The feeling of how it happens: haptic cognition in (pronunciation) teaching

Am often asked the question as to how "haptic" (movement+touch) can enhance teaching, especially pronunciation teaching. A neat new study by Shaikh, Magana, Neri, Escobar-Castillejos, Noguez and Benes, Undergraduate students’ conceptual interpretation and perceptions of haptic-enabled learning experiences, is "instructive". Specifically, the study,

 " . . . explores the potential of haptic technologies in supporting conceptual understanding of difficult concepts in science, specifically concepts related to electricity and magnetism."

Now aside from the fact that work with (haptic) pronunciation teaching should certainly feel at times both "electric and magnetic", the research illustrates how haptic technology, in this case a joy-stick-like device, can help students more effectively figure out some basic, fundamental concepts. In essence, the students were able to "feel" the effect of current changes and magnetic attraction as various forces and variables were explored. The response from students to the experience was very positive, especially in terms of affirmation of understanding the key ideas involved.

The real importance of the study, however, is that haptic engagement is not seen as simply "reinforcing" something taught visually or auditorily. It is basic to the pedagogical process. In other words, experiencing the effect of electricity and magnetic attraction as the concepts are presented results in (what appears to be) a more effective and efficient lesson. It is experiential learning at its best, where what is acquired is more fully integrated cognition, where the physical "input" is critical to understanding, or may, in fact, precede more "frontal" conscious analysis and access to memory. (Reminiscent, of course, of Damasio's 2000 book: The feeling of how it happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Required reading!)

An analogous process is evident in haptic pronunciation instruction or any approach that systematically uses gesture or rich body awareness. The key is for that awareness, of movement and vibration or resonance, to at critical junctures PRECEDE explanation, modeling, reflection and analysis, not simply to accompany speech or visual display. (Train the body first! - Lessac)

We are doing a workshop in May that will deal with discourse intonation and orientation (the phonological processes that span sentence and conversational turn boundaries). We'll be training participants in a number of pedagogical gestures that later will accompany the speech in that bridging. To see what some of those used for expressiveness look (and feel) like, go here!

KIT






http://educationaltechnologyjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41239-017-0053-2

Killing pronunciation 7: Talking learners (and instructors) out of pronunciation change

Credit: Anna Shaw

How do you persuade students to work on their pronunciation--or sell them on it, especially pronunciation-related homework?  If you are using more "distal senses" such as sight and/or sound, according to a new study by Elder, Schlosser, Poor, Xu of Brigham Young University, summarized by Science Daily, you may not have the right approach. If, on the other "hand", your method evokes a more "proximal" sense experience (such as movement, touch and/or taste), you are probably on the right track. (I'm sure you can see where this is headed!)

The BYU study dealt with the impact of advertising on what type of pitch and/sensory imagery seems to get you to make a commitment to buy sooner, rather than later. The actual journal title, So Close I Can Almost Sense It: The Interplay between Sensory Imagery and Psychological Distance, describes the research well. What they found, not surprisingly, is that imagery connecting to or evoking a "felt" somatic response from the body, in effect, draws you in faster, and more effectively.

That does not mean that you DO something physical, only that the imagery on a screen in this case, may get the customer or learner's brain to respond AS IF actual touch or taste was involved, generating a very real feeling or taste-related memory. That mirroring effect, in part entertained by "mirror neurons" in the brain, is well established in brain research. To the brain under most circumstances the distinction between how we feel when we observe and do can be minimal. Turns out our metaphors are more than metaphors, in other words.

Some of the variability here may have to do with our personal instructional style in bringing learners' attention to, in this case, what they need to do outside of class. How do you do that? A list somewhere in the syllabus? An oral announcement? Something written on the board? A brief oral run through of what is to be done? A brief rehearsal w/students of what is to be done? What is very important here is not the actual classroom activity but the imagery that it evokes. And the key to that is what prior schema the classroom event is linking back to--and how, in the moment, it is delivered and experienced.

