O n f e r e n c e

Classroom learning, a real-world problem 
Not enough knowledge about the learning environment described above is available. 
However, we have identified theoretical frameworks to provide backing for this study and 
taken into account factors that can affect learning outcome. In addition to contributing 
epistemologically to the academic fields from which we have based our current research 
design, the goal of this study is to obtain optimal student learning outcome because 
classroom learning, vs. experimental study in a lab, is a real-world problem. For this 
reason, we have to modify our research design as we identify best possible solutions 
during current and future studies. Accordingly, the study seems to fit the model of 
educational engineering, which stresses analysis and design in order to ensure the 
eventual quality and effect of the educational artifact (Colpaert, forthcoming). 
References 
Anderson, R. (1993). Four operating principles and input distribution as explanations for 
underdeveloped and mature morphological systems. In K. Hyltenstam & A. Viborg (Eds.), 
Progression and Repression in Language (pp. 309
–
339). New York: Cambridge University 
Press. 
Anderson, R. (1994). The insider’s advantage. In A. Giacalone Ramat & M. Vedovelli 
(Eds.), Italiano Lingua Seconda/Lingua Straniera (pp. 1
–
26). Rome: Bulzoni. 
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford 
University Press. 
Blyth, C. (1997).A constructvist approach to grammar: Teaching teachers to teach 
aspect. Modern Language Journal, 81, 50
–
66.
Blyth, C. (2002). Between orality and literacy: Developing a pedagogical norm for 
narrative discourse. In S. Gass, K. Bardovi-Harlig, S. Magnan, & J. Walz (Eds.), 
Pedagogical Norms for Second and Foreign Language Lerning and Teaching (pp. 241
–
274). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 
Blyth, C. (2005). From empirical findings to the teaching of aspectual distinctions. In D. 
Ayoun & M. R. Salaberry (Eds.) Tense and aspect in Romance Languages (pp. 211
–
252). 
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisiton. 
Foundations for teaching, testing and research. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

---

-181- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
Cohen, A. D., Oxford, R. L., Chi, J. C. (2002). Learning Style Survey: Assessing Your 
Own Learning Styles. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University 
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN [In Cohen & Weaver, 2006, pp. 15
–
21]. 
Colpaert, J. (2012). The Publish and Perish Syndrome. Editorial in Computer Assisted 
Language Learning, 25(5), pp. 383
–
391. 
Colpaert, J. (forthcoming). Educational Engineering as Research Method: Some 
epistemological considerations. 
Dansereau, D. (1987). A discussion of techniques used in the teaching of the passé 
compose/imparfait distinction in French. French Review, 61, 33
–
38. 
De Bot, K. (1996). The psycholinguistics of output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 
529
–
55. 
Frantzen, Diana. (1995). Preterite/Imperfect half-truths: Problems with Spanish textbook 
rules for usage. Hispania, 78, 145
–
158. 
Garrett, N. (1986). The problem with grammar: What kind can the language learner use? 
Modern Language Journal, 70, 133
–
148. 
H
wu, F. (2003). Learners’ behaviors in computer
-based input activities elicited through 
tracking technologies. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(1), 5

29. 
Hwu, F. (2004). On the applicability of input enhancement hypothesis and input 
processing theory in multimedia CALL: The case of Spanish preterite and imperfect 
instruction in an input application. CALICO Journal, 21(2), 317

338. 
Hwu, F. (2004). The relationship between personality and learning behaviors in a 
multimedia application for grammar instruction. Computer Assisted Language Instruction 
Consortium (CALICO) Annual Symposium. Pittsburg.
Hwu, F. (2005). Spanish preterite and imperfect in conversations: The pragmatic 
meanings. Journal of Languages and Linguistics, 4(2): 183
–
206. 
Hwu, F. (2007
). Learners’ strategies with a grammar application: The influence of 
language ability and personality preferences. ReCALL Journal, 19(1), 21

38. 
Salaberry, R. (2005). Evidence for transfer of knowledge of aspect from L2 Spanish to L3 
Portuguese. In D. Ayoun & M. R. Salaberry (Eds.) Tense and aspect in Romance 
languages. (pp. 179
–
210). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins 
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. 
Seildlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. 
Widdowson (pp. 125
–
144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Tomasello, M. (2002). The item-
based nature of children’s early syntactic development. 
In M. Tomasello & E. Bates (Eds.), Language development: The essential readings (pp. 
169
–
186). Malden, MA: Blackwell. 
Westfall, Ruth and Foerster, Sharon. (1996). Beyond aspect: New strategies for teaching 
the preterite and the imperfect. Hispania, 79, 550-560. 

---

-182- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be