Complexity Theory: CALL @
The Edge of Chaos "WOLFRAM CLASSES/LANGUAGE CLASSES"
by Stephen A. Shucart 

venturing out...
Offering new ways of
thinking about learning and
computers by Scott H. Rule 

Media and Formats on the Net by Paul Daniels 

CALL lab management: A hardcore story byKazunori Nozawa

Reviews
Azar Interactive
The Computer and
          the Non-Native Writer
The Third Culture

Officer Reports

CALL News
Letter from the Editor
IATEFL Reports
Conferences
Call for Papers
Amazon.com
Workshops

The Computer and the Non-Native Writer

by Martha Pennington

Reviewed by Kevin Ryan

Just like the outstanding student you encounter about once every ten years, the ones that make you relish teaching, there comes only rarely books in a certain field that truly inspire you.

Writing with Computers (WwC) was one such book. By Harvard professor Colette Daiute, it explored ways that computers can improve the process of writing instruction with native speaking children. The clarity and organization emphasized the power behind the words. This author even named courses after the title. The only problem was that Daiute’s book came out in 1985. While some wisdom is timeless, too much has changed in the world of computers to make WwC as valuable as it once was.

A new discovery replaces Daiute.

The Computer and the Non-native Writer: A Natural Partnership by Martha Pennington is a tour-de-force of research reviewed and applied to CALL classroom practice in writing. With a bibliography that runs twenty pages, Pennington cites a wide gamut of studies with often contradictory results to show the state of research in the field.

Chapter titles can give some indication of the quality of the publication. After a general introduction, Pennington explores positive and negative potentials of computers in writing. She then assesses the situational and methodological variables in computer-assisted writing. In many ways this second chapter is the heart of the book. The third chapter builds on the second chapter by suggesting directions that the research indicates. The fourth chapter takes this even further by suggesting specific activities to successfully complete the process writing indicated by research in Chapter 2. The fifth chapter suggests directions for further research to select questions that most need to be answered.

Paging through the book reveals interesting highlights. In the Introduction, Pennington first establishes a point of view of language as process. Then she outlines some models of language learning such as Burt and Dulay's Creative Construction model as well as the Socio-Cultural model, the Code-Elaboration model, the Skill Learning model, the Conscious/Unconscious model, the Interactional model, and the Mediated Learning model. A small quibble: she could have indicated some good models for computing and CAI here, as well as for language learning. She quotes people like Vgotsky in a discussion on the nature writing. She also quotes Coulmas about the different aspects inherent in writing. And she quotes herself when outlining the kinds of knowledge necessary for writing. In the teaching of writing she adheres to five classic steps of process writing; pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.

Computers take a front seat in Chapter 1, where the benefits and restrictions of using electronic technology for writing are explored. Technical issues such as keyboard and monitor configuration are discussed in relation to how writers perform their task. Because of the ambiguity of the research in this area, this is the shortest chapter in the book.

In Chapter 2 we find that, "Researchers generally agree that word processing facilitates the process of writing and revising…" which is unremarkable. But the depth of research delving into this assertion takes up the rest of the chapter, dealing with quality and quantity of writing, revision behavior, teacher and student roles in writing class, all before going on to "Situational and Methodological Variables in Computer-Assisted Writing Studies." These variables consist of elements such as students, teachers, soft and hardware, the setting, the type of instruction, the time and the measurement. In other words, we have here a very thorough analysis of the research to date.

Here are a few highlights of the research quoted.

The computer is not only a writing instrument, but an audience (Daiute, 1983).

There is conflict in results among studies on the efficacy of computers for word processing. Much of this can be attributed to difference between novice and expert writers (Williamson and Pence, 1989).

"Students overwhelmingly stated that lack of access to computers was the worst thing about writing with the computer." (Bernhardt, et.al., 1989, p.123).

Teachers who have classes in the computer lab spent more time with individual students than in a regular class setting (Bernhardt et. Al., 1990, p 364)

She quotes Bernard Susser (a C@LL N-SIG member) explaining that computers turned language students into writers with ideas for an audience because the computers increased control and authority among the students (Susser, 1993).

"Word processing appears to change certain student writers’ approach to text production, pointing the way to greater experimentation with their texts (however, more than 15 weeks of instruction may be required for a significant number of students to realize the advantages). (Williamson and Pence, 1989, p.120)"

Students using computers tend to create hard copy drafts at earlier stages than in regular writing courses (Pennington).

While Chapter 2 dealt with computers and writing in general while Chapter 3 deals with the same issues for language learners. It covers the process and setting for the writing, as well as specific steps (pre, draft, and post writing), as well as conception, attitudes and cognitive processing. Overall, though, this chapter covers much of the same ground as Chapter 2 and may confuse the reader. This author’s memory is taxed to recall whether a particular reference pertained to students overall (Chapter 2) or to language students (Chapter 3).

Chapter 4 explores changes in teaching methods resulting from becoming computerized. Tapping research from Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Pennington outlines Artifact Analysis, which evaluates software based on concerns most pertinent to software design and end users. Then specific elements of the classroom are covered, such as keyboards, monitors and printers. The format of assertion (claim) and counter-claim with appropriate research as a discussion technique is very lucid and makes the subject much more readable. Questions discuss concerns over monitor size and clarity, whether students want to work alone (beginners) or with others (students more comfortable with computing).

It points out that computers should be used with non-native writers functioning at "at least an intermediate level of general English proficiency and are writing essay-length assignments. It is also recommended that students achieve basic keyboarding skills, with a typing speed of at least 25 words per minute, before being expected to use a computer on a regular basis for writing assignments (p. 153)." Pennington goes on to say that computer skills for adequate writing in a foreign language requires more than one semester of training.

The last chapter is about directions for future research. More important, it outlines some perennial research questions that need to be answered in each computer classroom situation. Models of learning, computers, and languages are suggested as a starting point for this research.

Overall this book is very useful because of its modularity. The research can be approached on different levels, and analyzed in different contexts, much as the field of CALL itself is multi-dimensional. It is an excellent picture of the state of the art (and science) of Writing in CALL. I just hope I don’t have to wait ten years for another book like this.