Article 162

Peter A. Lafford and Barbara A.
Lafford 679
CALICO Journal, 22 (3), p-p 679-709. 2005 CALICO Journal
CMC Technologies for Teaching Foreign
Languages: Whats on the Horizon?
PETER A. LAFFORD
BARBARA A. LAFFORD
Arizona State University
ABSTRACT
Computer-mediated communication (CMC) technologies have begun to play an
increasingly important role in the teaching of foreign/second (L2) languages.
Its use in this context is supported by a growing body of CMC research that
highlights the importance of the negotiation of meaning and computer-based in-
teraction in the process of second language acquisition (SLA) (Chapelle, 1998;
Payne & Whitney, 2002). Recent research has also pointed out the importance
of situated cognition (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and the use of task-
based activities (Doughty & Long, 2003) to allow students to acquire language in
meaningful contexts for specic purposes. In this paper, various CMC technolo-
gies will be described and critically evaluated for their possible applications in
task-based foreign language learning activities. First, general issues of connec-
tivity will be dened and discussed (e.g., wired, wireless, and infrared technolo-
gies; dial-up vs. broadband, etc.). Then various asynchronous and synchronous
CMC technologies will be described and evaluated, pointing out their strengths
and drawbacks for use in a L2 learning environment. The authors then compare
and contrast the use of a task-based language-learning activity within wired ver-
sus wireless environments. The paper concludes with an overall discussion that
focuses on the challenges facing the implementation of these technologies (e.g.,
accessibility, compatibility, nancial considerations), some possible solutions to
those problems, and some speculation about future uses of these technologies to
enhance the L2 learning experience.
KEYWORDS
CMC, Task-based Language Learning, Asynchronous Communication, Synchronous Com-
munication, Wired Versus Wireless Technology, Wi-Fi, 802.11
INTRODUCTION
In recent years computer-mediated communication (CMC) technologies have be-
gun to play an increasingly important role in the teaching of foreign/second (L2)
languages. The use of CMC in this context is supported by a growing body of
research that recognizes the importance of the negotiation of meaning (Hatch,
680 CALICO Journal, Vol. 22, No. 3
1978; Long, 1981; Varonis & Gass, 1985; Pica, Kanagy, & Falodun, 1993; Gass &
Varonis, 1994; Gass, 1997; Long & Robinson, 1998) and computer-based interac-
tion (Chun, 1994; Kern, 1995; Salaberry, 1996; Ortega, 1997; Warschauer, 1997;
Beauvois, 1998; Chapelle, 1998; Pellettieri, 1999; Blake, 2000; Salaberry, 2000;
Sotillo, 2000; Warschauer & Kern, 2000; Furstenberg, Levet, English, & Maillet,
2001; Payne & Whitney, 2002; Ktter, 2003; Smith 2003a, 2003b; Tudini, 2003;
Lee, 2004) in the facilitation of the acquisition of a second language (SLA). Beau-
vois (1998) and Payne and Whitney (2002) have also noted the positive effects
of written CMC on oral communication among second language learners, which
supports Levelts (1989) model of language production.
Recent research has also pointed out the importance of situated cognition
(Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and the use of task-based activities (Doughty
& Long, 2003; Skehan, 1996, 1998; Willis, 1996), especially those that require
students to negotiate meaning to arrive at a single outcome (e.g., jigsaw tasks,
1
as
described by Pica et al., 1993; Blake, 2000), to allow students to acquire language
in meaningful contexts for specic purposes.
In this paper, various CMC technologies will be described and evaluated and
their possible applications in task-based foreign language learning activities will
be proposed. First, since CMC requires the communication of ideas among sev-
eral interlocutors who are connected to each other through computer technolo-
gies, general issues of connectivity will be dened and discussed. Then, various
CMC technologies will be described and evaluated, pointing out their strengths
and drawbacks for use in a L2 learning environment. Included in this discussion
will be technologies that facilitate both synchronous and asynchronous written
and oral communication. The next section of the paper discusses task-based in-
struction and the use of these new technologies in tasks that facilitate second
language acquisition. The differential effects of using various technologies in
selected task-based activities will also be explored. This paper concludes with
an overall discussion that focuses on the challenges facing the implementation
of these technologies (e.g., accessibility, compatibility, and nancial consider-
ations), some possible solutions to those problems, and some speculation about
future uses of these technologies to enhance the L2 learning experience.
USE OF THE INTERNET
The Pew Internet and American Life Project (see http://www.pewinternet.org) has
been publishing research since 2000 about the role and evolution of the Internet
in American life. Figure 1 shows the trend of American adults online rising from
about 15% in 1995 to over 60% in 2004.
Moreover, todays high school and college students have embraced the Internet,
email and instant messaging (IM) even more aggressively than the population at
large. In fact, according to Lenhart (2003), 78% of the 12-17 age group go online
compared with 63% of Americans as a whole. In addition, 92% of online teens use
email, and 74% use IM, not only to communicate with friends, but also with their
teachers. In another study, Thorne (2003) found that younger people use email
for vertical communication across power and generation lines but prefer to utilize
Peter A. Lafford and Barbara A. Lafford 681
IM for mediating interpersonal age-peer interactions for relationship building.
Clearly, CMC is a major mode of communication among the younger generation.
However, a report from the Pew Internet and American Life Project (2002) points
out that, in terms of learning and teaching opportunities, students are ready to
take more advantage of the Internet than the schools are. Therefore, L2 educators
must leverage the interest and inclination of students toward positive CMC use to
acquire the target language.
Figure 1
Percentage of American Adults Online, 1995-2004
a
a
Source: http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/InternetAdoption.jpg
DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION OF CMC TECHNOLOGIES
2
In order to benet from this discussion of the application of CMC technologies
to foreign language instruction, one must rst have a basic understanding of the
advantages and limitations of both wired and wireless connectivity.
Wired Connectivity
3
The networking by which a desktop or laptop computer is connected to the Inter-
net with a cable of one sort or another is wired connectivity. In a corporate set-
ting, academic ofce, or lab environment, this usually involves direct connection
to the Internet with at least a T1 broadband connection to a wide-area network
(WAN) of the Internet. On the local-area network (LAN) side, the LAN connects
computers within the building, organization, or campus to each other and, in turn,
to the router connected to the WAN. LANs are most often Ethernet networks,
ranging from a 10 Base-T network (using 10 megabit-per-second UTP [unshield-
ed twisted-pair] Cat-3 [category 3] cabling) to a 100 Base-T (100 Megabit) or
1000 Base-T (Gigabit) network with Cat-5e cabling. Most computers come
with an Ethernet card or built-in port for an RJ-45 modular plug, so that the physi-
cal network connection is fairly simple; a network setup wizard helps end users

congure the TCP-IP software even in the small ofce or home environment. A
wired connection is the most reliable, least expensive type of LAN connectivity;
the disadvantage of wired connectivity is the fairly high level of physical infra-
structure required, in terms of hardware and cabling in a computer lab, to provide
this resource to an entire class.
Wireless Connectivity
In an 802.11 wireless Ethernet environment, often called Wi-Fi (for wireless
delity, helping to distinguish it from the term wireless when this term is used
to refer to cellular telephones), the same basic components as in a wired Ethernet
network are present, except that there is a Wireless Access Point connected to,
or built into, the router. Further, the Ethernet card on the computer does not have
an RJ-45 port for a cable, but rather an antenna to facilitate receiving and trans-
mitting the network data via radio waves. There are two popular versions of Wi-
Fi: (a) 802.11b, which operates at speeds up to 11 Mbps and (b) 802.11g, which is
backwards-compatible with 802.11b but operates at speeds up to 54 Mbps.
A single Wi-Fi access point can provide coverage for a standard four-bedroom
house, a wing of a building, or a caf hotspot, for example. To provide Wi-Fi
access to larger areas, Wi-Fi extenders and bridged access points broaden the
range. New mesh network technology is providing Wi-Fi access across mul-
tiple city blocks and entire university campuses with self-organizing access points
which seek out and negotiate Wi-Fi access. (WiMAX [802.16] is another emerg-
ing technology promising wireless broadband access over areas measured in
miles rather than feet.) End users still need an account or some sort of permission
to make use of the network, but, as more laptops and personal digital assistants
(PDAs) with Wi-Fi capability come into use, this type of wide area Wi-Fi has the
potential to signicantly increase online access and, thereby, offer more access to
CMC without being tethered to the lab or the ofce.
A Wi-Fi environment is quite attractive in terms of minimal cabling demands
and, in fact, lends itself well to a mobile lab cart concept. The typical mobile lab
cart has 25 to 30 laptop computers with adapters and a Wi-Fi access point which
is simply plugged into an Ethernet jack in the classroom. Each laptop is equipped
with Wi-Fi networking congured to provide peer-to-peer access (access to each
of the other computers for messaging and collaborative work) and access to the
Internet. The laptops get charged up when not in use, so all users in the class can
be at their own desk with a laptop running from the charged battery, effectively
turning any classroom into a computer lab for an hour. The Ethernet connec-
tion and Wi-Fi would not be able to support 30 laptops downloading streaming
multimedia, but it would be adequate for web browsing, messaging, and email.
With low-end laptops costing less than $1,000 each, a mobile lab cart could be
purchased for approximately $1,000 per workstation.
One disadvantage to Wi-Fi connectivity is the additional care needed to main-
tain a secure environment. While security is important in any network, the wire-
less aspect of Wi-Fi demands special attention to prevent unauthorized use of
the network or access to the les on a Wi-Fi-connected device. Physical security
would also be an issue for the maintenance and storage of inherently portable
laptops.
A quick mention about Tablet PCs is in order here since they provide an alterna-
tive to the laptop with similar functionality.
4
A Tablet PC is essentially a notebook
(or small laptop) computer with a special LCD panel with touch screen capabili-
ties; the normal mode of input and navigation is with a stylus on the screen, using
the built-in handwriting recognition (which usually takes a period of adjustment)
or an on-screen keyboard for hunt-and-peck use with the stylus. Some Tablet PCs
are actually convertibles, with a standard keyboard underneath. Most Tablet PCs
have various forms of wireless connectivity built in and run special versions of
Windows software applications. They are usually smaller than a laptop but are
also usually more expensive; an institution considering a class set of laptops for a
mobile cart might also consider the Tablet PC.
Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) and Cellular Telephones
A major new technology used for wireless connectivity is global system for mobile
communication (GSM) which, itself, has a number of varieties: general packet ra-
dio service (GPRS), enhanced data for GSM evolution (EDGE), and third genera-
tion GSM (3GSM). Each of these varieties provides some level of access to data
on the Internet, though the slow data transfer speed (10-20 kbps uplink [sending],
10-64 kbps downlink [receiving]) and the small screen on cell phones require
specially formatted web sites (sometimes referred to as the wireless Internet).
This technology continues to evolve, however, and 3GSM promises multimedia
delivery to cell phones or other wireless devices with video communication capa-
bilities in the near future.
5

Infrared and Bluetooth
Other types of wireless communication technology include Infrared (IR) and Blue-
tooth. Infrared wireless technology is really quite common: almost all of todays
TV and VCR remote controls use a beam of infrared light (light at a wavelength
which is below the visible spectrum) to transmit one-way commands to a small
IR receiver on the TV or VCR. When the device can send and receive IR signals,
IR connectivity can provide basic data transfer capabilities between IR-equipped
devices at up to 4 Mbps (the Fast IR speed), allowing one user to beam a le
or business card from one phone or PDA to another or print a document or pho-
tograph from a PDA or digital camera on an IR-equipped printer. IR connectivity
requires very close head-to-head proximity, with the IR ports facing each other
separated usually by not more than 18 inches.
One of the weaknesses of IR connectivity is also one of its strengthsthe need
to be in close, head-to-head proximity in order to establish a two-way communi-
cations link. While IR devices may try to communicate with any IR device found
within range, in order for a transfer to be successful, the IR send and receive
LEDs need to maintain direct line-of-sight contact. This makes it an inher-
ently more secure environment than non-line-of-sight radio frequency systems.
Implementing an IR environment from scratch would be costly unless the primary
device used was a low-end (monochrome) Palm-based PDA, which can be found
for less than $100. Students can use PDAs to work in a peer-to-peer mode, as do
the multiplayer games such as Scrabble (see http://www.handmark.com) which
beam moves and letters from one players hand-held device to the next. Alterna-
tively, instructors can develop a more sophisticated (read, expensive) IR environ-
ment using a data distribution system such as Bluesh (see http://blueshwireless.
com) to distribute course documents, schedules, and collaborative projects. For
data distribution systems, it would be important to have a well developed imple-
mentation plan since the cost would run into the thousands of dollars.
Bluetooth, named after the tenth-century Viking king who united Denmark and
Sweden, is a very local area personal network which allows a user to have a
wireless headset transmit audio to and from a cell phone still on the users belt,
print documents from a hand-held to a Bluetooth-enabled printer, or connect to
the Internet via a Bluetooth access point. The current Bluetooth standard operates
via radio waves in the 2.4 GHz bandwidth within a distance of up to 10 meters
(within the space of a standard classroom) at speeds up to 1 Mbps. The protocol
allows the creation of a small ad hoc piconet or personal area network (PAN)
of up to eight Bluetooth-enabled PDAs for collaboration or data exchange, using
Palms own BlueChat and BlueBoard Bluetooth connectivity applications (Palm,
Inc., 2001).
The advantage of Bluetooth over IR is the radio frequency technology which
frees users from head-to-head beaming. The collaborative possibilities with Col-
ligo (www.colligo.com) self-discovering networking software (for both Bluetooth
and Wi-Fi) make Bluetooth a potentially more useful wireless technology than
IR, but it would still require Bluetooth-equipped hardware. USB-port Bluetooth
adapters are available for less than $50; institutions could perhaps purchase a
class-set of Bluetooth adapters to use with student laptops when they are in class.
This would leverage students acceptance of the technology, allowing greater total
access to technology without purchasing computers for all students because there
would most likely be many students who had their own laptops. With the class set
of Bluetooth adapters, and a limited number of school-owned laptops for those
without their personal laptops, the whole class could participate in online activi-
ties in the classroom with a relatively modest capital investment. The primary
weakness of Bluetooth is probably the security issue, again, in terms of keeping
out unwanted connections and viruses, since Bluetooth generally tries to connect
with any other available Bluetooth device. It would be important to monitor the
congurations to assure that the desired connections were the ones which were
actually made.
The connectivity described above can be used in a variety of ways in support of
L2 acquisition through the use of computer-mediated communication. Although
there will be cases in which the CMC applications overlap, it is helpful to divide
the discussion into two basic categories: asynchronous and synchronous CMC.
Asynchronous CMC
Email
Email is the most common form of CMC. Whether it is a web-based system like
Microsofts Hotmail, a proprietary system like AOL, or a system accessed with an
email client such as Microsoft Outlook or Outlook Express, the central function-
ality is the same: asynchronous exchange of messages from one user to another
(one-to-one) or from one user to a group of people via an email distribution list
(one-to-many). The messages may be text only, text with graphics, html mes-
sages (e.g., with various fonts, colors, and backgrounds), or they may have les
included as attachments, consisting of word processing documents, pictures, or
even sound les or video clips.
The use of attachments may be constrained by a few limitations. As a result
of the security threat posed by malicious, virus-bearing attachments, some email
systems block delivery of any potentially harmful les. If security is not an issue,
the other possible problem with attachments is le size, which is limited by some
email systems in order to not overtax email box storage quotas. These problems
are avoided by using a course management systems le sharing and delivery
mechanisms, such as Blackboards digital drop box, which allows easy transfer of
large les containing graphics, audio, or video.
Threaded Discussion Boards
The threaded discussion board is a mainstay of CMC in L2 acquisition activi-
ties. It is an asynchronous tool which allows someone in authority to post a topic
to start a discussion among classmates in the target language: La dieta Atkins:
Buena o Mala? The Atkins Diet: Good or Bad? Then the students are bidden
to research the issue on the Internet (e.g., http://www.esmas.com/mujer/saludable/
dietas/363285.html) and post a reply before the next class period, for example,
Student1: Creo que la Dieta Atkins es buena porque parece que la gente pierde
peso.
[I think the Atkins Diet is good because people do seem to lose
weight.]
Student 2: Creo que la Dieta Atkins es mala porque no hay un equilibrio entre
varios tipos de comidahay demasiada protena que viene de los ani-
mals.
[I think the Atkins Diet is bad because it is not balanced between food
groupstoo much protein from animal sources.]
Student 3: Soy vegetariano; esta dieta mata a los animales y debe ser prohibida!
[Im a vegetarian; this diet kills animals and should be outlawed!]
This type of threaded discussion more readily offers a shared communicative
experience than one-to-one email, which can get quite cumbersome when every-
one is included through reply to all email messages. Most online course envi-
ronments such as Blackboard and WebCT have some form of threaded discussion
tool available, either for whole classes or small groups designated by the instruc-
tor.
The Yahoo! Groups application is a commercial, advertising-supported envi-
ronment for facilitating group communication. Its prime function is the threaded
discussion board, but the application also provides sections to transfer les, pho-
tos, links, database info, calendar information, and an area to post polls among
the membership. The discussion board has a useful mode in that it can distribute
all posts to the members via individual email messages or by a daily digest of all
the posts once a day, cutting down on the email volume. The downside to Yahoo!
Groups (and, frankly, all the advertising-supported web sites) is the intrusive na-
ture of the promotional messages. While it is true that there is no such thing as a
free lunch, advertisers are resorting to more and more creative means of getting
their message across, especially in the face of more successful pop-up blockers
built into browsers. While it is possible to set up a class group in Yahoo!, Micro-
soft Network, or a similar environment, it is better to take advantage of a closed
course management system such as Blackboard or WebCT, if at all possible. In
this way, users avoid the threat of access and spam from the outside world and
can take advantage of the functionality built into the course management systems
designed specically to facilitate their educational mission. Both Blackboard and
WebCT require an institutional investment in software, hardware, and support.
Threaded Discussion Boards with Audio
Horizon Wimba produces Voice Tools, web-based voice interaction applica-
tions with an educational focus.
6
Its agship product is a threaded voice board that
offers a bulletin board application with audio capabilities. Other voice-enabled
Horizon Wimba tools provide audio within email messages, oral assessment ca-
pabilities providing an online, aural/oral quiz environment, embedded audio on
web pages, and an interface to course management systems (e.g., Blackboard or
WebCT). Horizon Wimba also offers a synchronous audio tool for live, one-on-
one conversation, lectures, and group discussions. The host application runs on a
web server and is accessed by users in a Java-enabled browser window. Upon rst
viewing a web page or email message with an embedded Horizon Wimba mes-
sage link, the browser downloads a Java applet to record and playback the small,
compressed audio les that reside on the server. Rather than sending the audio
as a bulky .wav le, Horizon Wimba provides access with a link to the audio le
that is compressed when initially recorded and then streamed in real time, thus
reducing bandwidth demands and enabling even dial-up audio support. It should
be mentioned that the audio technology underlying the application seems to have
been the focus of Horizon Wimbas development efforts, rather than polishing the
user interface, which is currently rather cumbersome; it is hoped that the interface
will be enhanced in future releases. Horizon Wimba is not an inexpensive prod-
uct; it requires a server and licensing based on the number of concurrent users.
However, when considered a core technology for distance learning, it is a reason-
able expense.
The advantage of providing audio in an L2 threaded discussion board is obvi-
ous: the stimulus is aural, and the response is oral. A posting can be a message