Pronunciation instruction done right is both an exceedingly physical and meta-cognitive process. What haptic work attempts to do is achieve that balance consistently. There are other ways to do that, of course, but most student textbooks, for example, either don't or can't, in part because the activities are presented and taught in a purely linear fashion. Haptic is ALWAYS simultaneous--sound, movement, and cognition (haptic) engagement, in effect, communicating more intentionally with learners in pronunciation change in and with somatic (body-based) imagery.

Still not sold? Try rereading the blog in the hot tub or on an exercise ball . . .

Full citation from ScienceDaily.com:
Brigham Young University. (2017, June 28). Now or later: How taste and sound affect when you buy: The way ads play on our senses influences the timing of our purchases. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 23, 2017 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/06/170628095858.htm

Killing pronunciation 3: Grit

Clker.com

To the "gritty" student, there can be nothing more frustrating than pointless, unproductive pronunciation homework--or even worse, none at all.

If you are a follower of this blog, you know I am a big fan of James Clear. If you need to change something--most anything--and you still don't need a coach or therapist to help get you there, his website is worth a visit. His latest post on "building mental toughness" linked to an earlier piece: Grit: a complete guide on being mentally tough. (Embedded in that post is a TED talk by Duckworth, on "grit" which you should also watch if you haven't already.)

Grit is defined in a number of ways but, basically, it means having the strength of character to persevere to ones goals. 

Grit is a key variable in success in pronunciation, I'm sure, although I have been unable to find a good study to verify that. My own experience with accent reduction clients is that to fix their accent  they need just two thing: grit and money (and time, of course.)

Where that especially comes into play is in homework--my current area of research in preparation for a panel at the 2017 TESOL Convention later this month. If you have a student who has real grit, in terms of pronunciation homework, can you provide him or her with sufficient direction as to what to work on and practice outside of class? I have been asking that question repeatedly of late and the overwhelming response from instructors is . . . No!

In fact some instructors have replied that monitored and required practice outside of class, such as drill and repetition and oral reading is probably not worth the effort. And even if it is, "how am I to know whether it was done well or productively?"

There you have it. One of Clear's key principles, based on current research, is that in developing grit the learner must NOT rely on motivation but on habit, on discipline. But for a student to do that, there must be clear guidance and assignments.

How do your homework assignments and guidance to your students on how to improve their pronunciation stack up with that criteria? Probably not all that well, right? This is big, actually. We are just coming out of a period where focus on motivation and meta-cognition (thought and planning about pronunciation change) have been enormously influential.

One of Clear's other principles in developing it is to: Build grit with small physical wins. There are any number of ways to do that, of course, but it takes a consistent, coherent method at least. In pronunciation work, that is or should be a "gimme!"

EHIEP is based on the idea that embodied (gesture-based) homework/practice is key. The success of the system relies on establishing cognitive schema (haptic cognition) such that subsequent in class or incidental learning or correction of pronunciation will happen efficiently, as the learn relates back to the model or rule learned earlier. (That is one of the most important findings in research on incidental correction in class of pronunciation.) In general, homework is carefully prescribed to help create such schema and students need to "homework" at least 3 times a week for 30 minutes to facilitate that, preferably every day.

It takes "true grit" to do that -- and manage it. If that is not part of your current method and "growth mindset" (Dweck, 2016), "Clear" up your current pedagogical habits and grit back to us!

(New) Haptic cognition-based pronunciation teaching workshop at 2016 TESL Ontario Conference

If you are coming to the 2016 TESL Ontario Conference later this month (November 24 and 25 in Toronto) please join us for the Haptic Pronunciation Teaching Workshop, on Thursday, 3:45 to 4:45. This will introduce the new "haptic cognition" framework for (amazingly) more efficient and integrated pronunciation modeling and correction that we have been developing for the last year or so. (See previous post on the applicability of a haptic cognition-based  model to pronunciation teaching in general.)

