Global intelligent design of interactive multimedia listening software

Intelligent Design of Interactive Multimedia Listening SoftwareVehbi Turel Bingol University, Turkey A volume in the Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design AETID B

Trang 2

Intelligent Design of Interactive Multimedia Listening Software

Vehbi Turel

Bingol University, Turkey

A volume in the Advances in Educational

Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID)

Book Series

Trang 3

Published in the United States of America by

Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global)

Web site: http://www.igi-global.com

Copyright © 2015 by IGI Global All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Cataloguing in Publication Data

A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.

For electronic access to this publication, please contact: eresources@igi-global.com

Intelligent design of interactive multimedia listening software / Vehbi Turel, editor.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index

ISBN 978-1-4666-8499-7 (hardcover) ISBN 978-1-4666-8500-0 (ebook) 1 Educational technology 2 Interactive multimedia I Turel, Vehbi, 1965- editor

Trang 4

The Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series (ISSN 2326-8905) is published by IGI Global,

701 E Chocolate Avenue, Hershey, PA 17033-1240, USA, www.igi-global.com This series is composed of titles available for purchase vidually; each title is edited to be contextually exclusive from any other title within the series For pricing and ordering information please visit http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advances-educational-technologies-instructional-design/73678 Postmaster: Send all address changes

indi-to above address Copyright © 2015 IGI Global All rights, including translation in other languages reserved by the publisher No part of this series may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphics, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping,

or information and retrieval systems – without written permission from the publisher, except for non commercial, educational use, including classroom teaching purposes The views expressed in this series are those of the authors, but not necessarily of IGI Global.

IGI Global is currently accepting manuscripts for publication within this series To submit a pro-posal for a volume in this series, please contact our Acquisition Editors at Acquisitions@igi-global.com

or visit: http://www.igi-global.com/publish/

• Online Media in Classrooms

• Web 2.0 and Education

• Digital Divide in Education

• Classroom Response Systems

• Instructional Design Models

The Advances in Educational Technologies & Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series is a

re-source where researchers, students, administrators, and educators alike can find the most updated research and theories regarding technology’s integration within education and its effect on teaching as a practice

Mission

ISSN: 2326-8905 EISSN: 2326-8913

Lawrence A Tomei Robert Morris University, USA

Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series

Trang 5

Titles in this Series

For a list of additional titles in this series, please visit: www.igi-global.com

Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning

Jared Keengwe (University of North Dakota, USA)

Fuzzy Logic-Based Modeling in Collaborative and Blended Learning

Sofia J Hadjileontiadou (Hellenic Open University, Greece) Sofia B Dias (Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal) José A Diniz (Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal) and Leontios J Hadjileontiadis (Aristotle University of Thes-saloniki, Greece)

Psychological and Pedagogical Considerations in Digital Textbook Use and Development

Elena Railean (University of European Studies, Republic of Moldova & Academy of Sciences of Moldova, public of Moldova)

Macro-Level Learning through Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Strategies and Predictions for the Future

Elspeth McKay (RMIT University, Australia) and John Lenarcic (RMIT University, Australia)

Implementation and Critical Assessment of the Flipped Classroom Experience

Abigail G Scheg (Elizabeth City State University, USA)

Transforming the Future of Learning with Educational Research

Helen Askell-Williams (Flinders University, Australia)

Intelligent Web-Based English Instruction in Middle Schools

Jiyou Jia (Peking University, China)

Handbook of Research on Teaching Methods in Language Translation and Interpretation

Ying Cui (Shandong University, Weihai, China) and Wei Zhao (Shandong University, Weihai, China)

701 E Chocolate Ave., Hershey, PA 17033Order online at www.igi-global.com or call 717-533-8845 x100

To place a standing order for titles released in this series, contact: cust@igi-global.com

Mon-Fri 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (est) or fax 24 hours a day 717-533-8661

Trang 6

Editorial Advisory Board

ChristinaAkrivopoulou,The Democritus University of Thrace, Greece

SelamiAydın,The University of Balıkesir, Turkey

HasanBoynukara,Namık Kemal University, Turkey

ErdoğanKartal,The University of Uludağ, Turkey

PeterMcKenna,Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

JohnMorley,The University of Manchester, UK

SüleymanSadiSeferoğlu,Hacettepe University, Turkey

AtifWaraich,Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

BuğraZengin,Namık Kemal University, Turkey

List of Reviewers

SedatAkayoğlu,The University of Abant Izzet Baysal, Turkey

RajaaAquil,Georgia Institute of Technology, USA

ArdaArıkan,Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Turkey

FeryalCubukcu,Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey

LeventDurdu,The University of Kocaeli, Turkey

LindaC.Jones,The University of Alaska, USA

IşılGünseliKaçar,Middle East Technical University, Turkey

TingtingKang,Northern Arizona University, USA

EylemKilic,The University of Yuzuncu Yil, Turkey

AubreyNeilLeveridge,The University of British Columbia, Canada

MohammedAliMohsen,Najran University, Saudi Arabia

M.DoloresRamírez-Verdugo,Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain

OlcaySert,Hacettepe University, Turkey

JingXu,Iowa State University, USA

RamazanZengin,The University of Istanbul, Turkey

Trang 7

Table of Contents

Preface xv Introduction xx

Section 1 Annotations, Optimum Combinations, Captions Chapter 1

DesignoftheWhileListeningActivitiesinInteractiveMultimediaListeningSoftware 103

Vehbi Turel, The University of Bingol, Turkey

Atif Waraich, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Chapter 6

DesignofMultimediaListeningSoftware:Instructions,Tasks,Texts,andSelf-Assessment

Tests 142

Peter McKenna, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Trang 8

Chapter 7

DesignofMultimediaListeningSoftware:UnfamiliarItems,Glossary,AuralTexts,andSpeechRate 170

TheEffectivenessofMultipleMediaToolsinL2Listening:AMeta-Analysis 246

Tingting Kang, Northern Arizona University, USA

Chapter 11

EnglishMajorStudents’AttitudestowardsMoviesandSeriesasLanguageLearningResources 276

Buğra Zengin, Namık Kemal University, Turkey

Duygu Doğan, Namık Kemal University, Turkey

Feryal Çubukçu, Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey

Işıl Günseli Kaçar, Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Trang 9

Compilation of References 405 About the Contributors 442 Index 445

Trang 10

Detailed Table of Contents

Preface xv Introduction xx

Section 1 Annotations, Optimum Combinations, Captions Chapter 1

EffectsofAnnotationsonInferringMeaningwithinaListeningComprehensionEnvironment 1

Linda C Jones, University of Arkansas, USA

Inthischapter,theauthoranalyzesstudents’abilitiestounderstandauraltextswhileaccessingannotatedinformationinamultimedia-basedenvironment.Inparticular,thestudyexaminesinferencingintheauralenvironmentandstudents’abilitiestoinfermeaningfromanauraltextwhenprocessingitinoneoffourtreatments:theauralpassage1)withnoannotations;2)withpictorialannotationsonly;3)withwrittenannotationsonlyor;4)withwrittenandpictorialannotations.Overall,studentswhoaccessedpictorialand/orwrittenannotationsmostofteninferredmeaningsignificantlybettercomparedtothosewhodidnotaccesssuchannotations.Andtoo,whiletherelationshipofrecallandinferencingwashighlycorrelatedbasedonannotationtype,therelationshipbetweenvocabularyknowledgeandinferencingbasedonannotationtypewasnotstrong

Chapter 2

AnnotatingAbstractVocabularyUsingMultimedia 27

Jing Xu, Iowa State University, USA

This chapter reports a research study that investigated the effectiveness of multimedia vocabularyannotations(MVAs)infacilitatingacquisitionofsecondlanguage(L2)abstractvocabulary.Twenty-onecollegiateL2studentsreadahypermediapassagethatcontainedmarginalMVAsforeighteenunknownabstractwords.Theirknowledgeofthesewordswasassessedimmediatelyafterthereadingactivityandtwelvedaysafterwards.ThequantitativedatafromvocabularyassessmentsindicatedthatthesestudentsneitheracquiredmorevocabularyknowledgenorretainedthisknowledgebetterbyusingMVAsthanusingtraditionaltext-onlyannotations.ThequalitativedatacollectedfromtwoquestionnairessuggestedthattheparticipantshadappliedvariousstrategiesforassessingMVAsandtheyhadencounteredcertaindifficultiesinunderstandingthevisuals.Theresultsareinterpretedbasedonmultimedialearningandvisualperceptiontheories.TheimplicationsoftheresultsfordesigningmultimediaL2readingandlisteningmaterialsarediscussed

Trang 11

Chapter 4

TheRemovalofTargetLanguageCaptioningSupports 75

Aubrey Neil Leveridge, University of British Columbia, Canada

Thischapterdiscussescaptioningsupportinsecondlanguageinstructionanditssubsequentremoval.Priorresearchhasfocusedontheadditionofcaptions,viewingcaptioningsupportassimilartoothertypesofsupports.However,captioningisunlikeotherinstructionalsupportsinthatitprovidesanalternativeroutefromwhichtogathercompletecomprehension,inturnfosteringlearnerrelianceonthesupport.Accordingly,thischapterarguesthattheremovalofthissupportmaynegativelyaffectlearners.Thecurrentpaperreportsonanempiricalstudythatgatheredlearnerperceptionsregardingcaptionreliance,captionadditionandremoval.Thedatarevealsthatperceptionsareaffectedbylearnerproficiency.Aframeworkwascreatedtoassistlanguageinstructorsandcoursedeveloperstomakeinformedchoicesregardingtheadditionandremovalofcaptioningsupport

Section 2 Tasks, Activities, and Other Design Issues Chapter 5

DesignoftheWhileListeningActivitiesinInteractiveMultimediaListeningSoftware 103

Atif Waraich, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Thischapterfocusesonthedesignofthewhile-listeningactivitieswhiledesigninganddevelopinginteractivemultimedialisteningsoftware(MLS)thataimstoenhancelanguagelearners’listeningskillsasapartoflearningEnglishasasecond.Thelanguagelearners’perceptionstowardsthetype(priority)aswellasthenumberofthewhilelisteningactivities(questions)onscreenatonetimewereinvestigated.Intotal,56(N=56)languagelearnersparticipatedinthisstudy.Thestudywasmostlyquantitativeandpartlyqualitativeinnature.ThequantitativeresultswereanalysedwithSPSS.Thequalitativedatawereanalysedbyexaminingtheparticipants’responsesgatheredfromtheopen-endedquestionsandsemi-structuredinterviews,andbyfocussingonthesharedthemesamongtheresponses.Theresultsrevealthatthelanguagelearnersthinkthatthepriorityaswellasthenumberofthewhilelisteningactivitiesonscreenatonetimecanhelpaswellashindertheirfocusandcomprehensionatthewhile-listeningstageintermsofdifferentaspects

Trang 12

Chapter 6

DesignofMultimediaListeningSoftware:Instructions,Tasks,Texts,andSelf-Assessment

Tests 142

Inthischapter,theprinciplesandguidelinesthatshouldbeborneinmindwhendesigninganddevelopingsomedigitalelementssuchas‘instructions’,‘tasks’,‘(reading)texts’and‘self-assessmenttests’ininteractivemultimedialisteningsoftware(MLS)forsecond/foreignlanguagelearning(SLL/FLL)arefocusedon.Thestagesofsoftwaredesignanddevelopmentarecategorizedintosixseparatestages:(1)feasibility,(2)settingupateamofexperts,(3)designing,(4)programming,(5)testingand(6)evaluating(Turel&McKenna,2013,pp.188-190).EachstageaswellaseachdigitalelementofinteractiveMLSisvitallyimportantinthedesignanddevelopmentprocessofcosteffectiveapplications.AwiderangeofprinciplesandguidelinesneedtobetakenintoaccountateachstageaswellasinthedesignanddevelopmentofeachelementsothatwecandesignanddevelopeverysingledigitalelementofinteractiveMLSefficiently.Asawhole,allofthesecanenableustodesignidealandcustomised/adaptedMLSforSLL/FLL

Chapter 7

DesignofMultimediaListeningSoftware:UnfamiliarItems,Glossary,AuralTexts,andSpeechRate 170

Thischapterfocusesontheprinciplesandguidelinesthatshouldbeborneinmindwhendesigninganddevelopingsomedigitalelementsofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwaresuchas‘unfamiliaritems’,

‘glossary’,auraltexts’,and‘speechrate’ininteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwareasapartofsecond/foreignlanguagelearning(FLL).Thestagesofsoftwaredesignanddevelopmentarecategorizedintosixseparatestages:(1)feasibility,(2)settingupateamofexperts,(3)designing,(4)programming,(5)testing,and(6)evaluating.Notonlyiseachstagevitaltothedesignanddevelopmentprocessforcosteffectivemultimedialisteningsoftware,butthedesignofeachdigitalelementofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwareateachstageisalsofundamental.Therefore,awiderangeofprinciplesandguidelinesneedtobeborneinmindateachstageinordertobeabletodesignanddevelopeverysingleelementefficiently.Theelementswhicharethefocusofthischapterare:‘unfamiliaritems’,‘glossary’,auraltexts’,and‘speechrate’

Trang 13

Section 3 Tools, Applications, and Resources Chapter 10

TheEffectivenessofMultipleMediaToolsinL2Listening:AMeta-Analysis 246

Tingting Kang, Northern Arizona University, USA

Duetothenatureoflistening,multiplemediatools(e.g.,audiocassetteplayers,radio,video,multimedia,andlanguagelaboratory)havebeenutilizedinsecondlanguage(L2)listeninginstructionforalongtime.Thischapterrecruitedthemostrecentlypublishedempiricalstudiesandmeta-analyzedavailableevidenceontheeffectsofdifferentmultiplemediatoolsonL2listeningcomprehension.Theresultsrevealedamedium-to-largeeffectofmultiplemediatoolsonlisteningcomprehensioninbetween-groupdesigns(Cohen’sd=.69).Theeffectsofindividualmultiplemediatoolshavealsobeenstatisticallysynthesized.Further,moderatoranalysiscouldhelpL2educatorsandtestdevelopersmakedecisionsonapplyingdifferentmultiplemediatoolsinthefieldsofL2instructionandassessment.Specifically,subtitles(inthefirstlanguage/L1)/captions(inthesourcelanguage/L2),aswellasself-regulatedlisteningandslowspeed,arerecommendedtoteachersandtestdevelopersasameanstoimprovelearners’listeningcomprehension.Intheend,thischapterconcludesbyidentifyingpotentialareasforfutureresearch

