I’m sure most teachers will tell you that their discipline is the most challenging to teach, thus nullifying the claim I am about to make. But if the availability of instructional software is any indication, modern language certainly deserves a place in the proverbial “running.”
I assert (I am sure not unchallenged), that we as modern language teachers have an enormous and extremely difficult task due entirely to the nature of our discipline: teaching modern language is the teaching of everything. Thanks in part to the laziness or ignorance (or fun cocktail of both) of language textbook publishers, in the eyes of the unfamiliar our material has been boiled down to two “essential” aspects: grammar and vocabulary. In reality, however, the content of our classes is so much broader. We are tasked with teaching history and current day, the spoken language and the unspoken, slang, music, dance, food, social values and structures, religion, literature, etymology, politics, current events, economics, social justice, and everything else that books and schools attempt to fit neatly under the enormously all-encompassing title of “culture.”
It is for this reason that instructional software does not even begin to skim the surface of our content area. The few tools that exist for classroom-based modern language learning are all focused in the areas that “define” modern language: grammar and vocabulary. These two aspects of language are well-contained and straightforward: easy to test, drill, and assess, making them the ideal focuses for instructional software.
Naturally, this is problematic for modern language teachers attempting to use (or write about) instructional software in the classroom. There is no prescribed way to teach “culture” - no order or universally accepted specific “essential” information. There is no possible way to simulate “culture” without actually experiencing it, no games or tutorials that can teach or reinforce key cultural concepts. For this reason, the market for instructional software for language learning is relatively empty (and what does exist focuses on the “important” aspects of language: grammar and vocabulary). So we as modern language teachers are forced to be extremely creative in how we use software tools, essentially creating our own instructional software to specifically cover the aspects of the language we choose to teach (and the order in which we choose to teach them).
That said, for the sake of this assignment I will discuss the types of instructional software and I will do my best to come up with examples of software relevant to my subject area.
In the course textbook I appreciated the difference provided by Roblyer concerning the difference between instructional software and tool software: the former is “used solely to support instruction and/or learning”, and the latter “serve[s] many purposes other than learning” (76) such as word processing, presentation, communication, etc. The textbook also identifies 5 types of instructional software: drill and practice, tutorial, simulations, instructional games, and problem-solving software.
Drill and practice software provides students the opportunity to work with “example items, usually one at a time, and receive feedback on their correctness” (Roblyer 80). There are myriad examples of drill and practice software designed to reinforce certain aspects of language (vocabulary and grammar). Software such as Memrise is a flashcard-type application that helps students practice and memorize vocabulary. Websites such as those provided with many textbooks such as the SuperSite from Vistas Higher Learning provided drills with enhanced feedback for grammar and vocabulary as well.
Tutorial software is “an entire instructional sequence on a topic…[and is] usually expected to be a self-contained instructional unit” (Roblyer 84). For the reasons explained above, this type of software is very difficult to develop for modern language. The only example I could think of that provides a self-paced and self-contained learning environment for language is software such as Rosetta Stone, which has almost no utility in a modern language classroom. As the textbook suggests, this type of software could be useful for low-demand language classes where a teacher is unavailable (Roblyer 86).
Simulation software provides students with a “computerized model of a real or imagined system that is designed to teach how the system works” (Roblyer 88). Given that modern langauage lacks any type of concrete or imaged “system” that could be simulated, these types of software for language are almost an impossibility. However, teachers can use tools to create simulated experiences such as conversations via recorded audio or simulated practice using navigational language using Google Earth.
Instructional Games are essentially drill and practice activities put into the context of a game or competition due to the added “game-like rules and/or competition” and differ from drill and practice due to their “different instructional connotation[s] to students” (Roblyer 93). Because specific aspects of language lend themselves well to the drill and practice model (i.e. grammar and vocabulary), instructional games are quite common in the modern language classroom. Sites like Kahoot and templates for game show-based classroom games such as Jeopardy or Are Smarter Than a 5th Grader? are good examples of instructional games used to learn or reinforce vocabulary and grammar.
Problem-solving software gives students the chance to practice skills involved in solving content-based problems (97). While a fantastically rewarding activity that does not necessarily require software, the problem of level and ability arises with problem-solving software in modern language classes. Solving problems in the target language is extremely good practice but the activity needs to be level appropriate (meaning it needs to utilize the verb tenses, grammatical structures, and other information that students are familiar with) in order for it to be a productive exercise. Therefore, this type of software could useful in upper level language classes but needs to be very tailored to the specific vocabulary, grammar, and “cultural” pieces of that particular lesson. This becomes an almost impossible challenge since (as previously explained) there is no prescribed order for teaching language and thus the burden of scaffolding (and then the project itself) falls on the teacher. Thus, problem solving software has almost no place in the language-learning environment since it can be much more effectively designed and implemented by the teacher herself/himself.
