Computers and the Language Laboratory: Learning from History

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the 1950s and 1960s, educators and researchers were extremely enthusiastic about the advent of the language learning laboratory. Many felt at the outset that students would finally, through the use of high‐tech equipment, reach higher levels of proficiency in the foreign or second language in a shorter amount of time than students who did not use the available technology. This is not what researchers found. In retrospect, the problems with the research as well as with the existing software at the time are obvious. Materials were developed, published, and distributed without research into how best to use the technology. The result was a loss of credibility for foreign language education and for the use of technology in language learning in general.In Smith's studies on the Pennsylvania project in the 1960s, he concluded that the use of a language laboratory had no discernible effect on student achievement. In fact, on a variety of tests, students who did not use the laboratory performed better than students who did use it. We know that assessment of student performance in this study was based on the grammar‐translation method. Since the students who used the lab were taught language via the audio‐lingual method rather than the grammar‐translation method, it is not surprising that they did not do well on the exams.This parallels, to a large extent, what is happening today in the area of Computer‐Assisted Language Learning (CALL). First, many studies focus on what students can do with the computer rather than what students actually do. Researchers such as Garrett (1991) have pointed out that the existence of state‐of‐the‐art functionality that may allow students to search for lexical, cultural, or structural items does not necessarily lead to actual use of these features. Second, as with the early language laboratories, materials are again being developed without research into their pedagogical efficacy, and results are often disappointing. As a result, many educators do not see the value of using computers in teaching foreign languages. This paper will describe a variety of possible uses of computers going beyond traditional drill‐and‐practice programs.