1. Introduction and selection protocol
In this issue of Language Teaching, we turn to an SLA research community which, despite having a strong research history and publishing in the most widely-spoken first language of Europe, might be overlooked internationally due to the fact that its primary language of publication – German – is not accessible to many researchers outside Germany, Austria and Switzerland. We thus take this opportunity to report on theses presented in German. Many of the authors reviewed here have also submitted summary articles on their theses which have appeared in various international English language journals.
Generally, this section of Language Teaching has allowed for a discussion of unpublished dissertation research: research which may be of interest to a larger public but, due to the nature of Ph.D.s, often remains hidden from general perusal. In Germany, however, a dissertation must first be published for the student to be able to be awarded the Ph.D. degree. Thus, the research we include here involves only published works. Since these are almost without exception written in German, we are adhering to the principle of presenting work which would normally not be read by the international research community.
The selection process for German dissertations involved some special considerations. In contrast to other countries already reported on in Language Teaching, such as Australia and Wales, Ph.D. programmes as such and Graduiertenkollegs (inter-university postgraduate research seminars) are still relatively rare in Germany; in general, an aspiring doctoral candidate finds a Ph.D. advisor and works closely with him or her during doctoral research. This made the search process for this article more difficult since, technically, dissertations can be written at any university or educational institution which is allowed to award Ph.D. degrees. There are some graduate student networks, which offered a database for dissertation searches, although here the participants tended to be only beginning their doctoral research and had not published within the timeframe of this article. Finally, SLA research in general tends not to take place within applied linguistics programmes or departments, which are still quite rare in Germany, but rather within – or affiliated with – language-specific departments. Research in, for example, ESL (English as a Second Language) or EIL (English as an International Language) is thus typically conducted in the English department, research in DaF or DaZ (German as a Foreign or Second Language) is generally guided by a professor in a German department, and some research takes place in Faculties of Education or in Psychology departments.
The fact that all dissertation research must be published did, however, aid in the selection process, as did the fact that the DGFF (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Fremdsprachenforschung – German Society for Foreign Language Research) keeps an ongoing (albeit incomplete) record of doctoral and post-doctoral work published in Germany. Although this listing is nowhere near as comprehensive as, say, the British Library's Index of Theses (as reported in the Ph.D. review of England in Language Teaching Volume 42.3), it is the most extensive listing we have in the area of SLA. German publishers’ catalogues as well as online dissertation listings of national libraries were also consulted. However, we do realise that some dissertations will have been missed in the collection process and, like our Australian counterparts, ‘[i]n some cases, we also found it surprisingly hard to get copies of theses we wanted to read’ (Language Teaching 41.2, 275f.) – despite the fact that the theses had gone to press.
This selection of dissertations reports on research published between mid-2006 and 2009, which was collected and then grouped thematically, as we wished to give a broad introduction to the main interests in German doctoral research at the moment. While this thematic grouping unfortunately led to some dissertations being excluded from the report, it did reveal four main areas of research interest key topics in Germany.
2. Topics of special interest in the German research community
The topics reported on here represent current interests in the German SLA community, much of which is driven by practical rather than theoretical considerations. Our first area of interest is foreign language teaching in primary school, which has become especially interesting due to changes in the school curriculum of various German states, where schoolchildren begin learning a first FL (in most cases, English) in the third year of schooling or – for example, in North Rhine-Westphalia – in the first year of schooling. Thus, for reasons of educational politics as well as methodology (more children in this age group are exposed to language teaching and can thus act as research subjects), research on language learning in primary school has grown exponentially in the past few years.
The second focus area involves Languages Across the Curriculum, CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) and Multilingual Pedagogy. This follows the great increase in bilingual education in schools in the past two decades, particularly in CLIL programmes, as well as considerations of (especially receptive) multilingual learning, or the integration of more than two languages in the learning curriculum. Here, demands by parents, teachers and schools for the inclusion of more CLIL programmes – and thus a general increase in research interest and research possibilities – has led to more attention to this area.
A third major topic in Germany is language learner autonomy. Again, various developments have led to this becoming a focus theme, including the organisational anchoring of language resource centres at universities, the necessity for people in quite differing employment areas to become multilingual and – unfortunately – either reduced funding for language teaching (at post-secondary level) or time constraints on people already employed in the private sector. Such practical considerations have thus led to increased interest in possibilities for promoting language learning in situations outside the traditional language classroom.
In the area of multimedia and language learning, Germany still lags behind traditionally strong CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) and TELL (Technology Enhanced Language Learning) research communities such as those in North America, but interest in the use of new technologies has been growing and this is reflected in the comparatively large number of theses conducted in this field. They have, like the three other fields reported here, been supported by the general tendency in the past few years for schools and further education institutions to provide more opportunities for technology use in learning.
2.1 Foreign language teaching in primary school
The 15 theses on FL teaching in primary school reflect recent debates in Germany about the expected benefits of early FL learning. Three thematic sub-domains were found. First, some studies deal with appropriate assessment and evaluation procedures for documenting FL development at primary level. Second, a smaller set of theses deals with the implementation of (international) educational standards and school monitoring in the area of FL teaching. Finally, theses dealing with educational materials and approaches for teaching a foreign/second language focus on using writing, action and music for building literacies.
Several underpinning aspects of these theses have been identified. Almost all refer – often on the first page – to the theme of multilingualism in the context of European initiatives for lifelong learning and knowledge-building in multicultural societies, quoting seminal papers published by the European Commission (most of which are available at http://europa.eu). Only one study, however, addresses bilingualism and multilingual learning in the title of the work (Müller Reference Müller2006). All but one of these theses, the exception being that of Kuhn (Reference Kuhn2006), rely on empirical data for investigating their research question(s), reflecting the shift in research on language learning to multi-method analysis and triangulation of perspectives. Research paradigms as well as methodologies vary, however, and range from closed questionnaires and interviews to video-recorded classroom activities, testing and (semi-)experimental elicitations of language production. A now standard triangulation of perspectives (e.g. learners, teachers, parents) acknowledges requirements for conducting research in the area of linguistic and pedagogical intervention (Franceschini, Ziegler & Müller Reference Franceschini, Ziegler and Müller2006). The overall quality of the work discussed is impressive, bringing together current socio-educational developments, methodological rigour and carefully selected literature from the Anglo-American, German-speaking and French-speaking research background, often bridging the disciplinary divide between language pedagogy research (French and/or English as a foreign language), applied linguistics, linguistics and educational sciences in general. The majority of the studies were conducted in the area of applied linguistics and educational linguistics, two with a focus on FLE (Français Langue Etrangère) (Dauster Reference Dauster2007; Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009), and nine with a focus on EFL (Bergner Reference Bergner2006; Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Kuhn Reference Kuhn2006; Duscha Reference Duscha2007; Elsner Reference Elsner2007; Roos Reference Roos2007; Drese Reference Drese2008; Geisler Reference Geisler2008). Similarly, studies conducted within the educational sciences highlight the need for research into FL learning at an early age, covering aspects of social integration, language impairment and pedagogical implications for, and implementations in, EFL (Bleutge Reference Bleutge2006; Schotte-Grebenstein Reference Schotte-Grebenstein2006; Walther Reference Walther2006; Kolb Reference Kolb2007) and FLE (Müller Reference Müller2006). The overall focus is on primary schooling, starting with children in their third year of schooling (age eight), although some studies do address earlier starts, including first year (age six) (Dauster Reference Dauster2007; Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009). Other foci include transitions between school forms (e.g. pre-primary/primary level (Schotte-Grebenstein Reference Schotte-Grebenstein2006)), primary/lower secondary level (Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Roos Reference Roos2007) and special-needs education contexts (Bleutge Reference Bleutge2006). Themes covered include models of learner language development with regard to age and conditions of learning (Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Dauster Reference Dauster2007; Roos Reference Roos2007; Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009), competence models and issue-driven teacher training (Bleutge Reference Bleutge2006; Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Müller Reference Müller2006; Drese 2007), and pedagogical materials (Bergner Reference Bergner2006; Duscha Reference Duscha2007; Kolb Reference Kolb2007; Geisler Reference Geisler2008).