Chapter 11

EnglishMajorStudents’AttitudestowardsMoviesandSeriesasLanguageLearningResources 276

Duygu Doğan, Namık Kemal University, Turkey

Feryal Çubukçu, Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey

Thischapterfocusesontheattitudesofthefourth-yearEnglishLanguageTeaching(ELT)studentstowardsstrategiesrelatedtousingmoviesandseriesasforeignlanguagelearningresources.Thesubjectswereteachercandidates(atastateuniversityinthewestofTurkey).Thecurrentstudydemonstratesthatforeign-languagemajorsarenotimmunetodownsidesofalow-exposureEFLsetting.Theparticipantsalsostatethatonlytheirfamilymembers-butnotfriends-arelikelytocauseashifttothedubbedversionofmovie/seriestheywanttoviewintheoriginallanguageandwithL2captions(intralingualcaptions/inthesourcelanguage)otherwise.ThisstudysuggeststhatbackseatTVsystemsonbusescanprovidesolutions.ThebackseatTVsystemsarewelcomebymostoftheparticipants,inparticularbythosewhoseintercitytravellinghabitsarefoundtobequitehigh

Trang 14

Chapter 12

Using3-DVirtualLearningEnvironmentstoImproveListeningSkill 296

Ramazan Zengin, Istanbul University, Turkey

The recent developmentsin educationaltechnologieshave givenopportunity to theuseof variousInternet-basedresources,appsandInteractiveMultimediaSoftware.Thisvarietyhasprovidedfreedomforforeignlanguagelearnerstoreachmultiplesourcesoftechnology.Theimmersivenatureof3-DvirtuallearningenvironmentssuchastheSecondLifemayprovidemanynewopportunitiesforauthenticcommunication,cooperativecreationofcontent,andmultiplemodesofinformationprocessinginthecontextofforeignlanguagelearning.Thischapterwilldiscusshowthesenewtechnologiescanbeusedinlanguageclassroomstoimprovestudents’listeningskillwhichisimportantforeffectivecommunication.Inthedigitalage,newtechnologiesarerepositioninglisteningasanimportant‘new’literacywherenewresourcescanbeusedtoprovideabetterlearning-teachingcontext.Today’syoungpeopleknownas“digitalnatives”arebornintoadigitalworld,andtheyspendhoursinfrontoftheirdigitaldevices

Chapter 13

GoogleSearchApplicationsinForeignLanguageClassesatTertiaryLevel:ACaseStudyintheTurkishContext 313

Işıl Günseli Kaçar, Middle East Technical University, Turkey

GiventhatitischallengingforEFLteacherstocreateaninput-richlearningenvironmentwithamplelearningandpractice/productionopportunities,theintegrationofonlineresourcesintolanguageclasseshasgainedimportancerecently.Althoughtheeffectiveuseoftechnologyineducationalsettingsisviewedasa21stcenturyskill,theissueofprovidingEFLlearnerswithsystematictrainingintheuseofonlinesearchtechniquesineducationalsettingshasnotbeenexploredsufficientlyandmanylearnersarenotyetawareofhowtoutilizetechnologicalresourcesforeducationalpurposes.Hence,thischapteraimstoinvestigatehowEFLmajorsinanEnglishpreparatoryprogramatapublicstateuniversityinthewestofTurkeyuseGooglesearchingskillsreceptivelyandproductivelyinpedagogicaltasks,tohighlighthowGooglesearchtaskscanbeusedtoraiselanguageawarenessandtooffersuggestionsforeffectiveintegrationofsearchtechniquesintoteachingEFLatthetertiarylevel

Trang 15

Compilation of References 405 About the Contributors 442 Index 445

Trang 16

Preface

USING COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY TO DESIGN AND DEVELOP

INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA LISTENING SOFTWARE

Notonlyarewe,aseducatorsandmaterialsdevelopers,livinginadigitalage,butwearealsorequiredtomeettheneedsoftoday’slearnerswhoareingeneraldigitallyfluentandcompetitive,-astheyarebornintoadigitalworld,wheretheycanspendmanyhoursinfrontoftheirdigitaldevices-.Therefore,notonlyaretoday’slearnersknownas‘digitalnatives’,buttheyarealsoknowntohavedifferentlearn-ingstylesandpreferencesincomparisontothelearnersofjustafewdecadesago.Asaresult,today’slearnersexpectcomputerbasededucationaltechnologytobeusedmoreoftenandwidelybothinteach-ingandlearning.Inordertobeabletomeetsuchdemands,we,aseducatorsandmaterialsdevelopers,needtoandhavetorespondtosuchlearningdemandsanddifferences.Thiscanbeachievedthroughaccommodatingthedigital–literateandwiselearnerswithappropriateandefficientlearningstylesthatmeettheirpreferencesacrossallfieldsaswellasatallstagesofteachingandlearning.Oneofthesesubjectsissecond/foreignlanguagelearning(SLL/FLL).Fortunately,atremendousamountofresearchhasbeenconductedaswellaspublishedinthefieldof(a)usingcomputer/educationaltechnologyforSLL/FLL(i.e.computerassistedlanguagelearning–CALL)and(b)thedesignanddevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialanguagelearningenvironmentsinaverywiderangeofdifferentpeer-reviewedinternationalsjournals.However,nocompiledbookhaseverbeenwrittenoreditedonthedesignanddevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwaretodate

Thisbook,Intelligent Design of Interactive Multimedia Listening Software,offersauniquewayfordesigning

anddevelopingefficientandcosteffectivemultimedialisteningapplicationsforthelearnersofanylanguage(e.g.English,Arabic,Chinese,Spanish,Japanese,Russian,French,German,Kurdish,Turkish,Persian,Italian,Portuguese,Hindi,Urdu,Greek,Hebrewetc.)thatistaught/learntasasecond/foreignlanguage

Thefourteenchaptersofthebook,-whichareauthoredbyexpertsandspecialistsinthefieldofCALLandthedesignanddevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwareasapartofSLL/FLLfromawiderangeofdifferentcountries-,cover(a)SLL/FLLandCALLoverviewtheories,hy-potheses,approachesandtrends,(b)efficientdesignprinciplesandguidelinesfordesignofdifferentelementsofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwaresuchasannotations,optimumcombinations,tasks,activities,instructions,(reading)texts,captions,self-assessmenttests,unfamiliaritems,glossaries,auraltexts,speechrate,andotherrelevantdesignissues,and(c)pertinenttools,applicationsandresources.Thesechapterspresenttheresultsoforiginalandempiricalresearchcoveringtheseareas.Inthesameway,thechaptersreportresultsofbothquantitativeandqualitativeempiricaldataontheactualdesignanddevelopmentofawiderangeofdigitalelements(ortheiroptimumcombinations)ofinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments

xv

Trang 17

Intelligent Design of Interactive Multimedia Listening Softwareprovidesreaders(i.e.undergraduate

andpost-graduatelanguageandcomputerstudents;languageandcomputerbasededucationteachers,tutors,lecturersandresearchers;educationalinstitutions;commercialsoftwarecompaniesandsoftwaredevelopers,andindividualsoftwaredevelopers)withthemostuptodatecompiledresearch,findingsandpracticaldesignprinciplesandguidelinesinthefieldofmultimedialisteningsoftware.Thisuniquecompiledbookwillenablealllinguisticandcomputerbasededucationscholars,students,institutions;softwarecompaniesandsoftwaredevelopersnotonlytobetterunderstandefficientandeffectivesoft-waredesignanddevelopmentprinciplesandguidelines,butalsotoempowerthemtodesignandcreateefficientcosteffectivemultimedialisteningsoftwareforanylanguageasapartofSLL/FLL

HOW THIS BOOK ORGANISED

ThechaptersinthisbookcoverthreekeyareasthatarevitalinthedesignanddevelopmentprocessofinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentsforanylanguageasapartofSLL/FLL.Thesekeyareasare:(1)annotations,optimumcombinationsandcaptions,(2)tasks,activitiesandotherdesignissues,and(3)tools,applicationsandresources

Annotations, Optimum Combinations, Captions

Inchapterone,“EffectsofAnnotationsonInferringMeaningwithinaListeningComprehensionEnvi-ronment”,Jonesfocusesonstudents’abilitiestoinfermeaningfromanauraltextwhenprocessingitin

oneoffourtreatments:Theauralpassage(1)withnoannotations;(2)withpictorialannotationsonly;(3)withwrittenannotationsonlyor(4)withwrittenandpictorialannotations.Overall,studentswhoaccessedpictorialand/orwrittenannotationsmostofteninferredmeaningsignificantlybettercomparedtothosewhodidnotaccesssuchannotations.Whiletherelationshipofrecallandinferencingwashighlycorrelatedbasedonannotationtype,therelationshipbetweenvocabularyknowledgeandinferencingbasedonannotationtypewasnotstrong

Inchaptertwo,“AnnotatingAbstractVocabularyUsingMultimedia”,Xureportsaresearchstudythat

investigatedtheeffectivenessofmultimediavocabularyannotations(MVAs)infacilitatingacquisitionofasecondlanguage(L2)abstractvocabulary.Thequantitativedataresultingfromthevocabularyas-sessmentsindicatedthatthesestudentsneitheracquiredmorevocabularyknowledgenorretainedthisknowledgebetterbyusingMVAsthanusingtraditionaltext-onlyannotations.Thequalitativedatacol-lectedfromtwoquestionnairessuggestedthattheparticipantshadappliedvariousstrategiesforassessingMVAsduringthereadingactivityandtheyhadencounteredsomedifficultiesinprocessingthevisualinformation.Theresultsareinterpretedbasedonmultimedialearningandvisualperceptiontheories.TheimplicationsoftheresultsfordesigningmultimediaL2readingandlisteningmaterialsarediscussed.Inchapterthree,“IntelligentDesignofCaptionsinInteractiveMultimediaListeningEnvironments”,

Turelinvestigated48languagelearners’perceptionstowardsthepresenceofcaptionsatthefirstlis-tening(i.e.thewhilelisteningstage)inaninteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentthataimedtoenhancethelanguagelearners’listeningskillsasapartoflearningEnglishasasecondlanguage.Theresultsrevealthatcaptionsshouldnotbeavailableatthewhile-listeningstageininteractivemultime-dialisteningenvironmentsforFLL/SLL.Theavailabilityofthecaptionsatthewhile-listeningstageininteractivemultimediaenvironments(IMEs)forFLL/SLLseemstomakelanguagelearnersrelyon

Trang 18

captions.Instead,theunavailabilityofthecaptionsatthewhile-listeningstageinIMEsforFLL/SLLseemsto:(1)helplanguagelearnerstofocusonlisteningtexts,(2)encouragelanguagelearnerstotrytounderstandlisteningtextswithoutcaptionshelpand(3)encourageandmotivatelanguagelearnerstolistento/viewthelisteningtextsmore

Inchapterfour,“TheRemovalofTargetLanguageCaptioningSupports”,Leveridgediscussesthe

useofcaptioningsupportinsecondlanguageinstructionanditssubsequentremoval.Learningtolisteninasecondorforeignlanguagemaybequitedifficultforsomelearners,especiallyinlisteningclassesinatraditionalclassroomsetting.Becauseofthisdifficulty,instructorsoftensupporttheauditoryma-terialswiththeadditionofverbatimcaptioningascaptioningprovidesavisualrepresentationofwhatisbeingheardandisreadilyavailablethroughmultimedia.Priorresearchhasfocusedontheadditionofcaptions,viewingcaptioningsupportassimilartoothertypesofsupports.However,captioningisunlikeotherinstructionalsupportsinthatitprovidesthelearnerwithanalternativeroutefromwhichtogathercompletecomprehension,inturnfosteringlearnerrelianceonthesupport.Accordingly,thecurrentpaperarguesthattheremovalofcaptioningsupportsmayaffectindividuallearnersnegativelyduetothisreliance,thusnecessitatinginvestigation.Inturn,theworkreportsonanempiricalstudythatgatheredlearnerperceptionsregardingindividualrelianceoncaptioning,andtheadditionandremovalofcaptioningsupport.Thedatarevealsthatperceptionsareaffectedbylearnerproficiency.Basedontheseperceptions,aframeworkconcerningcaptioningsupportiscreatedtoassistlanguageinstructorsandcoursedeveloperstomakeinformedchoicesregardingtheadditionandremovalofcaptioningsupport

Tasks, Activities and Other Design Issues

Inchapterfive,“DesignofWhileListeningActivitiesinInteractiveMultimediaListeningSoftware”,

Turel,andWaraichreportthelanguagelearners’perceptionstowardsthetype(priority)aswellasthe

ingaword’)onscreenatonetimeinamultimedialisteningapplication.Theresultsofthequantitateandqualitativedataasawholerevealthelanguagelearnersbelievethepriority(i.e.type)aswellasthenumberofthewhilelisteningactivities(i.e.questions)onscreenatonetimecanhelpaswellashindertheirfocusandcomprehensionduringthewhile-listeningofthelearningprocess

numberofthewhilelisteningactivities/questions(i.e.‘Clickable’,‘Drag&Drop’,‘Typingaletter’,‘Typ-In chapter six, “Design of Multimedia Listening Software: Instructions, Tasks, Texts and

Self-assessment”,Turel,andMcKennafocusontheprinciplesandguidelinesthatshouldbeborneinmind

whendesigninganddeveloping‘instructions’,‘tasks’,‘(reading)texts’and‘self-assessmenttests’ininteractivemultimedialisteningsoftware(MLS)forSLL/FLL.ThedesignofeachdigitalelementofinteractiveMLSisvitallyimportantinthedesignanddevelopmentprocessofcosteffectiveapplications.AwiderangeofprinciplesandguidelinesneedtobetakenintoaccountsothateachdigitalelementofinteractiveMLScanbedesignedanddevelopedefficiently.Asawhole,allofthesecanenablesoftwaredeveloperstodesignidealandcustomized/adaptedMLSforSLL/FLL

