Presentation on theme: "A Journey to the Heart of the Digilab: Impact of 21st Century Technology Enhanced Language Learning on Student and Staff Language Futures: Languages in."— Presentation transcript:
A Journey to the Heart of the Digilab: Impact of 21st Century Technology Enhanced Language Learning on Student and Staff Language Futures: Languages in Higher Education Conference Edinburgh (July 2012) A Journey to the Heart of the Digilab: Impact of 21st Century Technology Enhanced Language Learning on Student and Staff Dr Chelo de Andrés Martínez Plymouth University
Chelo.email@example.com Background & Rationale: Transition from analogue to digital Methodology: Journey undergone by staff and students Results: Successes & Challenges Recommendations: Moving forwards AGENDA
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org BACKGROUND & RATIONALE The digital technology suite at Albany Senior High School, New Zealand. (Mosborne01)
Chelo.email@example.com BACKGROUND & RATIONALE Strong government and institutional drivers to adopt TEL strategies in UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) For languages the advantages are obvious (Digital quality, authentic materials readily available (radio, TV, native blogs); access to a wider audience; collaborative learning, etc. Employability skills for students (both ICT & Language skills) 95% of London employers think that language skills are important for the London economy (CBI London, 2010)
THE THREE RS Gillespie and Barr (2002) RADICALS RESISTANTS RELUCTANTS
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org METHODOLOGY Pilot to explore and establish models for essential tasks Training (2 full days for hands on training) User log to document implementation Shadowing each other for a period Storage structure and regular meetings to review the procedure Folder with instructions Repository of tips and resources
Chelo.email@example.com METHODOLOGY The use of the digilab for the pilot comprised practice sessions for the following modules: Activities: A1 (Listening practice); A2 (Speaking practice); A3 (Pair exercises); A4 (self-study); A5 (Oral test); A6 (listening test); (A7 innovative). Module CodeStudentsActivitiesSessionsDigilab FTS0018A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A76CKY511 / CKY513 SPNX001135A1, A2, A6, A54 (5 groups)CKY511 / CKY513 SPNX00317A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A66CKY511 /CKY513 FREX00067A1, A22CKY511 FREX000711A1, A2, A72CKY511 GERX00120A61CKY513
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org Celebrated Successes The digilab has simplified and streamlined processes associated with assessment of listening by large cohorts of language learners. Additionally, through the purchase of 50 licences, large classes are, for the first time, gaining personalised control of their audio material instead of it being teacher-controlled. Class time spent on individual oral assessments has been reduced. Teacher performance has been standardised during assessment, thus enhancing test validity
Chelo.email@example.com Student voice I definitely think the major advantage of using a digilab is that the information of a language is communicated more fluently to the individual. Its fun, and different to just using a white board and writing notes in pen and paper. The computer session has given me more confidence when it comes to speaking I liked the pairing up with another via computers, that worked well. It also helps with aural.
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org Remaining Challenges Flexible technology enhanced learning space (No spatial identity as Modern Languages Lab) Technical reliability and resilience (No dedicated tech support) Users – lack of confidence/belief/enthusiasm Teacher commitment to analogue methods/materials
Chelo.email@example.com Student voice convenience and communication are definitely improved by the use of computers and technology, but some lecturers are not as familiar with it as others making some sessions feel a little slow when time is spent setting up and finding things for those who are less confident. The only advantage I can see from the digilab sessions is when we are taking tests (speaking) a huge disadvantage is that I am hearing a language from a computer and quite often doesn't sound the same when a real person is speaking that language. Not much control over learning, and if you don't want to use the tech then there is no other alternative! Gives an unfair advantage to those that learn best using tech.
CHALLENGES STUDENTSSTAFF “Learning a language through a computer is the wrong way to go about it.” “The digilab has not changed my practice” The digilab sessions and CMC tasks are an addition to provide practice and help learners to gain confidence. Some differences need to be identified in the new context of blended learning and multimodal delivery to be able to adapt to it.
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org RECOMMENDATIONS Focus groups should be established among staff, students and LTs in order to create a forum for dissemination/ exploration of good practice in e- assessment and TELL Staff training/CPD in e-learning methodologies could be accredited and/or made obligatory Learning conversations between academics and students should be established with a view to greater, tailored use of blended learning within which e- assessment and e-feedback is embedded.
Chelo.email@example.com REFERENCES & LINKS Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for Teaching, Testing and Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Comas-Quinn, A. (2011). Learning to teach online or learning to become an online teacher: an exploration of teachers’ experiences in a blended learning course. ReCALL 23(3): 218–232. doi:10.1017/S0958344011000152 JISC (2010). Effective Assessment in a Digital Age: a guide to technology-enhanced assessment and feedback. Bristol: JISC. Felix, U. (2005). Analysing recent CALL effectiveness research — towards a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(1/2), pp. 1-32.
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org REFERENCES & LINKS USED Gallardo, M., Heiser, S. and Nicolson, M. (2011). Teacher Development for Blended Contexts in Language Teaching in Blended Contexts eds. Nicolson, M.; Murphy, L. and Southgate, M. Edinburgh, U.K.: Dunedin Academic Press. Gentle, C; Witt, N; White, S; Gibb, J. (2011) Report on the Efficacy of E-Assessment at the University of Plymouth. Plymouth University. Gillespie, J. & Barr, D. (2002) Resistance, reluctance and radicalism: A study of staff reaction to the adoption of CALL/C&IT in modern language departments. ReCALL 14 (1) 120-132.
Chelo.email@example.com REFERENCES & LINKS USED Leakey, J. (2010). Evaluating Computer-Assisted Language Learning: An Integrated Approach to Effectiveness Research in CALL. Peter Lang AG. Bern, Switzerland. Links Wizard of Oz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzxpv92YZ54 Journey to the centre of the earth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF8Bf1d_crk
Chelo.firstname.lastname@example.org Thanks to Plymouth University colleagues and students that had contribute with their opinions. MANY THANKS TO YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Dr Chelo de Andrés Martínez Plymouth University
WELCOME TO Language Futures : Languages in Higher Education 2012 5th & 6th July 2012 Edinburgh #LLASconf2012