ReCALL 25(2): 250–271.

2013 r European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 250

doi:10.1017/S0958344013000049
First published online 26 March 2013

Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’: a framework for

conceptualizing and designing help options in
computer-based second language listening
MONICA STELLA CARDENAS-CLAROS
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaiso, Valparaiso, Chile
(email: monica.cardenas@ucv.cl)

PAUL A. GRUBA
School of Languages and Linguistics, The University of Melbourne,
3010 VIC Australia
(email: paulag@unimelb.edu)

Abstract

This paper proposes a theoretical framework for the conceptualization and design of help
options in computer-based second language (L2) listening. Based on four empirical studies, it
aims at clarifying both conceptualization and design (CoDe) components. The elements of
conceptualization consist of a novel four-part classification of help options: operational,
regulatory, compensatory and explanatory. The design section establishes ways that make help
options easy to use, encourage learner control, frame guidance and stimulate learning. Each
component is contextualized, discussed and presented with limitations and suggestions for
further research.

Keywords: Help options, computer-based L2 listening, L2 listening, participatory design,

design, framework.

1. Introduction

The design and sophistication of help options in computer-based second language

(L2) listening applications have evolved in line with the advances in computer
usability and capability (Lynch, 2009). Initially, help options were text-based and
they consisted of first language annotated transcripts and dictionary-like entries.
With the addition of static and interactive images, help options incorporated visual
elements as a way to complement texts and increase learner motivation. More
recently, help options have been developed with links to online resources. Nowadays,
they offer the listener alternative ways of exploiting aural texts through pro-
nunciation cues, cultural notes, dictionaries and grammar modules (Robin, 2007).
Despite such advances, however, the conceptualization and design of help options in
computer-based L2 listening remains an under-researched area.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 251

In this paper, we put forward the Conceptualization and Design (CoDe) framework in
an effort to spur the research and development of help options in computer-based L2
listening. We open our discussion with an examination of current classifications of help
options in CALL. After setting out four empirical studies, we present conceptualization
concepts and design guidelines. We conclude by exploring the integration of the con-
ceptualization and design components of the framework and by providing suggestions
for further research.

2. Situating the study

Earlier, we defined help options as embedded application resources that assist

learners in performing computing operations and/or support language learning
(Cárdenas-Claros & Gruba, 2009). We acknowledge that the purpose of ‘Help’
toolbars and elements are to assist, but throughout our work we have argued that the
actual use depends on each individual listener deciding whether, when and how to
utilize the available options. Choice is fundamental.
Notably, our views differ from those introduced by Pujolà (2002) and Hegelheimer
(2003). In Pujolà’s work, for example, help facilities were divided into two major
groups: assistance and guidance. Facilities for assistance provide learners with help
for comprehension of learning materials; guidance facilities provide learners with
help to act upon tasks (Table 1).
In a related framing, Hegelheimer (2003) set out two functions: operational guidance
that allows the learner to repair miscues caused by software; and task guidance, that
allows learners to act upon language learning tasks. Such views of help options may
require revision: First, the terms ‘assistance facilities’ and ‘task guidance’ do not fully
acknowledge learner autonomy; secondly, though in-built resources have the potential
to be assistive, their interpretation and subsequent use is dependent on a particular

Table 1 Help facilities framework (Pujolà, 2002)

Assistance > Dictionary

Help for comprehension > Cultural notes
> Transcripts
> Subtitles
> Replaying and forwarding controls
> Feedback: explanations

Guidance OPERATIONAL
Help for tasks > Information on how to use the program
> User’s guides for the radio and TV consoles
> Instructions
LANGUAGE LEARNING TRAINING
> Instructions: purpose and advice/provided
> Experts module: reading & listening strategies
> Information on how to make appropriate use of
Transcripts and subtitles
252 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

listener’s context and perception. On a third note, current classifications are not suffi-
ciently fine-grained to be able to conduct close analysis of empirical listening data. By
simply grouping a variety of options in a single category (i.e., ‘assistance facilities’ or
‘task guidance’), the intended functions of differing options are obscured. For instance,
when a listening transcript is accessed, the aural-to-visual resource is designed to assist
comprehension. A cultural note, however, acts to enrich or supplement listener under-
standing and not ‘assist’ or ‘guide’. For these reasons, frameworks must be complex
enough to be used in the sophisticated analysis of differing resources, purposes and
listener motivations.
Although current classifications of help options are widely acknowledged in the
CALL literature (see Levy & Stockwell, 2006), such frameworks remain largely
theoretical. To extend earlier work, here we include listeners’ voices as a way of
providing a richer account of what features they deem relevant for comprehension in
computer-based L2 listening.

3. Empirical studies

To lay the groundwork for our proposed CoDe framework, we review the literature
in three main areas: 1) L2 listening and computer-based L2 listening; 2) help options
use/non-use in CALL, interactive learning environments and help systems design
and 3) user-centered design with a particular focus on participatory design practices.
Thus, we consulted works that include:

3.1 Listening
> L2 listening: Flowerdew & Miller, 2005; Lynch, 2009; Rost, 2002, 2006, 2007;
Vandergrift, 2007.
> Computer-based L2 listening: Brett, 1995, 1996, 1997, 2000; Hubbard, 2001,
2004, 2006; Ramirez & Alonso, 2007; Vanderplank, 2009; Weinberg, 2002.

