Philosophy of Teaching with Technology
Technology is a ubiquitous feature of our daily lives, more so now than ever before. Teaching English in different contexts will require the use of technology in many and various ways. Younger learners may be highly fluent with technology, and may expect to use it in the classroom. Teaching English online through various different mediums is also becoming more popular. On the other end of the spectrum, certain teaching environments may have limited or no access to computers or other technologies that could assist the language learning process. Developing effective pedagogical practices will help teachers in both environments, and will help them develop sound activities incorporate technology for the purposes of language learning.
The most important consideration in combining technology with language learning is to ensure that the use of technology supports the language learning goals of any particular class. Technology should never be incorporated simply for the "wow" factor, but should support language learning activities. For instance, I have incorporated the use of mini-voice recorders in my Listening and Speaking classes. Tasks have involved replaying and listening to students' own voices, analyzing their own speech for pronunciation or other language features, encouraging language output and production, and assessing general comprehensibility. The tasks developed to support language learning goals should incorporate technology that also serves those goals. Developing tasks for the sake of using new or trendy technologies is not justifiable.
The technology chosen should be relatively straightforward to learn and apply, both for the teacher and the learners. As DuBravac (2013) states, "students should be able to focus on the language learning activities without having to troubleshoot the software" (p. 27). It may be beneficial to choose software or technological applications that students are already familiar with and can negotiate with confidence, so that extra time is not spent teaching the technology, rather than the language. However, teachers should not expect technology to work all the time, and must have a back-up plan to deal with breakdowns or snafus that are beyond the teacher's control. Additionally, when using new software or applications, the teacher should carefully structure the instruction, and incorporate thorough scaffolding and practice for the technological tools being utilized. Teachers also need to "realize and communicate to students that technical problems are not a reflection of students' poor linguistic skills," (Hampel, 2006).
The learners' needs and background should also be taken into consideration. In teaching English for vocational purposes, students may need to develop not only knowledge of different technologies, but the language used to talk about them. For instance, English learners hoping to work in secretarial positions will need to operate and discuss different computer applications than will English language learners studying to become air traffic controllers. In English for Academic Purposes settings--or other programs where students advance through different levels of instruction--the technology used should be standardized as much as possible across the different levels of instruction so that students and teachers can focus on the language being learned, rather than on negotiating the technology.
When designing tasks and activities, teachers need to realize that the medium of communication will change the nature of the communication. Task design should reflect this, and teachers may need to plan in extra time to discuss the pragmatics of communicating through new mediums. Hampel points out that utilizing audio-conferencing tools without a visual component reduced the amount of communication and interaction between participants, as they could not rely on body language or other visual cues to determine when to take turns. Teachers can set up rules or expectations for turn-taking in these situations, and enforce these with their students. Teachers may also need training when using synchronous or asynchronous CMC to become effective conversational moderators and guide their students to effective output and production. Students may also approach different mediums with different goals than their teachers. For instance, students utilizing blogging tools may see the blog as a medium for self-expression, rather than as a medium to interact with their peers or negotiate meaning as their teachers intend. When designing tasks, teachers need to take these things into account and adjust for them.
Different student and teacher populations will have different levels of familiarity and comfort with technology. These need to be considered when designing tasks incorporating technology for language teaching purposes. Both teachers and students need the proper training to utilize technology, but teachers also need training to understand how different mediums change communication, and for assessing which technological applications can be adapted for different educational purposes, or for teaching the different skills. Finally, technology cannot replace good teaching practices, but should supplement them.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Utilizing Digital Storytelling in a Language Lesson
Homework: Utilize Digital Storytelling in a Language Lesson.
I noticed that in our digital storytelling application, xtranormal.com, the characters had very little emotion in their voices. I decided to use this as a jump-off point to create a drama lesson about vocal expression.
PIE has a drama elective for Level 5 students. Many times, students are nervous about speakig in public, and often don't understand the idea of "getting into character." I created a digital story about a vacationing couple discussing whether to ride a roller coaster. The woman is very excited about the roller coaster; her husband hates it.
