Please find a link below to my dissertation for the MA in Digital Technologies for Language Teaching at the University of Nottingham. It brings together various themes covered on the MA and in this blog, such as game-based learning, creative writing, and course design. It may be of interest to anyone exploring the following: potentialshifts in language learning pedagogy;research methods; and motivation in relation to games, narrative, and make-believe.
After introducing students to flash fiction, how can you help them write their own?
The first thing I would do is discuss the differences between, say novels and short stories and the considerations writers need to take in each. For example, one area might be eliminating unnecessary information or making sure details push the plot forward. Perhaps a simple wiki page could be used for students to systematically delete these excess details in class and outside. This is not the most creative idea but I mention it to highlight the simple advantages of editing functions in digital environments over paper.
For more considerations, a quick google search brings up a whole variety of advice like this https://litreactor.com/columns/storyville-how-to-write-flash-fiction or this http://flashfictiononline.com/main/2015/04/thirteen-tips-for-writing-flash-fiction/, but quite a lot of it is conflicting. So rather than ask questions or impose one way of writing flash fiction, it might be a nice idea to get your students to come up with advice for each other. Students could do some research online and come to their own conclusions, or perhaps create their own top ten tips. This could be followed by a pyramid discussion, where groups combine and reduce the number of tips until they agree on a top 5 list.
From choose your own adventure to interactive fiction
In my last post I used the terms ‘choose your own adventure’ and ‘interactive fiction’ interchangeably, but now I’ve come to realise that a distinction needs to be made. As far as I understand it, choose your own adventure stories have their roots in children’s books in the early eighties. At the end of each page or chapter the reader is presented with choices and corresponding page numbers. Interactive fiction (IF), on the other hand, comes from text based digital environments where the reader/player uses commands to explore and solve puzzles.
A couple of weeks ago I mentioned a piece of interactive fiction called Playspent and the way it uses point of view to develop empathy in the reader/player. I recently tried another story called Lifeline, which has a similar effect. In Lifeline you receive messages from a stranded astronaut and help him/her survive. Messages arrive over a couple of days to add to the realism and you engage in a kind of conversation as the astronaut describes the situations. This approach allows for more linguistic complexity than the standard present tense 2nd person perspective of most adventure stories. The astronaut acts as narrator and can therefore vary tenses to reveal backstory elements. But what I really like is the way you interact with the story and the character, giving advice or choosing supportive or motivational comments. I killed the astronaut a couple of times before getting to a happy ending.
I will look at my level 8 group C2.1 as this is the group I am designing my course for at the moment. Looking through the course book I thought it would be nice to flip the listening sections but unless I make copies of the CDs, get the students to buy the CDs or publish them illegally on YouTube this is not feasible. I therefore decided to flip a reading lesson.
The normal class procedure (following the book) would be the following:
Speaking; SS discuss some questions related to the topic (health) of the reading while T monitors. the main aim of this is to engage students and activate schemata for the reading.
SS read for gist; a general question is proposed and a time limit imposed. (not included in the book)
SS read for detail; in this case complete an exam task, matching 4 narrators to paraphrased comments on there opinion or experience.
Students discuss a brief opinion of their views on the reading
Some kind of language analysis takes place; in this case, choice of verb for a more emphatic effect.
The flipped version
At home
Discussion; students respond to the discussion questions in a forum/Trello/Popplet/Edmodo post… backing up some of their ideas with links to videos/articles…
Students read the text; first gist question and task at home.
Students add opinions about the text to previous forum
Students identify more emphatic verbs and complete exercises.
In class
Students discuss the questions from the forum face to face. (more informed by research)
(if not done before SS compare answers from reading)
T provides answers to exercises
SS divide into groups and create a health campaign leaflet/poster/presentation to encourage teenagers to keep fit and healthy and make use of emphatic verbs in the process.
Pros and cons
Pros
More time for productive activities in class.
Students often find it hard to concentrate on reading and exam tasks in class.
Students encouraged to read/watch authentic content and delve deeper into the topic.
Students might have more to say about the topic.
Students encouraged to communicate with each other in L2 between lessons.
Cons
Students might not have time or motivation to complete the tasks at home having a knock on effect on the lesson.
Students might have lost interest in the topic by the time the lesson starts.
Students might have forgot what the reading was about and why they chose certain options by the time they come to class. (could be avoid by providing answers online).
Students might not follow the gist before detail procedure.
SS might use dictionaries/google as they read and not infer meaning from context.
SS might take longer to read the text and not adequately prepare themselves for potential exams.
From my experience EFL teaching in private language schools it has never been about lectures, so the idea of recording a lecture seems a bit irrelevant to my context. The way I see the flipped classroom is giving the homework before the lesson rather than after it to prepare the students for the class. Is that considered flipped?
Below I will outline a course that I have taught several times over the last few years. I will look into the structure, content and approach that I took during the course and what role technology could play. I have tried to tag on or squeeze in some of the approaches to course design into this reflection.
Class profile
Level 8 C2.1 General English
No. of students: 14
Age: 18 to 60
Nationality: Monolingual, Italian
Needs: This is not an exam focussed course.
Book: Cambridge Objective Proficiency level C2.2 (the learners are at C2.1 level)
Approaches
As the entire system in my specific context is based around Cambridge exams there is obviously a heavy influence from the set outcomes of CPE, which imposes a kind of backward design (Richards, J, C. 2013, p.5) on the course. On the one hand this is a restriction, but on the other it can be overcome by the assumption that students intending to take the exam the following year will need to be able to deal with almost any authentic content. I therefore see this level as an opportunity to develop real interests in authentic L2 content. The goal is not necessarily the CPE exam certificate but the wider goal that CPE exams test, native-like proficiency. This might imply that the learners are in a kind of liminal space (Cousin, G. 2006 pp.4-5) between an L1 and L2 identity. In order to cross this threshold (Land, R. et al. 2005, p.53), I try to encourage extensive reading of books and websites and extensive listening with films and YouTube videos. What is perhaps lacking is extensive content and identity creation in L2.
Some of the topics in the book and CPE exam are quite adult in nature and this can be difficult for younger adults with limited life experience. I therefore try to delve deeply into the various perspectives and conduct role plays around a particular topic to develop critical thinking skills and empathy. For this reason, it could be argued that there is an element of a Socially Critical Approach (Burbules, Nc Berk, Rupert 1999 p.1) built into my lessons. Here we might also observe that the processes of Accommodation and Assimilation (Kolb, 1993 p.141) are being facilitated as the students are required to reflect on opposing views and take on different roles. This means that I am effectively trying to teach the whole person inline with an Experiential Approach (Kolb, 1993 p.138). Due to the relatively small class sizes, it is easy to set up a variety of communicative tasks based around these topics. Peer correction/feedback and collaboration are an integral part of all lessons but less so outside class. This means that there is an element of Constructivism (Rovai, A. p80) in class as the students are constructing meaning through interaction with each other and the limited classroom environment.
Would technology support/enhance your approach?
