Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Современные информационно-коммуникационные технологии в обучении иностранным языкам. Учебно-методическое пособие
.pdf
Список литературы
сурс]. URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LA
W_140174/07b2a433c35195c28c56a221a970dc3ce333fade
(дата обращения: 09.09.2021).
54. Тест. Раванда. Электронный ресурс: https://ravanda.ru/tests/4
(дата обращения: 09.09.2021).
55. Титова С.В. Мобильное обучение сегодня: стратегии и пер-
спективы // Вест. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 19. Лингвистика и ме-
ждународная коммуникация. 2012. № 1. С. 9–23.
56. Титова С.В., Авраменко А.П. ИКТ компетенция препода-
вателя и интеграция мобильных технологий [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://goo.gl/YXG9VJ (дата обращения:
09.09.2021).
57. Титова С.В., Авраменко А.П. Мобильное обучение ино-
странным языкам: учебное пособие. М.: Икар, 2014. 224 с.
58. Титова С.В., Авраменко А.П. Мобильные технологии в пре-
подавании иностранных языков. М.: Изд-во МГУ, 2013.
225 с.
59. Требования к условиям и организации обучения в
обще-
образовательных организациях: СанПиН 2.4.2.2821-10
(с изм. на 22 мая 2019 года) [Электронный ресурс]. URL:
https://docs.cntd.ru/document/902256369 (дата обращения:
03.08.2021).
60. Трутнев А.Ю. Педагогические условия применения компью-
терной технологии в процессе обучения студентов университета иностранному языку: Дис. … канд. пед. наук. Магнитогорск, 2001. 182 с.
61. Федеральные государственные образовательные стандарты.
[Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://fgos.ru/ (дата обраще-
ния: 09.09.2021).
62
. Фоменко Т.М. Тесты как форма контроля. Французский
язык. М: Просвещение, 2008. 174 с.
63. Чернышов С.В., Шамов А.Н. Теория и методика обучения
иностранным языкам. М.: КНОРУС, 2021. 442 с.
64. Что такое мультимедия. КМ Образование [Электронный ресурс]. URL: km-wiki.ru/index.php/Что_такое_мультимедиа
(дата обращения: 09.09.2021).
111
Н. В. Горобинская, И. В. Трешина, С. В. Чернышов
СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННО-КОММУНИКАЦИОННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ В ОБУЧЕНИИ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ
65. Эльконин Д.Б. Детская психология: учеб. пособие для студ.
высш. учеб. заведений / Д.Б. Эльконин; под ред.-сост.
Б.Д. Элькониа. 4-е изд., стер.: М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2007. 384 с.
66. Ari-PekkaVäisänen. Learning English through video games:
Finnish Learners’ Experiences. Master’s Thesis [Электрон-
ный ресурс]. С. 21–23. URL: https://jyx.jyu.fi /bitstream/
handle/123456789/57392/URN%3ANBN%3Afi%3Aj
yu-201803221813.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (дата обра-
щения: 09.09.2021).
67. Bloom B.S. (ed.). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The
classifi cation of educational goals: Handbook I, cognitive
domain. New York: Longman. 1956.
68. Brown H.D. Principles of language learning and teaching. NY:
PearsonEducation. 2007.
69. Creative Commons Platforms [Электронный ресурс]. URL:
https://creativecommons.org/about/platform (
дата обращения:
06.02.2020).
70. Crookal D. Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal,
2010. P. 911.
71. De Haan J. Teaching and learning English through digital game
projects. Digital Culture & Education. 2011.
72. Kearney M. at all. Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical
perspective S. Schuck, K. Burden, P. Aubusson // Research in
Learning Technology Journal. 2012. № 20 (1). P. 21–34.
73. Meng P. Podcasting and Vodcasting: A white paper. University
of Missouri IAT Services. 2005. 14 p.
74. Petersen Sobah Abbas, Divitini Monica. Language learning:
from individual learners to communities // Wireless and Mobile
Technologies in Education. WMTE 2005. IEEE International
Workshop. 2005. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.
computer.org/csdl/proceedings/wmte/2005/2385/00/23850169.
pdf (дата обращения: 19.03.2018).
75. Prensky M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the
Horizon. MCB University Press. Vol. 9. No. 5. October 2015.
URL: https://goo.gl/9NyPm9 (дата обращения: 09.09.2021).
112
Список литературы
76. TeachThought. 100 ways to use Facebook2 in education by
categories. 2012. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.
teachthought.com/technology/100-ways-to-use-facebook-ineducation-by-category/ (дата обращения: 25.03.2018).
77. Terantino Joe, Karen Graf. Using Facebook
3
in the language
classroom as part of the net generation curriculum // Language.
