This is a forum for debating the text Tecnologias digitais no ensino de línguas: passado, presente e futuro.
Prof. Menezes mentions the 3 stages mentioned by Warschauer (see figure below). What does she say about it?
This is a forum for debating the text Tecnologias digitais no ensino de línguas: passado, presente e futuro.
Prof. Menezes mentions the 3 stages mentioned by Warschauer (see figure below). What does she say about it?
Good morning, everyone!
I enjoyed reading this text because it reminded me of my typewriting classes back in 1996 and my first computing classes in 1997. I studied Windows 95, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access. I was 13 years old, and I lived in São Paulo. The school where I studied was rather far from my house, so I had to take the bus to get there. Alternatively, I could take the bus and the subway. Of course, I chose the latter because I felt incredibly independent taking the subway all by myself.
Anyway, regarding the question proposed by Professor Celso, Menezes (2019) claims that the three stages proposed by Warschauer (1996) do not apply to the Brazilian context. The author explains that the first investigation concerning the use of computers for language teaching corresponds to the communicative stage. She refers to the study conducted by Freire (1992), which explored the learners’ interaction while playing the game SimCity. Menezes (2019) highlights that there might have been other initiatives; however, she has found no other register. Furthermore, the author says that many of the resources currently available for language learning on the internet fall into the structuralist category.
Hello everyone! I enjoyed reading this text because it is very clear and straightforward in explaining how the use of technology evolve through the years in Brazil.
As Tatiana already mentioned, Prof. Menezes argues that the stages proposed by Warschauer do not apply to the Brazilian context. Therefore, the author goes on telling the reader the "story" of the use of technology in Brazil. It is interesting to see that the author herself was part of this process, which began with the BITNET and evolve until we had smartphones in the hands of students with some schools even providing Wi-Fi to students.
I think it is important to take what Prof. Menezes' argument that our context is probably very different than other countries into account. What the author is arguing probably means that we are still learning how to deal with this issue in schools while other countries have already passed through all these stages throughout the years. Brazilian schools had to "catch up" as fast as they could with the resources they had and this still has impacts in the classrooms nowadays.
It was highly informative and engaging to visualize the developmental process of CALL in Brazil. As an English student, I remember how hard it was to have access to materials in English, such as books and magazines, in the early 2000s. If I wanted to learn how to sing a song properly, I had to ask my teacher to type and print the lyrics! Something unimaginable now, only about 20 years later.
Regarding Prof. Celso’s question, as Tatiana and Fernanda mentioned above, Menezes (2019) highlights the fact that Warschauer’s (1996) stages of CALL did not correspond to the Brazilian context as a result of late implementation of use of computers in the educational scenario. Tatiana also interestingly mentioned that “many of the resources currently available for language learning on the Internet fall into the structuralist category”, which made me think: why are we currently in an Integrative stage but still producing/consuming mostly practices that fall under the Structural phase? To which extent are the apps and digital resources for language learning actually developed with the support of specialists in CALL?
Finally, I particularly enjoyed that the author defined this moment as a “spectacular revolution in education, learning and society”. I sometimes reflect with insecurity on my role as a language teacher in the next 20, 30 years, but it was quite comforting to read her (an admirable specialist in the field!) say that the teacher will continue to play a fundamental role in the process and should not see this advance as a “threat”.
The authors of this study, Tecnologias digitais no ensino de línguas: passado, presente e futuro, formulated an interesting timeline concerning the history between new technologies and education. I would like to point out some of my impressions and highlights of each session they made throughout (our) history, past, present and future.
First information we realize is that even though we cannot imagine our lives without the facilities provided by digital technologies, their role in education (especially in Brazil) is impressively recent. I would dare to assume that the majority of the current professors out there witnessed these transitions and revolutions we have had in education. And even though some are reluctant to changes, I would say that teachers in general adapted marvelously despite the short time to either process the innovation and know how to manage it. Although most of the struggles the authors listed we had in the past we still face today – such as connection adversities, software slowness and so forth – the incorporation and adaptations we made are a sign that we are not as slow and inflexible as people might think.