3.2 Help options use/non-use:

> Computer-based L2 listening: (Cárdenas-Claros, 2005; Chapelle, 2003, 2005,
2009; Chun & Payne, 2004; Chun & Plass, 1996; Grgurović & Hegelheimer, 2007;
Hegelheimer, 2003; Hegelheimer & Tower, 2004; Hernández, 2004; Hoven, 1999,
2003; Hsu, 1994; Jones, 2003, 2006, 2009; Liou, 2000; Lin & Chen, 2009; Pujolá,
2002; Jones & Plass, 2002; Rivens Mompean & Guichon, 2009; Sun, 2010).
> Interactive learning environments (ILE): Aleven, Stahl, Schworm, Fischer &
Wallace, 2003; Aleven, McLaren, Roll, Koedinger, & Lester, 2004; Bartholomé,
Stahl & Bromme, 2004; Clarebout & Elen, 2006; 2009; Horz, Winters & Fries,
2009; Manlove, Lazonder & De Jong, 2009.
> Help systems design environments: Dworman and Rosembaun, 2004; Ellison, 2007;
Hughes, 2007; Kelleher & Pausch, 2005; Murray & VanLehn, 2005; Sampson, 2007.

3.3 User-centered design

> CALL design practices: Colpaert, 2004; Cushion & Hemard, 2003; Heift, 2006;
Hémard & Cushion, 2001; Fotos & Browne, 2004.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 253

> Participatory design: Müller, 2003; Bromberg & Henderson, 1990; Bødker, &
Iversen, 2002; Farmer, 2008; Farmer & Gruba, 2006; Könings et al., 2010,
Salman et al., 2009; Zaphiris & Zacharia, 2001.
Our review of the literature identified three main gaps regarding the lack of studies
pertaining to: 1) the listener experience, 2) design features that stimulate use, and
3) learning tasks that stimulate use. Importantly, we note that much research into
help options has been investigated through quantitative methods using non-
disruptive technologies such as tracking systems and screen capturing devices.
Although useful, we argue here that such measures do not allow for an opportunity
to ask participants if, how, and when they resort to the use of help options; that is, a
better understanding of listener reasons for use/non-use is not elicited. The questions
that guided our overall investigation included:

1. What triggers participants to use help options in a computer-based L2

listening activity?
2. What inhibits participants from using help options in a computer-based L2
listening activity?
3. What design features of help options can contribute to their use?

To answer these questions, four independent but interrelated empirical studies were
structured (Table 2). The first two studies (Study One and Study Two) sought to
explore reasons for use/non-use of help options with 15 adult learners of English
from Colombia who interacted with selected listening tasks from the Longman
English Interactiver (LEIr) program in three sessions. A series of semi-structured
interviews were audio recorded. Data were translated and coded and inter-translator
reliability established (0.95). Cyclical coding and recoding of data resulted in the
development of five themes: Relevance, Recovery, Challenge, Familiarity and
Compatibility (Appendix A).
In the two complementary studies, Study Three and Study Four, participatory
design sessions were held that consisted of eight language learners, two human-
computer interaction specialists, two language teachers and a computer pro-
grammer. To minimize issues of cultural influence, study participants were
predominantly from Colombia and all had been language learners themselves. Thus,
participatory design sessions were held in Spanish and participants evaluated three
researcher-generated paper prototypes, designed two paper prototypes (beginner and
high-intermediate) and iterated the design on paper (Study Three) and on the
computer screen (Study Four). Design outcomes and collaborative interaction
between participants were analyzed and qualities of help options were identified
across studies using software (Nvivo 8.0) to assist qualitative data analysis. Design
outcomes were presented in light of five features of design: Type, Location,
Sequence, Click-Through and Display (Appendix B). Analysis of interaction data
across studies yielded four themes: Ease of use, Learner control, Guidance and
Learning (Appendix C).1 In this paper, we focus on elements that provide repeated

1
For a thorough discussion of these findings, see Cárdenas-Claros (2011)
 254
Table 2 Summary of research design and findings in Cárdenas-Claros, (2011)

Study Aim Participants Materials Data Findings

Study One Explore help options Four L2 learners LEIr program Three semi-structured Qualitative data analysis across
use/non-use interviews studies yielded five themes:
phenomena from the Stimulated recall Relevance, Recovery,
perspective of L2 Familiarity, Challenge and
learners Compatibility.

M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

Study Two Eleven L2 learners LEIr program Six semi-structured
interviews per
participant
Stimulated recall
Study Three Explore design features Four L2 learners LEIr program One individual session Design outcomes presented in
of help options using One HCI specialist Researcher-generated Three participatory light of five features of
participatory design One L2 teacher prototypes design sessions design: Type, Location,
techniques Sequence, Click-through &
Display.
Interaction data analyzed
across studies yielded four
themes: Ease of use, Learner
control, Guidance &
Learning.
Study Four Four L2 learners LEIr program One individual session
One HCI specialist Randall’s cyber Five participatory design
listening lab sessions
One L2 teacher English listening lounge
One computer Researcher generated
programmer prototypes
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 255

and slowed audio text delivery (audio control buttons), transcribed texts, translations,
cultural notes, dictionaries, glossed words, listening tips and feedback. Captions and
subtitles, although one of the most common forms of listening assistance (Winke,
Gass & Sydorenko, 2010) were not explored because participants primarily inter-
acted with audio-only materials (on English Listening Lounger and Randall’s Cyber
Listening Labr) or with video clips that offered transcripts instead (Longman
English Interactiver).

4. The CoDe framework

As noted previously, we based the construction of this proposed framing on three

different sources: 1) results of previous research on help options in CALL, 2) find-
ings from research investigating help options/users’ assistance in interactive learning
environments, and 3) analysis of the four empirical studies conducted as part of a
doctoral study that investigated the use/non-use and design features of help options
in computer based L2 listening. Thus, our proposal is both theoretical and empirical
and consists of two components: Conceptualization (Co) and Design (De).

