1. "Language Learning and Technology: what have we learnt ?" Marie-Noëlle Lamy TELLP MMU 03 July 2009

2. Elina Brotherus Suites françaises 2

3. Design your courses as if they were aimed at a lighthouse keeper off the coast of Scotland. Walter Perry (1st Open University Vice-Chancellor,1970)

4. Online tutorials

5. 5 Tools used in HE/corporate language learning Asynchronous Forums (tutorial use) Podcasts & videocasts Web 2.0 tools Synchronous (tutorial use) Chats (with or without video enhancement) Audiographic platforms Virtual worlds Mobile phones, PDAs

6. Flashmeeting

7. Elluminate

8. http://www.digitalspace.com/avatars/traveler.html Traveler

9. 9 What does the research say? The “simple question to which everyone wants an answer : ‘Does the use of network-based language teaching lead to better language learning?’ turns out to be not so simple” Warschauer, M. and Kern, R. (eds) (2000) Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

10. 10 7 meta-studies of global CMCL Hassan et al., 2005 14 articles from 8 journals Hubbard, 2005 78 articles from 4 journals Jung, 2005 5301 articles from 200 journals & books Kern, 2006 36 studies from 12 journals & books Levy, 2000 47 articles from 5 journals & books Liu et al., 2002 70 articles from 21 journals Zhao, 2003 9 articles from 5 journals

11. 11 Teaching and learning online: the ingredients meDiation

12. Practices and design Formal learning Intra-group Inter-group (telecollaboration) Formal or informal learning Tandem, tridem Mobile projects

13. Hampel and Stickler’s pyramid of real-time online teacher skills

14. Vetter’s circle of real-time online teacher tasks

17. 17 Major challenge Feedback loop Copyright http://www.bloghighlight.com

18. Assessment of learner achievement in CMCL Mismatches between collaborative online activity and individually assessed outcomes

19. 19 AcquisitionA very guarded set of findings CMCL (asynchronous) facilitates higher-order thinking Complexity in synchronous CMCL does not promote LL Socio-collaborative pedagogies not best suited to acquisition research DiscourseAllows a great variety of discourse forms: from formal to informal, from text- based to visual. Prepares for real situations of e-communication e-LiteracyCMCL facilitates techno-literacy; techno-literacy facilitates group cohesion and task completion. Software design: telepresence? Emoticons? Sub-grouping facilities? Task design Oral skillsSynchronous CMCL promotes speaking (even text chat, does!) Participation patterns Quantity: CMCL increases learner engagement / is beset by drop-out. This changes if assessment is tied in. Quality: CMCL can affords student-centredness; but it can allow some participants to dominate. Socio-affective skillsCMCL provides opportunitiess for mutual support and for the ‘hyperpersonal’ to develop. Intercultural issuesTelecollaboration can work; but does not per se guarantee ICC learning. Emergence of issues of identity and offline worldviews. Group dynamicsTeachers become facilitators, learners can genuinely contribute

20. m.n.lamy@open.ac.uk http://lamymn.wordpress.com/lamy-publications/ Updated on UK developments? Go to the Subject Centre Website http://www.llas.ac.uk/ More info? Free online access to major journals? English-language: Language Learning and Technology http://llt.msu.edu/ http://llt.msu.edu/ French-language: ALSIC http://alsic.revues.org/