Part A.
1. Video-sharing website: You tube.
1. Video-sharing website: You tube.
The incorporation of such a rapidly growing video-sharing website into second language applications can perhaps be credited to the name of the website in general. Ever since its creation in 2005 You tube has perhaps in many ways, established itself as a ground-breaking website as it promotes the uploading and viewing of video media as well as accessing these from every corner of the globe. In addition, the site can be viewed as the initial web space enabling access to video files without the incorporation of highly-sophisticated software. In the classroom teachers can further expand on their lessons by providing learners with practice and real-life examples of earlier established tasks such as clozed activities focusing on vocabulary components; simple reading passages tagged with audio narratives and brief pronunciation-based clips. Another advantage experienced with You tube is the freedom it provides to view and upload video files.
Teachers and Students may refer to previously uploaded material without registering to the site; those deciding to register can upload an unlimited number of material. A possible obstacle for teachers and institutions might be actual ownership of a personal computer or PC, but apart from that, You tube’s only requirement is the instalment of an Adobe flash player plug-in – the basic software needed to view video material on most personal and laptop computers. As far as teaching methods are concerned, classroom equipped with projectors and internet plus network connection(s), can enable teachers to incorporate video files into their powerpoint presentation, and this is only permissible by html – a tagging system allowing users to “embed” videos onto any other space outside of the you tube website.
Students may also be encouraged to create amateur videos sharing on their learning experiences and embed these onto their personalised blog spots. You tube also offers a commenting application – a feature allowing fellow students and instructors to leave corresponding feedback. Up and coming teachers can also film and upload videos of their teaching and link these to personalised webpages as they can also be used as reference for future employment.
2. Mobile phones in the second language classroom.
The use of the Mobile phone along with contributions of Smart phones such as Apple’s IPhone has been a recent discovery in the role of second language learning and because their incorporation into what is known as Mobile Assisted Language learning is currently undergoing its developing stage, researchers; educators and developers have placed special interest into what can be offered to meet the needs of students in ESL/EFL contexts. The arrival of the iPhone in 2007 has definitely led to a flooding of other smart phones on the market, especially because of their abilities to download and update applications or programs delivering language learning-type activities. Because of their exclusive features such as highly-responsive touchscreens; larger keypad and significant faster, stronger processors these phone are also used in the classroom setting to deliver live lesson streaming and basic skills exercises such as vocabulary and dictionary applications. Educators must also place significant care when considering the use of such devices in their context, especially in the EFL setting. Considerations such as SMS prices and meeting the needs of students lacking mobile phone devices must be taken into account. Though they have come a long way since their introduction in 1981, mobile phones are still unable to match the versatility of Computer Assisted language learning but since most phones are currently equipped with connection capabilities such as USB and Bluetooth technologies, the future looks bright for this approach as Mobile learning and its combination with traditional classroom instruction and CALL applications can definitely deliver a more enjoyable and interactive method for teaching language.
3. Overhead projectors (OHP).
This classic yet reliable method of instruction can never be overlooked and amongst the most common faults, the projector’s electric bulb might be the only obstacle for instructors. In order to deliver the best possible presentation, teachers must accustom to clearing significant moving space for movement as slight adjustment and placement of the projector is critical for the information to be read from most classroom positions. The reflector focus must also be set correctly to obtain the clearest projection. Advancements in technology have also enabled users to produce the clearest transparency and printers are also capable of producing high quality transparencies with the capability of re-producing colour finished transparencies. There are many ways in which teachers can instruct a classroom and each method might be suited to a specific purpose but coming from personal experience, overhead projectors have many times proven as a reliable piece of equipment, especially as software malfunction as experienced in many PowerPoint applications have depended on overheads to complete presentations. Using the overhead projectors to demonstrate a procedure also enables instructors to maintain eye contact with the rest of the class.
Part B – essay: Mobile phones and second language acquisition.
It must be said that the mobile phone’s short yet successful breakthrough of conquering large portions of the telecommunications market during the early part of the 21st century has been one phenomenal achievement. Since its first release in 1981, the mobile phone jumped a marginable step towards gaining significant achievement, especially as they possessed downloadable ringtone abilities as well as being compatible in capturing digital pictures and being digital video equipped. For second language teaching and learning purposes, there appears to be significant generated interest and this can perhaps be credited to the abilities of applications or programs needed to exploit today’s mobile phone potential.
