The Linguistic Content of the Electronic Courses - Science Direct

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 182 (2015) 41 – 44

4th WORLD CONFERENCE ON EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCHES, WCETR2014

The linguistic content of the electronic courses Sarka Hubackovaa* , Ilona Semradovaa a

University of Hradec Kralove, Rokitanskeho 62, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic

Abstract The contents of the programs within the definition of eLearning and within its concepts in practice shall be focused on language knowledge and practice of the individual and his language experience. What could seem professional from the point of view of language use at first glance remains an occasional component of language teaching both in classical or electronic form. 2015The TheAuthors. Authors. Published Elsevier ©©2015 Published by by Elsevier Ltd.Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Academic World Research and Education Center. Peer-review under responsibility of Academic World Research and Education Center. Keywords: Electronic courses, foreign language, linguistic content, language system

1. Upgrade and update options of language system What do we mean with newness and updates of access and methods could be shown on a particular case – work with vocabulary. Textbooks usually give to the original text a list of words, which the authors believe that their meanings a student does not know and that it is necessary to learn them and due to this fully understand the whole text and was eventually able to translate it literally. The current methodology of foreign language teaching in Western countries, local textbooks and their accessories with audio recording is based on a totally different opinion: From the beginning, the student is taught that even with the best efforts and hard work he is not and will not be able to handle the entire vocabulary. The procedure of two types is applied: Not all expressions of a particular text are given.

* Sarka Hubackova. Tel.:+420 493332302. E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Academic World Research and Education Center. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.734

42

Sarka Hubackova and Ilona Semradova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 182 (2015) 41 – 44

Different approach could be found in so called Cambridge English textbooks. Although they present all terms necessary for understanding the text, only the most important of them are to acquire. Methodological books to our courses are very similar. Although they claim also all expressions, but joining instruction of the teacher: Work with these words! In both cases, the student is guided to learn the words necessary for overall, sometimes outline comprehension. At the same time the student shall also try to assess their substantive significance first based on the context and then one can verify a good textbook or dictionary. Our experience convinces us that students on secondary schools are not usually taught is this way. Usual requirement was to handle all the terms listed below the text. This concept of mastery of vocabulary is so familiar to them, that in the questionnaires students sometimes complain that the small number of new words. Our electronic course could then be not only a mean to repeat the vocabulary or once-remembered-expressions reminder, but also a kind of superstructure, which would be built on knowledge of the students and which would gradually expand their vocabulary with specific technical elements introduced by interesting texts. Exercise and subsequent tasks would be limited to checking understanding of substantive content. Regarding the nonprofessional text, we have not used alternative solution yet. It would be based either on use of shorter entrance texts with a shorter list of new words, or we would list default texts modified in the sense that from the authentic texts were deleted words, which knowledge is not essential for understanding the content of the text. We draw attention to these variants because in many professional essays theoretically focused on language teaching the applying of authentic textual materials is emphasized as one of the advantages of eLearning. 2. Communicative competence as a content eLearning courses All language knowledge and skills that form the content of the programs supporting the teaching of a foreign language can be described collectively with the term “communicative competence”. For a more accurate characteristic of a particular course it is useful and sometimes necessary to distinguish its essential components. These competencies are: grammatical discourse sociological strategic. 2.1. Grammatical competence Grammatical competence is often referred to simply as language or linguistic. We are avoiding both of these occasional naming. The term “language” is not concise, it is ambiguous. Each of these competencies is connected to language. Translation, or rather the international equivalent of the word is an adjective “linguistic”. We do not use it for this reason and also because it appears in a compound term “sociolinguistic”. We rather insist on the term grammatical competence, even if the actual content of courses is not just grammar, but often composition, vocabulary and phonology or phonetics. The contents of the programs within the definition of eLearning and within its concepts in practice shall be focused on language knowledge and practice of the individual and his language experience. Neither them nor practice the first semester college student usually has. The student expects, however, that anyone responsible for maintaining and compliance of content of language teaching syllabus will take into account his needs when selecting the specific content of the curriculum. These often can not be judged by the author, though he is well aware that at least some knowledge of basic linguistic facts is essential.