spoken at the time of recording, a music clip, or other audio le uploaded from a
different source. The audio can also be supported with text and/or graphics. Stu-
dents reply orally, can hear the responses of the other students, and the instructors
feedback as well in the discussion board. The instructor can reply orally in an
email to individual students, if desired. The exibility is limitless and well suited
to long distance language learning. The disadvantage of this technology is the re-
quired audio hardware with its potential for conguration problems and the infra-
structure required if using a server-based system such as that of Horizon Wimba.
Wikis and Blogs
Wikis and blogs (short for weblogs) are two other asynchronous modes of CMC
which can be employed in the L2 classroom.
7
The Center for Advanced Level
Prociency Education and Research (CALPER) at The Pennsylvania State Uni-
versity (see http://calper.la.psu.edu) has been exploring and supporting the role of
wikis and blogs (as well as discussion boards and chats) in the language learning
context. Wikis are collaborative web pages that can be edited by anyone visit-
ing the page using basic, simple text editing. On the other hand, blogs are web
pages where an individual (or a group) posts messages and invites comments; it
is a form of threaded discussion, but less structured, and its themes are often per-
sonal (e.g., travelogues from family trips). CALPER also hosts blogs for language
learning (see http://calper.la.psu.edu/blog). Some cell phone companies facilitate
photo blogs with the MMS services. T-Mobile, for example, provides 25 MB of
web space for a My Album/My Journal web page. Subscribers simply send pho-
tos from the camera phone directly to the Album/Journal page; they may also up-
load videos, audio les, and other pictures using a computer and a web interface.
Subscribers then invite visitors to the site with the URL and a password so the
visitors can post comments. Wikis and blogs strongly support collaboration, but
it is sometimes difcult to keep spammers out of the collaborative interactions.
While it is possible to restrict editing access to invited guests in protected areas,
implementing such a restriction runs counter to the spirit of the tools. Pending
more effective antispam efforts, however, the advantages of public access may be
outweighed by the disadvantages.
Synchronous CMC
Instant Messaging
Instant messaging (IM) is a close relative of email, though occurring within a
synchronous time frame, that requires both sender and receiver to be online at the
same time. Online in this case means on the Internet with either a hard-wired or a
wireless connection; the connection can be on the computer (desktop, laptop, or
hand-held device) or an IM-capable cell phone. Each person must have an account
or screen name on the system and must be logged into the IM system as avail-
able. All participants must use the same IM software (or a multinetwork client
such as Cerulean Studios Trillian software, which allows users to be logged into
multiple IM networks in one application). Some systems support the use of web
cams (usually low resolution, inexpensive digital video cameras) to add a live
picture to the communication medium, and some also support audio interaction.
In general, to use instant messaging, users create a contact list of IM contacts
(AOL calls their contact list a Buddy List) with the screen name or account num-
ber of the people with whom they wish to communicate. In order to complete the
communication link, the other people on the contact list also need to add the origi-
nal interlocutor to their contact lists. Then when individual users go online, they
each log into the IM server as available. The server checks everyones respective
contact list and reports back to each list, stating who from each list is currently
online and highlighting the names of the online contacts. Thus, user A selects the
name of an online contact, opens a text window, types a message, and sends it.
User B receives As message, clicks a button to reply, and sends back another mes-
sage, and so on. These messages may be displayed one by one in sequence or in
a single window as a progressive real-time transcript, sometimes called a chat,
depending on the IM client and the specic option chosen.
The major IM systems are AOLs Instant Messenger, ICQ, MSN Messenger,
and Yahoo! Messenger. AOLs Instant Messenger started out as a closed messag-
ing system available only to those using (and paying for) AOLs services (techni-
cally, a private dial-up network not on the Internet). In order to increase the user
base for its IM function, AOL opened it up to non-AOL members on the Internet
and distributed a free client application called AIM, which runs on desktops and
(presumably wireless) hand-held PCs. This move extended the domain of AOLs
IM beyond the AOL membership to Internet users at large. Indeed, many non-
AOL members use AIM to communicate with other non-AOL members. Now
owned by AOL, ICQ (an acronym to evoke the idea I Seek You)the rst
widely used IM system outside the closed world of AOLbegan in 1996. AOL
now operates ICQ in parallel with its Instant Messenger system and has made it
possible to put AIM screen names in the ICQ contact list, thereby providing a rare
case of interoperability. Along the way, Microsoft and Yahoo! both developed IM
applications, leading to considerable competition among all the IM platforms to
offer the best, most engaging bells and whistles in order to attract users who will
then see the advertising that supports the free IM environments.
Among the more noteworthy attractions, Yahoo! Messenger and MSN Messen-
ger have photo-sharing capabilities and theme-based contexts for their IM clients.
Yahoo! has animated avatars to represent interlocutors and an integrated stream-
ing radio application (LaunchCast) that allows the Yahoo! Messenger partners
to share and discuss streaming audio (music) les and video clips that they are
individually watching. Users can even view popular videos in foreign languages,
which, if chosen carefully, can serve as launching points for serious cultural dis-
cussions. At the time of this writing, Yahoo! had, in addition to three English
language Launch music pages, LaunchCast web pages for France, Germany, Italy,
Spain, and American Spanish. It seems that English language artists dominate the
offerings, but L2 artists are also available. Finally, there are often L2 advertise-
ments preceding the videos that can be used for L2 learning activities.
While IM software offers great potential, it may be difcult to control the IM
environment in a lab setting. For example, while being directed to do a learning
activity in the lab, students can use their own IM account to communicate with
others outside the lab on matters completely unrelated to the learning activity at
hand. This situation could be avoided by assigning lab-specic IM accounts to lab
machines, so that students would be addressing labmachine01 logged in as user
labmachine01, and so forth. Students using IM systems from home could be
instructed to sign in with a class-specic IM account since most IM systems offer
free accounts. However, even here, students can circumvent these restrictions by
maintaining multiple IM sessions. Nevertheless, if students are given a limited
amount of time to accomplish a specic learning task, they will be more likely to
stay on that task. The instructor and lab personnel would need to collaborate on
the labs set-up conditions and instructional strategies to best address each local
situation.
Cell Phones, IM, and SMS Text Messaging
Further broadening the reach of IM, many cell phones on the market today come
with AIM or other IM software built in. Cell phone companies are quite will-
ing to provide as many opportunities for sending and receiving messages as the
customer is willing to pay for, since each message (text or multimedia) generates
revenue, either billed la carte at a few cents per message or as another message
from the bucket of messages purchased in bulk. Even if the messages are not
counted as message units, they count as data, up- and downloaded via the cell
phones wireless Internet connection, again generating revenue for the cell phone
carrier billed at a few dollars per megabyte of data.
Most cell phones also offer short message service (SMS) text messaging. SMS
or text messaging (the terms are generally interchangeable) is a technology sim-
pler than IM in that it does not involve IM software, contact lists, or the require-
ment that both users be simultaneously online to receive messages. Text messag-
ing is potentially more useful than IM because it is very much like email; the cell
phone telephone number is used as the destination address for a text message,
which, when received, waits in an inbox on the phone to be opened when conve-
nient for the recipient. Students have not ignored the potential utility of this quiet
communication mode for exchanging unauthorized help during tests, and many
institutions have wisely banned access to cell phones and other communications
devices when their use is inappropriate.
SMS text messages, which are limited to 160 characters, are usually sent from
a cell phone to another cell phone, but, in fact, it is possible to send SMS mes-
sages from a cell phone number to an email address, from an email address to a
cell phone number, from a web site to a cell phone number, and even from some
IM clients to a cell phone number, which can, in turn, send an SMS reply back
to the IM client. (The Yahoo! Messenger does this particularly seamlessly.) This
multimodal SMS would make it possible to engage in CMC in a class where not
every student had a computer or a cell phone, but where everyone had access to
some mode of CMC.
A more sophisticated version of SMS, the multimedia message service (MMS)
message can include a graphic or a sound le, also delivered to a cell phone num-
ber. The pictures and videos shot with cameras on cell phones are generally trans-
ferred as MMS messages.
The major disadvantages of SMS and MMS messaging are expense and reliabil-
ity. In most cell phone contracts, SMS and MMS (if available) are options costing
a few dollars per month for a certain number of messages. Most students with cell
phones probably factor text messaging in as part of the cell phone expense. As
for reliability, on some occasions, it may take some time for text messages to be
delivered, and, if the classroom is in the basement of a ve-story building, cellular
service may be spotty. If the students do not have reliable coverage, it would be
better to minimize the role of in-class cell-phone-based activity.
8