According to Godwin-Jones (2011), educators have placed significant interest on language learning applications, especially since these produce exciting, newer methods for interacting in the classroom. In addition, incorporation of Mobile phones into second learning instruction is not a new phenomenon and amongst the most recent recalls, vocabulary exercises; meaningful and authentic activities such as emailing; and even live-space tutoring had been explored in the classroom as far back as 2006; but due to limitations in device design such as small screen; limited audio playback and even a lacking internet navigation system, immediate improvements were needed in order to make the most of the device’s potential (Godwin-jones, 2011, p.4). A considerable improvement arrived only 12 months after with the arrival of Apple’s iPhone. This type of “Smart” phone, in many ways, can be considered as a small computer compatible of making phone calls and capturing digital images. For simplicity’s sake, the Apple iPhone will be the main smartphone example used throughout this analysis and amongst its improved features: a larger screen; a more powerful processor ideal for smoother video playback, and a responsive touchscreen can benefit usage in educational contexts.
Concentrating on current applications suited for second language learning, teachers working in EFL contexts can provide students owning an iPhone with instruction on flashcard programs; multi-language dictionaries and phrase books. Applications suited for the iPhone have made several enhancements to flashcard activities and amongst the most popular kinds Godwin-Jones (2011) placed emphasis on Anki, a vocabulary software capable of delivering the same results as desktop releases and its current options allows students to engage in self-card editing; audio enhancement and a “reviewing” section. But this new approach of delivering language learning through mobiles is identified as “Mobile learning” and according to Fallahkhair et al. (2007), mobile phones make up an integral part of Mobile Assisted Language Learning or MALL. For this reason the method of instruction is also associated as learning on the move.
The nature of this mobile learning has also lead to vast empirical research and designing of various language learning applications, especially in the EFL context. For example, Kadyte (2003, cited in Fallahkhair et al, 2007) reviewed “the mobile language system” – a program designed in Finland featuring University teachers providing audio and text encrypted English lessons to students living in rural areas of Finland. These students enrolled in an elementary English course received lessons on grammar and vocabulary and as a varied approach to teaching such skills. This application also enabled teachers to track student progress and in addition, learners also took advantage of the voice option in order to exchange experiences and thoughts throughout their course. Such experiences can also be considered as providing a reasonable communicative learning environment for students, especially as many lacked the interaction experienced in the classroom. Mobile learning however, also possesses some limitations and many educators are currently questioning the solely operation of Mobile phones in delivering optimum instruction in EFL contexts.
Arani (2010, p.43) points out that simply relying on Mobile phones to cover what the traditional classroom approach to language learning can do is simply not sufficient in meeting the needs of the learner. Surely advantages of providing students with conversational exposure in and outside the classroom as well as mobility; social interaction; connectivity and, learner autonomy are all valuable assets of Mobile assisted language learning; however, since one of the main obstacles of EFL settings is the lack of exposure to Native English and interaction with Native English speakers, Arani (2010) indicates that a combination of traditional classroom training and Mobile learning can help overcome barriers associated with target language culture. An example of the merging of both teaching methods was explored in Arani’s study of a class of Iranian University students undertaking an English for Medical purposes course. The procedure involved the connection of a mobile phone to a teacher’s laptop as well as the incorporation of a short message service (SMS) application. In this instance, students received revision and few multiple choice exercises in the form of sms and in specified medical terminology. Learners were often advised to use their mobile phones during class and throughout this trial; there were some benefits to be gained from this study, especially from the instructor’s point of view and some of these include: avoidance of lecture repetition as well as generated interest by the students in relation to significant issues. But there also some not so favouable factors associated with this relatively new trend of Mobile learning and whilst many students did possess their personal mobile phone in the above experiment, many, especially in EFL contexts, do not have sufficient funds allowing ownership of a mobile phone let alone Smart phones. Those partaking in the study also voluntarily paid for their own SMSs and when communicating with the instructor about feedback response, many learners admitted to having nothing much to say in return. This form of exchanging short messages with academics had been somewhat successful, especially as the cost for sending messages had also been an issue for most of the class (Arani, 2010, p.44). Nonetheless, many students also recognized a need to further incorporate this type of medium in addition to traditional classroom instruction.
In addition, Godwin-Jones indicated that within ESL/EFL contexts, teachers must be prepared to purchase additional mobile phone units to accommodate for students lacking ownership of mobile devices. Making the most of the Smart phone also requires constant upgrading of applications, as seen in Apple iPhones and though most can be downloaded from Apple’s software upgrading space – applications are normally downloaded at a free cost. There are some complex applications however, that do require an upfront fee exceeding more than $100 AUS dollars (Goodwin-Jones, 2011, p.5). Overall, opportunities to interact through mobile phone devices might appear as an interesting approach for engaging learners with the language learning opportunities that arise from such device(s).
Amongst Mobile phone usage for language learning in the ESL/EFL classroom, learners might benefit from valuable and equally engaging language input. According to Khaziae (2011), instruction tapping on learners’ long-term memory such as digital story telling can be considered as a valuable asset delivered by MALL. In the long run, the material presented earlier in a semester can be easily recalled and applied if latter opportunities do arise. This certainly favours educators and learners alike and of the easily acquired skills, development of vocabulary skills is certainly easily acquired (Khazaie, 2011, p.179). One potential use of Mobile learning is currently being proposed and this requires a merging with television-delivered methodology. Fallahkhair et al. (2007) describes the new concept of the television and mobile phone assisted language learning environment project (TAMALLE) where assistance is given to advanced learners of English in an informal method for learning English: multimedia input.
Here through the use of a smart phone or iPhone, learners can store new language items viewed through an interactive television device. These language items are also expressed whilst watching English television programs and can take the form of digital still images or short videos. Prior to watching such programmes, learners can view short summaries of the new language on their phones and these can be retrieved via the usb connections from the interactive television or iTV. Complex and cultural items might be demonstrated in the form of an SMS and learners also have the option of adding and removing items from this existing database. Of course this is only one of the many up and coming applications that could be used as the mobile phone and on a larger scale, MALL innovations are continuingly used to deliver language learning (Fallahkhair et al. 2007, p.316).
From the above example, however, it can perhaps be accepted that due to mobile learning’s early development, complete instruction experienced from traditional classroom methods cannot be completely replaced and in order to meet the needs of the students a contribution of MALL and current teaching methodologies must be considered.
It must therefore be recognized that the use of the mobile phone, especially as seen with the arrival of apple’s iPhone – has surpassed the expectations of users and educators alike. Since its use is still considered as a new innovation, true contributions to language learning are at the current stage, partly effective. With the assistance of MALL and traditional classroom procedures, mobile phones can definitely assist with online streaming and vocabulary development, especially within the EFL context. Methods for overcoming barriers such as application updates or a lack of devices in the classroom, educators along with the help of developers can definitely contribute to the further development of such medium-also considered as one of the future methodologies for delivering second language learning.
According to Godwin-Jones (2011), educators have placed significant interest on language learning applications, especially since these produce exciting, newer methods for interacting in the classroom. In addition, incorporation of Mobile phones into second learning instruction is not a new phenomenon and amongst the most recent recalls, vocabulary exercises; meaningful and authentic activities such as emailing; and even live-space tutoring had been explored in the classroom as far back as 2006; but due to limitations in device design such as small screen; limited audio playback and even a lacking internet navigation system, immediate improvements were needed in order to make the most of the device’s potential (Godwin-jones, 2011, p.4). A considerable improvement arrived only 12 months after with the arrival of Apple’s iPhone. This type of “Smart” phone, in many ways, can be considered as a small computer compatible of making phone calls and capturing digital images. For simplicity’s sake, the Apple iPhone will be the main smartphone example used throughout this analysis and amongst its improved features: a larger screen; a more powerful processor ideal for smoother video playback, and a responsive touchscreen can benefit usage in educational contexts.
Concentrating on current applications suited for second language learning, teachers working in EFL contexts can provide students owning an iPhone with instruction on flashcard programs; multi-language dictionaries and phrase books. Applications suited for the iPhone have made several enhancements to flashcard activities and amongst the most popular kinds Godwin-Jones (2011) placed emphasis on Anki, a vocabulary software capable of delivering the same results as desktop releases and its current options allows students to engage in self-card editing; audio enhancement and a “reviewing” section. But this new approach of delivering language learning through mobiles is identified as “Mobile learning” and according to Fallahkhair et al. (2007), mobile phones make up an integral part of Mobile Assisted Language Learning or MALL. For this reason the method of instruction is also associated as learning on the move.
The nature of this mobile learning has also lead to vast empirical research and designing of various language learning applications, especially in the EFL context. For example, Kadyte (2003, cited in Fallahkhair et al, 2007) reviewed “the mobile language system” – a program designed in Finland featuring University teachers providing audio and text encrypted English lessons to students living in rural areas of Finland. These students enrolled in an elementary English course received lessons on grammar and vocabulary and as a varied approach to teaching such skills. This application also enabled teachers to track student progress and in addition, learners also took advantage of the voice option in order to exchange experiences and thoughts throughout their course. Such experiences can also be considered as providing a reasonable communicative learning environment for students, especially as many lacked the interaction experienced in the classroom. Mobile learning however, also possesses some limitations and many educators are currently questioning the solely operation of Mobile phones in delivering optimum instruction in EFL contexts.
