student engagement in a multimedia setting karin duffner centre for excellence in multimedia...
TRANSCRIPT
Student engagement in a multimedia setting
Karin Duffner
Centre for Excellence in Multimedia Language Learning
Forum for Innovation in Teaching and Learning
Lunchtime seminar - 19 November 2008
Outline of Talk
a. Digital labs: the potential & the realityb. Designing pedagogyc. Examples of innovations to enhance student
engagement
CEMLL’s Aim
….exploring pedagogical effectiveness of multimedia language labs.
Digital Language Labs – the potential
Dynamic Teaching Environment
a set of tools for:• presenting teacher/student screens• sharing files & applications • accessing information• monitoring comprehension• secure assessment
Multimedia Environment
access to variety of media: • CD, DVD, media files (digitised)• streaming audio, video• satellite television• WWW sites & communication tools• WebCT (University VLE )
Teaching Methodology
combine the benefits of: • computer-assisted learning• face-to-face teaching • peer interaction plus
• access to the Multimedia Resource Unit for independent learning
Digital Language Labs – the realityGroup discussion, CEMLL UK Symposium – 16/06/‘08We don’t know
what to do with them! Help!
CEMLL Survey of UK Higher Education institutions
> 70% have access to at least one multimedia language lab
However…..• existing multimedia labs are not being used to their full potential
as state-of-the-art teaching facilities• used simply as ordinary classrooms with little or no use being
made of the unique technological advantages they offer
…..absence of suitable exemplars
of appropriate pedagogy
Need for Pedagogical Design
Perhaps it is not
“the particular delivery technology….rather, the design of the course that determines the effectiveness of the learning”
(Rovai, 2002)
Design: in search of a model
Conversational framework – Laurillard (1997, 2002)
E-Moderating model – Salmon (2000)
Taxonomy of educational objectives – Bloom (1956)
Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education – Chickering & Gamson (1986)
Four views - Bransford, Brown and Cocking (1999)
The process of learning model – Laird (1985)
[…many more…Mayer (2001), Biggs (1999), Collis (1999), Conole & Fill (2005)…….]
Key Projects
Plan
Implement
Monitor
Evaluate
Revise Plan for subsequent
implementation
1. Teaching for Transition 2. Task-based Learning3. Irish Pronunciation4. French Translation5. Supporting the Year Abroad
6. Interactive Interpreting
Cyclical Framework
“different learning outcomes are best learned through particular types of learning activities” (Prensky, 2000)
Some multimedia resources used
WebCT Vista University VLE to support course management
Hot Potatoes web-based exercises, multiple choice tests
CALL software (s/w)
language specific programs,
electronic dictionaries
editing & recording s/w
audio e.g. Audacity
video e.g. Windows Movie Maker
playback s/w Windows Media Player, RealPlayer
online tools & resources
freesurvey tools, wiki, websites, YouTube
Camtasia screen capturing software
SONY Soloist / SCVR
audio comparative recording,
lesson editing software suitable for interpreting
classroom management s/w
e.g. Sony Virtuoso, SmartClass Visual Interface
1. Teaching for transition
Digital tools
WebCT: computerised tests
Hot Potatoes exercises
CALL software
to diagnose strengths / weaknesses &
to assess prior knowledge to note ability levels & monitor progress
to enhance learning, provide variety,
to acknowledge different learning styles
Aims: 1. To aid the transition between school and university2. To enhance student awareness of weaknesses in grammar
Reaction of students
• Positive feedback – 70% of respondents felt technology made positive contribution to
learning grammar– students wanted more exercises, especially those available online
• Motivational Value - diagnostics test revealed their weaknesses
“I think that Hot Potatoes was an excellent way to learn main grammar points”
“…like the way you have to keep working before you are given a clue or answer”
2. Task-based learning
Aims: Language Acquisition1. investigate use of technology in oral classes using TBL
approach2. increase student participation in conversation classesHot Potatoes students create crosswords for each other
- > fun, friendly competitionAudio editing & recording
students record their voices, interview peers
- > encourages self-evaluation & monitoringOnline survey tool students develop & complete surveys in class
- > immediate language focus, sense of ownershipVideo- jigsaw students sequence video clips in correct order
- > opportunity for negotiation, discussion, collaborationVideo-dubbing students summarise story in own words
- > help student find own voice, authentic materials used
Role of Multimedia in Languages
• inherent interactivity -> rich collaborative activities, student-led • SLA methodology currently favours knowledge construction • project/task-based learning - the real forte of digital media &
technology enhanced tools • learners engage in the creation of “comprehensible output”
(Swain)
…language study requires intensive interaction. ..and access to advanced educational technology (e.g. audio, video, multi-media & computing facilities).
www.qaa.ac.ukMultimedia capabilities…..enable the profession to incorporate much needed sociolinguistic authenticity into the L2 classroom. (Meunier,’94).