Inchapterseven,“DesignofMultimediaListeningSoftware:UnfamiliarItems,Glossary,AuralTexts

andSpeechRate”,Turel,andMcKennafocusontheprinciplesandguidelinesthatshouldbeborneinmind

tivemultimedialisteningsoftwareasapartofSLL/FLL.Thedesignofeachofthesedigitalelementsofmultimedialisteningsoftwareisfundamentalforcosteffectiveapplications.Therefore,awiderangeofprinciplesandguidelinespertinenttothedesignoftheelementsarediscussedinthischapter,whichcanenablesoftwaredeveloperstodesignanddeveloptheelementsofmultimedialisteningsoftwareefficiently

whendesigninganddeveloping‘unfamiliaritems’,‘glossary’,auraltexts’,and‘speechrate’ininterac-xvii

Trang 19

Inchaptereight,“IntelligentDesignofPost-listeningTasksinInteractiveMultimediaListeningEnvi-ronments”,Tureldemonstratesthroughconcreteexampleshoweffectiveandefficientpost-listeningtasks

forautonomousintermediatelanguagelearnerscanbedesignedandcreatedininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentsasapartofFLL/SLLprocess.Firstly,thedefinitionofautonomyisslightlytouchedon.Secondly,thecategorisationofautonomyisbrieflyexplained.Thirdly,aseparatepartonmultimedialisteningenvironmentsandthenatureofthelisteningstagesandtasksinsuchenvironmentsispresented.Mainly,whatneedstobetakenintoaccountinordertobeabletodesignandcreatepedagogicallyandpsychologicallyeffectiveandusefulpost-listeningtasksforautonomousintermediatelanguage-learnersininteractiveMLSisaccountedforindetail

Inchapternine,“InteractiveMultimediaandListening”,Vopresentsthedifferencebetweenlistening

andhearing,thedefinitionofinteractivemultimedia,andinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments.Explanationisthengiventowhylisteningissoimportant.Thechapteralsoaddressesmaintypesoflistening,activelisteningprocess,andobstaclestolistening.Thischapteradditionallyshowsthebenefitsofandrationalesforlisteningusinginteractivemultimediaresourcesincomparisonwithaudio-onlylisteningmaterialsregardingvisualsupport,authenticcontent,comprehensibleinput,vocabularyacquisi-tion,andstudentmotivation.ThechapterconcludesbysuggestingsomeInternetsourcesandmaterialsforlisteningpracticeasapartoflearningEnglishasaforeignorsecondlanguage

Tools, Applications and Resources

Inchapterten,“TheEffectivenessofMultipleMediaToolsinL2Listening:AMeta-analysis”,Kang

recruitsthemostrecentlypublishedempiricalstudiesandmeta-analysesavailableevidenceontheeffectsofdifferentmultiplemediatoolsonL2listeningcomprehension.Theresultsrevealamedium-to-largeeffectofmultiplemediatoolsonlisteningcomprehensioninbetween-groupdesigns(Cohen’sd=.69).Theeffectsofindividualmultiplemediatoolshavealsobeenstatisticallysynthesized.Further,modera-toranalysiscouldhelpL2educatorsandtestdevelopersmakedecisionsonapplyingdifferentmultiplemediatoolsinthefieldsofL2instructionandassessment.Specifically,subtitles/captions,aswellasself-regulatedlisteningandslowspeed,arerecommendedtoteachersandtestdevelopersasameanstoimprovelearners’listeningcomprehension

Inchaptereleven,“EnglishMajorStudents’AttitudestowardsMoviesandSeriesasLanguageLearn-ingResources”,Zengin, Doğan,andCubukcupresenttheattitudesofthefourth-yearEnglishLanguage

sources.Thecurrentstudydemonstratesthatforeign-languagemajorsarenotimmunetodownsidesofalow-exposureEnglishasaforeignlanguage(EFL)setting.Theparticipantsstatethatonlytheirfamilymembers-butnotfriends-arelikelytocauseashifttothedubbedversionofmovie/seriestheyviewintheoriginallanguageandwithL2captionsotherwise.ThisstudysuggeststhatbackseatTVsystemsonbusescanprovidesolutions,whichiswelcomedbymostoftheparticipants,whoseintercitytravellinghabitsarefoundtobequitehigh

Teaching(ELT)studentstowardsstrategiesrelatedtousingmoviesandseriesaslanguagelearningre-Inchaptertwelve,“Using3-DVirtualLearningEnvironmentstoImproveListeningSkills”,Zengin

discusseshowthree-dimensionalvirtuallearningenvironmentscanbeusedinlanguageclassroomstoimprovestudents’listeningandlisteningskills,whichareimportantforeffectivecommunicationasapartofFLL.Inthisdigitalage,newtechnologiesarerepositioninglisteningasanimportant‘new’literacywherenewresourcescanbeusedtoprovideabetterlearning/teachingcontext

Trang 20

Inchapterthirteen,“GoogleSearchApplicationsinForeignLanguageClassesatTertiaryLevel:A

CaseStudyintheTurkishEFLContext”Zengin,andKacarreportonhowEFLmajorsinanEnglish

preparatoryprogramandintheirfirstyearatastateuniversityinthewestofTurkeyuseGooglesearchingskillsreceptivelyandproductivelyinpedagogicaltasks,tohighlighthowGooglesearchtaskscanbeusedtoraiselanguageawarenessandtooffersuggestionsforeffectiveintegrationofsearchtechniquesintoteachingEFLatthetertiarylevel.AlthoughthestudyfocusesontheuseofGooglesearchtechniquesinwritingtasks,ithassomepedagogicalimplicationsfortheteachingofotherlanguageskills(i.e.listening,reading,speakingandwriting),aswell.ThesetechniquesmayhelpEFLlearnerswiththedevelopmentoflanguageawareness,particularlyawarenesstowardsgrammaticalandlexicalpatterns,accesstothereadingmaterialsoftheirownchoice,theapplicationofextensionsconvertingtexttospeechwithadifferentrangeofvoices,andconsecutiveaccuracychecksforthelisteninginputandspeakingoutput.Inchapterfourteen,“TurkishEFLMajors’AttitudestowardsMultimedia-enhancedWiki-mediated

BlendedLearningEnvironments:ACaseStudy”,KacarshedslightonagroupofTurkishEFLmajors’

perceptionsofamultimedia-enhancedwikiprojectinafreshmancontextualgrammarcourse.Theresultsindicatemainlyfavourablestudentperceptions,pointingtotheenhancingimpactofwikisonstudentmotivationtousetheforeignlanguage,onstudentcreativityandautonomy,whilerevealingvaryingdegreesofsatisfactionwiththecollaborativework,onthepartofthestudents,andthetechnicalaspectsoftheproject.ThechapteralsoofferssomepedagogicalimplicationsofincorporatingablendedlearningenvironmenttoEFLgrammarcoursesandsomesuggestionsonhowtodealwiththepossiblechallengesandhowtomakethemostofpotentiallearningopportunitiesthewikiprojectscanofferinablendedcollaborativelearningenvironmentwithanemphasisonautonomy,creativity,andconstructivism.Thewaystofeasiblyimplementwikiprojectsinforeignlanguageclassesarealsobementioned

Inconclusion,notonlydoesthisuniquecompiledbookimpactthefieldofCALLverypositivelyingeneral,butitalsocontributessignificantlytothedesignanddevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwareinspecificcases.CompiledwithexperimentalandpracticaldesignprincipalsandguidelinesforthedevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftwareandCALL,thisisabookthatnoundergraduateandpost-graduatelanguageandcomputerstudents;languageandcomputerbasededucationteachers,tutors,lecturersandresearchers;languageandcomputereducationalinstitutions;commercialsoftwarecompaniesandsoftwaredevelopers,andindividualsoftwaredeveloperscanaffordtobewithout

Vehbi Turel

The University of Bingol, Turkey

xix

Trang 21

LISTENING, MULTIMEDIA, AND OPTIMUM DESIGN

Listening

Listeningis“…atermusedinlanguagestudiesandlanguageeducationtorefer…toasetofcognitiveinteractionsinvolvedinorallanguageprocessing”(Rost,1994,p.3778).Itisalsoaddedthatlisteningis

ary(CEED)defineslisteningas“togiveattentionsoastohearsomethingtofollowadvice”

“ theprocessofderivingmeaningfromsound”(ibid).TheChambersEncyclopaedicEnglishDiction-ing….Following…iscloselyconnectedwiththeintelligibilityofamessage.Thatis,canalistenerrepeatthemessagealoud,sub-vocally,orinthemind’seye?”Furthermore,Bacon(1992,p.388)says:

Moreover,Vanderplank(1988,p.32)says:“…listeningcanbeseenas…followingandunderstand-“theactoflisteninginvolvesaninteractionofinput,task,andindividualvariables”

Asseen,therearedifferentdefinitionsof‘listening’.Allthesedefinitionsprovideuswithsomekeyfeatures.Theseare:‘asetofcognitiveinteractionsinprocessing’;‘theprocessofderivingmeaningfromsound’;‘givingattention’;‘following,understandingandrepeating/producing’;‘theinteractionofinput,taskandindividualvariables’.However,everythingisnotyetcrystal-clear.Therefore,thistermneedstobediscussedmore.Then,whatdoeslisteningmean?Isitatermrelatedtoonlylanguagestudies?Isitalwaysaprocessofderivingmeaningfromsound?Isitalwaysaprocessoffollowingonlyadvice?Toanswerthesequestionscorrectly,firstlyacomparisonshouldbemade,tosomeextent,betweenfirstlanguage(L1)andsecondlanguage(L2)listening.Inevitably,therearemany-similaritiesinL1andL2listeningsuchasfollowingspeech,tryingtounderstandit,and,insomecases,answering.Apartfromthesesimilarities,therearesomemoreaspectsofforeign/secondlanguage(FL/SL)listening,notallofwhichareindicatedclearlyintheabovedefinitions.Suchfeaturescanvarydependingon(a)thecharacteristicsoflanguagelearners,(b)thecharacteristicsoflisteninginput,(c)listeningpurposesand(d)learningobjectives.Languagelearners,forinstance,sometimes:

• tantelementsoflisteningtextsandpossessaroleinunderstanding(Goh,2000,p.59;Anderson-Hsieh,1992,p.52;Ur,1992,p.13;Richards,1983,p.226)

Onlylistentoacquirethecorrectpronunciation,stressandintonation,asthesefeaturesareimpor-• Onlyfocusongrammaticalstructures(i.e.syntax)tofindouthowsuchstructuresareusedinthetargetlanguage,assyntaxplaysanimportantroleincomprehensionandforeign/secondlanguagelearning(FLL/SLL;Conrad,1989,p.14).Letus,forinstance,saythatlanguagelearnershear

suchasentenceinalisteningtext:‘Minoritypeoplecould have,andshould have,beengivenequal

xx

Trang 22

rightsbythemodernstates’.Iflanguagelearnersdonotknowwhat“could have”,“should have” (i.e.unrealised/undonemodalauxiliariesinpast)andalso“been”(i.e.passivevoice),mean,then

naturallyandlogicallytheycannotbeexpectedtocomprehendwhattheyhear.ItisbecauseofthisConrad(1989,p.14)says:“KnowledgeofTL[targetlanguage]syntaxseemstobeanimportantfactorinincreasingtheamountoflinguisticmaterialthatcanberetainedbyshortmemory”

• lartimetounderstandthatparticularunfamiliarlexisorlearnnewlanguageitems.Moreover,anunfamiliarlexisisanotherelementthatmightcausedifficultyforlanguagelearnersinunderstand-inglisteningtexts(Turel,2014b;Chung&Huang,1998,pp.559-60;Underwood,1993,p.17)

Payattentiontounfamiliaritems(i.e.lexis),astheymightthinkthatitisimportantatthatparticu-• FolloweachsentenceandtrytotranslateitintoL1(i.e.providingequivalentsofL2inL1).Thisismostlydoneintheearlystagesoflanguagelearningprocess(Eastman,1987,p.198;O’Malley,Chamot,Stewner-Manzanares,Kupper&Russo,1985a,p.40),whichdoesnothelpcomprehen-sionandacquisitionalot(Goh,2002,p.192;Goh,2000,pp.62,67,69).Notonlydonativespeak-ersordinarilynotusetranslationstrategy,butalsothisstrategyisnotacceptedasahighlyefficientstrategy(O’Malleyetal.,1985a,p.39),astranslationslowsdownprocessingandtakeslanguagelearners’attentionawayfromcluesthatmightassistcomprehension(Goh,2002,p.192)

• Listentounderstandthesurfacemeaning(mainidea)ofthelisteninginput(i.e.involvesactualunderstandingoflisteninginput,initiallymainideas).Thisis,maybe,themostglobaltypeoflisteningfunctionthatlanguagelearnerscarryout.ThisiscommoninL1listening,aswell.Infact,inreallifewhenwelistentolisteningtextsinL1,wesometimesonlyfocusonthemainideasowingtothecircumstancesbecauseeitherwedonotwanttocomprehendindetailorduetootherreasonssuchasnotbeinginterestedinthetopic.Itmightbebecauseofsuchsimilaritiesthattheproponentsoftheproceduralskillshypothesis(i.e.thenatureofindividualskillinnativespeak-ers-NSs-andnon-nativespeakers–NNSs-isthesamealthoughtheabilityisacquiredgradu-ally)claim“thereisnofundamentaldifferenceinlanguageprocessingbetweenNNSandNS…”(Pienemann,2001,p.335)

• basedmeanings,theillocutionaryforces/aspeaker’sintention),whichisalsodoneinL1listening

