Software Evaluation #1
Rosetta Stone
Title of Software: Rosetta Stone
Producer: Fairfield Language Technologies
Target students (e.g., age or grade-level of students): This software is applicable for any age groups. Adult assistance for young learners under the age of 6 is recommended.
Proficiency level (e.g., beginning, intermediate, advanced): Contains lessons from Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3.
Description: Rosetta Stone is a comprehensive language learning software. The program is designed to provide language learners with the option of self-study in their own pace. It targets all four of the mains skills: listening, reading, writing, and speaking. It is considered to be suitable for all language learning backgrounds.
The software is presented in a CD-format. The program is broken down into units. Each unit consists of several lessons. The units incorporate a variety of real-life situations and topics such as getting directions and looking for a job together with some grammar structures. The lessons are structured systematically. The quality of the images is excellent.
The individual lessons target one of the four main skills: reading, listening, writing, or speaking. Some lessons target both listening and reading skills. For each exercise there is a preview and guided exercises.
What are the program’s strengths or weaknesses? Do you feel it would be effective for helping ELLs learn English? Why or why not? Would you use it in your classroom? Why or why not? What method or approach to language teaching does this program appear to represent?
Evaluation: The program’s strength is that it is well structured and interactive. It is logical and easy to follow. There is constant and immediate feedback. The language learner can learn in his/her own pace and return to difficult or problematic lessons any time throughout the learning process.
Among the weaknesses of the program is that it is limited in what it has to offer for the overall purpose of language learning. It inherently lacks social interaction that many believe language learning is based on. It is very scripted, there is no chance for negotiation of meaning, and it does not support constructive language learning.
Though Rosetta Stone does target all four main skills, it is may be more effective in the teaching of some skills than others. The reading sections test reading comprehension in multiple-choice format – not a very original idea. I like the idea of the built-in vocabulary in Level 3, where students can get the meaning of words by clicking on them.
The writing practice is limited to typing the recorded prompts or reconstructing the prompts by arranging phrase blocks in order. In my opinion, typing the recorded prompts is more like a listening comprehension than real writing practice. However, I do believe it may be beneficial for elementary-level learners. In addition, this activity comes with a great feature for feedback. Feedback is provided through two difficulty settings: the easy one (default) does not require correct capitalization or punctuation, while the strict setting does.
The speaking practice is not more than the repetition of prompts – very ‘audiolingualish’. While I do acknowledge the speech recognition aspect (recording and replaying option) of this exercise as very useful for checking and refining pronunciation, I do not believe this exercise has anything to do with real language output.
The program’s most effective part is probably the listening or listening-reading combination. It is easy to see how listening skills can be improved through Rosetta Stone. It is still limited and scripted, but it is a good way of practicing listening skills and/or augmenting listening comprehension with text.
To sum it up, I think Rosetta Stone can be a good tool to improve certain skills such as listening, reading comprehension, and pronunciation, especially in the elementary and intermediate level. It can be beneficial in a classroom where students have very different proficiency levels and therefore, the teacher needs to assign different tasks for each subgroup of students.
Besides the speaking section, I think the program is rather boring and typical of its kind. I do not think a language learner can fully acquire a foreign language using solely the Rosetta Stone. This program should only be used as a tool accompanied by other sources that provide opportunities to be exposed to unscripted language, interaction and opportunities to create the language.
As far as methods, some aspects of the program definitely follow the audiolingual method. I can also see traces of competency-based language teaching. I find it ironic that the cover of the demo mentions “immersion-learning techniques” as one of the program’s characteristics. Nice sales pitch.
R.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Monday, February 26, 2007
Prompt #6 On Inquiry and Problem Solving in the ESL Classroom
EGBERT Ch. 6. Inquiry and Problem SolvingRICHARDSON Ch. 8. Podcasting and Screencasting: Multimedia Publishing for the Masses
Describe an inquiry or problem solving activity appropriate for ELLs that you have used, participated in, read about, or just now thought of. Describe which critical thinking skills it requires students to use and develop. Then, describe how this activity supports language and content learning for ELLs. Finally, comment on how podcasting could be used within the inquiry and problem solving process in a manner which supports language and content learning for ELLs.
