CMC Teacher Education SIG Presentation; Antoniadou


Published on

PowerPoint Presentation, Antoniadou, Eurocall CMC Teacher Education SIGs, 2011, Barcelona

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

CMC Teacher Education SIG Presentation; Antoniadou

  1. 1.   CONSTRUCTING TEACHER KNOWLEDGE AND AWARENESS OF REQUIRED SKILLS IN A MULTIVOICED SETTING: A CHAT PERSPECTIVE EUROCALL CMC & Teacher Education SIGs Annual Workshop, Barcelona 2011 Victoria Antoniadou Departament de Didàctica de la Llengua, de la Literatura i de les Ciències Socials Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
  2. 2. Introduction <ul><li>Theoretical underpinnings of multivoicedness: </li></ul><ul><li>Dialogics , Ethnomethodology , Cultural-Historical Activity Theory </li></ul>
  3. 3. The multivoiced context of this teacher development design Second Life, emails, MSN/Skype Object : Development of teacher pedagogical skills Social interaction construction of teacher knowledge through ZPD Hands-on experience with telecollaboration and Web 2.0 tools Become a European language teacher Vignettes, teaching units/drafts, round-table discussions, teaching theory Resources, strategies, teacher observation, textbooks EPOSTL criteria 7 UAB student-teachers of TEFL
  4. 4. Data and Methodology <ul><li>14 online transcripts (2 semesters) </li></ul><ul><li>37 recorded hours of tutorial sessions on campus </li></ul><ul><li>7 final wiki reports </li></ul><ul><li>7 individual rankings of EPOSTL criteria </li></ul><ul><li>7 final course evaluations </li></ul><ul><li>Coding schemes (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) based on interpretations of the events made relevant by the participants online and offline </li></ul><ul><li>Action-Relevant Episodes (Barab et al. , 2001) to identify actions related to teacher learning. </li></ul><ul><li>How did the virtual exchange specifically afford teacher learning? </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>Examples of online manifestation of multivoicedness </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>Eve dice: Alicia , I really like your SWBAT as a list of activities, but the idea behind SWBAT is more to talk about what students will be able to do linguistically and this is how you can assess them </li></ul><ul><li>[…] </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: that's another interesting point I've borrowed from you (SWABTS) </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice: you're welcome </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: so poster format? </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice: But SWBAT is more like, &quot;students will be able to use key english phrases in </li></ul><ul><li>presenting a poster about their favorite sport.&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>the language use is the key part of SWBAT </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: Thanks for the clarification! is good to have USA peers </li></ul>Working in the Zone of Proximal Development
  7. 7. Feedback on language structure leads to teacher reflection <ul><li>misspark516:  i just have a small thing &quot;red eyes monster &quot;... i think should be red eyed monster </li></ul><ul><li>  yo:  ooooh! that's true.. but it's too difficult...don't you think so? </li></ul><ul><li>  misspark516:  hmmm </li></ul><ul><li>  yo:  i could ask them to use Big, small, long, short because the book introduces this vocabulary </li></ul><ul><li>  misspark516:  yeah the eye must be past tense tho so there should be a d there i think.... so big eyed monster </li></ul><ul><li>yo:  yes... that's a problem </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516:  it's just a little problem nothing big </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>Final teaching sequence: 15 min.: Start the new version of the book. I will introduce them the structure: “Mr. Zipadee, Mr. Zipadee, what do you see? I see 2 ears looking at me !” I will bring into class flashcards with the parts of the face and I’ll say: Miss Marta, Mr. Joan, what do you see? And they will answer me: I (or we) see 2 eyes looking at me . I’ll give them a sketch (draft) (see Annexe 1) where they will write the part of the face they see (depending on the flashcard I showed to them) and their names. Then they will copy the text on another page. (see Annexe 2: sheets, final sheet). The final sheet will say: “I see a nose, ears, a mouth, eyes and teeth looking at me !&quot; and it will have the parts of the face drawn
  8. 8. Shared knowledge construction <ul><li>Alici@! dice: but Eve are you gonna work with 7/8 year old children? isn't it? </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice: yeagm that's the thing, even those phrases may be too difficult </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: I think so.... 7-8 year old children are still learning how to write in their mother tongue </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice : So maybe I should write the two phrases on the board and they can copy, changing the names of the animals each time? </li></ul><ul><li> dice: do you think it will be their first exposure to En? </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: and produce their own writing is difficult unless you let them write as it sounds, without correcting ortography, which is a thing I'm really in favour! </li></ul><ul><li> dice: if u keep repeating they will figure it out i think </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice: If I tell them to write something, they usually ask &quot;come se escribe?&quot; </li></ul><ul><li> dice: what does that mean? </li></ul><ul><li>Alici@! dice: writing is great if you don't mind ortography … the fact of the matter is that students should write something they've been hearing in moer than one class, so that's an easy way to memorise and produce what you've been hearing from your teacher, and if they ask you &quot;como see escribe?&quot; you can show them the good way to write a word </li></ul><ul><li> dice: they can describe color... </li></ul><ul><li>Eve dice: yeah, I need to arrange the other materials before this final activity to introduce and reinforce the structures </li></ul>
