies advisement for on-line language learning employing interactive videodisc. System, 19, 277-287.
26. Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2004) Teaching and learning with telecommunications:Instructional discourse in a hybrid Russian class. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(2), 103-119.
27. Meskill, C., Mossop, J., & Bates, R. (1999). Electronic texts and English as a second language Environments. Albany, NY: National Research Center on English Learning and Achievement.
28. Mitra, A. (1997). Diaspora websites: Ingroup and outgroup discourse. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 158-181.
29. Murray, G. (1999). Autonomy and language learning in a simulated environment. System, 17, 295-308.
30. Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research approach. Language Learning and Technology, 3, 75-87.
31. Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning Technology, 1, 82-93.
32. Ozick, C. (1989). Metaphor and memory: Essays. New York: Knopf Publishing Group.
33. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
34. Piper, A. (1986). Conversation and the computer: As study on the conversational spin-off generated among learners of EFL in groups. System, 14, 157-198.
35. Scheffler, I. (1991). In praise of the cognitive emotions. New York: Routledge.
36. Scollon, S., & Scollon, R. (1982, October). Run trilogy: Can Tommy read? Paper presented at the symposium Children's Response to a Literate Environment: Literacy before Schooling, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
37. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27, 4-12.
38. Shea, P. (2000). Leveling the playing field: A study of captioned interactive video for second language learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22, 243-263.
39. Sotillo, S. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning and Technology, 4, 82-119.
40. Stevens, V. (1984). Implications of research and theory concerning the influence of control on the effectiveness of CALL. CALICO Journal, 2, 28-33, 48.
41. Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Yang, J., & Akahori, K. (1999). An evaluation of Japanese CALL systems on the WWW comparing a freely input approach with multiple selection. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12, 59-79.