Regarding the present – or maybe the present in 2015 – the fact that the highest percentage of internet users were surfing on the net to search for information and knowledge caught my attention, because if the survey was retaken now (only 5 years later) the results would surely be different. Is it a rising pattern? Will people be increasingly using the internet for distractions and “useless” purposes? The huge number of apps and social medias to serve this purpose doesn’t give me a lot of hope. I can’t imagine people using the computer or the cell phone focusing on enhancing their knowledge, but as a reward to escape from difficult or complex tasks there might be happening.
In relation to the authors’ predictions about the future – concerning technology and education – the first thing that crossed my mind is that most of them are happening in a more rapid pace due to the pandemic impacts we have suffered. For instance, topics 9, 10, 13 and 14:
9. Cursos/disciplinas na modalidade MOOC15 vão se expandir;
10. Haverá aumento de aprendizagem autônoma em função dos aplicativos de celulares, que permitem aprender em qualquer lugar e a qualquer hora;
13. Haverá ampliação de atividades pedagógicas gamificadas16;
14. Os livros digitais ganharão cada vez mais espaço e mais prestígio na comunidade acadêmica.
Thus, I would like to contribute with my own prediction about the future, inspired by the author, Menezes (2019). Some changes are here to stay. But if the change is technology, we have to keep in mind that what we consider new or innovative is ephemeral. It means that the way I see, educators will always have to adapt and keep up with the new technologies that appear and try to deal with the impacts they cause in teaching and learning processes. Teachers, the mediators of education, despite contrary ideas, will always be necessary.
Finally, about professor Celso's question, as my colleagues mentioned, this division of the history of computer-based teaching idealized by Warschauer (1996) doesn’t reflect our (Brazilian people) reality. I would say that this could be a reason why there has been a lot of worries and reluctance among our teachers, as we haven’t been exposed to a gradual exposure to these new technologies, but on the contrary, we were forced to adapt abruptly.
While Reading Menezes’s text I could make some connections with some of my practices within the classroom, which were related with the three stages mentioned in the text, past, present and future.
Regarding the past, I remember the hell on Earth it was to take my students to the library (where the computers were) because the people in charge apparently did not like students using the computes (?????) and they also did not appreciate me letting them use the cellphone in the classroom to do research. It was always a burocracy in order to have a “different” class. This is what Menezes says on page 7 “Nas escolas, a tecnologia se integrou facilmente nas administrações e nas bibliotecas, mas causava temor e estranheza aos pedagogos e professores.”
However, the students were always helpful when the issue was technology. I could learn a lot from them (how to use the lousa digital, for example).
I also agree with Marcella that some of the predictions to the future are already happening due to the pandemic context. The internet and technology were very importante tools and facilitators in this critical moment and I also do not see the next years moving backwards in this sense. Some of my private students have already told me that they will not, in their words, “leave their house, waste gas, time and Money to do what they can do from home” and I don’t think they are wrong. Online teaching methods are only getting better and adapting to it and seizing its contributions can also benefit us.
Concerning the text “Tecnologias digitais no ensino de línguas: presente, passado e futuro” Vera Menezes mentions Warschauer’s three stages of CALL: the Behaviorist in the 70's/80's, the Communicative in the 90's, and the Integrative in the 21st century. Menezes highlights that our reality in Brazil is quite different as schools had access to computer resources only late in the 90’s.
As for me, in the early 90’s, I was a student in a private college and I had the experience with the Behaviorist stage with classes in a language lab, repeating meaningless and boring drills. I felt that I should be happy to have those brand new tape recorders to learn English, but, in fact, I hated those classes. Still as a student, and at that time, I started teaching as well, I had classes in the Communicative stage. I was teaching in a private school and I got some training since 1995, 96 (at Yazigi which was one of the first language schools to use computer assisted learning). At that time, we didn’t have interaction, our activities were in websites and in 2000, I remember using the Simcity game with my high school students.
Nowadays, in the third stage, I deal with synchronous and asynchronous classes and all the digital resources we have. Our life as educators is much easier, with lots of options, authentic input, endless opportunities for interaction in the world community.