  9. 9. Doing “being-a-teacher” <ul><li>  yo: [...] I think you could focus just in one writting piece </li></ul><ul><li>  misspark516: that way they can take the leaf home and think about it with their parents if they cannot think of one at school </li></ul><ul><li>yo:   that's a good point! </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516: it's not a big writing piece it's just a picture or an idea that they want to write about </li></ul><ul><li>  yo:   I know but you may not have time to correct it and show them the errors, what is a good way to learn </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516:  it's so they don't start writing about different things and focus on one tradition in their story ahhh that is true </li></ul><ul><li>yo:   Maybe it's better to work on one piece but reflec ton it </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516:  yes, i think i might need to put in more time on the writing portion and have more activities where students can reflect and think about what they have written </li></ul><ul><li>yo:  they could write the text and per groups correct the text all together (ones will help others) and the 3rd day just draw and write the text (clean) you would have all the 2nd week to work on the text 2nd day sorry </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516: I wanted to incorporate the drawing first, because I thought it would help students remember what they want to write about each page and they can also use the drawings to incorporate details if they cannot think of 3 sentences </li></ul><ul><li>  yo:   yes, that's true </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516:  ahhh i likek the idea of the students working together but... because of the young age, i wonder if they will really be able to trust each other or really help each other  […] </li></ul><ul><li>yo:  I think they can! I'm doing my practicum with 2nd graders and they are able to help each other. You can do the groups so you put together high level students and lower level students, so ones can help each other yes! it's a good idea!! </li></ul><ul><li>misspark516:   ok! </li></ul>
  10. 10. Synthesizing the findings
  11. 11. <ul><li>Our micro-teaching session was based on the CLT approach and was done using, firstly a VoiceThread presentation and then group work - cooperative learning . To do this, we started the session contextualizing the project and presenting the final product students were expected to do further on : a VoiceThread presentation introducing themselves to Australian students . In my eyes, the introduction and first part of the session were precise, concise and to the point since students knew what they were expected to do. We wrote the session plan on the board, so that students know explicitly what they would do in that particular session. We gave students a real context and a real purpose in the use of English that went beyond the classroom, so that was motivating for them . Additionally, we modeled an example of VoiceThread presentation through which we hopefully answered indirect questions and clarified some doubts . </li></ul><ul><li>I would like to point out that we spent quite a lot of time planning this session and rehearsed twice before put it into practice. We built it up from the basis that we wanted to create a micro-teaching plan which has some purposeful and contextualized communicative events. I believe that was the reason why we finally imagined we would get in touch with an Australian school and then we came up with the idea of doing a VoiceThread as a tool to meet new people . In other words, from the basis of our objectives we planned some appropriate material to achieve them . </li></ul>Alignment with EPOSTL criteria
  12. 12. Alignment with EPOSTL criteria <ul><li>“ A good teacher knows how to integrate technologies into his teaching” is another main competence EPOSTL (2007) mentions. As far as I am concerned, I can integrate technologies into my teaching, but just the few technologies I know. When I was in school no technologies were used in class and that is why I do not know many educational technologies. Even that, in Practicum III and IV (school and Practicum sessions) I learned really good educational technologies for presenting and managing dynamic and creative activities. </li></ul><ul><li>One example is voice thread that I used in my teaching sequence. I’m very happy because students liked it very much and they really enjoyed recording their voice to create a storybook. Two of the English teachers of the school asked me for information about VT because they wanted to integrate it in their lessons. </li></ul><ul><li>[…] I am happy because I have experienced SL in a learning-teaching context and it may be useful for my future as a teacher. New technologies are very important nowadays and who knows if I will be in charge of an online collaborative task. In fact, I would like to. The times I talked to my UIUC peer I thought I would like to give a similar opportunity to my students, in which they could use English to communicate to English speakers (meaningful communicative events using target language with a real purpose) . Another similar task, such as writing letters with abroad schools is a great idea that students usually love and that I would love to put in practice […] </li></ul>Caterina_Reflections
  13. 13. Final words <ul><li>“ Individual expression is ultimately the product of various voices that are linked to one another through the socially constituted fabric of language” (Dooly, 2009: 40). </li></ul>
  14. 14. References <ul><li>Barab, S.A, Hay, K.E, Yamagata-Lynch, L.C. (2001). Constructing Networks of Action-Relevant Episodes: An in situ Research Methodology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences , 10(1&2), pp. 63-112. </li></ul><ul><li>Blin F. (2004) CALL and the development of learner autonomy: towards an activity-theoretical perspective. ReCALL , 16 (2): 377-395. </li></ul><ul><li>Dooly, M. (2009) Doing diversity: Teachers’ construction of their classroom reality. Peter Lang </li></ul><ul><li>Engeström, Y. (1987) Learning by Expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit. </li></ul><ul><li>Engeström, Y. (1999) Activity theory and transformation. In: Engeström Y., Miettinen, R. and Punamäki, R.-L. (eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19–38. </li></ul><ul><li>Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine Thorne, S. L. (2004) Cultural historical activity theory and the object of innovation. In: Van Esch K. and St. John, O. (eds.). New insights into Foreign Language Learning and Teaching . Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang Verlag. retrieved 15/10/2007. </li></ul><ul><li>Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes Cole, M. John-Steiner, V., Souberman, E. (eds.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. </li></ul>
  15. 15. [email_address] [email_address]