Just this past week I discussed the problem of getting junk mail with my adult ESL class. We started out defining the meaning of "junk". It generated some great examples and new vocabulary: junk food, garage sale and such. Then we read an article from Access Reading (a great book based on the Equipped for the Future Content Standards specifically designed for adult learners) about junk mail and scams. We finished the class with a guided-writing activity - we constructed a short paragraph together summing up the problem of getting junk mail. For the following class I brought in a bag of junk mail that I had recently "collected". I asked the students to help me sort my mail separating the junk mail from the important mail. They really enjoyed opening my mail and pointing out how much I was supposed to pay for this and that....
This activity involved some critical thinking, seaparting the useful from the useless and organizing information. Each student picked a word from the mail that they shared with the class. At the end of the class we made some suggestions on how to deal with junk mail. This was a follow-on for a previous activity when we had talked about using diffferent language stuctures to give advice.
It would have been great to use some technology to make this topic a little bit more intersting and relevant for students. It would have been interesting to find out about big companies' marketing expenses. We could have done a research on how to avoid junk mail e.g. discussing consumer rights. Podcasting would have been great to generate or share some ideas on the issue. We could have had a broadcasting on junk mail and encouraged listeners to contribute their ideas to our beatthejunkmail-wiki. It would have been a great way of combining different language skills and develop critical thinking together with language content through technology.
Describe an inquiry or problem solving activity appropriate for ELLs that you have used, participated in, read about, or just now thought of. Describe which critical thinking skills it requires students to use and develop. Then, describe how this activity supports language and content learning for ELLs. Finally, comment on how podcasting could be used within the inquiry and problem solving process in a manner which supports language and content learning for ELLs.
Just this past week I discussed the problem of getting junk mail with my adult ESL class. We started out defining the meaning of "junk". It generated some great examples and new vocabulary: junk food, garage sale and such. Then we read an article from Access Reading (a great book based on the Equipped for the Future Content Standards specifically designed for adult learners) about junk mail and scams. We finished the class with a guided-writing activity - we constructed a short paragraph together summing up the problem of getting junk mail. For the following class I brought in a bag of junk mail that I had recently "collected". I asked the students to help me sort my mail separating the junk mail from the important mail. They really enjoyed opening my mail and pointing out how much I was supposed to pay for this and that....
This activity involved some critical thinking, seaparting the useful from the useless and organizing information. Each student picked a word from the mail that they shared with the class. At the end of the class we made some suggestions on how to deal with junk mail. This was a follow-on for a previous activity when we had talked about using diffferent language stuctures to give advice.
It would have been great to use some technology to make this topic a little bit more intersting and relevant for students. It would have been interesting to find out about big companies' marketing expenses. We could have done a research on how to avoid junk mail e.g. discussing consumer rights. Podcasting would have been great to generate or share some ideas on the issue. We could have had a broadcasting on junk mail and encouraged listeners to contribute their ideas to our beatthejunkmail-wiki. It would have been a great way of combining different language skills and develop critical thinking together with language content through technology.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Reading Prompt #5
On technology, creativity and language production
Egbert chapter 5., Richardson chapter 4.
Most L1 and L2 theories agree on the importance of the environment in language acquisition, however, they differ in the role of environment. Some theorists like Chomsky and Krashen see the environment as the necessary source for input that will generate the learner’s innate language capabilities. From this point of view, the environment’s only contributions for language acquisition is input. Other theorists emphasize the role of the environment on a broader spectrum – they see the role of the environment as a much more comprehensive and vital for language learning. Ideally, the learner’s environment provides input and the learner will react to this input with output. Language production then will facilitate language learning. This exhange between input and output is mediated through interaction. This is where I believe the position of Long and Swain intervene on the issues of interaction and output in SLA.
Interaction is delivered through some sort of communication (verbal or written). This interaction between language learners, or language learner and native speaker can be characterized with all kinds of language acquisition processes such scaffolding, feedback, and testing hypotheses. I like to think that these processes are the building blocks of SLA.
