Effectiveness of a dynamic usage based computer assisted language program
The current paper explores whether a Dynamic Usage Based (DUB) approach – which takes authentic meaningful
language use with repetition and scaffolding for comprehension as its basis – can also be implemented in a CALL environment. The
effectiveness of the DUB-CALL program was tested in a semester-long experiment, comparing it with a teacher-fronted DUB program
(using the same materials as the CALL program) and a traditional CLT program; 228 university undergraduates in Sri Lanka
participated. Language gains were assessed in a pre-post design with an objective General English Proficiency (GEP) test and a
writing task. The results show that the students in the DUB-CALL condition performed significantly better on the GEP test than the
students in the two teacher-fronted classes. The results of the writing tests show that all groups improved significantly, but
here there were no differences among groups.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Rationale for a dynamic usage based teaching approach
- 3.Principles of a DUB teaching approach
- Competing attentional resources and exposure first
- Frequency of exposure through repetition
- Associative learning through real life exemplars
- Comprehension and noticing through teacher scaffolding
- 4.Rationale for a DUB-CALL program
- 5.The study
- 5.1Subjects/participants
- 5.2Teacher participants
- 5.3Instructional materials
- 5.3.1DUBc and DUBp
- 5.3.2tCLT
- 5.4Measures and procedures
- 6.Analysis approach
- 6.1Results
- GEP scores
- Writing scores
- 7.Discussion and conclusion
-
References
References (41)
Abbs, B., Cook, V., & Underwood, M.
(
1980)
Authentic English for Reading 1. Oxford: OUP.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Akaike, H.
(
1974)
A new look at the statistical model identification.
IEEE transactions on automatic control, 19(6), 716–723.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Allwright, R.
(
1979)
Abdication and responsibility in language teaching.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2(1), 105–121.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Alper, D.
(Producer) &
Muccino, G. (Director) (
2002)
The Pursuit of Happyness [motion picture]. United States: Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H.
(
2008)
Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M.
(
2008)
Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items.
Journal of memory and language, 59(4), 390–412.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bidlake, E.
(
2009)
Learner Experience using self-instructed CALL: Methodological and learner insights.
Novitas-Royal, 3(2), 93–109.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
CourseLab
Software]. Moscow: WebSoft Ltd. Retrieved from
[URL]
Dickson, S. V., Chard, D. J., & Simmons, D. C.
(
1993)
An integrated reading/writing curriculum: A focus on scaffolding.
LD Forum, 18(4), 12–16.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dobrovolny, J.
(
2006)
How adults learn from self-paced, technology-based corporate training: New focus for learners, new focus for designers.
Distance education, 27(2), 155–170.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, N. C.
(
2002)
Frequency effects in language processing.
Studies in second language acquisition, 24(02), 143–188.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gass, S. M.
(
2013)
Input interaction and the second language learner. London: Routledge.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grgurović, M., Chapelle, C. A., & Shelley, M. C.
(
2013)
A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning.
ReCALL, 25(02), 165–198.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Herrell, A. L., & Jordan, M. L.
(
2015)
50 strategies for teaching English language learners (5th ed.). Pearson.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hong, N. T. P.
(
2013)
A dynamic usage-based approach to second language teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kao, P., & Windeatt, S.
(
2014)
Low-achieving language learners in self-directed multimedia environments: Transforming understanding. In
J.-B. Son (Ed.),
Computer-assisted language learning: Learners, teachers and tools (pp. 1–19). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing (APACALL).
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krashen, S. D.
(
1981)
Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krashen, S., & Terrell, T.
(
1983)
The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lafford, B. A., Lafford, P. A., & Sykes, J.
(
2007)
Entre dicho y hecho. An assessment of the application of research from second language acquisition and related fields to the creation of Spanish CALL materials for lexical acquisition.
Calico Journal, 24(3), 497–529.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
1987)
Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites (Vol. 11). Stanford: Stanford university press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
2008)
Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1997)
Construct validity in SLA research: A response to Firth and Wagner.
The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 318–323.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nagasundaram, P.
(
1996)
What’s wrong with the ELT program in our country? Navasilu, 141, 93–97.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
(
2000)
Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis.
Language learning, 50(3), 417–528.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pennington, M.
(
1996)
When input becomes intake: Tracing the sources of teachers’ attitude change. In
D. Freeman, &
J. Richards (Eds.),
Teacher learning in Language Teaching (pp. 320–348). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pezdek, K., Lehrer, A., & Simon, S.
(
1984)
The relationship between reading and cognitive processing of television and radio.
Child Development, 55(6), 2072–2082.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Core Team
(
2015)
R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from
[URL]
Reinders, H., & Hubbard, P.
(
2013)
CALL and learner autonomy: Affordances and constraints. In
M. Thomas,
H. Reinders, &
M. Warschauer (Eds.),
Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 359–375). New York: Continuum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Roberts, J. T.
(
1986)
The use of dialogues in teaching transactional competence in foreign languages.
ELT Documents 124: The practice of communicative teaching. Oxford: The British Council/Pergamon.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rogers, C. V., & Medley, F. W.
(
1988)
Language with a purpose: Using authentic materials in the foreign language classroom.
Foreign Language Annals, 21(5), 467–478.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schmid, H. J.
(
2015)
A blueprint of the entrenchment-and-conventionalization model.
Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 3(1), 3–25.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schmid, H. J.
(
2017)
How language works: A dynamic model of how language use, minds, and societies shape linguistic structure, variation, and change. Paper presented at the Thinking Doing Learning conference, April 21, Munich.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P.
(
1997)
The influence of planning and post-task activities on accuracy and complexity in task-based learning.
Language Teaching Research, 11, 185–211.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Soyemi, J., Ogunyinka, O. I., & Soyemi, O. B.
(
2011)
Integrating self-paced e-learning with conventional classroom learning in Nigeria educational system.
Proceedings of the 1st International Technology, Education and Environment Conference. Retrieved from
[URL]
Tomasello, M.
(
2003)
Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomlinson, B., & Masuhara, H.
(Eds.) (
2010)
Research for materials development in language learning. London: Continuum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
VanPatten, B.
(Ed.) (
2004)
Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Oxford: Routledge.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verspoor, M. H., & Hong, N. T. P.
(
2013)
A dynamic usage-based approach to Communicative Language Teaching.
European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 22–54.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verspoor, M., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X.
(
2012)
A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239–263.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wilkins, D.
(
1976)
Notional syllabuses.
Bulletin CILA (Commission interuniversitaire suisse de linguistique appliquée)(«Bulletin VALS-ASLA» depuis 1994), 241, 5–17.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by 2 other publications
Rousse-Malpat, Audrey, Rasmus Steinkrauss, Martijn Wieling & Marjolijn Verspoor
2022.
Communicative language teaching: Structure-Based or Dynamic Usage-Based?.
Journal of the European Second Language Association 6:1
► pp. 20 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Rousse-Malpat, Audrey, Lise Koote, Rasmus Steinkrauss & Marjolijn Verspoor
2021.
Parlez-vous francais?Effects of structure-based versus dynamic-usage-based approaches on oral proficiency.
Language Teaching Research ► pp. 136216882110402 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.