Using Wireless Notebooks in Project-based Classes

William Kay, Paul Gemmell, Andrew Johnson, Don Hinkelman,

Blended Language Learning

33rd JALT International ConferenceNovember 24, 2007Olympic Conference Center, Tokyo, Japan

Content

1. Problem 2. Research questions 3. Our Study4. Our Activities 5. What we learned6. The Future

Problem: Computers needed for Powerpoint/Internet projects

Why Go Wireless?

1. No computer rooms available

2. Students already had

notebook computers

3. Low cost for school

1. Demand for Computer Rooms

• One computer room available on Wednesday mornings: A-201

• Four teachers need computer rooms at the same time

2. Needs & Opportunities

• The teachers• 4 teachers – 4 styles• All preferred to use powerpoint

and internet for project-based language learning

• The students• Social Information Majors - 192

(computer science)• All Ss owned same type notebook

computers, required by department

3. History of Computer Room Costs

Computers #Rooms Total Cost

Cost / room

1996wired

Custom CALL (40)

1 1.0 milUSD

$1,000,000

2002wired

Standard Computer lab (40)

1 0.2 milUSD

$200,000

2005wireless

Student-owned notebooks(192)

12 0.01 milUSD

$10,000 (+$60,000 students)

Research Questions

Year 1 Research Questions April 2006 -- March 2007

• Can wireless notebooks and internet activities be incorporated into classic desk-and-chair classrooms, incorporating CALL in a non-computer laboratory?

• How do students respond to using wireless notebooks in a language learning class?

Our Study

The classes

• Two morning periods• 2nd year Social Info majors (3 classes)• 1st year Social Info majors (3 classes)

• 3 wireless classrooms• 14 - 90 minute classes/semester• 25-35 students/class

Objectives/Approach

• Oral communication• Project-based • Blended learning

Curriculum/Course Features

• Authenticity

Utilizing authentic online resources in an effective and meaningful capacity.

Course Syllabus

1st Year StudentsSelf and Japan

• Sapporo• Personal

interests • Japanese

celebrities• Japanese culture• Summer holidays• Ghost stories

2nd Year StudentsInternational

• Planning a trip abroad

• Int’l celebrities• Int’l culture• Foreign movies

Course Preparation

• Set up Moodle courses • One Course for each class

• Pre-enrolled students

• One Teacher’s area• Space for sharing documents/ ideas

Class demo: Project X

Introduce a project that has a variety of activities - f2f and computer

Class Demo: cont

Class Demo: cont.

What we learned

Benefits of teaching in a Wireless Classroom

• Can easily work with or without computers

• Easy visual contact• Computer is student’s own• Students can roam within the classroom, and beyond

• Cost to university

Drawbacks of teaching in a Wireless Classroom

• Connections may be lost • Lack of network between student and teacher’s computer　

• Batteries may die• Computers may be forgotten• Printing connections

Technical Problems with Wireless

Example: Conflicts from two competing

wireless LAN systems

Differences between Wired and Wireless

Parameter Wired WirelessTechnology Cost

Expensive Inexpensive

Technology Reliability

Stable Fragile

Space Fixed Flexible

Pedagogy Project-based Project-based plus more conversation &

group work

Authority/Attention

Higher control of student operation

Lower control of student operation

Student Responses

• 17-question survey

Did you find xxx helpful?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Yes! Yes + - No No!

1st Year Ss2nd Year Ss

The Future

New Research Questions

• Year Two: April 2007• How provide language learning

exercises that support the projects?• How provide printed materials for

classroom activities & absentees’ reference?

• Year Three: April 2008• How redesign our teaching spaces to

give wired stability and teaching flexibility?

• Other new questions?

Project Booklets (add images)

Blended Learning Spaces Plan for April 2008

Questions

?

??

?

??

?

?

?

Our questions…• How to reduce tech time, increase speaking time?

• How to share our activities more quickly? (repository?)

• How to gear projects to direct student needs?

• How to add language support activities? (online quizzes?)

• How redesign the classroom spaces?

Your questions…

Thank you!

Remaining slides omit from JALT 2007 presentation, save as reference

Wireless class goal success rate by week

Week # Success

1 75-100%

2 85-95%

3+ 90-95%

Students who had success logging on the first try

Week # Success

1 100%

2 70-80%

3 95%

4+ 99%

• Possible Reasons• Switched Rooms to reduce cross-

reception• New wireless system

Wireless class goal success rate by week

Survey Results

Profile

Internet Introductionhttp://www.teachingideas.co.uk/welcome/internet/page1.htm

Web Search

Student Courses

Teacher Area

Wired photos

Wireless photos

Permeation ofMobile Technology

2003 2005* 2010*

Handheld camera

100% 100% 100%

Handheld video 10% 50% 100%

Voice recorder 10% 50% 100%

Wireless notebook

20% 50% 100%

Based on reports by 20 year-old English Department students at Sapporo Gakuin University during the 2003 term

*projection

Actual Internet Device Permeation

2003 2005 2010* 2010**University Labs

550 550 550 600

Personal Notebooks

400 1000 5000 400

Mobile Phone Internet

1500 3000 5000 4000

Sapporo Gakuin University Student Population n=5000

Estimated Input Devices to Web e-Learning

*previous projection **current projection

Course Syllabus

1st Year StudentsSelf and Japan

• Sapporo• Personal

interests • Japanese

celebrities• Japanese culture• Summer holidays• Ghost stories

2nd Year StudentsInternational

• Planning a trip abroad

• Int’l celebrities• Int’l culture• Foreign movies

Mobile Technology Baseline of Student Population

2003 2005 2010*

Handheld camera 100% 100% 100%

Handheld video 10% 50% 100%

Voice recorder 10% 50% 100%

Wireless notebook

10~100% 30~100% 100%

Based on personal estimates of 20 year-old English Department students in a mid-level Japanese University during the 2003 term

*projection

?

