proficiency development through a hybrid course with e-tandems

Proficiency Development through a Hybrid Course with e-Tandems

Gabriel Guillé[email protected]

@gaguillen This presentation http://go.miis.edu/elio

#Calico20155/28/2015

mailto:[email protected]

http://go.miis.edu/elio


INTRO RESULTS DISCUSSION FEEDBACK

Should I buy a hybrid car?


1) Survey on tandem learning and Language Learning Social Networks (155 students, 21 instructors) and a preliminary experiment with e-tandems.

2) Measured and described proficiency development through a 10 week hybrid Spanish course with an e-tandem requirement, in contrast with a traditional course. Today quantitative results.

3) Explained the state of the art of social Computer Assisted Language Learning (sCALL) and gave recommendations for using and developing LLSNs.


MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY

THURSDAY FRIDAY

Face to Face Face to Face Face to Face Face to Face

Face to Face


THURSDAY FRIDAY

Virtual Face to Face

Virtual Face to Face

Virtual


THURSDAY FRIDAY

Virtual Virtual Virtual Virtual Virtual


A hybrid course with e-tandems

What are tandems? Two individuals of different native languages (L1) helping each other to learn the target language (L2).

It is “one of the oldest learning methods in the world” (Brammerts 1996, 121). What are e-tandems? Online tandems.


Why tandems?1. Lack of opportunities for oral interaction with speakers of

other cultures. Intercultural competence (Beltz, 2003, Lee, 2009)

2. A satisfactory tandem experience promise a road to fluency development (Morley & Truscott, 2005, Xiao 2007, Ware & O’Dowd, 2008, Brinckwirth, 2012).

3. Curricular tandem projects are still peripheral in second language education (O’Dowd 2010, 2013).

4. Learner autonomy, duh.

5. Also…. the hybrid and online classes seem to be an ideal space for the implementation of tandem projects (outside of the classroom).

6. Recent studies have shown that students taking hybrid courses (2 days a week) reach comparable levels of oral proficiency to those taking traditional courses that meet 4 or 5 days a week (Blake, Wilson, Cetto & Pardo-Ballester, 2008, Rubio, 2012).


Methods

1. Duration: 10 weeks (January-March, 2014)

2. Level: Intermediate Spanish

3. Participants: Started with 50, ended up with 23 learners (HyC: 11; TrC: 12), after removing native speakers who scored 75-80 in the test, other participants who had technical issues with the test, and participants who did not finish the course.

4. I was the tandem partner for all of the students, in order to favor uniformity. The hybrid group was exposed to a minimum of 8 tandem sessions (50 minutes).

5. HyC learners wrote 8 reports, specifying words and collocations they have “learned” during the tandems. Along with the words, HyC learners wrote a brief personal reflection (no more than 8 lines) for each tandem session. 15% of final grade.

6. There were specific tasks for each tandem session.

7. All learners took the Versant Test (measuring fluency, sentence mastery, pronunciation, and vocabulary) before and after the treatment. The Versant Spanish Test “estimates the test taker’s level of automaticity with the language” (Versant 2011, 9). It has been tested for validity. For instance, it has shown a high correlation (0.86-0.92) with the OPI.

own online textbook, iCultura (with Blake & Bradley) and syllabus


Quantitative Research Questions 1. How a hybrid course with an e-tandem learning

component would or would not improve L2 fluency and “automaticity” (sentence mastery) for college students, compared to a traditional course? How this hybrid course would or would not improve L2 proficiency in general, and in regards to vocabulary and pronunciation, compared to a traditional course?

2. Which factors contribute the most to second language development in the hybrid course: motivation, language aptitude, or the final score in the course? Is it different from the traditional course? What about both of them combined?