Listentounderstandthedeepermeaningofthelisteninginput(i.e.syntax,social-andculture-• Listen/viewtounderstandnotonlywhattheyhearbutalsothenon-verbalaspectsofthesegments,asthemeaningoflisteninginputdoesnotalwaysconsistofonlywords,whichisalsothecaseinL1listening.Non-verbalaspectsoflisteningtextsandsituationsmightsometimesplayavitalroleincomprehension.Tothisend,Oxford(1993,p.207)evenclaimsthatinsomecases“asmuchas93%ofthetotalmeaningofanyinteractioncomesfromnon-verbal,oftenvisual,clues”,anideawhichmightnotbeagreedonbyeveryone

Inotherwords,forlanguagelearners,listening:

• Isnotaprocessofderivingmeaningevery time

• Isnotaprocessofhearingsomethingbecausehearing,asdefinedinCollinsCobuildDictionary

ingisasensewhichenablesustobeawareofsoundregardlessofwhetherwewanttohearornot

(CCD),is“asensethatmakesitpossibleforustobeawareofsound.”Asunderstoodhere,hear-suchasnoise,chatting,shouting,crying,swearing,musicandso

on.Inlistening,languagelearn-ersconsciouslyfollowspeech,someonetalking,newsandsoonto,ingeneral,graspmeaningandsometimesforotherindicatedpurposes

xxi

Trang 23

• Isnotonlyaprocessoffollowing.Itismoreaprocessofunderstandingwhichiscarriedoutby

textualreferences(Weissenrieder1987,p.23;Long,1989,p.32;O’Malley,Chamot&Kupper,1989,pp.431-32)

usingworld-(socialandcultural)knowledge,comprehensionclues,listeningstrategies,andcon-• Isnotaprocessoftuningintoalisteningtextorsomeoneunconsciouslyandunintentionally.Conversely,

listeningrequirescarefulattentionanditismostlyonpurpose,otherwiseitwillbehearing,notlistening

Allofthese,ofcourse,arenotexactlywhatlanguagelearnersalwaysdowhentheylistento/viewlisteningtexts.Theseareonlysomeoftheapproachesthatlanguagelearnersfollowwhentheylistentolisteninginput.Itisbecauseofthesedifferentlisteningpurposesthatthetypesoflisteningarecategorisedintodifferentgroupssuchas(1)empathiclistening(requiresfocusingonfactsandemotionalcontent),(2)appreciativelistening(includeslisteningtoenjoy),(3)criticallistening(focusesonanalysingandindicatingtheimportanceofarguments),and(4)relationallistening(requiresaholisticapproachbypayingattentiontothewholematerial;(Oxford,1993,p.208-89;Vo,2015;Coakley&Wolvin,1995)

Comprehension

thing”,whileLund(1991,p.196)says“…theconstructionofmeaningusingboththedecodedlanguageandthecomprehender’spriorknowledge”.AccordingtoFaerchandKasper(1986,p.264-65)wheninputandknowledgematcheachother,thencomprehensionoccurs,butthismatchingisnotperfectasarulebecauseofthegapswhichregularlyoccureitherintherecipient’sorintheinterlocutor’ssources.Theysaythatthecomprehensionprocessreliesonthreetypesofinformation:

Comprehensionisdefined,intheCCD,as“fullknowledgeandunderstandingofthemeaningofsome-… linguistic and other communicative input, the recipient’s linguistic and other (socio-cultural, world) edge, and contextual information deriving from the situational context and the linguistic co-text (ibid: 264).

knowl-IntheCEED,comprehensionisdefinedas“theprocessofpowerofunderstanding;thescopeorrangeofone’sknowledgeorunderstanding”,whileChapelle(1998,p.28)goesfurtherandcategorizescomprehensioninto‘semanticcomprehension’,whichisconsideredthemoredifficultprocess(Carroll,1977,p.505),and‘syntacticcomprehension’.Comprehension,alternatively,canalsobedefinedasourgeneralcapacitytothink,andsolveproblemsbyusingallavailable(verbal,visual,situational,contextualetc.)inputdependingonourtransactional(informationseeking)objectives(Figure1)

Figure 1 Listening comprehension

Trang 24

tion(i.e.theencodingoftheinput),parsing(i.e.thetransformationofwordsintomentalrepresentation)andutilisation(i.e.relatingmentalrepresentationstoexistingknowledge/elaboration,whichenablestostoreinlong-termmemory)

AccordingtoAnderson’s(1995,p.379)comprehensionframework,comprehensionconsistsofpercep-Understanding

Understanding,accordingtoVanderplank(1988,p.32),“…involvesmuchwidernotionssuchaspriororpragmaticknowledge,abilitytofollowargument,contextualrelevance,insiderinformation,etc.”.AccordingtoRost(1994,p.3799)understandingis“ anoptimalinteractionbetweencomprehensionoftheoralinputandinterpretationofthatinputinthesituationalcontext”.Thesedefinitionsshedinvaluablelightonthisterm.Thedefinitionsrevealdifferentvariablessuchasinput(Faerch&Kasper,1986,p.264-5),languagelearners’linguisticandworldknowledge(ibid),contextualinformation,meaningof‘input’,constructionofmeaning,targetculture(Turel,2014c;Turel&Kilic,2014;Platt&Brooks,2002,p.369;Kohn,2001,p.254;McLoughlin&Oliver,2000,p.59;Vygotsky,p.1978),syntacticandlexicalcomprehension(Hegel-heimer&Chapelle,2000,p.42;Smith,2003,p.52),encoding,transformationofwordsintorepresenta-tions,elaboration,long-termmemory,abilitytofollow,optimalinteractionandinterpretations(Brown,1978,p.59;Eastman,1991,p.185)playanimportantroleinunderstanding.Forus,intermsoflisteningskills,comprehensionandunderstanding,ascanalsobederivedfromthedefinitions,meanmoreorlessthesamething,butinordertomakethemclearerweneedtodiscussthemabitfurther

Firstly,itshouldbeknownthatitisnotalwayspossibleforlanguagelearnerstofullycomprehendorunderstand.MaybethisisnotoftenpossibleinL1listening,aswell.Tothisend,BrownandYule(1992,p.57)emphasise:“…a100percentnotion.Whatnative-listenersoperatewitharepartial,reasonableinterpretationsofwhattheyarelisteningto…”

actionalgoals.Thedegreeoftheprocessofpowerofcomprehension/understandingislargelydependentonthelearners’transactional(informationseeking)objectives;interpersonalaims;abilities;linguistic(language),socialculturalandworldknowledge.Partlytothisend,PorterandRoberts(1981,p.42)state:

Itisdefactothatlanguagelearnersdonotalwayswanttofullycomprehend,asaresultoftheirtrans-“…weunderstandaTL[targetlanguage]atdifferentlevelsaccordingtoourabilitytouselinguisticcluesandsituationalandparalinguisticinformation”.Letussaythatwelistentoanewsprogrammeparticularlytofindoutwhathashappenedasaresultofanincident,notwhereandwhenithappenedbecauseofourtransactionalobjectives.Then,inevitably,wewillnotfollowandfocusonwhenandwherethatparticularincidenthasoccurred,aswearenotinterestedinfullunderstanding,andonlyinterestedinsomethingspecific.Tothisend,Oxford(1993,p.206)says:“Noteverythingtowhichastudentisexposedbecomes‘intake’,onlythepartthatissignificantandtowhichthestudentispayingattention”.Inthesameway,comprehension/understandingisnotalwaysaprocessofusinginformationandsolv-ingproblems.Iflanguagelearnersaresupposedtolistentolisteningtextsandanswerquestionsaboutthem,findoutsomethingspecificorsolvetheproblem,thenitcanbesaidthatitisaprocessofusinginformationandsolvingproblems.Letusimaginethatlanguagelearnerslistentoaradioprogrammeaboutwhichtheydonothaveanypre-knowledgeandonlywanttoknowwhatitisabout.Inthesameway,thelearnersarenotalsorequestedtocompleteanytask.Insuchacase,firstly,thelearnerscannotuseanypre-informationandsolvetheproblems,astheylackit.Secondly,thelearners’transactionalobjectivesdonotalsonecessitatethemtounderstandindetailandtousethisinformationtosolveproblems,answerquestionsoranalyseit.Isthisaprocessofusinginformationandsolvingproblems?

xxiii

Trang 25

Therefore,intermsoflanguagelearners,itcanbesaidthatcomprehension/understandingis,ingeneral,aprocessofderivingmeaningfromthelisteningtextstheytuneinto.Thisprocessisalsoconsciousandonpurpose,whichnotonlytargetsderivingmeaning,butalsotargetsacquiringtheotheraspectsofthetargetlanguageinanypossibleway.Thedegreeofthisprocessislargelydependentonlanguagelearners’level;theirage,levelofintelligence(i.e.fast/slowlanguagelearners;Gardner,1985,p.23),gender(ibid:43);theirlearningstylepreferences(Carson&Longhini,2002,p.408;McLoughlin,1999,pp.222-23;Brickell,1993,p.103)andthestrategiestheyuse(Hurd,Beaven&Ortega,2001,p.342;Cohen,1998,p.5;Chamot&O’Malley,1994,p.371);theirtransactionalobjectives(Oxford,1993,p.206);worldknowledgeandlinguisticknowledge(Porter&Roberts,1981,p.42);thedifficulty/easeofthelisteningtexts(Anderson&Lynch,1989,pp.6,56;Rixon,1992,p.65;Underwood,1993,p.17);andcontextualinformation(i.e.visuals,knowledgeaboutthestructureofthelisteningtext/formalschemata-e.g.newsprogrammeorevent:pre-thematic-thebeginning-,thematic-main-,andposthematiccontext-theendofthestory;Faerch&Kasper,1986,p.264).Regardingindividualdifferences,Bacon(1992,pp.399-400)pointsout:“Individuallearnervariablessuchasattitudeandmotivation,backgroundknowledge,perceptualstyle,previouslanguage-learningexperience,andlearningstrategiesallcontributetohowalistenerwillinteractwithinput”.Duetothesefactors,languagelearnersapproachlisteninginputindifferentways,whichresultsincomprehension/understandingorinterpretationindiverseways.Intermsofmanyaspects,thisprocessisalsovalidforL1comprehension

Listening Comprehension

Listeningcomprehensionis“ beingabletounderstandnativespeechatnormalspeedinunstructuredsituations”(Geddes&White,1978,p.38).Regardinglanguagelearners’listeningcomprehension,Brown(1978,p.59)andEastman(1991,p.185)statethatlanguagelearnershavetobepreparedandencour-agedtotargetareasonable,logicalandacceptableinterpretationratherthana‘correct’interpretation.However,whensomeonelooksatthedefinitionoflisteningcomprehension,itmightbesignificantlyimportantintermsofwhichapproachlisteningcomprehensionisdefined,aseachapproachinlisteninggivesprioritytodifferentaspectsoflisteningcomprehension.Byrnes(1984,pp.317-78),forexample,groupslisteningcomprehensionintothreeapproaches,andineachapproachthefocusisdifferent:(a)Alinguisticapproach:thisapproachindicateshowlistenersarriveatastructuraldescriptionofalisteningtext(sentence)basedonthephonological,syntacticandsemanticaspects.(2)Aconceptualapproach:itfocusesonhowalistenerputsaconceptualstructureintoalinguisticinput(anon-linguisticontoalinguistic-structure).(3)Acommunicativeapproach:thisapproachseeslisteningcomprehensionasaresultofatransactionalinteractionbetweenaspeakerandalistener.Itisachievedsuccessfullyparticularlywhenthelistenersidentifytheillocutionaryforces(i.e.theforceofasentence/aspeaker’sintention).Itfocusesonmeaning,notonform,andfunctionsasapartofanintegrated-skillapproach

Moreover, there are many factors that affect listening comprehension. These are: (a) learners’characteristics(i.e.theirage,L1listeningability,L2proficiency/level,vocabularydevelopmentinL2,-Vandergrift,2006-;levelofintelligence,learning-style-preferences,learningeffectiveness,transac-tionalobjectives,psychologicalreadinessandwillingness,-whichisalsoconsideredoneofthemaincomponentsofautonomy,e.g.Littlewood,1996,p.428,1997,p.82-;theirexperienceinthetargetlanguage,familiaritywiththetargetcultureandtopic,worldandsocial-culturalknowledgeandsoon,e.g.Turel,2014c;Turel&Kilic,2014),(b)inputrelatedfactors(i.e.lengthandamountofinput,culturaldifferences,subjectmatter,coherence,typesoflanguageinput,unfamiliaritems,discoursemarks,the

Trang 26

difficultyoreaseofthelisteninginput/levelofinput,,thepresenceorabsenceofcomprehensionclues,tasks,informationorganisation,lexis,syntax)and(c)soundrelatedfactors(i.e.speechrate;voiceandbackgroundnoise;pauseandhesitationphenomena;stress,intonation,andrhythmpatterns;thenumberofspeakers;expertnessandthegenderofspeakers;accent;Turel,2014b;Leveridge&Yang,2014;Yang

&Chang,2014;Chen,2011).Inotherwords,whenlanguagelearnerslistento/vieworareexposedtolisteninginput,theirpersonalcharacteristics,andinputandsoundrelatedfactorsplayavitalroleinfull-/half-/mis-comprehensionoflisteninginput.Inshort,listeningcomprehensionistheprocessofmanyinterweavedmultifacetedcognitiveprocesses(Diao,Chandler,&Sweller,2007;Chang,Tseng,&Tseng,2011;Meinardi,2009;Goh&Taib,2006;Wipf,1984)

sionisawayofpartialortotalmatching.Thismatchingisbetweenwhatlanguagelearnerstuneinto(i.e.linguisticandothercommunicativeinput/whattheinterlocutorsays)andtheresourcesthelearnershave.Theresourcescanbe:world,social-culturalandlinguisticknowledge;abilities;strategies–cognitiveandmeta-cognitive-;contextual(processing)referencesintheformoftextualreferences(i.e.MaryandJohn-they),referentialconnections(i.e.theverbalsystemandthevisualrepresentationsystem)orsituationalreferences(i.e.subsequent-thecurrentsimilarevent-andpriorreferences-theprevioussimilarevent);skillsandthelinguisticco-text(i.e.thelinguisticenvironment/context).Theseresourceshelplearnersgraspandarriveatanacceptable,logicalandreasonableinterpretationofthelisteninginput.Thedegreeofthepowerofthismatchingislargelydependentonthedegreeofusingtheabove-mentionedsourceseffectively.Thebetterlanguagelearnerscanusethesesourcesandapplyeffectivestrategies,thebettertheycanfulfillisteningcomprehension,whichmightmeanthatthelisteningcomprehensionprocessiscompleteand(closeto)perfect.Inshort,listeningcomprehensioninforeign/secondlanguageacquisition(FLA/SLA)occursthroughthephasesoflanguagelearningprocessshowninFigure2

