You are here:

Are Language Learning Websites Special? Towards a Research Agenda for Discipline-Specific Usability
Article

, , The Open University, United Kingdom

Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Volume 15, Number 3, ISSN 1055-8896 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

With the intention of defining an initial research agenda for discipline-specific factors in the usability of e-learning websites, this article focuses on the example of foreign language learning. First, general notions and concepts of usability are analyzed, and the term "pedagogical usability" is proposed as a means of focusing on the close relationship between usability and pedagogical design. Then, to address the key issue of whether there are aspects of pedagogical usability that are discipline-specific, the article examines how language learning and teaching, in particular Technology Enhanced Language Learning (TELL), has approached usability when developing technology-enhanced learning materials. Three elements of a research agenda are identified: (a) pedagogical usability, (b) intercultural usability, and (c)website evaluation. In conclusion, it is suggested that, just as language learning websites may require a discipline-specific approach, other disciplines pedagogical usability may also need to be considered in relation to the specific requirements of the discipline, and that a debate around these issues is timely.

Citation

Shield, L. & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2006). Are Language Learning Websites Special? Towards a Research Agenda for Discipline-Specific Usability. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(3), 349-369. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Allum, P. (2001). Principles applicable to the production of CALL-ware: Learning from the fi eld of human computer interaction (HCI). ReCALL, 13(2), 146–166.
  2. Avouris, N., Dimitracopoulou, A., Daskalaki, S., & Tselios, N. (2001). Evaluation of distance-learning environments: Impact of usability on student performance. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(4), 355-378. Retrieved March 10, 2006 from http://dl.aace.org/6469
  3. Boardman, M. (2005). The language of websites. London: Routledge.
  4. Brinck, T., Gergle, D., & Wood, S.D. (2002). Usability for the web: Designing web sites that work. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
  5. Cronjé, J.C. (2001). Metaphors and models in Internet-based learning, Computers and Education, 37, 241-256.
  6. Doughty, C., & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50-80. Retrieved March 10, 2006 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/doughty/default.html
  7. Evers, V., Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Jones, A. (1999). Cross-cultural understanding of interface design: A cross-cultural analysis of icon recognition. In E.del Galdo & G. Prahbu (Eds.), Designing for Global Markets: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Internationalisation of Products and Systems (pp. 173-182). Rochester, NY: Backhouse Press.
  8. Felix, U. (2002). The web’s potential for language learning: The student’s perspective. ReCALL, 13(1), 47–58.
  9. Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the silent language of culture: The CULTURA project. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 55-102. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/furstenberg/default.html
  10. Hale, C., & French, D. (1999). Web-related assessment and evaluation. In D. French (Ed.), Internet based learning: An introduction and a framework for higher education and industry. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publications.
  11. Hall, R.H. (2001). Web-based training site design principles: A literature review and synthesis. In B. Khan (Ed.), Web-based training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
  12. Hémard, D. (2003). Language learning online: Designing towards user acceptability. In U.Felix (Ed.), Language learning online: Towards best practice (pp. 21-42). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
  13. Hémard, D., & Cushion, S. (2000). From access to acceptability: Exploiting the web to design a new CALL environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(2), 103-118.
  14. Hémard, D., & Cushion, S. (2001). Evaluation of a web-based language learning environment: The importance of a user-centred design approach for CALL. ReCALL, 13(1), 15-31.
  15. Hubbard, P. (2002). A survey of unanswered questions in computer assisted language learning. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.stanford.edu/~efs/callsurvey/index.html
  16. Hubbard, P. (2003). A survey of unanswered questions in CALL? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(2-3), 141–154.
  17. Jordan, S. (2002). Intercultural issues in foreign language learning and ethnographic approaches to study abroad. The guide to good practice for learning
  18. Kelly, C. (2000). Guidelines for designing a good website for ESL students. Internet TESL Journal, 6(3). Retrieved March 10, 2006 from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kelly-Guidelines.html
  19. Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. New York: Oxford University Press. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (1999). Language and communication: Essential concepts for user interface and documentation design. New York: Oxford University Press.
  20. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
  21. Levy, M. (2002). CALL by design: Discourse, products and processes. ReCALL, 14(1), 58–84.
  22. Marcus, A., & West Gould, E. (2000, June). Cultural dimensions and global web user-interface design: What? So what? Now what? Proceedings of 6th Conference on Human Factors and the Web, Austin, Texas. Retrieved March 10,
  23. Muir, A., Shield, L., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2003a, June). The pyramid of usability: A framework for quality course websites. Proceedings of EDEN
  24. Muir, A., Shield, L. & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2003b). Report on the usability roadshow to region 06. Internal Open University Report.
  25. Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.
  26. Nielsen, J. (2001). Just how important is usability in e-learning? Elearning Post. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.elearningpost.com/features/archives/001015.asp
  27. Plass, J. (1998). Design and evaluation of the user interface of foreign language multimedia software: A cognitive approach. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 35-45. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article2/.
  28. Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
  29. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Benyon, D., Holland, S., & Carey, T. (1994). Human-computer interaction. Harlow, UK: Addison-Wesley.
  30. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction design: Beyond humancomputer interaction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  31. Shield, L., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2003a, September). Language learning websites: Designing for usability. Paper presented at EUROCALL’03: New
  32. Shield, L., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2003b). The annual courses survey (2002): A summary of student responses to questions about their course-related websites. Open University Knowledge Network Internal Document No.3852. Shiratuddin, N., & Hassan, S. (2001). Web sites usability evaluation guidelines for teachers: A case of CikguNet on-line environment. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2001 (pp. 3074-3079). Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://dl.aace.org/4154
  33. Singh, N., & Baack, D. (2004). Website adaptation: A cross-cultural comparison of U.S. And Mexican web sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(4). Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol9/issue4/singh_baack.html#fourth
  34. Van Dijck, P. (2000). Cultural portals: What makes ‘em tick? Evolt.org. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.evolt.org/article/Cultural_portals_ What_makes_em_tick/20/3099/
  35. Wade, V., & Lyng, M. (2000). An automated evaluation service for educational courseware. World Conference on the WWW and Internet 2000 (pp. 569-574). Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://dl.aace.org/100
  36. Weininger, M.J., & Shield, L. (2003). Promoting oral production in a written channel: An investigation of learner language in MOO. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(4), 329-349.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections