1 / 32

Classroom materials creation and pedagogical knowledge improvements in a telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL

Classroom materials creation and pedagogical knowledge improvements in a telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL teachers. M. Camino Bueno- Alastuey Public University of Navarre. Index. Introduction Telecollaboration Telecollaboration in FL teacher training

leon
Download Presentation

Classroom materials creation and pedagogical knowledge improvements in a telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Classroom materials creation and pedagogical knowledge improvements in a telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL teachers M. Camino Bueno-Alastuey PublicUniversity of Navarre

  2. Index Introduction • Telecollaboration • Telecollaboration in FL teacher training • Knowledge creation metaphor The project • Context and objectives • Methodology • Participants • Data collection instruments • Procedure Results Limitations and further research Conclusions

  3. Introduction Telecollaborationprojects (Helm et al, 2012) • Linguistic (more expertconversationpartners) • Cultural awareness (intercultural communicativecompetence) • Development of digital literacy and techno-pedagogicalskills

  4. Telecollaboration research Research has focused on: • real interaction opportunities to gain expertise in language development through exposure to non-native or native speakers of the target language (Grosbois, 2011) in written (Guth &Marini-Maio, 2010) and oral modes (Bueno-Alastuey, 2010, 2013) • an increase in language learner´s motivation (Jauregui & Bañados, 2008) • the development of intercultural competence (Tian &Wang, 2010) • the development of techno-pedagogical skills (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) in teacher training programmes (Dooly & Sadler, 2013; ReCALL 23 (3), 2011)

  5. “knowing the pedagogical affordances and constraints of a range of technological tools as they relate to disciplinary and developmentally appropriate pedagogical designs and strategies” (p.65)

  6. Telecollaboration in FL teacher training Teacher training programmes should aim at • Developing techno-pedagogical skills through experiential use • Lesson planning • Materials design • ICT use in teaching EFL International telecollaboration • Experiential use of variety of distance communication tools • Reflection of various techno-pedagogical aspects • Purpose and usefulness of the telecollaboration project • Appropriateness of design and realistic expectation

  7. Telecollaboration in FL teacher training Studies on telecollaboration in teacher training programmes have noted: • an increase in pre-service teachers competences in CALL and CMC (Guichon & Hauck, 2011) • the adoption of telecollaboration into trainees´ own repertoire of teaching techniques (Antoniadou, 2011) • an increased awareness of the difficulties inherent to these projects (Dooly & Sadler, 2013) • but negative perceptions of the project related to these difficulties (Bueno-Alastuey & Kleban, 2012) Research has hardly explored the potential of these projects for joint lesson planning and material creation

  8. Knowledge creation metaphor • This metaphor “emphasizes the collaborative effort of developing joint objects of activity’ (Paavola, Lipponen & Hakkarainen, 2002:1) • Learning takes place as a result of solving problems, facing challenges or puzzleswhile learners “activelyengage in collaborative tasks and knowledge-building dialogue”. (Lee et al., 2008:509)

  9. This project Context • Previous telecollaboration project (linguistic vs. techno-pedagogical objectives) • unequal participation levels • lack of awareness of pedagogical value • few data collection methods Objectives • Techno-pedagogical skills development • Awareness of the techno-pedagogical skills (lesson planning with ICT) • Experiential learning of telecollaboration: awareness of benefits and constraints • Plan realistically and how to overcome or accept some of the problems involved

  10. Methodology Participants • 16 Polish university participants enrolled in a course of ELT Course Design (five months) • Level of English language proficiency: C1 • Age: 20 -24 • 13 Spanish participants enrolled in a Master of Education • ICT applied to English language teaching (three weeks) • Level of English language proficiency: from C1 to C2 (1 native speaker) • Age: 24 to 45 years old

  11. Multiple data collection instruments Dropbox: a folder per group • Skype conversations (8/6 project) • Lesson plans (drafts and final) (7/12) End-of-project on-line survey (n=23/79%) Reflections reports (7)

  12. Procedure TASK: create two lessons plans with the materials to be used using technology • Step 1: Skype conversation in class • Objectives: getting to know each other, get familiar with the technology and plan your work • Step 2: Create a draft version of a lesson using technology • Step 3: Skype conversation to comment on draft versions of the other group • Step 4: Refine lesson plan based on comments and add written comments to lesson plan • Step 5: Final version of lesson plans and materials • Step 6: Write a reflection about the process and answer survey

  13. Results • Technological tools used • For communication and collaboration • In lesson plans • Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation • Type: pedagogical, technological and techno-pedagogical • Location: Skype, e-mail, reports and lesson plans • Successful (lesson plan and/or materials transformation) • Perceived benefits and problems • Possible improvements

  14. Technological tools for communication and collaboration

  15. Technological tools in lesson plans

  16. Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation: Pedagogical

  17. Technological collaboration • Skype: • PS1: “What is that Surveymonkey?” • SS2 : “It is a web page to create quizzes” • PS2: “Oh, good idea. We wanted to do a quizz but we did not know which tool to use”

  18. Techno-pedagogical collaboration • PS1: “At the end, they could do some collaborative writing, maybe in a wiki” • SP1: “ Do you propose to do it in a wiki?” • SP2: “Great idea. The wiki is not complicated” • SP1: “Yes. They can write and share reports in a wiki” • PS2; “I think it´s a good idea, putting the vocabulary in context. They share reports in a wiki” • Skype • Reports • The comments we were exchanging helped our groups to reflect on what we did and to modify/improve the lesson plans both in terms of the ideas/activities designed for the lessons and in terms of the CMC tools.