Intermsoflearners(andteachers)ofalanguageasanFL/SL,itcanbesaidthatlisteningcomprehen-WhatdoesFigure1mean?Tocomprehendlisteninginput,languagelearners:

• Needtobeprovidedwithcomprehensible

input.Theassumptionunderlyingthisisthatiflan-guagelearnerscomprehend,thentheycanacquireFL/SL(seeVidal,2003,p.79abouttheroleofcomprehensioninvocabularygain).Carroll(1977,p.500)alsosays:“…whencomprehensionissuccessful,thepersonpresumablyhaslearnedsomethinghehasnotknownbeforeandhasthusachievedanewkindofcompetence,’Additionally,Long(1983,p.138)pointsout:“Itiswidelyassumed…thatsamples…heardbutnotunderstoodbyawould-beacquirer…servenousefulpurposeintheSLAprocess.Onlycomprehensibleinputwilldo”.Thereis,however,apointabout

‘comprehension’thatneedstobeemphasisedhere.Comprehensionthattakesplacethroughacombinationofsemanticandsyntacticprocessingcanmakethelinguisticcharacteristicoftheinput‘intake’andthisholdsthepotentialfordevelopingthelanguagelearners’linguisticsystem

(Chapelle,1998,p.23).Inadditiontocomprehensible input,Krashen(1982,p.21)managesto

drawourattentiontoanothervitalpoint:“Weacquire…onlywhenweunderstandlanguagethatcontainsstructurethatis‘alittlebeyond’wherewearenow”.Infact,Krashenisnottheonewhomentionsthisfirst.Casambre(1962,p.166),forexample,says:“‘…acertaindegreeofdifficultyisnecessarytomakesubjectslearnandretainthematerialwithgreaterpermanence.Pedagogically,itmeansthat‘spoon-feeding’shouldbeavoided”

• fixes,stressandintonationandinternationalcognates).Herethedifficultyoreasinessofthelisten-ingtextplaysanimportantrole.Ifthey,forexample,featuremanyunfamiliaritemssuchasnouns,

Uselinguisticinput(i.e.titles,grammaticalstructures,words,phrases,clauses,prefixesandsuf-xxv

Trang 27

verbs,phrasalverbs,idioms,grammaticalstructures(Underwood,1993,p.17;O’Malleyetal.,1989,p.428;Markham&Latham,1987,168)andstrong-regionaldialects(Turel,2004,p.87),theninevitablythesewillhinderlisteningcomprehension(Rivers,1981,p.164;Boyle,1984,p.35;Anderson&Lynch,1989,pp.6,56)

• Utiliseavailablecomprehensionaids(i.e.supplementaryaids)suchasfacialgestures,diagrams,imaginarydrawings,cartoons,charts,stillormotionpictures,maps,keywords,captionsandthelike.Whiletheirpresencecaningeneralincreaseandimprovelisteningcomprehension,similarlytheirabsencecanalso,toagreatextent,handicap(Turel,2014d;Jones,2003,2004,2006,2009;Jones&Plass,2002;Arnold&Brooks,1976,pp.711-16;Omaggio,1979,pp.112-15;Mueller,1980,pp.335-40)

• mation,andthenmatchitwithwhattheyhear.Thiscanbeagreataidintermsofenhancinglis-teningcomprehension(Long,1990,pp.65-80;Weissenrieder,1987,p.23;Markham&Latham,1987,p.168).Thedegreeofusingsuchinformationalsourcestotheiradvantageisdependentontheamountofsuchknowledgelanguagelearnershave,andthecapacityandcapabilityofusingit

Usetheirworldandsocial-culturalknowledgeofsubject-matter,andtheirtargetlanguageinfor-Figure 2 The framework of the phases of listening comprehension in FLA/SLA process

Trang 28

• counteringlistening,forinstance,alisteningtextrelatedto‘seeingadoctor’,languagelearnerscanroughlyguesswhatadoctor-and-a-patientconversationmightconsistof.Suchasituationalcontextcanhelplanguagelearnerstonarrowtheirscopeandfocus,whichcanresultinbettergraspingandunderstanding.Languagelearnersalsousecontextualreferencesprovidingthattheyhave.Intheaboveexample,languagelearnerscanmakeuseoftheirpreviousexperiencesrelatedtodoctor-patientcontext(priorreference)tounderstandthe‘seeingadoctor’listeningtext(thesubsequentreference)

Usesituationalcontextsandcontextualreferences(i.e.subsequentandpriorreference).Onen-• Applylisteningstrategiessuchas(a)meta-cognitivestrategies–advanceorganisers,directedattention, selective attention, self-management, advance preparation, self-monitoring, delayedproduction,self-evaluation,self-reinforcement-.(b)cognitivestrategies–repetition,resourcing,directedphysicalresponse,translation,grouping,notetaking,deduction,recombination,imagery,auditoryrepresentation,key-word,contextualization,elaboration,transfer,inferencing,questionforclarification-.(c)socialstrategies,(d)affectivestrategies(O’Malleyetal.,1985a;O’Malley,Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Russo & Kupper, 1985b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Bacon,1992)

•

Theseprocessingstages,whichareknownas‘meaning-negotiationprocess’leadtocomprehen-sion,whichcanresultinproductivepractice(i.e.output)inthetargetlanguage(Ortega,1997,

p.87).Producedcomprehensible(modified)outputcanaidlanguagelearnerstobecomeawareoflinguisticproblemsthatmayfurtherhelpthemtomodify/developtheiroutput.Asaresult,languagelearnersmightbeforcedintoamoresyntactic-processingmode(Chapelle,1997,pp.

25-6),whichiscalledideal comprehensible output.Thisisconsideredanimportantcontributorto

languagedevelopmentbothatlinguisticandsemanticlevel(Chapelle,1998,p.28).Forinstance,letusassumethatalanguagelearnerlistenstoanativespeaker(NS)whosayswhattheybought

thedaybefore.Afterlistening,thelanguagelearnersays:‘Isee,youbuyedabookyesterday’and theNSsays:‘Yes,Iboughtabook’.Inthisexample,afterasuccessfulcomprehensionprocess,

thelanguagelearnerproducesoutput,whichiscomprehensibleatsemanticlevel,butproblematiconlyatlinguistic(i.e.grammar/syntax)level,andthereforereceives(implicit)feedback.Thiscanforcethelanguagelearnerintoamoresyntacticprocess(especiallywhenoutputiscorrectedex-plicitlyormorecorrectlywhenfeedbackaswellastheproducedproblematicoutputmanagestoattractthelearners’attentiontosyntactic,lexicaland/orsemanticalfeaturesthatareproblematic).Notonlycanthisultimatelyhelplanguagelearnersrealisetheirmistakes,butitcanalsoprovidethemwiththeopportunitytomodify/developtheproducedproblematicoutputasaresultofpro-ductivepracticeandreceived(implicit/explicit)feedback.ItisbecauseofthisthatChapelle(1998,p.24)sayserrorcorrectionaffordstheopportunityto“focusonform”(Long,1988)’and“focusonformisexpectedtobebeneficialwhenitoccursduringtheprocessofattemptingtoconstructmeanings”.Thisprocess,whichisreferredtoas‘negotiationofmeaning’(Harrington&Levy,2001,p.15;Hegelheimer&Chapelle,2000,p.42;Long,1996),however,mostlyoccursduringcomprehension/communicationbreakdownwhenlanguagelearnersareconfusedaboutmeaningorsyntax(Hegelheimer&Chapelle,2000,p.42;Smith,2003,p.52).Once,forexample,theauthorofthisstudyheardachildattheageofKeystage2(KS2)callinganotherchildattheageofKS1‘gay’.Theauthorgotconfused(themeaning-negotiationprocessbegan),asachildcouldnotbeagay.AfternegotiatingwithanNS,hefoundouttheword‘gay’wasusedasakindof

‘swearword’(themeaning-negotiationprocessfinished).Inanothercase,theauthorofthisstudy

xxvii

Trang 29

poseswhilespeakingtoanNS,thatpersonlookedathimstrangely,anattitude(relatedtolexis)theassumptionofwhichtheauthorofthisstudyhasnotfiguredoutyet(i.e.unfinishedmeaning-negotiationprocess).Havingcomprehensionproblemscandrawlanguagelearners’attentionto

heardphrase‘UncleHitler’fromaTVprogramme.Whenheusedthattermforpractisingpur-‘certain’aspectsofthetargetlanguage.Thiscanleadthemtorequesthelpintheformofaccessingfeedback,askingsomeone(Williams,2001,p.337;Smith,2003,pp.39-40)orlookingatare-sourcebook.This‘meaningnegotiationprocess’canresultincomprehension,whichisverylikely

toleadto(correctlymodified)outputthatismorelikelytobelearnt(i.e.acquisition),aslanguage learnershavetomakemore efforttoprocess,comprehendandproduce.Thus,thelearnersare

unlikelytoforgetaccordingtothedepthprocessingtheory,whichsuggeststhatwithoutenougheffort(deepprocessing)informationwillbeforgotten(Craik&Lockhart,1972)

Insum,thereisanactiveinterplaybetweenallphases/elementsillustratedinFigure1,whereeachphase/knowledgesourcehasatwo-wayaccesstoeveryothersourceinthetaskofanalysingandinterpret-

ingthesensoryinput(i.e.bothlinguisticandnon-linguistic)whileusingavailablesourcesandapplying effectivestrategiestomatchwiththeinput.Thisresultsincomprehensionafterthemeaning-negotiation

process,whichleadstoproductiveoutputthatresultsinforeignlanguageacquisition(inanon-target

languagecommunity,SLAinatargetlanguagecommunity).Someoftheseelements-words,phrases,grammaticalstructuresandthelike-arekepttemporarilyinshort-termmemory,whichislimitedinstoragecapacityandthereforecanonlyholdalimitedamountofinformationforalimitedamountoftime;whilesemanticcuesareacquiredandsustainedinlong-termmemory.ItisevenlikethisinL1comprehension.We,forexample,donotrememberwords,phrasal-structures,andsentences,wholly,evenpartially,afteraperiodoftime,butwedomostlyremembersemanticrepresentations.Thisislimitedandsubconscious,andalsodependsonsomefactorssuchasreviewing(i.e.effort),whichisconsideredaneffectivefactorinFLA/SLAaccordingtosometheories(i.e.thesociallearningtheory,theconditioningtheory;Robinson,1989,pp.119-130,1991,pp.158-59;Bandura,1977;Skinner,1953)andfindings(Schmidt,1990,p.147)

Alloftheserequiredesignersanddevelopersofinteractivemuldimediaenvironmentstobemorecareful,asawiderangeofdigitalelementscanbecombinedanddeliveredonthesamedigitalplatforminstaneously,andthustheyaremorelikelytomaketheprovidedinputunchallengingorcausecognitiveoverload.Asaresult,therearesomeimplicationsoftheseforthedesignanddevelopmentofinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments,whicharediscussedbelowindetails

Thefirstimplicationisthatlisteninginputtobeusedininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments

needtobecomprehensible.Theprovisionofcomprehensibleinputininteractivemultimedialistening

environmentsisalsoarequirementofthecomprehensioninputhypothesisandtheory,whichstatethatlanguagelearnersacquireonlywhentheyunderstand,andtherefore“considerintakesynonymouswithcomprehensibleinput”(Krashen,1984,p.21;Ellis,1997,p.47;Tschirner,2001,p.311).Likewise,itisalsoarequirementofthesociallearningtheory,which“positsthatpeople’sjudgementsabouttheirpotentialabilitytoperformwellortocopeinasituationactuallyaffecttheirefforts…”(Robinson,1991,p.157).Thepersonperceptiontheory,whichrequiresustoavoidfocussinglanguagelearners’attentionontheirweaknessessothattheydonotdevelopnegativejudgementsabouttheirabilitytoperform(ibid:157),andthesocial-psychologicaltheoryandthesocio-educationalmodel,whichfocusontheroleofattitudesandmotivationinFLA/SLA(Gardner,1985,p.158;Masgoret&Gardner,2003,pp.158-59,124,127)alsorequireustoprovidecomprehensiblelisteningtextsininteractivemultimedialistening

Trang 30

environmentsasapartofSLL/FLL.Comprehensibleinputcanalsobeconsideredasarequirementofthecognitiveloadtheory,which“placesaprimaryemphasisonworkingmemorycapacitylimitationsasafactorininstructionaldesign”andsuggeststhat“toomanyelementsofinformationmayoverwhelmworkingmemory,decreasingtheeffectivenessofinstruction”(Kalyuga,2000,p.161;Sweller,1999).Languagelearnershavelimitedprocessingcapacityandthusproperallocationofcognitiveinformationiscriticaltolearning(Kalyuga,2000,p.161;Hedberg,Harper&Brown,1993,p.6;Sweller,1999).Failuretotakeintoaccountworkingmemoryconsiderationscancausecognitiveoverloadparticularlyininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentswheremanyelementsarecombinedandpresentedonthesamedigitalplatform.Inshort,inputthatfeaturesmanyunfamiliarlexis(i.e.words),syntax(i.e.gram-mar),accentandsoon,andthusisbeyondlanguagelearners’currentlevelcancauseriskofoverloadonlanguagelearners’limitedworkingmemory

Thesecondimplicationisthatthecomprehensible linguistic inputusedininteractivemultimedia listeningenvironmentsshouldbeslightly challenging,whichis-asmentionedabove-alsoarequire-

vatelanguagelearners,especiallyautonomouslearners,astheyarebythemselvesandthismightcause

mentofthecomprehensioninputhypothesis.Unchallenginginput,likeverydifficultone,candemoti-themtogetboredandquitveryeasily.Moreover,slightly challenginginputrequirelanguagelearnersto putmoreeffortandrevise,whichisnecessaryforFLA/SLAaccordingtothedepth-processingtheory,

whichsuggeststhatwithoutenougheffort(deepprocessing)inputwillbeforgotten(Craik&Lockhart,1972).Inshort,asaKurdishProverbsays,weneedto:“Ploughneatly,deeplybutdonothurttheoxen”

This(i.e.providingcomprehensible,butslightly challenginginputthatrequiresenough effort,but doesnot develop negative judgements…)iswhatneedtobeachievedininteractivemultimedialisten-

ingenvironments,wheremuchmorecanbeachievedbetterincomparisontoconventionalmaterials.Insum,interactivemultimediadevelopersneedtomakesurethattheprovidedcomprehensibleinputis

slightlybeyondthecurrentlevelofthelanguagelearners.