In the lesson, the teacher uses this video and directs students' attention to the characters' voices. The teacher asks student to listen and see if they can tell which character is excited, and which is frightened. Since students are at differing proficiency levels with listening comprehension in Level 5, some students may have understood the words and will be able to answer the question based on the spoken content. Some students will not have understood much, and would have needed to rely on other features in the language such as speed and intonation, which are mostly absent.
After listening, the teacher elicits student responses, and points out that when normal people speak, they have expression. The teacher plays back the first few exchanges between the man and woman, and demonstrates how to say each phrase with more expression (faster rate, intonation, etc.) to make it sound more realistic. The teacher then passes out a transcript of the conversation and has ss listen while they read along. The teacher can stop after key points in the dialogue and ask ss whether the voice reflected the emotion of the character. For instance, how do you sound when you are excited about something? Do you speak slowly? Afterwards, students practice reading the dialogue aloud to each other, practicing appropriate expression.
The next part of the lesson would need to be conducted in a language lab, or adapted to the availability of compatible technology in the classroom setting. The teacher can either use one computer and have the students take turns, or s/he can have each student sit at an individual computer in the computer lab to record their voices. I think the first option might be more convenient, as the teacher would not have to teach the students how to use the application. S/he would just have to call each student to the computer to record their part.
Either pair students, assign roles, and have them record their dialogue into the application (using appropriate intonation, stress, and expression), or have each student record one part of the dialogue, eventually recording the entire dialogue with different voices. The students can listen to the lines recorded previously and respond with the type of vocal expression they think is appropriate.
Here is a link to the video I created:
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/14153917/not-the-roller-coaster
Here is a transcript of the dialogue:
Woman: Wow! That roller coaster was fun! Did you like it?
Man: No! That was horrible! I never, NEVER want to go on a roller coaster ever again!
Woman: But why not? Roller coasters are the most fun. Wheeeeeee! Come on; let's go on it again.
Man: No way! Are you crazy?
Woman: Come on, come on, come on come on come on come on come on!!!
Man: Stop it! I don't want to go. Leave me alone.
Woman: Oh, come on. You know you enjoyed it.
Man: I DID NOT! I hated it! Aren't you listening to me?
Woman: I don't know what you're talking about. You were laughing the whole time.
Man: I was not laughing. I was screaming.
Woman: Hum. Well then, I'll go on it by myself. Bye!
Man: Wait. You're going to leave me here alone?
Woman: Yes, Sweetie. You can just wait here. All alone. All by yourself.
Man: Um... But I don't like being on my own.
Woman: Oh, you can handle it. You're a grown up. Okay, I'm going now. Going to the roller coaster.
Man: But...
Woman: Yes?
Man: Um...
Woman: Yes?
Man: Okay, I'll go with you.
Woman: Oh! Excellent! This is going to be so much fun. Here we go!
Man: Oh no... Not again...
I noticed that in our digital storytelling application, xtranormal.com, the characters had very little emotion in their voices. I decided to use this as a jump-off point to create a drama lesson about vocal expression.
PIE has a drama elective for Level 5 students. Many times, students are nervous about speakig in public, and often don't understand the idea of "getting into character." I created a digital story about a vacationing couple discussing whether to ride a roller coaster. The woman is very excited about the roller coaster; her husband hates it.
In the lesson, the teacher uses this video and directs students' attention to the characters' voices. The teacher asks student to listen and see if they can tell which character is excited, and which is frightened. Since students are at differing proficiency levels with listening comprehension in Level 5, some students may have understood the words and will be able to answer the question based on the spoken content. Some students will not have understood much, and would have needed to rely on other features in the language such as speed and intonation, which are mostly absent.
After listening, the teacher elicits student responses, and points out that when normal people speak, they have expression. The teacher plays back the first few exchanges between the man and woman, and demonstrates how to say each phrase with more expression (faster rate, intonation, etc.) to make it sound more realistic. The teacher then passes out a transcript of the conversation and has ss listen while they read along. The teacher can stop after key points in the dialogue and ask ss whether the voice reflected the emotion of the character. For instance, how do you sound when you are excited about something? Do you speak slowly? Afterwards, students practice reading the dialogue aloud to each other, practicing appropriate expression.
