VoiceThread: A Digital Storytelling Experience

There's a new trend in education: digital storytelling. Before yesterday's class, I had heard of it. Two of my past roommates each had to do one, and funny enough, both times were for education classes. This tells me it is becoming a "thing" within the classroom...or at least people want it to become one.

So, what is this digital storytelling idea? Simple. A person uploads some pictures and records a voiceover. Maybe it's just a person sitting in front of a webcam. Maybe it's text boxes floating over some pictures pulled from the web. The cohesive factor? A story worth telling.

When it comes to education, this idea seems useful. It's a way to combine creativity with education, especially in the case of a language classroom. It's also fun.

That's why when we were asked to use VoiceThread, I was open to the new experience. Working with Katie, we decided to create "A Day in the Life of an MA TESL Student." Here's the link: https://voicethread.com/?#q.b4058727.i0.k0 (Note: You might need to have an account and be logged in to view.)

Going back to the idea of evaluation, VoiceThread falls in the "fun and useful but with obvious downfalls" category. The fun idea is rather straightforward, and it comes down to the fact that you can pretty much create whatever you like with it. The useful part comes in with the potential applications the program can have in the classroom, especially as a speaking activity. In these ways, VoiceThread is pretty cool. It's layout is even clean-cut and shiny.

However, VoiceThread can be tricky. Because we did not upgrade to anything other than the free membership, it did not allow us to use more than eight slides. We tried. Unrelated to the account status, the we had issues with the recording function. It did not want to play back the recording, so we had no idea if anything worked until we tried it on a third computer. We also had some trouble getting the slides to match our voice. It actually took far longer than it really should have. Lastly, sharing the video is tricky and involves unnecessary steps. There's also no good way to know it's working and doing what you want it to do. 

There's a chance I would use VoiceThread in the classroom, but only if this was the best of the best when it comes to digital storytelling websites. I really like the activity; it's just the execution that is at times unnecessarily tricky. Good try, VoiceThread. Good try. 

An Example Evaluation

As part of a class activity, we were asked to form groups, pick a language skill, and identify criteria for determining whether that software is relevant for the language classroom. My group chose listening as our language skill, and we developed criteria with YouTube in mind. However, I would like to also use this criteria to evaluate podcasts, especially those featured on iTunes.

The criteria

• Are there distractions?
• Our group felt like this was important because we tend to have short attention spans when it comes to technology. Just look at StumbleUpon, where you can hit "Stumble" each time you are bored and want something new. With listening especially, it is easy to get distracted. 
• Is the design easy to use?
• If the software is too complicated, students will not want to take the time to use it, unless there is a clear motivating factor in doing so. In addition, hard-to-use designs are time-consuming and perhaps not useful in a classroom setting. This criterion also takes into account whether the design works on different devices, especially if the students are asked to use it at home.
• Who is the author of the content?
• Because anyone can post online, it is good to determine whether the author is a reliable source.
• Is the content authentic?
• Of course, determining the author leads into whether the material is authentic, which is useful for listening purposes. Exposure to different dialects and registers is key.
• Is the content appropriate and useful?
• Content should be appropriate for a class and for a listening activity, and the listening software needs to match the objectives of the course. 

The evaluation: YouTube

Distractions:

YouTube has ads before some videos (usually music videos or videos associated with copyrighted material), and there are occasionally bright, interactive ads in the background advertising TV shows and movies. Otherwise, the layout is clean.

Easy to use:

Yes. Most students will already be very familiar with this website, but for those who are not, the concept is straightforward: search for a specific topic or video, and the internal search engine generates results based on the key word(s). 

Author:

There are some well-known authors on there, including musical artists, but generally speaking, the author is a complete stranger who is posting for fun or for informative reasons. As such, determining whether someone is reliable is tricky. However, for a listening activity, reliability may not be essential.

Authentic content:

Authenticity would count more, and because YouTube is a place to post informally (usually), it is likely that people use their home dialects. In this manner, if the purpose of the listening activity is to expose students to various dialects, this website is useful.

Appropriate and useful content:

Whether or not YouTube meets this criterion depends largely on the individual video. YouTube does have content guidelines, and more "mature content" videos require a login, but there are definitely videos that are not classroom appropriate. As for usefulness, this factor depends on the course and again, the video in question.

The evaluation: iTunes podcasts

Distractions:

Students download podcasts to their iTunes, so there are no visual distractions.

Easy to use:

Yes. Most podcasts are free, and students can download them from the iTunes store, and then listen from their computer, their iPod, etc. If students do not have iTunes yet, the software is also free and easy to download. It is compatible with all but the most dinosaur computers.

Author:

Again, the author really depends here. As such, content may or may not be reliable.

Authentic content:

Like YouTube, podcasts tend to be recorded in "home dialects," so for listening purposes, it is likely that they will be useful.

Appropriate and useful content:

Also like YouTube, podcasts vary in content. It is up to the instructor to determine whether each podcast used is useful for the course objectives, and whether the content itself is appropriate based on age, purpose, and so on. 

The Results

YouTube and podcasts are similar in that they both have varied content and can be useful for listening purposes. YouTube requires just the internet to work, while podcasts are a little more complicated. However, podcasts are good for just audio, while YouTube videos can be distracting with ads and the visual aspect. Overall, it comes down to the activity itself to determine which is better, though both seem to be useful based on the above criteria.

Another look at the criteria

Though we tried to pick easy, straightforward criteria, it seems like there was one that was less important than the others: the author. It seems like if the content is authentic, appropriate, and useful, then the author is less relevant.

Moreover, in my last post, I mentioned that criteria should fit the specific goals of an institution and should move away from the generic. Our criteria was largely generic, so 

Source: themiamibikescene.com

Until next time, dear readers. 

Evaluating Technology Using...Checklists?

Last week, I discussed evaluating technology and came to the conclusion that I really had no idea what it means to do so.  In fact, much of my post came back to the idea that I--as well as the students we teach--do not even put much thought into what goes into evaluating, as we take our technology for granted. Indeed, we can evaluate so unconsciously that when we are asked to describe what makes a good website for anything (including learning English), we blank.

When it comes to websites, tools, applications, and so on for learning English as a second language, there are actually many approaches we can use, but I would like to discuss one in detail: checklists. When they first came up in class, again, my immediate reaction was to think that it seemed obvious, but yet again, there is more to it.

We were given an example in class, and it was then that I realized that these checklists, such as Son's model, are extensive. They can include 15, 30, and sometimes more criteria, each of which is ranked on a scale rather than the typical boxes.


Source: http://www.ncvps.org/index.php/students/student-checklist/

There are some obvious benefits. Checklists are straightforward. They're a well-organized way to evaluate. As we see with technology, we tend to like things that are easy to use.

However, there is also a downside: checklists are not exclusive. That is, each institution will need a different checklist that matches up with the objectives of that program. Sure, there are some checklists that are marketed as being usable by different institutions, but those tend to be general, sometimes including questions like: Does the website match the objectives of the course? While that is always good to ask, the question itself ignores the most critical element: the objectives themselves.

Another downside to checklists is that, save for the ones that use broad questions, checklists are static; they do not change as technology changes. In a world where even your laptop can be obsolete in a matter of months, there needs to be a consistent effort to evaluate and reevaluate technology often.

As such, checklists are useful, but need to be used with careful planning. Criteria needs to be up-to-date so that programs are relevant to students. Otherwise, a poor evaluation--one that does not keep students in mind--can lead to a less than helpful learning experience.

Evaluating Technology for the Classroom

Hello world,

Having just read a chapter on evaluating technology, I am actually sitting here perplexed--not at the fact that there is so much that goes into evaluating but that this fact is something that our generation seems to intuitively overlook.

Let's take a step back.

I am on my second semester teaching a first year composition class at the university, one in which instructors are required to teach class in a computer lab one day a week. Last semester, I began the semester thinking that I would teach online research databases and let the students work on their papers those days. It made sense to me that teaching technology to a group of 18-20 year olds would not require much explicit instruction. However, I did not account for one of my students not being within this age group. To him, using Microsoft Word could present challenges, not because of any lack of motivation, but because he did not grow up using technology like the rest of the class. While it just didn't come naturally to him, he ended up being one of my most motivated students.

Fast forward to now, a time when I am now taking a class on using technology in the (second language) classroom. This fact presents two ironies: the class I am employed to teach is a group of native English speakers, and the ESL class I teach for practicum has absolutely no available technology to use. Regardless, I feel like this CALL class will be useful in my future career. Until then, it will at least force me to reflect on my first point: our generation takes evaluating sources for granted. That is, how do we know technology is useful? More specifically, how do we know specific applications, software, and so on actually aid learning rather than serve as a mindless pastime?

The aforementioned class reading goes into quite some depth about specific strategies, at least for a second language classroom, but there is one that struck me: taking into consideration the learning styles of your students. It makes sense. Every learner brings something new to the classroom. Every learner is an individual.  In that way, when bringing technologically-based activities into the classroom, teachers should think of them like any other activities: some will work for one group of students, some may work better for just a few, and some may just flop. There is no magic solution for finding the "perfect" application. No one program will suddenly make learning a language that much easier. (Yes, I'm talking to you, Rosetta Stone.) For this reason, technology cannot overrun the classroom. Instead, it needs to supplement other instruction, and it needs to be done in a way that fits in with the background of the learners, the institution's curriculum, and the overall course objectives.

While this idea sounds functional to me, in practice, I'm not quite there.

The First Step

Welcome to the ponderings of an overworked grad student.  In this blog, I will be documenting my journey into a new world, moving from being somewhat technologically savvy to being able to use this knowledge to help second language students learn English. As of right now, the title of my blog is a lie, as I know little about what it means to use technology in a language learning classroom.  Despite this fact, I do believe that the ability to use technology in such a way is imperative for language teachers, as it creates new and innovative ways of exploring material, all the while combining students' interests with educational activities. That being said, I hope that by the end of this class, I will have a much more thorough grasp of CALL. 

My knowledge of using technology in the classroom is generally limited to my experiences as a student, rather than as a teacher. While studying foreign languages as an undergrad, I was exposed to various teaching methods. I had one instructor in particular--my French 101 teacher--who was excellent at making language learning interactive. He encouraged us to use the website that worked alongside our textbook, which consisted of vocabulary flashcards and sound recordings, as well as a plethora of activities for each lesson. In addition, he would bring music into the classroom, which would either be sung in French or would lightheartedly poke fun at what it means to be a beginning French language learner. We would also listen to material that demonstrated various accents and dialects in French, as well as what people of other nationalities sound like (generally speaking, of course) when speaking French. In this way, this instructor introduced us to different dialects, thereby trying to break down the stereotypes that can unfortunately come along with learning a language. As an aspiring ESL teacher, I reflect on this class with appreciation because it has provided me with ideas for using technology in the classroom, even if the above examples are just a few ways to implement it effectively.

I believe this course will be useful for me in a number of ways, which coincidentally means that I will hopefully accomplish my aforementioned goal of understanding  CALL and being able to use technology effectively in the second language classroom.  I am open to learning about all areas of CALL, partly because I am a curious person by nature and partly because I am unsure as to what all those areas are.  

With that in mind, dear readers, I look forward to my adventures this semester!