Beyond Panic: Some Practical Ideas For The Multi-Media Classroom

Part 1

 Marta Genis and Janet Wilson-Smith

Janet Wilson-Smith is the Multimedia Coordinator at Colegio Legamar, a private school in the outskirts of Madrid.  She teaches children and teenagers an has done so for the last 15 years.  She has a B.A, M.Sc (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) and the U.C.L.E.S  RSA Certificate

 Marta Genís  holds a degree in Spanish Philology (UAM),  a Masters in  Applied Linguistics  (UCM), and  she is about to finish  her PhD in  English Philology (UCM). She has worked as a primary and secondary English  teacher. She is now one of the co-ordinators of the English Department in Universidad Antonio de Nebrija where she has been teaching general English and English for Specific Purposes for six years. Her fields of interest are Advertising, Cinema Studies and  New Technologies applied to Language Learning.

 Correspondence to: Marta Genís, Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Campus de la Berzosa, Hoyo de Manzanares, 28240 MADRID, e-mail: mgenis@nebrija.es.

 PART 1

Introduction

There is a trend in Secondary and University education that promotes a kind of open and flexible learning, with students who go to class, on the one hand, and distance learning on the other. For this reason, it is necessary to develop a new model of teaching which considers the reality of the new learning scenarios.

The main objective of multimedia learning is to move the students’ responsibility from the teacher to themselves, using nonconventional space and time. This means a change of didactic focus, for it combines self-learning through multimedia material with assessment and direct intervention by teachers in the learning process.

The aim of this paper is to present two different experiences of multimedia learning, one in a secondary school, which we present here, and the other at university level., which will appear as Part II in the next issue of the TESOL-SPAIN Newsletter.

Theoretical Considerations

In recent times, constructivism and constructivist learning environment designs have created considerable interest among scholars (Bodner, 1986; Jonassen, 1991; Duffy  & Jonassen, 1991).  According to Kahn & Friedman (1998), constructivist learning has the following main principles, in terms of movement from:

¨       instruction to construction

¨       reinforcement to interest

¨       obedience to autonomy

¨       coercion to co-operation

The second theory, frequently mentioned as the basis for the didactic validity of Internet environment is conversation theory (Pask, 1975); this theory follows Vygotskys point of view (1978) about learning. He states that learning is a social phenomenon, i.e., learning is the result of the interaction between participants in a dialogue in which an individual contrasts his/her personal point of view with that of another individual until they reach an agreement. The Internet adds interaction between people from different cultures and different experience levels to this social phenomenon and it frames them within a common technological culture.

A third theory which is frequently mentioned when defending the validity of the Internet as a resource for learning is the theory of placed knowledge. According to this theory, knowledge is an active relationship between an agent and the environment, and learning occurs when the learner is actively involved in a complex and realist instructional context (Young, 1993). The most extreme position of placed learning sustains that not only learning but also thinking is placed (Gibson,1979) by perception, not by memory.

      These theories have informed our use of multimedia both in a class setting and with distance learning.

Class Environment

In June 2001, my school installed a multimedia class. The initial reaction of the teaching staff was a mixture of doubt and panic.  What was this and why was it being installed?  Was it a way of slowly eliminating teachers?  Of reducing staff while maintaining the promised hours per week of English given to the students???  Once the whole lab had been created, the real horror was revealed. This was a tool which we were expected to dominateit was THE FUTURE. The head of studies and director talked about working on different channelswhat were they on about??? The initial sense of shock lead to further dread.  The rooms use was explained to us very enthusiastically by various people, none of whom are language teachers.

            Apparently these labs permitted language teachers to give individual attention to those students that needed it without losing control of the rest of the classneedless to say this all sounded very unlikely. Then we had a brief seminar given to us by the actual designers of the lab, but the explanations were technical rather than pedagogical.   We definitely felt that we were being thrown into the deep end before wed even learnt how to doggy paddle.  However, over the last two years I think that all of us have developed an understanding of how useful these labs can be, their advantages and disadvantages, and how best we can take advantage of them.

Types

First of all, what is a teacher controlled language lab?  There are basically three types:

·        The most basic system is an interactive audio system.  The teacher has a control desk, with what is called a home lab for pronunciation activities, four cassette players, two of which can record, and a computer, for playing CDs or using material from the internet.  The students have earphones and microphones, and there is usually a minimum of two channels.  Basically this means that a teacher can have two working groups of students working on two different activities at the same time.

·        The next level of technology, the multimedia system, incorporates a video screen (usually one per two students) to the package.  This means that students can view material controlled by the teacher: videos, DVD, internet material, etc.

·        The ultimate package adds a computer network to the lab, thus allowing for more independent learner use of CD ROMs and internet activities.

FUNCTIONING AND ORGANIZATION

One of the best things about the modern language labs is that they allos the teacher to cater to the different needs of their students. The ability to divide a class up into various levels, have them do different activities (or a similar activity at a different pace), change back and forth from one group to the other without moving is a great way to provide for ways of changing how classes are taught.

How does it work?  Basically the labs have various channels (up to seven), one usually designated to what is called a home lab, four cassette-based channels, a video/camera channel, and a computer channel.  In the case of a multimedia or Netscape system, these audio channels are also linked to two different video image sources (one from the computer, and one from the video/camera). The teacher has the ability to control whether or not the students microphones work, to override whatever audio source is being listened to if we want to give everyone a general message, to freeze students on certain channels, and to cruise from one channel to the other.  In simple terms, this means that we could assign a speaking activity, divide the students up into groups of 4 based on their levels, assign each group a channel, and control whether or not they are actually doing what they are supposed to be doing. The division of groups doesnt always have to be equal; eight well-matched students can work on one channel, and other smaller groups can work simultaneously on others.

Keeping the multimedia room in good condition is extremely important, and that can be easily achieved by organizing the students. Here are some tips:

• Seat them in groups according to level.
• Always seat them in the same post, and have a register of where they should be.
• Have a clearly established and easily understood set of norms and sanctions, so that students are aware of what will happen if they misuse the equipment.
• Delegate one student to quickly check all the posts before and after you use the room.
• Keep a control sheet at the teacher’s desk, where teachers can note down any incidents.
•   One teacher should be in charge of the room to keep track of any problems.  Wrong doing must be caught and dealt with quickly to be effective.
• If very young students (under 6) use the multimedia room, have them put the headphone on backwards  (otherwise they will CHEW ON THE MICROPHONES) and have a cloth nearby to wipe off the microphones.
• Never use more channels than you can handle.
• Time the activities so that you can dedicate yourself to one group at a time.

Activities

We do a lot of project work in our lab; students are assigned projects that they work on in groups in the labs, and then present to other groups (of similar levels). Not only does it involve the students in their learning process, it also lifts the burden of preparing material at various levels from the teacher and transfers it to the student. Basically any normal class project can be carried out in the multimedia classroom; the following tend to work well:

• student dictations, interviews and book readings which can be practised and then recorded and used on other groups.

• storytelling of classic tales  or invention of new ones, complete with images.

• radio programs which can be planned, practised and then recorded

• video worksheets which can be prepared by the students.

• dubbing of small excerpts of  movies.

One of the benefits of the integration of multimedia classes in our school is that it has encouraged the sharing of material amongst teachers, as they pass activities on from one group to another.

 Conclusions

Our dream as teachers is that our students become autonomous, capable of learning on their own. Students who are allowed to learn in their own way, to work at their own individual pace, to be responsible for their learning, get more successful results. Students that know how, what and why they are learning are also easier to manage, because they feel themselves involved in decision making. Of course, this does not mean that multimedia will substitute teachers, but rather that multimedia is a very useful tool  to help increase student motivation and self-esteem, to aid them in developing self-discipline, co-operation and autonomy.

The next issue of  Newsletter will present a different experience of multimedia learning at university level, developed at the Universidad Antonio de Nebrija.

References 

Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 873-878.

Duffy, T. M  & Jonassen D.H., (1991) Constructivism: New implication  for Instructional Technology. Educational Technology, 31 (5), 7-21.

Gibson, J. J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Jonassen, D.H., (1991). Evaluating Constructivistic Learning. Educational Technology, September, 28-33.

Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Friedman, B. (1998). Control and power in educational computing. In H. Bromley & M. W.Apple (Eds.), Education/Technology/Power: Educational computing as a social practice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Pask, G. (1975). Conversation, Cognition, and Learning. New York: Elsevier.

Vygotski, L. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Young, M.F. (1993)"Instructional Design for Situated Learning." Educational Technology Research and Development 41/1: 43-58.