Implications for Teaching and for Research

  • Regine HampelEmail author


This chapter explores how the potential that the new technologies offer in the context of language learning and teaching can be realized at a time when the system of the traditional classroom is in a period of turbulence, or in chaos. It suggests possible ways of responding to the current phase shift, which is the result of traditional models and approaches to meaning-making in the language classroom being challenged by the introduction of new technological tools. The focus is on what teachers and institutions can do to support learners to use the new digital environments successfully and what the implications are for policy makers and researchers. The chapter concludes by calling for a social justice orientation to computer-assisted language learning (CALL).


Learner support Soft assembly Multiliteracies Teacher development Social-justice oriented CALL Qualitative research methodologies in CALL 


  1. Austin, N., Hampel, R., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2017). Video conferencing and multimodal expression of voice: Children’s conversations using Skype for second language development in a telecollaborative setting. System, 64, 87–103. Scholar
  2. Cameron, L., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). Complex systems and applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 226–239. Scholar
  3. Chapelle, C. A., & Voss, E. (2016). 20 years of technology and language assessment in Language Learning & Technology. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 116–128. Available at
  4. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164–195. Scholar
  5. Cutrim Schmid, E. (2017). Teacher education in computer-assisted language learning: A sociocultural and linguistic perspective. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  6. Dooly, M. (2018). “I do which the question”: Students’ innovative use of technology resources in the language classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 184–217. Available at
  7. Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50–80. Available at
  8. Gleason, J., & Suvorov, R. (2019). Promoting social justice with CALL. CALICO Journal, 36(1), i–vii. Scholar
  9. Helm, F. (2017). Critical approaches to online intercultural language education. In S. L. Thorne & S. May (Eds.), Language, education and technology (pp. 219–231). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. Available at Scholar
  11. Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (2016). Theory in computer-assisted language learning research and practice. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language learning and technology (pp. 24–38). London and New York: Routledge. Available at
  12. Karamifar, B., Stickler, U., Hampel, R., Germain-Rutherford, A., Hopkins, J., Heiser, S., et al. (2019). Perspectives and trajectories of the language teacher in the 21st century. In WorldCALL 2018 Proceedings.Google Scholar
  13. Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  14. Kukulska-Hulme, A., Norris, L., & Donohue, J. (2015). Mobile pedagogy for English language teaching: A guide for teachers. British Council 2015. London. Available at
  15. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 49–74. Scholar
  16. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2013). Complex systems and technemes: Learning as iterative adaptations. In J. Arnold & T. Murphey (Eds.), Meaningful action: Earl Stevick’s influence on language teaching (pp. 190–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Toward an integrative framework for SLA. In AAAL Conference 2015. Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  18. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, H., Hampel, R., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2019). Gesture in speaking tasks beyond the classroom: An exploration of the multimodal negotiation of meaning via Skype videoconferencing on mobile devices. System, 81, 26–38. Scholar
  20. Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2017). Explaining dynamic interactions in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 96–120. Available at
  21. Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2008). Foreign language teacher preparation and asynchronous CMC: Promoting reflective teaching. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(4), 513–532.Google Scholar
  22. Lund, H., Brunnhuber, K., Juhl, C., Robinson, K., Leenaars, M., Dorch, B. F., et al. (2016). Towards evidence based research. BMJ, 355(8079), 5440. Available at
  23. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  24. Norris, S., & Jones, R. H. (Eds.). (2005). Discourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Ortega, L. (2017). New CALL-SLA research interfaces for the 21st century: Towards equitable multilingualism. CALICO Journal, 34(3), 285–316. Scholar
  26. Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M. C., Gray, J. A. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312, 71. Scholar
  28. Stickler, U., & Hampel, R. (2015). Transforming teaching: New skills for online language learning spaces. In R. Hampel & U. Stickler (Eds.), Developing online language teaching: Research-based pedagogies and reflective practices (pp. 63–77). New language learning and teaching environments. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. Available at
  30. Thorne, S. L. (2016). Engineering conditions of possibility in technology-enhanced language learning. In C. Caws & M.-J. Hamel (Eds.), Language-learner computer interactions: Theory, methodology and CALL applications (pp. 241–246). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Thurlow, C., & Jaworski, A. (2014). ‘Two hundred ninety-four’: Remediation and multimodal performance in tourist placemaking. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(4), 459–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wagner, J. (2015). Designing for language learning in the wild: Creating social infrastructures for second language learning. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 75–102). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  33. Ware, P., & Kessler, G. (2014). Telecollaboration in the secondary language classroom: Case study of adolescent interaction and pedagogical integration. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–24. Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language StudiesThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations