Developing criteria for the design and evaluation of interactive whiteboard based materials:

Intermediate findings from the iTILT project

Euline Cutrim Schmid, Sanderin van Hazebrouck, Margret Oberhofer – EUROCALL 2012

www.itilt.eu

Overview

www.itilt.eu

• IWBs in education• IWBs in language teaching

The Current Situation

• Aim of the project, Partners, Duration

iTILT – Interactive Technologies in Language Teaching

• IWB training, Data collection, Website

Development of the Project

• Motivation• Theoretical Framework• Methodology • Criteria

Defining Criteria for IWB Materials Design

Conclusion

The Current Situation

www.itilt.eu

IWBs in Education

www.itilt.eu

General trend towards more ICT in schools across Europe

Clear increase of IWB sales

2010 20110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

BelgiumNether-landsUK

Future Source, 2010

IWBs in language teaching

www.itilt.eu

Rapid increase of IWBs

Limited teacher training materials and support

for the design, evaluation and

implementation of IWB-based materials for the

FL classroom

IWBs in language teaching

www.itilt.eu

• development of training models• examples of good practice

• Train language teachers to become confident users of the IWB technology and remain consistent with current models of language teaching methodology

Need

Aim

Gray et al., 2007; Cutrim Schmid, 2010

www.itilt.eu

Clear need for professional training and pedagogical resources to assist

teachers in exploiting IWB in the foreign language classroom

iTILT – Interactive Technologies in Language Teaching

www.itilt.eu

The Project

www.itilt.eu

iTILT Project

Aim Partners Duration

Aim of the iTILT project

www.itilt.eu

Helping language teachers make the most of interactive whiteboards • produce effective IWB training materials for language

teachers

• inform teachers of IWB best practice based on research

• provide a support network for teachers and schools

• bring together teachers from all sectors (primary,

secondary, vocational, tertiary) of education

• encourage the sharing of example lesson plans and

resources

• promote reflective practice with IWBs

Website

www.itilt.eu

The final website will contain:

Video clips of IWB classroom episodes

Comprehensive training manual

Training materials in 6 different

languages

List of publications on IWB in language

education

Links to helpful websites

List of criteria for materials design

Partners

www.itilt.eu

Coordinator

www.itilt.eu

Duration

www.itilt.eu

January 2011 April 2013

www.itilt.eu

Development of the project

IWB Training Data Collection Website

IWB Training

www.itilt.eu

Aimed for language teachers

• emphasis on communicative language teaching

• explanation of strategies and procedures for designing and

implementing effective IWB materials

Training Resources• Designed for teaching different languages (EN, CY, FR, ES,

TR, NL)

• various educational contexts (primary, secondary,

vocational and higher education)

• organized around the four skills, speaking, listening,

reading and writing and vocabulary and grammar teaching

The iTILT Training Manual

www.itilt.eu

introduction to IWBs

general tips on how to make the best use of interactive whiteboards

criteria for the design and evaluation of IWB-based language teaching materials

tips for the implementation and copyright issues of IWB based material

examples of activities for teaching speaking, listening, writing and reading with an IWB, plus grammar and vocabulary

Electronic Flipcharts

www.itilt.eu

• description of the activity and steps to be taken by teacher and students

activity

• aim of the activity• learning goalsaim

• explains how the flipchart was designed design

• potential of the activity in comparison to former methods

potential

Data Collection

www.itilt.eu

Website – Learning Objects

www.itilt.eu

Learning object

video clip and short

description

Teachers’ and students‘

comments

teaching resources (e.g.

flipchart)

Website

www.itilt.eu

LEARNING OBJECTS

• More than 200

learning objects

• 6 languages (EN, CY,

FR, ES, TR, NL)

• different

educational sectors

www.itilt.eu

www.itilt.eu

www.itilt.eu

Defining the Criteria for IWB Materials Design

www.itilt.eu

Why the Focus on Criteria for IWB Materials Design?

www.itilt.eu

The lack of appropriate materials for the interactive whiteboard (IWB) from publishing houses leads to an increasing responsibility for teachers as materials designers.

Research findings have shown that the technology has mainly been used by language teachers to support stepwise knowledge building, mainly through the use of drill and practice exercises.

Lack of a design framework that focuses specifically on IWB materials for language teaching.

Why the Focus on Criteria for IWB Material Design?

www.itilt.eu

Aim of the iTILT project to support:

teacher autonomy: criteria help support reflection on others' and own current teaching materials

teacher experimentation: criteria help teachers get started making their own materials

teacher exchange and collaboration: criteria allow teachers to check whether resources they might consider submitting to the project website are likely to constitute an effective contribution

Criteria as guidelines

www.itilt.eu

for the design of digital materials that exploit the IWB technology as an effective tool for: a) facilitating the structuring and visualisation of

concepts and ideas b) assisting learners in engaging with and

understanding complex subject matter and c) enhancing classroom interaction

Theoretical Framework

www.itilt.eu

Theoretical Framework

www.itilt.eu

Interaction - essential role played by pedagogical materials in creating opportunities for enhanced interaction, collaboration and negotiation of meaning - Pica, 1994; Long, 1996; Müller-Hartmann, 2000

Desired features of tasks - Müller-Hartmann & Schocker-von Ditfurth (2011)

Task features that support language learning: Motivate learners to get involved Complexity Focus on form Problem-solving in interactive scenarios

Methodological Principles of Task-Based Learning – Doughty and Long (2003)

www.itilt.eu

1. Use tasks, not texts, as the unit of analysis2. Promote learning by doing3. Elaborate input (do not simplify, do not rely solely on “authentic” texts)4. Provide rich (not impoverished) input5. Encourage inductive (chunk) learning6. Focus on form7. Provide negative feedback8. Respect “learner syllabi” / developmental processes9. Promote cooperative / collaborative learning10. Individualize instruction (according to communicative needs and psycholinguistically)

www.itilt.eu

Criteria for CALL Task Appropriateness - Chapelle (2001)

Language-learning potential The degree of opportunity present for beneficial focus on form.

Learner fit The amount of opportunity for engagement with language under appropriate conditions given learner characteristics.

Meaning focus The extent to which learners’ attention is directed toward the meaning of the language.

Authenticity The degree of correspondence between the CALL activity and target language activities of interest to learners out of the classroom.

Positive impact The positive effects of the CALL activity on those who participate in it.

Practicality The adequacy of resources to support the use of the CALL activity.

Literature on IWBs in Education

www.itilt.eu

The IWB literature on material design has focused on the following aspects (Jewitt et al, 2007):

Multimodality: harnessing a wide range of multimodal resources in order to facilitate pupil learning (Levy, 2002; Ball, 2003; Kennewell,2004).

Pace: increasing the pace and efficiency of classroom delivery and therefore best use of teacher time (Ball, 2003; Miller, 2003; Becta, 2004; Smith et al., 2005).

Interaction: enhancing interactive whole-class teaching (Glover & Miller, 2001; Ball, 2003; Becta, 2004; DfES, 2004).

Jewitt et al., 2007

Development of the Criteria

www.itilt.eu

Development of the Criteria

www.itilt.eu

Phase 1: a set of 10 criteria were included in the training manual criteria mainly drawn from previous research on IWB use in

language education (Cutrim Schmid, 2011)

Phase 2: The initial set was further developed into 35 criteria, divided into 5 key areas.

- These criteria were based on: analysis of video clips and materials developed by iTILT data

partners and teachers’ feedback during training workshops

Phase 3: validation of the criteria in subsequent stages of the project via a survey questionnaires administered to experts in two or more rounds

(experienced practitioners and IWB researchers)

The Survey

www.itilt.eu

The criteria are divided into five key areas: methodological principles, pedagogical activities, learner engagement, tools and features, and practical considerations.

Participants decide on the importance and relevance of the criteria by awarding them a mark from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (extremely important).

At the end of each of the sections participants will also be asked if they feel any criteria have been omitted from this list, or if a criterion needs to be reformulated.

Examples of Criteria

www.itilt.eu

Criteria for the design of IWB-based Material

www.itilt.eu

Materials promote learning by doing as opposed to lecture content

Materials allow learners to demonstrate understanding and help teachers to evaluate learning

Materials create opportunities for learners to assess their own performance without teacher intervention

Methodological Principles

Criteria for the design of IWB-based Material

www.itilt.eu

Activities have a clear language learning objective; they are not only designed for enjoyment

Materials provide linguistic and/or cognitive support to help learners understand input

Materials provide linguistic and/or cognitive support to maximise learners' language production

Pedagogical Activities

Criteria for the design of IWB-based Material

www.itilt.eu

Materials include topics and activities which are likely to motivate learners

Materials allow adequate space for learner experimentation and discovery, or inductive learning

Learners' class contributions can have an impact on how the lesson unfolds

Learner Engagement

Criteria for the design of IWB-based Material

www.itilt.eu

The materials include audio, visual and/or tactile input to support teaching and learning

Pages and files are not overloaded with too much information or too many different stimuli which may overwhelm learners

IWB tools (e.g., spotlight) and features (e.g., drag and drop) are used not only to support physical interactivity with the IWB, but also cognitive interactivity with learning content

Tools and Features

Criteria for the design of IWB-based Material

www.itilt.eu

The materials represent an efficient use of teacher time in terms of preparation versus classroom use

Instructions are included which allow other teachers to quickly understand the intended learner level, objectives, and implementation of activities

The level of technological sophistication of the materials is appropriate to the technology available in class (connectivity, equipment, software)

Practical Considerations

Conclusion

www.itilt.eu

Conclusion

www.itilt.eu

Such objective is best accomplished through the examination of pedagogical practice , in close

collaboration with teachers and in this way strengthening the link between theory, research and

practice.

The development of criteria for the design and evaluation of IWB-based materials is seen as an

important element of this overall objective.

The overall aim of the iTILT project is to assist teachers in exploiting the IWB in ways that are consistent with

current models of foreign language teaching methodology.

Thank you for your attention

Do you have any questions?

www.itilt.eu

References

www.itilt.eu

Chapelle, Carol A. (2001), Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cutrim Schmid, Euline (2010). Developing competencies for using the interactive whiteboard to implement communicative language teaching in the English as a Foreign Language classroom. In Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 159-172. Routledge 

Cutrim Schmid, Euline (2009). The Pedagogical Potential of Interactive Whiteboards 2.0. In Thomas, M. (Ed) The Handbook of Research on Web 2.0 and Second Language Learning. IGI Global, USA

Doughty, C. & Long, M.H. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning and technology 7, 50-80

Gray, C, Pilkington, R, Hagger-Vaughan, L and Tomkins, SA. (2007). Integrating ICT into classroom practice in modern foreign language teaching in England: making room for teachers’ voices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 30 (4), 407-429

Jewitt, Carey; Moss, Gemma & Cardini, Alejandra (2007), Pace, Interactivity and Multimodality in Teachers' Design of Texts for Interactive Whiteboards in the Secondary School Classroom. In: Learning, Media and Technology 32 (3), 303-317.University of London, UK

Long, Michael (1996), The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition. In: Ritchie, William C. & Bhatia, Tej K. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. New York: Academic Press.

Miller, D & Glover, D. (2009). Interactive Whiteboards in the web 2.0 classroom. In: Thomas, M. Handbook of research on Second Language Leraning. IGI Global, USA.

Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2011), Teaching English: Task-Supported Language Learning. Paderborn: UTB/Schöningh.

Pica, Teresa (1994), Research on Negotiation: What Does it Reveal about Second-language Learning Conditions, Processes, and Outcomes? In: Language Learning 44 (3), 493-527.

Reinders, Hayo & White, Cynthia (2010), The Theory and Practice of Technology in Materials Development and Task Design. In: Harwood, Nigel (Ed.), English Language Teaching Materials: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 58-80.

Wall, K., Higgins, S. & Smith, H. (2005). The visual helps me understand the complicated things: Pupils’ views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology 36(5), 851-867