Abstract
There is potential in incorporating technology for language learning. Studies investigating the potential that technology offers to English language pedagogy indicated that it supported the learning of vocabulary (Cross, 2011; Prince, 2012; Sydorenko, 2010), stimulated interaction to encourage language output (Acar & Kobayashi, 2011; Franciosi, 2011; Sagae, Kumar, & Johnson, 2009), encouraged collaboration in language learning to share, adapt, and create meaning (Jalkanen & Vaarala, 2013), and enhanced the learning of grammar for writing (Acar, Geluso, & Shiki, 2011).
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Acar, A., & Kobayashi, H. (2011). Whys and how’s of language exchange meetings. CALL-EJ, 12(2), 1–10.
Acar, A., Geluso, J., & Shiki, T. (2011). How can search engines improve your writing? CALL-EJ, 12(1), 1–10.
Albert, A., & Kormos, J. (2011). Creativity and narrative task performance: An exploratory study. Language Learning, 61(1), 73–99.
Antoniadou, V. (2011). Using activity theory to understand the contradictions in an online transatlantic collaboration between student-teachers of English as a foreign Language. ReCALL, 23(3), 233–251.
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20.
Bacow, L. S., Bowen, W. G., Guthrie, K. M., Lack, K. A., & Long, M. P. (2012). Barriers to adoption of online learning systems in U.S. higher education. Retrieved from http://www.sr.ithaka.org/researchpublications/barriers-adoption-online-learning-systems-us-higher-education
Baker, M., Bernard F.-X., & Dumez-Féroc, I. (2012). Integrating computer-supported collaborative learning into the classroom: The anatomy of a failure. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 161–176.
Bakhurst, D. (2009). Reflections on activity theory. Educational Review, 61(2), 197–210.
Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundation of learning environments (pp. 25–56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barab, S. A., Evans, M. A., & Baek, E. O. (2004). Activity theory as a lens for characterizing the participatory unit. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communities and technology (pp. 199–214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bates, T. (2010). New challenges for universities: Why they must change. In U.-D. Ehlers & D. Schneckenberg (Eds.), Changing cultures in higher education: Moving ahead to future learning (pp. 15–25). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Bax, S. (2000). Putting technology in its place: ICT in modern foreign language teaching. In K. Field (Ed.), Issues in modern foreign languages teaching (pp. 208–219). London, UK: Routledge Falmer.
Bax, S. (2003). CALL – past, present and future. System, 31(1), 13–28.
Bax, S. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 1–15.
Beglau, M., Hare, J. C., Foltos, L., Gann, K., James, J., Jobe, H., … Smith, B. (2011). Technology, coaching, and community: Power partners for improved professional development in primary and secondary education. An International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) White Paper, Special conference release, Eugene, Oregon. Retrieved from http://www.instructionalcoach.org/images/downloads/ISTE_Whitepaper_June_Final_Edits.pdf
Blake, R. (2013). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Computers & Education, 50(2), 475–490.
Brandau-Brown, F. (2013). Trend becomes tradition: The educational challenges of new communication technologies. Southern Communication Journal, 78(1), 1–7.
Christensen, C., Aaron, S., & Clark, W. (2002). Disruption in education. In M. Devlin, R. Larson, & J. Meyerson (Eds.), The internet and the university: Forum 2001. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffpiu013.pdf
Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural–historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Compton, L. K. (2009). Preparing language teachers to teach language online: A look at skills, roles, and responsibilities. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 73–99.
Cross, J. (2011). Comprehending news videotexts: The influence of the visual content. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 44–68.
Cutrim Schmid, E. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1553–1568.
Dennen, V. P., & Burner, K. J. (2008). The cognitive apprenticeship model in educational practice. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. V. Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 425–439). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
Egbert, J., Huff, L., McNeil, L., Preuss, C., & Sellen, J. (2009). Pedagogy, process, and classroom context: Integrating teacher voice and experience into research on technology-enhanced language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 754–768.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity–theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity-theoretical conceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–18). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Franciosi, S. J. (2011). A comparison of computer game and language-learning task design using flow theory. CALL-EJ, 12(1), 11–25.