Using a Wiki or Blogs would effectively enrich the environment from which students could construct meaning and create an online identity. The only issue would be motivating the students to do this in their free time. This could be achieved by getting the students to reflect on the online element of their learning at regular intervals. Ideally students will come to their own understanding of how they personally learn effectively given the flexibility to do so with a variety of web 2.0 tools. Wikis and blogs would also give the students a space to collaborate online and even influence the content of the face to face lessons. This could help me move towards a more Central Design or Natural Approach(Richards, J, C. 2013, p.16), using the wiki as a facilitating framework.
On our course we were asked to come up with a list of evaluation criteria for OERs. After discussing suitable criteria in our Moodle forum we came up with the following:
OER Evaluation Criteria
Clarity/comprehensibility of content, Opportunities for deeper learning, Accessibility, Usability, Alignment to standards, Adaptability of content, Relevance of content, Interactivity, Connectivity/linkage, Coherence, Originality, Content quality, Up-to-date content, Opportunities to contribute, Opportunities for peer critique/correction, Communication, Ease of navigation
In the end I came to the conclusion that any tools that allow you to aggregate resources related to the specific field you are interested in could be used as an OER. One example is Pinterest.
The courses in my school do not have a course outline, the teachers structure the course around the course book and adapt and supplement it to the needs and interests of the students. Is this the same for anyone else? Anyway, in most of the exam based books I failed to find anything but a list of items to be learnt. I wonder why this is, could it be because the objectives are set by the CEFR? I did manage to find some aims in the teacher’s book for an FCE book, but no aims for the learners in the student’s book. On the other hand, in Messages, a pre-intermediate book aimed at younger learners, there were aims and objectives in the student’s book but not in the teacher’s. The aims and objectives were labelled You study (aims) and So that you can do (objectives).
But still a bit unsure on this. I think I found the answer I like in Moon, J. (2002) as explained below.
Original aims and objectives from learning event (lesson)
Messages: Pre-intermediate A2.2
As written in student’s book
You study: names of everyday routines and link words. (aims)
So that you can: talk about everyday routines and write about your average day. (objective)
These aims and objectives have obviously been simplified so that the learners can understand them. I will therefore reword them slightly from a teacher’s perspective without changing the meaning.
Aims
The learners will study the names of everyday routines and linking words.
Objectives/outcomes
By the end of the lesson the learners will be able to talk about everyday routines and write about their average day.
Revision thinking
Aims
The learners will study the names of everyday routines and linking words.
Moon, J. (2002, p.62) Aims are related to teaching intention, outcomes related to learning and objectives are often written in the terms of both and are therefore confusing.
If aims are an intention, then we need to change ‘will study’ to perhaps ‘will be introduced to’.
Objectives/outcomes
By the end of the lesson the learners will be able to talk about everyday routines and write about their average day.
Moon, J. (2002, p.64) outlines three elements for writing outcomes; A verb (‘what the learner will be able to do), A word (that indicates on what and with what the learner is acting’) and a word (indicating the nature in context and standard).
So in the example: the verbs .. and write…about routines/average day are in place.
The ‘on what and with what’ could be routines and their average day.
However, it would also appear that the nature in terms of standard is missing. Therefore ‘will be able’ could be replaced by ‘will be better able’.
Final revised aims and objectives/outcomes
Aims
The learners will be introduced to the names of everyday routines and linking words.
Or… To raise awareness of lexis related to everyday routines and linking devices.
Objectives/outcomes
By the end of the lesson the learners will be better able to talk about everyday routines and write about their average day.
In reference to SOLO levels
The outcomes of this learning event seem to be limited to quantitative: pre-structural/uni-structural and multi-structural demonstrations of learning. Perhaps the writing section could be considered relational as they put everything together. However, opportunities for extended abstract are absent, unless you consider students applying the lexis to their own lives.
If later assessment of this lexis takes the form of a gap fill or multiple choice exercise students might try to memorise the items rather than truly understand their use and context. Biggs, J. (2003 p.1). However, in this lesson the outcomes are a piece of writing (perhaps it should be an email or something to give it context) which could lead to more individualised ‘constructed’ examples of understanding. (p.2).
Constructive alignment seems to dovetail into backward design (p.2) (correct me if I’m wrong).
What is a more desirable outcome? Being able to complete a multiple choice test or having a personal understanding of how they can use the language for real-life tasks? If I want the second one this is going to completely change the aims statement above.
To be honest I have a limited understanding of Bloom’s taxonomy. the only thing I am familiar with is this pyramid. My understanding of this image is that there is often little opportunity to engage in the top three categories. In other words, our systems of education tend to focus on the bottom three most of the time. This could possibly be because of misguided outcomes or assessment procedures. As our society and workplace becomes ever more participatory, it would seem that this imbalance needs to be addressed.
I am back! After deciding to move over to blogger for my creative writing module, I’ve decided that I miss my WordPress blog 😦 So, I’m going to continue but this time I will be focussing on digital technologies for course design.
The first 3 weeks have been quite intense as we’ve looked at a wide range of approaches. Here were my initial reflections on my context and my impressions/understanding of the approaches we were about to focus on.
My current context
Most of my courses are aimed at Cambridge exams. KET, PET, FCE, CAE and CPE. Ielts is also becoming popular for EFL learners. The syllabus is usually dictated by the course book. However recently I have just found out that all non-exam adult classes in my school will be using MyClass, which appears to involve the use of prescribed lesson plans and materials for modular-type drop-in language courses. These will inevitably come with some form of pedagogy built into them and restrict the teacher’s freedom to adapt his/her approach to their context. more on this when I get more information.
Traditional or discipline-based approach
Most course book syllabi also divide courses into topics based around important concepts, usually grammar points of increasing complexity. Also, topics are pre-selected and not necessarily related to students’ interests. However, unlike this approach, in EFL practical skills are considered important and are practised during a course.
Performance or systems-based approach
The communicative approach (karina’s slideshare), an approach on which most course books claim to adhere to, also stresses the importance of purposeful or meaningful activities. At the same time, some course books could be seen as being teacher-proof and providing a type of quality control, i.e. English File, like a systems-based approach. Adding to this, EFL courses also involve a process of practice and feedback with recommended remedial action. It would seem that this approach is very similar to my context if I have understood it properly.
The cognitive approach
Like the cognitive approach learners in EFL are often encouraged to work things out for themselves. This is achieved by using an inductive approach to grammar rules or guided discovery and opportunities to deduce meaning of lexis from context rather than explicit instruction. Also, learning strategies or study skills are often included alongside unit content. However, there is little emphasis on critical thinking and becoming lifelong learners in EFL course books.
Experiential or personal relevance approach
This is my favourite so far 🙂 And it is how I would like my classes to be. In reality, I have to make a compromise between prescribed course book content and personalisation. I have recently introduced PbWorks to my adult classes to give more power to the students. I often ask the students to delve deeper into topics from the course book. That said, participation has been low so far, I need to look into why this is.
The socially critical approach
I must say that most of my students come from fairly affluent families and I have felt the need to engage in activities and debates that might help raise feelings of empathy in my learners. I feel that I have a sense of responsibility to encourage discussion and reflection on social issues but at the same time I avoid explicitly expressing my opinion. Like the socially critical view of knowledge (p64), there is no doubt to my mind that EFL course books that we use are also historically, socially, economically and politically conditioned.
In the self Illusion by Bruce Hood the author argues that ‘there is no you inside your head’ and that our sense of self depends on our bodies, environment and others around us (2012, p3). Despite this he stresses the importance of maintaining this illusion of self to feel in control of our lives, remain motivated and function in general (2012, p.218). Dörnyei. Z, sees the motivation to bridge the gap between our current self perception and our ‘ideal’ self as fundamental to language learning (2009, p.4) However, this transition from L1 identity to L2 cannot be seen as a journey with one destination if we consider our identity to be multifaceted, context dependent and in constant flux.
For a deeper understanding of the self illusion and the relationship between language learning and identity please see the video below:
The Third Place
Language is inextricably linked to culture and identity and when an individual acquires more than one language they may shift between identities or roles to suit different cultural or interactional contexts (Kramsch. C, 1998, p.82). Therefore, instead of a division between target and local culture, Kramsch suggests that learners create a ‘third place’ between cultures (Kramsch, C 1993, p.9). Creating an entirely new L2 identity is more difficult for adult learners though, as they have already established a strong culturally embedded L1 identity(Wehner, 2011 p.281). We should therefore encourage learners to find a third place, combining and consolidating parts of their cultural identity with the target culture.
Role play
Lemke claims that in order to communicate effectively in a language, we need to play an appropriate role or take on a specific social identity. He also expresses concerns over the ability of limited classroom instruction and context to provide learners with sufficient time and space to develop these identities. (2002, p.68) At the same time, Taylor claims that the medium in which we ‘exist’ and the experiences we have online and in virtual worlds can also reshape our ideas of self image and identity (Taylor, 2002 p.57). If this is true, virtual environments, such as Second Life, could provide an immersive third space without time restrictions that is removed from a learner’s L1 social context. This would allow learners to develop strong L2 identities, increase motivation and consequently aid language acquisition.
A closer look at virtual worlds
Second life
Apart from the benefits of identity recreation with avatars and role play, there are many more affordances of virtual worlds like SL for language learning, as outlined by Warburton below (2009, p.421).
Despite this, I have rarely seen second life or any other virtual worlds actively employed in language teaching. So why is this?
For me, Second life’s biggest problem is its complicated user-unfriendly interface which seems to require a laptop or desktop with keyboard to navigate. I also get the impression that people are moving away from these devices to tablets and mobiles, especially younger generations. The portability of mobiles and tablets make it easier to dip into a virtual world at any time and maintain an online presence. Adding to this are the rather dated graphics and jerky physics of the game which make it unappetising to the eye. With the wealth of graphically rich online console and tablet games, why would anyone bother with SL. Also, As Milton mentions (2013, p.7), from an institutional perspective it would seem that the cost of computers powerful enough to run the software and the maintenance needed to keep it up to date is enough to stop SL before it even gets off the starting line in most schools.
SmallWorlds
An alternative to SL could be SmallWorlds which seems to facilitate shorter session times to complete simple tasks. In fact, the main attraction of this virtual world for me as a language teacher is the ease of use. It took me only ten minutes to choose a hair cut, a pair of trousers, order a cocktail, decorate my house, take a picture, share it, find the DTLT Garden and make a couple of friend requests. It also has a point and click interface making it potentially compatible with tablets and phones. Although this is currently not the case. Another feature I noticed is the ability to add it on to the social network Facebook, which makes it easier to integrate it into a PLE. The graphics might not be as sophisticated as SL but they are colourful and pleasing to the eye, you just have to accept that it is not trying to look realistic.
Here I am in the town centre on SmallWorld
My experience as a learner in SmallWorlds
When I teleported to the town centre in SmallWorlds I was surrounded by avatars, avatars with real human beings behind them. I suddenly started to behave as if I was actually there, by this I mean that I was aware of my body language and personal space. I avoided lurking around people without saying hello or staring at anyone for too long. I eventually moved away from the crowd and found a safe little corner of my own. I think I had experienced bodily presence in a virtual world. Taylor also found that avatar position in The Dreamscape could transmit feelings of anger, friendship or even love.(2002, p.43)
Language learner anxiety
Looking back at week 9 of the course, I find I disagree with Roed when he states that interactions online are less anxiety inducing (Roed, 2003, p.155). I also feel that Drayfus’s need for embodiment to connect with our ‘messy emotions’ is nullified by my recent experience (Drayfus, 2001, p37). I therefore agree with Blake when he criticises Drayfus’s emphasis on physical embodiment for effective language learning. I also agree with Blake’s focus on the role of imagination in creating feelings of commitment and risk online (Blake 2002, p385). This means that we might need to reconsider issues related to the affective filter and language learner anxiety in the context of virtual worlds.
Anonymity
At the same time, there seems to be a strong sense of anonymity in most virtual worlds. On the one hand this might be good for language learning anxiety but on the other it could encourage anti-social behaviour without fear of retribution. Despite this, I think it is great for meeting up with people you already know or have met online in other contexts.
During our tutorial we came across a few random people with animal heads and butterfly wings. Luckily, they were not anti-social.
So, what next?
The most exciting realisation from wandering around SmallWorlds was how easy it would be to set up text-based pair and group work, mingles, surveys or even a find someone who. In fact, I can see classroom activities translating quite well into these environments but what is more interesting is how learning can be enhanced by virtual worlds. I have briefly introduced SmallWorlds to a pre-int class and an advanced class, and I intend to host a christmas party in the DTLT space which would otherwise be impossible to organise. Adding to this, virtual worlds allow us to link up learners from different geographic locations to take part in the same ‘classroom’ activity. For example, each class could prepare questions for the other about life in their part of the world. Due to this global reach, these kinds of activities can also be used to facilitate immersive interaction with native speakers of the target language no matter where you are. Although using virtual worlds for language learning is not with out its difficulties, I think it is clear that there is great potential in them for language learning. Also with technologies like oculus rift and google glass on the horizon I believe that virtual worlds will play an ever more important role in education in general.
Here Michael Bodekaer looks at the future of science education, but it is easy to imagine the same concept applied to language learning.
References
Blake, N. (2002) Hubert Dreyfus on Distance Education: relays of educational embodiment. Educational Philosophy andTheory, 34, 4, pp. 379-385
Dörnyei, Z. and Ushioda, E. (2009) Chapter 1, Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self: A theoretical Overview. Multilingual Matters.
Dreyfus, H. (2001) On the Internet (ch 2). Routledge: London
Hood, B. (2002) The Self Illusion UK: Constable
Kramsch, C. (1993) Context and Culture in Language teaching. Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, C. (1998) Language and Culture. Oxford University Press.
Lemke, J.L. (2002) Language development and identity: multiple timescales in the social ecology of learning. In Kramsch C.J. (ed.)Language acquisition and language socialization: ecological perspective. London; New York: Continuum. pp.85-95.
Milton, J. (2013) Second Language Acquisition via Second Life. In Chapelle C.A. (Ed) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Roed, J. (2003) Language Learner Behaviour in a Virtual Environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 2-3, pp. 155-172.
Taylor, T. (2002)Chapter 3, Living Digitally: Embodiment in Virtual Worlds T.L. From R. Schroeder (Ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments. London: Springer-Verlag.
Warburton, S.(2003) Second Life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching.British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 3, 414-426.
Wehner, A, K. Gump, A, W. Downey, S. (2011) The effects of Second Life on the motivation of undergraduate students learning a foreign language. (Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24, 3, 277-289.)
