Rhodes, July 11, 2013 The Learning Conference

Vasilia Kourtis-Kazoullis, Assistant Professor, Department of Primary Education, University of the

Aegean

Hasan Kaili, Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Mediterranean Studies, University of the Aegean

Aytac Celtek, Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Mediterranean Studies, University of the Aegean

Online Language Learning for the Teaching and Learning of Turkish for Greek Adults

1. The Program: Life-Long Learning at the University of the Aegean

2. Turkish language teaching in Greece

3. Theoretical Framework (Eclectic Approach)

3.1 Communicative Approach

3.2 Focus on Form

3.3 Pedagogical Orientation: Socio-Constructivism Pedagogy

4. e-didaskaleio glosson: First Year of Implementation

4.1 Learners’ Profiles

4.2 Moodle Environment and Big Blue Button

4.3 Syllabus and its implementation

4.4 Sample Online lesson

5. Feedback from learners

6. Conclusion

Overview of the presentation

The life-long learning program at the University of the Aegean offers a variety of online courses, including language lessons.

The sub-program is called e-didaskaleio glosson

In the first year of implementation, online lessons for the Turkish language were offered for beginners.

In the second year of implementation, online lessons for the Turkish language will be offered for beginner and intermediate levels.

1. The Program: Life-Long Learning at the University of the Aegean

Turkish lessons are offered for Greek speakers at:

1. The Department of Mediterranean Studies, University of the Aegean,

2. The Department of Turkish and Modern Asiatic Studies, University of Athens,

3. The Department of Language, Literature and Culture of the Black Sea, Countries,

Democritus University of Thrace,

4. The Department of Balkan Slavic and Oriental Studies, University of Macedonia,

5. The Department of History and Archeology, University of Crete

Also, in several private institutions

Online lessons have not been offered before the implementation of this program.

2. Turkish Language Teaching in Greece

Language Learning Theories/Approach:

Eclectic Approach

Communicative Language Learning

Focus on Form

Pedagogical Framework:

Social Constructivism

3. Theoretical Framework

Core assumptions of the Communicative Approach were used to design this particular online language learning environment.

The online language learning environment was based on interaction between the learners and

instructors of the language during the once a week / 1 hour online session.

This involved:

Collaborative creation of meaning

Creating meaningful and purposeful interaction through language

Negotiation of meaning as the learner and his or her interlocutor arrive at understanding

Learning through attending to the feedback learners get when they use the language

Paying attention to the language one hears (the input) and trying to incorporate new forms

into one’s developing communicative competence

Trying out and experimenting with different ways of saying things

Making real communication the focus of language learning

Providing opportunities for learners to develop both accuracy and fluency

Focusing on communicative competence/speaking

Combining Grammar / Language Instruction with Language Use

Fostering meaningful interpersonal exchanges

Focusing on meaningful communication which results from students processing content that is

relevant, purposeful, interesting, and engaging (Richards 2009)

3.1 Communicative Approach

The program also relies on the principles of the form-focused instruction (Nassaji & Fotos 2011, Ellis 2001, Long 1991) and follows the guidelines for creating structured input activities (VanPatten & Sanz 1995, Lee & VanPatten 2003):

Present one thing at a time

Keep meaning in focus

Move from sentences to connected discourse

Use both oral and written input

Have the learners do something with the input

Keep the learner's processing strategies in mind

3.2 Focus on Form

Based on the concept of “nested pedagogies” (Skourtou, Kourtis-Kazoullis & Cummins 2006)

Combination of three different Orientations (Cumming 2000) based mostly on Social Constructivist Pedagogy

The four fundamental elements of communities of learning (Pallot & Pratt 2007):

1. people, i.e. social presence;

2. purpose and policies;

3. interactivity, i.e. interaction, communication, team work, collaboration;

4. reflective/transformative learning

3.3 Pedagogical Orientation: Socio-Constructivism Pedagogy

4. e-didaskaleio glosson: First Year of Implementation

1 2

11

2 1

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Post-graduate

Ph.D.