Multiple User Text Chat
Some IM clients make it possible to have simultaneous chats with multiple par-
ticipants. Each participant alternates between receiving/reading messages and
typing/sending messages. In general, the messages are received automatically
upon being sent. The text to be sent is typed into a text entry window and sent by
clicking the send button. Some IM clients (ICQ, for one) have a Chat mode
allowing the receiving participants to see the text as it is being typed. Rather than
having to wait for a whole sentence to be typed and sent, the recipient can get a
sense of where the text is going and can complete the thought by preemptively
typing a message that is seen by the other participant, in effect, making the chat
process more efcient. An earlier version of ICQ (prior to 2003) had a very inter-
esting feature whereby a text chat could be replayed in real time; one could see the
text being typed and corrected, which was valuable from a CMC research stand-
point. Current versions of ICQ offer only a static .txt or .rtf le; CMC researchers
wishing to study the details of the text entry and correction process must resort to
analyzing more complex keystroke loggers, which may or may not capture both
incoming and outgoing text.
Chat Rooms
It is important to differentiate among IM, multiuser chats (sometimes called con-
ferences), and chat rooms. While IM and text chatting usually consist of one-to-
one communication between known contacts and multiuser chats are peer-to-peer
connections among multiple known contacts, the chat room is usually hosted on
a server and may have dozens of participants at one time (though the creation of
small-group chat rooms is possible). Chat rooms are an evolution of Internet relay
chat (IRC), a text-based system in which users from around the world would log
into a room on an IRC server and engage in a text-based conversation among
the participants who happened to be in the same room. The text that chatters type
scrolls by slowly or quickly according to the level of trafc; in an active room
with dozens of native-speaker participants, the L2 learner is likely to be lost. In a
more controlled environment, the chat room can be a useful exercise in communi-
cation in which L2 learners would interact either with nonnative speakers (NNSs)
or native speakers (NSs) known to the instructor.
Todays chat room systems function in essentially the same way but may be
browser-based (e.g., ICQ chat) or may use client software; in either case, there is
usually a simple way to nd the desired rooms among the hundreds or thousands
available in each system, for example, #europe; #french; #language_and_culture.
Upon providing a nickname by which the user is identied, the user can join the
list of participants in the room, enter text, and submit it for discussion with those
already in the room. It is also possible to start a private conversation with another
user in the chat room by sending a message to that user only. If using a chat room
system with video and audio capabilities (e.g., iVisit or PalTalk, see below) and
if the user has a microphone or a web cam, it is possible to send video and audio
to users who opt to receive the video and audio, even though most of the other
participants use text chat. While all systems have public chat rooms with open
access, most offer upgraded (more expensive) provisions for creating password-
protected rooms with limited access, a very important function given the prepon-
derance of chat rooms characterized by discussion and language inappropriate to
L2 acquisition.
Cziko and Park (2003) discuss free IM and chat software which provide audio
(and video) capabilities: AOLs Instant Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, MSN Mes-
senger and Windows Messenger, PalTalk, and iVisit. Included in their article are
discussions about tandem language learninga context in which participants take
turns being learner of the second language and tutor of their native language
as well as discussions dealing with concerns about the public nature of the chat
rooms. Cziko and Park favor PalTalks multiple-participant audio chats where
only one participant may speak at a time, though they also mention a special
feature of iVisit that allows playback of up to 10 minutes of a recorded chat ses-
sion. These authors also point out that while video support may provide an added
level of interest, in actual practice, the talking-head image (usually available) is
less critical to the L2 learning experience than the audio. In setting up a lab for
this type of CMC, Cziko and Park consider good audio hardware to be essential.
Therefore, a good microphone-equipped headset, with complete ear enclosures, is
indispensable in a lab environment.
As long as the issue of uninvited participants is controlled in the chat room
environment being used, chat rooms can provide a rich opportunity for real com-
munication. The ability to log in from anywhere makes it possible to use chat
either in a classroom/lab environment or in a distance learning environment with
students logging in from home at a prearranged time. Participating in public chat
rooms around the world is also a valuable communicative activity, provided par-
ticipants are adults who can make the right decision about room selection to ad-
vance their language skills.
Many of the chat applications allow the transcript of a chat session (from IM,
ICQ, or other sources) to be saved and printed out, thus extending the reach of the
benets of CMC from the computing lab to the regular classroom by facilitating
class analysis of the written language used in the chats. For instance, in the class
following the chat interchange, the instructor can use a computer or overhead
projector to project the image of a chat transcript and focus on linguistic features
that occur in the chat interactions (e.g., pragmatically (in)appropriate speech, use
of certain grammar points, or spelling/punctuation questions).
Security issues can be minimized by having students use the chat function in
course management software (e.g., Blackboard or WebCT), which allows students
to communicate within a closed system (one in which only students in the class
are permitted to enter the chat rooms). To enable students from different classes to
communicate with each other, students could use a local web-based chat that has
been specially programmed to allow only students participating in this activity to
send and receive chat messages.
The next section of this paper will explore the use of these new technologies in
task-based activities that facilitate L2 acquisition and the differential effects of the
use of wired and wireless technologies to carry out the same task.
TASK-BASED INSTRUCTION
According to Willis (2004)
9
task-based instruction (TBI) grew out of communica-
tive language teaching (CLT). CLT, which makes use of real-life situations that
necessitate communication (Galloway, 1993, p. 2), emerged in the 1970s as a
reaction to grammar-translation and audiolingual approaches. CLT drew on ideas
by Hymes (1972), who proposed the need for students to attain communicative
competence
10
in the target language, Halliday (1973, 1975), who viewed language
primarily as a system for conveying meaning and carrying out linguistic func-
tions, Austin (1962) and Searle (1969), whose work on pragmatics highlighted the
importance of using language appropriately in various contexts, and Grice (1975),
who outlined shared maxims of linguistic behavior that underlie communication.
The basic principle of CLT that language learning should be driven by com-
municative ends and through exposure to authentic and purposeful uses of lan-
guage led to content-based instruction (CBI), an approach to language teaching
that utilizes foreign language texts (oral and written) to illustrate the purposeful
use of the target language, that is, to teach the content of another discipline (e.g.,
art, history, politics). TBI focuses on purposeful language use through the use of
content-driven tasks within a communicative context.
The term task has been dened in many ways in the SLA literature.
11
For
instance, Willis (1996) denes a task as a goal-oriented activity in which learn-
ers use language to achieve a real outcome. In other words, learners use whatever
target language resources they have in order to solve a problem, do a puzzle,
play a game or share and compare experiences (p. 53). On the other hand, Ske-
han (1996) denes tasks and task-based instruction in the following way: [tasks
are] activities which have meaning as their primary focus A task-based ap-
proach sees the learning process as one of learning through doing it is by pri-
marily engaging in meaning that the learners system is encouraged to develop
(p. 20). Skehan (1998) proposes a denition of task in which meaning is primary,
there is some communication problem to solve, there is some sort of relationship
to comparable real-world activities, task completion has some priority, and the as-
sessment of the task is in terms of outcome (p. 95). Following Willis (1996) and
Skehan (1996, 1998), Hadley (2004) states that Task and Task-Based Learning
is dened as a series of graded activities that require learners to work with the
target language, with the purpose of preparing learners to meet the challenges of
real-world functions (p. 2).
Willis (2004) notes that many of the denitions of task in the SLA literature (a)
mention the need to arrive at an outcome or attain a goal or objective, (b) assume
that tasks are meaning focused, (c) acknowledge or imply the possibility of the
use of more than one skill to complete a given task (e.g., reading, speaking, and
writing), and (d) resemble real-world problem-solving activities in order to mo-
tivate students and facilitate their ability to appropriately use the target language
in real-world interactions. In this paper, we will base our discussion of task-based
learning on the ideas presented by Willis (1996, 2004), Skehan (1996, 1998), and
Hadley (2004).
Although tasks do not necessarily involve two-way communication to achieve
their goals (e.g., searching the target language newspaper for retail bargains), this
papers focus on tasks within a CMC context behooves us to focus on tasks requir-
ing interaction between NNS learners and NNS/NS instructors, other NNS peers,
or unknown NSs of the target language. Several scholars have also proposed vari-
ous taxonomies of interactive tasks;
12
among the most cited works of these au-
thors is the article by Pica et al. (1993), who assume that interaction forms the
basis for SLA and that activities that require negotiation of meaning help learners
make input more comprehensible. Two of these task types include information
gap and jigsaw activities.
Jigsaw tasks are distinguished from information gap tasks in the following way.
In information gap activities, students exchange information either one-way (one
student is the sender, the other is the receiver) or two-way (each has informa-
tion the other needs to obtain). In jigsaw tasks, students possess different pieces
of information that are needed to solve a problem, and they must collaborate in
order to come to a common solution. Pica et al. (1993) predicted that those ac-
tivities requiring cooperation, convergence, and pooling of resources (e.g., jigsaw
activities) would require more negotiation of meaning. Blake (2000) conrmed
this hypothesis and found that jigsaw tasks constitute ideal conditions for SLA,
with the CMC medium being no exception (p. 133). The sample activities de-
scribed below are jigsaw activities requiring interaction among several language
students.
NATIONAL STANDARDS
TBI interfaces well with the implementation of the National Standards for For-
eign Language Teaching (National Standards, 1999). The use of internet and other
wired/wireless technologies facilitate the integration of the ve Cs (Communica-
tion [interpretative, presentational, and interpersonal modes], Culture [perspec-
tives, practices, and products], Comparisons, Connections, and Communities) in
various tasks. While we will not delve into the denitions or underlying reasons
for these standards here,
13
in the rationale sections of the tasks that follow we will
make reference to the standards incorporated into the activities involving the use
of the new technologies discussed above.
NEW TECHNOLOGIES APPLIED TO TBI
In this section, we will present a jigsaw task that can be implemented through
the use of CMC (wired and wireless) in a language learning setting. Each task
will be accompanied by a description of the task, procedures, rationale, materi-
als/technologies required, outcomes, and discussion of the task. In addition, for
each task, the differential effects of the use of various CMC technologies (wired
vs. wireless) on activity procedures and student outcomes will be discussed. The
differences in student abilities and outcomes in the two versions of the task will
have to be tested empirically before any statements could be made regarding the
effectiveness of one or the other technology on the language learning process.
Task 1 (jigsaw): Cultural Heritage Activity (Intermediate/Advanced, wired)
Task description
Real-world activity: You are a member of a Cultural Heritage Committee,
whose mission is to highlight the contributions that a given minority ethnic
group has made to the community in a large urban area. You and the other
members of your committee wish to form a web site that provides information
on the history of the community and the role that it plays in the current life of
the city. Since an important member of the group (either a NNS or a NS) is
currently located in a country of origin of the ethnic group, all communica-
tion about this web site needs to take place via the Internet. The committee
decides to go out and make a record of cultural products and practices (e.g.,
pictures of monuments, architecture, museums, restaurants, stores, celebra-
tions, parades) of that ethnic community and record (audio or video) mem-
bers of the community speaking their language at cultural events or in more
intimate family settings, using digital technology (e.g., still and video camer-
as, digital audio recorders, and minidisc recorders). The US-bound members
concentrate on their local ethnic community while the in-country member
gathers similar information about similar cultural perspectives, practices, and
products in that target culture country. All of the pictures, audio les, and
video les can then be uploaded to a common web site so the project can take
shape. The committee members then form a wiki to work on the web page
and chat with each other (via ICQ or Horizon Wimbas Voice Direct) as they
negotiate what to put on the site.
Procedures
Classroom simulation: A language class decides to create a web page on
the target language ethnic community in their city. The class is divided into
smaller groups of three students, who use a chat function in the computing
lab (e.g., Virtual Classroom in Blackboard) to plan the creation of their por-
tion of the class web site (e.g., history, celebrations, community groups) and
make individual assignments. Students in the smaller groups then go into
the community and gather their assigned information and make pictorial and
audio or video recordings of that information using digital cameras, digital
audio recorders, minidisc recorders, and digital video cameras. They are also
required to interview (in the target language) at least two members of the tar-
get community and record this conversation (or a conversation among native
speakers using the target language) using digital audio or video technology
(permission will need to be granted by all people interviewed before their
images or voice can be used for this project). If a study abroad/exchange