Yet, in public schools, we still have a lot of challenges. I dare to say that some schools in Brazil still don’t have access to technological resources, increasing the educational deficit in our country and reproducing patterns of social inequality. Besides, are Brazilian language teachers being prepared to deal with the integrative stage of CALL? Do they have the necessary equipment and training? Digital literacy?
Well, if I mentioned the government efforts to improve education in our country, then, I would have to cry….
Regarding the trends for the future mentioned in the text, I agree with Luana. Many of these trends are already happening. I guess the Covid-19 pandemic has prompted a lot of advances, for example, the e- learning experiences we had last year. The amount, variety and quality of online events I could attend last year was amazing. I guess this was the positive side of these hard times.
By the way, last year, Vera Menezes delivered a lecture on Abralin channel which was really nice. In that lecture, she refers to the Greek and the introduction of the alphabet as a new technology of that time, saying that: “O alfabeto se espalhou por contato. A nova tecnologia era tanto o vírus como o seu vetor de transmissão.” Also, she says that some philosophers of that time were against the alphabet, opposing that new technology because they believed it could harm our memory.
That reminded me of our last readings! It seems that human beings are always questioning technological advances…Isn’t it true for the internet and the discussions we have nowadays?!
Below you find the link, in case you want to watch it.
The author provides a very engaging and friendly reading text when explaining technological advances and their role in teaching methodologies. I found it very interesting how the text is structured, as it first shows that language teaching theories have been developing in some accordance with technology. However, our teaching context does not follow the same advances since the use of technology in learning started late in Brazil, and we have not yet reached the same level as other countries. Therefore, as mentioned by some of you, the technology and language teaching internships proposed by Warschauer (1996) cannot be applied to the Brazilian educational context.
Although we appear to be “late”, it is also necessary to recognize that much has been improved recently. For example, in my first experiences with English learning, I did not have access to the internet, and my learning resources were quite limited. I hardly ever could watch videos and movies in English, and the only way for looking up a word was by using a physical dictionary. So, if things were more demanding for me as the learner, I imagine how they were for teachers.
I also have the impression that when tools show more evident benefits, as in the case of textbooks and voice technology (e.g., audiotapes and recorders), people are more willing to implement them. On the other hand, when it brings many changes that are not well known and not so certain, it may require more time to test, learn and start using them effectively. As a consequence, the lack of instruction for teachers might be one of the fundamental issues for a thorough application of technology in our scenario.
In the future perspectives addressed by the author, we see some very optimistic predictions, and some of them are already part of our academic context. Hopefully, they will soon start to appear in regular schools as well. According to the author, teaching training will probably include more guidelines for the integration of digital technologies in education, which can perhaps result in new ideas for the proper use of technology.
Professor Lúcia Menezes in her text "Tecnologias digitais no ensino de línguas: passado, presente e futuro" provides readers an informative and enlightening reading about the history regarding technology and its relation to language teaching in Brazil. It was quite interesting to see that Prof. Menezes not only briefly explains about Warschauer's three stages of CALL but also provides her personal experiences regarding technology and language teaching throughout her career as a professor. As the author presents an overview of the relation between technology and language teaching/learning in Brazil, she provides substantial examples of her contributions to the field in its early stages.
It is funny to realize how history repeats itself when the author states that some teacher back then, to when computers where first introduced to schools, may have been opposed to its implementation and the fact that still today with every new technology that is introduced to us some people might be resistant to its use or even feel a certain way. As I was reading this text I was able to go back in time and connect my English learning experiences to when I was a teenager around the year of 2003 attending English classes in a private school and having multimedia activities on desktop computers as a complement to the English book activities we would previously see in class. I remember finding those multimedia activities to be quite interesting and fun to do, however since it was a private language school the implementation of computers in public schools was a completely different reality back then.
Regarding Professor Celso's question, when it comes to Warschauer's three stages of CALL (Structural, Communicative and Integrative), Prof. Menezes in a few words explains about them providing readers with some examples, however, when we try to apply them to our reality in Brazil we end up facing some problems, since computers were not implemented at the same time as they were in other parts of the world.