Thethirdimplicationisthatthedesignersanddevelopersofinteractivemultimediaapplicationsneed

todrawthelanguagelearners’attentiontobothsyntactical(i.e.recognition)andsemantic(i.e.selection/

meaning)characteristicsofthecomprehensibleinputininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments.Althoughcomprehensibleinputisnecessary,thisaloneisnotsufficientforFLA/SLA.Comprehensibleinput,fortheauthorofthisstudy,doesnotmeantheinputthesurfacemeaning(i.e.syntax)ofwhichisunderstood,butalsoinputthedeepermeaning(i.e.grammarstructures,culture-basedmeanings,theillocutionaryforces/aspeaker’sintention)ofwhichisunderstood.Drawinglearners’attentiontobothsyntacticalandsemanticcharacteristicsofthecomprehensibleinputisarequirementofthenoticinghypothesis,whichsuggeststhatpaying/drawingattentionto(specific)formsintheinputisnecessaryforlearningnewlinguisticfeaturesofalanguage(Schmidt,1993,1995;Nicholas,Lightbown&Spada,2001,p.721;Leow,2001,pp.114,144).Thiscanbeimplementedeffectivelyinparticularinaninter-activemultimediaenvironment,whereawiderangeofdigitalelementscanbecombinedandpresentedmuchmoreefficiently(Turel,2015a;Turel,2014a;Turel,2014b;Turel,2014c;Turel,2012).Intermsofnoticing,whilesomeclaimthatformsareperceivedfirst(Tschirner,2001,p.312),othersclaimthatwego‘formeaningfirst’(Krashen,1984,p.21).Theauthorofthisstudypersonallythinksthatthepriorityischangeabledependingonlanguagelearners’levelandtransactionalobjectives.Low-levellanguagelearnersmightgomostlyforformsfirst,whileupper-levellanguagelearnersmightgomostlyformeaning.Inthesameway,whenlanguagelearnershaveheardaformorstructure(i.e.unplannedform;Williams,2001,p.327)whichtheyhavebeenlookingforwardtoforages(ibid:326),thenformsarelikelytobeperceivedfirst.Inlikemanner,whenlanguagelearnersareinterestedin‘what’sgoing

xxix

Trang 31

on’,inthiscasesemanticisperceivedfirst(althoughtheprioritymightevenchangeafewtimesatonesingleexposure).Somemightcallit‘apersonalanectode’,but,thisis,atleast,whathashappenedtothe

Listening Skills

Listeningskillisanaturalandgloballearningskill.Languagelearningisnormallycarriedoutbyusingsensesofvision,hearing/listening,speakingandtheothers(i.e.tasting,touchingandsmelling),whicharecalled‘sensesofhumanbeing’aswellasreadingandwriting.Wecan,forexample,requirelanguagelearnerstotouchorholdcottonwhenteachingthewords‘soft’or‘light’;astonewhenteaching‘hard’and‘heavy’orrequirethemtotaste‘honey’whenteaching‘sweet’orsmellperfume/aflowerwhileteaching‘smell’,‘nicesmell’or‘badsmell’.These,doubtless,havetheirroleinthelanguagelearningprocess.Intermsoflistening,thefirsttwosenses(i.e.visionandhearing)mightplaymoreimportantrolesincomparisonto‘speaking’,aslisteningreliesonbothauditoryandvisualinputandrequirestheuseofsightandhearingwhenlisteningtosomeonetalkingorlisteningtexts.Ofcourse,whenthelisteningtextisaudio-lingual,thesenseofsightcannotbeused.Instead,imaginationcanbeused.Likewise,theothercommunicativeperformanceskills(i.e.speakingandwriting)enable‘productiveoutput’whichisnotonlynecessaryforthelisteningprocesstobecomplete,butisalsovitalinthelanguagelearningprocess.Theauthorofthisstudy,forinstance,oncewatchedaTVprogrammeinwhichoneNSsaid:

“I’vefiguredoutwhatkindofjerkIam”,whilehewasaninpatientinthehospitalduringhisPhD.study.He(partly)comprehendedthesentenceandwantedtopracticethe‘new’word‘jerk’asaconsciouslanguagelearner,andthushesaidtooneoftheNSinpatients:“Youknow,I’vefiguredoutwhatkindofjerkyouare”,theobjectiveofwhichwasjusttopractise.Althoughthepatientgotreallyveryangry,thisunfortunateproductiveoutputintheformofspeakingskillhelpedtheauthorofthestudytolearnthenewwordtruly(althoughithasothermeanings,aswell),asitbecameclearthatyoucouldusethatwordforyourself,butnotalwaysforotherswheneveryouwant(negotiationofmeaning).Thissimpleconcreteexampleshowstheroleofcarefullistening(i.e.moreaccuratelytheroleofcomprehensionandpayingattentiontosyntacticalandsemanticfeatures),aswellasspeakingintheformofreproducingthecomprehendedinputintheformofcomprehensible(butproblematic)productiveoutputinFLA/SLA.Whensomeonelooksatthepercentageoflanguagelearnerswhoareauditoryandvisual(Reid,1987,pp.96-97;Dunn&Dunn,1979,pp.238-44),theimportanceoflisteningskillsinFLA/SLAbecomesclearer.Thismeansthatmostlanguagelearnersusetheirsensesofsightandhearing,whicharemostrequiredforlistening.Theimplicationisthatmoreemphasisonteaching/learningoflisteningskillsininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentsmightbettercontributetoFLA/SLA.Inotherwords,more

Trang 32

andbetterinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentsasapartofFLL/SLLneedtobedesignedanddevelopedbothforclassroomandautonomousstudy.Insuchapplications,inparticularinthosecre-atedforautonomousstudy,theteachingoflisteningcanbedeliveredintheformofinstructions,globalandlocalhelp,feedbackandtasks(Turel,2012,pp.35-49).Thesearesomeofthepossibilitiesthatareconsideredforstrategytraininginclassroomandautonomy(Hurdetal.,2001,pp.346,350;Kohonen,1991,p.109;Mangiafico,1996,p.112)andfacilitatorsoflearning(Sturtridge,1987,p.9)

Maybeitisbecauseofthevalueandimportanceoflisteninginlanguagelearningprocessthatbeforecommencingtosaybasicmeaningfulwords,babieslistenforroughlyonetoone-and-halfyearsandthenbegintouttermeaningfulchunks.ThoughthisisnotanFLLprocess,therestillremainsinvaluablefactsintermsoftherolelisteningcanplayintheFLLprocess.Thequestion,ontheotherhand,isthatalthoughlisteningissovaluableintermsof(a)thesensesdevoted,(b)itsfrequentuseindailylife,(c)itsroleinlearningL1and(e)FLL/SLL,itishardtosaythatitisexploitedappropriately.Asaresult,notonlydolanguagelearnerslackeffectivelisteningskills,as“most-learnersdonotcomeintothelearningsituationwiththeknowledgeandskillstodeterminecontentandlearningprocesseswhichwillenablethemtoreachtheirobjectivesinlearninganotherlanguage”(Nunan,1997,p.201),buttheydonotalsoutilisesuchlisteningskillstolearneffectively.Fortunately,thelisteningskillhasbeenconsideredasmorecentralintheFLL/SLLandteaching/learningprocessinthelasttwodecades.Ithasbeenobviousthatthisskillisvitallynecessaryinthisprocessandneedstobetaughtmoreovertly(Rost,1990;Brown

&Yule,1992;Ur,1992)

Ithasalsobeenclearlanguagelearnersofallabilitiesandlevelscandevelopandextendtheirlisteningskills,assuchskillsareteachable/learnable.Tothisend,someresearchersstatelanguagelearnerscanimprovetheirlanguageperformancebybeingtrainedtousebeneficialstrategies(Rost&Ross,1991;O’Malleyetal.,1985a;Tezza,1962).Inanexperiment,thelearningstrategiesoftreatmentgroups,whoweretrainedfor50minutesdailyfor8days,improved,andtheyoutperformedthecontrolgroup(O’Malleyetal.,1985b,p.574).RubinandThomson(1992,p.10)alsostate:“…studentscanbetaughttocontroltheiruseoflisteningstrategies”.Inthesameway,Cohen(1984,pp.101-12)statesthatforeignlanguagelearnerscanusestrategiesthathavebeenshowntobesuccessfultoquickenlearning.Addi-tionally,Ehrmann(1963,p.18-20)reportedthatlisteningtrainingimprovedtheauralcomprehensionofHebrewalthoughsomeotherstudiespartlydifferfromthoseobtainedbytheaboveresearchers(Rubin

&Thomson,1992;O’Malleyetal.,1985a;O’Malleyetal.,1985b;Tezza,1962,pp.39,46)

Itappearsthatlisteningskill:

• IsafundamentalskillintheprocessofFLL/SLL,andreliesonthesensesof‘sight’and‘vision’dependingonlisteningmode.So,whencreatinginteractivemultimedialisteningsoftware,thefocusshouldbeonboth‘visuals’and‘auditory’input.Inthesameway,alltypesoflisteningma-terials(i.e.audio-only,audio+supplementaryvisuals,audio+animation,talking-headsvideo+supplementaryvisuals,video-only)needto,andshouldbeprovidedininteractivemultimedialisteningenvironments(Turel,2011)

• Isteachableandlearnable.Teaching/learninglisteningskillsdoesnotendintheclassroom.Thus,(autonomous) interactive multimedia listening environments should “function as a surrogateteacher”(Frankel,1987,p.53)asthewholepointofskillsdevelopmentistodevelopautonomy,whichisthemainwayoflife-longlearning.Thisistherequirementoftheautonomouslearn-ingtheory,which“demandsthatlearnerstakecontroloftheirlearning”(Voller,1997,p.106).Improvinglanguagelearners’skillsandstrategies,whichconsidered“themainissue”inautonomy

xxxi

Trang 33

(Benson,1997,p.19)shouldbetheobjectiveoftheinteractivemultimedialisteningapplications.Interactive multimedia listening applications should aim to help language learners to developtheirabilitytolearnindependently(i.e.toequipthemwiththelisteningskillsandtechniquestheyneed)throughguiding,taskinvolvementandencouragingthemtotakeresponsibilityfortheirownlearningandtoapplyaffectivestrategies,whileimprovingtheirlistening

• Listeningtrainingcanhelplanguagelearnerstoacquirestrategiesandusethem(Hurdetal.2001:346;Goh,2000,p.73;Field,1998,p.117)althoughalllevelsoflanguagelearnersmightnotben-efittothesamedegree.Low-levellanguagelearnerscan,forinstance,benefitmore,whichmeansthatinteractivemultimedialisteningapplicationscanbemoreeffectiveintheirtraining(Turel,2012).Throughtasks,languagelearnerscan,forinstance,berequiredtousecertaincognitivestrategiessuchas‘infermissingorunfamiliarwordsusingcontexts,co-textandpriorknowledge’;

‘predictcontentsbeforelisteningusingcontextandpriorknowledge’;‘usepriorknowledgetoelaborateandcompleteinterpretation’;‘takenotesofcontentwords’,relateonepartofthelis-teningtexttoanother’,or‘visualisescenes’(Goh,2000,p.72)atdifferentstages(Turel,2012).Likewise,languagelearnerscanberequestedtoemploycertainmetacognitivestrategiessuchasto‘payattentiontovisuals’;‘establishpurposeforlistening’;‘listenselectivelyaccordingtopurpose’orpayattentiontocertaininput(Goh,2000,p.72)orevaluatetheirprogress(Turel,2012).SuchrequirementsareinlinewithconstructivistapproachestoFLL/SLL,asaccordingtotheconstructivistlearningtheoryFLL/SLLisadynamicprocesswherelanguagelearnersarethearchitects,ratherthanthepassiverecipientsofknowledge

Inshort,listeningskillsarenecessaryandteachable,andplayaroleinFLL/SLLprocess(Rost,1990,p.154).Theseskillsarenotalways,however,taughtandacquiredproperly.Thismeansthattheskillsarenotusedtotheadvantageoflanguagelearnersfully.Thismightbeduetomanyreasonssuchasthelackof(1)listeningcoursesinthecurriculum,(2)properlytrained(listening)teachers,(3)appropri-ateteaching,(4)appropriatematerials,or(5)duetotheovercrowdedclassesandsoon.Forexample,althoughtheimportanceoflisteninginFLL/SLLwasmostlyfirstemphasisedafewdecadesago,inmanycountrieslisteningisnotpracticallyincludedinthecurriculumadequatelyyet.Likewise,manyteachersareeithernottrainedproperlyordonotteachastheyaresupposedto(TESMay21,2004,p.3).Theteachersarenotalwaysawareofthelanguagelearners’needsordonotalwayscaresatisfac-torily.Likewise,forinstance,althoughtheroleofvisualsinFLL/SLLiswellknown(Furnhametal.,2002,pp.191-210;Ginther,2002,pp.133-67;Dodson&Schacter,2002,pp.782:802;Gyselincketal.,2002,pp.665-85;Amrheinetal.,2002,843-57;Al-Seghayer,2001,p.203;Seculesetal.,1992,pp.480-90),theyarenotusedenoughbyteachersaswellasininteractivemultimediaapplications.TheauthorofthisstudywasshockedwhenherealisedthebiggapbetweentheimplicationsoffindingsinthefieldofFLL/SLLandCALL,andwhatreallyoftengoesoninclassrooms.Learningmaterials,whethertheyareconventionalorinteractivemultimedia,arealsonotalwaysconvenient(Turel,2014).Inonecase,thelanguagelearningmaterialsweremostlyaboutrobbery,burglary,andstealing.Theauthorofthisstudyfeltasifhewereattendinga‘robberycourse’.Whenhehadprivateconversationswithsomeotherlanguagelearnerswhowereattendingthesamepre-sessionalcourse,herealisedthattheyfeltthesame,butnobodyfeltsafeenoughtotelltheiropinion.Thisisoftenthecaseinourcivilised(!)worldparticularlyinacenturywhenflatteringisfavouredmostandpeopledarenotoftentotelltheirhonestopinion(TESApril30,2004,p.1)althoughthebenefitsoftruthextendsfarbeyondindividualsandthecenturywelivein,anditscontributiontohumanity,asawhole,istremendousandinvaluable