  19. Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation

  20. Lesson plans and materials: product modifications • Evidence: 9 (75%) out of 12 lesson plans were modified as a result of the collaboration process. • Changes related to all three types of collaboration: • 15 Pedagogical changes (timing, specifications of objectives, topics of interest ..) • 2 Technological changes (placing links in Edmodo, exploring Surveymonkey ..) • 12 Techno-pedagogical changes (e.g. length of video, using Edmodo to place everything together)

  21. Report and survey analysis: Perceived benefits

  22. Reports and survey analysis: perceived benefits The feedback provided by someone from “outside” may be extremely helpful and beneficial • Pedagogical • Differences between groups • Telecollaboration issues • ICT tools/materials • Collaboration “We have been able to see the way people from another country work: how they prepare lessons, materials, the use of technology for teaching …. They developed different ideas, working different skills” “I’m glad we´ve made it as we have seen the pros and cons of the activity and know better nowadays when, how and with whom this type of activities can be carried out” The exchange let me know about Edmodo and Hot Potatoes since these tools greatly make teachers work easier It shows that there is the possibility of collaborating together in different projects and it is a small door that can lead students to propose new activities and cooperative ideas

  23. Report and survey analysis: Perceived benefits

  24. Reports and survey analysis: perceived challenges • Perceived usefulness low for international telecollaboration (Kleban & Bueno-Alastuey, 2013) • Technological planning problems (said by teacher)/time to meet on Skype (19 students) • Some students did less/lack of involvement ( 3 students) • The process, deadlines and expectations clearer (5 students) • Slowness of process (2) • Technological problems (technology not working or lack of social presence) (1)

  25. Project improvement suggestions from students • To improveschedule/institutional constraints: • align timetables so it can be done in class(unrealistic) • longer time onproject at thesame time as course. • Joint creation of each lesson by all group members and more conversations in Skype • More planning and monitoring project progress on the part of teachers: leads to limited autonomy • Examples of successfulwork

  26. Conclusions • Improvementsoverpreviousproject • Participation • Skype conversation in class • Influence of project in grade • Profile of students • Outcome of task • Multiple data sources • Triangulation of data frommultipleperspective • Insightintothecollaboration • Awarenessraisingeffect (stillsomenegativeperceptions and greatvariations)

  27. Conclusions • Creating lessonplans andpedagogical materialsthroughtelecollaborationeffectiveway of: • Experientiallearning of differenttechnologicaltoolsforcollaboration • Alternativeways of communicatingthatoriginallyplanned • Improving ICT use in lessons • Improvingpedagogical, technopedagogical and technologicalknowledgein lessonplanning and materialscreation • Promotingincreased awareness of telecollaboration benefits and constraints and possibleways of solvingthem • eventhough willingness to collaborate levels variedwithingroups.

  28. References • Antoniadou, V. (2011). Using Activity Theory to understand the contradictions in an online transatlantic collaboration between student-teachers of a foreign language. ReCALL, 23(3), 233–251. • Bueno-Alastuey, M.C. (2010). Synchronous-Voice Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects on pronunciation. CALICO, 28 (1), 1-25 • Bueno-Alastuey, M.C.(2013). Interactional feedback in Synchronous Voice-based Computer Mediated Communication: Effect of dyad. System, 41(3), 543 -559. • Bueno-Alastuey, M.C, & Kleban, M. (2012) A (partially successful) telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL teachers. Paper delivered at EuroCALL 2012 Conference, 22-25 August, Gothenburg, Sweden. • Dooly, M, & Sadler, R. (2013) Filling in the gap: Linking theory and practice through telecollaboration in teacher education. ReCALL, 25(1), 4-29. • Grosbois, M. (2011) CMC-based projects and L2 Learning : confirming the importance of nativisation. ReCALL, 23(3), 294-310. • Guichon, N .& Hauck, M. (2011) Teacher education research in CALL and CMC: More in demand than ever. ReCALL, 23(3), 187 -199. • Guth, S., & Marini-Maio, N. (2010) Close encounters of a new kind: The use of Skype and Wiki in telecollaboration. In: S. Guth and F. Helm (Eds.). Telecollaboration 2.0. Bern: Peter Lang AG, 413–427. • Helm, F., Guth, S.,& O'Dowd, R. (2012) University Language Classes Collaborating Online. A Report on the Integration of Telecollaborative Networks in European Universities. http://intent-project.eu/sites/default/files/Telecollaboration_report_Final.pdf

  29. References • Kleban, M., & Bueno-Alastuey, M.C. (2013).Creating pedagogical knowledge through electronic materials in a distance telecollaboration project for pre-service teacher trainees. Paper delivered at WorldCALL 2013, 10-13 July, Glasgow • Koehler, M.J. & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge?. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9 (1), 60 -70. • Jauregi, K., & Bañados, E. (2008) Virtual interaction through video-web communication: A step towards enriching and internationalizing learning programs. ReCALL, 20(2): 183–207. • Lee, M. J. W., McLoughlin, K. and Chan, A. (2008) Talk the talk: Learner-generated podcasts as catalysts for knowledge creation, British Journal Of Educational Technology, 39(3), 501-521. • Paavola, S., L. Lipponen, l. and K. Hakkarainen. (2002)Epistemological foundations for CSCL: a comparison of three models of innovative knowledge communities. In G. Stahl (ed.) Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum, 24- 32. • Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2003) Knowledge building. In J.W. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopediaof Education (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan, 1370–1373. • Tian, J. & Wang, Y. (2010) Taking language learning outside the classroom: learners' perspectives of eTandem learning via Skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 181-197.

  30. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!!!! Any questions?

More Related