Early FL research focuses largely on the what of learning, with a special emphasis on assessment issues, given the young age of the learners and the often playful set-up of the classroom environment. The description of the how of learning draws on empirical analyses of young learners’ language productions, with special focus on the playful contexts within which such productions can be collected by the researcher. Interestingly, however, little research is available which questions the reasons for successful learning (why) or which provides explanatory models for systematic processes in early FL learning.
2.1.1 Assessment and evaluation of language development
Several studies comment on a major observable shift in FL pedagogy since the implementation of various pilot studies with young learners in Germany in the 1970s (Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Roos Reference Roos2007; Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009). The aims of a Begegnungsdidaktik (‘pedagogy of culture contacts’), which marked German L2 language-learning research until the 1990s, are still tangible, especially at pre-primary/primary level (e.g. Müller Reference Müller2006), and are therefore discussed by authors who advocate a radically different focus. Keßler (Reference Keßler2006), followed by Roos (Reference Roos2007), situates his analyses of EFL within SLA, calling for a substantial integration of SLA research results into primary FL curricula. He presents the shortcomings of contradictory pedagogical foci (at primary level there is a stronger focus on intercultural contact, whilst at secondary level, the focus tends to be on grammar), resulting in a ‘re-start’ in the learning of English as students leave primary school after two years of English classes and enter lower secondary school. Keßler's study documents learners’ accomplishments at the end of primary schooling and suggests ways that these can be integrated into EFL teaching in lower secondary school.
Keßler's findings highlight the striking gaps which exist between primary school achievements in the FL and standards-driven language curricula. The author then suggests a ‘developmentally moderated syllabus’ (Keßler Reference Keßler2006: 272) to allow for the sustainable integration of the learner's EFL level when moving on to secondary school. He then demonstrates how an ICT-supported assessment tool, implemented by EFL teachers trained in its use, may allow for tracing language learner profiles in English.
Roos’ (2007) study supports Keßler's findings by investigating the role of formulaic expressions in primary English as well as the importance of teachers’ awareness of how such formulaic expressions or chunks affect the young learners’ acquisition process. Roos’ results point to the importance of quality verbal interaction as a condition for language development in the primary school classroom.
Inspired by an interactional research paradigm within SLA research, Dauster's (2007) work on FLE in the Saarland region at primary level (first to fourth year of schooling, involving two language lessons per week) looks at classroom interaction and students’ utterances and activities as a basis for analysing learner language development and the quality of FL achievements. Relying on criteria such as frequency of self-initiated talk and development of MLU (mean length of utterance), the study shows how interaction analysis can be useful for understanding language learning at primary level. One of the merits of the study is its design, which integrates quantitative and qualitative language development by looking at multi-modal aspects of learners’ (expanding) utterances. In addition, introspective reports from the French teachers on the longitudinal data of FLE classroom interaction are innovative in this research area. The author highlights the importance of considering the function(ing) of utterances in their interactional situatedness (i.e., their function within the sequential environment).
Dauster's analysis provides some real results for teachers in the primary FL classroom. First, it highlights the expansion of learners’ self-initiated utterances that demonstrate their language development over the four years of teaching. Second, it demonstrates the integrated nature of language learning and encourages teachers to take into account its multimodal aspects, including pre-verbal and para-verbal production. Finally, it advocates the careful design of research methodologies sensitive to classroom interaction, because quantifiable aspects of learners’ utterances relate more to learning conditions than to the level of learner language achieved.
Méron-Minuth's (2009) corpus-based analysis of the communication strategies of FLE learners at primary school (in the state of Baden-Württemberg) supports these findings. Her analysis investigates language learners’ strategies and shows both how young learners develop a ‘learning competence’ and how different types of strategies emerge (Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009: 255). The results from the detailed analysis of classroom interaction sequences outline a classification of such communication strategies for learning at primary level. In addition to discussing language-bound strategies (such as word associations or code-switching), the study highlights the pivotal function of cooperation strategies in language learning. Méron-Minuth concludes by revisiting communication strategies as fundamental requirements which all language teachers, even in primary school, should be well acquainted with.
2.1.2 Introducing educational standards and school monitoring
The monitoring of, and grounds for, educational standards in teaching and testing – often driven by economics (Husfeldt & Bader-Lehmann Reference Husfeldt and Bader-Lehmann2009) – is the focus of two studies (Bleutge 2007; Drese 2007). These theses argue that the introduction of standardised competence models as a basis for assessing teaching outcomes may not be capable of comprehensively portraying the FL primary classroom.
Drese's (2007) study investigates potential gaps between standardised competence descriptions on one hand, and the assessment of oral proficiency within teachers’ classroom work on the other. Based on available descriptions of expected competence levels (in the state of Hessen), four teachers of EFL used a three-fold model, implementing specific tasks, standardised observations and semi-formalised activities, to assess competencies during regular classroom work. The study shows that such teacher-led assessments can be fruitful, especially in developing a specific observational focus and a context-sensitive understanding of learners’ outputs during tasks. Although teachers need time to implement such integrated assessment practices, students can benefit, as the continuous analysis allows for frequent and more specific reflections upon their own task-related needs. Retrospective interviews suggest that teachers also profit, as their judgements with regard to the suitability of linguistic elements improves. Drese concludes by arguing that specially trained language teachers can provide relevant assessment results in line with standardised procedures, without neglecting task-based learning, a fact which is often overlooked by external evaluators. More suitable assessment practices such as these, including various dimensions of learning (and learning outcomes), might assist the learners’ language development.
Bleutge (Reference Bleutge2006) takes up a similar issue by analysing the difficulties linked with output-oriented educational standards in EFL language classrooms, which challenge one of the main principles of primary school, inclusive pedagogy, and special needs education (such as for children with specific language impairments). Based on a quantitative, comparative overview of classroom discourse in three different classes with differing classroom set-ups, the author pinpoints literacy in a first language as a main concern related to the definition of standards. Special needs classrooms struggle to reach standards for writing development, especially when this involves a FL. Despite the fact that positive effects of EFL in special needs classrooms are evidenced (such as increased participation of students using the FL), EFL runs the risk of losing this potential where FL writing is concerned. Bleutge (Reference Bleutge2006) emphasises the dangers of an output orientation if it fails to consider the development of the individual learner.
2.1.3 Educational materials for teaching foreign languages at primary level
Research focusing on the suitability of specific materials addresses autonomy (Walther Reference Walther2006; Kolb Reference Kolb2007), intercultural learning (Müller Reference Müller2006) and the relevance of supporting different modalities in FL learning (Bergner Reference Bergner2006; Duscha Reference Duscha2007; Geisler Reference Geisler2008). Geisler (Reference Geisler2008) takes up the often expounded but rarely empirically studied issue of musical elements in language teaching. Focusing on one group of grades 3 and 4 over a period of four years, Geisler integrates metrical, prosodic and musical elements into EFL. He shows that students develop the ability to work with prosodic features when analysing new elements in the foreign language, and that students with multilingual backgrounds also benefit from this approach. Bergner's study (2006) with the same age group, and involving a true experimental design (with control and experimental groups), is concerned with the value of theme-based gesture support in EFL during action songs, and shows that thematic gestures enhance vocabulary learning compared to a control condition without thematic gestures. Moreover, students as well as teachers in the experimental condition report higher positive evaluations of both self and others, especially in the early stages.