Trang 34

Interactive Multimedia

Nowadays,whenonespeaksof‘multimedia’mostlyonethingcomestomind.Itistheuseofsound,video,text,pictures,graphicsandsoforthonthesamecomputerplatform,whicharetotallycomputerisedandthereforeundercomputeraswellaslearnercontrol(Turel,2015a,pp.2495-96).Itisalsowellknownthatmultimediaalsoreferstotheuseofdifferenttools,notone,suchastelevision,thetaperecorder,video,theOHP,slideprojector,andthelike(Ashworth,1996,p.81).Thisisnow“referredasmultiplemediatodifferentiateitfromcomputerisedmultimedia”(Peter,1994,p.10)

Turel(2014a,p.167)definesmultimediaasadesign,combinationanddeliveryofawiderangeofdigitalelementsonthesamedigitalplatformwhich“providesamultidimensional,multi-sensoryenviron-mentinwhichrich,efficient,instant,comprehensible,optimumandmeaningfulinputandfeedbackcanbepresented”tothelearnersofallsubjectsatallstagesoflearning(Figure3).CCEDdefinesmultimediaas:‘…programswhichinvolvetheuseofsound,pictures,andfilm,aswellasordinarytext,toconveyinformation’(seeBrett,1998,p.81;theDictionaryofMultimedia,1997,p.151;Ashworth,1996,p.81;Thierry,1996,p.7forfurtherdefinitions).Itappearsthatmultimediaisapowerfultool,asitenablesmaterialsdeveloperstocombineanddeliverdifferentdigitalelementsonthesamecomputerplatforminverybeneficialandmeaningfulways.Noneoftheconventionaltoolshassuchapower.Whenlinksbetweenelementsareprovided,thenitiscalledinteractivemultimediaaswellashypermedia(Turel,2015a,p.2496),otherwiseitiscalledmultimedia.Theselinkscanbeintheformofhyperlinks,hypertext,buttons,hotspotsorhotwordssothatausercanretrieveinformationand/ornavigate.Inotherwords,certainwordsorunitslinktootherdocumentsormoveausertoanotherpositionintheapplicationordisplayinformationpertinenttotheparticularlinkonthecurrentposition.Thisinformationcanbeintheformofsound,text,picture,graphics,videoandsoon,oroptimumcombinations.Wheninterac-tivemultimedia/hypermedia“enableslearnerstomakepreferences,recordthem,theirindividualneedsandlearninggoals,andthenusesthemthroughoutinteractionwiththelearnersinordertomeettheirpersonalneedssothattheycanlearnbetter,thenhypermediabecomesadaptivehypermedia…”(Turel,2015a,p.2497),whichisrelativelyanewdirectioninthefield(Brusilovsky,2012,p.46)andconsistsofdifferentmodels(Kahraman,Sagiroglu&Colak,2013,p.60)

Figure 3 Combination and delivery of a wide range of digital elements on the same digital platform

xxxiii

Trang 35

Interactive Multimedia in FLL/SLL

diaapplicationsandconventionalmaterials.Thesedifferencesare:(a)thecombinationanddeliveryofawiderangeofdifferentdigitalelementsonthesamedigitalplatform,whichcannotbeprovidedwithanyothermedia.(b)Multimediaapplicationsarenavigationalandinteractive.(c)Languagelearnershavebettercontroloverinteractivemultimediaapplications.(d)Itiseasierforlanguagelearnerstouseinteractivemultimediaapplications,as‘everything’isonthesameplatformaswellasinstantaneousduetothepresenceofhyperlinksintheformofhotspots,hypertextandbuttons.Inthesameway,inter-activemultimedialanguageapplicationshavemanydifferentcombinedelements,whichcanmake(a)inputmoreeasilycomprehensibleand(b)learningenjoyable,allofwhichcanresultinFLL/SLLbet-ter(Turel,2015a;Turel,2014e,pp.292-309;Stevens,1995,pp.289-99;Stepp-Greany,2002,p.172).Forinstance,inSobolevaandTronenko’s(2002,p.495)study,languagelearnersappreciateddifferentaspectsofCALL,whetheritisdeliveredontheWeboronCD-ROMformat,andtheyfounditinterest-ing,rich,simulative,helpful,interactiveandsoon.Theseresultsarealsosupportedbyotherstudies(e.g.Turel,2014a).InBorrasandLafayette’s(1994,p.67)study,themajoritypreferredthecomputerlaboratorytothelanguagelaboratory.Thepositiveattitudestowardsinteractivemultimediaarealsoagreedonbylanguageteachersinthattheythink,“theuseofcomputerswouldmotivatethestudenttostudy(81.47-0%)…”(Carbola-Calero,2001,p.11).Theresultsofotherconductedinvestigationsrevealedthatlanguagelearnersrememberedbetterfromtheinteractivemultimediatreatmentthenthetraditionaltreatment(Crosby,Stelovsky&Ashworth,1994,pp.3-13).AstudybyBrett(1997,pp.39-53)alsoreportsthatlanguagelearners’successratewhileusinginteractivemultimediaisgreaterthantraditionalones(ibid:45-6).AresearchstudybyDeville,Kelly,Paulussen,Vandecasteele&Zimmer(1996,p.81),whichwasconductedonagroupofbeginnerlanguagelearnerswhoaccessedinteractivemultimedialisteningsoftware,revealedthatlanguagelearnersgenerallyperformedbetterinlisteningcomprehension.Likewise,interactivemultimediaisalsoeffectiveforotherskills(i.e.writing,reading,teachingofgrammarandculture)(Soboleva&Tronenko,2002,p.494;Adair-Hauck,Willingham-McLain

IntermsofFLL/SLLandteaching,therearesomeoutstandingdifferencesbetweeninteractivemultime-&Youngs,1999,p.294)althoughspeakingwas“…clearlybeyondcomputers’workingpossibilities”adecadeago(Fletaetal.,1999,p.55).Itisnowfeasibleeventointegrateoralrespondingtasksinlisteningtaskswiththematurityofnaturallanguageprocessingtechnology.TheTOEFLintegratedlisteningandspeakingtasksare,forexample,goodexamplesalthoughtheyarecurrentlyonlyusedforassessmentpurposes(Xi,2010,pp.291-300)

SinceFLL/SLLisamulti-channelphenomenon,thecombinationofdifferentelementsprovidesamultidimensional,multi-sensoryandinteractiveenvironmentinwhichlanguagecanbepresentedindifferentways(Turel,2011).Thiscanmeettheneedsofdifferentindividuallearnerswhohavedifferentlearningstylepreferences(Carson&Longhini,2002,p.408;McLoughlin,1999,pp.222-23;Brickell,1993,p.103),althoughintermsoflisteningskillsonlytwoofthesensorychannels-visualandacoustic-areespeciallyprivileged.Forinstance,whiletheprovisionofaudio-onlymeetstheneedsofauditorylearners(Ridgway,2000,p.182),videocanmeettheneedsofvisuallearners(Adair-Haucketal.1999,p.289;Peter,1994,p.202;Hart,1992,p.5;Tschirner,2001,p.310).Likewise,functionalinteractivityfacilitatesthenegotiationofmeaning,whichisnecessaryinFLL/SLL,aslearnerscanaccesshyper-links,glossaries,feedback,captions,andsoonimmediately,andfindoutwhatandwhytheyhavenotunderstood,andtheunderlyingassumptions(Turel,2015a).Allthesefacilitatelisteningcomprehension,

Trang 36

drawlearners’attentionto‘theirweaknesses’andcertainaspects(i.e.syntacticalandsematicfeatures)ofinput(Nicholasetal.,2001,p.721;Leow,2001,pp.114,144;Schmidt,1993,1995)andresultindepthprocessing(Craik&Lockhart,1972),allofwhicharenecessaryconditionsforFLL/SLL.Thecombinationofdifferentelementsthroughlinksonthesameplatformprovidesnavigationalandfunctionalinteractivityandmulti-dimensionalandsensorysupport(Herron,Dubreil,Corrie&Cole,2002,p.37;Leffa,1992,p.66).Forinstance,whenlearnersneedto,theycanaccessinstantdictionaries,grammarstructures,captions,feedbackandthelike,whicharecombinedandonthesameplatform,orrelistentolisteningtextswithoutlosingtime,allofwhicharegoodopportunitiestoexercisecontroloverFLLinformation(Tschimer,2001,pp.312-13;Brickell,1993,p.103).Theseaspectsofinteractivemul-timediacanenablelearnerstofindoutthedifficulties,therightsolutions,whattherulesare;toanalysethemistakesthathavebeenmade;andtofindoutwhytheyhavemadesuchmistakesbyassessingtheiranswers,recordingandscoringthem,pointingoutandexplainingmistakes.Thiscapabilityprovidesmorereal-worldlearningcontextsandmoreauthenticandinteractivetasks(Turel,2015a)

InteractivemultimediaenvironmentsprovidelearnerswiththeopportunitytolearnFL/SLattheirownpace,withoutfearofmakingmistakesinthepresenceofateacherorotherlearners.Itisatensionfreeenvironmentinwhichlearnerscanusecomputersindividually,aslearnershavenoteachersandfriendspresent.Inparticular,duringself-studyitisaprivateandflexibleworkplacewherelearnerscantakerisks;workintheirownplace(Tschirner,2001,p.307),intheirowntime,atthepacetheyneed,andinthewaytheyenjoybecauseitgivesthemthecontrol(Soboleva&Tronenko,2002,p.493;Trinder,2002,p.75),providesthemwithdifferentchoices,tasksandfeedback.Inotherwords,itenableslearnerstodecidewhattostudy,whentostudy,howtostudy,howlongtostudy,howoftentostudy,andevenwheretostudyinaconsiderablyeasierinvironment,aswiderangeofelementsareonthesameplatformandeverythingissimultaneous.Thesecanmakelearnersfeelmorecomfortableandmightresultinpromot-ingdevelopmentofself-confidenceandprovokingworkinghard.Itisduetothesereasonsthatlearnersdonotcomplainaboutthefearofmakingmistakes(Devilleetal.,1996,p.83).Conversely,learnersexpresstheircomfortofworkingwithinteractivemultimedia(Trinder,2002,p.75;Fletaetal.,1999,p.55;Brett,1997,pp.46-7;Peter,1994,pp.157-58;Hoven,1999,p.91)

Sinceinteractivemultimediaofferslearnersmanychoices(i.e.soundsequences,videoclips,video/soundclipswithoptionalcaptions,vocabularyandgrammarlinks,pertinentcomprehensiontestswithimmediate,remedialandinnovativefeedback,instructions,visualsandthelike),itishighlymotivating.Whenlearnersmakemistakes,thisdoesnotevende-motivatethembecausetheyhavetheopportunitytoreceiveinstantandmeaningfulfeedback,andpractiseasmanytimesastheywantto,andneedto(Soboleva&Tronenko,2002,p.483;Ayres,2002,pp.247-48;Lyall&NcNamara,2000,p.9).ThisisanimportantfactorinFLL/SLLespeciallyduringautonomousstudybecause“howtoengagetheinterestofthelearnerandsosustainhismotivationtolearn”isconsidered“arelatedproblemforthewriterofself-studymaterials”(Frankel,1987,p.53).Mostimportantly,notonlyismotivation“directlylinkedtoachievement”accordingtothesocioeducationalmodel(Masgoret&Gardner,2003,p.129),whichsug-geststhatintegrativenessandattitudestowardthelearningsituationcauselearners’motivationtolearnanFL/SLandmotivationisresponsibleforachievement(Masgoret&Gardner,2003,p.124;Gardner,1985,p.158),butmotivationisalsocommontoallmodelsofFLL/SLL(i.e.theacculturationmodel,theconsciousreinforcementmodel,theintergroupmodel,theinteractionistSLAmodel,theLMR-plusModel,themonitormodel,thesocialcontextmodel,thesocialpsychologicalmodel,theelaborationTheorymodel–Gardner,1985,pp.142,125-66)

xxxv

Trang 37

activemultimediatocombineanddeliverdifferentelementsonthesameplatformmoreeffectivelyininteractivemultimediaenvironments.Forinstance,interactivemultimedia(i.e.computerbasededucationaltechnology)providesanon-lineareditingfacility.Thus,materialswriterscancutandmovedigitisedaudio/videoinanyorder(Tschirner,2001,p.307).Moreover,computersoundhasmoreadvantagesincomparisontotape-cassettesforlearners.Theseare:“(1)Theoptionofinstantlyaccessingsoundinnon-linearform,(2)Thefacilitiesofsteppingandisolating,(3)Instantrecord,replayandcomparison,(4)Theabilitytosynchronisetextandgraphics”(Willets,1988,p.4)