This week we were asked to critically analyse a piece of research on social media use in language classrooms. As I have been using Edmodo I was looking for something similar to compare with my experience of social media. But what exactly is social media?
This question is much harder to answer than it might first seem, the word social media is a huge umbrella term encompassing a wide range of web 2.0 tools. Under the term social media, we find subcategories, such as blogging, microblogging, podcasting and social book-marking. Each of these application types has a range of features that help distinguish them. For example, most social networks allow users to set up a personal profile, publish or share content on message boards and communicate though chat or instant messaging features. Despite these seemingly distinct categories and affordances, there is a lot of cross-over between these constantly evolving Web 2.0 tools. For an exhaustive list of social media tools follow the link below to an interactive PDF from http://www.ovrdrv.com/.
The research journal I found focused on the use of Facebook in language learning and students’ reactions to its use. For further information, please see the the link to the research and my slideshow below.
The journal starts out by outlining how the development of Web 2.0 tools and the social web have changed the way individuals interact with the world and the impact this is having on education (G. Blattner, L. Lomicka, 2012, p.2). Many experts align themselves with this view claiming the widespread use of Web 2.0 tools require a departure from industrial mass-market approaches to education (K. Robinson, 2015, p.xv), (C. Mcoughlin, M. Lee, 2008 p1) (G. Dudeney, N. Hocky, M. Pegrum, 2013. p.5). C. Mcoughlin and M. Lee even go on to coin the term ‘Pedagogy 2.0’ to respond to these changes (2008, p.1).
‘Pedagogy 2.0 integrates Web 2.0 tools that support knowledge sharing, peer-to-peer networking, and access to a global audience with socioconstructivist learning approaches to facilitate greater learner autonomy, agency, and personalization.’
Notwithstanding the affordances of Web 2.0 tools, there are still many hurdles to cross before we can confidently dive into ‘pedagogy 2.0’. Although there may be many issues to consider, I would like to focus on the issue of privacy which came up in the research journal on Facebook mentioned above.
Social Networks and Privacy
There is a general trend towards openness and sharing on the internet, marked by the multitude of blogs, YouTube videos and Facebook profiles (M. Weller, 2011 p23). However, not everyone is happy to share their personal information with the rest of the world or even their peers on a language course. In fact, in the study on Facebook one of the students did express concerns over the sharing of personal information (G. Blattner, L. Lomicka, 2012, p.11). Many teachers I know, including myself, refrain from using Facebook with students for the very same concerns. That said, G. Dudeney et al. argue that it is our responsibility as teachers to develop students’ ‘digital literacies’ for our networked digital age (2013, p.2). One solution suggested by Matt Britland from the Guardian is to use Facebook groups as they can be set up without participants needing to be ‘friends’(2012). Click here to read the article.
Education focussed alternatives
Tools like Edmodo can act as a more neutral space, where you can share as much or as little as you like with relative ease compared to Facebook. I have been using Edmodo for the last 2 months and it seems to be going well. It doesn’t have all the features and integration of Facebook but it’s good for sharing links, files, audio recordings, flipcharts and giving out assignments. Another use I recently discovered was using Edmodo to keep a running commentary of the lesson for absent students.
Instant messaging
The instant messaging application WhatsApp has some similarities to Facebook, in the way that it crosses personal boundaries. As I’ve mentioned before in previous posts some of my classes create L2 only WhatsApp groups to keep track of homework and share pictures of the board. There is a lot of pressure though from the class for students to divulge their numbers for the group and resistance to do so can create tension in some groups. On our MA we have started using Kakao as an alternative to WhatsApp to avoid these issues. I personally have never felt like joining WhatsApp groups with my students, but this does leave me out of the loop and makes it difficult to monitor students’ contributions.
Control
Perhaps the issue of privacy hides a deeper unconscious resistance from teachers and institutions to engage in social media, that of losing control. According to Stefana Broadbent, cognitive scientist and tech anthropologist, this fear of losing control due to technology can be seen across all areas of society.
‘what is going on is that these institutions are trying to decide who, in fact, has a right to self determine their attention, to decide, whether they should, or not, be isolated.’
Are you ready for pedagogy 2.0?
Where does all this organic communication and collaboration between individuals fit in with our current content delivery models of education? If we decide to embrace social media in education, how can we effectively monitor and assess our learners’ progress in these environments? I fear that our current approaches to SLA do not address these questions adequately. I therefore agree with the need for a ‘pedagogy 2.0’ (C. Mcoughlin, M. Lee, 2008). And with Ravenscroft when he states that we need to ‘reconfigure and reformulate learning and pegagogy’ to take advantage of the social web(2009).
References
Blattner, L. Lomicka (2012) Facebook-ing and the Social Generation: A new era of Language Learning. Alsic, Vol. 15, n1.
Dudeney, N. Hocky, N. Pegrum, M. (2013) Digital Literacies. Pearson.
Mcoughlin, C. Lee, M. (2008) Future Learning landscapes: Transforming pedagogy through Social Software (Innovate Journal of Online Education, Vol 4, Issue 5, p.1987-1989)
Ravenscroft, A. (2009) Social software, Web 2.0 and learning: Status and implications of an evolving paradigm. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol 25, Issue 1, p.1-5
Robinson, K.(2015) Creative Schools. Allen Lane.
Weller, M.(2015) The Digital Scholar, Bloomsbury publishing.
Facebook privacy https://www.facebook.com/help/325807937506242/(viewed on 29/11/15)
Edmodo https://www.edmodo.com/ (viewed 29/11/15)
Featured image
Facebook control http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/11/how-the-cia-uses-social-media-to-track-how-people-feel/247923/ (viewed on 29/11/15)
Video
Stefana Broadbent How the internet enables intimacy TED.com (viewed on 29/11/15)
It has long been accepted that anxiety can have a negative effect on SLA and there are various communicative approaches and methods that claim to reduce the affective filter, such as the Natural Approach (Krashen, S. and Terrell, T. 1983, p.59), Total Physical Response (Asher 1977), Community language Learning (Curran 1976) and Suggestopedia (Lazonov, G. 1960s). All of these approaches have foundations in face-to-face learning in classrooms, but could the classroom context itself be fostering foreign language anxiety?
Stress-free environment
Jannie Roed claims that students exhibit less language learning anxiety in online contexts using text-based SCMC due to a reduced sense of ‘social self awareness’ (2010, p.155). Roed’s findings suggest that this reduction in social anxiety encourages production of the target language in students that would be unlikely to contribute in face-to-face learning environments. (Roed, 2010, p.171). The assumption here is that learners feel more comfortable expressing themselves through synchronous written interaction than they would when speaking in a foreign language class. Results from the foreign language classroom anxiety scale (FLACS) are also indicative of the fact that anxious students refrain from speaking in L2 in classroom environments. (Horwitz, K. 1986, p.129).
Scaffolding
At first it may seem that increased written communication would have little effect on spoken fluency but SCMC or online ‘chat’ with apps like WhatsApp blur the line between these two productive skills. Also, online written communication could provide the scaffolding insecure learners need to become more confident in face-to-face interactions. (Roed, J. 2010, p.170).