4.1 The conceptualization component

Acknowledging the work of Pujolà (2002) and Hegelheimer (2003), we propose four
components that set the boundaries of help options: Operational, Regulatory,
Compensatory and Explanatory. In Table 3, we set out the conceptualization
component of the framework. In the first and second columns we describe the types
of help options and their functions, focusing on the activities or actions where
learners may benefit from the use of a particular help option element. In the third
column, we explain when and/or how each type of help option is used. In particular,
we consider the moment when the option is used as it transforms original input in
order to ease comprehension, facilitate language processing, and draw the learners’
attention to key linguistic features. In the final two columns, we set out the type of
enhanced input as identified by Chapelle (2003) and how such input has been, and
can be, operationalized in CALL.

4.1.1 Component One: Operational help options. Operational help options are
designed to assist listeners to master software and hardware functions in advance of
potential problems. In general, operational help options encompass available advice
on how to run, approach and address software operations; examples of such options
include help menus, user manuals, training modules and interactive tutorials.
As we conducted Studies One and Two, we found that participants stressed the
need to include components that directed them where to click when a problem arises.
With a view to minimizing frustrations that interfere with learning, participants in
Studies Three and Four recommended that operational help options be presented at
an introductory level. At this level, participants noted, all other functions of the
program could be explained both in the target language and in the first language of
the listener. In this way, participants suggested, learners could gain familiarity with
the software as well as benefit from exposure to the target language. In the introduction
 Table 3 Conceptualization of help options in computer-based L2 listening

256
Type of help Type of
option Functions When/ how enhanced input Operationalization of help option

Operational *Addresses potential frustrations with hardware User manuals;

and software; Help menus;
*Assists the user with the functions of a computer Training modules;
program; Introductory level

M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

*Describes help options available in a program. Tutorials.

Regulatory *Affords opportunities to self-regulate In preparation for task Listening tips; Hints on strategy use
learning; demands. development; Guidance on how to
*Influences the way a task is approached; use particular help options.
*Suggests ways in which help options can be used;
*Pushes learners to find correct answers on their own. After task completion. Explanatory feedback.

Compensatory *Modifies input to make it more accessible to Aural-to-visual Modified Orthographic

the learners; modification. Audio to transcripts
*Addresses potential demands of second Audio to subtitles
language processing; Pictorial; Audio to still images;
*Affords opportunities to immediately repair Audio to video.
breakdowns in understanding.
Visual-to visual. Modified Transcript to translation.

Audio control buttons

Aural-to-aural Salient Media controller bar
modification. Variable speed playback button
Explanatory *Directs learners’ attention to key words/ Salient Explanatory hints; Hyperlinked
linguistic features of the input. elements linked to glossaries,
definitions & glossed words.

Cultural notes; Concordancers;

*Provides enriched input. Elaborated Grammar explanations; Dictionary.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 257

section of a computer-based listening resource, participants argued that listeners

should be required to complete a module that explains each option before being
allowed to access any further material.

4.1.2 Component Two: Regulatory help options. Regulatory help options, as we see
them, are designed to influence and guide listeners on how to pace their learning such
that they can adjust their behaviour in response to task demands. Sensitive to the
moment of use, we set out two types of regulatory help options: in preparation for
task demands and after task completion.
Listeners use regulatory help options in preparation for task demands as a way of
approaching texts. Instances of regulatory help options used in preparation for task
demands are listening tips, hints on strategy training and guidance on if, when, and
how to use help options. Such options, for example, provide listeners with instruc-
tions on how to proceed with learning, how to approach a task and how to attend to
focal language features. To illustrate, imagine that the goal of a lesson is to famil-
iarize students with numbers from zero to nine. Here, the task would be to listen to a
conversation and then fill in a chart with the correct phone numbers. In this instance,
a regulatory option would be presented as a listening tip to suggest listening for
specific information in the text (numbers). The listening tip would direct learners to
employ strategies that would allow for the identification of key information.
Regulatory help options used after task completion promote the self-regulation of
learning by raising the awareness of the power of self-assessment for both compre-
hension and misunderstanding. Such options go beyond traditional corrective
feedback (where answers are marked as right or wrong) as they provide listeners with
further opportunities for text comprehension, task completion and/or learning.
Instances of such regulatory help options include explanatory feedback and mes-
sages that are displayed after a listener clicks on a check or submit button.
Ideally, regulatory help options should be accessible throughout the completion of
a task. At present, we understand that regulatory options in the form of ‘interactive
hints’, for example, may be designed for reading, vocabulary and/or grammar but at
present the promise of (more) Intelligent CALL for listening is still in its infancy.
Additionally, research would be needed to clarify interactional factors and pinpoint
specific instances that require assistance. The construction of such sophisticated
options would require a substantial investment as ‘hints’ would need to be tailor-
made for each audio segment. We would argue that the mere availability of
sophisticated options would not guarantee that learners would actually use them. In
fact, throughout our studies participants noted that simultaneous interactions with
help options and aural texts placed such cognitive demands on them that they were
distracted, not assisted.

4.1.3 Component Three: Compensatory help options. Compensatory help options

assist listeners to recover from breakdowns in understanding. Such breakdowns
may result from the lack of background knowledge, frail confidence, or weak task
and software familiarity as well as low working memory capacity. To classify
compensatory help options, we argue, SLA principles of input and interaction from
an interactionist perspective (Chapelle, 2005b) are the most salient. In this view,
258 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

input undergoes three types of modification: aural-to-visual, aural-to-aural, and

visual-to-visual.
In the aural-to-visual modifications, we distinguish between pictorial (e.g., images,
video clips) and orthographic (e.g., transcripts) elements. Visual elements in the
video were used by most participants in Studies One and Two to complement their
understanding of the audio track. Some participants, however, found the images
distracting, and thus avoided watching the video. Importantly, participants noted
that they needed to have a minimum grasp of the aural text to make sense of the
video; otherwise, they thought, images could be misinterpreted and understanding
negatively affected. The participants in Study Three and Study Four found that a
transcript, one form of aural-to-visual modification, was crucial for language
development and they were keen to use it more often.
The second type of modification, aural-to-aural modification, is performed as
users replay, pause, rewind and/or forward specific or complete aural segments.
Aural-to-aural modification makes input salient in the form of repetition, and
this key feature of input is believed to push language development (Chapelle, 2003).
Such modification is operationalized as audio/video control buttons, media con-
troller bars, and variable speed playback buttons. Through these tools, learners
can pace the delivery of input in tune with their learning styles and working
memory capacity.
In a third type of modification, visual-to-visual modification, input is presented
through written texts in the target language of the user. Operationalized as native
language translation options, learners can use these modifications to comprehend the
target language, to confirm their own hypotheses and to check their understanding
of individual lexical items.