2011. P. 44–47. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.actfl .
org/sites/default/fi les/pdfs/TLEsamples/TLE_Nov11_Article.pdf
(дата обращения: 09.03.2018).
78. Terms of Service. YouTube: [сайт]. URL: https://www.youtube.
com/static?template=terms (дата обращения: 06.02.2020).
79. Terms of Use. BritishCouncil: [сайт]. URL: https://www.
britishcouncil.org/terms (дата обращения: 06.02.2020).
80. Traxler D. Current State of Mobile Learning // Mobile Learning:
Transforming the Delivery of Education & Training. 2009 // Элет-
кронный ресурс Интернет: http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/
books/120155.
2
Facebook принадлежит компании Meta, признанной экстремистской организацией и запрещенной в
РФ.
3
Facebook принадлежит компании Meta, признанной экстремистской организацией и запрещенной в РФ.
113
ПРИЛОЖЕНИЕ
INCREASING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A LANGUAGE
COURSE IN SCARCE CLASS TIME
Traditional design of English Phonetics course has lost its
effectiveness due to lack of class time and heterogeneity of language
learners. This is especially apparent for distance learning in higher
education where students are supposed to acquire knowledge and skills
independently without any physical presence of a facilitator. Several
group meetings with an instructor are given to such students to clarify
misconceptions or misunderstandings in the course material and, fi nally,
take examinations. The problem of designing an effective degree course
in the above described conditions led to undertaking the following pilot
study: fl ipping the course by asking students to independently learn
the theoretical basis of English phonetics using a specially developed
online course in the learning management system (LMS), Moodle,
and offering them intensive pronunciation practice during face-toface group meetings. The research showed that carefully scaffolded
independent online practice helps to intensify face-to-face instruction
and reach more learning goals, thus increasing course effectiveness.
Such a design is especially effective for highly motivated learners while
weak students benefi t too, as they receive basic knowledge and acquire
major skills. By asking students to work independently and showing
how to do it, instructors can foster an autonomous language learner.
The task under investigation is the improvement of English
Phonetics course in a country where English is a foreign language and
contact with native speakers is quite rare. The problem is also affected
by specifi c conditions for studying and types of learners. According to
the recent changes in higher linguistic education, the number of hours
114
Приложение
devoted to different academic subjects has been cut, but the learning
goals have remained ambitious. The students under investigation have
to receive their higher linguistic education distantly because of a variety
of reasons: full-time education is not affordable for them or they already
have their major and are getting their minor, mostly for English, or they
live far from an educational establishment and can only afford to travel
periodically throughout the year. Nevertheless, English Phonetics course
is very important for them and should be designed effectively as to meet
the needs of these learners in the described studying environment.
Traditionally, English Phonetics course had two learning goals:
students needed to understand the general phonetic processes (e.g.
assimilation, accommodation, elision, etc.) and describe them in
English. The latter was the only way to apply their knowledge because
of the limited class time. The course design had the following structure:
an instructor explained theoretical material during class under extreme
time constraints (max. 6 lectures); after the lectures students were left
for several months to do exercises or tests for the next term on their own.
For instance, the students were asked to answer questions in writing
such as: How is a vowel different from a consonant? How does a noise
consonant differ from a sonorant? How can stress affect the character of
the end in vowels? How can a voiceless consonant affect the sonorant?
They were also given a task to describe one English monophthong, one
diphthong, and one diphthongoid following an example and to do a
phonetic analysis of an English text. The teaching experience showed
that students gathered for the next term with answers simply copied
from a textbook without really having learned the material. They simply
repeated information rather than applied it. While the course required
knowing defi nitions, application is the real test of knowledge. To make
the situation even worse, students were not given any self-check during
inter-term period to understand if they were on the right track. The
tests / exercises done on paper were submitted for feedback just upon
their arrival for the next term. So they did not have enough time to
correctly apply the concepts and get fully ready for their examination.
In spite of the fact that the period between two terms lasts from
three to six months, it often happened that without any guidance
from the instructor students could not cope with an academic load
115
Н. В. Горобинская, И. В. Трешина, С. В. Чернышов
СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННО-КОММУНИКАЦИОННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ В ОБУЧЕНИИ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ
alone and failed their examinations / tests. Besides, this way of
teaching left no time for guided pronunciation practice and students
fi nished the course only with some theoretical knowledge of the
subject. The interview, conducted with the students after a traditional
course, detected the learners’ dissatisfaction with the fi nal results
as the course was too theory-based and no really useful practical
skills in pronunciation were fi nally acquired. This unfortunate
learning experience led to the creation of the questionnaire which
aimed at understanding students’ real needs and demands. It
showed that the real goal of these students was to get a near-native
competence in English pronunciation (American or British accent),
including articulation of English sounds and the use of correct
intonation patterns. They were also interested in understanding
the general phonetic processes for the purposes of learning other
foreign languages or listening and reading about this topic. The
fi ndings led to the course redesign which helped to make time for
guided pronunciation practice – the actual application of students’
knowledge – and increase the level of understanding of the theory.