student or a native speaker (in-country) can be found to participate in this
task, similar information from that person will also be incorporated into the
web site (perhaps comparing/contrasting a celebration in the country of ori-
gin with the same event as it is celebrated in the United States). They then use
a wired connection to upload this information to a wiki and complete the task
as described above using a synchronous chat function (e.g., ICQ or Horizon
Wimbas Voice Direct) on the side to discuss changes they want to make to
the wiki. Students then present their portion of the nal web site to the class
in a computer-equipped classroom with Internet access.
Rationale
Students in this jigsaw task negotiate meaning to come to a common solution
(Communications standard, interpersonal mode). They also acquire cultural
knowledge about the ethnic group in their community that speaks the tar-
get language of the classroom (Culture and Communities standards). If it
is feasible to include a person in another country for this activity, students
could make comparisons and contrasts between the local ethnic community
and the target culture in a country of origin (Comparisons standard) and nd
out about some of the cultural perspectives underlying the practices (e.g.,
celebrations of historical events) and products (e.g., food and dances) they
document (Culture and Connections Standards). The use of digital technolo-
gies makes possible the uploading of this information directly to a web site.
The use of wikis and ICQ (or Horizon Wimbas Voice Direct) on the side
facilitates simultaneous communication among the students as they nalize
the web site.
Materials/technologies (required)
Computers with a chat function (e.g., ICQ, Horizon Wimbas Voice Direct),
connections to the Internet, digital cameras, digital audio recorders, minidisc
recorders, and digital video cameras.
Outcomes
Students negotiate meaning via chat room dialogues as they agree on a com-
mon solution in this jigsaw activity. Students also become much more aware
and appreciative of the contributions that their target language ethnic group
has made to their community at large. In addition, they gain perspectives on
the target culture in the form of products and practices and the origins of cer-
tain celebrations and the perspectives underlying them. Through the incorpo-
ration of digital technologies, students gain experience creating a portion of
the class web site that contains pictures, audio les, and video les of aspects
of the target language local community and a similar community in a coun-
try of origin. Students make an oral presentation to the class to demonstrate
their portion of the web site in a computer-equipped classroom or language
computing lab.
Discussion of task
In this activity, students are required to interact with members of the target
language ethnic community in their urban area to complete this task. The
collaboration necessary to complete this jigsaw task requires negotiation of
meaning (with other NNSs or perhaps with NSs in another country) and the
use of digital technologies to create a portion of a common web site. This
activity will not only enhance students language skills, but will also help
them hone their knowledge and use of digital cameras, digital audio record-
ers, minidisc recorders, and digital video cameras and the ability to up- and
download pictures, audio les, and video les to a web site using a wired
connection. If there is an opportunity to include a friend on a study abroad
program or a native speaker from a target language country in this activity,
students could benet from his/her perspectives on the target culture as well
as from pictures, audio les, and video les that he/she uploads to the same
wiki. The disadvantage of using this technology is that students have to carry
around a lot of equipment (video cameras, audio recorders, and digital cam-
eras) to capture the information and then have to take more time later on to
upload it to a web site. If students then nd themselves among native speak-
ers having an interesting conversation without the necessary equipment, a
valuable opportunity for capturing this information will be lost.
Task 2 (jigsaw): Cultural Heritage Activity (Intermediate/Advanced, wireless)
Task description
Same as in task 1 above.
Procedures
Classroom simulation: A language class decides to create a web page on
the target language ethnic community in their city. The class is divided into
smaller groups of three students in various locations who use a chat function
on their laptops, PDAs, or cell phones to plan the creation of their portion of
the class web site (e.g., history, celebrations, community groups). Students
can use a combination of their own personal phones, PDAs, or laptops and
those that might be provided by the university. Students in the smaller groups
gather the cultural information and make a pictorial record and audio or video
recordings of members of the target culture engaged in daily conversation or
various cultural practices (e.g., celebration of a day of independence) using
cell phone cameras capable of taking pictures and making short audio or
video recordings.
14
After capturing their pictures, audio, or video, students
can send these les from their wireless phones via MMS messages to an
email address or a web site. Alternatively, students can upload these audio
and video les using a Web interface on a laptop or PDA after transferring the
les to these devices using Bluetooth, IR, or some sort of ash memory such
as Secure Digital, Compact Flash, and so on. This can be accomplished while
still in the eld, at an Internet cafe, where they can either discuss their les in
person, or, if time is short, they can later discuss the les they received from
each other using their cell phones (or PDAs with Wi-Fi access) to send SMS
messages or participate in Upoc synchronous protected chat groups. Even a
study abroad/exchange student or a native speaker (in-country) participating
in this task can use a cell phone to record similar things in the country, send
them directly to a web page or to an email address, and participate in the SMS
or synchronous chat discussions. The members of the group can then retrieve
the pictures and video les from their email messages or web pages and pro-
ceed to work in a wiki to complete the task as described above using a syn-
chronous chat function available through their cell phones, PDAs, or laptops.
When they nish their task students then present their portion of the nal web
site to the class in a computer-equipped classroom with Internet access.
Rationale
As in the wired task, students negotiate meaning to come to a common solu-
tion (Communications standard, interpersonal mode). They also acquire cul-
tural knowledge by investigating various aspects of the target culture in their
own community and abroad (Comparisons, Culture, Connections, and Com-
munities standards). The use of wireless technology allows students more
exibility with their communication and makes it possible for three people
in various geographic (wireless) locations to plan an activity together. The
temporal and spatial exibility of these wireless technologies give users more
freedom to communicate with each other without being tied to a computer
lab or to their home computers. Some digital still cameras have Bluetooth
capabilities, which allow pictures to be transferred to a Bluetooth-enabled
cell phone, for transfer using MMS. This would allow the pictures and videos
to be submitted from the eld to an email account or a web page, without a
complex wired computer connection.
Materials/technologies (required)
Cell phones capable of taking pictures and recording audio and video clips,
PDAs, laptops, synchronous chat function. Audio les (recorded conversa-
tions of native speakers) can be captured on cell phones with calling a voice-
over-IP (VoIP) voicemail service that has voicemail delivered via email. The
recordings of several voices at once would be aided by a speaker phone func-
tion on the cell phone.
Outcomes
The nal outcomes are the same as described above. However, because the
use of wireless technologies facilitates communication anytime and in any-
place, it is possible that more interaction and negotiation of meaning will take
place in the wireless form of this activity.
Discussion of task
The wireless version of this activity facilitates the completion of the task for
people with very busy schedules who have difculty nding time to meet
physically in person to use desktop computers. In addition, students can be
encouraged to go out into the target language community to capture sponta-
neous interviews with NSs without having to carry around expensive, bulky
recording equipment. The use of these cutting-edge technologies would also
animate students (some of whom may already be enamored with wireless
communication) and motivate them to complete this task. However, this task
does have some possible drawbacks. For instance, in state universities that
serve students with modest technical backgrounds, it cannot be assumed that
an entire class would have access to technologies which can capture and
send pictures, audio les, or video les to complete the project. For students
without such access, the university will need to provide the aforementioned
hardware (cell phones, PDAs, and laptops) with the proper functional capa-
bilities. In addition, the short video clips taken with cell phones do not have
the capacity or the resolution of recordings made with digital video cameras.
However, for a class project of limited dimensions, the quality of video and
audio captured via the wireless technologies may be sufcient. To conclude,
this wireless activity will not only enhance students language learning expe-
rience, but it will also help them hone their knowledge and use of cell phones,
PDAs, and laptops to communicate in a classroom without walls as they
complete this task.
CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW CMC TECHNOLOGIES
This article has discussed the application of CMC technologies to the teaching of
foreign languages using task-based activities. While the authors believe the ideas
presented are innovative and worthwhile, it is understood that they cannot all be
implemented at all levels, nor would such a widespread implementation necessar-
ily be appropriate. There are various barriers to implementation: cost, accessibil-
ity, and matching the task to the situation, among others. How can these barriers
be overcome?
In considering the cost of the various technologies, one must take into account
the cost of hardware acquisition, software licensing, and communication services.
Can the hardware cost be shared among various programs, projects, or purposes?
Although there may be some specialized hardware required for a camera or mi-
crophone, the function of a computer is generally determined by the software
being run on it or the web sites being visited with it. For specialized hand-held
computers, a class set could easily be shared between foreign language classes
and English classes, with language web sites and communications software used
by the language classes, while e-books loaded on removable memory would pro-
vide specic content and functionality used by the English classes. A mobile cart
of laptops or Tablet PCs offers the same exibility and can turn any classroom
into a computer lab for the one or two sessions necessary to get a class started on
a project which is then completed outside of class in a permanent computer lab.
A capital acquisitions board or grant-funding agency might be more receptive to
a proposal highlighting collaboration and cooperation than one focusing on a nar-
rowly specied objective.
Other aspects of the CMC technology discussed above involve cell-phone-
based text messaging or wireless communications between laptops and/or hand-
held computers. More and more students are cruising the campus with their back-
packs bulging with the latest communication device or MP3 player. If a project
can include students using their own hardware, less hardware will need to be
acquired by the institution. This does not absolve the institution from providing
technology to those students who do not have their own; on the contrary, all stu-
dents must have access to the class-wide activities. If it is determined that only
a small proportion of the students in a class have their own tool for IM, then an
IM-based activity should make use of institutional hardware, although the option
for students to use their own device would still exist. As personal communication
devices become more common, a set of PDAs, for example, they could be spread
between two classes in which, say, half of the students have their own devices.
This is certainly an area where each institution will need to evaluate its own de-
mographics and act accordingly.
With the increased use of SMS and IM to student-owned devices, will there be
an issue of cost for SMS messages or bandwidth being transferred to students
phone accounts? No more so than the concern that students must pay for the pa-
per and pens they use as tools of todays educational system. Of course, a certain
level of access to technology should be made available to students by the institu-
tion, but students who use their own equipment (e.g., laptops, palm tops, and cell
phones) should consider the cost of connectivity a normal cost of education.
Software licensing, and conferencing and communication services are other ar-
eas where intrainstitutional collaboration may be possible. Perhaps the expense of
a conferencing tool, such as Horizon Wimba or videoconferencing services from a
communications provider, can be spread among the language department and the
athletics department, to support distance learning for student athletes.
Accessibility is another potential barrier. Is the tool simple enough for students
to grasp quickly, so that language learning is enhanced (rather than frustrated) by
the technology? The educator must be attuned to the technology comfort level of
students. It may be necessary to create teams of students, with the technologically
stronger students distributed among the groups and serving as facilitators. As the
projects progress, the other students will become more adept at manipulating the
technology on their own.
Matching the task to the particular educational situation is probably the most
challenging barrier to implementation. It is here that the educator must apply his/
her understanding of individual students, the curricular goal of the task, and the
technology available to accomplish the task to tailor the activity to the academic
setting (e.g., primary, secondary, or postsecondary; beginning, intermediate, or
advanced learners, etc.). Elementary and high-school students are better off in
a controlled, protected online environment; college students could probably be
granted a little more freedom, but still within clearly dened guidelines. If cre-
ative communicative interactions in a CMC environment can be made more real-
istic and meaningful through the use of information gap and jigsaw activities, then
students will become more fully engaged in the process of L2 learning.
ON THE HORIZON
In his 1995 book, The road ahead, Microsofts founder Bill Gates wrote broadly
of the information highway and intelligent appliances that will have access to
it, offering games, electronic mail, and home banking. He projected video on
demand with direct-video-server-to-TV service without the need for a time-shift-
ing VCR. He said that when the two dedicated communications infrastructures,
telephone lines and television cables, are generalized into one digital-informa-
tion utility, the information highway will have arrived.