4.1.4 Component Four: Explanatory help options. Explanatory help options offer a
listener the ability to access additional information about the input rather than pre-
senting the same input in a different modality. Two functions motivate the use of
explanatory resources: to draw learner’s attention to key words/linguistic features and to
expose learners to enriched input. Hyperlinks to glossaries, definitions, and glossed
words, for example, can draw learners’ attention to specific elements of the input.
The second function of explanatory help options is that of enriching original input to
encourage learners to explore language beyond the interaction with original input.
Instances of explanatory help options that enrich input include culture notes, online-
concordances, grammar explanations, and dictionaries.
In the listening section of the LEIr program, explanatory help options are oper-
ationalized as culture notes and as an online monolingual dictionary. The cultural notes
option is presented as a separate button in the listening comprehension activities
and is available across each level of language proficiency. Participants in our studies,
particularly beginners and high-beginners, neglected the culture notes option because
they did not see an immediate relevance to make use of it for either text comprehension
or task completion. Moreover, lower proficiency listeners neglected culture notes
because they could not understand the input. Learners at the intermediate and high-
intermediate proficiency levels, however, used cultural notes to extend their under-
standing to go beyond the initial information that was available in the aural input.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 259

A software design flaw prevented the effective use of culture notes for all learners
because scrolling caused the notes to be hidden and thus neglected. In our studies, it
appeared that the benefit of accessing cultural notes was not apparent; participants in
Study Three, for example, asked for cultural notes to be better highlighted to ensure
better interaction. Listeners in Study Four recommended that the option be omitted in
designs for low proficiency learners, as a way of freeing cognitive resources for other
listening tasks.
Another explanatory component, the monolingual dictionary option, is offered in
the LEIr program. Participants found it difficult to use as it could only be accessed
through the homepage. Such poor design structure, we found, forces learners to
abandon listening exercises in order to access the in-built dictionary. Difficulties in
accessing and then trying to make use of a dictionary involved additional cognitive
demands which listeners were often unable to meet. When they did use a dictionary,
participants in our studies made an effort to exit the LEIr program and access an online
translation tool.

4.2 The Design component

The Design component of the CoDe framework was primarily, but not exclusively,
informed by the analysis of collaborative interactions between L2 learners, language
teachers, computer programmers, and HCI designers. In this section, we propose
four guidelines based on what we ourselves found and with other previous research
and principles.

4.2.1 Design Guideline One: Strive for simple and intuitive design. Our first con-
tention is that the design of help options in computer-based L2 listening should be
easy to understand regardless of previous computer experience, language proficiency
and the level of engagement with listening activities. Throughout our studies, we
found that participants too often reported problems in finding available options
because they were difficult to find and use. To illustrate, we recorded the actions
of a listener who neglected key vocabulary options because of a confusion between
links that were intended for complete units and those intended for specific listening
tasks. In another example, we saw high proficiency listeners who were unable to
access glossed words because the program first required them to open up one of the
transcripts.
To improve design, the design session professionals who participated in our studies
suggested that help options be: 1) grouped and located in a horizontal toolbar
immediately above the questions; 2) named by the function they accomplish;
3) offered in a single click, and 4) be displayed continually on the screen. Ideally, they
argued, the location of any given help option would emulate the design patterns that
have been established by major companies (e.g., Google, Apple, Microsoft) and
located horizontally along the screen. Customization by users would also be pre-
ferable. Further, the design professionals argued that options be given functional
names so that learners could anticipate what they would do once they were accessed.
Finally, learner effort and cognitive resources are likely to be wasted if options are
not a single click away and constantly displayed (Lynch & Horton, 2009).
260 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

4.2.2 Design Guideline Two: Provide different routes for interaction. Help options
need to be designed to accommodate different learner preferences and learning
styles. At present, a common flaw in help option design forces learners to make use
of a single path of interaction (Colpaert, 2004; Grgurović & Hegelheimer, 2007;
Cárdenas-Claros & Gruba, 2009). Current help option designs are not flexible
enough to cater for the different preferences and learning styles of a wide variety of
language learners.
Throughout Studies One and Two, we witnessed several listeners who missed a
number of interaction opportunities, for example, with glossed words and transla-
tion options. Students were often unable to effectively transfer classroom strategies,
such as vocabulary preview, to the computer-based environment. Confusion and
frustration were readily apparent.
Design professionals in our work made a range of specific recommendations to
foster ways to better accommodate individual preferences and learning styles. They
suggested that glossed vocabulary, for example, be accessed both within the context
of a transcript and as part of a stand-alone list. Similarly, translation options would
be better presented if they were made available in tandem with an aural text, or
placed alongside a transcript, or if possible be accessed through a combination of
these two modalities.

4.2.3 Design Guideline Three: Provide fewer, rather than more, help options. Help
options, we found, are best presented to listeners in terms of proficiency. Offering
too many options, in the hope of providing assistance ‘just in time’, seems to
unnecessarily confuse listeners and places additional cognitive demands on them.
In our studies, we found that participants at the lower proficiencies were seemingly
confronted with too many options and thus did not make effective use of them.
Design professionals recommended that ideally four or five options be made
available at each level of proficiency. Help options that are not seen to be beneficial
for learners at different stages can be removed or replaced by others. Translation
options, for example, could be offered for beginners; for other levels, transcript and
glossary options could be included in the program.

