Dr Nancy Tille-Victorica

1. Your professional interests span second language acquisition, instructional technology and literature in language education. How has your experience of teaching languages from beginning through advanced levels shaped the way you approach new technologies in the classroom?
Over more than a decade of teaching French and Spanish from beginning through advanced levels, as well as Hispanic and Francophone literatures, I have learned that technology needs to serve different purposes depending on students’ proficiency and the course objectives. Beginning learners may benefit from targeted practice and immediate feedback, while more advanced students can use digital resources to deepen their engagement with language, literature, and cultural context. I therefore approach new technologies with both curiosity and caution, asking what students are ready to do independently and what the technology genuinely adds to their learning.

2. Much of the discussion around generative AI in language education has focused on advanced learners. What led you to explore its potential specifically with first-semester Spanish students?
Beginning language students are already encountering generative AI, whether or not we formally introduce it in our courses. That made me interested in exploring whether we could teach students to use it responsibly from the beginning, rather than simply prohibiting it or waiting until they reach a higher proficiency level. First-semester students are particularly interesting because their linguistic resources are still very limited. I wanted to investigate whether carefully structured AI use could provide meaningful support while still requiring students to do the essential work of learning and producing the language themselves.

3. Your LERC2026 study emphasises structured and reflective AI use rather than simply giving students access to generative AI tools. What does effective scaffolding look like when learners are still developing foundational language knowledge?
For beginning learners, I believe the boundaries need to be very explicit. In my study, students were not simply told to “use ChatGPT.” They first completed their own work and could then use AI for specific, limited purposes, such as clarifying a word, phrase, or sentence or checking language they had produced themselves. They retained their original work alongside any AI-assisted corrections and reflected on the feedback they received. Effective scaffolding, for me, means keeping the learner responsible for understanding, producing, and evaluating the language, rather than allowing the technology to do that work for them.

4. Your revised study focuses particularly on reading and writing development. Where do you see the greatest pedagogical potential of generative AI in supporting these skills, and where should teachers remain cautious?
I see particular potential in the individualized support and feedback generative AI can provide. In writing, it can help students notice and understand patterns in their errors, while in reading it can help them work through difficult words, phrases, or sentences without interpreting an entire text for them. I also see considerable potential for speaking and listening practice, particularly because speaking is often one of the most challenging skills for beginning learners. I collected oral-production data as part of this study and hope to explore that dimension further. Across all skills, however, AI should support rather than replace the cognitive and linguistic work students need to do themselves.

5. As generative AI becomes increasingly embedded in education, what would you most like language teachers attending LERC2026 to consider before deciding how or whether to integrate it into beginning-level language courses?
I would encourage teachers to begin with the learning objective rather than with the technology. The question should not be “How can I use AI in this course?” but “Is there a specific learning need that AI can help students address without replacing the learning itself?” We also need to consider what beginning learners are capable of evaluating independently, since they may not yet recognize inaccurate or inappropriate output. Our role is increasingly to teach students not only how to use these tools responsibly, but also when not to use them.