To make this redesign possible, the English Phonetics course used a
pedagogical fl ip based on computer technologies.
The so-called “fl ipped classroom” inverts traditional teaching
methods. This concept is not new. Dr. Eric Mazur of Harvard
University has been investigating this type of learning since the early
1990’s, and many other instructors have been using this learning
method for even longer. Walvoord and Anderson (1998) promoted the
use of this teaching method in their book called “Effective Grading”
in 1998, but the terminology “fl ipped classroom” was introduced in
2007. The fl ipped classroom model is considered to have been fi rst
developed by Jonathan Bergman and Aaron Sams, who began to use
technology to record Power Point presentations (Bergmann & Sams,
2012). The approach proved to give learners the opportunity to read
or watch lessons at their own pace depending on their abilities and
educational background, thus differentiating to better meet student
needs. In addition, one of the drawbacks of traditional homework is
that students do not receive any meaningful feedback while doing it.
Having a teacher present to address concepts and misconceptions that
116
Приложение
students are able to bring to class following lessons learned on their
own, proves a “feedback cycle [that] has greater potential to boost
student learning” (Horn, 2013).
Literature review in fl ipped teaching shows that this method
is often simplifi ed to content learning (reading of the material,
watching videos or listening to audio fi les) which takes place at
home, and its discussion, analysis and/or creation based on learned
material takes place during class. Brame points out that “fl ipping the
classroom means that students gain fi rst exposure to new material
outside of class, usually via reading or lecture videos, and then use
class time to do the harder work of assimilating that knowledge,
perhaps through problem-solving, discussion, or debates” (Brame,
2013). But its key feature is that it increases the amount of class time
spent on developing higher-order thinking skills (Bloom’s taxonomy
revised by Krathwohl) as activities involving lower-order thinking
processes are done before the class. Remember, Understand, and
Apply are considered lower-order thinking skills while higher-order
thinking skills include Analyze, Evaluate, and Create (Krathwohl,
2002). Thus, “fl ipped instruction moves the lower-order thinking
skills parts of course to independent study, and the analysis and
creative use of language (higher-order thinking skills) to a supported,
teacher-guided environment” (Rosen L.B., Maeda M., & Roberts N.,
2017).
In Flipped Learning Network, we can fi nd the following
defi nition: “Flipped learning is a pedagogical approach in which
direct instruction moves from the group learning space to individual
learning space, and the resulting group space is transformed into a
dynamic, interactive learning environment where the educator guides
students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject
matter” (Flipped Learning Network, 2014). This idea resonates with
Gunyou’s opinion of an effective methodology that mostly contains
active learning and interactive engagement (Gunyou, 2015). One
critical difference between a traditional and fl ipped class is that
time is no longer spent passively taking in “raw content” (Horn,
2013). Instead, students practice problem-solving, discuss issues,
or work on different projects. As a result, the classroom becomes
117
Н. В. Горобинская, И. В. Трешина, С. В. Чернышов
СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННО-КОММУНИКАЦИОННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ В ОБУЧЕНИИ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ
an interactive environment that engages learners actively in their
education.
The advocates of the fl ipped method (Bergmann & Sams, 2012;
Brame, 2013; Cockrum, 2013; Enfi eld, 2013; Gunyou, 2015; Horn,
2013; November & Mull, 2012; Millard, 2012; Moran & Young, 2014;
Rosen, 2016, etc.) point out its other benefi ts. They say that fl ipping
allows more individual interaction with every student, signifi cantly
reduces negative behaviors, helps to develop better relationships with
all learners (Cockrum, 2013), and offers wide opportunities for gaining
instructional time and differentiation (Cockrum, 2013; Horn, 2013;
Rosen, 2016). All these have great potential to boost student learning
and get remarkable academic achievements.
Modern education requires the use of up-to-date tools and
technologies. As our students are mostly the representatives of
“Generation Z” (people born in the 1990s, also known as Gen
Z, the connected generation, digital natives, the net generation),
incorporating such trends into education can not only be satisfying
and interesting for instructors, but also motivating and engaging
for students. Moreover, fl ipped learning is completely open for the
integration of any computer tools.