Differences in, and growing awareness of, learning experiences as a resource in developing language learning competence are at the centre of Kolb's study (2007), which focuses on EFL portfolio work. The author flags a problem with initial individual portfolios such as the European Language Portfolio: they are strongly pre-structured and therefore not particularly suitable for charting an individual's ongoing (and not necessarily linear) learning experiences. Kolb highlights the idea of individual portfolio-building during learning events and self-evaluation of these by learners. As with all assessment based on portfolio work, EFL teachers must accept the learner's own evaluations beyond language norms or educational standards. When teachers work towards the integration of such insights into classroom practices, further insights into the learning process are made possible, and the portfolio acts as a mediator between shared classroom experiences and learning events as perceived by the student.
Duscha's study (2007) investigates the impact of writing on primary EFL learning by comparing children in their third year of schooling who are either exposed or not exposed to written support in English. Responding to concerns that there is, on the one hand, a divide between desired communicative pedagogical environments at the primary level and, on the other, initiatives that advocate the introduction of writing in primary classrooms, Duscha's comparison of several competence domains demonstrates the positive effect of writing in the FL: supportive writing appears to have a positive effect on listening comprehension and oral production. Moreover, the introduction of writing does not have negative effects on the frequency or quality of students’ communicative actions and oral productions. The findings put writing in line with other supporting Lerngegenstände (‘learning foci’) such as visual and auditory elements (Duscha Reference Duscha2007: 303). By highlighting the catalysing nature of writing in the communicative early primary classroom, the author sensibly cautions against its integration in the early EFL classroom and recommends using functional milestones for introducing writing (supportive role at primary level, productive role at secondary level) and tools (such as picture/written word cards) at the beginner level.
In sum, the recent research on FL learning and teaching at primary level in Germany seems to be related to two current trends in educational research. Firstly, a stronger orientation towards international comparison studies such as PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment, http://www.pisa.oecd.org) suggests a growing concern about issues of standardisation and whether it is appropriate in the primary FL environment. Given the young age of the learners and the growing diversity of German primary classrooms – not just in the number of first languages spoken – standardised tests may not be the best choice here. Secondly, a general orientation towards individual learners and their linguistic needs, especially as regards writing competencies in several languages, is evident amongst researchers. The three research sub-domains discussed in the previous sections illustrate these concerns. Moreover, they highlight research blind spots and point to a research agenda in this area, including the following domains:
1. The studies dealing with appropriate assessment and evaluation of FL development at primary level draw on only a limited set of models and methodologies (Keßler Reference Keßler2006; Dauster Reference Dauster2007; Roos Reference Roos2007; Méron-Minuth Reference Méron-Minuth2009). However, current discussions in the larger area of SLA research (e.g. social turn, multilingual learning) and language socialisation research might provide relevant insights for documenting FL development.
2. Research that seeks to show how current trends in education influence FL learning and teaching (e.g. international educational standards) can provide empirical evidence supporting educational policies (Bleutge Reference Bleutge2006; Drese Reference Drese2008). However, future doctoral research might focus on the theoretical as well as the practical issues raised by education becoming more international (for example, assessments such as PISA that compare the quality of education in different countries), especially at primary level. How can age-appropriate standards be suitably defined and implemented for primary school children? Which methodologies can help to bridge the gap between context-detached standards, varying classroom contexts and children's individual development?
3. Finally, recent studies on primary FL learning address issues of literacy and learners’ awareness thereof (Bergner Reference Bergner2006; Müller Reference Müller2006; Walther Reference Walther2006; Duscha Reference Duscha2007; Kolb Reference Kolb2007; Geisler Reference Geisler2008). More research will be needed in this area, especially in the area of media literacy, such as the impact of language input from video games and other literacy-relevant resources involving different modalities of the FL (e.g. English), including writing or intercultural issues.
2.2 Languages across the curriculum, CLIL and multilingual pedagogy
CLIL in Germany has continued its success story beyond the mid 1990s, when its expansion across various subjects and school types first hit a peak. Taking a closer look at recently published dissertations in Germany in this field, it becomes obvious that not only has the quantity of theses increased significantly in the last four years, but that also the quality of the discussion (i.e. the choice of and approach to topics in academic discourse) has changed considerably.
This becomes most obvious in Breidbach's thesis (Breidbach Reference Breidbach2007), which in its subtitle promotes a ‘reflective didactic approach towards content and language integrated learning’. Based on a critical analysis of the context that has so far shaped the genesis of thought in this field (Part 1), Breidbach's hermeneutical work aims to develop a critical educational theory of CLIL (Part 2). It starts with a comprehensive history of CLIL ideas by offering a systematic terminology- and problem-based reconstruction of theories. Against this backdrop, the author identifies subject knowledge (Wissenschaft), intercultural learning (Kultur) and language as the three crucial reference points for the construction of a comprehensive critical theory of CLIL, which he places in a larger educational context of learning and teaching in general. The complex didactic model suggested by Breidbach provides a framework for staging CLIL which moves beyond a utilitarian viewpoint of education and encourages critical didactic and methodological reflection on teaching and learning processes in general.
Other dissertations demonstrate a productive combination of CLIL theory and practice by focussing on individual aspects of CLIL with regard to the two subjects most frequently taught in two languages (German and English or French) in German CLIL contexts, i.e. history (Müller-Schneck Reference Müller-Schneck2006; Kollenrott Reference Kollenrott2008; Lamsfuß-Schenk Reference Lamsfuß-Schenk2008) and geography (Heine Reference Heine2007; Viebrock Reference Viebrock2007; Müller-Bittner Reference Müller-Bittner2008; Coetzee-Lachmann Reference Coetzee-Lachmann2009). These are grouped in the discussion below according to whether they refer predominantly to teacher- or learner-related aspects. As the analysis will show, overlaps exist between the two categories, indicating that these are not to be understood as separate entities but rather as signposts offering a possible orientation for the grouping of a number of relevant theses in the field, which will be discussed subsequently.
Viebrock's (2007) dissertation is of merit as it considers the importance of the teachers’ perspective on CLIL pedagogy as a salient issue in the discussion. In her work on bilingual geography teaching she focuses on subjective didactic theories and how these influence CLIL pedagogy and practice. These theories were acquired by teachers during their professional education and are then shaped individually on the basis of their daily experiences and routines. Viebrock's work starts from a solid conceptual framework and is based on qualitative data collected through teacher interviews and lesson observations (four out of ten participants were selected for case studies). The study asks whether, and in what way(s), these subjective theories are connected with current research results (e.g. studies from pedagogy, applied linguistics and CLIL) on the one hand, and with practical decisions in the classroom on the other. By making processes of pedagogical thinking and acting transparent, Viebrock's work is a good example of how to combine theoretical and practical perspectives on learning and teaching in general, and how to move a step further towards a comprehensive CLIL pedagogy in particular.