4.2.4 Design Guideline Four: Minimize potential distractions. The design of help
options should help learners to stay on task. Help options that require learners to
take a number of unnecessary steps in response to task demands creates frustration
and signals the presence of poor design practices (Colpaert, 2004; Hegelheimer &
Tower, 2004). In particular, we highlight the poor design of the dictionary option in
the LEIr program that required listeners to exit interactive activities. As a result of
the flaw, listeners opted to use an online translation tool because it was familiar, easy
to access and could be constantly displayed. Going online, and thus outside the
listening program, encouraged simultaneous interaction between the definitions and
the listening activities.
Dictionary options, design professionals suggested, could be presented in
pop-up windows and appear on the top-right-hand-side of a page. Although such
a design may cause listeners to ‘momentarily abandon’ a task to work with the
dictionary, such an interruption would not be as abrupt as exiting to work on an
 Table 4 Relationship between conceptualization and design of help options

Guideline 3: Provide
fewer, rather than
more help options
Types of help Operationalization of Guideline 1: Strive for Guideline 2: Provide different Guideline 4: Minimize
options help options simple & intuitive design routes for interaction Low p High p potential distractions

Operational Intro-level; O O O
User manual;
Training modules;

Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’

Tutorials.
Regulatory Listening tips; O O O
Hints on strategy use
development.
Explanatory O O O
feedback
Compensatory Transcript O O O
Translation O O O
AC buttons O O O
Variable speed O O O
button
Explanatory Glossed words, key O O O O
words &
vocabulary lists
Dictionary O O O
Cultural notes O O

261
262 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

entirely different page; hopefully, learners could recover more easily to then resume
task completion.

4.3 Integrating the conceptualization and design of help options

Integrated findings from four empirical studies show a relationship between the
conceptualization and the design components in our proposed CoDe framework
(Table 4). The first column of Table 4 lists the four components of the conceptual
part; the second column lists the help options suggested by design professionals.
In each of the remaining columns, we list a single design guideline of the CoDe
framework. It is worth noting that, although all of the suggested help options are
grounded in Guideline One: strive for simple and intuitive design, only a few of the
options are informed by Guideline Two: offer different routes of interaction or
Guideline Four: minimize potential distractions.
We found that only two options, ‘glossed words’ and ‘translation’, follow
Guideline Two and allow multiple routes for access. We recognize, however, that
providing varying paths to access to help options such as audio control buttons
would result in potential complexity and further distraction. Thus, simple and
intuitive design would seemingly be sacrificed. Clearly, more research into effective
help option design on this point is warranted.
Guideline Three, provide fewer, rather than more help options suggests that L2
listeners should be provided with the options they are more likely to use based on
language proficiency. Design professionals acknowledged that some help options
were more useful for learners at particular proficiencies than at others, as in the case
of translation options. Therefore, they argued that option access should differ by
language proficiency.
Although such a view addresses the concern to do with having too many options,
this guideline should be interpreted cautiously because the listeners may use a pro-
gram without training and for a short time. It is likely, though, that additional
exposure to the learning environment along with training may result in a reduction
of cognitive load without implying a further restriction of options.
With regard to Guideline Four, minimize potential distractions this is mostly
apparent in the use of a dictionary option that is offered in a separate page of
interaction. We found that listeners neglected dictionary options because they were
required to set aside productive interactions. As a result, listeners were distracted
away from the task at hand.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, we have proposed a re-conceptualization of help options in the CoDE

framework. Such a framing leads to two insights relating to both the neglected and
the indiscriminate use of help options. With regard to the former, researchers have
consistently reported an underuse or neglect (Cárdenas-Claros, 2005; Grgurović &
Hegelheimer, 2007; Hsu, 1994; Hegelheimer & Tower, 2004; Liou, 1997; Rivens
Mompean & Guichon, 2009); here, we argue that in particular regulatory and
explanatory help options tend to be the most commonly neglected. Further study,
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 263

directed at regulatory help options specifically, should be conducted in light of their

increased use throughout CALL materials.
Indiscriminate use of help options may well hinder the effective development of L2
listening skills; that is, beyond their utility for immediate task completion, only
participants at the high levels of proficiency could make a link between computer-
based learning and real-world application. If a poor transference between modalities
persists, listeners run the risk of misusing help options. At present, it appears as
if only regulatory help options prepare learners to work with real world materials.
To improve the utility of help options to support autonomous learning, for example,
we would argue that students need to be better directed to make links between
assistance and future usages of a particular aspect of listening.

6. Pedagogical implications

In this section, we argue that our proposed CoDe framework could well serve as a
roadmap in the CALL classroom to train L2 listeners to make better use of help
options; in particular, we would like to encourage learners to use in-built computer
resources for purposes beyond immediate task completion and/or text comprehension.
Clearly, the potential of help elements for learning should be emphasized through sys-
tematic reflection on the part of learners as well as structured guidance from CALL
instructors. A frequent discussion of mutual experiences, we believe, may lead to a shift
in the misconceptions often associated with help option use/non-use.
We understand that our proposed design guidelines in the CoDe framework do not
ensure that listeners will use the help options as intended, but we hope that their
implementation may ease some of the usability issues that have been reported in the
literature. We view the guidelines as an initial effort to reconcile the oft-recurring
debate between ‘usability’ and ‘learnability’, and hope to encourage the classroom
teacher to take a more central role in leading students towards the discovery of ways
that may allow them to make better use of help options.

