Teacher Fit

Approach-based design criteria considers the value of linguistic and learning assumptions;

language teaching approach; and computer as delivery system. For instance, in linguistic and

learning assumptions, it evaluates the courseware if it provides comprehensive input at a level just

beyond that already acquired by the student. At the same time, in language teaching approach, it

evaluates the courseware if it provides a challenge through varied activities that does not produce

frustration or anxiety to the learner. And for computer delivery system, it evaluates the courseware

if it provides meaningful communicative interaction between the student and the computer.

Hubbard (1988) proposed specific templates for CALL evaluation:

1. Linguistic and learning assumptions. It focuses on evaluating CALL’s lessons and

activities good for enhancing listening, speaking, reading and writing skill. It also includes the

primary focus on grammar mastery, vocabulary enhancement, pronunciation and adequacy of

exercises as a potential factor for English proficiency and fluency.

2. Language teaching approach. It originates in the classroom that includes many

different approaches, but Hubbard mentioned common language teaching approaches which can

be openly offered by CALL such as behaviorist approach, explicit learning approach,

comprehension-based approach, communicative approach; and humanistic approach as some of

the better known approaches. It primarily aims to assess any CALL software in its role in imbibing

these different approaches.

3. Computer delivery system. It evaluates if a CALL software allows for individualization

having the capacity to bring the learners into contact with other humans as in Computer Mediated

Communication. This means that the courseware assigns human characteristics to tutor and a

system that delivers both the content and pedagogy. Hubbard made this guide because a teacher
can be boring and unmotivating sometimes and notes that the anticipatory interaction (e.g.

providing the learner with limited but potentially useful simulations of communicative interaction)

offers options not possible with the traditional textbook. Hubbard (1988) further said that this

greatly concerned the computer level of difficulty and user’s appropriateness. It also tried to infer

and explore the language teaching approach that the software reflects and determine the degree to

which it is compatible or incompatible with language teacher’s approach.

Learner Fit

Hubbard (1988) also said that the design component consists of the specification of the

goals and objectives of the method, and their actualization through the syllabus and the learner

variables.

Learner variables concern the intended audience for the courseware; learners’ proficiency

level, age, native language, and needs. Learner variables include learning style and classroom

management. Hubbard admitted that there is difficulty of measuring individual learner variables

described as one of the problems of this area of SLA and CALL. It is agreed that language learning

is a complex process. Larsen-Freeman (1991) pointed out that more complex research designs

should be adopted. He said that multivariate statistical techniques can provide a means for

examining the relationship among learners’ characteristics. Learner variables inevitably overlap

and interact with others and it may not be possible to isolate a particular factor.

The syllabus is influenced by the approach-based design criteria and it is concerned with

the learning objectives and how they are obtained. Syllabus covers the program focus and learner

focus. A syllabus normally deals with a language learner at a particular level, be it beginner,

intermediate or advanced where topics or lessons and activities are stipulated with a target days,
week or semester to accomplish. This place of CALL syllabus tries to primarily evaluate the

lessons and activities targeted by the students and how it is achieved by the software.

If learner variables mainly cover the learning style and classroom management to meet the

objective; and syllabus covers program focus and learning focus, both try to determine the CALL’s

language difficulty; program difficulty; and content.

Hubbard (1988) specified the following criteria to be evaluated in CALL and their

contextualization on the designed syllabus as well as its connection and relatedness on the given

learner variables.

1. Language difficulty. It affects learner variables and syllabus. This covers the factors

such as familiarity, concreteness and length play a role in determining language difficulty.

Familiarity refers to the themes chosen that should be familiar to the learner (e.g. everyday

greetings and saying learner’s name). Concreteness deals with the course’s concrete items and tries

to avoid abstract themes, which would not be suitable for beginners. Lastly, length focuses on the

time to be spent on conversations, explanations, vocabulary and exercises.

2. Program difficulty. It refers to the level of suitability and opportunity given for non-

experienced computer users and people with a limited linguistic background in order to minimize

the level of program difficulty. It also affects learner variables and syllabus. This can be achieved

through the use of images to help contextualize the learning process; and no time limit placed on

the use of the system. In addition, this criterion of learner fit gives emphasis on the easiness of

program operation which aims to minimize the cognitive load associated with the operation of the

program with a consistent interface and easy maneuverability within the system. Moreover, it also

includes the following: a) learner’s option to simply correct answer, match pairs of words or type

in the correct answer; b)tasks are all based on the lesson content and should be easy to understand;
c) learner has complete control over the program operation which means that the learner can leave

the system when s/he wishes or can move to another part without censure; and d) if the learner

ends up somewhere unexpected, navigation aids make it easy to go back to a known location.

3. Content. It refers to the lessons and activities provided by the CALL software that may

address specific syllabus goals or the perceived needs and interests of the students. This mainly

influences learner variables and syllabus. This focuses on the impacting exercises or drills during

learner-computer interactions that merely provide the opportunity of honing the listening,

speaking, reading and writing skills.

4. Learning style. It (in this context) describes the type of learning styles supported by the

CALL activity. This has to be considered under learner variables like the appropriateness of the

CALL activities which include recognition, recall, comprehension, experimental learning and

constructive learning. Other classifications include inductive-deductive, and form vs. meaning

focused. This covers in evaluating if the courseware aims to accommodate several learning styles,

by providing information in both audio and text formats. The functional images are also used to

appeal to those that are visually oriented.

5. Program focus. It refers to the linguistic objective of the activity. This affects the

syllabus. As the template aims to produce a complete beginner's course, this includes phonology,

spelling, vocabulary and grammar. Within this list, each part of the system has its own particular

objective. For example, the lessons concentrate on vocabulary and grammar, while the dictionary

section explains the phonology and spelling of the language (in simplified terms).In short, this

template covers in evaluating majority the CALL’s pedagogical content.

6. Learner focus. It covers the language skills area covered by the courseware such as

listening, speaking reading, and writing. This also affects the syllabus objective and
contextualization in developing different language skills. For instance, learners can listen to the

conversations (an unlimited number of times). In the activities, they can listen to the question

before producing an answer. They can read the conversations (with or without a translation).

Learners get the chance to produce and apply the target language in the exercise at the end of each

lesson. In short, this template focuses on the beneficiality of the learned skills from the courseware.

7. Classroom management. It considers how the students will be grouped in relation to

the computer if alone, in pairs or in larger groups. This also affects the learner variables and its

main support on student’s learning style. The template was developed with a single learner in

mind. However, there is nothing in the format or design of the template that prevents it being used

by a group of learners at once. Indeed, given the learning style preference of Filipino students, it

may well be the case that it will be used in a group setting.