Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-qr5l4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T04:50:54.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Call in UK Higher Education: A Preliminary Survey by the CTI Centre for Modern Languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Brian Powell
Brian Powell
Affiliation:
University of Hull
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the principal objectives of the CTI Centre for Modem Languages (CTICML) and of the other CTI Centres are to increase awareness of the potential of computers and other forms of IT in teaching and learning and to stimulate their actual use, it seemed a reasonable first step after the establishment of the CTICML in April 1989 to try to establish the current range of attitudes and practices in the field of lan- guages in higher education in the United Kingdom. We considered that this would both help us to gain a view of what had to be done and give us one yard- stick against which to measure the effect which our activities over the next few years will have had.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , May 1990 , pp. 1 - 4
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Notes

1. Given the possibility of multiple replies, the percentages do not add up to one hundred. I have also rounded all figures to the nearest whole number. I realise, of course, that Classics is not a language but a category which covers a number of languages. The predominant one in replies was Latin. No reply from a polytechnic mentioned a classical language.

2. Three people only said they disliked computers, a figure no doubt affected by the self-selecting nature of the respondents.

3. Users were offered the categories ‘frequently’ and ‘occasionally’, but no attempt was made on the questionnaire to define what these categories meant

4. One reply from a user complained that there was too much information available. One other expressed a lack of conviction of the value of computers in language teaching and learning despite being a user of them.

5. Since this paper was prepared a further 27 relevant questionnaires have been returned, making a total of 240–192 from universities and 48 from polytechnics and colleges. We have had replies from 49 university institutions and 27 polytechnics and colleges.