Egbert points out that output in itself does not promote language learning. This is an important realization for me. I must admit before I read chapter 5 in the Egbert book, I liked to imagine that the role and importance of output in SLA is a given. It’s the key or at least one of the keys in SLA. And it is true, but as Egbert points out, output or language production needs to be meaningful and promote creativity. Drills and reciting does not promote language learning. To make language production meaningful SLA teachers need to encourage interaction among language learners. Cooperation is the next step or ingredient in this process toward successful language learning.
Now, what does technology has to do with this all? It makes language learning more interesting and facilitates learners’ creativity. But above all, “it makes it stick”. It will make language learning more successful.
I must admit I kind of felt a little bit overwhelmed reading about Mr. Lin’s class (right at the beginning of the chapter). It just seems to be a little bit too much – I thought. Isn’t it a language class? Is Mr. Lin training future film makers? Then I read the “Activities that Encourage Creativity and Production” section and I felt better. The amount of technology used in the classroom is really up to the teacher, the students, and the goals of the language program. There are many options out there how two utilize technology in the classroom.
Wikis play an important part in combining interaction with technology to support SLA. Through Wikis, students can constantly provide feedback, modify input, negotiate meaning, and test hypotheses – those very processes that I have referred to earlier as important components of SLA. Wikis can create learning environments through interaction and collaboration among learners. They promote language production and creativity using technology.
Egbert chapter 5., Richardson chapter 4.
Most L1 and L2 theories agree on the importance of the environment in language acquisition, however, they differ in the role of environment. Some theorists like Chomsky and Krashen see the environment as the necessary source for input that will generate the learner’s innate language capabilities. From this point of view, the environment’s only contributions for language acquisition is input. Other theorists emphasize the role of the environment on a broader spectrum – they see the role of the environment as a much more comprehensive and vital for language learning. Ideally, the learner’s environment provides input and the learner will react to this input with output. Language production then will facilitate language learning. This exhange between input and output is mediated through interaction. This is where I believe the position of Long and Swain intervene on the issues of interaction and output in SLA.
Interaction is delivered through some sort of communication (verbal or written). This interaction between language learners, or language learner and native speaker can be characterized with all kinds of language acquisition processes such scaffolding, feedback, and testing hypotheses. I like to think that these processes are the building blocks of SLA.
Egbert points out that output in itself does not promote language learning. This is an important realization for me. I must admit before I read chapter 5 in the Egbert book, I liked to imagine that the role and importance of output in SLA is a given. It’s the key or at least one of the keys in SLA. And it is true, but as Egbert points out, output or language production needs to be meaningful and promote creativity. Drills and reciting does not promote language learning. To make language production meaningful SLA teachers need to encourage interaction among language learners. Cooperation is the next step or ingredient in this process toward successful language learning.
Now, what does technology has to do with this all? It makes language learning more interesting and facilitates learners’ creativity. But above all, “it makes it stick”. It will make language learning more successful.
I must admit I kind of felt a little bit overwhelmed reading about Mr. Lin’s class (right at the beginning of the chapter). It just seems to be a little bit too much – I thought. Isn’t it a language class? Is Mr. Lin training future film makers? Then I read the “Activities that Encourage Creativity and Production” section and I felt better. The amount of technology used in the classroom is really up to the teacher, the students, and the goals of the language program. There are many options out there how two utilize technology in the classroom.
Wikis play an important part in combining interaction with technology to support SLA. Through Wikis, students can constantly provide feedback, modify input, negotiate meaning, and test hypotheses – those very processes that I have referred to earlier as important components of SLA. Wikis can create learning environments through interaction and collaboration among learners. They promote language production and creativity using technology.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Reading Prompt #4
Reading Prompt #4
Communication and collaboration facilitates language learning. Communication conveys knowledge, and collaboration creates the route for it via social interaction.
What I really like about this chapter and about the Egbert book in general is that it gives very good examples. It not only talks about the importance of using technology in the classroom, but also shows how to apply it in real classroom situations.
I find it very important, as Egbert points out, to engage students by assigning specific roles to each one of them, so that everybody gets involved in the classroom work. I also like the idea of students presenting their work for the class. If the class is involved in a presentation through various tasks and/or activities, it will give added value to the presentation for both the presenter and the class.
I must admit, I have never used computers in my ESL classrooms other than my laptop for testing. I know it’s sad, but I simply do not have access to a computer that I could utilize. But reading about these methods and activities that Egbert brings up, I constantly catch myself planning all kinds of computer-based activities that I would like to use with my class – one day.
Communication and collaboration facilitates language learning. Communication conveys knowledge, and collaboration creates the route for it via social interaction.
What I really like about this chapter and about the Egbert book in general is that it gives very good examples. It not only talks about the importance of using technology in the classroom, but also shows how to apply it in real classroom situations.
I find it very important, as Egbert points out, to engage students by assigning specific roles to each one of them, so that everybody gets involved in the classroom work. I also like the idea of students presenting their work for the class. If the class is involved in a presentation through various tasks and/or activities, it will give added value to the presentation for both the presenter and the class.
I must admit, I have never used computers in my ESL classrooms other than my laptop for testing. I know it’s sad, but I simply do not have access to a computer that I could utilize. But reading about these methods and activities that Egbert brings up, I constantly catch myself planning all kinds of computer-based activities that I would like to use with my class – one day.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Reading Prompt #3
Reading Prompt #3
CUMMINS Ch. 4. TechnologyEGBERT Ch. 3. Developing and Practicing Listening and Speaking Skills
Cummins et al. discussed the pedagocial divide that separates instruction for low-income and for more affluent students. Discuss some of the technology-supported strategies from their chapter. Also comment on one of the examples from Egbert's chapter and describe how computers can assist ELLs with learing and practicing listening and speaking in English.
(Due 2/6/07 before class -- Post answer on own blog, and respond to another students' answer on their blog).
Cummins et al. discussed the clash between transmission-based orientation and inquiry-based orientations to pedagogy. The transmission-based orientation promotes the internalization of curriculum, while the inquiry-based orientations to pedagagogy are aimed at constructing knowledge. As Cummins et al. pointed out, this conflict between these pedagogical practices translates into literacy in the following way: ELLs and low-income students have greater difficulty in reading to learn than in learning to read. I think it sums up the situation really well.
Research suggesst that literacy development lays in combining extensive reading with effective comprehensive strategies. What follows as far as strategies is really nothing more or less than what I have learned about in my reading-writing class (ESL 5053 ?) adding technology to it: engaging prior knowledge, cognitive challenge, creative thinking, reading strategies, and extensive engaged reading. See, again - technology is not an end, but a tool.
That takes me back to the first part of the chapter. What really matters is to use technonolgy wisely. We need to learn how to benefit from what it has to offer.
My favorite example from the Egbert chapter is when the Japanese students are planning to visit the US and they worry that they will not be able to understand spoken English. The teacher uses technology to model the language - situations that students may come across in the US. It is like sampling the language. I can see how it gives support for students and motivate them. Of course, students should never rely too much on such samples. I mean memorizing e.g. dialogues or routines is unlikely to work in real-life situatons.
I feel I have learned a lot from these chapters.
CUMMINS Ch. 4. TechnologyEGBERT Ch. 3. Developing and Practicing Listening and Speaking Skills
Cummins et al. discussed the pedagocial divide that separates instruction for low-income and for more affluent students. Discuss some of the technology-supported strategies from their chapter. Also comment on one of the examples from Egbert's chapter and describe how computers can assist ELLs with learing and practicing listening and speaking in English.
(Due 2/6/07 before class -- Post answer on own blog, and respond to another students' answer on their blog).
Cummins et al. discussed the clash between transmission-based orientation and inquiry-based orientations to pedagogy. The transmission-based orientation promotes the internalization of curriculum, while the inquiry-based orientations to pedagagogy are aimed at constructing knowledge. As Cummins et al. pointed out, this conflict between these pedagogical practices translates into literacy in the following way: ELLs and low-income students have greater difficulty in reading to learn than in learning to read. I think it sums up the situation really well.
Research suggesst that literacy development lays in combining extensive reading with effective comprehensive strategies. What follows as far as strategies is really nothing more or less than what I have learned about in my reading-writing class (ESL 5053 ?) adding technology to it: engaging prior knowledge, cognitive challenge, creative thinking, reading strategies, and extensive engaged reading. See, again - technology is not an end, but a tool.
That takes me back to the first part of the chapter. What really matters is to use technonolgy wisely. We need to learn how to benefit from what it has to offer.