The teacher's perspective on CLIL is also illustrated by Müller-Schneck's dissertation on bilingual history teaching (Müller-Schneck Reference Müller-Schneck2006). She first identifies constructivism as a particularly suitable theoretical basis for CLIL pedagogy. Only from a sound theoretical basis, the author stresses, is it possible to analyse and evaluate the practice of CLIL, to formulate aims and to conceptualise appropriate methodologies. The second part of her thesis offers a representative and systematic insight into the practice of CLIL in one of the largest German federal states: it involves a description and evaluation of the results of a questionnaire that was sent out to all schools with CLIL programmes (n = 117) in North Rhine-Westphalia. The answers to this questionnaire provided data for a description of the current situation of bilingual history teaching (the questionnaire was filled in and sent back by 89 schools), with regard to its development and organisation, its methodological implementation and its evaluation from the teachers’ point of view. On the basis of this description, the author moves on to make suggestions for the future design and implementation of bilingual history teaching and also points out areas for future research. These data show that the practice of teaching history bilingually is currently very heterogeneous with regard to, for example, the choice of topics and materials, the use of the L1 and the L2, and the importance assigned to different assessment criteria. This heterogeneity provides a possible explanation for why attempts to creating a distinctive and comprehensive CLIL pedagogy might not have succeeded so far.
Like Müller-Schneck, Müller-Bittner (Reference Müller-Bittner2008) investigates the teacher's perspective on CLIL, in this case the critical reception of learning and teaching materials in the bilingual (i.e. German/French) geography classroom. The work includes an analysis of the various functions of geography textbooks in French and in German as well as of materials specifically designed for teaching geography in bilingual settings. In this explorative study the data were collected in interviews with teachers involved in bilingual geography teaching (n = 18) in North Rhine-Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate. The data evaluation reveals highly significant aspects of the selection and use of textbooks and teaching materials in the bilingual geography classroom. These results are arranged systematically in an analysis of the topics presented as well as a standardisation of teacher types with regard to the usage of and satisfaction with the materials. The work finishes with suggestions for future information policy, the development of and supply of teaching materials, as well as the education and training of (future) CLIL teachers.
Kollenrott (Reference Kollenrott2008) also highlights teachers’ perspectives on CLIL materials, but with regard to a particular learning objective: to define the potential for intercultural learning in CLIL settings (history in German and English) from the perspective of the teachers involved and specifically with regard to the materials used, in particular the course book Spotlight on History, which was designed for bilingual history classes in Germany. Data were collected in two stages. In step 1 (quantitative), a questionnaire was sent out directly to all teachers involved in bilingual history teaching in Lower Saxony whose schools had indicated an interest in taking part in the study. The questionnaire contains items about the following aspects of bilingual history teaching: (curricular) framework, language use and language learning (including the role of learners’ L1), methodology, content learning, material choice and design, intercultural learning, teachers’ motivation, qualification and experience. In step 2, qualitative data were collected in interviews with eight teachers involved in bilingual history teaching. The study was based on the hypothesis that the bilingual history classroom offers great potential for intercultural learning, but through data triangulation the author demonstrates that theoretical concepts, at least in this regard, meet with hardly any response in the practice of CLIL pedagogy.
The work by Lamsfuß-Schenk (Reference Lamsfuß-Schenk2008) is concerned with the same topic, i.e. intercultural learning in the bilingual (here, German/French) history classroom. However, this study puts the learners’ perspective into focus by starting with the following question: Can the same objectives with regard to content learning, in particular with regard to intercultural learning (Fremdverstehen), be reached in a CLIL history classroom as in a traditional history classroom? The author chose to collect data in an action research design, comparing selected history lessons from a bilingual and a non-bilingual classroom setting with regard to the materials and topics chosen, as well as the learning processes observed. She comes to the conclusion that bilingual history classes offer a particularly favourable environment for intercultural learning, due to a greater elaboration of content processing. It remains arguable, however, whether this is due to the method employed and related didactic decisions taken or due to the high-performance learner clientele generally found in CLIL settings.
Coetzee-Lachmann's dissertation (2009) also focuses on the learners, in particular on the assessment of the performance of bilingual geography learners in subject-specific tasks. The author investigates CLIL-learners’ writing skills with regard to linguistically adequate and coherent texts on subject-specific tasks. The data collected were written answers from 84 bilingual learners at the end of grade 10 (aged 16), elicited in a geography competence test at four grammar schools in Lower Saxony. The data were assessed through a set of holistic and analytical procedures designed specifically for this study, based on the key construct of written discourse competence according to Halliday's approach of systemic-functional linguistics. The results of the study reveal that the written texts of bilingual learners possess adequate structure and markers of textual coherence, yet show significant deficiencies with regard to the use of subject-specific terminology, as well as both completeness and correctness of the subject matter. Thus it becomes obvious that in order to increase learners’ subject-specific task performance, CLIL pedagogy has to take into account the writing conventions of a subject-related discourse community.
Heine's dissertation (2007) re-examines the foundations of CLIL from a cognitive perspective by focusing on the role of language in problem-solving activities that have a focus on meaning (rather than form). In particular, she is interested in any differences are observed ‘if a task with a focus on meaning is solved in an L2-dominated environment, compared to an L1 context’ (Heine Reference Heine2010: 1). After giving an overview of the theoretical foundations of problem-solving, thinking and language processing, Heine presents the results of a study of the language and content-focused cognitive processes of learners during task-solving. The subjects (n = 20) who participated in the study came from two groups of grade 10 (age 16) students from the same German grammar school. Group 1 consisted of students who had received all their geography education in an L2 (English) and thus received task material exclusively in English. The second group of students came from a class where only the L1, German, had been used as a working language in content-focused school subjects. This class solved the same tasks as group 1, the only difference being that the material was presented to them in German. The data were elicited via think-aloud protocols. They show that the use of an L2 has a positive impact on conceptual thought in that it can deepen semantic processing.
Heine provides what can be called a description of the theoretical turn in CLIL. She stresses that only when CLIL learners and teachers alike learn more about the interrelation between language and conceptual learning will they be able to understand what is going on in their classroom and will thus be enabled to make informed decisions.
Further related dissertations in this field are concerned with questions of plurilingualism from the perspective of the Romance languages (Frings Reference Frings2006) and teaching methods as well as learning strategies in bilingual settings, with a particular focus on vocabulary learning (Plieger Reference Plieger2006; Ender Reference Ender2007) and reading strategies (Ender Reference Ender2007).
Frings (Reference Frings2006) provides an analysis of the teaching of modern Romance languages (French, Italian and Spanish) in a diachronic as well as a synchronic perspective. The author takes a historic-systematic approach and starts with an overview of the history (of the politics and policy) of modern Romance language teaching in Germany with a particular focus on the period between 1965 and 2005 in Rhineland-Palatinate. He then turns to the recent situation in this state today by providing a statistical overview of students, teacher trainees and teachers in the field of modern Romance languages. Next, he presents data obtained from a written questionnaire given to volunteer students (n = 266) and teachers (n = 326), which asked about the participants’ linguistic profile and language learning history, as well as the roles of plurilingualism and linguistics in their education and/or daily (teaching) practice. With regard to the last two aspects, the author goes on to analyse curricula and textbooks that frame the teaching of modern Romance language teaching today. On the basis of his evaluation of the data, he claims that plurilingualism and linguistics should be integrated to a much larger extent into the teaching of modern Romance languages in German grammar schools.