I would like to finish my post with a quote from the text when Prof. Menezes on her final thoughts states that "Cada vez mais, vamos ser demandados a nos fazer presentes em camadas digitais sobrepostas à estrutura física e alterar nossas ações de linguagem entre elas sem perder o foco de nenhuma delas".
Hey there, everyone!
As people have already answered, Warschauer's table does not apply to the Brazilian reality, as Vera Menezes argues. In fact, the author points out many other relevant topics for discussion regarding the past, present, and future of technology for teaching a second language.
Considering the article, I think this particular sentence is incredibly accurate: "não há necessidade de apagar práticas antigas, mas eficientes". Reading this unit's articles, I understand that there is a growing necessity of integrating technology into the curriculum so it adapts to student's current needs. However, technology has to facilitate the teaching or learning process and not the other way around.
Furthermore, the article brings some interesting data regarding the access to technology in people's houses and schools in a Brazilian context. Apparently, 69% of the schools have an IT lab and 93% of the families have access to a smartphone. This number is quite impressive, and we can certainly use it as a convincing argument to ask for more teacher training related to the usage of technology for pedagogical purposes.
To put it succinctly, I agree with Vera Menezes when she says that the usage of technological innovation is unquestionably relevant to teaching modern languages. Nevertheless, we have to learn how to apply it in the best way possible, respecting our pedagogical goals.
The use of digital technology has changed and continues to change, our lives. How could this affect how we learn and teach a language? In this article, Vera Menezes attempts to answer questions like this, using lots of evidence drawn from research and her experience as a professor. For her, we need to engage in new ways of learning, teaching, interacting, and creating knowledge. I agree with her, but, as pointed by Chapelle (2003), before doing that, we also need to be critically aware of the relationships among technology, culture, and ideology.
As my classmates have mentioned, Vera Menezes states that Warschauer's three stages do not apply to Brazilian contexts, where the development of technology and computers was slower than in other countries. I can relate this to my experience of learning English in middle school, around 2008. What should be the third stage (21st century), with internet and multimedia used as a tool to language learning, and with the use of authentic discourse, in reality we were still in the 70-80s, learning repetitions, grammar, and the most technological tool our teachers would be able to use was a radio device for us to sing songs in English. I really liked this text and I think it provided me with a good reflection on these issues.
As my colleagues already stated, while placing CALL in a Brazilian context, Menezes implies that Warschauer stages were not mirrored here. Indeed, as with any other social practice, it is paramount that we take into consideration the local reality when telling CALL's story.
Menezes also mentions Braga's (2013) statement that using technology today is more of a social demand than an extra option when teaching English. I strongly agree with this and reflecting on it made me wonder about a sort of egg or chicken question: what came first the approaches to SLA or students' demands? Even considering the early stages of the language labs, students were given access to native speech via recordings and they should compare that speech sample with their own. Naturally, an over-focus on speech production was seen. Moving forward, today we are able to interact with people from different language backgrounds (especially other EFL learners) as well as from different social statuses. As such, genuine interaction seems to be the new objective.
Menezes's text was very informative for me. It is pleasant how she describes the trajectory of the use of computers for teaching and learning as well as her experience with the advance of technological resources.
As some of my colleagues said, Menezes explained that Warschauer’s division of the stages of CALL does not apply in Brazil. We are in other reality considering technological applications for teaching and learning. We are in 2021 until nowadays at public schools in Brazil many teachers comment that they do not feel comfortable using technology. Moreover, there is no space and equipment for teachers to use as they want, they always have schedules to use equipment many days in advance.
Considering my experience as a student, I left high school in 2015, I can count the times that we used CALL for learning. Thus, as Menezes described our scenario we are in another context, however, as discussed in the chapter we cannot avoid the use of digital resources, there is another generation that is surrounded by media and digital resources. As she states at the end of the chapter, it is necessary to adapt and to learn new ways of teaching.
As most of my classmates mentioned, Menezes (2019) argues these three stages cannot be applied to the Brazilian context. Besides that, the author says it is not necessary to stop using activites who were effective in the past. With relation to that. I think what we need is to understand how technologies can be integrated to our practices. Technologies are part of today's reality and part of students' social lives, so they need to be part of language learning as we are responsible for them to see how meanings are constructed in everyday discourses.