Pedagogy and Anxiety
However, Roed’s conclusion that the reduced anxiety in online text-based SCMC can aid SLA seems to underestimate the importance of pedagogical choices. According to Wörde’s research, it’s the teacher’s approach in the classroom that is vital to creating a stress free environment. (Wörde, R. 2003, p.7). Wörde gives examples of teachers needing to make the class enjoyable, not putting shy students ‘on the spot’, attitudes to error correction, using games and providing material that is relevant to the students’ lives. (2003, p7,8).
Digital Technology and anxiety
Adding to this, claims that online text-based SCMC reduce language learner anxiety fail to take into consideration a whole host issues related to distance education in general. These include, amongst others, feelings of isolation from your peers and the teacher, absence of immediate feedback and inability to gauge your progress against other students’ work (Hurd, S. 2007, p.495). We also need to consider the anxiety some learners may experience due to negative associations with technology or unfamiliarity.
A time and place for text-based SCMC
Despite these issues, Text-based SCMC does have some other advantages over spoken communication apart from the reduction of social awareness in reducing foreign language anxiety. These include less anxiety over accuracy due to spelling and grammar checkers, and less time pressure to type and reflect. (Yamanda, 2009, p.830). These affordances could even be used in blended learning contexts to encourage shyer learners to express themselves in classroom environments. So, perhaps we need to consider the fact that Text-based SCMC can have considerable advantages for less confident students and not rush straight to the latest video and audio features of digital technologies for the sake of it.
For a more in-depth look at foreign language anxiety please see the video below:
Glossary
SCMC, synchronous computer mediated communication
SLA, second language acquisition
References
Horwitz, K. et al (1986) Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety: The Modern Language Journal, 70, 2 pp. 125-132).
Hurd, S.(2007) Anxiety and non-anxiety in a distance language learning environment: The distance factor as a modifying influence. System, 35, 487-508.
Krashen, S. and Terrell, T. (1983) The Natural Approach, Language acquisition in the classroom, Alemany Press.
Renée von Wörde, (2003) Students’ Perspectives on Foreign Language Anxiety: Virginia Community College System 2003, Inquiry, Volume 8, Number 1.
Yamada.(2009) The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers and Education, 52, 820-833.
Garrison, Aderson and Archer (2000, p.87) outline three crucial elements of an educational experience in their community of inquiry template; cognitive, social and teaching presence. See image below.
(Garrison et al. 2000, p.88)
One sub category of ‘social presence’ is ‘emotional expression’ and is seen as being essential for achieving learning outcomes. (Garrison et al. 2000, p.95). Dreyfus also argues that learning may not surpass the stage of ‘competence’ without students being emotionally involved, and goes further to state that emotional involvement requires embodiment (2001, ch 2, p.39). He also claims that students are more emotionally involved, and care more about their learning when an ‘intimidating’, physically present teacher is there in the flesh.
Cyborgs
James Dwight supports Drayfus by bundling together emotion and embodiment but hints at the fact that technologies are, in a way, part of our bodily presence (2001, p.146). He also reflects on our symbiotic relationship with digital technology and our ‘posthuman’ state, combining biological, social and digital presence (2001, p.149). This is very much in line with Cousin’s view of digital technologies as an extension of the nervous system (Cousin. G, 2005, p.119). Seen in this light, your online presence could be considered part of your bodily presence and therefore not so easily separated from your emotions.
Imagination and emotional engagement
Adding fuel to the argument against the claim that online learning is devoid of emotional involvement, Blake (2002, p.384) gives examples of his experience with ‘flaming’ to demonstrate how online interactions can have significant emotional impact. He also highlights the role imagination plays in emotional engagement in both online and face-to-face interactions. From this he concludes that it is our imagination and psychological connections that make interactions emotionally engaging, not just our physical presence (Blake 2002, p385). In fact, our imagination can give us the illusion of presence or of ‘non-mediation’ where the technology seems ‘invisible’ as described by Lombard M. and Ditton T. (1997, p.8). Here is a popplet me and my peers created with their concept of presence laid out: Presence. It is easy to see how recent developments, such as the Oculus Rift and Microsoft’s HoloLens will help aid this illusion of presence and thus increase emotional engagement.
My Experience as an online learner
I agree with Drayfus (2001, ch2, p.39) that emotional involvement is fundamental to learning but, as a student on this course, I do not find online learning to be less emotionally engaging. On the contrary, my emotional engagement seems higher due to the exposure of my thoughts to a potentially wider public audience. Apart from taking part in discussion forums, I find writing this blog to be an enormously risky and emotionally charged experience. Rarely do you share your writing with other students and possibly the public in ‘traditional’ face-to-face learning environments.
My experience of online teacher presence
Garrison et al. suggest that teaching presence can also come from anyone within a community of inquiry and not just the teacher, i.e. your peers (2000, p.90). Despite this, the main responsibility for the design and facilitation of a course often lies with the teacher (Garrison et al. 2000, p.90). I must say that the level of support and teacher presence on my current course in Digital Technologies for language Teaching has been excellent so far, if not better than my experience in face-to-face learning environments. I am acutely aware that there are human beings at the other end of the line and I can feel their presence through our online interactions. That said, I come to this course as an adult, have clear objectives and clear expectations of what an MA entails. Higher education obviously requires a high level of learner autonomy, and my expectations of teacher presence were therefore relatively low. I am also a teacher who believes in the importance of peer evaluation and collaboration in learning. This means that I am happy to take more control of my learning and accept the teacher as a guide or facilitator. Other, less experienced or less autonomous learners may find online education more difficult due to their specific expectations, level of study, subject of study and context. That said, the level of support or teacher presence does not necessarily increase just because your course is face-to-face.
References
Blake N. (2002), Hubert Dreyfus on Distance Education: relays of educational embodiment. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 34, 4, pp. 379-385
Cousin. G, (2005) Learning from cyberspace in Land, R. and Bayne, S. (eds) Education in cyberspace. (London, Routledge Falmer. pp. 117-129.
Dreyfus H.(2001) On the Internet London, Routledge, ch 2.
Dwight J. (2004) Review Essay. On the Internet. E-Learning, 1, 1, pp.146-152.
Garrison et al. (2000) Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. Elsevier Science Inc; The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), pp. 87-105
Lombard, M. and Ditton, T. (1997) At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3: 0. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x
Images
Community of inquiry image
Garrison et al. (2000) Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. Elsevier Science Inc; The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), pp. 87-105
We are now, more or less, halfway through the first module of the MA, which is basically a week off. So, I thought I’d take the opportunity to put a post together with links to all the posts so far. This is to organise my thoughts and for anyone who wants to to dip in and out of areas that interest them.
Preparing for the course
Before we started the course I read a couple of introductory books on the subject of digital technologies in education. Here is my initial introduction on why I am writing this blog and the first book I read about the roles computers can take.
When I started drawing my PLE I put myself in the middle with all the pathways to other people and content around me, but as I progressed I found myself appearing at the edges of the map too. This made me wonder whether I had misinterpreted my importance in my PLE, perhaps the ideas are more important then me.
