Text ************** [yes!] ‘reconstruction’ (TR) programs allow the user to input a text, which gets turned into symbols, such as stars, where each symbol represents a character in the text. The idea is that, having initially read through the original text, learners try and reconstruct it by entering a word at a time that they think is contained within the text. If their guess is correct, all instances of that word are shown, until all words are revealed.
There are different versions of this, and the one shown above [esl.fis.edu] provides a clue to the learner when they hover over a word by giving the initial letter of that word, which may be very handy after the fifth attempt of guessing it! It also shows a running score, which is incremented per correctly guessed character. However, the given website looks outdated, which is unfortunately a recurrent theme in many of these websites.
Nonetheless, there are many advantages of using TR. ‘Text reconstruction programs call upon a wide range of skills. The student not only has to apply his/her knowledge of grammar and vocabulary but also common sense and general knowledge . . . they encourage learners to think, work out their own strategies and to search and use their store of linguistic knowledge’, Davies (1988: 36).
However, TR tasks can be difficult to complete, if it is done without a suitable pre-task, such as predicting the content of the text from its title, and is limited in benefit if not followed by a post-activity, such as summarising the text. It also lacks communicative purpose if done in isolation. In order to tackle this issue, the text used should be authentic and appealing to the learners, who may then be motivated to discuss the topic in hand.
Regrettably, I haven’t used a TR program in my teaching, thus far, but I can see good potential of a fun and challenging way to engage learners with it. Please let me know if any of you have used it in class and how it was received.
Some further reading:
Brett, P. (1994). Using text reconstruction software. ELT Journal, 48(4), 329-336.
Davies, G. (1988). CALL software development. Computers in Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching: A CALL Handbook. Frankfurt am Main, 29-47.
Storch, N. (1998). A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal, 52(4), 291-300.
Technology in TESOL 
I thought it was more complex than that. Does the user input the text or is the application pre-programmed with a specific text chosen by a teacher for the students to use? I like these programs, but I do think they look dated and off-putting for students.
If given a fresh modern look, I would enjoy using them with students, but then maybe the way it looks isn’t everything. The user-interface is simple and students with very limited knowledge of the English language can guide themselves through the website and use it.
LikeLike
The website I linked provides a few ready-to-go texts to choose from but you can click on ‘Own text’ to easily paste in a text of your choice – in the given text box.
Yes, I also wish these websites looked better and more modern. An option to set an image or two would also help to create context. Please let us know if anyone comes across a better TR website.
LikeLike