Using gesture and movement to avoid "Pop Outs" in (pronunciation) teaching!

I like this study. One of the biggest obstacles in effective teaching (of anything) are sudden distractions, when what should have "popped in" easily in a lesson . . . doesn't . . . because of what just "popped out or up." Interesting piece of research by Klink et al,  on visual distraction--and a potential strategy for dealing with it, summarized by Neurosciencenews.com, Trained Brains Rapidly Suppress Visual Distractions. Title of the original study, published on PNAS: Inversion of pop-out for a distracting feature dimension in monkey visual cortex, (Ignore that term "monkey" in the original there!)

In essence the "subjects" were trained as followed (from the summary):

"The researchers trained monkeys to play a video game in which they searched for a unique shape among multiple items, while a uniquely colored item tried to distract them. As soon as the monkeys found the unique shape, they made an eye movement to it to indicate their choice. After some training, monkeys became very good at this game and almost never made eye movements to the distractor."

So what is a potential application of that "discovery" in teaching? What visual distractions are your students subject to in the classroom? On a task by task basis, how do you maintain student attention to the focus of the activity? 

For example, in haptic pronunciation teaching, instructor and students do a great deal of repeating words, phrases, sentences and dialogues together (not repeating after) while using speech-synchronized gestures continuously. In this choreographed technique, what we call "movement, tone and touch techniques" (MT3s) it is essential that instructor and student gesturing is constantly synchronized, throughout. You can "SEE" just how disruptive a visual distraction in the room in the visual fields of students could be. 

On the flip side, however, you can also "SEE" how MT3 training, itself--or even typical gesture use in teaching or communication, whether designed or impromptu, can, in principle, serve to enhance general visual attention in the classroom. 

How free of distraction or immune to it is the visual field in your classroom? Can you manage it better, more "movingly?" 

Source: Klink, P., Teeuwen, R., Lorteije, J. and P. Roelfsema. (2023). Inversion of pop-out for a distracting feature dimension in monkey visual cortex. PNAS February 22, 2023  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2210839120

Why exact repetition may be exactly . . .wrong (in pronunciation teaching and elsewhere)

This study is potentially something of a game changer, at least conceptually. A little background. In KINETIK work we make extensive use of gesture synchronized speech. Extensive. Something we "learned" early on was that 

• In modeling the gestures and getting learners to move along with us it was apparently critical to at least some learners that you try to stay in the same "track" in the visual field every time you use it in instruction. 
• If you didn't, some students (possibly as much as 5%) would become disoriented, unable to synchronize their body movements with the model. Some even experienced some "motion sickness." 
•  In effect, the variability in the position in the visual field could be disconcerting and disruptive. 

Turns out, we may have been actually approaching the problem from the wrong direction, that is doing our best to be as consistent in the patterns of the gestures we use as possible  . .  . was actually counterproductive!  

New research by Manenti, et al, Variability in training unlocks generalization in visual perceptual learning through invariant representations, summarized by NeuroscienceNews.com, demonstrated that variability in the repeated application in the visual field/tract may actually enhance learning of the pattern, itself. It does that in part, apparently, by presenting the pattern in varying contexts, perhaps giving it potentially wider applicability. 

Excerpt from the (exceptional) study: 

• . . . four groups of subjects were trained to detect small differences in the orientation of a line pattern. The relevant task was to detect the clockwise or counterclockwise slope of the lines. For each of two groups, the number of lines was changed during the experiment. This was the irrelevant stimulus.
• The subjects were still able to recognize the differences in the orientation of the line pattern, even when the number of lines was changed. They were able to perform the task even when they were shown entirely new line patterns or a new position on the screen that had not appeared during training. Thus, the increase in variability did not cause the learning process to deteriorate, but rather to generalize and even improve learning performance.
•  “We found that varying the number of lines during training led to better generalization of the actual task performance,”

Undoubtedly, that the same principle applies to repetition of sounds or words in instruction--and even formulations of ideas and concepts as well. (There is substantial research on the contribution of paraphrase training in writing instruction, for example.) 

The insights from this study are certainly worth repeating!

Source: 

Manenti, G., Dizaji, A.,Schwiedrzik, C. 
“Variability in training unlocks generalization in visual perceptual learning through invariant representations” in BioRxiv doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.26.505408

Do-it-(almost by and with)-yourself: English SELF-TALK Pronunciation Improvement (ESPI)

How's your pronunciation and diction when you talk (out loud) to yourself? Probably not great, right? Well, how about using that venue/menu to help improve a learner's general English pronunciation? We are testing a new KINETIK course, English SELF-TALK Pronunciation Improvement (ESPI), that has in the past shown real promise in (also) improving the pronunciation of talk with other people as well! Wow . .  . what a concept, eh!

ESPI is basically, an application of the Lessac system as presented in Lessac's 1997 book, The use and training of the human voice: A bio-dynamic approach to vocal life

Note: In that (1997) edition there is a brilliant, multi-step roadmap for the individual who wants to or must work on their own. Today's Lessac practitioners may or may not still work with that (slightly solipsistic) framework. Although the 1997 version is focused on giving native speakers of English, not nonnatives, a "healthy vocal life," derived from Lessac's career in voice training, it is easily adaptable by an experienced English language instructor. I have been using it, in some form, for about 40 years, in fact. 

Research on how learners learn has always pointed to at least the prominence of learners practicing "out loud," depending on modality preferences. Why not work with that more systematically? Good idea.

The course is designed especially for a specific niche. Those who:

• Can benefit from lots of practice speaking (but not necessarily conversing with somebody else)
• Have reasonably good aural comprehension for the demands of their personal context
• Lack confidence to use what they know, what they can say if they have the time and occasion.
• Have issues with rhythm, stress and intonation 
• Have a few, high functional load consonants (which they can effectively deal with by being referred to free sources on the web for personal practice, such as Accent Tutor.)

Notice in the blogpost title is the word, almost . .. The basic course includes just a set of videos and book. There is an option available for the student or a class of students to get periodic feedback (from me or one of my grad students) on their progress. That feedback could also be provided by their instructor, assuming that the instructor has done the course along with the students. 

It will be available to the public by next month, at the TESOL Convention in Portland in March. See you there! 

Lessac, A. (1997). The use and training of the human voice: A bio-dynamic approach to vocal life (3rd ed).. New York: Drama Book Specialists.