This reminded me of the theory of ‘memes’ as laid out by Richard Dawkins, in ‘The Selfish Gene’. The concept is as follows; ideas, melodies, images (memes) exhibit similar patterns or behaviour to genes. They make copies of themselves in books, songs, paintings and digital artefacts, and often end up in our heads. While they’re in our heads they get mutated by our experience and other memes. Then when they come out again in the forms of ideas, melody, images etc. they are slightly different. The ones which get copied survive and the ones that don’t, don’t. There are no inherently ‘good’ or ‘bad’ ones and sometimes the proliferation of certain memes can do us more harm than good. So I could see myself as a ‘meme machine’ or a temporary vessel for the memes that I will pass on in my PLE.
The collective PLE
To bring this realisation a bit closer to our everyday reality, I basically use the information I am exposed to as inspiration for creative pursuits, which I then put back into circulation. These creations are digested by other conscious (or non conscious) beings and provide fuel for yet more creations that may come back to me. It’s almost as if there is one giant PLE that everybody is connected to facilitating this process. Before the advent of the internet, the number of people who could contribute to the collective PLE was fairly small, now all you need is a device and an internet connection. This means that memes, like the concept of PLEs themselves, are free to develop, evolve and spread like never before.
My role in the PLE
If I see my PLE as being connected to the people I interact with, then I must see myself as a collaborator. By this I mean that I work together with others to develop intellectually by bouncing ideas off others. We learn together as we receive ideas and contribute to the community of people we are connected to.
My role in my students’ PLEs
Seeing a learner’s PLE as part of their identity, through which they can shape and contribute to in a language community, means that language learners are most definitely not passive receivers of content. What’s more, learners can continue to play an active role in the language community for the rest of their lives, learning is no longer confined to a course or geographical location.
So how do you teach a PLE?
From a teaching perspective my first role would be a as guide, in order to raise awareness of a student’s PLE and how to consciously exploit and expand it. I would get students to reflect on what they learn from and contribute to and even attempt a mind-map of their PLE. To encourage students in this task we could also consider the fact that interaction using L2 is authentic communication in the real world. After this, I could move on to a more facilitating role, monitoring students as they interact, select content and explore elements of the L2 culture they identify with. As students start to collaborate in their PLEs, I would become a collaborator too. This has interesting implications for teacher-student relationships as your social and professional lives become entwined and reach beyond the confines of a course or an institution.
The end of institutions
Even if PLEs have always existed, giving them a name and reflecting on what they represent is potentially revolutionary for education. The main reason for this is that they have very little to do with our conventional associations between educational institutions and education. Weller in ‘The Digital Scholar’ suggests that we should not ‘confuse function with form’ like we did with the album and track, the newspaper and information, and books and ideas (Weller. M, 2011). Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) have gone some way to separate form from function but they are still walled-gardens, controlled by institutions and often based on linear content delivery. Perhaps as we embrace the PLE we will no longer need buildings, managers, expensive directors, the government and all the other people and things that cost so much and often get in the way of learning.
I must admit, this ‘revolution’ is unlikely to happen overnight, and might be more accurately described as an ‘evolution’. That said, the concept of PLEs is still a powerful evolving meme that I believe will have profound effects on the way we learn and teach.
References
Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, (Oxford University Press 1989)
Martin Weller, The Digital Scholar, (Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 2011)
Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) can be seen as ‘a set of tools, information sources, connections and activities-experiences that every person uses to learn assiduously’ (Castañeda. L & Soto. J, 2010). This seems straight forward enough until you try to draw one. Then you start to realise, as your mind-map gets bigger and bigger, that it’s an endless web of tools and people with everything connecting to everything else. Towards the end, you might even start to question your own existence as a conscious entity.
The extended nervous system
Last week we discussed the shift from CALL to TELL, with computers/devices and web 2.0 ‘tools’ becoming part of the environment in which language is situated. But are we not also part of this environment?
Cousin. G, questions the idea that digital tools are neutral to pedagogy, seeing them as being inextricably linked to our identity, or even ‘an extension of our nervous system’.(Cousin. G, 2005). This challenges the assumption that pedagogy should be leading the use of digital technology in education because this ‘set of tools’ changes the way we view our world, interact with it and ultimately learn. As a result, technology should have an effect on pedagogy and visa versa. If our PLE is, among other things, a collection of tools connected to our nervous system, then we become part of our learning environment and our learning environment becomes part of us. Therefore, when we interact with and create digital artefacts, letting them loose on the world wide web, we are, in a sense, recreating our self.
Carving out an identity
Before digital technologies and the internet, my nervous system was largely confined to my immediate surroundings. I could only really interact with and learn from my local community and environment. Obviously, I could write a letter or maybe even pick up the phone, but the level of interaction and immersion was nothing compared to what we can do now. Nowadays, we can interact with more people/things, from further away, in more ways and often at little cost. My digital nervous system can, or will one day be able to connect to almost anything or anyone in the solar system. If people learn from experience and interaction with their environment, there is now a lot more that we can learn. At the same time, other people can learn from me and my digital artefacts while I carve out my identity from cyber-space and the cosmos.
So, to sum up, my PLE should, include anything my senses can take in and anything/one I can have an effect on, whether it be next to me or in Australia, or on Mars via a robot. The only problem with this concept is that it is very difficult to draw.
In the next post I will look at my role in my PLE and the role of PLEs in education.
References
Castañeda. L & Soto. J, Building Personal Learning Environments by using and mixing ICT tools in a professional way. (digitalEDUCATION 2010), 18 [http://greav.ub.edu/der/index.php/der/article/view/163]
Cousin. G, Learning from cyberspace in Land, R. and Bayne, S. (eds) Education in cyberspace. (London, RoutledgeFalmer. 2005) pp. 117-129.
According to the Jisc Digital Media site, a VLE is ‘an online set of tools and spaces that are managed by the institution for use in supporting teaching and learning’.(Jisc, viewed 2015). Some examples of VLEs are Moodle and Blackboard. Some of the affordances of VLEs, apart from providing a structure for learning, are; content delivery, synchronous and asynchronous discussion, online assessment, student tracking and provision of student tools. (Weller. M, 2007).
Getting to know VLEs
I have very little experience with VLEs, apart from Moodle on my current course and a couple of MOOCs on Astronomy and Music on Coursera. I can see VLEs as being fairly fundamental to online courses in order to organise and manage course content but I am yet to be convinced of their validity alongside face-to face teaching in blended learning contexts. In order to raise my awareness of VLEs I have decided to experiment with Edmodo with a couple of my adult classes. I will use it mainly as a storage space for students to post links to useful websites, articles, podcasts and videos related to course content. Although Edmodo lacks the flexibilty and structure that Moodle offers, it may be more accessible due to its similar look and feel to Facebook. I will have a minimal presence on the site and give students the freedom to use the space as they please. Nonetheless, I am concerned that my absence might have a negative effect on student engagement and will therefore check in once a week to monitor contributions and select some of their comments and links for use in lessons.
Time concerns
I think one of the most common concerns from my colleagues in regards to VLEs in a blended learning context is that interaction will creep outside their normal working hours. Most teachers already feel overstretched, and a badly managed VLE could tip them over the edge, or at least put them off digital technology for good. However, if the teacher’s method is based on learners finding/creating material and peer to peer collaboration not only will it save time but also enhance learning, in line with the constructivist learning theory.