Ender's dissertation (2007) also deals with multilingualism and the learning of a Romance language, but from a different angle. She investigates the receptive strategies employed by multilingual learners of French when reading a text, and the relevance of these strategies to the (incidental) acquisition of vocabulary items and their processing in the mental lexicon. In particular, the author is interested in finding out whether and in what way(s) the individual participants’ (n = 24) strategies were influenced by the fact that they are multilingual. The study is based on data obtained from think-aloud protocols (during reading activities), triangulated with results from follow-up vocabulary tests. The author manages to show the positive effect(s) that learning experience and multilingualism can have on language learning processes. At the same time the study shows that multilingual subjects have yet to be made aware of their special potential by, for example, strategy training, which would empower them to make good use of their extraordinary language learning resources.
Another recent dissertation also deals with the structure of the mental lexicon and its consequences for the teaching or learning of foreign languages. Plieger (Reference Plieger2006) investigates the structure and acquisition of the bilingual lexicon and develops ideas for how the learning and teaching of vocabulary in an L2 can be supported by media. In the first part the author provides a comprehensive overview of processes in the mental lexicon during L2 acquisition. She focuses on interfaces in so-called ‘semantic nets’ – logically arranged clusters – and the correlation of meaning and form. On this foundation, she formulates the hypothesis that the way in which speakers build up semantic nets in their L1 and L2 accounts for their level of competence and the type of acquisition in the respective L2. In order to test this hypothesis, a number of tasks were presented to three groups of speakers. The first group consisted of speakers whose L1 is German and whose L2 is Italian; this was reversed in group two. The third group consisted of members deemed balanced bilinguals with regard to the two languages. The empirical data confirm the author's hypothesis; they also show that the bilingual lexicon is a highly complex construct and depends on a variety of multifaceted factors. In particular, the data suggest that the bilingual mental lexicon does not develop in a linear way, but rather in developmental phases. The author concludes that, with regard to vocabulary learning and acquisition, task types should be designed to reflect these phases. In the second part of her work, she develops a range of phase-related programmes for vocabulary learning which, she argues, should be supported effectively by media.
The studies presented in this section show that CLIL and multilingualism have aroused great interest in the German doctoral research community in the past years. The outcomes of the studies discussed above highlight questions which are also being discussed in an international context, in particular the following:
1. How can language and content learning be integrated in a sensible and yet efficient way (Breidbach)? On what learning processes is this integrative didactic approach based (Heine)? How does an integrative way of teaching language and content influence the didactic framework with regard to the specific subjects taught (e.g. textbook design, (Kollenrott and Müller-Bittner), methodology (Müller-Schneck) and assessment (Coetzee-Lachmann)?
2. Does the CLIL classroom merely offer more opportunities for the use of an L2 (as was often assumed in the ‘grassroots era’ of CLIL in Germany) or does it also provide a particular quality of learning opportunities, in particular with regard to learning objectives in the field of intercultural learning (Kollenrott, Lamsfuß-Schenk)?
3. How can a dialogue between the theory and practice of CLIL be fostered? How can the CLIL classroom benefit from the results of empirical studies in the field (Heine, Viebrock, Breidbach; for a similar question with regard to the field of the theory and practice of the teaching of the Romance languages, see Frings)?
4. Finally, how can FL pedagogy (with regard to, for example, reading strategies and vocabulary learning) make good use of the fact that a growing number of learners are multilingual (Ender and Plieger)?
In conclusion, the studies in this section, often based on mixed methods with rather small numbers of participants, show that bilingual and multilingual classrooms open up new opportunities for language learning but at the same time provide challenges for learners and teachers alike, many of which still need investigation.
2.3 Language learner autonomy
A somewhat smaller research area is that of language learner autonomy. In this section, we review five theses which focus on language learners, especially their learning strategies, learning styles, attitudes towards language learning and their own concepts of learner autonomy. The studies also investigate the influence of strategy training or learning advisory sessions (Sprachlernberatung) on the learning process and on the development of learner autonomy. One is a school study which analyses young pupils’ vocabulary learning at home (Haudeck Reference Haudeck2008). In the studies focusing on adults, strategy training and advisory sessions, in which specially trained advisors support learners’ efforts to set themselves realistic goals, choose the right material and evaluate their learning process and progress, are the focus of Claußen's (2009) thesis, while Roche (Reference Roche2006) and Schöcke (Reference Schöcke2007) concentrate on learner styles. Martinez (Reference Martinez2008) takes a different view, asking how prospective teachers conceptualise learner autonomy.
Haudeck (Reference Haudeck2008) takes a closer look at vocabulary work ‘outside the classroom’. She uses a qualitative design to study twelve schoolchildren aged 10–14, including interviews about learning habits and attitudes towards learning English, audio learning diaries and observations during home vocabulary learning. The innovative audio version of the traditional learning diary was proposed to encourage more detailed responses, saving the time and energy required for written formulations.
Haudeck aims to gain insight into individual learning processes and to describe the learning strategies and techniques applied by pupils in these phases of autonomous learning. The macro-perspective (how vocabulary is learned in general) shows that, above all, students use typical memory and repetition strategies, while structuring or elaboration strategies do not seem to play an important role. The micro-perspective, achieved through detailed reports of single-word learning, however, reveals a remarkable variety of these techniques. The choice of strategies also appears to depend on many individual variables (e.g. previous knowledge, sound associations and references to personal experiences), but is also influenced by instructions or advice given by teachers, parents and other family members.
The variety of research subjects – chosen from grades 5 and 8 – allows Haudeck to examine differences between the learning techniques of pupils who had just started to learn a first FL and those of learners with three years of learning experience. Her results indicate that, firstly, due to language learning experience and age, older pupils are more discriminating in describing their vocabulary learning activities; secondly, that pupils who learn (or are learning) more than one language have a wider variety of organisational strategies at their disposal, including intralingual transfer and morphological or syntactical analysis as well as contrastive language comparisons; and finally, that pupils with little language learning experience concentrate more on form (especially correct orthography), while more experienced learners also exploit semantic organisation.
Haudeck concludes, first, that teachers should foster learners’ awareness of how they learn vocabulary without judging their chosen techniques. Secondly, learning strategies should be made a subject of discussion in the classroom and in other contexts to give learners a chance to exchange experiences. Finally, all participants in the learning process should become aware of the importance of incidental vocabulary learning (and thus seek to increase opportunities for this to occur).
In her study, Claußen (Reference Claußen2009) turns to a type of course frequently offered at German universities: learning support programmes for foreign students, which aim to help them develop independent academic study skills. Study strategy training is designed to help participants cope in a more efficient way with recurring tasks like taking notes in a lecture or summarising the main points of an article. Claußen's focus is the impact of such training and learning advisory sessions on the communicative and learning behaviour of foreign students.
In addition to the objective impact of the study strategy training and advisory sessions carried out at the University of Leipzig, Claußen examines how the new students themselves evaluate the benefits of these sessions. She chooses a multi-method qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews, audio-recordings of the advisory sessions, written self-reflections, interviews with the learning advisors and observations in the training classes. Her case study, involving four students from Latvia, Nigeria, Russia and South Korea, reveals positive changes in the learners’ behaviour, including an improved ability to solve communicative problems and better use of learning strategies. The students themselves felt that the programme helped them to gain self-confidence and that they benefitted especially from the hand-outs, the simulation of presentations and the oral exams and feedback. The advisory sessions were often assessed differently by the students and the advisors, an effect that Claußen mainly attributes to the fact that the students were not familiar with the concept of non-directive consultations. Despite this seemingly supportive evidence for such study courses, Claußen admits that (in the absence of comparative data) some of the positive changes might also be connected with other experiences in students’ everyday life. She also emphasises that the effectiveness of the training and advisory sessions only became evident after a fairly long period (two semesters), which is important as a warning against ‘quick-fix’ solutions.