Franken, M., & Rau, C. (2009). Enabling conditions for professional development of te reo Māori teachers. In S. May (Ed.), LED 2007: Second International Conference on Language Education and Diversity [CD-ROM]. Hamilton, New Zealand: The University of Waikato.
Garrett, N. (2009). Computer-assisted language learning trends and issues revisited: Integrating innovation. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 719–740.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105.
Gruba, P., & Hinkelman, D. (2012). Blending technologies in second language classrooms. Hampshire, England: Plagrave MacMillan.
Guichon, N., Bétrancourt, M., & Prié, Y. (2012). Managing written and oral negative feedback in a synchronous online teaching situation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 181–197.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Andrea, R. (2012). Tasks, teacher feedback, and learner modified output in naturally occurring classroom interaction. Language Learning, 62(3), 851–879.
Haydn, T., & Barton, R. (2008). ‘First do no harm’: Factors influencing teachers’ ability and willingness to use ICT in their subject teaching. Computers & Education, 51, 439–447.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(2), 171–183.
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456.
Issroff, K., & Scanlon, E. (2002). Using technology in higher education: An activity theory perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 77–83.
Jalkanen, J., & Vaarala, H. (2013). Digital texts for learning Finnish: Shared resources and emerging practices. Language Learning & Technology, 17(1), 107–124.
Johnson, E. M., Ramanair, J., & Brine, J. (2010). ‘It’s not necessary to have this board to learn English, but it’s helpful’: Student and teacher perceptions of interactive whiteboard use. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 199–212.
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC Horizon report: 2013 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000, October). Learning as activity. Paper presented at the Meaning of Learning Project, Learning Development Institute, Presidential Session at AECT, Denver, CO.
Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Preface. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. iii–ix). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.darrouzet-nardi.net/bonnie/Kaptelinin_Nardi_CHI12_Affordances.pdf
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2012). Affordances in HCI: Toward a mediated action perspective. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 967–976). New York, NY: ACM.
Karabulut, A. (2013). Factors impacting university-level language teachers’ technology use and integration (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Iowa State University, Iowa, IA. Retrieved from http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4150&context=etd
Karlström, P., & Lundin, E. (2013). CALL in the zone of proximal development: Novelty effects and teacher guidance. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(5),412–429.
Keengwe, J., & Kang, J-J. (2013). A triangular prism model: Using activity theory to examine online learning communities. Education and Information Technologies, 18(1), 85–93.
Kessler, G. (2013). Collaborative language learning in co-constructed participatory culture. CALICO Journal, 30(3), 307–322.
Kessler, G., & Plakans, L. (2008). Does teachers’ confidence with CALL equal innovative and integrated use? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 269–282.
Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59, 1109–1121.
Kreijns, K., Vermeulen, M., Kirschner, P. A., van Buuren, H., & van Acker, F. (2013). Adopting the Integrative Model of Behaviour Prediction to explain teachers’ willingness to use ICT: A perspective for research on teachers’ ICT usage in pedagogical practices. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(1), 55–71.
Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. A Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 17–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Laferrière, T., Hamel, C., & Searson, M. (2013). Barriers to successful implementation of technology integration in educational settings: A case study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 463–473.
Lai, K.-W., Khaddage, F., & Knezek, G. (2013). Blending student technology experiences in formal and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 414–425.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1–27). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (Eds.). (1994). Vygotskyan approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Leont’ev, A. N. (1974). The problem of activity in psychology. Soviet Psychology, 13(2), 4–33.
Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of mind. Moscow, Russia: Progress.
Li, Z. (2013). Natural, practical and social contexts of e-Learning: A critical realist account for learning and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 280–291.
