In spring of 2020, Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) practitioners and scholars suddenly were in high demand. While the CALL field has spent decades investigating the efficacy of technology-mediated language learning (Plonsky & Ziegler, 2016), in general and different delivery formats in particular (Grgurović, Chapelle & Shelley, 2013), their work has not always been recognized, known, and/or accepted by language educators and scholars. Researchers in CALL and syntheses of CALL research have concluded that technology-mediated language learning and online or hybrid delivery formats are at least not harmful to learners and may even have some benefits (Aldrich & Moneypenny, 2019; Blake, Wilson, Cetto, & Pardo-Ballester, 2008; Goertler, 2019). Yet, what happened in educational institutions around the globe in 2020 was not planned online instruction, but rather remote emergency teaching and learning (Gacs, Goertler, & Spasova, 2020). Whereas Emergency Remote Teaching and Learning (ERTL) was unplanned, unprecedented, and highly unpredictable, it has necessarily led many institutions and language educators to rethink their pedagogies, policies, practices, technologies, strategies and more.
The COVID-19 crisis forced educational institutions to quickly adjust to new ways of doing their work. In the months and years following March 2020, adjustments were made and refined that could have long-term implications for language learning and teaching. Much of the early research on the COVID-19 pandemic has focused on its negative effects, such as the lack of infrastructure and preparedness (Tao & Gao, 2022), issues in equitable access for educators and learners (Back, Zavala, & Franco, 2022), perceived lowered outcomes (Moser, Wei & Brenner, 2021), and the emotional burdens (MacIntyre, Gregersen, & Mercer, 2020). In this volume, we aim to capture some of the lessons learned during and as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to move forward as a field with intention and purpose and to take advantage of the crisis-prompted innovation. The volume aims to provide implications for other current and future challenges and crises that require our attention in language teaching and technology. Contributions will bring additional depth to the pandemic discussion by specifically addressing one or more of the questions posed below.
What is the purpose and goal of the book?
What are the chapters about?
What was done?
What was missing (infrastructure, skills, etc.)?
What training was offered for learners, educators, and/or support personnel?
What changes were made initially and how were they improved upon as we moved through the pandemic?
What were the unique challenges of language learning and teaching (e.g., synchronous/asynchronous modalities, cancellation of education abroad, non-roman scripts, etc.)?
What infrastructures were created? What do we want to/need to keep? What didn’t work? What needs to be discarded? Why?
What changes were made to curricula and their implementation? What do we want to/need to keep? What needs to be discarded? Why?
What skills and approaches did educators develop? What was their process of trial and error? How? And what do they want to keep?
What strategies and skills did learners develop in response to the pandemic? How? And what should be kept/left behind?
What practices and policies were changed, adapted, and created in response to the pandemic? Which were effective and which were less so? What should we continue and, alternatively, discontinue?
What were unique ways of responding to the challenges of language learning and teaching?
How well did language learners learn the course content? What were successful/less successful approaches and strategies?
How well did educators teach? What were successful strategies, tools? What challenges did they face? What were the failures? How did they overcome these difficulties (or not)?
How well were educators and/or students supported?
How well did language programs react/survive/thrive? What were some successful strategies?
What do these outcomes mean for the future?
What alternatives were found for aspects of language education that were difficult to imagine in a remote format (e.g., education abroad, service learning, …)?
How did enrollments change?
How did the interest in language learning change (e.g., were there more people pursuing language learning through apps rather than classes?)?
How did remote working impact the emotions and emotional labor of learners, educators, and support personnel? What are the goals, lessons, and needs for the future?
What adjustments were made as a result of the pandemic to working and learning conditions and logistics? What are the goals, lessons, and needs for the future?
What were the financial implications for institutions and individuals of pandemic working, teaching, and learning? What are the goals, lessons, and needs for the future?
Based on the chapters in this volume, what lessons were learned during the pandemic? What were the major take-aways? What potential crisis-prompted frameworks for language learning and technology might arise as a result?
Based on the chapters in this volume, what are some recommendations for constructively and productively moving forward as learners, educators, programs, and institutions? Where do we go from here? How can we be prepared for other current and future crises, emergencies, and challenges?
The volume will consist of an introduction and a conclusion written by the editors and four parts with 2-3 chapters each. We intend to have one invited chapter per section written by a respected author team and 1-2 chapters solicited through a two-step call for proposals: (1) proposals; (2) full chapters. Below are the sections of the book and the questions each part is intended to answer. All main chapters are expected to be based on original empirical research.
Aldrich, R. S. & Moneypenny, D. B. (2019). Assessing Spanish proficiency of online language learners after year 1. The EUROCALL Review, 27(2), 28-39.
Back, M., Zavala, V., & Franco, R. (2022). “Siempre adistanciados”: Ideology, equity, and access in Peruvian emergency distance education for Spanish as a second language. CALICO Journal, 39(1), 79-102.
Blake, R., Wilson, N. L., Cetto, M. & Pardo-Ballester, C. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face and blended classrooms. Language Learning and Technology, 12(3), 114-127.
Gacs, A., Goertler, S., & Spasova, S. (2020). Planned online language education versus
crisis-prompted online language teaching: Lessons for the future. Foreign Language
Annals, 53 (2), 380-392. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12460
Goertler, S. (2019). Normalizing online learning: Adapting to a changing world of language teaching. In N. Arnold & L. Ducate (Eds.), Engaging language learners through CALL: From theory and research to informed practice (pp. 51-92). Equinox.
Grgurović, M., Chapelle, C. A., & Shelley, M. C. (2013). A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL, 25, 165- 198. doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000013
MacIntyre, P.D., Gregersen, T., & Mercer, S. (2020). Language teachers’ coping strategies
during the COVID-19 conversion to online teaching: Correlations with stress wellbeing and negative emotions. System, 94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102352
Moser, K., Wei, T., & Brenner, D. (2021). Remote teaching during COVID-19: Implications from a national survey of language educators. System, 97, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102431
Plonsky, L. & Ziegler, N. (2016). The CALL-SLA interface: Insights from a second-order
synthesis. Language Learning & Technology, 20 (2), 17-37.
Tao, J. & Gao, X. (2022). Teaching and learning languages online: Challenges and responses.
System, 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102819.