 More or less, yeah, thank you. Having been coerced more or less into giving this talk, I thought what I would try to do, I'll look at some of the theoretical considerations and try and attempt some sort of broader picture and get us to think about issues that one might not necessarily think about straight away, when confronted with the notion of technology and hand-standard teaching and learning. But which, nevertheless, it might be anyway, and from the basis of the research that I've been doing over the years, can be and should be considered to be very important. One of the things I thought I'll do at the very beginning give you a quick overview of some of the issues if we have the time, we could talk about in detail and I'd like to put clearly we don't. I've already worked with my finishing point, I've already been told I have to allow 10 minutes for questions, so I've got logic slides and I just say a word or two about each of those. I won't be able to deal with them in any detail, I'm afraid. But here are the sorts of issues that I think are worth exploring and thinking about and knowing about in order to be able to ensure effective, whatever you might mean by that, integration of technology in language teaching and learning. So one of the things that's very important for me at the start is trying to get some grips of why, some grapple, why is it that we are now sort of 30, 40 years into the integration of new technologies in language teaching and learning and arguably, we're still very near the start of really making a very effective going. And there's a number of reasons here why I think we have had problems in relation to the effective integration of technology. And there's all sorts of research thinking to be done around these points and issues in order to be able to do things better and do them well. From a, but at a range across a whole wide spectrum, the first point that I list here, productivity paradigm and dominance of discourses around delivery. And our governments are quite good at that, are they not? And our managers, they want us to do this in order to save time, be more easy and all that. But does it really save time? Any of you who've been playing around, trying to maximize the affordances of technology for language teaching and learning will have found out, no, it doesn't, it takes more time. And so long as these sorts of notions are being banded around everywhere, it's going to be very, very difficult to really make it successful. Then there's a big problem that many of people in our genes, a latter group have around technology. They profoundly dislike any sort of fetishization of technology, technology is something to toys for the boys. So we won't go there, let's just, that's been a problem. And if you look on the way in the various blocks, people trying to promote the virtues of technology, they speak a language that no normal person speaks. And you don't really understand what they're going on about. So there's a lesson there for us, ways in which we could make it more effective. Arguably, policy makers and managers have unrealized the expectations that comes from that. Software producers tend to have a solution orientation. I haven't dealt with software producers, I've had the pleasure of doing that. I've had the pleasure of looking at their products. They want to have one product for a worldwide market and it doesn't work like that, yeah? You need situated context specifically local solutions and that's what works. So there's a fundamental tension there in terms of the way in which a lot of this material is being produced and then we wonder why it doesn't work. Then I think I'm borrowing Graham's language here and Graham do correct me if I'm wrong there. There is a sense of a perpetual obsolescence of technology. What do we mean by that? By the time you get your head around how the staff works, it's out of date. It's like a cruise now and your system is not supported anymore or it's perceived to be out of date. Big problem. And Gene's example of TV is being taken out of the classroom, is one such example. The tendency of trying to find an educational problem to which to apply an existing tool that's the other than Lorela's big notion. So you've got all these people inventing things and then desperately looking around what to do with it now and finding an educational problem to apply them to. They ain't gonna work by that. It's gonna work the other way around, yeah? What problem do we have? Let's find a device, a way of using technology in order to solve them. Then, a particular hobby also of mine is a lack of clarity about the definition of basis. Have you ever engaged with government policy on anything to do with it? Yeah. But, you know, it means everything and anything. And that's not a good start, yeah? If you're not clear about what you actually have in mind because you have no basis for talking about it and develop these courses. Then, there is, unfortunately, a perception out there that technology in itself is enough, completely forgetting that it's actually things like pedagogical skills required in order to make the technology do something effective in the classroom. And I've just been involved in now the second research project for PECTA where we look at ICTC people. And provision isn't great, I have to say. Opportunities for people like yourselves out there in schools and other contexts to learn how to use that to get there. Not very good. Then, another thing that I'm hoping to illuminate a little bit today is there is numerous key knowledge components which need to be understood in order to make technology work. And I've just listed some there. There's loads as we would see. There's no foreign language pedagogy in itself is a specialized aspect and field of inquiry that one really needs to be acquainted with in order to be able to see how technology fits and can fit in. Then, you need to know about technology and its affordances in order to bring those two things together. You ought to have had a look at second language learning and foreign language learning research if you, for example, want to bring technology to there on the development of writing skills in your learning. You need to know a little bit about what the research on writing actually tells about processes around writing in order to be able to understand how technology can be effectively