What could seem professional from the point of view of language use at first glance, remains an occasional component of language teaching both in classical or electronic form. The key content of transmitted information will always be linguistic system of language as a whole of the didactics. The task of the author of next program will be to provide at least approximately, which folders of content would be taken over by face-to-face teaching and which sections of content will the electronic form pay attention. This planning and deciding what will be the final content of individual language programs created to meet the needs and possibilities of ICT is in the near future likely the way by which the creation of programs will take. It must be flexible enough, because the needs of users and even the possibilities of ICT will not stagnate. The change probably goes unquestioned in preparing high school students. Grammatical competence is inherently language system in all its components. To it belongs then phonology – in teaching sometimes associated with phonetics, morphology, syntax and semantics. Regarding the morphology, it is mainly the so-called formal morphology dealing with word forms, especially declination and conjugation forms, emerging in declension of nouns and verb conjugation. Due to the nature of German, for which is significant the application of composite expressions, one can imagine a program dealing with this issue. In this area the terms morpheme or morphology somewhat different meaning, although strictly defined. The experience would probably have opted for the creation of even such a focused program. It is a traditional phenomenon that language teaching at universities focuses primarily on this competence. This, however, has two basic and from didactic point of view different forms. Creator of the course, has to decide the crucial thing: whether the course is to teach language or about language. The issue is broad, but we will try to sketch it at least. If the author wants to teach about the language, he will probably discuss the nouns according to gender and type of inflection first, then adjectives, pronouns, etc. However, to learn the language as quickly as possible to move the student to actively use the language and thereby greatly motivate, he chooses another arrangement: pronouns as first (in order of personal, possessive, demonstrative) in the nominative, then verbs in the present tense, and then nouns in the accusative (in conversation busiest fall) across declination system, etc. We intentionally put these two approaches against each other rather excessive. But to remember our practice, we want to note that its part is the syllabus, which defines our action as repetition and supplement of language skills of students on the background of linguistic system in this sense it is the basis of layout of our activities in the individual semesters. If we have previously pointed out that on the creation of concept of substantive content must be involved professionals in the field, then it is necessary for any subsequent adjustment of language teaching syllabus that it must be developed by those who teach that language. If we then calculate with the significant expansion of electronic forms of education, should also be given at least a framework recommendation for the creation of new programs. Grammatical competence is the traditional content of classically conceived textbooks and various language manuals. eLearning on the other hand should put into practice a somewhat different approach to the acquisition of the same matter, unless it wants to present a mere transcript of the traditional process in electronic form. Let's have a more detailed look on this issue. Grammatical competence is composed of a number of elements. The most important of them have their properties, by which they are mutually interconnected in a system. These features are learned by students. Students recognize them in their consequences and master especially those. They are forms of words, often only their endings, which represent a system property. I will introduce a little example of didactic procedure that can be applied in the program. I suppose the positive answer the student and his elementary knowledge. Read the following phrase: ein hohes Haus. Identify the grammatical gender of noun Haus. - According to what you have managed to properly define it? (The question is formulated to include feedback and help for students: The correct answer can be found in the phrase.) - Try to generalize your observation: Select for this generalization the appropriate of the following claims. All statements are correct. The form of adjective corresponds to noun gender. By gender of the noun is determined a form of adjective. In combination of noun and adjective the adjective precedes, but noun is the determining one.

43

44


In combination of noun and adjective the adjective usually precedes noun and indicates its grammatical gender. (The program is directed according to the selected student's answer. Here we assume for instance b) - Return to the given phrase and try to supplement or refine the chosen answer. Take into account all the three words. (The task is again formulated to include feedback. Constituent should be also taken into consideration.) The program can, however, be designed so that it in this section begins with a simple declaration on endings of adjectives in the basic form by term indefinite. The way which I have indicated, however, may rather correspond eLearning or at least be closer to it: Uses the observation method in work with the language, one of the most important in any study. Shows to the student common language phenomenon rather unusually and thereby motivates him to some extent. It contains the essential moments of rules that the student has to repeat or at least remember. Leads the student to realize that in the future he can avoid many of the mistakes when realizing all of the eligible relationships. Indirectly forcing the student to his own formulation of a certain rule, while stressing the importance of its content prior to formulations. Indicates to the student the necessary summarization of all elements to be included in the final rule. 3. Conclusion The disadvantage of this procedure is its time demands. In the management of face-to-face teaching the teacher prefers the shortened procedure. In the procedure I have outlined were reflected all major educational benefits that eLearning can provide. It could be use as a part of the homework exercises with face-to-face teaching. I remind that there are possible variations of the above procedure. Somewhat more broadly, I dealt with the concept of grammatical competence, pointing to something that goes with it, because especially that forms the axis of the teaching a second foreign language at the FIM.

References Cahill, J. L. (2011).Implementing online or hybrid courses in a traditional university. [online] Elearning Papers 24, 2011. Retrieved October 09, 2012 from: http://elearningpapers.eu/en/article/Implementing-online-or-hybrid-courses-in-a-traditional-university. 2011 Cap, J., Mareš, J. (2001). Psychologie pro ucitele. Praha. 2001. 656 s. ISBN 80-7178-463-X. Frydrychova Klimova, B. (2009). Blended learning, in Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education, Lisboa, 2009. Hoffmann,L. (1987). Kommunikationsmittel Fachsprache : Einfuehrung. 3. Aufl. Berlin : Akademie Verlag, 1987, 307 s. Frankle, K. M. Blended Learning: The Key to Successful Web-Based Training and Education. [online] . Retrieved October 09, 2012 from: http://www.citeconsortium.org/PDF/articles-papers-presentations/World%20Congress%20Paper%201014%20-%20July%2005.pdf. Frydrychová Klímová, B. Teaching formal written English. Vyd. 1. Hradec Kralove. Gaudeamus. 2012. Kochang, A., Britz, J., Seymour, T.,(2006). Panel Discussion. Hybrid/blended learning: Advantages, Challenges, Design and Future Directions. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Informing science and IT education joint conference, Salford UK, s. 155-157. 2006 Ligorio, M. B., Cucchiara, S. Blended (2011). Collaborative constructive paricipation. A model for teaching in higher education. [online] Elearning Papers 27, 2011. Retrieved October 09, 2012 from: http://elearningpapers.eu/en/news/elearning-papers-27-designing-learningpublished Schroder, H. Aspekte einer Didaktik-Methodik des fachbezogenen Fremdsprachenunterrichts (Deutsch als Fremdsprache) : unter besonderer Berücksichtigung sozialwissenschaftlicher Fachtexte. Frankfurt am Main : Lang, 1988. 210 s. factors in e-learning. Retrieved October 15, 2011 from Smith, R. (2011). Motivational http://www.ruthcsmith.com/GWU%20Papers/Motivation.pdf. Poulova, P. and Hynek, J. (2003). Application of Information and Communication Technologies. In Education and Information Systems: Technologies and Applications. Orlando : International institute of informatics and systemics, 2003, pp. 80-85. Prucha, J. (2005). Moderni pedagogika. Praha: Portal, 2005. Ruzickova, M., Hubackova, S. (2009). The Copyright Law of e-Learning in Czech legal Frame In Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education, Lisboa 2009.