The next part of the lesson would need to be conducted in a language lab, or adapted to the availability of compatible technology in the classroom setting. The teacher can either use one computer and have the students take turns, or s/he can have each student sit at an individual computer in the computer lab to record their voices. I think the first option might be more convenient, as the teacher would not have to teach the students how to use the application. S/he would just have to call each student to the computer to record their part.
Either pair students, assign roles, and have them record their dialogue into the application (using appropriate intonation, stress, and expression), or have each student record one part of the dialogue, eventually recording the entire dialogue with different voices. The students can listen to the lines recorded previously and respond with the type of vocal expression they think is appropriate.
Here is a link to the video I created:
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/14153917/not-the-roller-coaster
Here is a transcript of the dialogue:
Woman: Wow! That roller coaster was fun! Did you like it?
Man: No! That was horrible! I never, NEVER want to go on a roller coaster ever again!
Woman: But why not? Roller coasters are the most fun. Wheeeeeee! Come on; let's go on it again.
Man: No way! Are you crazy?
Woman: Come on, come on, come on come on come on come on come on!!!
Man: Stop it! I don't want to go. Leave me alone.
Woman: Oh, come on. You know you enjoyed it.
Man: I DID NOT! I hated it! Aren't you listening to me?
Woman: I don't know what you're talking about. You were laughing the whole time.
Man: I was not laughing. I was screaming.
Woman: Hum. Well then, I'll go on it by myself. Bye!
Man: Wait. You're going to leave me here alone?
Woman: Yes, Sweetie. You can just wait here. All alone. All by yourself.
Man: Um... But I don't like being on my own.
Woman: Oh, you can handle it. You're a grown up. Okay, I'm going now. Going to the roller coaster.
Man: But...
Woman: Yes?
Man: Um...
Woman: Yes?
Man: Okay, I'll go with you.
Woman: Oh! Excellent! This is going to be so much fun. Here we go!
Man: Oh no... Not again...
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Blog Post #4
Blog Post #4?
I'm losing track of my blog posts. It has
taken me some time to figure out how to get into the blog to make posts.
It seems so easy! And yet it is not...
This week in class, Erin Aldrich presented on how
to adapt the google application My Maps to use in the classroom. I
thought she had some fun suggestions, such as doing restaurant reviews.
We also got to explore Google Docs. I found the mind-mapping activity
quite enjoyable. I enjoyed the creative aspect of it--messing with colors and
shapes and squiggles--and it was interesting to be creating a document in real
time with other students. There was an element of spontaneity to it that
I found refreshing. Also, developing a document to outline the mind map
happened extremely quickly! This could be efficacious in a classroom
environment when developing study guides or other collaborative documents.
There were also several concerns that need to be
addressed. Cynthia and I were partners for this activity, and I'd say
that neither of us is as intuitive with technology as others in the class.
We needed more direction and it took us longer to get started.
Someone wrote "Conspicuously Blank" in our section, which I
thought was rather funny since I am highly self-conscious of my
behind-the-times technological expertise and like to poke fun at myself for it.
However, in another setting and with other students, these types of
comments, spontaneously written and as easily deleted with no evidence, could
be problematic. I do want to clarify that I thought this comment was
funny, and whoever wrote it--thank you for giving me a laugh!!! In other
situations, however, this type of activity could get out of hand and distract
students from the task at hand.
While I found the spontaneity fun, there was a part
of it that felt out of control. Sometimes there were too many things
happening on the screen at once. Furthermore, the document would often
jump as people added new content, which can be jarring to the eyes, especially
when you're trying to keep track of where you're writing in the document.
Also, the colorful markers of other contributors moving around all over
the place was also distracting. I wanted to read what everyone was writing
at the current moment, but with so many contributors all writing and editing at
once, it became difficult.
