Download - Synchronous VC with young EFL learners: Whyte & Cutrim Schmid, AILA 2017

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

http://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

http://itilt2.eu

http://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


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


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

http://itilt.eu

AILA 2017 wp.me/p28EmH-Nk 6


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


… 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


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


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


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


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

http://itilt.eu

http://itilt.eu

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

http://itilt2.eu


2. Technology & pedagogy

21


considerations

2



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


Synchronous video communication

❖ French classroom: table-top interactive display (SMART Podium)

❖ Bridgit (proprietary videolink with screensharing)

❖ webcam and microphone

23


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


Research protocol


Participants: Teachers

27


Participants: Learners

28


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


Task 3: Supermarket

30


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


Task 4: Breakfast time

32


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


(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


Research protocol


3. Researching learner interaction

36


considerations

2


3



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


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


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


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


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


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


2 media files: 1 video, 1 audio

view image and wave form


3 tiers1. language (speaker)2. screen movement3. gesture (speaker)

grid1. list of annotations2. start/end time3. duration


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


integrating two sides of interaction❖ funny animal task❖ German learner using

IWB to create animal (left)

❖ French learners describing animal (right)

53


side-by-side view

5 tiers


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


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


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


4. Further examples

61


considerations

2


3Further examples of video communication

4



Synchronous video communication with young EFL learners: A multimodal analysis of task negotiation

Shona Whyte

[email protected]

Euline Cutrim Schmid

[email protected]

63

http://itilt2.eu

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://itilt2.eu