1. The overall results showed that HyC learners can perform comparably to the TrC learners, which means that it’s a viable alternative to the traditional teaching method, as seen before in the literature (Blake et al, 2008, Rubio, 2012)

2. However, none of the groups showed substantial progress in terms of fluency, after 10 weeks of Spanish learning

3. Similarly, students did not show statistically significant progress in terms of pronunciation, as it was expected

4. The area where both groups showed more significant progress was sentence mastery, which reflects how students are able to recall and produce Spanish phrases that are syntactically accurate and appropriate in regards to usage

5. Finally, only the HyC group showed a significant improvement in vocabulary. The progress for the TrC group, even though existent, was not statistically significant


6. For both groups (HyC and TrC) there was no significant correlation between the Versant Results and aptitude, vocabulary, and the final grade in the course.

7. This is still relevant. For example, the final grade and the aptitude test ended up not being a good predictor of student language progress (how well students do in the Versant Test).


1. Good news! The model of this HyC with e-tandems worked and it could work with “non-professional” tandem partners. It was a brand new course.

2. Neither group showed a statistically significant progress in the fluency score, using the Versant results for this category. This is different from previous positive results with tandem learning experiments (Morley & Truscott, 2006, Xiao, 2007, Brinckwirth, 2012)

3. It does not necessarily imply that students did not progress in terms of automaticity and proficiency. Their substantial progress in sentence mastery and vocabulary establishes a solid base for future fluency progress.

4. The sentence mastery score does not take into account rhythm and timing but complexity and, to a certain degree, length, which are more important for fluency development (Towell, 1996). The only difference between the Versant fluency and sentence mastery scores is that the former takes into account the reading activity, a task where learners read a series of sentences without creating new utterances.


5. Vocabulary improvement, showed only by the HyC students, is also a predictor of fluency gains

6. The quantitative results are not measuring the impact of the tandem per se but the overall effectiveness of this hybrid model. The impact of tandems is addressed in the qualitative discussion. Tandems are, nonetheless, an essential component for any hybrid course that seeks to promote autonomy and fluency development

7. Projects such as the tandem experiment could not only enhance language learning but allow students to create their own opportunities for language learning beyond the constraints of the classroom. Lifelong learning needs


8. As in the preliminary experiment, learners need more training in regards to the principles of tandem (autonomy and reciprocity) and the characteristic of effective language feedback and language learning strategies. The implementation of the tandem workshop before the tandem encounters was not sufficient. Therefore, instructors should not only reinforce this workshop but organize monthly follow-up sessions with the students in order to ensure optimal tandem learning

9. Future studies should use “real” tandem partners and increase the importance of the tandem in the activitities, projects, and syllabus

10.The whole course could be designed around the idea of substituting the traditional language class with coach sessions with one or two learners, establishing weekly goals and giving immediate feedback on recordings, reading/listening/writing projects, and reports from the tandem experiences (with L1 “native” speakers). A real E-TANDEM course


Limitations 1. Further studies should increase the number of participants,

include a delayed posttest, and avoid using the instructor as the tandem partner, in spite of the positive outcomes of this experiment. I improved my English! But it was not reflected in the Versant Test

2. Similarly, it would be ideal to compare groups that share the same instructor and content. These two variables might have impacted the results of the main experiment, beyond the hybrid design and the tandem component

3. Finally, a more longitudinal study, solely based in tandem and the use of LLSNs, is recommended. The dialogue between the emerging LLSNs and the language profession should flow naturally from the core of the common interests


http://go.miis.edu/tandem

What happens if they never meet up with their partners, if they don’t hand in their dossiers, if they do not attend the final examination? Remember that after the early meetings, there is no more face-to-face contact with tutors. We had to learn to trust the students, to relinquish our control and to hand over responsibility. And we have been rewarded in our trust. Out of the several hundred students who have now participated in the scheme [tandem project], only a handful have not met the challenge – and they would probably have proved problematic in the more conservative class-based course unit as well. (Truscott & Morley, 2004, p. 157).

http://go.miis.edu/tandem


Questions, complains, references:[email protected] @gaguillen

This presentation:http://go.miis.edu/elio

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.gaguillen.com/


proficiency development through a hybrid course with e-tandems

Education