Arani (2010, p.43) points out that simply relying on Mobile phones to cover what the traditional classroom approach to language learning can do is simply not sufficient in meeting the needs of the learner. Surely advantages of providing students with conversational exposure in and outside the classroom as well as mobility; social interaction; connectivity and, learner autonomy are all valuable assets of Mobile assisted language learning; however, since one of the main obstacles of EFL settings is the lack of exposure to Native English and interaction with Native English speakers, Arani (2010) indicates that a combination of traditional classroom training and Mobile learning can help overcome barriers associated with target language culture. An example of the merging of both teaching methods was explored in Arani’s study of a class of Iranian University students undertaking an English for Medical purposes course. The procedure involved the connection of a mobile phone to a teacher’s laptop as well as the incorporation of a short message service (SMS) application. In this instance, students received revision and few multiple choice exercises in the form of sms and in specified medical terminology. Learners were often advised to use their mobile phones during class and throughout this trial; there were some benefits to be gained from this study, especially from the instructor’s point of view and some of these include: avoidance of lecture repetition as well as generated interest by the students in relation to significant issues. But there also some not so favouable factors associated with this relatively new trend of Mobile learning and whilst many students did possess their personal mobile phone in the above experiment, many, especially in EFL contexts, do not have sufficient funds allowing ownership of a mobile phone let alone Smart phones. Those partaking in the study also voluntarily paid for their own SMSs and when communicating with the instructor about feedback response, many learners admitted to having nothing much to say in return. This form of exchanging short messages with academics had been somewhat successful, especially as the cost for sending messages had also been an issue for most of the class (Arani, 2010, p.44). Nonetheless, many students also recognized a need to further incorporate this type of medium in addition to traditional classroom instruction.
In addition, Godwin-Jones indicated that within ESL/EFL contexts, teachers must be prepared to purchase additional mobile phone units to accommodate for students lacking ownership of mobile devices. Making the most of the Smart phone also requires constant upgrading of applications, as seen in Apple iPhones and though most can be downloaded from Apple’s software upgrading space – applications are normally downloaded at a free cost. There are some complex applications however, that do require an upfront fee exceeding more than $100 AUS dollars (Goodwin-Jones, 2011, p.5). Overall, opportunities to interact through mobile phone devices might appear as an interesting approach for engaging learners with the language learning opportunities that arise from such device(s).
Amongst Mobile phone usage for language learning in the ESL/EFL classroom, learners might benefit from valuable and equally engaging language input. According to Khaziae (2011), instruction tapping on learners’ long-term memory such as digital story telling can be considered as a valuable asset delivered by MALL. In the long run, the material presented earlier in a semester can be easily recalled and applied if latter opportunities do arise. This certainly favours educators and learners alike and of the easily acquired skills, development of vocabulary skills is certainly easily acquired (Khazaie, 2011, p.179). One potential use of Mobile learning is currently being proposed and this requires a merging with television-delivered methodology. Fallahkhair et al. (2007) describes the new concept of the television and mobile phone assisted language learning environment project (TAMALLE) where assistance is given to advanced learners of English in an informal method for learning English: multimedia input.
Here through the use of a smart phone or iPhone, learners can store new language items viewed through an interactive television device. These language items are also expressed whilst watching English television programs and can take the form of digital still images or short videos. Prior to watching such programmes, learners can view short summaries of the new language on their phones and these can be retrieved via the usb connections from the interactive television or iTV. Complex and cultural items might be demonstrated in the form of an SMS and learners also have the option of adding and removing items from this existing database. Of course this is only one of the many up and coming applications that could be used as the mobile phone and on a larger scale, MALL innovations are continuingly used to deliver language learning (Fallahkhair et al. 2007, p.316).
From the above example, however, it can perhaps be accepted that due to mobile learning’s early development, complete instruction experienced from traditional classroom methods cannot be completely replaced and in order to meet the needs of the students a contribution of MALL and current teaching methodologies must be considered.
It must therefore be recognized that the use of the mobile phone, especially as seen with the arrival of apple’s iPhone – has surpassed the expectations of users and educators alike. Since its use is still considered as a new innovation, true contributions to language learning are at the current stage, partly effective. With the assistance of MALL and traditional classroom procedures, mobile phones can definitely assist with online streaming and vocabulary development, especially within the EFL context. Methods for overcoming barriers such as application updates or a lack of devices in the classroom, educators along with the help of developers can definitely contribute to the further development of such medium-also considered as one of the future methodologies for delivering second language learning.
Bibliography
§ Arani, J.A. 2010. Mobile English learning face-to-face: a blended model. Modern English Teacher, 19(1): 43-45.
§ Fallahkhair, S., Griffiths, R., Pemberton, L. 2007. Development of a cross-platform ubiquitous language learning service via mobile phone and interactive television. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(4): 312-325.
§ Godwin-Jones, R. 2011. Emerging Technologies: Mobile Apps for language learning. Language learning & Technology, 15(2): 2-11.
§ Khazaie, S. 2011. Contribution to Vocabulary Learning via Mobiles. English Language Teaching, 4(1): 174.