Liang, R., & Chen, D-T. V. (2012). Online learning: Trends, potential and challenges. Creative Education, 3(8), 1332–1335.
Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2005). Foreign language learning with CMC: Forms of online instructional discourse in a hybrid Russian class. System, 33(1), 89–105.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Mitchell, R. (2013). What is professional development, how does it occur in individuals, and how may it be used by educational leaders and managers for the purpose of school improvement? Professional Development in Education, 39(3), 387–400.
Naidu, S. (2006). E-Learning: A guidebook of principles, procedures and practices (2nd ed.). New Delhi, India: Commonwealth Educational Media Center for Asia. Retrieved from http://dspace.col.org/bitstream/123456789/138/1/e-learning_guidebook.pdf
Nardi, B. A. (1996). Studying context: A comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and humancomputer interaction (pp. 69–102). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. M. (2006). Exploring sociocultural perspectives on race, culture, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 449–475.
Nunn, R. (2006). Designing holistic units for task-based learning. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 69–93. Retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/30635081/September_2006_Proceedings_final920.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1430852284&Signature=3lX034xCCC%2B0EpgmH45KHkakypw%3D&response-content-disposition=inline#page=122
Perez, M., Peters, E., Clarebout, G., & Desmet, P. (2014). Effects of captioning video comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. Language Learning and Technology, 18(1), 118–141. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2014/monteroperezetal.pdf
Prince, P. (2012). Towards an instructional programme for L2 vocabulary: Can a story help. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 103–120.
Rambe, P. (2012). Activity theory and technology mediated interaction: Cognitive scaffolding using question-based consultation on Facebook. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(8), 1333–1361.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Second language teacher education today. RELC Journal, 39(2), 158–177.
Richards, J. C. (2010). Competence and performance in language teaching. RELC Journal, 41(2), 101–122.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (2011). Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61(1), 1–36.
Sagae, A., Kumar, R., & Johnson, W. L. (2009, July). Scaling up in speaking proficiency by supporting robust learning behaviors. Paper presented at the AIED 2009 Workshop, Brighton, England.
Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education, 23(1), 1–24.
Selwyn, N. (2012). Making sense of young people, education and digital technology: The role of sociological theory. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 81–96.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Singh, K., Schrape, J., & Kelly, J. (2012). Emerging strategies for a sustainable approach to professional development. In M. Brown, M. Hartnett, & T. Stewart (Eds.), Future challenges, sustainable futures. Proceedings Ascilite Wellington (pp. 833–842). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wellington12/2012/images/custom/singh,_kuki_-_sustaining_professional.pdf
Smith, C. A., Moyer, C. A., & Schugar, H. R. (2011). Helping teachers develop positive dispositions about technology-based learning: What a brief global learning project revealed. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), 1–14.
Steel, C. (2009). Reconciling university teacher beliefs to create learning designs for LMS environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 399–420. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/steel.html
Sydorenko, T. (2010). Modality of input and vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 50–73.
Toetenel, L. (2014). Social networking: A collaborative open educational resource. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(2), 149–162.
van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning. A sociocultural perspective. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Vinagre, M., & Muñoz, B. (2011). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and language accuracy in telecollaborative exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 72–103. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2011/vinagremunoz.pdf
Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403–413.
Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159–180.
Ware, P., & O’Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43–63.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 85–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Yalden, J. (1987). Principles of course design for language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Yang, H. C., & Sun, Y. C. (2013). It is more than knowledge seeking: Examining the effects of OpenCourseWare lectures on vocabulary acquisition in English as a foreign language (EFL) context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 1–20.
Zou, B. (2013). Teachers’ support in using computers for developing students’ listening and speaking skills in pre-sessional English courses. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 83–99.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ramanair, J. (2016). Turning Challenges into Opportunities. In: Gedera, D.S.P., Williams, P.J. (eds) Activity Theory in Education. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-387-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-387-2_8
Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam
Online ISBN: 978-94-6300-387-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)