LLTI Archives

September 2004, Week 5

LLTI@LISTSERV.DARTMOUTH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LLTI-Editor <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:38:48 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (204 lines)
--- Forwarded Message from "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]> ---

>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:09:28 -0500
>From: "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #7633.5 High School Labs (!)

Dr, Charters, Deanne,
I'd like to commend you both for providing such clear and informative
reasons for wanting to use the more traditional lab. It's clear that
these labs are working for you and many others. I've come to the
conclusion that no one way is best for everybody. I think enthusiasm
plays a pivotal role in teaching and learning. Enthusiastic and
committed teachers transmit that to their students, regardless of the
technology. If the technology works for you, the technology works!  I
have never had a traditional console lab here at my school, and don't
plan to implement one, but I appreciate better understanding how you use
them.

David Pankratz
Loyola University Chicago


>>> [log in to unmask] 9/28/2004 3:17:45 PM >>>
--- Forwarded Message from Deanne Cobb <[log in to unmask]> ---

>From: Deanne Cobb <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: [log in to unmask]
>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:22:36 -0600
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
<[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #7633.4 High School Labs (!)
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>References: <[log in to unmask]>
>Disposition-Notification-To: Deanne Cobb <[log in to unmask]>
>Return-Receipt-To: Deanne Cobb <[log in to unmask]>
>Priority: HIGH

Dr. Charters,
I wanted to add my support for the arguments that you have made here.
We have
very similar qualitative results here from our use of language lab
pairing/telephone.  In fact, one of our instructors has had so much
positive
feedback from students and so much evidence of improvement in speaking
skills
that she not only does pairing activities in the one hour of designated
lab time
per week, but also books the lab for one hour of her class time per
week
specifically so that she can do pairing activities.

In addition, since we are at a University which is experiencing
classroom
shortages and increased class sizes, there is an additional reason why
a lab
environment is more conducive to pairing: classroom assignment is not
always
optimal.  Sometimes it is impossible for an instructor to move around
the room
to listen to or talk to students because of cramped conditions.

It is also worth noting that it depends upon what one sees for the use
of a lab.
 I know that at many institutions, the lab is a drop-in study centre
and
students visit primarily to work on their own.  At our own institution,
the lab
hour is a scheduled lab hour with a TA and is expected to be an
interactive hour
with a set assignment and materials.  We minimize the number of drill
exercises,
and encourage much more learner-centred activities which include
pairing, and
compositions. To this end, we believe that we are optimizing students'
learning. At the same time, there is a mixture of three to four classes
in the
lab at the same time with one TA.  Each class is working on a separate
assignment.  With pairing through a turn-key lab, students can work on
their own
class' assignment with the assistance of the TA seamlessly with one
another, and
the TA can effectively work with each class group from a single
location.

That's my two (and a half) cents.

Deanne Cobb
University of Regina


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:22:28 EDT LLTI-Editor
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> --- Forwarded Message from Duncan Charters <[log in to unmask]> ---
>
> >In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:25:30 -0500
> >To: Language Learning and Technology International Information
Forum
> <[log in to unmask]>
> >From: Duncan Charters <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Re: #7633.2 High School Labs (!)
>
> >I'm curious why you want the computers to
> >facilitate this rather demanding technical task over simply having
> >students speak face-to-face? Are you pairing students up over a
> >distance, such as between different schools? If not, what do the
> >computers add to this activity that is not present in simply
pairing
> >students up face-to-face?
> >
> >-John
> >___________________________________________
> >John de Szendeffy
>
> I regularly pair students up in the classroom for conversation
practice,
> but noticed that they are much more excited about it when we do this
in the
> lab.  So I asked colleagues who got the same reaction, observed what
was
> happening, and surveyed the students.  There certainly seems to be
enough
> reason to try to incorporate this feature in any new lab arrangement,
for
> at least the following "top 10" reasons (a few may not apply in every
lab
> situation):
>
> 1. It's different, a change in the typical class pace and routine.
> 2. A lot of face-to-face communication is non-verbal.  When
practicing
> language in a lab situation, you can focus on the verbal task without
other
> distractions.
> 3. Students tend to stay on task more rather than lapsing into
English or
> kidding with their friends when the teacher is not right next to
them.
> 4. The teacher can monitor them any time without their knowing, and
> intervene and correct without other students being aware or being
disturbed
> by that. The teacher can spend more time with those in need without
others
> noticing.
> 5. Students seem much less intimidated knowing that other people are
not
> watching them, or eavesdropping and hearing their mistakes, so they
tend to
> speak more freely. Students (especially middle-high school) can be
very
> conscious of how they look and sound to their peers in a group.
> 6. It's fun not knowing who your new partner is, so practice of
greeting
> questions happens naturally where it wouldn't make sense in
face-to-face
> class work. It keeps interest and anticipation high.
> 7. The constant "buzz" of everyone talking in a class situation makes
it
> harder for students to focus on what their partner is saying and
understand
> it, especially when they are struggling to express themselves and
respond
> to questions and statements. There is little such distraction with
> headsets, even less where there is some isolation between positions.
> 8. By switching pairs, all students can talk to all other students in
the
> class without constantly moving themselves or their chairs around.
They
> stay in touch with everyone in the class and can get information
quickly
> from each one if doing a survey or checking on others' reactions.
> 9. One of the most challenging tasks in a foreign country is
communicating
> on the phone when one has had practice only with face-to-face
> communication.  Students who have practiced this a lot in the lab
find that
> situation more natural and familiar.
> 10. With the newer full-feature labs that have "telephone dialing"
> capability, the teacher can allow students to take control of their
own
> communication when appropriate, so practice can become less
> teacher-directed when students have shown they have learned the
material.
> Free (or freer) conversation can follow guided practice seamlessly
with one
> quick announcement to all of the change.
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Duncan Charters
> Professor, Language Department
> Principia College, Elsah, IL 62028-9799
> Telephone: (618) 374-5252    Fax: (618) 374-5465
> E-mail: <[log in to unmask]>


Deanne Cobb
Language Lab Manager
Language Resource Centre
University of Regina

ATOM RSS1 RSS2