How correct were his
predictions? Many people now get their video service from a cable TV provider
who also supplies high-speed Internet access on the same wire. VoIP is a rap-
idly growing segment of the communications market; many modern technophiles
have VoIP phone service, using high-speed Internet access over the cable TV line
without any other phone line to their house.
Therefore, according to Gates criterion, the information highway has already
arrived. Aside from the obvious access to international web sites and culture, what
does this highway bring to language students? It can facilitate audio and video
contact with native speakers of the target language, not only with cumbersome
chat programs, but also with standard telephones making low-cost, high-quality
international VoIP telephone calls, for ve cents per minute. Very shortly, VoIP
providers will also offer low-cost video-over IP phone calls.
In addition, increased bandwidth is providing greater access to target language
video programming. Not only do digital cable TV systems have hundreds of chan-
nels with many more sources of target language programming, but Internet sourc-
es for video have progressed beyond the postage stamp of astronaut video. For
instance, SCOLA, the subscription service providing foreign-language news from
around the world (see http://www.scola.org), has added high-quality streaming
or downloadable video on demand to their normal satellite delivery. This allows
instructors to post activities based upon current news broadcasts on a class web
site or use SCOLAs Insta-Class transcripts and audio right off the web. Other
news and entertainment outlets around the world provide streaming video of other
target language programming. Among language-learning keypals or chat partners,
these downloaded video clips can provide rich, relevant material for discussion. A
little further down the road is video over broadband (IPTV), again with incredible
variety and potential for educational programming.
Gates also enumerated things people might carry on their person: keys, money,
identication, an address book, a calendar, a note-pad, reading material, a camera,
a pocket tape recorder, a cellular phone, a pager, concert tickets, a map, a com-
pass, a calculator, an electronic entry card, photographs, and so on. He predicted
that another information appliance called the wallet PC would have a snapshot-
sized screen providing all of the listed functions as well as email, faxes, weather
and stock reports, games, wireless funds transfers, personal identication, GPS
and navigation functions, etcetera, etcetera. The most basic Pocket PC available
today does most of the information management mentioned, and free information
services such as AvantGo (see http://www.avantgo.com) provide up-to-date infor-
mation, even from foreign-language newspapers, for off-line reading, although
a live Internet connection is required for synchronization. Given a students ca-
pability to download virtually any web site to a hand-held device for off-line ac-
cess, AvantGo could be used for distributing target language activities to students
equipped with a hand-held device.
The electronic funds transfers and smart card credit card technology Gates talk-
ed about is not as far along in the United States as in some other technologically
advanced countries, but radio frequency identication (RFID) chip technology,
which has been used in pet identication applications for years, is nding its way
into the marketplace in new ways, including passports and product tracking. Stu-
dent ID cards may eventually have RFID chips, encoded with a students schedule
or major. A step up from the simple magnetic strip on todays ID card which must
be swiped just to verify someones identity, the Spanish major presenting an RFID
card could be offered a Spanish language menu on the touch screen in the Student
Union. Imagine a language school coffee house or study lounge whose virtual re-
ality walls would morph from an Italian Gelato caff to a French sidewalk caf, to
a Spanish amenco bar as multilingual students chose the desired ambiance from
a menu of possibilities; the lingua franca used would then cycle according to the
target language of the students in the caf. Alternatively, the topic of conversation,
in whichever language, could follow the lead of the virtual reality walls, which
could morph periodically from one social context to another by changing scenes
(e.g., from a caf to a travel agency to a museum).
On other horizons, greater wireless bandwidth to cellular phones with advanced
G3 cellular telephone services will support video streaming technology to deliver
video content to the telephones. Already available in certain markets, snapshot
soap operas with two episodes of six still frames per day,
15
and even short 1- or
2-minute video clips called mobisodes
16
can provide content in the target lan-
guage.
Another keyword for the future is convergence, applied not only to software,
but also to hardware. The convergence of functionality in communications soft-
ware sometimes blurs the line between IM client software, chat-room-client soft-
ware and SMS software. This is due to the fact that IM clients such as ICQ and
Yahoo! Messenger have chat room modules or web sites; conversely, software
which was designed as chat room software, such as PalTalk (http://www.PalTalk.
com) and CUworld (http://www.CUworld.com), have incorporated IM and con-
tact list modules. Moreover, some IM software has built-in SMS capability, so
that an interlocutor on a PC can use Yahoo! Messenger to engage in a text chat
via SMS with someone on a cell phone just by using the cell phone number as the
recipient.
On the hardware side, many cell phones have built-in IM clients, thus solidify-
ing the role of the cell phone as a multipurpose communications device. Some
cell phones have calendaring and address book capabilities, full (though cramped)
QWERTY keyboards and voice recognition to facilitate text entry (e.g., Nokia
6800 and Samsung P207), and digital cameras; while others even have video
camera functionality with the ability to record audio and video clips from 15 sec-
onds to several minutes in length (see footnote 14). PDAs or pocket PCs are also
converging with cell phones, digital cameras, digital audio recorders, and MP3
players. In the language lab, the cassette tape has given way to the audio CDs and
online audio and video. An increasing number of publishers are providing their
audio and video materials in digital format, ready for streaming. In order to use
the streaming content, students have typically needed to be at a computer with an
active Internet connection. However, the new technology involved in podcast-
ing will allow students to download streaming audio and video onto hand-held
devices and play it back in a convenient venue. Podcasting is an evolution of
the XML news-reader subscription technology using Really Simple Syndication
(RSS) designed to download audio content to the desktop where it gets synchro-
nized and downloaded to a mobile audio device, such as Apples iPod (hence the
name podcasting), any MP3 player, or other digital audio player. The elegance
of podcasting is in its simple versatility. While the most popular use of podcasting
so far appears to be audio blogcastingthat is, home grown audio talk radio
and musicand podcasting of some radio programs, it would be a very efcient
way to deliver audio programming to language students, and even for students
to produce class projects. The language lab would set up the RSS audio chan-
nels as password-protected feeds, supplying the weeks programming and perhaps
including the latest news from SCOLAs Insta-Class programs. Students would
download the audio with iPodder (www.ipodder.org) or Doppler (www.Doppler-
Radio.net) software to a computer and, optionally, to a mobile device. The com-
puters in the language computing lab would also have the iPodder or Doppler
software subscribed to the up-to-date feeds and make them available for playing
or downloading. Video programming could also be made available for download
in a similar fashion, eventually downloaded to the students pocket DVR (a PDA-
sized device with a multi-gigabyte microdrive) or served up to video capable cell
phones or via IPTV.
From the early days of the language lab a half century ago, the language teach-
ing profession has always been on the leading edge of applying technology to ed-
ucation. In the language lab and in the classroom, audio/visual technology added
a dimension of reality to the language-learning experience. Over the past quarter
century, CALL has been enhancing this experience, primarily in the language lab.
Today, technology useful to education can be found in an increasing number of
bookbags, masquerading as a cell phone, an MP3 player, a PDA, or a notebook
or laptop computer. The students who use this technology on a daily basis are
ready, not to learn from it, but to learn with it. We reiterate a point made in the
introduction to this article: the language profession must leverage the interest and
inclination of students toward positive CMC use to acquire the target language.
The energy and intelligence students invest in these new technologies is much too
valuable for the language-teaching profession to ignore.