My last concern regards a previous comment I made
above about how "efficacious" these documents are, within the context
of saving time or creating things quickly. I have developed a skepticism of
new technological applications that bill themselves as time-savers. They often
take time to learn, then, as soon as you learn them and streamline them into
your routine, they are outdated and no longer serve the function that you hoped
they would. Then you have to spend time learning a new one. Also, I
think it is healthy to say "STOP" to the amount of work you are
doing. If these time-saving technologies only serve to make us work more
and do more, well... I like living my life. When you apply this to
the classroom, how much are we asking our students to do, and to what purpose?
So they have time for more homework? More classwork? More
learning? How much learning can you do in a day? Is this really
helping or is it creating more work? Or is it creating overload? I think it's important to think about this as
an instructor, so that the activities have meaning and purpose, not just a
"time-saving" purpose.
On the whole, I found the exercise fun and interesting and would LOVE to
apply it to a classroom. Now I just have to figure out how...
Homework: Evaluate an Online Resource for appropriate classroom application.
During class, we discussed the use of Podcasts for listening practice. There are innumerable podcasts available, but I chose to review one I frequently listen to and am familiar with: RadioLab. I've often listened and thought that it would be great to share with my students, specifically because of the subject matter discussed. It would be especially adaptable to an EAP course focusing on the physical and biological sciences. For instance, one recent episode discussed the difference between the "universe" and the "multiverse." These are terms applicable to the study of astronomy, physics, or physical science. The podcasts also mix characteristics of casual speech with features of scientific discourse. The content is thought provoking and interesting, and they take difficult scientific concepts and break them down into easily understandable examples. Thus, you could approach the listenings from both a bottom-up and top-down approach. Some of the podcasts are extended in nature, up to an hour long, and others are relatively short, about 10-15 minutes. They could act as stand-ins for authentic lectures (by the most interesting of professors, of course). They could be used for extensive listening practice. Alternatively, these could be easily broken down and played in shorter chunks. You can access them on both PC's and Mac's. They are easily downloadable, and if students had the appropriate technology, could download them and listen as homework. Or a computer lab could be used for this purpose.
The website itself was fairly simple to negotiate, and many of the episodes are supplemented by readings and videos. Since it is a publicly supported radio show, there are no distracting ads on the website, only links to supplementary info or related content. For students familiar with website negotiation, little extra support would need to be given other than getting acquainted with the site and understanding where to locate the episodes. The website itself links you to the listenings, or you can subscribe to the free, weekly podcast.
I would recommend this site only for advanced students, as the language is often complex, uses advanced vocabulary, colloquial and "creative" English terms. However, advanced English learners may be interested in the many episodes they have about language, as will English teachers. One recent episode I listened to talked about the connection between music and language, and how Chinese speakers are quite significantly more likely to have perfect pitch than English speakers (potentially because recognizing tones in the Chinese language crosses over to recognizing musical notes or tones as well).
Teachers, however, may find it time consuming to preview and adapt the content for the purposes of their class. Once again, this would only be recommended for advanced learners in classes geared towards careers or study in the sciences.
Take a look (or a listen)! It's fun!
http://www.radiolab.org/
During class, we discussed the use of Podcasts for listening practice. There are innumerable podcasts available, but I chose to review one I frequently listen to and am familiar with: RadioLab. I've often listened and thought that it would be great to share with my students, specifically because of the subject matter discussed. It would be especially adaptable to an EAP course focusing on the physical and biological sciences. For instance, one recent episode discussed the difference between the "universe" and the "multiverse." These are terms applicable to the study of astronomy, physics, or physical science. The podcasts also mix characteristics of casual speech with features of scientific discourse. The content is thought provoking and interesting, and they take difficult scientific concepts and break them down into easily understandable examples. Thus, you could approach the listenings from both a bottom-up and top-down approach. Some of the podcasts are extended in nature, up to an hour long, and others are relatively short, about 10-15 minutes. They could act as stand-ins for authentic lectures (by the most interesting of professors, of course). They could be used for extensive listening practice. Alternatively, these could be easily broken down and played in shorter chunks. You can access them on both PC's and Mac's. They are easily downloadable, and if students had the appropriate technology, could download them and listen as homework. Or a computer lab could be used for this purpose.
