Advertisement

Modelling User Linguistic Communicative Competences for Individual and Collaborative Learning

  • Timothy ReadEmail author
  • Elena Bárcena
Chapter
Part of the Cognitive Systems Monographs book series (COSMOS, volume 22)

Abstract

In this article, an innovative framework for use in Intelligent Computer-Assisted Language Learning (henceforth, ICALL) systems (as developed by the ATLAS research group) is presented in terms of the different models that compose it. It is argued that such a general framework allows the design and development of ICALL systems in a technologically, pedagogically and linguistically robust fashion, thereby avoiding the use of ad hoc knowledge models, which prove difficult to move from one system to another. Such a framework has been designed to overcome three problems present in most second language learning systems: the oversimplification and reduction of the vastness and complexity of the learning domain to a few formal linguistic aspects (studied in closed and decontextualised activities), the lack of underlying pedagogic principles, and the complexity of automatic language parsing and speech recognition. The framework attempts to capture and model the relevant pedagogic, linguistic and technological elements for the effective development of second language (henceforth, L2) competence. One of the goals were that any ICALL system developed around this framework would structure the complex network of communicative language competences (linguistic, pragmatic and sociolinguistic) and processes (reception, production and interaction) within the L2 learning process in a causal quantitative way, adapting such process to the progress made by a given student.

Keywords

Group Model Collaborative Learning Collaborative Activity Communicative Language Conceptual Unit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Amaral L, Meurers D (2011) On using intelligent computer-assisted language learning in real-life foreign language teaching and learning. In: ReCALL, vol 23, no 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 4–24Google Scholar
  2. Bailin A (1995) AI and language learning: theory and evaluation. In: Holland VM, Kaplan JD, Sams MR (eds) Intelligent language tutors: theory shaping technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 327–343Google Scholar
  3. Bárcena E, Read T (2004) The role of scaffolding in a learner-centered tutoring system for business english at a distance. In: Proceedings of the 3rd EDEN research workshop, Universität Oldenburg, pp 176–182Google Scholar
  4. Bárcena E, Read T (2009) The integration of ICALL-based collaboration with the english classroom. In: To be published in proceedings of EuroCALL 2Google Scholar
  5. Chanier T (ed) (1994) Language learning. Spec. Issue J. Artif. Intell. Educ 5(4)Google Scholar
  6. Chen YS, Kao , Sheu JP, Chiang CY (2002) A mobile scaffolding-aid-based bird -watching learning system. In: Proceedings of IEEE international workshop on wireless and mobile technologies in education (WMTE’02), Växjö (Sweden). IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 15–22Google Scholar
  7. Council of Europe (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, sssessment. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Curtis M, Luchini K, Bobrowsky W, Quintana C, Soloway E (2002) Handheld use in K-12: a descriptive account. In: Proceedings of IEEE international workshop on wireless and mobile technologies in education (WMTE’02). IEEE Computer Society Press, Växjö, Sweden, pp 23–30Google Scholar
  9. Gamper J, Knapp J (2002) A review of intelligent CALL systems. Comput Assist Lang Learn 15(4):329–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holland VM, Kaplan JD, Sams MR (eds) (1995) Intelligent language tutors, theory shaping technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  11. Kay J (2000) Stereotypes, student models and scrutability. In: Gauthier G, Frasson C, VanLehn K (eds) Intelligent tutoring systems. ITS2000 ( LNCS 1839). Springer, Heidelberg, pp 19–30Google Scholar
  12. Levy M (1997) Computer assisted language learning: context and conceptualization. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Martin MA (1978) The application of spiraling to the teaching of grammar. TESOL Quart 12(2):151–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McLoughlin C, Marshall L (2000) Scaffolding: a model for learner support in an online teaching environment. In: Proceedings of the teaching and learning, Forum (2000)Google Scholar
  15. Morrow K (2004) Insights from the common European framework. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Read T, Bárcena E, Barros B, Verdejo MF (2002) I-PETER: modelling personalised diagnosis and material selection for an on-line english course. In: Garijo F, Riquelme J, Toro M (eds) Advances in artificial intelligence—Iberamia 2002 (LNAI 2527). Springer, Berlin, pp 734–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Read T, Bárcena E, Barros B, Verdejo MF (2002b) Adaptive modelling of student diagnosis and material selection for on-line language learning. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 12(3/4):135–150Google Scholar
  18. Read T, Bárcena E, Pancorbo J (2004) Adaptive tutoring architectures for english distance learning. In: Proceedings of the international conference on education. (Innovation. Technology and Research in Education), Bilbao, pp 142–146Google Scholar
  19. Read T, Bárcena E, Barros B, Varela R, Pancorbo J (2005) COPPER: modeling user linguistic production competence in an adaptive collaborative environment. In: Ardissono L, Brna P, Mitrovic A (eds) 10th international conference on user modelling, Edinburgh, (LNAI 3538). Springer, Berlin, pp 144–153Google Scholar
  20. Read T, Barros B, Bárcena E, Pancorbo J (2006) Coalescing individual and collaborative learning to model user linguistic competences. In: Gaudioso H, Soller A, Vassileva J (eds) User modeling and user-adapted interaction. Special issue on user modeling to support groups, communities and collaboration, vol 16, no 3/4, pp 349–376Google Scholar
  21. Read T, Bárcena E, Rodrigo C (2010) Modelling ubiquity for second language learning. Int J Mob Learn Organ 4(2):130–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. van Ek JA, Alexander LG (1975) Threshold level english. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Wilkins DA (1976) Notional syllabuses. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Wood P (2008) Developing ICALL tools using GATE. In: Computer assisted language learning, vol 21, no 4Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Lenguajes y Sistemas InformáticosUNEDMadridSpain
  2. 2.Departamento de Filologías Extranjeras y sus LingüísticasUNEDMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations