Classroom materials creation and pedagogical
knowledge improvements in a telecollaboration
project for pre-service EFL teachers
M. Camino Bueno-Alastuey
Public University of Navarre
Index
Introduction
• Telecollaboration
• Telecollaboration in FL teacher training
• Knowledge creation metaphor
The project
• Context and objectives
• Methodology
• Participants
• Data collection instruments
• Procedure
Results
Limitations and further research
Conclusions
Introduction
Telecollaboration projects (Helm et al, 2012)
•
Linguistic (more expert conversation partners)
•
Cultural awareness (intercultural communicative competence)
•
Development of digital literacy and techno-pedagogical skills
Telecollaboration research
Research has focused on:
•
•
•
•
real interaction opportunities to gain expertise in language
development through exposure to non-native or native speakers of
the target language (Grosbois, 2011) in written (Guth &MariniMaio, 2010) and oral modes (Bueno-Alastuey, 2010, 2013)
an increase in language learner´s motivation (Jauregui &
Bañados, 2008)
the development of intercultural competence (Tian &Wang,
2010)
the development of techno-pedagogical skills (Koehler &
Mishra, 2009) in teacher training programmes (Dooly & Sadler,
2013; ReCALL 23 (3), 2011)
“knowing the pedagogical affordances and constraints of a
range of technological tools as they relate to disciplinary
and developmentally appropriate pedagogical designs and
strategies” (p.65)
Telecollaboration in FL teacher training
Teacher training programmes should aim at
• Developing techno-pedagogical skills through experiential use
• Lesson planning
• Materials design
• ICT use in teaching EFL
International telecollaboration
• Experiential use of variety of distance communication tools
• Reflection of various techno-pedagogical aspects
• Purpose and usefulness of the telecollaboration project
• Appropriateness of design and realistic expectation
Telecollaboration in FL teacher training
Studies on telecollaboration in teacher training programmes have
noted:
• an increase in pre-service teachers competences in CALL
and CMC (Guichon & Hauck, 2011)
• the adoption of telecollaboration into trainees´ own
repertoire of teaching techniques (Antoniadou, 2011)
• an increased awareness of the difficulties inherent to these
projects (Dooly & Sadler, 2013)
• but negative perceptions of the project related to these
difficulties (Bueno-Alastuey & Kleban, 2012)
Research has hardly explored the potential of these projects for
joint lesson planning and material creation
Knowledge creation metaphor
• This metaphor “emphasizes the collaborative effort of developing
joint objects of activity’ (Paavola, Lipponen & Hakkarainen, 2002:1)
• Learning takes place as a result of solving problems, facing
challenges or puzzles while learners “actively engage in collaborative
tasks and knowledge-building dialogue”. (Lee et al., 2008:509)
This project
Context
▫ Previous telecollaboration project (linguistic vs. techno-pedagogical
objectives)
 unequal participation levels
 lack of awareness of pedagogical value
 few data collection methods
Objectives
▫ Techno-pedagogical skills development
 Awareness of the techno-pedagogical skills (lesson planning with ICT)
 Experiential learning of telecollaboration: awareness of benefits and
constraints
 Plan realistically and how to overcome or accept some of the problems involved
Methodology
Participants
 16 Polish university participants enrolled in a course of ELT
Course Design (five months)
▫ Level of English language proficiency: C1
▫ Age: 20 -24
• 13 Spanish participants enrolled in a Master of Education
▫ ICT applied to English language teaching (three weeks)
▫ Level of English language proficiency: from C1 to C2 (1 native speaker)
▫ Age: 24 to 45 years old
Multiple data collection instruments
Dropbox: a folder per group
• Skype conversations (8/6 project)
• Lesson plans (drafts and final) (7/12)
End-of-project on-line survey (n=23/79%)
Reflections reports (7)
Procedure
TASK: create two lessons plans with the materials to be used using
technology
• Step 1: Skype conversation in class
• Objectives: getting to know each other, get familiar with the technology and
plan your work
• Step 2: Create a draft version of a lesson using technology
• Step 3: Skype conversation to comment on draft versions of the other group
• Step 4: Refine lesson plan based on comments and add written comments to
lesson plan
• Step 5: Final version of lesson plans and materials
• Step 6: Write a reflection about the process and answer survey
Results
▫ Technological tools used
 For communication and collaboration
 In lesson plans
▫ Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation
 Type: pedagogical, technological and techno-pedagogical
 Location: Skype, e-mail, reports and lesson plans
 Successful (lesson plan and/or materials transformation)
▫ Perceived benefits and problems
▫ Possible improvements
Technological tools for communication and
collaboration
Tools
4 tools
3 tools
2 tools
1 tool
N survey
%
N. data
files
%
17.2
Skype, Facebook, e-mail and
comments
0
5
Skype, Facebook and comments
2
0
Skype, e-mails and comments
9
Skype and Facebook
4
E-mail and Skype
2
E-mail and comments
1
0
Skype
1
0
E-mail
1
4
Facebook
1
Comments in dropbox
2
47.8
20
69
0
30.4
21.7
0
0
0
0
13.8
Technological tools in lesson plans
No. lessons
Tool
10 lesson plans
Internet for material (download YouTube videos or images)
7 lesson plans
Hot Potatoes
6 lesson plans
Editing software /graphs (1)
5 lesson plans
Internet to search for information
4 lesson plans
Power Point
3 lesson plans
Edmodo
Wiki
2 lesson plans
Wallwisher
Podomatic
Webquest with videos and links
1 lesson plan
Facebook chat
Website
Surveymonkey
Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation:
Pedagogical
Technological collaboration
• Skype:
PS1: “What is that Surveymonkey?”
SS2 : “It is a web page to create quizzes”
PS2: “Oh, good idea. We wanted to do a quizz
but we did not know which tool to use”
Techno-pedagogical collaboration
• Skype
PS1: “At the end, they could do some collaborative
writing, maybe in a wiki”
SP1: “ Do you propose to do it in a wiki?”
SP2: “Great idea. The wiki is not complicated”
SP1: “Yes. They can write and share reports in a wiki”
PS2; “I think it´s a good idea, putting the vocabulary in
context. They share reports in a wiki”
• Reports
The comments we were exchanging helped our groups to reflect on what
we did and to modify/improve the lesson plans both in terms of the
ideas/activities designed for the lessons and in terms of the CMC tools.
Evidence of collaboration and knowledge creation
Type
Skype
PED
71
TECH
25
TECHNO
58
Comments
23
Reports
15
3
18
10
Changes
29
Group
G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
G6
Type
Ped
Tech
Techno
Ped
Tech
Techno
Ped
Tech
Techno
Ped
Tech
Techno
Ped
Tech
Techno
Ped
Tech
Techno
Skype
Comments
4
7
1
4
38
19
40
9
6
2
1
7
Reports
2
1
1
3
2
1
3
5
20
5
7
4
6
6
4
3
7
2
2
3
Changes
3
11
4
5
8
3
Lesson plans and materials: product modifications
• Evidence: 9 (75%) out of 12 lesson plans were modified as a result
of the collaboration process.
• Changes related to all three types of collaboration:
▫ 15 Pedagogical changes (timing, specifications of objectives, topics of
interest ..)
▫ 2 Technological changes (placing links in Edmodo, exploring
Surveymonkey ..)
▫ 12 Techno-pedagogical changes (e.g. length of video, using Edmodo
to place everything together)
Report and survey analysis: Perceived benefits
Reports and survey analysis: perceived benefits
The feedback provided by someone from “outside” may
• Pedagogical
be extremely helpful and beneficial
• Differences between groups
“We have been able to see the way people from another country work: how they prepare lessons,
materials, the use of technology for teaching …. They developed different ideas, working different
skills”
• Telecollaboration issues
• ICT tools/materials
• Collaboration
“I’m glad we´ve made it as we have seen the pros and cons of the
activity and know better nowadays when, how and with whom this
type of activities can be carried out”
The exchange let me know about Edmodo and Hot Potatoes since
these tools greatly make teachers work easier
It shows that there is the possibility of collaborating together in
different projects and it is a small door that can lead students to
propose new activities and cooperative ideas
Report and survey analysis: Perceived benefits
16
14
12
10
reports
survey
8
6
4
2
0
Telecollaboration issues
Differences between groups
Pedagogical solutions
ICT tools/materials use
Collaboration issues
Reports and survey analysis: perceived challenges
• Perceived usefulness low for international telecollaboration (Kleban
& Bueno-Alastuey, 2013)
• Technological planning problems (said by teacher)/time to meet on
Skype (19 students)
• Some students did less/lack of involvement ( 3 students)
• The process, deadlines and expectations clearer (5 students)
• Slowness of process (2)
• Technological problems (technology not working or lack of social
presence) (1)
Project improvement suggestions from students
• To improve schedule/institutional constraints:
▫ align timetables so it can be done in class (unrealistic)
▫ longer time on project at the same time as course.
• Joint creation of each lesson by all group members and more
conversations in Skype
• More planning and monitoring project progress on the part of
teachers: leads to limited autonomy
• Examples of successful work
Conclusions
• Improvements over previous project
▫ Participation




Skype conversation in class
Influence of project in grade
Profile of students
Outcome of task
▫ Multiple data sources
 Triangulation of data from multiple perspective
 Insight into the collaboration
▫ Awareness raising effect (still some negative perceptions and great
variations)
Conclusions
• Creating lesson plans and pedagogical materials through
telecollaboration effective way of:
▫ Experiential learning of different technological tools for collaboration
 Alternative ways of communicating that originally planned
▫ Improving ICT use in lessons
▫ Improving pedagogical, technopedagogical and technological knowledge
in lesson planning and materials creation
▫ Promoting increased awareness of telecollaboration benefits and
constraints and possible ways of solving them
• even though willingness to collaborate levels varied within groups.
References
• Antoniadou, V. (2011). Using Activity Theory to understand the contradictions in an online transatlantic
collaboration between student-teachers of a foreign language. ReCALL, 23(3), 233–251.
• Bueno-Alastuey, M.C. (2010). Synchronous-Voice Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects on pronunciation.
CALICO, 28 (1), 1-25
• Bueno-Alastuey, M.C. (2013). Interactional feedback in Synchronous Voice-based Computer Mediated
Communication: Effect of dyad. System, 41(3), 543 -559.
• Bueno-Alastuey, M.C, & Kleban, M. (2012) A (partially successful) telecollaboration project for pre-service EFL
teachers. Paper delivered at EuroCALL 2012 Conference, 22-25 August, Gothenburg, Sweden.
• Dooly, M, & Sadler, R. (2013) Filling in the gap: Linking theory and practice through telecollaboration in teacher
education. ReCALL, 25(1), 4-29.
• Grosbois, M. (2011) CMC-based projects and L2 Learning : confirming the importance of nativisation. ReCALL,
23(3), 294-310.
• Guichon, N .& Hauck, M. (2011) Teacher education research in CALL and CMC: More in demand than ever.
ReCALL, 23(3), 187 -199.
• Guth, S., & Marini-Maio, N. (2010) Close encounters of a new kind: The use of Skype and Wiki in
telecollaboration. In: S. Guth and F. Helm (Eds.). Telecollaboration 2.0. Bern: Peter Lang AG, 413–427.
• Helm, F., Guth, S.,& O'Dowd, R. (2012) University Language Classes Collaborating Online. A Report on the
Integration of Telecollaborative Networks in European Universities. http://intentproject.eu/sites/default/files/Telecollaboration_report_Final.pdf
References
• Kleban, M., & Bueno-Alastuey, M.C. (2013). Creating pedagogical knowledge through electronic
materials in a distance telecollaboration project for pre-service teacher trainees. Paper delivered at
WorldCALL 2013, 10-13 July, Glasgow
• Koehler, M.J. & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge?.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9 (1), 60 -70.
• Jauregi, K., & Bañados, E. (2008) Virtual interaction through video-web communication: A step
towards enriching and internationalizing learning programs. ReCALL, 20(2): 183–207.
• Lee, M. J. W., McLoughlin, K. and Chan, A. (2008) Talk the talk: Learner-generated podcasts as
catalysts for knowledge creation, British Journal Of Educational Technology, 39(3), 501-521.
• Paavola, S., L. Lipponen, l. and K. Hakkarainen. (2002) Epistemological foundations for CSCL: a
comparison of three models of innovative knowledge communities. In G. Stahl (ed.) Computer
support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum,
24- 32.
• Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2003) Knowledge building. In J.W. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
Education (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan, 1370–1373.
• Tian, J. & Wang, Y. (2010) Taking language learning outside the classroom: learners' perspectives of
eTandem learning via Skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 181-197.
THANKS FOR YOUR
ATTENTION!!!!
Any questions?