Two further theses concentrate on learning styles and learner types. Roche's thesis (2006) was published in English and is thus accessible to a broader public, so we restrict ourselves to short comments on his research and then proceed to Schöcke (Reference Schöcke2007), the only quantitative study in this section.
After a short analysis of learning style discourse, Roche (Reference Roche2006) discusses different methods of investigating learning style, including interviews, questionnaires, observations, psychometric testing and journals. In his own study, which questions (and refutes) the widespread assumption that learning styles are a fixed trait, stable across time, he chooses journals to monitor the strategy use of ten learners over a two-semester EFL course. He concludes that learning style does not exist independently of learning situations, and that the learners’ choice of strategies is influenced by a variety of factors including task style, teaching method, social network, thematic and language focus and, finally, perceived difficulty.
Schöcke (Reference Schöcke2007) offers a more detailed overview of learning style research in general and in the context of FL learning research in particular, discussing possible consequences for language teaching and language learning. In her own experiment, testing several hypotheses concerning the two dimensions holistic vs. analytic learning style and verbal vs. visual learning style as well as their interdependence, she studies 33 L1-Turkish learners on intensive German courses at the CEFR level A2. After examining their preferences for verbal or visual input and holistic or analytic organisation of information via questionnaires (the Individual Difference Questionnaire (IDQ) (Paivio & Harshman Reference Paivio and Harshman1983), and the Cognitive Style Index (CSI) (Allinson & Hayes Reference Allinson and Hayes1996)), Schöcke asks whether vocabulary and grammar learning is more efficient if the presentation of the material corresponds to the candidates’ learning styles immediately following the presentation, as well as after one and two weeks.
Her hypothesis that the presentation method should correspond to the preferred learning strategy proved to be true for ‘visual learners’ with visually presented vocabulary and also – to a lesser extent – for ‘verbal learners’ with verbally presented words. Regarding holistic and analytic learner types, Schöcke found that holistic learners achieved more stable results in analytically-presented grammar tasks than analytic learners confronted with holistically-oriented tasks. Also, holistic learner types benefitted more from a holistic-verbal presentation of the learning material. The assumption of interdependence between analytic and verbal learner type, on the one hand, and between holistic and visual, on the other, could not be confirmed.
Schöcke expresses her reservations about the available methods for identifying learning styles. Nevertheless, she, like Haudeck, comes to the conclusion that questionnaires like the IDQ or the CSI can be used in class to foster self-reflection on learning processes.
Martinez's (2008) study is unique in this field of research in concentrating not on language learners per se, but on prospective teachers – students studying French, Spanish or Italian in an Education degree – thus exploring a link between learners (their present status) and teachers (their future status). Martinez investigates how these students conceptualise learning, especially learner autonomy. However, the focus of the qualitative study is on the students in their role as learners, following the assumption that ‘an essential precondition for the teacher to be able to foster autonomous learning is an explicit awareness of the teacher's own self as a learner’ (Breen & Mann Reference Breen and Mann1997: 145, cited in Martinez Reference Martinez2008: 132, original emphasis).
The 16 research subjects were chosen from the participants in two courses on learner autonomy held at the universities of Kassel and Giessen. The seminars aimed at sensitising the students to the concept of learner autonomy and autonomy-fostering FL teaching. Like Haudeck and Claußen, Martinez chooses a multi-method, qualitative design: questionnaires on the concept of learner autonomy, learning experiences, learner biographies and current learning behaviour, interviews for further elaboration of the questionnaire responses, and group discussions recorded during the courses. During and after the courses, further questionnaire surveys, learner diaries and retrospective interviews were examined.
Martinez compares the scientific discourse on learner autonomy to the students’ subjective theories and their concepts of language learning. Her study provides empirical evidence for connections between learner autonomy and
a) subjective theories: the relationship between learners and their individual learning process depends on their concepts of language learning and especially the ways in which the student conceptualises his or her role and means of controlling the learning process,
b) communication: learner autonomy evolves in authentically motivated use of the target language(s),
c) motivation: autonomous learners have positive attitudes towards their target language(s) and their speakers, and
d) multilingualism: multilingual learners have a reflective approach to the language learning process; learner autonomy is facilitated by the learners’ previous linguistic and didactic knowledge.
This last connection, which has – according to Martinez – not been sufficiently taken into consideration by Anglo-American learner autonomy research, could be an interesting starting point for further research on learner autonomy.
The studies presented in this section exploit different research methods to reveal and analyse the attitudes and techniques of language learners outside the classroom. Irrespective of their approach, they seem to concur on the importance of fostering the awareness of learning strategies in language classes, although the positive effects might not become immediately visible.
2.4 Multimedia and language learning
Multimedia, TELL (technology enhanced language learning) and CALL, and Blended Learning (BL) have become important topics in language acquisition research, after a somewhat slower start in Germany than, for example, North America – and not only due to the difficulties imposed by budget cuts. In this section, we review Ph.D. research carried out in the areas of German, English and Romance applied linguistics involving teaching and learning languages using the computer or internet. The motivation generally given for such studies is the fact that multimedia has become widespread, and the breadth and depth of multimedia possibilities for language learning (online and offline) continues to expand. Many authors cite the problem that, to date, there is little empirical literature dealing with the language learning process in these technology-mediated contexts.
All the dissertations have pedagogical implications, although some have a stronger emphasis on pedagogy than others. In general, they fall into one of two main categories: they either focus on effects that multimedia has on language learning (including its effects on attitudes or motivation for language learning (Grünewald Reference Grünewald2006; Schmidt Reference Schmidt2007), on the development and use of strategies (Würffel Reference Würffel2006) or on knowledge gain (Wilden Reference Wilden2008; Scheller Reference Scheller2009) – often questioning whether Cuban (Reference Cuban1993) was right in stating in his article title: ‘Computers meet classroom: classroom wins’. Others do not question the value of multimedia or BL environments, but rather, how they can be optimised for language learning (Kirchhoff Reference Kirchhoff2008; Launer Reference Launer2008). The studies under consideration will therefore be discussed in the following order: first, studies investigating learning (and learners) in TELL situations, and second, those questioning how to optimise BL in language learning.
In his consideration of FL learning in the classroom, Grünewald (Reference Grünewald2006) focuses on a typical tertiary language in Germany – Spanish – and investigates the effect of computers and the internet on students’ motivation and their self-appraisals regarding learning progression. Here, typically ‘good’ learners (although not necessarily good language learners) are investigated: in this case, students in the German Sekundarstufe II of the Gymnasium, that is, nearing the completion of their school education and in the academic stream of German schools, leading to a university place. Grünewald poses an important question which has arisen from increasing experience with multimedia: in this age of constant bombardment from the media in everyday life, does the inclusion of TELL in the classroom actually have an effect on learners’ motivation? In addition, he considers how individual learning processes and changes in motivation can be described, and how these might have pedagogical implications for the language learning classroom.
