Post on 21-Jan-2018
AILA World Congress, 27 July 2017, Rio de Janeiro
Synchronous video communication with young EFL learners: A multimodal analysis of task negotiation
Shona Whyte Université Côte d’Azur, Nice, France
Euline Cutrim Schmid University of Education Schwäbisch-Gmünd, Germany
B9 Educational technology & language learning wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Interactive Teaching in Languages with Technology
B: Language teaching and learning
9: Educational technology & language learning
http://itilt2.eu
wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
2
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Workshop audience & objectives
❖ language teachers using classroom technologies
❖ teacher educators involved in technology training
❖ researchers working in L2 interaction and CMC
3
❖ technical & pedagogical factors
❖ searchable collections of practice examples for teacher education
❖ methodology for analysis of multimodal interactions
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Workshop outline
4
Technical and pedagogical
considerations
2
Researching learner interaction in classroom CMC
3Further examples of video communication
4
Background to video communication project1
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
1. Background itilt.eu❖ Interactive Technologies in Language Teaching (iTILT)
❖ EU lifelong learning project 2011-13: website for IWB in language teaching
❖ IWB: multimodal learning (audio-visual input/output, tactile/kinesthetic dimensions)
❖ different countries, languages, educational levels, L2 proficiency
❖ examples of teaching practice
5
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 6
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 7
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 8
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
French primary class learning English
❖ topic: classroom supplies❖ objective: vocabulary
recognition❖ teaching materials: page in
IWB file with images and embedded audio recorded by teacher
❖ activity: name image, then play audio to check
9
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 10
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
… limited interactional opportunities
❖ one learner at IWB in front of whole class❖ technical rather than pedagogical interactivity❖ pedagogical exercises rather than tasks
11
lower levels of
interactivity
basic IWB tools and features
involving single learner at IWB
reactive (gratuitous)interactivity
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Rationale for iTILT 2❖ iTILT-based research showed that many participating teachers
tended to restrict themselves to a relatively limited palette of tools and features to meet modest teaching objectives (Whyte et al., 2014; Whyte & Alexander, 2014, Whyte, 2015)
❖ iTILT partners saw a need less for technical support in integrating new technologies but rather for increased pedagogical assistance in designing and implementing learning activities
❖ AND Future Source figures indicate an increasing presence of tablet devices and other types of mobile technology in the educational sector.
12
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
iTILT 2: a new questionHow can we support teachers in exploiting affordances of technologies with more impact on classroom interaction?
❖ authentic communicative situation
❖ synchronous oral communication
❖ task-based approach
❖ visual support for listening and speaking
❖ pair/small group learner-learner interaction
13
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Collentine, 2009
“Doughty and Long (2003)—and similarly Lafford and Lafford (2005)—argue for the avoidance of
highly open-ended CMC tasks such as scavenger hunts and even guided SCMC discussions,
recommending instead to follow task-based language teaching (TBLT) design principles in
which meaning is primary; there is a relationship to the real world; task completion has some
priority; and the assessment of task performance is in terms of task outcome” (Skehan, 1996)”
14
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
iTILT and ITILT 2❖ iTILT
❖ Focuses on the use of interactive whiteboards
❖ Open-access website (http://itilt.eu), a searchable repository of training materials (manual, sample materials)
❖ 267 classroom illustrations (video clips, participant comments)
15
❖ iTILT 2: http://itilt2.eu
❖ Focuses on a wider range of interactive technologies: iPads, tablet PCs, video communication
❖ Stronger emphasis on pedagogy
❖ Extension of the existing website to include over 100 new video clips and associated resources
ERASMUS+ project (2014-17)
website with video examples of task-based language
teaching with various technologies
Development of the project
TBLT Training
Data Collection Website
Data collection
Website
20 teachers, 25 tasks, over 100 clips
5 languages
English French
German Turkish Welsh
3 educational levels
primary secondary university
Belgium France
Germany Netherlands
Turkey UK
6 countriestablets
smartphones video
3 technologieshttp://itilt2.eu
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
2. Technology & pedagogy
21
Technical and pedagogical
considerations
2
Background to video communication project1
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Synchronous video communication
❖ two primary classes in France and Germany (English as a lingua franca)
❖ IWB linked to computer and projector (SMART board and software)
22
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Synchronous video communication
❖ French classroom: table-top interactive display (SMART Podium)
❖ Bridgit (proprietary videolink with screensharing)
❖ webcam and microphone
23
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Task 1: Identity Card❖ Aim: introductions❖ Task: the hearer drags and drops
elements on the IWB page to make an ID card for the speaker
❖ Post-task: learners pool knowledge to identify pupils in class photo
❖ Watch German pupil respond to French speaker
24
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 25
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 26
Research protocol
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Participants: Teachers
27
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Participants: Learners
28
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Task 2: Funny animals❖ Aim: describe a “funny animal”
using body parts (head, body and legs) of ten different animals
❖ Task: the speaker describes their drawing of a funny animal and the hearer drags and drops body parts to construct the animal.