A simple wired/wireless dichotomy oversimplifies the conditions

A Wired/Wireless Continuum

“① Old” CALL Laboratory (A-202)

“② New” CALL Laboratory (A-201)

③ Fixed IP

Wireless

(Kanda)

④ Roaming IP Wireless (A-318)

Special applications

Standardapplications

Standardapplications

Standardapplications

GrammarVocabulary

Communication Communication Communication

Locked in chairsFace forward

Rolling chairsFace sideways

Flexible chairs and tables

Flexible chairs and tables

Little eye contact

Computer Permeation

2003 2005 2010* 2010**University Labs

550 550 550

Personal Notebooks

1000 1000 5000

Mobile Phone Internet

1500 3000 4900

Student Population = 5000 >200% level of permeation

Sapporo Gakuin UniversityInput Devices to Web e-Learning

*previous projection **current projection

Curriculum/Course Features

• Communicative responses:

Focus on socially validated student responses to the authentic material and project task (Kenny:1989).

CALL Room

Benefits of teaching in a Wired Classroom

• Large folder space to store student work

• Convenient location of equipment for teacher (DVD, CD, Scanner, OHP, Video, Staff computer)

• CAMPUS ESPer software (Monitoring from a distance, My Document Deliveries, Keyboard, Mouse Lock function)

Drawbacks of teaching in a Wired Classroom

• Non-Flexible Study Location　

• Fixed seating arrangement• Monitors inhibiting communication / eye-contact

• Boot up time

Drawbacks of teaching in a Wired Classroom• Artificial environment, stale air, warm in summer adding to lethargy

• Bulky Equipment impeding movement

• Authorization problems

Benefits of teaching in a Wired Classroom

• Stable internet connection• Fast internet access • Reliability of hardware• Ability to print• Students familiar with desk top operations

Affordance Analysis: Wired and Wireless

Parameter Wired WirelessTechnology Cost

Expensive Inexpensive

Technology Reliability

Stable Fragile

Space Fixed Flexible

Pedagogy Project-based Project-based plus more conversation & group

work

Authority Higher control of student operation

Lower control of student operation

SGU Cycle Two: Booklets

• Booklets• LMS reconfiguration/New Modules

SGU Cycle Three:• Purposes: events, publishing,

public• Assessment: WEI, WAI• Spaces: kanda light movable

furniture carpet• Sharing: teacher online

repository

Conclusions I• Intial euphoria over mobile technology exposed a technocentric preoccupation

• Low level students need highly structured, just-in-time language support in a group-based activities (not self-study)

• Paper-based, custom-built forms in project booklets provided the core blended learning technology along with customized open source LMS modules

• Teaching team collaboration key to shared materials, accelerated innovation

Conclusions II

• Move from SLA to SLS as a theoretical framework, ecological metaphors, and semiotic (not only linguistic) analysis

• Select research methodologies based on qualitative, longitudinal investigations. Especially, collaborative action research teacher-groups in cyclical stages. Encourage use of reflexive tools in insider teams.

• Focus on teacher actions and learner actions as unit of analysis-- a hybrid, blended perspective (van Lier, 2007)

• Conceptualize “autonomy” as an emergent quality happening in the solidarity of learning communities

ReferencesKramsch, C. (ed.) (2002a). Language acquisition and language

socialization: Ecological perspectives. London: Continuum.

Kramsch, C. (2002b). Introduction: How can we tell the dancer from the dance? In C. Kramsch (Ed.) Language acquisition and language socialisation: Ecological perspectives (pp. 1-30). London: Continuum

Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Fifth edition. New York: Free Press.

van Lier, L. (2002). An ecological-semiotic perspective on language and linguistics. In C. Kramsch (Ed.) Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives, (pp. 140-164). London: Continuum.

van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

van Lier, L. (2007). Action-based teaching, autonomy, and identity. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. Vol. 1, No. 1. Pp. 46-65.

Warschauer, M. and Kern, R. (eds.) (2000). Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Historical Rationale:

Institution Profile• Number of Students: 5000• Nationality: Japan• Level: Low• Majors: Commerce, Econ, Law, Psychology, English• Classes: 100+• Requirements: two years of “A”

English-reading/listening two years of “B” English-

communication• Students per class: 28 (average)• Number of Teachers: 40• Teacher Nationality: A classes --

Japanese B

classes -- Native

Institutional ProblemsStudents• Passive background• Skill imbalance• Low motivation• Poor attendence• English not relevant

Teachers• Dissatisfied teachers• No accountability - high independence

Institutional Teaching History• Tradition of teacher independence

• Choose texts and materials• Choose requirements and assessment• Choose topics and emphasis• 50% part-time staff

• Extensive computer laboratory facilities• Ten labs• Special purpose CALL lab “first in Northern Japan”

• Required two year curriculum• No student choice

• Textbook-based, no school materials• General curriculum, not content-based by

department

Institutional Innovation

• 2002: Add projects to textbook-based courses• Powerpoint Speeches: Bossaer, Hinkelman, Miyamachi

(2002)

• 2004: Remove textbooks, only projects• PowerPoint Projects: Kay & Flenner (2004)• Self-designed textbooks: Gemmell (2004)

• 2006: Coordinated curriculum• Common projects by year• Shared materials• Student-owned technology wireless notebooks, mobile

phones• Language support

Action Research Questions

2002: Can teachers technically manage large classes of students

using presentation software?

2004: How can projects be made more communicative?

2006: What should be coordinated, what should be independently-designed?