Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Oklahoma State University's German by Satellite program employs a telecommunications satellite as a conduit to provide equal access to an educational opportunity primarily for rural and economically disadvantaged schools. This cost-effective German-language program differs from conventional language instruction via radio or television because every student uses a personal computer as a major pedagogical tool. Since coordinating teachers at the receiving sites generally do not know the German language, the computer assists the teacher in involving each student in the instructional process. Every student is presented with goal-oriented tasks that require inventing German sentences, solving language problems, and responding to cultural and political aspects of German-speaking countries. In all of its facets, the German by Satellite program is a complex design by which a university professor in cooperation with a high school teacher can guide students to be actively and successfully involved in attaining a basic level of global language proficiency in German.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Harry Wohlert , “German by Satellite: Technology-Enhanced Distance Learning,” in Modern Technology in Foreign Language Education: Applications and Projects, ed. William Flint Smith (Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook, 1989), pp. 201-210.

2. B. Secter , “Small-Town Schools Get on the Beam,” Los Angeles Times, 4 Nov. 1987.

3. T. V. Higgs and R. Clifford , “The Push toward Communication,” in Curriculum, Competence, and the Foreign Language Teacher, ed. T. V. Higgs (Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook, 1982), p. 72.

4. John F. Lalande II , “Inquiries into the Teaching of German Grammar,” Die Unterrichtspraxis, 23(1):30-41 (Spring 1990).

5. Gerald Bracey , “Results of Cognition Research Could Help Improve Educational Software,” Electronic Learning, 4(9):18 (Jan. 1990).

6. Higgs and Clifford , “Push toward Communications,” p. 73.

7. Ibid., p. 70.

8. R. L. De Bruyn , “How We Control Academic Achievement,” The Master Teacher, 20(17):1 (Jan. 1989).

Z. Mevarech et al , “To Cooperate or Not to Cooperate in CAI: That Is the Question,” Journal of Educational Research, 80(3):164-167 (Jan.-Feb. 1987).

10.

10. Del Marie Rysavy , “Frequency and Spacing of Drill and Practice in the Learning of Verbal Information Using a Computer-Based Drill” (Paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Anaheim, CA, Jan. 1990).

11.

11. H. Ritchie and T. J. Newby , “Classroom Lecture/Discussion vs. Live Televised Instruction: A Comparison of Effects on Student Performance, Attitude, and Interaction,” American Journal of Distance Education, 3(3):42 (1989).

12.

12. Vernon Florence , “Comparing Learning by Satellite Classes from OSU and Traditional Classes” (Paper delivered at the annual Learning by Satellite Conference, Tulsa, OK, Apr. 1987).