3. Irish pronunciation
Digital tools Audacity: voice recording
WebCT: portfolio of recordings
PowerPoint notes
U. of Iowa animated website
Use of “authentic” audio / video(TG4, Radió na Gaeltachta)
to self-evaluate, for teacher to assess
to monitor process/product, set own goals
to support learning
to understand theory behind phonetics
to recognise pronunciation, provide variety, acknowledge different learning styles, experience community of practice
Aims: 1. to adopt a dynamic solution to teaching Irish pronunciation2. to develop resources for use with students
Students’ comments
access issues
eye strain
intense!
can be impersonal need for balance (non-computer
related activities)
teaching material easily visible
resources readily available immediacy of activityseamless integration
allows individualised instruction, 1:1
efficient use of class-time independent learning, greater
autonomy increases IT literacy
presents subject in modern way
Likes Dislikes
4. French translation
Digital tools WebCT: translation activitiesonline reflective logWiki: group translation tasksVideo-editing software: subtitlingElectronic dictionariesWeb-based resources
to assess abilityto self-evaluate, develop awareness to collaborate, to peer-review to provide applied context for translation to provide lexical support to compare standards of translations
Aim: to provide a flexible, student-centered approach to teaching
translation skills in a second year French translation module
Example of activity - wiki
• Collaborative translation work• Comment on translations• Archived access to translations over semester• Selective Release of information / exemplary model translation
“I felt that the class demonstrated the subtleties of the meaning of words. I
began to see how the choice of word is not
necessarily what it looks like in English”
“Checking related websites helped me
understand the context and get a feel for the
language”
“Very helpful, I have realised it is important to look at different
dictionaries to find the correct word to use.”
5. Year Abroad Support
Innovations in developmentPedagogical need: adequate preparation prior to trip, maintain contact
with University & encourage reflection while abroad -> need for centralised communication platform
Aim: To facilitate student learning and pastoral support online
• Support/administrative materials on WebCT• Pastoral meetings via synchronous chat tools• Completion of online assessments• Development of online e-portfolio of information on year abroad
destinations• Use of multimedia lab technologies for year abroad preparation
classes
6. Interactive Interpreting
Innovations in development
Pedagogical need: skilled area, lots of practice & repeated testing required -> need for digitised content & regular access to materials, also ease of capture of student work
Aim: To provide support materials to encourage student interpreting practice beyond the classroom
• Banks of listening dialogues (in mp3 format) available on WebCT• Access to interpreting transcripts for self-assessment• Self-practice tools (Wimba) for students to practice and self-
assess/tutor to monitor
Progress
At University of Ulster• Labs heavily-used for teaching, both in Coleraine and Magee• Multimedia Resource Unit frequented by languages and media students• More languages staff adopting aspects of technology in their teaching • Positive student attitude, evidence of increased motivation and
engagement• Approaches commended by external examiners, noted in Revalidation• Multimedia approaches embedded in course structure
Nationally • CEMLL dissemination events in UK well-attended and received, growing
momentum and recognition• Increasing interest in CEMLL Multimedia Lab Teaching Award • Establishment of network of practitioners• Collaborative venture to produce a Good Practice Guide
Issues
Practical• timetabling• access for staff & students• safe environment to practice,
prepare materials• staff turnover / skills development
Technical • server management issues• software incompatibilities• lab maintenance / updates• security• copyright
Pedagogical• time: (sourcing appropriate tools, developing
materials, devising methodology, evaluating)
• aligning aims: (teaching goals/student assessment/institutional practices/evaluation)
• dissemination (examples, getting the word out there)
• changing practice / exploiting technology
Future Plans
Multimedia Lab Teaching Awards
Good Practice Guide
Languages Workshops - Coleraine, 20th Jan. ’09 & Magee, 21st Jan. ’09
Launch of new multimedia language lab - Belfast campus, 22nd Jan ‘09
CEMLL pre-conference workshops - at the Subject Centre e-Learning Symposium ’09, University of Southampton, 29th Jan ’09
3rd CEMLL Symposium - Belfast, September ‘09
Thank you very much for listeninghttp://cemll.ulster.ac.uk
References • Bloom, Benjamin S. (editor). 1956.Taxonomy of educational objectives:
Book 1, Cognitive domain. New York: Longman. [http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/Literacy/ReferenceMaterials/
BibliographyLiteracy/Bloom1956.htm]• Bransford, J., Brown A., & Cocking, R. (1999) How people learn: brain,
mind experiences and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• CEMLL report (2008) [online] Report on Multimedia Language Learning in Higher Education in the UK. [http:///www.cemll.ulster.ac.uk]
• Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. (1986) Seven Principles for good practice in undergraduate education. The Wingspread Journal, 9(2) [http://www.csuhayward.edu/wasc/pdfs/End%20Note.pdf]
• Laird D., (1985). Approaches to Training and Development. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
References cont.• Laurillard, D. (2002) Rethinking University Teaching: a conversationalframework for the effective use of learning technologies. 2nd ed. London:RoutledgeFalmer• Meunier, L. (1994) Computer-assisted language instruction andcooperative learning. Applied Language Learning, 5(2)• Prensky, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon.NCB University Press, 9(5)• Rovai, A. P. (2002) Building Sense of Community at a Distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 3(1) [http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.1/rovai.html]• Salmon, G. Eds. (2000) E-moderating: the key to teaching and
learning online. 2nd ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer• Swain, M. (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles ofcomprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In
S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Conversational Framework
Laurillard http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Laurillard_conversational_framework
Taxonomy of educational objectives
Bloom (1956)
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm
An Effective Learning Environment
• learner-centred• knowledge-centred• assessment-centred• community-centred
as described by Bransford, Brown & Cocking (1999)