The website itself was fairly simple to negotiate, and many of the episodes are supplemented by readings and videos. Since it is a publicly supported radio show, there are no distracting ads on the website, only links to supplementary info or related content. For students familiar with website negotiation, little extra support would need to be given other than getting acquainted with the site and understanding where to locate the episodes. The website itself links you to the listenings, or you can subscribe to the free, weekly podcast.
I would recommend this site only for advanced students, as the language is often complex, uses advanced vocabulary, colloquial and "creative" English terms. However, advanced English learners may be interested in the many episodes they have about language, as will English teachers. One recent episode I listened to talked about the connection between music and language, and how Chinese speakers are quite significantly more likely to have perfect pitch than English speakers (potentially because recognizing tones in the Chinese language crosses over to recognizing musical notes or tones as well).
Teachers, however, may find it time consuming to preview and adapt the content for the purposes of their class. Once again, this would only be recommended for advanced learners in classes geared towards careers or study in the sciences.
Take a look (or a listen)! It's fun!
http://www.radiolab.org/
In class this week, Nour and I experimented with Digital Storytelling software, specifically Xtranormal. This site was kind of fun. I enjoyed choosing the setting, the sound effects, the voices, the characters, etc. There were plenty of options to make it fun! There were several problems; the voices, regardless of the accent, sounded "flat" and emotionless. One voice was very low (a bass) and was distorted coming through the computer speakers. Some of the accents were "overdone." You can choose movements for your characters to make, however, they did not always sync up with the spoken dialogue in the way you would want them to. Regardless, I enjoyed customizing my characters, creating a dialogue, and seeing it played out. Here is our result:
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/14141127/peepz-movie
Enjoy!
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/14141127/peepz-movie
Enjoy!
Post 3
In my classes at the Intensive English Program where I work, I've learned a lot about teaching students about plagiarism. It is interesting to how different cultures view copying texts. For some, it is a sign of respect. Students often use translation software and do word-for-word translations from the L1 to the L2. Some students think this is a quick, easy, fail-safe way to do their homework! However, translation software is not very sophisticated. The text we are reading in my CALL class--Technology in the L2 Curriculum by Stayc DuBravac--has an easy and simple activity to demonstrate to students why translation technology often doesn't work. DuBravac suggests taking a phrase from the L1, putting it into the translation software to translate into the L2. Discuss the results with students. Does the translation make sense in the L2 (for our purposes I will use English as the L2 example)? Then, have them put the translated phrase back into the translator in English, and have them translate it back into the L1. Is it the same, or did the words or meaning change? This appears to be a good way to show students that translation software does not work very well.
I really liked this suggested activity because it has a specific purpose, is easy to implement in the classroom, allows students to use things like their smart phones in the classroom (so they don't feel like they're being deprived), and can be used as a jumping off point to discuss language features. I wish I had known about it last semester!
This is so simple, that even a technophobe teacher like myself can easily adapt it to the classroom, and since the technology is common and familiar, it takes little time to educate oneself about how it operates.
In my classes at the Intensive English Program where I work, I've learned a lot about teaching students about plagiarism. It is interesting to how different cultures view copying texts. For some, it is a sign of respect. Students often use translation software and do word-for-word translations from the L1 to the L2. Some students think this is a quick, easy, fail-safe way to do their homework! However, translation software is not very sophisticated. The text we are reading in my CALL class--Technology in the L2 Curriculum by Stayc DuBravac--has an easy and simple activity to demonstrate to students why translation technology often doesn't work. DuBravac suggests taking a phrase from the L1, putting it into the translation software to translate into the L2. Discuss the results with students. Does the translation make sense in the L2 (for our purposes I will use English as the L2 example)? Then, have them put the translated phrase back into the translator in English, and have them translate it back into the L1. Is it the same, or did the words or meaning change? This appears to be a good way to show students that translation software does not work very well.
I really liked this suggested activity because it has a specific purpose, is easy to implement in the classroom, allows students to use things like their smart phones in the classroom (so they don't feel like they're being deprived), and can be used as a jumping off point to discuss language features. I wish I had known about it last semester!
This is so simple, that even a technophobe teacher like myself can easily adapt it to the classroom, and since the technology is common and familiar, it takes little time to educate oneself about how it operates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)