Works Cited
Roblyer, MD. Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching Enhanced Pearson Etext Access Card. 7th ed. Nova Southeastern University: Pearson College Div, 2015. Web.
I assert (I am sure not unchallenged), that we as modern language teachers have an enormous and extremely difficult task due entirely to the nature of our discipline: teaching modern language is the teaching of everything. Thanks in part to the laziness or ignorance (or fun cocktail of both) of language textbook publishers, in the eyes of the unfamiliar our material has been boiled down to two “essential” aspects: grammar and vocabulary. In reality, however, the content of our classes is so much broader. We are tasked with teaching history and current day, the spoken language and the unspoken, slang, music, dance, food, social values and structures, religion, literature, etymology, politics, current events, economics, social justice, and everything else that books and schools attempt to fit neatly under the enormously all-encompassing title of “culture.”
It is for this reason that instructional software does not even begin to skim the surface of our content area. The few tools that exist for classroom-based modern language learning are all focused in the areas that “define” modern language: grammar and vocabulary. These two aspects of language are well-contained and straightforward: easy to test, drill, and assess, making them the ideal focuses for instructional software.
Naturally, this is problematic for modern language teachers attempting to use (or write about) instructional software in the classroom. There is no prescribed way to teach “culture” - no order or universally accepted specific “essential” information. There is no possible way to simulate “culture” without actually experiencing it, no games or tutorials that can teach or reinforce key cultural concepts. For this reason, the market for instructional software for language learning is relatively empty (and what does exist focuses on the “important” aspects of language: grammar and vocabulary). So we as modern language teachers are forced to be extremely creative in how we use software tools, essentially creating our own instructional software to specifically cover the aspects of the language we choose to teach (and the order in which we choose to teach them).
That said, for the sake of this assignment I will discuss the types of instructional software and I will do my best to come up with examples of software relevant to my subject area.
In the course textbook I appreciated the difference provided by Roblyer concerning the difference between instructional software and tool software: the former is “used solely to support instruction and/or learning”, and the latter “serve[s] many purposes other than learning” (76) such as word processing, presentation, communication, etc. The textbook also identifies 5 types of instructional software: drill and practice, tutorial, simulations, instructional games, and problem-solving software.
Drill and practice software provides students the opportunity to work with “example items, usually one at a time, and receive feedback on their correctness” (Roblyer 80). There are myriad examples of drill and practice software designed to reinforce certain aspects of language (vocabulary and grammar). Software such as Memrise is a flashcard-type application that helps students practice and memorize vocabulary. Websites such as those provided with many textbooks such as the SuperSite from Vistas Higher Learning provided drills with enhanced feedback for grammar and vocabulary as well.
Tutorial software is “an entire instructional sequence on a topic…[and is] usually expected to be a self-contained instructional unit” (Roblyer 84). For the reasons explained above, this type of software is very difficult to develop for modern language. The only example I could think of that provides a self-paced and self-contained learning environment for language is software such as Rosetta Stone, which has almost no utility in a modern language classroom. As the textbook suggests, this type of software could be useful for low-demand language classes where a teacher is unavailable (Roblyer 86).
Simulation software provides students with a “computerized model of a real or imagined system that is designed to teach how the system works” (Roblyer 88). Given that modern langauage lacks any type of concrete or imaged “system” that could be simulated, these types of software for language are almost an impossibility. However, teachers can use tools to create simulated experiences such as conversations via recorded audio or simulated practice using navigational language using Google Earth.
Instructional Games are essentially drill and practice activities put into the context of a game or competition due to the added “game-like rules and/or competition” and differ from drill and practice due to their “different instructional connotation[s] to students” (Roblyer 93). Because specific aspects of language lend themselves well to the drill and practice model (i.e. grammar and vocabulary), instructional games are quite common in the modern language classroom. Sites like Kahoot and templates for game show-based classroom games such as Jeopardy or Are Smarter Than a 5th Grader? are good examples of instructional games used to learn or reinforce vocabulary and grammar.
Problem-solving software gives students the chance to practice skills involved in solving content-based problems (97). While a fantastically rewarding activity that does not necessarily require software, the problem of level and ability arises with problem-solving software in modern language classes. Solving problems in the target language is extremely good practice but the activity needs to be level appropriate (meaning it needs to utilize the verb tenses, grammatical structures, and other information that students are familiar with) in order for it to be a productive exercise. Therefore, this type of software could useful in upper level language classes but needs to be very tailored to the specific vocabulary, grammar, and “cultural” pieces of that particular lesson. This becomes an almost impossible challenge since (as previously explained) there is no prescribed order for teaching language and thus the burden of scaffolding (and then the project itself) falls on the teacher. Thus, problem solving software has almost no place in the language-learning environment since it can be much more effectively designed and implemented by the teacher herself/himself.
Works Cited
Roblyer, MD. Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching Enhanced Pearson Etext Access Card. 7th ed. Nova Southeastern University: Pearson College Div, 2015. Web.