The use of computer technologies in English as a Second Language
(ESL) is also not new as back in the 1960’s teachers started to combine
e-learning and traditional classes. Since the early 1980’s, scientists have
referred to using computers in language teaching as Computer Assisted
Language Learning (CALL). In his research paper, Kalamarz (Kalamarz,
2014) described several stages of development of CALL. One stage
was associated with computer stimulating automatic responses learners
gave to such tasks as text reconstruction, paragraph ordering, multiple
choice questions or drills. Another phase featured the communicative
approach “allowing for increased creativity and inventiveness in
students’ answers” (Kalamarz, 2014). Then came the tendency to use
multi-media and the Internet as a learning environment which helped
to develop language skills through interaction with other learners.
Nowadays, more user-friendly tools and software are being invented.
As Kalamarz concludes, “as a result of development of information
and communication technology e-learning has all the qualities of an
118
Приложение
essential constituent of an educational process” (Kalamarz, 2011). All
of these stages of growth and technological advances in CALL have
made the Flipped Model a viable option.
In the 21st century, quite many practitioners (Bates & Poole, 2003;
Collis & Moonen, 2002; Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Neumeier,
2005; Millard, 2012; Pacansky-Brock, 2012; Cockrum, 2013; Moran
& Young, 2014, etc.) speak for the use of modern technologies in
education. They highlight such positive aspects as automatic responses,
interactivity, multi-sensory experience, a good infl uence on motivation,
etc. (Cechova & Rees, 2013; Krajka, 2012). Very many researchers in
language learning (Brinckwirth, 2012; Guillen, 2015; Kalamarz, 2014;
Kern, 1995; Lindaman & Nolan; 2015; So & Lee, 2012; Strobl, 2014)
have analyzed the infl uence of appropriate e-learning techniques on the
development of language skills and came to the conclusion that “they
favor the development of the key competences of communicating in
foreign languages” (Kalamarz, 2014), in particular listening, reading,
and writing. Burston (2014) claims that mobile devices can support
learning and teaching only if integrated right, and this idea can be
expanded to any technology used in educational process and “the
fl ipped model is open to the integration of any tool that helps instructors
provide content to their students and help students learn the content
they need to become more profi cient, both in and out of the classroom
setting” (Rosen, L.B. et al., 2017). It is also important to remember
that for blended learning environments to be successful, it is essential
to carefully align the online and face-to-face portions of learning
experience (Ginns & Ellis, 2007) and to combine “the best of both
worlds” (Graham, 2003).
In this study, we would like to solve the problem of developing an
effective English Phonetics course for distant learners in a country
where English is a foreign language and to fi nd a sound way of
integrating technology and portions of online learning to meet the
variety of learning styles and levels of language profi ciency so vividly
present among distant learners.
Relevant data was collected from two groups (control and
experimental). The total number of participants was 18: 7 learners
in the control group & 11 learners in the experimental group. In the
119
Н. В. Горобинская, И. В. Трешина, С. В. Чернышов
СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННО-КОММУНИКАЦИОННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ В ОБУЧЕНИИ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ
experiment, female students prevailed: 15 females to 3 males. There
were six females and one male in the control group, and there were two
male and nine female students in the experimental one. Their language
level varied from Intermediate Low to Advanced Low based on ACTFL
Profi ciency Guidelines. The age range was 18–33 years. All the
participants were native speakers of the Russian language pursuing an
academic degree as distant students at the Russian linguistic university.
As for their former educational background, half of them had earned a
higher education degree before, while the other half had fi nished high
school. It proves that these both groups of students are heterogeneous
and require a more individualized approach.
The results of the pre-course questionnaire showed that the
majority of the participants could be labeled as digital natives
(Prensky, 2001). Most of them were completely comfortable with
the use of computer technologies in the course. The questionnaire
aimed at identifying any previous experience in blended learning and
technical skills possessed by the students. The results showed that
half of the participants had been enrolled in a blended course and used
an online course management system, such as Blackboard, Moodle,
or Desire2Learn before. It was also evident that the students had
basic computer skills necessary in the course: searching the Internet
(91.3%), receiving and sending emails (82.6%), attaching fi les to send
in an email and opening the attachments received (69.6%), saving
fi les (73.9%), formatting, organizing, downloading, uploading,
compressing and uncompressing fi les (73.9%), working with fi le
sizes (65.2%), and changing image sizes (65.2%). The collected data
proved that the participants were fully prepared for a blended course
in English Phonetics and needed no additional technical skills. All
of them had a computer or a laptop with Windows software and the
Internet connection at home. The majority had scanners, printers, and
photo cameras necessary in the online part of the course. It was also
important for the research fi ndings that no participant had ever taken
part in a fl ipped course before.
A new English Phonetics course was constructed on the basis of
backward fl ipped design. It means that the theoretical material was
carefully scaffolded in order to accomplish the three identifi ed learning
120
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]