brought to bear on that. And then in relation to the pedagogical dimension, as we know from Lee Schumann and colleagues, pedagogical content knowledge is a very complex field. And now, with technology being thrown into the mix, it's becoming more difficult even still. And Yarek at the back there, one of my students been working on that for some time now and if you're interested in this, he's the man to talk to. He knows all about it. Then, there's a lack of embeddedness of technology and enhanced practices for language teacher education and development. Have you, have you enjoyed any training at all, firstly, in relation to your role in higher education? That's not often the case. And then, if so, have you enjoyed any instruction in relation to technology? Probably very little. And then, teacher perceptions of these positions are important to leadership. I'll come back to that in a second. That's just a domain map that we're putting together for a current project. But what we are finding is certainly from the literature that these sorts of things are very, very important. It's just being disempowered because they don't understand technology, they don't understand the difficulties. They think it impacts negatively on their relationship with learners in the class from taking power away from them, taking expertise away from them so you can have a teacher with that extra pedagogy but through technology we need the mix. They are not expert any longer, they're usually friendly. And also, how people use media in their everyday lives, that's very important. And then, just in relation to leadership, that's very, very important to assume. Here's some research that's just come out by colleague, by colleague at least, to that level knowledge lab, who's looked at leadership styles in relation to making ICT work. Now think about your own context and I fear many of you will find that it's either this or that type of leadership that you're enjoying and what research suggests is neither this nor that, are particularly effective in order to bring about effective leadership. It's these sorts of leadership styles. So one of the implications that research is showing and I have to say, okay, what we actually need to do is provide development opportunities for leaders to become more aware of these sorts of things in order to be able to do the ICT implementation or anything like that. So shall we all pack up and go home now? Obviously not, we're committed to this and we want to work through this. This is one of the main things I'm gonna say to you is in order to be able to implement ICT effective, we need to spend some time thinking about diseases and we need to go through relevant research that helps us understand these diseases but just walking away is really not the response. And one particular problem, and you can read that from that later on, I'm not gonna talk about it in a length, is I think a certain problem that education has around acculturation and moving learners on and unfortunately we've got a lot of pressure on us always around the transmission of knowledge and what I would say later on is the technologies that we are currently seeing evolving, they don't work on the basis of transmission of knowledge. They operate on a very, very different parallel. So at one level we need to think about our educational aims and our learning objectives for teaching and learning in order to stand any real chance of making technology work for us because if we've got objectives and aims that it is with the affordances of technology what a real chance is there for us to really make a goal of it. The argument being of course that this sort of tension is being brought into the focus by new technologies which are based on of the creativity, innovation, knowledge, construction, knowledge, sharing. I wanted to share this to just, Gene's attempted one way of charting the history of computer assisted language learning. I just found this particular graph from a report by some sort of very big science organization in the States. I think Roy P. was one of the lead authors. You have Roy P., not you should have. Stanford, California. Very, very important person in that field. Basically saying that what we can see here is an increase in complexity of integration. Go tell if there's anything that I say you profoundly disagree with, shout out which are the leading semi-autisticists here and it's always very difficult to talk about these sorts of things with people in the room who know much better than you. So one of the things therefore technology is good at is mediation and that I think is a lesson that we ought to learn for our language learning and teaching purposes. The other question that's already been raised this morning is around what do we really need by language and I'm sure Gunther is going to dig up on that as well. And if we want to use technology effectively, one of the hypothesis that I want to posit this morning is to say, well then we need to really think about what sort of, what do we need by language and do we need to start to redefine a language in order to give technology a chance to be effective, we've already heard the term multi-modality mentioned earlier. But here they basically saying that this is my, I just, because you won't be able to read this side, I'll even get here on the right. We can see that technologies have over the years started to do or enabled us to do different sorts of things. And at this particular point we are at the point where we have a cyber infrastructure of mediated position. And in order to make that work effectively, we need to do one thing for many, for example. We need to take seriously the technology use in everyday life of our learners. Unless we do that, we might as well not bother. We'll be back. So all I'm doing here is basically throwing out a few questions that I let you worry about what to do with them, yeah? I'm not, I'm having all the answers, I'm just asking a few questions. And this is something more traditional that you might have come aware. That one might have come across already. A clusters of application, courseware, micro worlds, hypertext, simulations, modeling, collaborative learning environments. These might have been the sorts of things that we might have at our disposal through our employers, through their infrastructure. But we need to be aware that if that's