Getting Your Students Speaking FromInputToUptake Harnessing the power of blended learning and new technologies Giving Students A Voice

OnlineResources

What’s On Tap Potential Why get students speaking online? Types of delivery options Best practices Blended ideas / activities Websites / Tools Q and A Overview

New Possibilities WhatIf?

Why? Rationale Why the need for students to speak online?

Rationale Output reinforces fluency by 1.Practice 2.Noticing + CF 3.Hypothesizing 4.Habituation Merrill Swain

Rationale More Reasons Motivation Repetition Feedback / Monitoring Evaluation Self Directed Learning Efficacy / Fairness Low Affective Filter

What options are available? Options What types of blended learning can teachers implement ?

What options are available? Options Synchronous Asynchronous

What options are available? Options Websites Devices Audio / Video Video only Audio only Lab / Class / Home

Standards BestPractices What is the Gold standard?

StandardsBestPractices Make it official Give Ss choice Demo in class Provide a model Hardware Set standards

Lesson Planning Activities&Ideas How can teachers make this part of their online learning?

Lesson Planning Activities&Ideas Performances / Role plays Record the Textbook Reading for the class Picture Prompts / Response Mimicking | Singing Skype in the Classroom Opinions / Presentations Student Feedback

OnlineResources

EnglishCentral Top 3

Voicethread Top 3

Voxopop Top 3

Bubblejoy VideoPostcards

Eyejot Video

Audioboo AudioOnly

Chirbit AudioSharing

Evoca Audio Drop Box

Vocaroo No Frills Audio

Fotobabble SpeakingPhotos

Mailvu Video

Intervue VideoConvo

Lingt LMSCourses

Present.me FlippedCurriculum

Screenr Website

SingSnap SongsSinging

Woices LocationBased

Wetoku DuoInterviews

Scribblar Real Time Whiteboard

Skype in the Classroom Real Time Convo Record!

Tutorials PD

Further Thoughts Let’sTalk Discussion Q and A on technology

ContactMore

Further Reading Research Brown, Jeremy, Noticing: Is it a valid concept? TESL-EJ, 2002Noticing: Is it a valid concept? Heift, Trude, Corrective Feedback and learner uptake in CALL, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.Corrective Feedback and learner uptake in CALL Long, M.H., Problems in SLA, 2006 Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 63–90. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of language learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59–84. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235– 253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Further Reading References Schmidt, R. (1983). Interaction, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp ). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). New York: Routledge. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371–391. Taddarth, Assma, Recasts, Uptakes and Learning: Effects and Relationships. 2010Recasts, Uptakes and Learning: Effects and Relationships