Anchoring with touch in haptic pronunciation teaching

Sometimes it becomes necessary to define what a method or system is NOT.(See Changing Minds list in that regard.)  In a recent discussion on a professional discussion board, EHIEP was characterized as involving excessive "interpersonal touching!" Nothing could be further from the truth. Even a cursory reading of the blog or the website (which the contributor had obviously not had time to get to) would dismiss that idea. In a nutshell (no reference to the earlier comment, of course) touch dramatically increases the efficacy of gesture, among other things. Here is a list of all the touching that goes on in EHIEP:

Learner's

Clip art: Clker

• Hands touch each other, sometimes with one hand holding a baton or pencil.
• Hands touch either the shoulder or fore arm.
• Hands may occasionally touch the chin or voice box.
• Holding a coffee stirrer or tongue depressor, hands may touch lips, teeth or tongue. 

Even self-touch is "touchy" in all cultures, with many different interpretations and constraints. As you can see, the EHIEP pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs) set, where touch occurs on stressed syllables for the most part, is pretty safe stuff. We have spend years figuring out PMPs that are generally appropriate in the cultures we have worked in. So far so good.

If your find a PMP in the Demo list on the website that is potentially objectionable in some culture, PLEASE, let me know! (Will give you a free month's Vimeo.com access as a reward!)

Keep in touch!

Cultural body image in haptic-integrated pronunciation teaching

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

I am often asked if there aren't some students and instructors that feel uncomfortable with moving their hands, arms and upper bodies in anchoring pronunciation. There are occasionally. In previous posts I have looked at factors that may influence a learner's ability to benefit from haptic engagement and the kind of attention management that is involved. There is an extensive research literature related to  personality, body image, self-confidence, self-esteem, culture and gender. For example, this  MA thesis by Baird at Western Kentucky University  or this gender-based study of body image and self-esteem by Cheanneacháin and Quinn at Dublin Business School.  In our work, it is, of course, important to be alert especially to the cultural "gestural constraints and spaces" of our students. Over the years I have "discovered" any number of potential pedagogical movement patterns, especially related to hand movements across the visual field and facial configurations, that violate rules in some culture. In general the current inventory of PMPs has been thoroughly tested on all the main cultural groups that we encounter, but there will always be surprises. When we do encounter a  resistent or reticent learner the underlying cause of the problem seems more often to be related to the fit between learner's satisfaction with some idealized L1 "body culture' and his or her own. In the Cheanneacháin and Quinn study, the typical female-bias in terms of body image dissatisfaction was not evident; in the Baird study, it was the African-American males' perceived or identified fit to that culture's male ideal that affected body satisfaction and identity. Body satisfaction in full-bodied interventions (FBIs--see recent posts) is always a factor, at least initially. Time to hit the gym? (Consider taking a couple of your more recalcitrant students with you!) 

Haptic-integrated pronunciation . . . and "Ro-butts?"

Clipart: Clker

Clipart: Clker

(Caveat Emptor: There is probably a serious point in the following but it may not be all that obvious!)  The character in the  EHIEP logo off to the right, what we affectionately refer to as "EHIEP-bot," embodies a few key features of the system, including controlled, precise movements, the sounds of language in the visual field--and attitude! But up until now there was no plausible analogy or connection between the robot personna and the efficacy of touch in learning. Now there may be. Japanese inventor, Takahashi, has figured out how (or at least where) to do haptic anchoring with robots: on the gluteus maximus! I suppose, were it not for certain cultural constraints--or lack of them for example, here in a Youtube of a German folk dance move -- that might work on us non-robots in doing pronunciation, particularly rhythm, as well. Instead of using the visual field, looking forward, we might focus on pronunciation in retrospect! Actually, doing two of the more rhythm-oriented protocols when seated, the critical butts-in-chairs variable in group dynamics and sales-- does seem to help anchor or "nail down" the pattern being attended to, especially with the right Latin beat in the background. Wow. A whole new area of research and exploration here? This is supposed to be a "whole brain and whole body approach," after all! Ah . . . perhaps we'd better sit on that for the time being!

3-second hugs and pronunciation practice!

Talk about short attention span. Turns out that most everything we do as humans (and the same applies to animals) is processed at some level in 3 second chunks--even hugs. Research in language development and use confirms the same principle: relatively short chunks of speech or text are fundamental to understanding. What is fascinating about that study and others like it is what it may tell us about how to best present and work with language, especially pronunciation. In other words, if we want something to be "absorbed" or anchored well, there is an optimal packaging, rhythm or even visual configuration. There is in fact, as shown by studies of learning and training in various disciplines. As elaborated in several earlier blogposts, HICP is based on the idea of using "pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs)," hands moving through the visual field with one touching the other on prominent syllables. None of the PMPs are 3 seconds in duration but the time interval occupied by one such action, including the "silence" preceding and following certainly fits within that model. A sentence or phrase may be longer than 3-seconds, of course, although for conversational interaction, at moderate speaking pace, that can be pretty demanding for beginning and intermediate learners, but it will typically still consist of two or more PMPs when practiced--reflecting basic conversational rhythm. Just imagine--in some other less interpersonal touch-averse culture and time--a typical "hug-as-haptic-anchor" used in the classroom with the "peak" squeeze occurring on the prominent syllable of a utterance being articulated such as "How wonderful to have interACTed with you in class today, Joe!"

Working with cultural taboos on touch in HICP

Clipart: Clker

In my high school public speaking class (circa 1960), one of the "rules" for giving effective speeches was to NEVER touch your head. You got points off every time you touched your face--for any reason. That lesson stuck . . . (For a general review of the place of the use of touch in communication and therapy cross-culturally, see the piece on the Zur website linked above.) Although it is difficult to find readily accessible research on the web on the place of self-touch in various cultures, there are some surveys that relate general principles, such as this one. Given the incredible range of symbolic meanings attached to the head, face, hands and arms in different cultures, the chances of infringing on a student's L1 paralinguistic taboos in working with directed upper body movement can be substantial. Likewise, touching hands in the visual field can accidentally coincide with a prohibited gesture. That constraint is evident in the development of signing systems for deaf in different cultures, as well. In EHIEP system as it is today, in addition to touching hands, much like sign language, there is some minor facial touching in anchoring, such momentarily placing a finger on the voice box or point on the head to get the felt sense of resonance. Experience with learners from most major cultures have helped us gradually eliminate pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs) that don't work in specific contexts, but instructors may well have to make minor adjustments. For example, recently we were working with a new protocol to establish more upper body flexibility that included lightly tapping both thighs in the course of the exercise. The students reacted with great, embarrassed laughter--quickly informing the instructor that that touching gesture signalled a very personal function in their culture, never to be done in public! There have been more than a dozen such "revelations" in the last few years--such as left hand use--to the point where what we have today generally is accepted by students as at least inoffensive in the classroom context. (Part of the reason for that is that normally in the early stages as the PMPs are being learned, only the instructor can see the students' PMPs, not other students.) I have, on the other hand,  a long list of other techniques that should be taboo in pronunciation teaching . . .