what we're at first, we have to make choices here, which of those we could probably have to do all of them. And each of those will do different things well and others not so well. So in order to be able to talk about effectiveness, I saw one person in relation to Gene's talk, I think I was nosy looking at their notes and they said their key question was around effectiveness and efficiency, that's always a big question. But we can't, for example, expect micro worlds to do certain things whilst we can expect to do others. And just to underline the complexity of it all, it's just, I played around with this this morning, just very briefly, I thought, how can a cloud here of the tags that I use are delicious to bookmark things. So there's nothing scientific about it, it's hugely personal. But just for you to get a quick reminder about how complex this whole area really is. And when we talk about technology enhanced language teaching and learning, we could be meaning all these sorts of things. And they're all very, very different and all have their challenges and so forth. Then I would argue that in addition to knowing what technologies there are, which was the previous slide, this slide is talking about we need to have a sense of what we mean by learning. And Gunther and I, for example, have had long and protracted conversations of what we mean by learning and we don't always agree. And there's loads of different positions, but at the very least, we sat down and we asked ourselves the question and I'm just putting out here as an example, not as any sort of different type of pronouncement, one way in which learning might be thought of. So if you want to think about the learning bit of technology enhanced language learning, what do you mean by it? And if you mean this sort of thing, for example, interaction with others, interaction with oneself, confrontation between internal and external dialogue, interaction between the individuals and others who need the learning training and social environment. You have to look for a type of technology use and types of applications that do that sort of thing. If you, by learning me, I'm sitting in rows like we're doing now and have somebody talk out to you, then obviously you're a different source of technology that's backed out more. Although we know that it's not effective at all, but that's... So my invitation to you is, have you ever thought about exactly what to mean by that? I think I've not gone through that. Yes or no? So just ask yourself the question and then try and answer it for yourself. Okay and since I'm working in the field of mobile learning, I just thought clearly one aspect of technology are devices and one of the things I want to ask myself about those devices is both their particular characteristics and affordances are. So if you want to use mobile technologies in the language classroom, my argument would be that by understanding that one particular characteristic of mobile devices is personal ownership, you're more likely to be more effective whatever it is you do with them. If you're using the devices that are owned by the learners rather than devices that belong to the school that you give to them in two minutes to play around with. But that's just an illustration, that these sorts of things need to be thought about. Portability, if you think about portability, mobile devices having that in them are great characteristics. So having people sat in classrooms with devices to look at rather than books, are the affordances of these devices namely portability really being maximized? How can I create and move and think of my teaching and learning complexity experience to harness that particular characteristic? And so forth. So I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to talk about it in any speech every time I'm talking. Okay, I don't know why this is, I'm using a Mac and I've not worked out yet how to make these cooler things disappear if anybody knows. One of the things that clearly is if you want to do mobile learning effectively, you need to understand the bigger picture, the broader context. And here is some points about this broader context, particularly here in relation to fluidity, provisionality and instability. And unless your pedagogical disposition is not prepared to take into account these very, very significant implications of using that technology, please don't start using them because it's going to evoke chaos. It's going to make you unhappy and it's going to make the learner unhappy. It leads to changes in authority. If you go problem with that from a pedagogical in front of your pedagogical self-belief, then don't do it. What do you think? Do you recognize yourself there as a teacher? Yeah. It's a very interesting work by a colleague, Adam King, a few years ago, shows very effectively, with one image, how complicated and complex it actually is to pretend to be an effective language, in this, in our particular case, a language teacher using technologies. Because in order to do it effectively, as Graham will know, and we'll introduce him in a minute, and he's very active in all those sorts of domains, you have a lot of things to learn and lots of opportunities to learn about things like books, which is everything, and through and with them, from others. And a lot of things are simply saying here, it's awfully complicated and complex to be an effective denomination. It sounds like I'm wanting to put you off, not got the talk, yeah? That's not the talk I'm trying to do. Then, pedagogical content on it. We talk about some theoretical, that's at least what my title, I was going to do there, talk about some theoretical level things. Well, one of the things you ought to know about in order to be able to use technology effectively is about teaching. And this woman who we mentioned earlier has talked about pedagogical content on it. And he said that, well, you need to have knowledge of the environmental context, knowledge of the subject area, knowledge of your students, pedagogical knowledge, and all of that. And it is debatable. That's just one model that's been around for 20 or 30 years, that's been cited time and time again. That has proven to be fairly useful as a starting point for the talk. And then, technology comes along. And Bishra and Kola are saying, okay, now, don't just have