The here and now
I can understand the idea that if you set up content on a VLE one year, the next year should be easier and less time consuming. That said, I am afraid of not responding to my learners needs, in the here and now, by following a linear structure set out the previous year. When I started teaching in my current position, I spent hours preparing PowerPoint presentations that followed the course book content. Despite all the hard work, the presentations never seemed to fit with my new learners, I felt as if I wasn’t really engaging with them as human beings or responding to their individual interests.
Free, open and non-linear
As with course books and PowerPoint presentations, VLEs tend to follow a predetermined path with a culturally imposed viewpoint and little room for learner agency. They also seem to forego the affordances of the internet and go against current trends in online behaviour where content is free, open and non-linear. It almost feels as if we are trying to cling on to an outdated ‘traditional’ educational system based on the one-way transmission of information that doesn’t quite fit with our current digital reality. According to Glynis Cousin, VLEs grew out of ‘the broadcast phase of technology’ and thus it is in their very nature to be content-centred to a certain degree. (Cousin. G, 2005). This is why I find the alternative of PLEs (Personal Learning Environments) quite interesting with the VLE as only a small part of much larger network of peers and learning tools.
The way we use language has been transformed by the technology it is embedded in. So, do we need to reconsider the role technology plays in language teaching and learning? Warschauer laid out three phrases of ‘CALL’ Computer-Assisted Language Learning; ‘Behaviouristic CALL’, ‘Communicative CALL’ and ‘Integrative CALL’. (Warchauer, M. 1996). However, due to the development, ubiquity and normalisation of digital technologies in our daily lives, experts are now calling for a new phase or even approach called ‘TELL’ Technology Enhanced Language Learning. (Walker, A. & White, Goodith. 2013). One of the key differences between previous approaches and ‘TELL’ is that digital technology is seen as the environment in which language is learned and used, not just a tool.
From pen and paper to word processors
Here is one example of how written communication has been affected by its technological environment.
Nowadays, when we want to write to someone, apply for a job or compose an essay we are most likely to turn to a word processor rather than pen and paper. Word processors now come in many shapes and sizes, which can potentially transform the writing process. Using a computer or device learners can edit their text at any time without prior planning and use spelling and grammar checkers to aid fluency. (Beatty, K. 2003)
From Wikis and blogs to microblogs
Wikis take writing composition to a new level by making it collaborative and connected to the web. Here learners can incorporate hyperlinks into their text, making the experience interactive and non-linear. Blogs can be interactive and non-linear too, but they also facilitate social elements, such as comments and discussion. Microblogs on the other hand, have created a truly unique etiquette of their own, a style of written communication that did not exist before that is potentially synchronous.
From SCMC text to multi-media
Adding to this, text messaging or chat applications like WhatsApp have blurred the line between written and spoken interaction and now you can even include voice messages, videos or images into your conversation. There is also a new repertoire of symbols that have come into play to express emotion, the emoticon.
From assisting language learning to language ownership
By using WhatsApp groups, learners can simultaneously communicate with a large number of peers from anywhere in the world and possibly create their own communities with unique cultural norms and etiquette. Therefore, the affordances of digital technologies allow communities of interest and language learners to shape the way language is used. This goes way beyond the role of assisting language learning and into the realm of genuine language use and ownership. This, I hope, goes some way to explain why our perception of the role of digital technologies in education may need to change from CALL to TELL.
From TELL to the normalisation of change
In order to fully implement a TELL ‘approach’ you need a certain amount of normalisation or invisibility of digital technology, which may not always be feasible in some educational contexts. At the same time, digital technologies are continuously evolving and we will always be playing catch up as educators and learners. In fact, this could be said of many other areas of our lives at the moment where technology is playing an ever increasing role, such as in our professional lives and relationships. It is natural for people to crave stability and feel unsettled by the unpredictability life offers. However, we shouldn’t be hiding away from these technological developments for fear of failure, but rather view these changes as an opportunity to constantly improve on the way we live and learn.
References
Warschauer M. (1996) “Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction”.
In Fotos S. (ed) Multimedia language teaching, Tokyo: Logos International: 3-20.
Aisha Walker & Goodith White. ‘ Technology Enhanced Language Learning’ Connecting theory and practice (OUP 2013).
Ken Beatty. ‘Teaching and Researching Computer-Assisted language Learning’ (Pearson, 2003).
Inspired by my course so far, I sent round an email at work to see who might be interested in developing their use of digital technologies for language teaching. Every year we are required to complete an action research project which, unfortunately, is often seen as another imposition on top of all the other administrative tasks we have to do. Despite this, two very experienced teachers decided to take part in the special interest group (SIG) and we had our first face-to-face meeting on Friday.
Where shall we start?
We set out by focussing on specific areas where we felt we were failing our learners or where little progress was being made. We then tried to identify which digital tools might provide new solutions to these issues. Areas that came up included learner agency, learner autonomy, engagement and personalisation. We also came to the conclusion that investigation into our learners’ attitudes towards the role of digital technology in their learning was needed. We felt the best way to start would be with a questionnaire for our students and perhaps even one for ourselves too. One of the teachers used SurveyMonkey to complete her research last year for both qualitative and quantitative data using ranking, multiple choice questions and comments. We therefore decided to focus on this tool as our first structured use of digital technologies with our students.
What questions do we need?
The questionnaire will need to focus on the following areas for both students and teachers:
Attitudes to learning languages.
understanding of teacher and learner roles.
Past experience of technology for language learning.
Current use of technology for learning.
And finally, perhaps some evaluation of digital literacies.
Please join in!
This is by no means a complete list, so please feel free to suggest other areas which you feel should be included. When the survey is completed I would like to share the result here for further evaluation and for any teachers that would like to use it with their classes.
Back in 2003, Stephen Bax described ‘normalisation’ as ‘the stage when technology becomes invisible’ and sets this as an aim for truly integrated CALL (Bax, S. 2003). Digital technology has come a long way since 2003 and most learners now carry tiny computers in their pockets that are vastly superior to what was available back then.
So, has technology become invisible in our classrooms?
My students were initially surprised when I started using a BYOD approach, but I believe mobile phone use in class can reach a certain level of ‘normalisation’ with time. However, this is helped by my current context where class sizes are fairly small and students expect something different from their normal lessons in state schools. Having also worked in a number of primary and secondary state schools in China and Italy, it would seem that the ‘normalisation’ of digital technologies in mainstream education is a long way off. That said, most students nowadays do have smart phones hidden under their desks, so perhaps it is mainly an issue of teacher/student attitudes and training. Another reason could be that many teachers feel threatened by the information students have at their fingertips. Either that or they associate mobile phone use with distraction and disrespect, which does need to be addressed. That said, by banning mobile phone use completely, teachers are denying their students and themselves a wealth of opportunities.
Bridging the gap
Charles Leadbetter sees cheap ubiquitous mobile devices as the solution to the ‘digital divide’ (TED.com, 2010). In his talk on TED.com Charles looks to what is happening in the poorest communities in Brazil and Africa for inspiration. He states that in these situations, learning needs to be connected to the realities of life i.e. finding a job and surviving. Mobile devices allow learners to access the collective knowledge of the Internet and take learning beyond the confines of the classroom, perhaps even to companies. I think there is a lot of potential to overcome social-economic divides through the ‘normalisation’ of smartphone use in education. I also believe that educational institutions in the developed world have a lot to learn from other less privileged contexts. Towards the end of the video Charles states that ‘we are on the verge of the schoolification of the world’. However, this talk was made five years ago and we still feel a long way off from this dream. If the technology is already here and ‘normalised’ in our everyday lives, what is stopping the digital divide from being bridged?
