Deep learning: Giving (haptic) pronunciation teaching a hand!

A little applause, please! In a 2014 University of Chicago study by Novak and colleagues, reported in UChicago News by Ingmire (Sorry that I can't afford to pay the 6-vente-latte-equivalent to get the original article!), kids who hand-gesture more (of a certain kind) gain a " a deep understanding of the {math} problems they are taught . . . " That did not happen if they, instead, did some kind of "acting" or mime while trying to solve a math problem, however. Furthermore, “Abstract gesture was most effective in encouraging learners to generalize the knowledge they had gained during instruction (italics, mine), action least effective, and concrete gesture somewhere in between . . ."

The protocols of the study as described in the summary look like they were ripped off directly from our haptic-integrated pronunciation teaching pedagogical movement patterns: movements that had some symbolic meaning that connected to the problems at hand. (In HPT the connection is to sounds and sound patterns.)

One of the key issues in understanding how gesture works in supporting learning of any kind is unpacking in more "depth" just how/when the gesture is contributing or directing the process. In earlier posts I have looked at research in haptics that basically positions haptic as the "exploratory" sense. In this study we see how gesture itself--without explicit reference to whether touch--was involved: linking not just to abstract concepts but apparently facilitating later generalization from the event. Haptic anchoring--and I'm certain there was some of that involved--would further intensify the effect of the gestures.

As we get more field tests and research on the basics of haptic pronunciation teaching, we should also feel continually "freer" to generalize from research in several other fields as to the power and efficacy of haptic engagement.

Keep in touch!

Experiential pronunciation learning

Probably the best model for understanding how haptic-integrated pronunciation work should work is Kolb's (1984) "experiential learning cycle." His four stages are (A) concrete experience, (B) reflective observation, (C) abstract conceptualization, and (D) active experimentation. 

Clip art: Clker

Haptic-integrated instruction makes Stage A a much more multiple modality experience The HICP framework from the outset contains strong elements of the visual/cognitive engagement as well, in addition to movement and touch sensations. (Many typical pronunciation teaching techniques begin with Stage B.) While maintaining the "felt sense" of the sound or word, in Stage C, the learner "attaches" its formal properties (its grammatical functions and collocation--where it occurs in conversation, etc.) as it is practiced. In Stage D, as the new or repaired sound is initially used in speaking or attended to in listening, the haptic anchor (the somatic/body feeling of the targeted sound) should be re-experienced or felt, signalling to the learner at a marginally conscious level such that it is noticed and further integrated. 

One frequent, sometimes humorous side effect of EHIEP work is that a new word is so strongly anchored in instruction that learners may get temporary "flash backs" to the training protocols or the classroom or the specific lesson. That, of course, also serves as delightful confirmation that learning is in process! (See earlier post on the "Hexis" of haptic-integrated instruction as well.)