content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, but you also have to think about technological knowledge. In other words, the most effective ways of harnessing your pedagogical knowledge in order to make learners understand content knowledge. And that's one model, and then obviously, researchers meet to disagree with each other in order to stay in business. You get out of people, come along, and take these ideas and modify them. So that's another way of thinking about if you know ICT content, context, learn, and so forth. The details here don't matter. It's the overall message that I would like you to take your way around. It's actually been quite difficult from a theoretical perspective to conceptualize with this whole issue. There's a lot of useful research. And then, of course, some research that dates back to 2004 by Margaret Cox and Mary Webb, also at Keynes. What do teachers need to understand and know in order to be able to use ICT resources effectively? And here's a range of issues. And one particular problem for example is here. Teachers need confidence in using a regular ICT resources which can only be achieved through frequent practice. But if you've got a setup where you've got a computer room and you've got to spend an hour making sure that you put this up, then we get in there. You don't know what particular configuration is on the computer, what the last person has done to make sure it doesn't work and all these other things. The confidence is a very, very difficult thing to talk about as I'm just explaining to you. Okay, mobile learning, I did say perhaps like I talked a little bit about it, so our theory that we've been working on suggests that in order to be able to analyze and practice mobile learning effectively, you need to understand mobile learning in terms of socio-cultural ecology where you've got structures, agency, and cultural practices interacting with each other. And it was interesting to hear you talk about agency. That's very important in our way of thinking about it as well. So you need to know about the structure, speed and technology, I actually got some slides about that. Let's start with agency. So if we want to use this stuff effectively, we need to take young people seriously as agents in learning and we need to realize and recognize that they display what we call a new habitus of learning in which they constantly see their life as well as training, as well as a challenge as an environment and a potential resource for learning. Their expertise is individually appropriate in relation to personal definitions of residence and the world has become the curriculum. So these are huge implications for our approaches to cognitive, for example, in relation to language teaching and learning. How do we get hold of the learners' life worlds and the practices learners have adopted with those technologies in their life worlds? How do we deal with this notion of individually appropriated and personal definitions of relevance if you work in school, a national curriculum, or if you work in higher education, some locally defined curriculum? Government is trying hard to make the notion of personalized learning work. It's not easy to do. And how do we bring the world outside the classroom and the learning that takes place outside the classroom into the classroom? And if I don't know whether any of you iPhone users and many of you played around with the applications of the iPhone, there's actually lots of all of them with reference to language learning there. Then there's cultural practices that young people develop around the use of learning. Mention that there's the structures that govern that use and we need to understand those. Another thing that obviously has a bearing on the effective use of technology, language teaching learning, is a particular paradigm of language we subscribe to. And in the literature, go to the proper argue, this is all basically artificial and all that, but this is a taxonomy and let's just use this because it doesn't exist. People are talking about structural perspectives, cognitive perspectives, and social perspectives, and social and naturalist perspectives. And the argument therefore is you need to be clear what way you stand, what perspective you have of language, and that will have to determine for certain influence the way you think about technology, bringing about these sorts of things. You must talk about fluency being very important. Well, not all of these models have fluency as well as their core components. So point there to think about. And then of course, my particular, what's always is that we talk about language and we don't talk about culture enough. And we don't have a very good understanding about culture acquisition and culture learning. And of course, it's certainly not as good as in terms of language learning. And we ought to ask ourselves some questions about how do we think language culture learning takes place? What are the issues and therefore what can technology do for us? So here is one, just an example. She was already mentioned today, Carol Chappelle, way back in 98, she put forward this particular description of the second language acquisition process. Let's assume for a moment, we went along with that, and let's assume that I'm in that thinking. So then you have to study, okay, where in the process are we around input? Well, if I want to focus on input, then technology can do certain things. If you want, say, you're interested in output, then you want to look at different sorts of technologies, doing different things. So basic message here is what science doesn't fit all. For this, you need to be very clear on what stage in the learning process you are, what your particular objective is, and choose your technology accordingly. And obviously, as mentioned earlier, about being driven by technology won't work because it doesn't take into account these sorts of things. Then, another place you could go to quite a part of, okay, what does second language acquisition research and tell us, and Dr. Long, for example, have put forward these methodological principles which they derived from their research. So they say, methodological principle one, NGP one, is use task, no text is the unit of analysis, therefore unit of teaching and analysis. If you believe in that, then you will use technology in a very particular way. You will look for