My favorite example from the Egbert chapter is when the Japanese students are planning to visit the US and they worry that they will not be able to understand spoken English. The teacher uses technology to model the language - situations that students may come across in the US. It is like sampling the language. I can see how it gives support for students and motivate them. Of course, students should never rely too much on such samples. I mean memorizing e.g. dialogues or routines is unlikely to work in real-life situatons.
I feel I have learned a lot from these chapters.
Friday, February 2, 2007
Reading Prompt #2
Readings: Egbert Ch. 2, Cummins Ch. 2, Richardson Ch. 3
What are "multiliteracies" as described by Cummins et al.? How does this relate to Egbert's assertions about the need for authentic materials to support ELL students' reading and writing? Discuss
how blogs and blogging can be a tool for achieving these ideals with ELL students. Finally, describe your own experience creating your blog this week. Was it harder than you thought? What ideas do you have about the kind of stuff you want to blog about (besides what is required for this course)?
The concept of “Mulitliteracies” is considering the skill of reading and writing from a new prospective. Traditionally literacy was considered, as Cummins puts it, a paper and pencil issue. In this sense, the ability of reading and writing solely meant reading and writing. The concept of multiliteracies goes beyond this tradition and extends reading and writing to a more comprehensive set of skills.
The idea of multiliteracies generated from recent societal changes, namely globalization and technological change. This new societal environment is diverse in nature – diverse cultures, languages, personalities, skills, learning styles, choices, etc.
Egbert reinforces Cummins’ thought in that the concept of one fits all is no longer an option in education – or at least it shouldn’t be. And it doesn’t need to be. If we combine the phenomena of globalization and technological changes that is, diversity with new choices via technology, we realize that we have the option of supporting individual needs and intelligences.
I like the way Egbert questions the authenticity of authentic materials. It is relative what we consider authentic. I can clearly see the connection between multiliteracies and authenticity. I think it’s naïve to assume that let’s say an ELL living in San Antonio will eventually only interact with reading and writing materials originated from Texas. I think students should be exposed to different sources.
And that brings me to my blog. What an exciting way of interacting, sharing, and discussing information about teaching ESL! I found it pretty easy to set up my blog. However, I had some difficulties logging in for the first time. I am really hoping that my blog will be a good way of sharing my ESL experiences with my friends and relatives who are current ELLs. I plan on using my blog as a forum to share and discuss web-based ESL sources.
What are "multiliteracies" as described by Cummins et al.? How does this relate to Egbert's assertions about the need for authentic materials to support ELL students' reading and writing? Discuss
how blogs and blogging can be a tool for achieving these ideals with ELL students. Finally, describe your own experience creating your blog this week. Was it harder than you thought? What ideas do you have about the kind of stuff you want to blog about (besides what is required for this course)?
The concept of “Mulitliteracies” is considering the skill of reading and writing from a new prospective. Traditionally literacy was considered, as Cummins puts it, a paper and pencil issue. In this sense, the ability of reading and writing solely meant reading and writing. The concept of multiliteracies goes beyond this tradition and extends reading and writing to a more comprehensive set of skills.
The idea of multiliteracies generated from recent societal changes, namely globalization and technological change. This new societal environment is diverse in nature – diverse cultures, languages, personalities, skills, learning styles, choices, etc.
Egbert reinforces Cummins’ thought in that the concept of one fits all is no longer an option in education – or at least it shouldn’t be. And it doesn’t need to be. If we combine the phenomena of globalization and technological changes that is, diversity with new choices via technology, we realize that we have the option of supporting individual needs and intelligences.
I like the way Egbert questions the authenticity of authentic materials. It is relative what we consider authentic. I can clearly see the connection between multiliteracies and authenticity. I think it’s naïve to assume that let’s say an ELL living in San Antonio will eventually only interact with reading and writing materials originated from Texas. I think students should be exposed to different sources.
And that brings me to my blog. What an exciting way of interacting, sharing, and discussing information about teaching ESL! I found it pretty easy to set up my blog. However, I had some difficulties logging in for the first time. I am really hoping that my blog will be a good way of sharing my ESL experiences with my friends and relatives who are current ELLs. I plan on using my blog as a forum to share and discuss web-based ESL sources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
