<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Second Language Learning and Software</title>
	<link>http://www.wal.org/wordpress/index.php/2009/05/11/second-language-learning-and-software/</link>
	<description>News and Information from the oldest nonprofit language school in Seattle, WA!</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:15:11 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: John Lovell</title>
		<link>http://www.wal.org/wordpress/index.php/2009/05/11/second-language-learning-and-software/#comment-675</link>
		<dc:creator>John Lovell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 00:44:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.wal.org/wordpress/index.php/2009/05/11/second-language-learning-and-software/#comment-675</guid>
		<description>This is a great discussion.  The claim that these software are like first language learning is certainly misleading.  But there is an attractiveness to the idea that first language learning might have aspects which could be used effectively.  For instance, I have felt that the vocabulary of second language learning could match the vocabulary of first language in terms of sequence.  

Even though the software does not have the human contact element which is so important, it might be possible for future software to have such content.  And it might be possible to have software to increase some elements of learning while not being capable of providing the total learning.  

Also more could be done in software.  Writing is not an early component of first language learning, but seems like a potentially great tool in second language learning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great discussion.  The claim that these software are like first language learning is certainly misleading.  But there is an attractiveness to the idea that first language learning might have aspects which could be used effectively.  For instance, I have felt that the vocabulary of second language learning could match the vocabulary of first language in terms of sequence.  </p>
<p>Even though the software does not have the human contact element which is so important, it might be possible for future software to have such content.  And it might be possible to have software to increase some elements of learning while not being capable of providing the total learning.  </p>
<p>Also more could be done in software.  Writing is not an early component of first language learning, but seems like a potentially great tool in second language learning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