Education

30 people applied/24 completed the program: 19 female/5 male

4.1 Learners’ Profiles 2012-2013

female

79%

male

21%

Gender

female

male

Previous experience with online courses:

Professions & Age:

professions ranged from Humanities to Engineering

Ages: 22-56 (mean age: 34.13)

Other information

4

12

4

4

very often

quite often

not often

first time

10

4

1 1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1 1 Athens

Thessaloniki

Lamia

Chalkida

Ioannina

Kavala

Corfu

Mitilini

Chios

Samos

Kos

Crete

Geographical Distribution

The two instructors taught via teleconferencing from Rhodes

Multimodal Asynchronous tools:

Teaching Material (written texts/recorded dialogues)

Pronunciation guides (recorded)

Grammar notes

Exercises

Synchronous tools:

Video Conferencing Tools

Instant Messaging

Screen sharing

4.2 Moodle Environment and Big Blue Button

The course includes 20 modules

Each module focuses on a particular communicative situation (accompanied in most cases by a grammatical phenomenon

The syllabus and the learning material was designed and implemented by Hasan Kaili & Aytaç Çeltek

4.3 Syllabus and its Implementation

The first two modules provide basic information on Turkish (typological characteristics, the alphabet, phonological rules)

Two modules are devoted to review of the previous modules

The material is posted in the Moodle environment from the previous week

An extra session of teleconferencing is provided for final assessment

The lesson starts with greetings in Turkish

5’-10’ are dedicated to questions

Reading and discussion of the dialogues-texts follows

Discussion takes place on the expressions of the particular circumstance and then the interaction follows

The lesson ends with discussion for further study and a short evaluation

During the lesson

The Big Blue Button screen was divided into three columns:

4.4 Sample Online Lesson

Analysis of written and oral reflections can be grouped in 3 categories:

Online Learning Environment

Syllabus

Suggestions for improvement/complaints

5. Feedback from learners

Quality of the learning environment was rated as very good or excellent

Learning from a distance was very convenient for them

Hours: They expressed a desire for more than 1h/w for the synchronous lesson.

Audio Files: They found them very helpful

Technical Assistance: They reported positive contribution of the helpdesk to the immediate solution of technical problems

5.1 Reflections on the Online Learning Environment

The syllabus and its implementation met the needs and expectations that the students had. A typical example of their positive reflection:

“I believe that the lesson was so well structured that did two things at the same time. It offered new knowledge on the one hand and on the other hand it gave us a taste of what would follow in later lessons. This was giving me a sense of security but also created an expectation.”

Concerning the sequencing of the syllabus students were content

“Greek adult students need grammar first to feel safe while learning a foreign language. I was happily surprised to find out that I learned fulfilling communicative needs first”

5.2 The Syllabus

There were also some reports for issues and complaints such as:

‘classmates monopolizing the time’,

‘need for more asynchronous exercises’,

‘overdose of grammar’.

5.3 Suggestions for Improvement/Complaints

The program e-didaskaleio glosson initially began with

one language and one level of proficiency as a pilot for other years, other language levels of proficiency and other languages.

In this paper, we have outlined the program in such a way as to show that:

(a) it was based on specific approaches/methods of language learning and pedagogical orientations and

(b) it was carefully designed to meet the communicative needs of adult learners.

After the first year of implementation, the accumulation of data from the learners through online interviews gave us insight as to how the program should be structured in the years to come.

6. Conclusion

What is not evident in this paper is the tremendous effort on the part of a large team of persons

The first year was demanding for the entire team that supported this program;

The first online lessons were a source of stress for the instructors who were teaching in an electronic environment for the first time.

After the first year of implementation, it was very important to come to scientific conclusions about the success of the program and what or if something should be altered in order to make it more successful.

Minor problems, mostly of technical nature, were overcome and the end result was successful.

Our aim is to improve the environment, based on the evaluation of the first year of implementation, and to provide more language proficiency levels and languages as the program evolves.

Allen, J.P.B. 1980. A three-level curriculum model for second language education – Keynote address at the Annual Conference of the Ontario Modern Language Teacher’s Association. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Anadolu. 2013. www.tesp.anadolu.edu.tr

Canale, M., and M. Swain. 1980. "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics (1): 1–47. Retrieved June 20, 2013.