NOTES
1
See section on task-based instruction in this paper for a denition of these activities.
2
See Tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix to this article for snapshot comparisons of the tech-
nologies described below in terms of reliability, complexity, and cost.
3
See Godwin-Jones (2002) for a more in depth discussion of Wireless Networks. Although
the technology keeps advancing, most of this discussion is still relevant.
4
See Godwin-Jones (2003a) for a more in depth discussion of the Tablet PC.
5
The web site http://www.GSMWorld.com provides a good description of GSM technol-
ogy.
6
Horizon Wimba is a new corporate entity, the result of the 2004 merger of HorizonLive, a
provider of virtual classrooms and real-time collaboration software, and Wimba, a provider
of web-based voice collaboration tools. The resulting rm, Horizon Wimba, promises more
integrated educational communications environments featuring audio and video that are
sure to be very intriguing to language instructors interested in using CMC technologies.
7
See Godwin-Jones (2003b) and Thorne and Payne (this volume) for further discussion of
wikis and blogs.
8
An interesting enhancement to the SMS environment is provided by a free service called
Upoc (see http://www.upoc.com). Upoc facilitates the creation of SMS and MMS distri-
bution lists, allowing one text message to be sent to a class or group. It is also possible to
accomplish IM-like chats by using an Upoc group. There are many possibilities for creative
use of this feature.
9
See Leaver and Willis (2004) for an extended discussion of task-based instruction.
10
Hymes (1972) noted that the need for a consideration of communicative competence
(CC) emerged as a reaction to Chomskys (1965) focus on only grammatical competence.
This notion was expanded by Canale and Swain (1980), Canale (1983), and later by Bach-
man (1990).
11
See Willis (2004) for an in-depth discussion of the denitions of task.
12
Further discussion of these task types goes beyond the scope of this paper, but the reader
is referred to Skehan (1996), chapters 5 and 6, for an in-depth discussion of various types
of tasks used to facilitate L2 acquisition.
13
The reader is referred to National Standards (1999) as well as the ACTFL web site (see
http://www.act.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3392) for more information on the Na-
tional Standards.
14
The length of audio or video clips that can be captured using cell phones depends on
several factors (e.g., buffer and memory capacities of the cell phone and the voice-over-
IP (VoIP) service. When making a video clip, the video information is rst buffered in
the short-term memory and is then automatically transferred to the long-term memory
in the cell phone; the length of each clip is limited by the size of the buffer, and the total
clip capacity is limited by the long-term memory storage. Some phones have slots to ac-
cept removable long-term memory cards, for virtually unlimited total capacity. On todays
phones, for instance, the maximum length of a single video clip may be as short as 15
seconds or as long as 5 minutes (as of this writing). The limits of audio recording on aVoIP
voicemail system are set by the carrier (e.g., Vonage voicemail messages can be a maxi-
mum of 5 minutes long and take up to 6 MB of memory).
15
See http://www.springwise.com/newbusinessideas/2003/10/jong_zuid.html for Holland.
16
See http://www.answers.com/topic/mobisode for general discussion; see http://www.wi
relesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&le=article&sid=984 for Japan.
REFERENCES
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Write to speak: The effects of electronic communication on the
oral achievement of fourth semester French students. In J. A. Muyskens (Ed.),
New ways of learning and teaching: Focus on technology and foreign language
education (pp. 93-116). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish inter-
language. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 120-136. Retrieved May 1,
2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake/default.html
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learn-
ing. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-42.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language peda-
gogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication
(pp. 2-27). New York: Longman.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to sec-
ond language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1 (1), 1-47.
Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed
SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (1), 22-34. Retrieved May 1, 2005,
from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article1/index.html
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of a theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chun, D. M. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive
competence. System, 22 (1), 17-31.
Cziko, G. A., & Park, S. (2003). Internet audio communications for second language learn-
ing: A comparative view of six programs. Language Learning & Technology, 7
(1), 15-27. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num1/review1/
default.html
Doughty, C., & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance for-
eign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (3), 50-80. Re-
trieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/doughty/default.html
Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the
silent language of culture: The Cultura project. Language Learning & Technol-
ogy, 5 (1), 55-102. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/
furstenberg/default.html
Galloway, A. (1993). Communicative language teaching: An introduction and sample ac-
tivities. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/
ERICServlet?accno=ED357642
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Stud-
ies in Second Language Acquisition, 16 (3), 283-302.
Gates, B. (with Myhrvold, N., & Rinearson, P.) (1995). The road ahead. New York: Viking
Penguin.
Godwin-Jones, B. (2002). Wireless networks. Language Learning and Technology, 6
(1), 6-10. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/emerging/
default.html
Godwin-Jones, B. (2003a). E-books and the Tablet PC. Language Learning and Technol-
ogy, 7 (1), 4-8. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num1/emerg-
ing/default.html
Godwin-Jones, B. (2003b). Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Lan-
guage Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 12-16. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://
llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/emerging/default.html
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and
semantics III: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Hadley, G. (2004). A task-based approach to teaching English for science and technology.
Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.ecp.com.cn/in2004/ca1986.htm
Hatch, E. (1978). Acquisition of syntax in a second language. In J. Richards (Ed.), Un-
derstanding second and foreign language learning: Issues and approaches (pp.
34-70). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward
Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), So-
ciolinguistics (pp. 269-93). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
Kern, R .G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Ef-
fects on quantity and characteristics of language production. Modern Language
Journal, 79 (4), 457-76.
Ktter, M. (2003). Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Lan-
guage Learning & Technology 7 (2), 145-72. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/
vol7num2/kotter/default.html
Leaver, B. L., & Willis, J. (2004). Task-based instruction in foreign language education:
Practices and programs. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Lee, L. (2004). Learners perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native
speakers of Spanish in the US. Language Learning & Technology, 8 (1), 83-100.
Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol8num1/lee/default.html
Lenhart, A. (2003). Generation IM: Teens and technology. PowerPoint presentation given
at Hommoks Middle School PTA, Larchmont, NY. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from
http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/14/presentation_display.asp
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.),
Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-278). New York:
Annals of the New York Academy of Science.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C.
Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language
acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. (1999). Standards for foreign
language learning in the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen.
Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Dening
the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language
Learning & Technology, 1 (1), 82-93. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.
edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html
Palm, Inc. (2001). Bluetooth: Connecting palm powered handhelds. Bluetooth White Pa-
per. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://palmos.com/dev/tech/bluetooth/palm_
bluetooth_mwp_r1.pdf
Payne, S., & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 Oral prociency through synchronous
CMC: Output, working memory and interlanguage development. CALICO Jour-
nal, 20 (1), 7-32.
Pellettieri, J. (1999). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of
grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based
language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap
between Internet-savvy students and their schools. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for
second language instruction. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and lan-
guage learning: Integrating theory and practice, Vol. 1 (pp. 9-34). Clevedon,
England: Multilingual Matters.
Salaberry, M. R. (1996). The theoretical foundation for the development of pedagogical
tasks in computer mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 14 (1), 5-34.
Salaberry, M. R. (2000). Pedagogical design of computer mediated communication tasks:
Learning objectives and technological capabilities. Modern Language Journal,
84 (1), 28-37.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J.
Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 17-
30). Oxford: Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268-
86.
Smith, B. (2003a). The use of communication strategies in computer-mediated communi-
cation. System, 31 (1), 29-53.
Smith, B. (2003b). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. Mod-
ern Language Journal, 87 (1), 38-57.
Sotillo, S. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asyn-
chronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82-119. Re-
trieved May 1, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/default.html
Thorne, S. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language
Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 38-67. Retrieved May 27, 2005, from http://llt.
msu.edu/vol7num2/thorne/default.html
Tudini, V. (2003). Using native speakers in chat. Language Learning & Technology, 7
(3), 141-159. Retrieved May 1, 2005 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/tudini/
default.html
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for ne-
gotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning. Modern Language
Journal, 81 (4), 470-481.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts
and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J. (1996). A exible framework for task-based learning. In J. Willis & D. Willis
(Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford: Heine-
mann English Language Teaching.
Willis, J. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: Understanding our practices, ac-
knowledging different practitioners. In B. L. Leaver & J. Willis (Eds.), Task-
based instruction in foreign language education: Practices and programs (pp.
3-44). Washington, DC.: Georgetown University Press.
APPENDIX
Table 1
CMC Technologies: General Reliability, Complexity, and Cost
CMC Category Technology Reliability Complexity Cost
Asynchronous
Email
Threaded discussion boards
Threaded discussion boards
with audio
PC, wired, wireless
PC, wired, wireless
PC, wired, wireless
High
High
Medium
Low
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Medium
Synchronous
Instant messaging
SMS/text messaging
Multiple user text chat
Chat rooms
Wikis and blogs
PC, handheld, cell phone
PC, handheld, cell phone
PC
PC
PC
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Low
Low
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
C
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
t
y
C
o
s
t
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
H
a
r
d
w
a
r
e