References
Stephen Bax, CALL-past, present and future, (Elsevier Science Ltd, 2003)
Charles Leadbetter, Education innovation in the slums, (TED.com 2010)
This blog post is just a quick update on my experiences with Edmodo, Quizlet, Popplet and Wikis in my classroom.
So, how did Edmodo go?
For some unknown reason my initial Edmodo class just disappeared! This was possibly due to it being registered with my school’s email address or perhaps even my own digital stupidity. Despite this minor setback, I was still able to access my students’ posts through my work email. I had asked my students to find a video on TED.com that interested them, then write and post a summary of the main points on Edmodo for the rest of the class. I am very interested to see how Edmodo can encourage learner autonomy and collaboration. My plan was to ask them to use their phones to access Edmodo in class and then summarise the longest summary but instead, I had to print of the summaries. I have since set up new Edmodo groups with all my adult classes with my personal email address and everything seems to be working now.
Next thing to try
We have been using Moodle as a VLE on my distance learning course and I would like to make use of Edmodo in a similar way for a blended learning experience. One affordance of some VLEs is synchronous CMC, which could be used in class to encourage shyer learners to participate. I would like to try starting a discussion in pairs, face to face, then invite the students to post their ideas to Edmodo. I can then display the posts on the IWB to give feedback, or the discussion could continue beyond the lesson.
Quizlet
I have also started using Quizlet with most of my classes to act as a student storage space for lexis. This has received mixed reactions, Adult classes took to it immediately, but surprisingly my teenage learners have not. I think I need to find a way to integrate it into lessons more to highlight its usefulness and give it more relevance. Quizlet generates games based on the lexis you input but it lacks a real social element, which might also explain why my younger learners are disinterested.
My learning with Quizlet, Popplet and the Wiki
Seeing as I was trying out these web 2.0 tools with my learners, I thought I might as well use them too. I have therefore set up a Quizlet set for lexis related to digital technologies and a Popplet mind map for web 2.0 tools to encourage collaboration. Our tutor has also provided a Wiki page for us to use as we please. I am unfamiliar with Wiki pages so I am trying to experiment with it as much as possible to get some experience. So far I have created a page for digital lesson ideas, a page for video and text-based content related to the course, and added links to the Popplet and Quizlet set mentioned above. From what I can tell Wikis provide a storage space for all our ideas, notes and discussions, but so far most of the interaction has taken place on Moodle. When I become more confident with Wikis and fully understand their affordances I will experiment with my learners.
When Marc Prensky coined the terms ‘digital immigrants’ and ‘digital natives’ back in 2001, he sparked a debate which still rages today. (Prensky, 2001, p.1,2). Nowadays however, it is generally accepted that such a clear divide between ‘native’ and ‘immigrants’ is both misleading and dangerous. (R. Land & S. Bayne, 2011, p.159), (Stoerger, S. 2009, p.Conclusion). Despite this, there is little doubt that the way people live has changed dramatically since the advent of the internet. We use the internet to apply for jobs, book holidays, find somewhere to live, keep in touch with family or even to find a partner. This coupled with the widespread distribution of ever cheaper digital devices means that we are forever connected to the rest of the world.
Here’s a link for more insight into how our lives have changed:
One phenomenon of this connection has been the spread of social networks, some of which have even been held responsible for social change. Twitter, for example, has changed the way we communicate political views, breaking news, celebrity gossip and activism amongst others. (Lee, D. BBC 2013). Apart from changing how we interact with the world, some people believe our exposure to digital technologies will lead to a new type of learner owing to the increasing plasticity of the brain. (Prensky, M, 2011, p.18). Others urge caution and call for more theoretically based research to truly understand learners have changed as a result of exposure to digital technologies. (Bennet, S. & Maton, K. 2010, p.329).
Here is a video of Marc Prensky arguing, amongst other things, for the case that digital technologies are changing our minds:
So, is our exposure to digital technologies really having an impact on the way people learn?
Growing up with it
Children growing up now have never known a world without digital technologies and the internet. This technology permeates every corner of their lives, from when they are stuck in front of a YouTube video as a baby to when they copy and paste a thesis from a google search. This ‘growing up’ with digital technology must surely invoke certain expectations from education. Another major change in behaviour amongst the majority of the population is our approach to privacy. In a culture of sharing and openness, a large number of our students now have a photographic record or their entire lives available to their friends or the wider public. The invention of the selfie stick for smart phones can also been seen as a manifestation of our desire to document our lives and self-obsession.
Non-Linear learning
No matter what age, almost every student at my school has a smartphone begging them for attention with WhatsApp messages and Facebook updates throughout the day. This influx of interactive information could develop skills in prioritising and multi-tasking which in turn could lead to disinterest in more linear tasks. Most syllabi and lesson plans do currently tend to take on a rather step by step approach to second language acquisition which might be inappropriate for our multitasking digital learners. That said, Bennet & Maton believe that we need to distinguish between knowledge acquired outside educational contexts and within them. And that a linear method of instruction may be more effective for certain subjects (2010, p.327). Adding to this, it can be equally argued that learners have always been multitasking or even that multitasking causes distraction rather than aiding learning (Bennet, S. et al. 2008, p.779).
Here is a list of interesting articles on multitasking:
These digital learners may also have new perceptions of authority, or disregard the teacher as provider of knowledge, when they have access to the wealth of information on the web. Prensky makes reference to the data stored on the web when he discusses ‘digital wisdom’. He suggests a new type of wisdom fuelled be our collective knowledge online and our ability to navigate it using critical thinking skills. (Prensky, M. 2011, p.18). It’s possible that today’s learners will not be convinced by more teacher centred approaches and may already be autonomous learners by the time they start their first language lesson. I have definitely noticed a shift in the last few years of students who feel the need to check answers on google in class.
New learners or new ways of learning
Even if the idea that there now exists a new type of learner may be hard to accept, the affordances of digital technologies do appear to offer new ways of learning. Whether or not these new opportunities support current theories of second language acquisition or require a change in pedagogy is still unclear to me.
Bennett & K. Maton, (2010) Beyond ‘digital natives’ debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences, Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008) The “digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence.British Journal of Education Technology, 25, 5, 775-786.
Land, R. & Bayne, S. (2001 ) EDs, Digital difference: Perspectives on Online Learning, Sense Publishers, pp. 159-169.
Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, MCB University Press.
Prensky, M. (2011) Deconstructing Digital Natives, Young people, Technology and the new literacies. Editor Michael Thomas Routledge; 1 edition.
Stoerger, S. (2009) The digital melting-pot: bridging the digital native-immigrant divide. First Monday. 14: 7. (html)http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2474/2243
Images
Featured image: http://betakit.com/majority-of-canadian-schools-havent-adopted-mobile-learning/(viewed 8/12/15)
Looking for aims and objectives in course books
Digital EFL 