7. Limitations and avenues for further research

Our work in developing the CoDe framework was based on qualitative studies.
We consciously sought to pursue an agenda that recognized the learner voice in use/
non-use of help options. Specifically, our analyses were grounded in the relatively
short interactions of fifteen adult Colombian learners of English with a particular
piece of software. Through quantitative procedures, a next step in the development
would be to refine and validate the proposed framework.
Once an empirical research design was constructed that identified key variables
(e.g., time of access, purpose of access, frequency of access), interaction data with
learners and help options could focus on the role of different native languages,
different target second languages and different types of software packages. Longi-
tudinal studies, perhaps embedded in a curriculum in which computer-based L2
listening played a big part, could offer opportunities to expand the CoDe frame-
work. Extrapolating the four-part classification of help options to language skills
other than listening would be another avenue worth exploring.
264 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

In our proposal, we sought to address aspects of visual design and interaction.

Whether and how our suggested guidelines contribute to L2 listening development
remains speculative. Can learning be made more effective, in measurable terms, on
the basis of improved software design? We are cautious of making strong claims, and
take note of Garrett (2009):
‘‘The availability of tools [y] does not guarantee that students will, in fact, use
them in the way or to the extent that developers intend; only careful structured
assignments and follow up work can effectively promote such use’’ (op. cit.: 277).
To conclude, it is teacher and learner training that is paramount in promoting usable
design and fostering meaningful contributions to language learning.

References
Aleven, V., McLaren, B., Roll, I., Koedinger, K. and Lester, P. (2004) Toward tutoring help
seeking applying cognitive modeling to meta-cognitive skills. Paper presented at the Intelligent
Tutoring Systems: 7th International Conference, ITS 2004, Maceió, Alagoas, Brazil.
Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F. and Wallace, R. (2003) Help seeking and help
design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(3): 277–320.
Bartholomé, T., Stahl, E. and Bromme, R. (2004) Help-seeking in interactive learning environ-
ments: effectiveness of help and learner-related factors in a dyadic setting. Paper presented at
the Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Learning sciences: Embracing
diversity in the learning sciences, Mahwah, NJ.
Bødker, S. and Iversen, O. S. (2002) Staging a professional participatory design practice:
moving PD beyond the initial fascination of user involvement. Proceedings of the second
Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction, 11–18.
Brett, P. (1995) Multimedia for listening comprehension: The design of a multimedia-based
resource for developing listening skills. System, 23(1): 77–85.
Brett, P. (1996) Using multimedia: an investigation of learners’ attitudes. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 9(2): 191–212.
Brett, P. (1997) A comparative study of the effects of the use of multimedia on listening
comprehension. System, 25(1): 39–53.
Brett, P. (2000) Integrating multimedia into the Business English curriculum: a case study.
English for Specific Purposes, 19(3): 269–290.
Bromberg, J. L. and Henderson, A. (1990) Reflections on participatory design: lessons from
the trillium experience. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in com-
puting systems: Empowering people, 353–360.
Cárdenas-Claros, M. S. (2005) Field Dependence/Field Independence: How do students
perform in CALL-based listening activities? Unpublished M.A. thesis, Iowa State University,
Ames, IA.
Cárdenas-Claros, M. (2011) A preliminary framework of help options in computer-based
second language listening. Unpublished PhD thesis. School of Language and Linguistics,
Faculty of Arts, The University of Melbourne.
Cárdenas-Claros, M. and Gruba, P. (2009) Help options in CALL: A systematic review.
CALICO Journal, 27(1): 69–90.
Chapelle, C. (2003) English language learning and technology: Lectures on applied linguistics in
the age of information and communication technology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chapelle, C. (2005) CALICO at center stage: Our emerging rights and responsibilities.
CALICO Journal, 23(1): 5–15.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 265

Chapelle, C. (2005) Interactionist SLA theory in CALL research. In: Egbert, J. and Pettrie, G. M.
(eds.), CALL research perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates, 53–64.
Chapelle, C. A. (2009) The Relationship Between Second Language Acquisition Theory and
Computer-Assisted Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93: 741–753.
Chun, D. and Payne, J. S. (2004) What makes students click: Working memory and look-up
behavior. System, 32(4): 481–503.
Chun, D. M. and Plass, J. L. (1996) Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary
acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80(2): 183–198.
Clarebout, G. and Elen, J. (2006) Tool use in computer-based learning environments: Towards
a research framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3): 389–411.
Clarebout, G. and Elen, J. (2009) Benefits of inserting support devices in electronic learning
environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4): 804–810.
Colpaert, J. (2004) Design of online interactive language courseware: Conceptualization,
specifications and prototyping. Research into the impact of linguistic-didactic functionality on
software architecture. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.
Cushion, S. and Hémard, D. (2003) Designing a CALL package for Arabic while learning the
language ab initio. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(2): 259–266.
Dworman, G. and Rosenbaum, S. (2004) Helping users to use help: improving interaction with
help systems. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, 1717–1718.
Ellison, M. (2007) Embedded user assistance: The future for software help? Interactions, 14(1):
30–31.
Farmer, R. (2008) A conceptual framework for situated task analysis within the context of
Computer Assisted Language Learning System Design. Unpublished PhD thesis, The
University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Farmer, R. and Gruba, P. (2006) Towards model-driven end-user development in CALL.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(2): 149–191.
Flowerdew, J. and Miller, L. (2005) Second Language Listening: Theory and Practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fotos, S. and Browne, S. (2004) New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms.
Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Garrett, N. (2009) Computer Assisted Language Learning Trends and Issues Revisited:
Integrating Innovation. The Modern Language Journal, 93: 719–740.
Grgurović, M. and Hegelheimer, V. (2007) Help options and multimedia listening: Student’s
use of subtitles and transcripts. Language Learning & Technology, 11(1): 45–66.
Hegelheimer, V. (2003) Help options in CALL. Paper presented at the Conference on Technology
for SLL, Ames, IA.
Hegelheimer, V. and Tower, D. (2004) Using CALL in the classroom: Analyzing student
interactions in an authentic classroom. System, 32(2): 185–205.
Heift, T. (2006) Context-sensitive Help in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
19(2): 243–259.
Hémard, D. and Cushion, S. (2001) Evaluation of a Web-based language learning environ-
ment: the importance of a user-centred design approach for CALL. ReCALL, 13(1): 15–31.
Hernández, S. S. (2004) The Effects of Video and Captioned Text and the Influence of Verbal
and Spatial Abilities on Second Language Listening Comprehension in a Multimedia
Learning Environment. Unpublished PhD thesis, New York University, New York.
Horz, H., Winters, C. and Fries, S. (2009) Differential benefits of situated instructional
prompts. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4): 818–828.
Hoven, D. (1999) A model for listening and viewing comprehension in multimedia environments.
Language Learning & Technology, 3(1): 88–103.
266 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

