Conference Presentation, August 2015, Harvard University by Liliane Dusewoir, Mark Lewis, and Shawn Provencal

1. Developing Oral Proficiency
using Digital Audio and Video
Liliane Duséwoir, Sr. Lecturer, French
Mark Lewis, Director, Geddes Language Center
Shawn Provencal, Systems Administrator,
Geddes Language Center
FLEAT VI – IALLT 2015

2. Proficiency and Assessment
 ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines
 3 modes: Interpretive,
Presentational,
Interpersonal
 Oral Proficiency Interview
(OPI) Training
 Use of technology to
increase exposure and
practice in interpersonal
skills

3. History of Geddes
 1937, founded as a lab in 1961, then 1969.
 Forty-two open-reel stations and a central control
console
 Renovated in 1993
 Forty-eight audio cassette stations with a central
console, 16 VHS stations.
 Currently: 28 languages across 4 departments; 40
computer workstations, 5 classrooms, audio and
video recording studios, student lounge, faculty
workspace

7. Moving to computers
 By 2000 lab use dropped significantly
 Online workbooks (Quia, MyLab)
 Streaming textbook audio

8. Class activities still in the lab
 Recording of Dialogues (often in pairs)
 Recording Activities
 Typing practice
 Online workbooks
 Proofing/Analytics (“Antidote”)
 Other web tools (Lingt, Voicethread, Zoom,
etc.)

9. Student A: “Do I really need to record
myself speaking Japanese??...”
Lab-based:
• RecordPad
• DiLL for Mac
Cloud-based:
• Voicethread
• Flipgrid
• Lingt Language
… Easy-to-use eLearning
Ecosystem

10. Where did we start?
 DLRecorder
 Audacity
 Quicktime

11. What we figured out (quickly)
 Good quality microphones
 Simple interface with automatic saving
 Visual cues for recording
 Lab staff needed to check and configure
stations often
 Lab staff needed to be available
 Instructors needed to be “present”
 Practice assignments before an exam

12. RecordPad

13. RecordPad
 Pros:
 Simple Interface
 Automatic Saving
 Visual while
recording
 Files could
automatically be
uploaded or emailed
 Cons:
 Pricey
 No interactivity
between
students or
between
students and
instructor

14. DiLL
 DIgital Language Lab
 Macintosh-based
 Developed at Northwestern University
 www.swifteducation.net

15. Benefits
 More control
 Better feedback
 Improved peer interaction & authenticity
 Differentiated instruction & gain of time
 Less anxiety
 More participation
 Enhanced input and increased
awareness

16. Lili’s Video

17. Example of tasks
 Listening comprehension
 Recording answers on the spot
 Analytical questions on assigned readings
 Prepare answers collaboratively
 Rehearse answers to enhance confidence
 Interpreting exercises
 Self-correcting

18. DiLL
 Unlike other software tools, the
instructor can interact with students
 Instructor acts like “telephone
switchboard operator”

22. Dill: Tasks
 Interface for recordings
 Students initiate asynchronous tasks
 Instructors initiate synchronous tasks
 Tasks automatically saved
 Instructors access via website

26. Obstacles
 Upfront costs
 Class sizes and number of stations
 Overcoming “Another tool!?!”
 Getting instructors to see the benefit of
giving up class time to come to the lab

27. What Dill Doesn’t Do
 Allow students to review their own work
 Synchronous tasks in pairs (promised)
 Group activities outside of class
 Activities outside the lab

28. Complementary tools
 Voicethread
 Flipgrid
 Lingt Language
 others

29. What’s next?
 Adopt Lingt Language as our next
complementary tool
 Expand faculty development
opportunities for faculty
 Re-evaluate use of digital technologies
as a means to extend speaking
/listening opportunities prior to OPI

30. More information
 bu.edu/language
 bu.edu/geddes