technologies to do certain things. So you have to think about, and then of course there's a big thing about digital media center, but since Gunther's talking about the future of English anyway, I'm gonna leave that aside, basically just to say what do we mean by language. Then of course you need to think about the characteristics and the potential of technologies and the sorts of things that in my work, I've tended to use the technologies, okay. Sorts of things they can do well is offer flexibility of modality, interactivity, non linearity, they're distributed in nature, they offer authenticity, a common potential and a virtuality. And most recently, we see a very distinctive trend towards convergence of all of these things. And then we could go on and on and on. But talking in detail what these things mean, but since we haven't got the time, and I just want to throw out a few questions anyway, just think about affordances. I know my colleague, Mountain Oliver, at Institute doesn't necessarily like the word I do. I think it has a marriage, think about the affordances and use that to do things. Then what else do we need to do? We need to think about the learners, what their problems and potential issues are. We've done quite a bit of research with our master's level students using mixed mode computer media communication based courses. And what we found is that newness is a very important issue for them. Even if they've already been distance or mixed mode technology enabled language learning before. It's not, newness is not something that is there at the beginning and then goes away. It stays with learners in different ways, differently. And these are the sorts of problems they have. How do you manage work life and learning with technology? That's a big, a stumbling block for them. And the effectiveness of technology in terms of student outcome related a lot to the effectiveness that students develop in actually managing these complex things for themselves. As a course team, we didn't help them with that at all, we just left them on their own. That was clearly not such a good thing to do. And I would say I'm just, all here, getting used to e-learning, we came up with this particular model, where we said, okay, there is these bipolar parameters if you like. And at any one time, in any one place in relation to any one task, a learner might be here in terms of vulnerability, here in terms of no feeling of incompetence, here in terms of informality, here in terms of newness. And that changes all the time according to complex tasks. But unless you are aware of these sorts of features, you're not going to be able to allow the learners to be effective users of this technology. Then, I don't know, two more minutes may be in there. Community of inquiry. Teaching online is very different to teaching face to face. And there's various different sorts of models out there. I just picked up one that's very popular, well-cited in the literature. Should you have a course at Garrison and Anderson talking about the community of inquiry and talking about the importance of getting the social presence right, the cognitive presence right, as well as the teacher presence right. And if you go to their website, they go to the website of the community of inquiry, you can drill down into all of these areas in great detail. But point being, don't just assume that face to face pedagogical approaches will work in a mixed mode or online environment. They won't. And in our work, for example, we devised these four design principles for computer-mediated communication around which we develop pedagogical templates in order to work with our students. Narrative principle, discursive principle, argumentation principle, and the intercultural principle. And if you want to know more about that, I can tell you where we've written that up. So you can go. Then assessment is another thing that is very different. I think Jean, you mentioned that, if I'm not mistaken. So again, if we have the time, I can tell you a lot about that, but we don't. But I wanted to just share this with you. In our work in a GIST funding project that really last year, we were asked to scope a vision for formative assessment for the higher education sector. Let me just assure you we didn't choose that title. But one of the things we did find was that these are the sorts of things that technology can do reasonably well in relation to assessment. And the real question is, are they used to us in our particular situation? And we've got, if you're interested, we've developed a case that is on our website in relation to those. And we've got some outfits coming out from all the way. But one thing, for example, to follow off from Jean and to link through to Gunther this evening is around representation. Having these sorts of technologies allowing us to capture digital artifacts from students that are different to just written texts enables us to make very different sorts of judgments about their communicative abilities and competencies that has traditionally been the case. And then I'm not gonna go into this now because I ran out of time, but what I was gonna do, the other thing you have to think about is, okay, am I looking at a particular skill set now that I want to be teaching and what has technology got to offer for me? And if you, for example, want to focus on reading and writing in our experience on the basis of the research that we've done, the notion of narrative is actually quite useful and quite important and allows you to do lots of exciting things. And on my delicious account, if you want to go there, I think you'll find 40 or so different resources packed in relation to digital storytelling. So that's a very vibrant field and there's a lot of exciting tools out there that allow you to do this. But in order to be able to do it effectively, you actually need to engage a little bit with what is known about the field of narrative from a theoretical perspective. What do we know about writing processes in the foreign language and how can we feed all of this in and map it onto or match it with the affordances of technology in order to give us any sort of chance to become effective users of technology in those countries. No idea whether that's what you're expected to hear from me, but that's what I have to say in this so I'm hoping to take Sandy here with me. Thank you.