Shrewsbury College of Arts & Technology Aspire Partner Development Fellowship Awards Theme: Learning using technology

 Central question: ‘ Do foreign language learners benefit from audio feedback for their assignments?. ’ The project aimed to identify tangible benefits for students AND staff:  Learners able to ‘listen again’ to feedback  Learners encouraged to focus on the feedback rather than the grade  More opportunity to listen to the spoken word and develop listening skills  Opportunity to provide more discreet feedback to learners (a way of nurturing and protecting confidence among sensitive beginners)

 Research - A review of the available literature and a technology review.  inform the early stages of the project  understand what other researchers had developed/discovered/achieved, and how they had done things technically.  Setup –ILT team to experiment with the technology  investigate various options  share the chosen option with the tutors.  allowed the evaluation process to be designed.  Launch – A demonstration of the audio feedback process in the classroom.  communicate the project work to the learners  questionnaire - find out learners technical skills & ability to access the technology.  Go Live –teaching/learning activity took place  tutors recorded their audio feedback  made it available for the learners.  activity and feedback (verbal, written, and digital audio).

 Two main choices about the use of technology  the choice of voice recorder  the method of getting the feedback to the learner: Choice of voice recorder  Several models of digital voice recorder available in the College. Chose the M-Audio Microtrack II  Prior use by ESOL tutor for narrating chapters of a book for learners  Satisfied with the sound quality  Used other digital voice recorders but this model most ‘user friendly’  M-Audio Microtrack II ability to produce mp3 files with no additional software or conversion necessary  Excellent sound quality and ease of connection to PC for file transfer

 Moodle used for delivering the feedback to the learner.  Limited the technical choices to the available Moodle modules.  Preferred choice was the ‘Assignment’ module. Other modules allow file uploads but ‘Assignment’ module ability to give feedback to an individual learner (no other learner has access).

 Three ESOL tutors were involved in this project:  Kim Prior – combined Level 1/Level 2 class - mix of PT & FT learners  Sue Watters - Entry Level 2 and 3  Simon Mootz - Entry Level 1 and 2 – beginner and elementary learners  Each tutor chose to use audio feedback in different ways  managed their group’s use of it in different ways.  allowed for feedback on the process so changes could be made  used ‘control groups’ differently but ensured exposure for learners to both written & audio feedback  benefits could be properly assessed during evaluation.

 Level 1 / Level 2 – Kim Prior  learners listen to a reading from a set text (audio file on Moodle)  write their own summary  tutor marks/comments on written work (12 learners involved, with 6 receiving written and 6 receiving audio feedback, then repeated so they experience the other form of feedback)  Entry Level 2 and 3 - Sue Watters  learners take an end of unit test  tutor provides audio feedback on their results and on areas for improvement (12 learners with the same control group method as above)  Entry Level 1 and 2 - Simon Mootz  Learners respond to direct questions then engage in observed discussion about topic  tutor gives feedback on their performance (6 learners will be involved, with 3 learners receiving direct verbal feedback and 3 receiving 'remote' audio feedback. In the following session this will be reversed).

 Did it work?  Feedback from staff and learners  Continuation with audio feedback?  Project Report – Nov/Dec 2010  Questions?

Richard Booth ILT Coordinator Dave Shearan College Projects Coordinator Kim Prior ESOL Tutor Sue Watters ESOL Tutor Simon Mootz ESOL Tutor