Like most projects in this subject area, Grünewald chooses a qualitative design to investigate his questions, involving pre- and post-study questionnaires, learning diaries and guided interviews, to follow motivational changes in his subjects. He arrives at three main conclusions. First, concerning the effect of computers in the language classroom, not surprisingly, students who enjoyed working with computers displayed a higher motivation for integrating computer use into their Spanish learning than students who did not: the latter were actually demotivated by the inclusion of CALL components. Interestingly, less able students seemed to appreciate the usefulness of the computer for learning more than the better students did. Despite this, most students considered the computer to be a useful medium for developing autonomous learning. Moreover, the opportunities provided for individual choices of learning topic had the effect of allowing students to concentrate on those areas deemed most necessary (or interesting). Second, general motivational influences on language learning seem to be strongly affected by how well students feel they are progressing and the belief that they can effect a change in their own learning progress. Motivation to learn is influenced most by the lesson topic as well as whether the student sees a purpose in learning what is being presented. In this case, computers might or might not have an influence on motivation. Finally, Grünewald considers the changing role of the teacher in multimedia learning environments, not only in the actual teaching activities, but also in the eyes of his students. The teacher becomes less instructor and controller, and takes over a more guiding role as a type of learning counsellor. This is not necessarily positive: not all students want a change in the role of the instructor, which, obviously, gives rise again to the question: for whom are BL environments most useful?
Schmidt (Reference Schmidt2007) turns to a less-studied area in his research, and chooses to apply an explorative-interpretive design to provide initial answers to his research questions. Specifically, he asks how software-based learning can enhance collaborative learning in the EFL classroom. He asks which types of tasks are most appropriate for use in multimedia classroom learning, how learners communicate and cooperate with each other while working with the medium, and how interaction with the computer can be characterised.
In this explorative study, 127 grade 7 (aged 12–13) students in a private school for girls (academic programme) worked in pairs on the software program ‘English Coach 2000’. Schmidt used pre- and post-study questionnaires with the schoolgirls and their teachers, recorded them using audio and video methods during task work, conducted guided interviews and analysed the students’ learning diaries in order to focus on the interaction of the schoolgirls with each other and with the learning software.
Schmidt draws four main conclusions from his study. First, the software program appeared to be well-suited for use in the classroom, although it was primarily developed for autonomous learning situations; it seems to be important that it is used in a variety of ways and not overused in classroom work. Second, metalinguistic communication between partners regarding problems and hypotheses about English could be helpful in learning the language. Third, the role of the teacher becomes one of moderator and organiser, rather than expert. The workload is not reduced, however, but rather shifts to an earlier preparatory phase, and teachers are required to have greater technical competence than before. And finally, various intervening factors can contribute to inefficiency of learning with language software, including the fact that the software in question was ill-equipped to give rich feedback on errors, that some explanations for errors were actually false, or that learners themselves did not pay attention to longer explanations (possibly due to frustration with the inaccurate feedback given by the program). There were also problems with hardware (in almost every class, there were difficulties with at least one of the computer learning stations), which had a negative impact on learning.
Würffel (Reference Würffel2006) decided to concentrate on a web-based program for training reading comprehension, and follows six American university members (graduate students and professors) with little or no knowledge of German while they learn to read this target language. In keeping with the typical target group of these studies, Würffel focuses on good learners with a specific learning motivation, and like the other authors in this group of studies, she chooses an explorative-interpretative methodology. Think-aloud protocols are used to investigate cognitive processes, supported by video recordings of the learners as they engaged in learning tasks, questionnaires and retrospective interviews on task work, as well as a post-study interview for evaluating the web-based learning program.
Würffel's focus is, specifically, strategy use during the reading course. She found that strategy training in the course seemed to lead to better learning outcomes, although this was not the focus of the study. The research subjects – highly motivated academics – were obviously intent on gaining a solid understanding of language content, and thus tended not to take common shortcuts: for example, instead of merely guessing unknown content, they paused and formulated educated guesses based on previously acquired knowledge, and preferred to find reasons for their own errors instead of allowing the software to present it to them. It is probably also for this reason that even these beginning readers had success with more complex reading tasks. Würffel concludes that these learners rely on a large number of different types of strategies when solving web-based learning tasks, even in the case of learning programs which may be – as in the present case – highly instructional, and allow for constructivist learning only to a certain degree. Autonomous learners, it would seem, remain autonomous, even when a learning situation attempts to make them conform to its own structure.
As the only study with a primarily quantitative design, Scheller's (2009) thesis investigates whether the use of multimedia can influence learning of specific topics: here, the German Wechselpräpositionen – prepositional verbs which, depending on context, are followed by nominal phrases in one of two cases (generally accusative or dative). Normally, the choice depends on whether the context involves a change in location or state. Learning the correct use of these prepositions is particularly difficult for learners of German as a foreign language. Scheller asks whether these prepositions can be taught and learned better through animations, since previous research indicates that in many cases, animations are actually not more helpful than static pictures in teaching the correct use of these prepositions. She bases her research on the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (Mayer Reference Mayer2001) and its modification (the integrated Model of Second Language Acquisition with Multimedia (Plass & Jones Reference Plass, Jones and Mayer2005)), assuming that general cognitive principles exist which explain the optimal presentation of elements within a multimedia learning environment.
To test the effectiveness of grammar animations, a multimedia learning program to teach Wechselpräpositionen (‘changing/varying/alternating prepositions’) was designed. As with most other projects in this topic area, adults made up the focus learner group: 89 university students of German in Minsk, Belarus, nine university-level learners in Munich, Germany, and 13 learners at an adult-education centre in Munich. A quasi-experimental design was chosen, with one pre-test and two post-tests. These were supported by a questionnaire asking about the learner's acceptance of the learning program.
Scheller found that, in general, animations appear to be helpful in learning which case (accusative or dative) to choose following a preposition, but the combination of a ‘border-crossing explanation’ with animation produced the best and most lasting learning results, and also – for the students from Minsk – the best transfer results. Contrary to studies suggesting that higher-level learners might profit more from BL scenarios, students who had been learning German longer did not improve as much through animations in this study; however, a ceiling effect might also have contributed to this result. Finally, students seemed to rate the use of the program positively. Scheller concludes that, while animations show great potential for grammar teaching, a continuous reinforcement of the conceptual level of grammar units is necessary to achieve improvements, and learning with such animations is best explained through the construct of mental models, which are dynamic representations of structures. Because of this, she argues that cognitive psychological and linguistic research should be taken more into account when conducting research and when teaching German as a foreign language.
Teachers, and not learners, are the focus of Wilden's (2008) study. She looks at self-perception and perception of others – and changes in these perceptions – in intercultural online communication, comparing FL teachers in a qualitative content analysis approach using observation (transcripts of voice and text chats) and interviews. The study was carried out in the context of an exchange project based on an online adaptation of the learning program the ‘ABC's of cultural understanding and communication’ (Schmidt Reference Schmidt2006), and included ten language teachers (five each in Germany and England).
Wilden found that most dialogue data were restricted to information about the person communicating (or their own culture); statements about the exchange partner or about the interaction of both dialogue members were relatively rare. However, the cultural comparative data did incorporate both cultures involved. Perhaps surprisingly, especially considering that those studied were language teachers and not learners, most of the statements remained superficial/descriptive, and did not move onto a more analytic/interpretive plane. Participants themselves expressed mixed views on the use of multimedia in this course; the text-chat functions were seen especially negatively, as participants felt that this did not allow for more in-depth discussions (although it must be noted here that the German teachers, with an average 16 years experience in their profession, were significantly older than the English teachers, who were only in their first or second year of teaching; these differences might have skewed the results of the study). In summary, the cultural concepts of the participants did not seem to change over the course of the study – a somewhat disappointing result.
Wilden's conclusions include the suggestion that teachers must be given the opportunity to try such online exchange programmes before they begin to use one in their own classrooms; only in this way might they be able to understand the potential and the caveats of proposed intercultural online exchanges.