Cummins, J. 2000. Negotiating Identities: Education for Empowerment in a Diverse Society. Los Angeles, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.

e-epimorfosi. 2013. http://e-epimorfosi.aegean.gr/

Ellis, R. 2001. “Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction.” Language Learning 51 (1), 1–46.

Hymes, D. H. 1966. “Two types of linguistic relativity.” In Sociolinguistics, edited by W. Bright, 114–158, The Hague: Mouton.

Kaili, H., S. Prokou, and A. Çeltek. 2011. “Grammar in teaching Turkish as a foreign language in tertiary education in Greece”. In Foreign Language Teaching in Tertiary Education III: Current Trends – Conference Proceedings, edited by T. Gogas and P. Tagkas, 162-179, Athens: Dionikos Publications (in Greek).

References

Kourtis-Kazoullis, V. 2013. “Technology Assisted Language Learning: Worldwide Development and Applications in Greece.” In From the weak taxonomy of Pedagogy to interdisciplinarity and scientific hybridization, edited by G. Kokkinos and M. Moskofoglou-Chionidou, 236-262, Athens: Taxideftis (in Greek).

Lee, J., and B. VanPatten. 2003. Making communicative language teaching happen. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Livemocha. 2013. http://livemocha.com/

Long, Michael. 1991. “Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.” In Foreign Language Research in cross-cultural perspective, edited by K. DeBot, R. Ginsberg, and C. Kramsch, 39-52, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Moodle. 2013. https://moodle.org/

Nassaji, H., and S. Fotos. 2011. Teaching grammar in second language classrooms. Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. London: Routledge.

Palloff, R., and K. Pratt. 2007. “Online Learning Communities in Perspective.” In Online Learning Communities, edited by R. Luppicini, 3-16, Information Age Publishing.

Kostas, A., and A. Sofos. 2012. “Internet-mediated Communities of Practice: Identifying a Typology of Critical Elements.” In Intelligent Adaptation and Personalization Techniques in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, edited by T. Daradoumis, S. N. Demetriadis and F. Xhafa, 311-344, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Pennington, M., and V. Stevens. 1992. Computers in Applied Linguistics. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

Reinmann-Rothmeier, H. Mandl, and M. Prenzel. 2000. Computer supported learning environments. Planning, formation and assessment. München: Wiley-VCH. (in German)

Richards, J.C. 2009. Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Skehan, P. 1992. “Second Language Acquisition Strategies, Interlanguage Development and Task-based Learning”. Thames Valley University Working Papers in English Language Teaching, Vol. 1: 178-208.

Skourtou, E., V. Kourtis Kazoullis, and J. Cummins. 2006. “Designing Virtual Learning Environments for Academic Language Development.” In International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments, edited by J. Weiss, J. Nolan, J. Hunsinger, and P. Trifonas, 440-467, Norwell. MA: Springer, 2 Vols.

Stern, H. 1983. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: OUP.

Stevens V. 1989. “A direction for CALL: from behavioristic to humanistic courseware.” In Teaching languages with computers: the state of the art, edited by M. Pennington, 31-43, La Jolla, CA: Athelstan.

Underwood J. 1984. Linguistics, computers and the language teacher: a communicative approach, Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

VanPatten, B. and C. Sanz. 1995. “From input to output: Processing instruction and communicative tasks.” In Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy, edited by F. Eckman, D. Highland, P. Lee, J. Mileham, and R. Weber, 169-185, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Verbalplanet. 2013. http://www.verbalplanet.com/index.asp

Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. [Chapter 6 Interaction between learning and development, (79-91)]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Warschauer, M. and D. Healey. 1998. “Computers and language learning: An overview.” Language Teaching 31: 57-71.

Warshauer, M. 1996. “Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction.” In Multimedia language teaching, edited by S. Fotos, 3-20, Tokyo: Logos International http://www.ict4lt.org/en/warschauer.htm#stevens

Thank you for your attention

Τeşekkür ederiz/ Σας ευχαριστούμε

Hasan Kaili,

Vasilia Kourtis-Kazoullis

Aytac Celtek

Questions & Discussion