❖ Check: learners show their drawing via webcam for confirmation.
29
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Task 3: Supermarket
30
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Supermarket❖ Aim: learners roleplay a
shopping trip in the other country
❖ Task: The hearer plays the shop assistant and the speakers play customers. The shop assistant drags and drops products to the shopping cart and the customers then pay.
❖ Post-task: teachers review saved IWB pages with each class
31
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Task 4: Breakfast time
32
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Breakfast time
❖ Aim: request breakfast from a host
❖ Task: The speaker requests breakfast items which the hearer places on the breakfast table.
❖ Post-task: teachers review saved IWB pages with each class for additional discussion
33
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
(Task 5 My lunchbox)❖ Some German pupils showed their lunch boxes and described their
contents via the webcam just before the breakfast time session.
34
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 35
Research protocol
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
3. Researching learner interaction
36
Technical and pedagogical
considerations
2
Researching learner interaction in classroom CMC
3
Background to video communication project1
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
teacher perceptionsEnhanced self-confidence in pupils’ ability to comprehend and use the target language
37
Instead of just introducing themselves in a dumb way and the others responding by introducing themselves, the IWB was the element that showed that they had understood. In other words it was an evaluation in a
way. ‘I have understood what you told me.'
They won self-assuredness in their own possibilities and skills though the visible feedback on the IWB
The children could actively use the previously learned vocabulary or structures, and the activities provided space for
openness and differentiation
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
pedagogical interpretation
❖ teachers considered VC tasks more authentic and interactive than traditional activities
❖ development towards less teacher intervention and enhanced learner autonomy
❖ desire for even greater learner-centredness
❖ challenge: the balance between adequate linguistic and emotional support and space for learners to create
38
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
a closer look
❖ not just learner language, also embodied action
❖ physical interactions (IWB, camera, video feed, classmates, teacher)
❖ orchestration of interaction in complex classroom CMC environment
39
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
CMC analysis in classroom contexts1. filming
a) ethical considerationsb) observer’s paradoxc) image and sound
2. editinga) editing image and soundb) converting/extracting video and audioc) sharing large files
3. annotatinga) software: EXMARaLDA, Transanab) ELANc) recent CMC research in CALL
40
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
complex interactions❖ recording: class films from each side of exchange (FR & DE)❖ interactions:
❖ French learner(s), teacher, researcher❖ German learner(s), teacher, researcher(s)❖ French-German learners
❖ transcription: ❖ English, French & German speech (speaker and hearer)❖ manipulation of IWB screen (actor and viewer)❖ other physical movement (gesture, gaze, posture)
41
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 42
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 43
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 44
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 45
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Annotating
46
ELAN
❖ Max Planck Institut open source freeware❖ access video (play, slow, stop)❖ annotate on timeline (transcribe speech, code gestures)❖ create separate tiers for specific types of annotation❖ view annotations in table form
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 47
2 media files: 1 video, 1 audio
view image and wave form
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 48
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 49
3 tiers1. language (speaker)2. screen movement3. gesture (speaker)
grid1. list of annotations2. start/end time3. duration
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 50
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 51
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
affordances and challenges
❖ learner tailors contributions specifically to task requirements (I’m a boy)
❖ teacher provides rapid and effective orientation to visual affordances
❖ learner aligns speech and gaze very closely with screen movement
52
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
integrating two sides of interaction❖ funny animal task❖ German learner using
IWB to create animal (left)
❖ French learners describing animal (right)
53
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 54
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 55
side-by-side view
5 tiers
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 56
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 57
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
affordances and challenges❖ distractions due to technical
interface and hors-champ❖ German class reaction to
coincidence in boys’ names❖ who is in charge?
❖ German hearer controls IWB❖ French speaker has speaking
rights❖ external manipulation of IWB
by German teacher (time lag)
58
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
other research
❖ technical problems such as lag and impossibility of mutual gaze “can make conversational experience less natural and possibly less comfortable” (Kern, 2014)
❖ semiotic perspectives (Guichon & Wigham, 2016) - champ, contre-champ, hors-champ
❖ methodological issues in CALL-CMC (Chanier & Wigham, Cohen & Guichon, in Caws & Hamel (eds), 2016)
59
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
some findings ❖ complex classroom CMC environment (video communication with
screensharing)
❖ fine-grained multimodal analysis shows different reactions:
❖ great autonomy and ease in integrating various sources of information for some learners
❖ for others, loss of focus and purpose faced with too many competing channels
❖ role of teacher in scaffolding learners to support interaction
❖ differences between F2F interaction and CMC (lag, mutual gaze)
❖ multimodal analysis allows insight into how learners negotiate tasks
60
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
4. Further examples
61
Technical and pedagogical
considerations
2
Researching learner interaction in classroom CMC
3Further examples of video communication
4
Background to video communication project1
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 62
AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk
Synchronous video communication with young EFL learners: A multimodal analysis of task negotiation
Shona Whyte
whyte@unice.fr
Euline Cutrim Schmid
euline.cutrim.schmid@ph-gmuend.de
63
http://itilt2.eu