Technically,pedagogicallyandpsychologically,itiseasierforthedesignersanddevelopersofinter-Beingabletofeaturein,combineanddeliverdifferentelementsonthesameplatform,interactivemultimediacanguidelearnersmoreeffectively.Forexample,whenlearnersmakeamistake,theyreceiveinstantandmeaningfulfeedback(Turel,2012,pp.35-49).Thiscanenablethemtofindoutwhytheyhavemadetheparticularmistakes,howtheycanovercomesuchdifficultiesinfutureoccasions,andimprovenewstrategies.Duetothesereasons,interactivemultimediisconsideredefficientforself-studyuse(Soboleva&Tronenko,2002,p.483;Brett,1996,p.206).Additionally,iflearnersareinstructedaboutwhichstrategiestheyneedtofollowinwhichsituations,thentheycanbedirectedandguided(Turel,2012;Debski&Gruba,1999,pp.219-20;Barnett,1993,p.303).Thisisimportantbecauselearnerscanbetaughtto“useappropriatecomprehensionstrategies”(Goh,2000,p.71),whichismostlyneededduringself-study,aslearnersarebythemselves(Debski&Gruba,1999,p.219-20)

Interactivemultimedicanpreparelearnersmoreeffectivelyandadequatelyforlisteninginput.Theassumptionsarethat,forinstance,interactivemultimediempowersthedesignersanddevelopersoflisteningmaterialsto(1)providelearnerswithdifferentelementssuchasunknownitems,grammaticalrules,specialfeaturesoftexttype,shortaudiomessages,shortvideoclips,samplesentences,graphics,animations,visuals,simplifiedwrittenversionsofthetext,informationaboutthespeakers,theirroles,howtheyinteract,thecontentandsoonatthepre-listeningstage,whichcannotonlybeimplementedindifferentandefficientways,butalsoprepareslearnersverywelltothewhile-listeningstage(Turel,2015b)

Interactivemultimedicanqualifylearnerstoovercomepotentialsourcesofdifficultiesoflisteninginputsuchasunfamiliaritems,propernames,culturaldifficulties,grammarstructures,fastspeech,andunfamiliaraccents(Turel&McKenna,2015;Turel,2014c;Turel&Kilic,2014).Themeaningsofun-familiaritemscanbeprovidedthroughhypertext,hotspotorotherlinkssuchasdictionaries.Thesecanbeexplainedintargetlanguagethroughsynonymsorantonyms(Turel&McKenna,2015).Likewise,learners’attentioncanbedrawntocognates,falsecognatesandpolysemouswords,whichareusefulforvocabularyacquisitionandhelpfulforunderstanding,andimprovinglisteningaswellastheotherskills(Vidal,2003,p.80,Hammer&Monod,1978,p.32;Nakic,1981,pp.11-12),atthepre-listeningstage.Additionally,simplesentencesandshortparagraphsfeaturingunknownitemscanbeprovided.Insomecases,theunfamiliaritemscanbeexplainedthroughoutvisuals,audioorvideoclips.TheirequivalentsinL1canbegivenifLLsaremonolingualorifweknowtheL1ofthetargetcustomers.Unfamiliarpropernamescanalsobegiveninadvancesothatlearnerswillnothavedifficulty.Suchnamescanbegiventhroughpicturesandcartoonsthathavelabelsandinstructions.Culturaldifferencesandunknowngrammarstructurescanbeexplainedandillustratedthroughsimplesamples,pictures,audioorvideoclips.Theassumptionsbehindculturaldifferences,forinstance,canbeelucidatedandpresentedindif-ferentways(Turel&McKenna,2015;Turel,2014d,pp.268-293;Turel&Kilic,2014,pp.245-267)

Trang 38

Fast-speechandunfamiliaraccentscanbeovercomeininteractivemultimediindifferentways:(1)Theycanbeovercomebyprovidingcaptions,astheymakefastspeechcomprehensible(Turel,2015c).(2)Fastspeechcanbeovercomebygivinglearnersthecontrolofspeech-rateoralternativelybyprovid-ingslowversionsinadditiontotheauthenticversions(Turel&McKenna,2015).Captionscanalsohelplearnerstocometogripswithpropernames(Turel,2015c).Notonlydothesehelplearnerstoovercomethedifficulties,buttheyalsohelplearnerscomprehend,gainconfidence,andprepareforfutureocca-sions,whichareverybeneficial(Fox,Romano-Hvid&Sheffield,1992,p.48;Devilleetal.,1996,p.82).Inconventionalmaterials,feedbackisnormallygiveninlearner’sbooksoranswerkeybooks.Whenlearnershavedifficulty,theycanaccessthem.Althoughthisisuseful,feedbackinconventionalmateri-alsisverylimited,as(a)itisnotinstantand(b)itconsistsofrestrictedelementssuchastext,picturesandgraphics.Ininteractivemultimedia,feedbackis(a)immediate,(b)canconsistofdifferentelements(i.e.audio,video,visuals,text,animationoroptimumcombinations)whichmeetbothlearners’visualandacousticneedsresultinginFLA/SLAand(c)canbeconditional(Turel,2012,pp.35-49).Suchfeedbackcanhelplearnersto(a)findoutwhatandwhytheycouldnotunderstandand(b)overcomethedifficultiescausingthemnottocomprehend,whichfacilitatesmeaningnegotiation,drawsattentionandraisesconscious/metacognitiveawareness.Thiscanguideandleadlearnerstodevelopnewandeffec-tivestrategies,whichisoneofthetargetsthatmaterialwriterswantto,andneedto,fulfilespeciallyinautonomousmaterials(ibid:35-49).Tothisend,afamousKurdishscholar,KahlilGibran,inhisbookentitled‘TheProphet’;hasapoem,thepartofwhichrunsthus:“Thensaidtheteacher:‘Speaktousofteaching.’ ‘Ifheisindeedwise,hedoesnotbidyouenterthehouseofhiswisdom,butratherleadsyoutothethresholdofofyourownmind”

Learnersdonothavethesamebackgroundandabilities.Whilesomehavehighabilitiesandknowquitealotabouttargetlanguageandtargetculture,othersmaynot.Asinteractivemultimedienablesmaterialswriterstomakeuseofdifferentelementswhichcanmakeinputcomprehensibleandcreategradualanddifferenttasks,eachindividualcanfindwhatismostappropriateforthemorawayofworkingwhichismostconvenientforthem.Forinstance,learnerswithhighproficiencycanprefertolistentolisteninginputwithoutcaptions,whilethosewithlowproficiencycanlistentowithcaptions.Inthesameway,iflearnersfindspeechratetoofast,thentheycanslowdownoralternativelyprefertheslowversions.Ofcourse,wedonotmeanthateveryindividualbenefitsfromsuchapplicationstothesamedegree.Itisafactthatalllearners’attitudestowardsFLL/SLLandusingcomputersforFLLpurposesarenotthesame.Thus,logicallyandapparentlydifferentlearnerswillbenefitindifferentdegrees

Interactivemultimedicanbeusedforclassroomuseandindividualuse(Soboleva&Tronenko,2002;Gillespie&McKee,1999),asithasmuchtooffer.TheresultsofresearchbyMangiafico(1996,p.106)suggestthattheuseofthesameprogramforbothclassroomuseandindividualusecanbeequallybeneficialinenhancingstudents’FLL/SLLlisteningcomprehension.Althoughtheauthorofthisstudythinksandbelievesthatinteractivemultimediaisbeneficialforbothclassroomandindividualuse,hebelievesthatitcanbemorehelpfulforindividual-use(dependingonthenatureofinteractivemultimediapplications)

Ontheotherhand,thepowerofinteractivemultimedia(i.e.combinationofawiderangeoflearningfeaturesonthesameplatform)requirethedesignersanddevelopersofinteractivemultimediaenviron-mentstoconsidertherequirementsofthedualcodingtheoryandthegenerativetheoryofmultimedia,whichsuggestthatpresentingtwoconcurrentelementstoteachoneelementiseffective,asithelpsguidelearners’cognitiveprocesses(Moreno&Mayer,2002;Al-Seghayer,2001,p.226;Mayer,1997;Chun

&Plass,1996,p.515;Mayer&Sims,1994;Mayer&Anderson,1992;Wittrock,1990;Paivio,1986)

xxxvii

Trang 39

althoughthisisnotalwaysthecase(Amrheinetal.,2002,pp.843-57;Kalyuga,2000,pp.2-3).Inthesameway,thisaspectofinteractivemultimediaalsorequiresthedesignersanddevelopersofinteractivemultimediatoconsidertherequirementsofthecognitiveloadtheory.Alltheseshowhowitisessen-tialtodesigneveryelementofinteractivemultimedialisteningenvironmentsefficiently(i.e.optimumcombinationsor‘rightbalance’)(seeFigure4foroptimumcombinations)

Tosumup,interactivemultimediaprovidesaninvaluableenvironmentthatenablesthedesignersanddevelopersoflisteningapplicationstoovercomelisteningdifficultiesandprovideconditionsthatfacilitatelisteningcomprehensionasapartofFLL/SLL.ThesecanmakeanundeniablecontributiontolisteningskilldevelopmentasapartoftheFLL/SLLprocess

The Limitations of Interactive Multimedia in Teaching Listening

Althoughcomputerbasededucationaltechnologywasnotsonotperfectadecadeago(i.e.thequalityofvideoclips,forinstance,woulddiminishewhentheywerecompressed;Soboleva&Tronenko2002,pp.488,496),sincethentechnologicaldevelopmentsinthefieldofeducationaltechnologyhasoccuredveryrapidly.Asaresult,nowadaysveryhighqualityandefficientcomputertechnogoyisavailable,whichfortunatelycancurrentlyenableus,materialsdesignersanddevelopers,tohavetechnologicallyveryhighlysophisticatedqualities

Themainproblemisnotthetechnologicaldimensionanymore;atleasttheauthorofthisstudythinksso.Currently,therearemanyinteractivemultimediaapplicationsonthemarketthatarenotentirelysophisticatedpedagogicallyandpsychologically(Turel,2014a,pp.167-183;Ferney&Waller,2001,p.

Figure 4 Optimum design of different digital elements on the same digital platform

Trang 40

156;Trinder,2002,pp.69-84).Suchapplicationswereevencalled‘shovelware’inthepast(Clifford,1998,pp.2-8),aswasthecasemorethantwodecadesago(LeMon,1988,p.39).SomeevenfeaturedspellingerrorsalthoughtheywerewrittenbyNSs(TESTeacher2004,p.18).Theproblemsfundamentallystemfrommaterialswriters,notthetechnologyitself,asinmanycasesmanymaterialswritersarenotexperteithertechnicallyoreducationally.Onlyateamthatconsistsofbothpertinenteducatorsandtechnologistscancreatebothtechnicallyandpedagogicallyverysophisticatedandidealinteractivemultimedialisten-ingapplications.Iftechnicallyandpedagogicallysophisticatedinteractivemultimediaapplicationsonthemarketaresurveyedcarefully,itwillbeseenthattheyhavebeencreatedbyteamsmadeupofeducatorsandtechnologists,noteither.Thisisthecaseformanyinteractivemultimediaprojects,aswell(Phillips,Pospisil&Richardson,2001,pp.96-114;Grob&Wolf,2001,p.234).Tobeabletocreateinrealsensecost-effective/professionallysophisticatedintearcativemultimediaapplications,theactiveparticipationofallexpertsneeded(dependingonthetypeoftheapplicationwewanttocreate)isamustsuchasinstructionaldesigners,(specialist)teachers,programmers,graphicdesigners,audioengineers,photographers,artists,voiceactors,filmdirectors/specialists,musicians,animators,(target)learnersandsoon(Turel&McKenna,2013,pp.188–209).Alltruelyprofessionalworksarealwaysachievedbyateamofpertinentexperts,notbysingleindividual,“whereonepersonactsasacurriculumexpert,contentexpert,programmerandinstructionaldesigner”(Hedbergetal.,1993,p.4).Theinvolvementofsuchexpertsisvitalandhastobeintruesense(Nicholson&Ngai,1996,p.3).Targetlearners’involvement,forinstance,“producesmoreuseableandeffective”interactivemultimediaapplications(Nikolova,2002,p.112;Kennedy&McNaught,1997,p.6;MacGregor,1993,p.3;Eraut,1988),althoughthefindingsinthefieldofinteractivemultimediamaterialsandCALLareveryoftenlearners’preferences,views,ideas,progressetc.Equally,thelackofaspecialistprogrammerhindersnotonlytheuseofthemaximumpotentialofthecomputertools,butalsoresultsinlackoftheminimumrequirements(Grob&Wolff,2001,p.249;Lyall&McNamara,2000,p.8).Theinvolvementoftheseexpertsneedstobeintruesense.Inthepast,therewereevensomeinterac-tivemultimediaprogrammesthatcreatedbyexperts,butweredeveloped“withminimalreferencetotheeducationalresearchavailable,bothwithinaparticulardisciplineandaboutstudentlearningingeneral”(Kennedy&McNaught,1997,p.1).Interactivemultimediaapplicationsalsoneedtobeevaluated,whichhappenswhilecreating(i.e.formativeevaluation)andafter(i.e.summativeevaluation),andrevisedac-cordingly(Colpaert,2002,p.439;Phillipsetal.,2001,p.5;Sims,2000,p.4;Adair-Haucketal.,1999,p.274).Inotherwords,thestagesofinteractivemultimediasoftwaredesignanddevelopmentarecategorizedintosixseparatestages(i.e.feasibility,settingupateamofexperts,designing,programming,testing,andevaluating)andateachstageawiderangeofprinciplesandguidelinesneedtobeborneinmindsothatcosteffectiveinteractivemultimedialanguagelisteningenvironmentscanbedesignedanddeveloped(Turel

&McKenna,2013,pp.188–209)

Inconclusion,nowadays,itisthelimitationsofinteractivemultimediadesignersanddevelopersthataretheprobleminthedevelopmentofinteractivemultimediaapplicationsratherthanthelimitationsofthecomputerbasededucationaltechnology.Thisuniquecompiledbookwillfurtherenablealllinguisticandcomputerbasededucationscholars,students,institutions;softwarecompaniesandteamsofsoftwaredevelopersnotonlytobetterunderstandefficientandeffectiveinteractivemultimediasoftwaredesignanddevelopmentprinciplesandguidelines,butalsowillempowerthemtodesignandcreateefficientandcosteffectivemultimedialisteningsoftwareforanylanguageasapartofFLL/SLL

Vehbi Turel

The University of Bingol, Turkey

xxxix

Định dạng
Số trang	504
Dung lượng	13,17 MB