HaPT-E, v4.0

Haptic cognition defined: 

• The felt sense of pronunciation change (Gendlin, 1996) – somatic (body) awareness and conscious, meta-cognitive processing 
• Change activated consciously and initially through body movement pattern use (Lessac, 1967) 
• Haptic (movement+touch) uniting, integrating and “prioritizing” of modalities in anchoring and recall (Minogue, 2006)

Modalities of the model:

• Meta-cognitive (rules, schemas, explanations, conscious association of sound or form to other sounds or forms)
• Auditory (sound patterns presented or recalled) 
• Haptic
• Kinesthetic (movement patterns experienced/performed or mirrored by the body, gesture, motion patterns)
•  Cutaneous (differential skin touch: pressure, texture, temperature)
• Vocal resonance (vibrations throughout upper body, neck and head)
• Visual (visual schema presented or recalled: graphemes, charts, colors, modeling, demonstrations) 

 General instructional principles:

• Get to "haptic" as soon as possible in modeling and correcting.
• Use precise pedagogical movements patterns (PMPs), including tracking and speed in the visual field.
• Insure as much cutaneous anchoring as possible.
• Go “light” on visual; avoid overly “gripping” visual schema during haptic engagement.
• Use as much vocal resonance as possible.
• Repeat as few times as possible.
• Insure that homework/follow up is feasible, clear—and done (including post hoc reporting of work, results and incidental/related learnings).
• Use haptic PMPs first in correction/recall prompting, before providing oral, spoken model.

The elaborated, audio-embedded Powerpoint from the workshop will be available later this month.

KIT

The "myth-ing" link in (pronunciation) teaching: Haptic cognition

Nice piece from The Guardian Teacher Network, Four neuro-myths still prevalent in schools, debunked, by Bradley Bush (@Inner_Drive). Now granted, The Guardian is not your average  refereed, first-line journal, but the sources and research cited in the readable piece are credible. Just in case you need a little more information to help your colleague finally abandon any of them, check it out. The four myths are:

Haptic Wolverine, 2016

• Learning styles are important in teaching and instruction
• We use just 10% of our brains.
• Right vs left brain is a relevant distinction in understanding learning and designing instruction
• Playing "brain" games makes you smarter and should have a more prominent place in instruction

So, if those popular "teacher cognitions" are lacking in empirical support, especially the first and third, how should that affect design of instruction? (The fact that the second and fourth just seem so "right" at times when in the classroom, notwithstanding!)

One helpful framework, cited by Bush (and this blog earlier) is Goswami (2008), which argues that learners learn best, in general, when taught using a  multi-sensory, multiple-modality approach. From that perspective, for example, when teaching a sound or process or vocabulary word, as many senses as possible must be brought to the party, either simultaneously or in close proximity:

• Auditory (sound)
• Visual (imagery)
• Kinesthetic (muscle movement and memory)
• Tactile/cutaneous (surface skin touch)
• General (somatic) sensation of vocal resonance throughout the head and upper body. 
• In addition, the potential impact of that is conditioned by the degree of meta-cognitive engagement (conscious awareness on the part of the learner of all that sensory input, plus existing schemas, such as rules, experience and connections to related sounds and language bits and processes). 

How to best do that consistently is the question. The concept of "haptic cognition" (Gentaz and Rossetti, in press) suggests why haptic awareness can function to bring together all those modalities in learning. From the conclusion:

"Taken together, this suggests that the links between perception and cognition may depend on the perceptual modality: visual perception is discontinuous with cognition whereas haptic perception is continuous with cognition." (Emphasis, mine.)

In other words, visual schema, such as charts, colors and even text itself, may actually work against integration of sound, resonance, movement and meaning in pronunciation teaching. Research from a number of fields has established the potentially problematic nature of visual modality overriding auditory, in effect disconnecting sound from meaning. On the contrary, the haptic modality generally serves to unite sensory input, connecting more readily with cognition based in sound, resonance and meaning. 

Another myth then, that of visual explanatory schemas (images and text) being a good approach in pronunciation teaching in textbooks and media--as opposed to active experience of sound, movement and awareness of resonance, plus some visual support, needs serious reexamination. What Gentaz and Rossetti are asserting (or confirming) is that visual imagery may not always effectively contribute to conscious, critical, cognitive integration and awareness in learning--the ultimate goal of all media advertising!

In other words, pronunciation instruction should be centered more on comprehensive haptic cognition. If you are not sure just how that happens . . . ask your local haptician!

(Coincidentally, the name of our company is: Acton Multiple-Modality Pronunciation Instruction Systems, AMPISys, inc.!)