D
e
s
k
t
o
p

P
C

L
a
p
t
o
p
/
t
a
b
l
e
t

P
C

P
D
A

o
r

h
a
n
d
h
e
l
d
/
p
o
c
k
e
t

P
C

C
e
l
l

p
h
o
n
e

V
i
d
e
o

w
e
b

c
a
m

E
n
c
l
o
s
e
d

h
e
a
d
s
e
t
H
i
g
h
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
H
i
g
h
L
o
w
M
e
d
i
u
m
H
i
g
h
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
L
o
w
L
o
w

(
$
1
,
0
0
0

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
1
,
0
0
0
-
$
2
,
0
0
0

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
1
0
0
-
$
5
0
0

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
s
t
u
d
e
n
t

b
o
r
n
e
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
2
5
-
$
5
0

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
7
5

e
a
c
h
)
L
a
b

o
r

o
f
c
e

b
a
s
e
d
M
o
b
i
l
e

l
a
b

o
r

o
u
t

a
n
d

a
b
o
u
t
C
l
a
s
s

s
e
t
,

s
t
u
d
e
n
t

o
w
n
e
d
,

o
r

b
o
t
h
V
a
r
i
o
u
s

l
e
v
e
l
s

o
f

c
a
p
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
e
.
g
.
,

L
o
g
i
t
e
c
h

W
e
b
C
a
m
e
.
g
.
,

T
e
l
e
x

D
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

D
S
8
V
P
e
e
r
-
t
o
-
p
e
e
r

c
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

H
a
r
d
-
w
i
r
e
d

e
t
h
e
r
n
e
t

W
i
-
F
I

(
8
0
2
.
1
1
)

I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d

B
l
u
e
t
o
o
t
h
H
i
g
h

(
w
o
r
l
d
-
w
i
d
e

r
a
n
g
e
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

w
i
n
g

o
r

h
a
l
l
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
a

f
e
w

f
e
e
t
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
c
l
a
s
s
r
o
o
m
)
L
o
w
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
L
o
w

(
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
)
L
o
w

t
o

m
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
2
5
-
$
5
0

e
a
c
h
,

+

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
)
L
o
w

(
b
u
i
l
t

i
n
t
o

d
e
v
i
c
e
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
2
5
-
$
5
0

e
a
c
h

o
r

b
u
i
l
t

i
n
)
L
a
b
s
,

o
f
c
e
s
,

s
o
m
e

c
a
f
e
s
S
o
m
e

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
,

p
u
b
l
i
c

h
o
t

s
p
o
t
s
M
o
s
t

u
s
e
f
u
l

f
o
r

l
e

a
n
d

d
a
t
a

t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
L
i
m
i
t
e
d

(
b
u
t

g
r
o
w
i
n
g
)

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
-
t
i
o
n
s
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

a
n
d

C
M
C

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
E
m
a
i
l
I
n
s
t
a
n
t

m
e
s
s
a
g
i
n
g
C
o
u
r
s
e

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

C
M
C

t
o
o
l
s
C
e
l
l
-
p
h
o
n
e
-
b
a
s
e
d

t
e
x
t

m
e
s
s
a
g
i
n
g

a
n
d

S
M
S
C
e
l
l
-
p
h
o
n
e
-
b
a
s
e
d

m
u
l
t
i
m
e
d
i
a

m
e
s
-
s
a
g
i
n
g

s
e
r
v
i
c
e

(
s
t
i
l
l

a
n
d

v
i
d
e
o
)
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

v
i
d
e
o

c
h
a
t

r
o
o
m

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

(
e
.
g
.
,

i
V
i
s
i
t
)
A
u
d
i
o

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

s
e
r
v
e
r

t
o
o
l
s

(
e
.
g
.
,

H
o
r
i
z
o
n

W
i
m
b
a
)
H
i
g
h
H
i
g
h
H
i
g
h
H
i
g
h
H
i
g
h
M
e
d
i
u
m
H
i
g
h
L
o
w
L
o
w
L
o
w
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
M
e
d
i
u
m
L
o
w
L
o
w
L
o
w
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
s
t
u
d
e
n
t

b
o
r
n
e
,

a

f
e
w

c
e
n
t
s

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
s
t
u
d
e
n
t

b
o
r
n
e
,

$
.
2
5

e
a
c
h
)
M
e
d
i
u
m

(
$
1
0

p
e
r

y
e
a
r

e
a
c
h

c
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t

u
s
e
r
,

2
0

o
r

5
0

e
d
u
c
a
-
t
i
o
n
a
l

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
s
)
H
i
g
h

(
$
1
0
0

p
e
r

y
e
a
r

p
e
r

c
o
n
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
t

u
s
e
r
,

1
0
0

s
t
r
e
a
m
s
)
P
l
a
g
u
e
d

b
y

s
p
a
m
A
n
y

P
C

b
a
s
e
d
,

f
r
e
e

p
h
o
n
e

b
a
s
e
d
,

a

f
e
w

c
e
n
t
s

e
a
c
h
I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
V
e
r
y

p
o
p
u
l
a
r

a
m
o
n
g

h
i
g
h

s
c
h
o
o
l

a
n
d

c
o
l
-
l
e
g
e

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s

c
a
m
e
r
a

c
a
p
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s

o
n

p
h
o
n
e
I
s
s
u
e
:

s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y

f
r
o
m

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

w
o
r
l
d
P
a
r
t

o
f

d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
T
a
b
l
e

2
C
M
C

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
:

S
p
e
c
i
c

R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,

C
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
t
y
,

a
n
d

C
o
s
t
AUTHORS BIODATA
Peter A. Lafford is Associate Research Professional and Director of the Language
Computing Laboratory at Arizona State University. He has written several re-
views and articles for the CALICO Journal and other journals, and he is a frequent
presenter at CALICO conferences and other national, regional, and state language
conferences. He coauthored the chapter Teaching Language and Culture with
Internet Technologies in the 1997 ACTFL volume Technology-Enhanced Lan-
guage Learning. He is currently developing specialized delivery systems for the
digital resources used in the hybridized language courses at Arizona State Uni-
versity.
Barbara A. Lafford is Professor of Spanish and Linguistics at Arizona State Uni-
versity. She has published in the areas of Spanish sociolinguistics, second lan-
guage acquisition, applied linguistics, and CALL. Her most recent book Span-
ish second language acquisition: State of the science (2003) was co-edited with
Rafael Salaberry. She has presented regularly at CALICO and other national and
international linguistics associations (e.g., ACTFL, AATSP, AAAL, and AILA)
and has served on the board of the Southwest Conference on Language Teaching
and as President of the Arizona Language Association. She currently serves as a
member of the CALICO Executive Board.
AUTHORS ADDRESSES
Peter Lafford
Department of Languages and Literatures
PO Box 870202
Tempe, AZ 85287-0202
Phone: 480/965-4524
Fax: 480/965-0135
Email: plafford@asu.edu
Barbara A. Lafford
Department of Languages and Literatures
PO Box 870202
Tempe, AZ 85287-0202
Phone: 480/965-4648
Fax: 480/965-0135
Email: blafford@asu.edu

Article 162

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Article 162

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Peter A. Lafford and Barbara A.

682 CALICO Journal, Vol. 22, No. 3

Você também pode gostar