Further projects focus on the pedagogical implications of Blended Learning concepts in the language classroom. Kirchhoff (Reference Kirchhoff2008), working with EFL learners in Germany, analyses the contextual constraints of BL scenarios and, on the basis of this, looks for pedagogical implications, including the development of guidelines for initiating and evaluating BL environments. She chooses 37 medical students in an ESP (Medicine) BL course as her focus group: again, typically good learners, although, like the students in Grünewald's study, not necessarily good language learners. Her interest here is especially in the usefulness of multimedia-assisted learning programs – which often seem to promise more than they can deliver – and her explicit goal is a pedagogical one: to show how regular classroom learning and technology-enhanced language learning can be combined. Thus, the author is not questioning the value of BL, but rather, how it can be optimised.
With the goal of theory generation, Kirchhoff chooses to carry out a qualitative study, involving guided interviews and questionnaires. She then develops a model of BL in the language classroom, asking which parameters are necessary for the development and description of BL environments (including modi, models of integration of the learning phases, methods and specific learning environments), and, specifically, how the software under consideration (Medilingua) could be evaluated within these parameters.
Blended Learning environments are seen to have advantages for the individualisation of learning, including opportunities for learners to engage in concepts which are more tailored to their specific language levels, and the increased possibilities for autonomous learning. However, the expectation of increased flexibility regarding place of learning was not fulfilled; rather, CALL segments seemed to anchor learners to specific places (computer, multimedia laboratory etc.). Only the PDA applications (for example, for learning content course vocabulary) were helpful in this regard. Finally, Kirchhoff found that learners’ acceptance of online autonomous vs. guided classroom phases was highest, in the proportion of about one third autonomous to two thirds classroom learning. This suggests a direct pedagogical implication: BL courses might be most effective in doses smaller than those typically prescribed.
Finally, Launer (Reference Launer2008) develops and evaluates a BL concept for the DaF (German as a foreign language) classroom. Typically for German studies in multimedia, she focuses on university students; her subjects are 39 students from 21 different countries, speaking 17 different first languages. Her experimental focus, however, is unusual: she includes a control group (with fixed course times) and an experimental group (with course phases involving BL) and compares them on the basis of both quantitative data (through tests of vocabulary and grammar) and qualitative data (evaluations of the course by learners and teachers, using questionnaires and learning diaries) over a six-week course period (unfortunately, 16 students left the course before the end of the study, which raises problems for the validity of the study.) She used the learning package uni-deutsch.de, developed in German and available online, in her study.
Launer poses an important question: is BL merely a pragmatic alternative to traditional classroom learning, or can it be a serious option for teaching methodology? She suggests that autonomous learning phases may be more helpful for vocabulary grammar learning and training than classroom-based learning contexts, as learners have more opportunities in the autonomous phases for focusing on their own learning needs and can work according to their own rhythm and speed.
The results are summarised in three areas. First, it was found that learners in the BL course spent the largest proportion of their time on grammar training, followed by vocabulary training. Second, regarding language skills, reading comprehension was the most successful in the BL phases: listening comprehension came a poor second. Third, the study indicated that the control group – the group with no multimedia learning component – improved most between pre-test and post-test on the quantitative measures of vocabulary and grammar learning, indicating that BL was not, in fact, the more successful approach (supporting Cuban's (1993) rather controversial title).
Launer finds BL courses to be effective, and draws on her qualitative data to support this conclusion: students who are motivated to incorporate the computer into their learning are also more successful. In fact, she lists a variety of learner characteristics that appear to be necessary for BL concepts to be successful, including motivation, self-discipline, patience, technical knowledge, awareness of one's own learning needs, endurance and acceptance of the quality and usefulness of particular tasks. In short, if learners do not bring these qualities to a BL situation, they will not be successful in their learning. It would be interesting to investigate whether these learners were, in fact, also generally better language learners (i.e. will good language learners learn well, regardless of what we subject them to, and will poor or unmotivated language learners learn poorly, whether they have the opportunity to learn autonomously or are are restricted to a more traditional learning classroom?).
The studies presented in this section point not only to specific outcomes which are interesting far beyond the reaches of the German research community, but also to research desiderata which also apply outside the German context. Four strands for further research appear to be especially promising:
1. Are multimedia learning contexts (including BL courses) only of ‘added value’ in certain contexts? Specifically, are they better for certain cultural groups (see Launer), for good (more motivated, more autonomous, more strategy-wise) language groups (see Grünewald, Launer and Würffel), or only useful in certain learning areas (such as vocabulary or grammar: see Scheller) but not in others, such as intercultural learning (see Wilden)?
2. How is the didactic dialogue between learners and computers different from that between learners and teachers, and how is it conducted, especially with regard to important features such as feedback, correction of errors and learning assessment (see Schmidt and Würffel)?
3. Are learning concepts which involve the use of multimedia environments only useful up to a certain point (see Kirchhoff and Launer), beyond which they become less helpful than more traditional, classroom-based learning contexts? And if so, how can computer-based tasks be integrated in a useful way into other learning and teaching activities (see Schmidt and Launer)?
4. Finally, how is the changing role of the teacher to be considered in blended and multimedia learning contexts (see Grünewald and Schmidt)?
In sum, the studies in this section, primarily qualitative and explorative in nature, pose fascinating questions about language learning in human–machine interfaces and the new considerations that the advent of multimedia in language learning continues to raise.
3. Conclusions
This overview of thesis work carried out during the past three years in Germany shows that there are common features with regard to topics and research design. Most studies seem to:
• be qualitative (explorative and/or interpretive in design), making use of method triangulation within this research paradigm, usually involving questionnaires and interviews, but also interaction analysis and observation,
• use relatively small samples to investigate individual learning processes,
• focus on learners’ awareness of the learning processes (and how to raise it),
• involve adult learners (with the exception of language learning in primary school), and
• focus on EFL, but viewed within a broader context of multilingualism.
However, the review also indicates what remains to be done in the years to come with regard to methodology, multilingualism and media devices:
• While young researchers need to be able to choose from a broad array of research methodologies, they should also be exposed to these different possibilities early. Quantitative designs or integrated (quantitative/qualitative) research designs, involving larger samples and quantitative data, should be developed further, in order to provide a more complete view of language teaching and learning.
• Future theses in the field need to take into account the fact that a growing number of learners are multilingual: for many, German is not a first, but rather a second or foreign language, so English is not necessarily their first FL.
• Internationalisation of language issues involves media and other literacies (e.g. games) which should be addressed, since they have a large effect on the multilingual experiences of most learners today. Future studies might focus specifically on these intersections and explore their impact on FL learning and teaching.
Sigrid Behrent is the managing director of the Centre for Language Studies at the University of Paderborn, Germany. In her Ph.D. thesis in applied linguistics she analysed ‘interalloglot communication’, the interaction between non-natives who communicate in their common target language.
Sabine Doff is Full Professor of English Language Education and Speaker of the INFORM-Institute/Institute of Foreign Language Learning & Teaching Research and Multilingualism at the University of Bremen, Germany. Her research interests include the history of foreign language learning and teaching in Europe, methodology in teaching L2 English, in particular CLIL pedagogy, and the role of culture (inter/transcultural learning) in the English language classroom.
Nicole Marx is Associate Professor of Language Acquisition Research and German as a Foreign Language at the University of Paderborn, Germany. Her research interests include multilingualism and intercomprehension pedagogy, learning processes in tertiary language learning, and language learning with multimedia.
Gudrun Ziegler is Associate Professor at the trilingual University of Luxembourg, specialising in multilingualism, language acquisition and interaction research. Her research projects focus on language development in multilingual learning, the development of linguae francae in multilingual learning/working contexts, interactional competence and the design of bi-/tri-lingual teaching schemes.