Hoven, D. (2003) Strategic uses of CALL: What learners use and how they react. Australian
Review of Applied Linguistics, 17: 125–148.
Hsu, J. (1994) Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL): The effect of ESL students’ use
of interactional modifications on listening comprehension. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation.
Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
Hubbard, P. (2001) The use and abuse of meaning technologies. Contact, 27: 8–86.
Hubbard, P. (2006) Evaluating CALL software. In: Ducate, L. and Arnold, N. (eds.), Calling
on CALL: from theory and research to new direction in foreign language teaching (Vol. 5).
San Marcos, Texas: CALICO Monograph series, 313–338.
Hubbard, P. (2004) Learner training for effective use of CALL. In: Fotos, S. and Browne, C.
(eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms. Mahwah, New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 45–68.
Hughes, M. (2007) A pattern language for user assistance. Interactions, 14(1): 27–29.
Jones, L. C. (2003) Supporting listening comprehension and vocabulary acquisition with
multimedia annotations: the students’ voice. CALICO Journal, 21(1): 41–65.
Jones, L. C. (2006) Effects of collaboration and multimedia annotations on vocabulary
learning and listening comprehension. CALICO Journal, 24(1): 33–58.
Jones, L. C. (2009) Supporting Student Differences in Listening Comprehension and Vocabulary
Learning with Multimedia Annotations. CALICO Journal, 26(2): 23.
Jones, L. and Plass, J. (2002) Supporting listening comprehension and vocabulary
acquisition in French with multimedia annotations. The Modern Language Journal, 86(4):
546–561.
Kelleher, C. and Pausch, R. (2005) Stencil-based tutorials: Design and evaluation. Portland,
OR: ICH.
Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwelb, S. and van Merrienboerb, J. (2010) An approach to parti-
cipatory instructional design in secondary education: an exploratory study. Educational
Research, 52(1): 45–59.
Levy, M. and Stockwell, G. (2006) Call Dimensions: Options and issues in computer assisted
language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
Lin, M. and Chen, T. (2009) The impact of an online explicit lexical program on EFL
vocabulary gains and listening comprehension. JALTCALL, 5(2): 3–14.
Liou, H. C. (1997) Research of on-line help as learner strategies for multimedia CALL eva-
luation. CALICO Journal, 14(2–4): 81–96.
Liou, H. (2000) Assessing learner strategies using computers: new insights and limitations.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(1): 65–78.
Lynch, P. J. and Horton, S. (2009) Web style guide: Basic design principles for creating web
sites. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lynch, T. (2009) Teaching Second Language Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Manlove, S., Lazonder, A. W. and De Jong, T. (2009) Trends and issues of regulative support
use during inquiry learning: Patterns from three studies. Computers in Human Behavior,
25(4): 795–803.
Müller, M. (2003) Participatory design: The third space in human-computer interaction. In:
Jacko, J. and Sears, A. (eds.), The Human-Computer Interaction handbook. New Jersey:
Lawrence Elbaum Associates, 1051–1068.
Murray, R. C. and VanLehn, K. (2005) Effects of dissuading unnecessary help requests while pro-
viding proactive help. Paper presented at the Artificial Intelligence in Education conference, Berlin.
Nvivo, Version 8.0 (2008) [Computer program]: QSR international.
Pujolà, J. (2002) CALLing for help: researching language learning strategies using help
facilities in a web-based multimedia program. ReCALL, 14(2): 235–262.
 Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’ 267

Ramirez, D. and Alonso, I. (2007) Using digital stories to improve listening comprehension
with Spanish young learners of English. Language Learning & Technology, 11(1): 87–101.
Rivens Mompean, A. and Guichon, N. (2009) Assessing the use of aids for computer-mediated
tasks: taking notes while listening. JaltCALL, 5(2): 45–60.
Robin, R. (2007) Commentary: Learner-based listening and technology authenticity.
Language Learning & Technology, 11(1): 109–115.
Rost, M. (2002) Teaching and researching listening. England: Pearson Education.
Rost, M. (2006) Areas of research that influence L2 listening instruction. In: Uso-Juan, E. and
Martinez Flor, A. (eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language
skills (Vol. 47–73). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Rost, M. (2007) I am only trying to help: A role for interventions in teaching listening.
Language Learning & Technology, 11(1): 102–108.
Salman, Y. B., Ince, I. F., Kim, J. Y., Cheng, H. I. and Yildirim, M. E. (2009) Participatory
design and evaluation of e-learning system for Korean language training. Paper presented at
the 2nd International Conference on Interaction Sciences: Information Technology, Culture
and Human Factors. Seoul, Korea: ACM Press.
Sampson, F. (2007) Who you gonna call? Interactions, 14(1): 22–23.
Sun, F. (2010) Research on the effect on listening comprehension using Computer Assisted Language
Learning. Paper presented at the Computer Engineering and Technology conference, Chengdu.
Vandergrift, L. (2007) Recent developments in second and foreign language listening
comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40(3): 191–210.
Vanderplank, R. (2009) Déjà vu? A decade of research on language laboratories, television
and video in language learning. Language Teaching, 43(1): 1–37.
Weinberg, A. (2002) Virtual misadventures: technical problems and student satisfaction when
implementing multimedia in an advanced French listening comprehension course. CALICO
Journal, 19(2): 331–357.
Winke, P., Gass, S. and Sydorenko, T. (2010) The effects of captioning videos used for foreign
language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1): 65–86.
Zaphiris, P. and Zacharia, G. (2001) Design methodology of an online greek language course.
Paper presented at the CHI0 01 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems,
Seattle, WA., 103–114.
268 M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba

Appendix A

Definition of themes and factors

Theme Factor Definition

Relevance Text comprehension Whether and how the use of help options facilitate
the understanding of aural input
Task completion The degree of perceived relevance of help option
use for completing comprehension activities
Language learning The notion that the use of help options is
conducive to improving other language skills or
sub-skills
Real-life language use The way listeners see that help options usage may
relate to real life communication contexts
Challenge Self-initiative The use/non-use of help options to increase the
perceived difficulty of an aural text
Self-reliance The participant’s reluctance to admit lack of
understanding of an aural text
Recovery Self-aware limitation Conscious perception on behalf of the learner that
factor help option use may compensate for self-
perceived difficulties of aural input
comprehension
Technical issues A learner’s use/ non-use of help options to
compensate for technical difficulties while
interacting with aural texts
Working memory Notion that help options usage compensates for
limitations deficiencies in short-term memory span
Confirmation The use of help options to compensate for the lack
of confidence in an aspect of language learning
Familiarity Experience Prior experience or lack thereof to use help
options in other language settings
Software Design A listener’s lack of familiarity with the interface
design elements
Compatibility Distraction A shift in attention from the aural input to other
features of the software as a result of help
option use
Mismatch The acknowledgment that the ephemeral and fast-
paced nature of aural input constrains
simultaneous interaction with help options

Study Three and Four: Summary of findings - design outcomes
Features of design & definition
Design elements
Type
The number and kind of help
options L2 learners consider
relevant for comprehension in
computer-based listening as
measured by L2 proficiency
Location
The tentative position where help
options are placed on the
interface with reference to
other design elements
Sequence
The order in which help options
are presented with reference to
other help options. Help
options on the left are seen as
more relevant for
comprehension than those on
the right
Click-through
The numbers of steps a user takes
to access help options
Display
The visual presentation of help
options in the program. That is
buttons, tabs, and pop-ups and
how their input is displayed
Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’
Appendix B
Study Three
Video, questions and help
options toolbar
Exclusive to low proficiencies:
translation options
Across proficiencies:
transcripts, glossary, cultural
notes, listening tips and
audio/video control bar
Exclusive to high proficiencies:
dictionary
Video located in Frame 4
Questions located in Frame 5
Help options grouped as a
horizontal toolbar located
along Frames 2 and 3
Dictionary as a button in the
toolbar (Frame 2)
Transcript, glossary, cultural
notes, listening tips and
translations
Translation options are offered
on the far right
Transcripts antecedes glossary
options
Help options presented
one click- away from
the user
Help options presented in pop-
ups that open in Frame 6
Glossary and translation
options open from the
transcript and the toolbar
269
Study Four
Video, questions, help options
toolbar and keywords panel
Exclusive to low proficiencies:
translation options
Across proficiencies: transcript,
glossary, listening tips,
dictionary, keywords panel
and variable speed playback
button
Exclusive to high proficiencies:
cultural notes
Video located in Frame 4
Questions located in Frame 5
Help options grouped in as
horizontal menu located along
Frames 2 and 3
Dictionary as a search box
(Frame 3)
Listening tips, cultural notes,
transcript, glossary and
translation
Translation options are offered
on the far right
Transcripts antecedes glossary
options
Help options presented one click
away from the user
Help options presented in tabs
that open in Frame 5
Glossary and translation options
open from the transcript and
the toolbar

Study Three and Four: Summary of findings-Interaction data
Ease of use
Type
Location Locating help options in
intuitive places,
familiar to most users.
Help options grouped in
a toolbar and locate it
along Frames 2 & 3
Sequence
Appendix C
Learner control
Software decides beforehand what
options are available for use
based on language proficiency
only. This does not recognize that
learners vary greatly even if they
share a similar proficiency level
Having help options in a fixed
location gives learners
confidence regarding what they
can/cannot do with the software
270
Guidance Learning
*Limiting the number of help
options based on L2 proficiency
M. S. Cardenas-Claros and P. A. Gruba
to avoid information overload.
*Retrieving and/or replacing help
options as learners advance in
language proficiency
*Designing help options that can
be manipulated to
accommodate learners at
different proficiencies
As help options are visible Having help options visible at all
at all times learners may times so that learners don’t waste
be tempted to use help time locating them, thus, freeing
options indiscriminately. important cognitive resources.
Presenting help options in Pushing learners to use help
the order of perceived options that do not directly aid
assistance for learning text comprehension.
Listening tips as a first Translation is key for
option to guide learners comprehension, therefore it
towards listening skills should be offered as a last
development. option
Translation as a last option
to guide learners towards
language development
 Appendix C Continued

Click-through Offering help options a Naming help options by the Having help options visible at all
click away from the function they accomplish, times so that learners don’t
user instead of presenting them only waste time locating them, thus,
embedded through other freeing important cognitive
options. resources that can be used
for learning.
Display Using design Making help options accessible Designing help options in Offering help options that open in
conventional through different routes of tabs that forces a fixed a single interaction page, to

Decoding the ‘‘CoDe’’

interaction as in the case of path of interaction minimize the potential number
glossary and translation of distractions and to help
options. learners stay on task

271
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.