LIN8006 Exercise 1.5 - Selected reading: Bax (2003)

Make a comment on Open CALL defined and discussed in the reading

Bax defines three 'approaches' of CALL to replace the three 'phases' suggested by Warschauer (2000). The first approach is roughly similar to the behaviouristic phase of CALL, although Bax claims that this period was 'restrictive' in that it spoke to the outer boundaries and limitations of teaching in terms of learning theories, the learner, the environment, the teacher. Bax argued that his second 'approach', Open CALL, is 'open' in terms of being less restrictive than the previous period; that there is greater flexibility in teaching methodologies, learning environments, and use of technology. Although he defines a third approach, Integrated CALL, Bax contends that this is one possible future evolutionary state of CALL, confidently suggesting that we are currently in the period of the second, or Open CALL, approach.

A summary of the reading, and key passages...

Bax (2003, pp. 13-14) seeks to define the past, present and potential future of CALL, contending that the future should be informed by the past and present. Citing Delcloque's (2000) approach of describing CALL literature as either 'properly researched' or 'interpretive' - with Delcloque's obvious bias for the former - Bax argues the need for more of the latter as the mere 'facts of the matter' are insufficient as they, of themselves, offer little or no analysis or understanding of the evolution of CALL.

Bax is critical of so-called 'properly researched' work focussed on explaining the distinction(s) between the "many acronyms [for CALL] but little analysis" (p. 14) by various theorists, and seemingly endless reviews of yet more reviews of CALL history literature.

Bax identifies work by Warschauer and Healey (1998) and Warschauer (2000) as being the only creditable attempt to analyse CALL in that period, and uses Warschauer (2000) as a foundation for further discussion (p. 14).

Warschauer's (2000) three phases of CALL:

1. Behaviouristic CALL
2. Communicative CALL
3. Integrative CALL

Bax contends that these phases are popular yet have "a number of significant weaknesses" (p. 15). He argues that SL teaching today typically uses a communicative approach, “so it is confusing for teachers to hear that 'communicative CALL' is no longer with us..." (p. 16). A good point – but does 'communicative' still mean what it did two decades ago, or has it evolved in partial alignment with the evolution of the WWW as a learning medium?

"...there is no mention of communication at all, which is obviously central to communicative language teaching (CLT)... [and so] without the central features of human communication and interaction it would be difficult to term this 'communicative CALL' in any useful sense" (pp. 16-17).

"...by the end of the 1980s, many educators felt that CALL was still failing to live up to its potential..." (Warschaeur, 1996) - is this a matter of hype or unrealistic expectations?

As "task-based, project-based and content-based approaches ... are all used in CLT classrooms today ... it is difficult to accept the suggestion that these features marked any new departure in language teaching, with or without computers" (p. 19).

After systematically questioning the validity of Warshauer's 'phases' Bax acknowledges the need to fill the resulting space with "an alternative vision of the history of CALL" (p. 20) that is more readily understood, historically more accurate, and, importantly, that provides a current snapshot of CALL and it's possible future. Bax proposes three 'approaches' to replace Warschauer's flawed 'phases':

1. Restricted CALL (p. 20), which Bax admits nearly similar to Warschauer's first phase, but argues the name is more indicative as it describes the limitations of the theories, software, activities, and teacher.
2. Open CALL (p. 20, p. 22) as the software, feedback to students, role of the teacher are less restricted than the previous phase.
3. Integrated CALL (p. 22) as distinct from Warchauer and Healey's descriptors in that it describes one possible future goal for CALL.

Bax claims that CALL at the time of writing existed largely in the second phase - open CALL.

Bax (p. 22) suggests that the use of 'approaches' avoids the confusion that he sees as arising from the 'periods of CALL' as defined by Warschauer and Healey (1998) and Delcloque (2000) in which the periods may or may not align with behaviourist or communicative approaches.

"... owing to technological limitations related to hardware and software it was not possible to use computers for realistic communication in a CLT vein until the advent of effective CMC ... however it is [now] possible to ... argue for a more genuinely 'communicative' role for CALL from around 1995, at least in terms of software" (p. 23). Bax employs the benefit of hindsight when commenting on the then-current perspectives of the authors of eariler literature, however seems to often 'hedge his bets' on his own views, "[In] general terms we are in an Open phase of CALL, but... each institution and classroom may also exhibit certain Restricted and even Integrated features" (p. 23).

Bax identifies 'normalisation' (Bax, 2000) - the point at which a given technology is sufficiently adopted as to no longer be remarkable - as “the end goal for CALL" (p. 23), thus supporting a rather astonishing claim that CALL teachers should seek to be extinct by reaching this goal. Education, and specifically SL teaching, may be closer to Bax's defined goal, however when we consider the prevailing focus on the capabilities of technology (such as iPads and more recently other tablets, or interactive whiteboards, for teaching) over content and pedagogy - Bax's 'Sole Agency' fallacy (p. 26) - we have a way to travel.


References

Bax, S., (2000). Putting technology in its place. In: Field, C. (Ed.), Issues in Modern Foreign Languages Teaching. Routledge, pp. 208–219.

Delcloque, P., (2000). History of CALL. Available from http://www.history-of-call.org/

Warschauer, M., (2000). ‘‘CALL for the 21st Century’’ IATEFL and ESADE Conference, 2 July 2000, Barcelona, Spain. Available from http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/cyberspace.html

Warschauer, M., & Healey, D., (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language Teaching 31, 57–71. Available from http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/web/faculty/markw/overview.html