Moving learners to be more positive and work together in (pronunciation) teaching: person or process?

One typical reason often given for not teaching pronunciation has to be something like: I don't feel comfortable having to be so outgoing and interpersonally "invasive" in messing with students' speech. Granted, many (if not near all) of the strongest proponents of pronunciation teaching, mea culpa, tend to be pretty far down the "extrovert" rabbit hole. In more traditional approaches to teaching you almost had to be to drive drill and other mindless practices with enthusiasm, motivation students to stay with it.  Being around someone who is excessively positive and extroverted can also get real annoying, eh!

Turns out, according to a non-significant study by Qui and Ho of Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, that all that extroverted talk and language may not really be contributing much to the process--a proposition that I, being an extrovert, endorse whole heartedly, enthusiastically! (but see below.) Based on a meta-analysis of about three dozen studies of extrovert behavior, they almost discovered that extroverts tend to use more "positive emotion words" and "social process words" than the rest of you. Taken from the Neuroscience News summary: 

"Positive emotion words are defined by psychologists – using text analysis tools – as words that describe a pleasant emotional state, such as ‘love’, ‘happy’, or ‘blessed’, or that indicate positivity or optimism, such as ‘beautiful’ or ‘nice’. Social process words include words containing personal pronouns except ‘I’, and words showing social intentions, such as ‘meet’, ‘share’ and ‘talk’."

Then, their conclusion: "Our results suggest that positive emotion words and social process words are linguistic correlates of extroversion, but they are small in magnitude." 

Really? By "small in magnitude" they mean their findings did not reach an r of 0.05 (0.069 and 0.077.) Normally, I don't report "near misses" like that, but since I like the conclusion, let us run with it a bit. What it "tells" me, is that what many see as the secret to setting up the most effective learning "atmosphere" in class, the use of "pedagogically correct" language that is generally positive, "grouply" discourse, does not depend on being personally . . . extroverted. So what does motivate (move) your students? You, your pedagogy or both? And how does that interaction really function in class? 

We discovered early on that uncontrolled enthusiasm, as great as it is for getting everybody on board, is near toxic in working with gesture, easily letting things get out "hand" or of control or focus--and very likely pronunciation, in general. In part, the reason for that being that the learner's attention can go almost anywhere in the visual field around them, affecting what is remembered from the session, compromising attention to sound, for example. Research (and common sense) has long established that both positive excitement and negative stress can wear you out equally, take you off your game. 

It's certainly about moving . . . moving learners to learn efficiently, metaphorically and physically. Try this: Evaluate your next three or four in-class or on Zoom lessons just in terms of relative quantity and quality of body movement, by both you and the class--a fundamental principle of haptic pronunciation teaching. 

One great way to do that is to record the session and then review it with the sound off. (If you are interested, let me know in the comments section and I'll share with you a rubric for that that we have developed for teacher training.) That will seriously impact/enhance your awareness and work on screen. Guaranteed. 

Achieving intentional, appropriate kinaesthetic engagement is critical in teaching with systematic gesture, as in HaPT. And it can't help but make you and students look and sound better as well! 

------

Bottom line: Being an extrovert should NOT be especially advantageous in pronunciation teaching, properly understood . . . like in the new (EXCITING!) iteration of haptic pronunciation teaching (HaPT.) I'm sure you saw that coming! Acton Haptic Pronunciation: Content Complement System (AHP:CCS) official roll out date is now 2/15/21. Check out previous blogpost for more info on that. ,

Original source:
“A meta-analysis of linguistic markers of extraversion: Positive emotion and social process words” by Jiayu Chen Lin Qiu, Moon-Ho Ringo Ho. Journal of Research in Personality

Good, or at least less "distracting" distraction in (pronunciation) teaching

Now here is some "different" research from the Journal of Food Science Education and the journal, Perception, that you may have missed (summarized by Science Daily). The first, by Schmidt of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, titled: Distracted learning: Big problem and golden opportunity; the second, by Hipp, Olsen and Gerhardstein, Mind-Craft: Exploring the Effect of Digital Visual Experience on Changes to Orientation Sensitivity in Visual Contour Perception.

In pronunciation teaching, and especially so in haptic work, distraction can be lethal, depending on which modality it is coming through! Dealing with it is always high priority. We manage distraction and attention several ways, but principally with gesture, touch and management of the visual field. 

Schmidt's report reviews research on sources of potential distraction evident in the multitasking world of today and then considers a number of potentially effective measures for addressing them. Hibb et al examine an intriguing phenomena where the brain/eyes are seen adapting in surprising ways to the visual digital milieu, especially shifting among different environments that we are engaged in today. Taken together, the two studies seem to suggest that, probably for a number of reasons, distraction is emerging as a much more complex and variable phenomenon in the experience of those who have "grown up" in that milieu than we often assume. 

In other words, the impact of disruptive elements on learning and teaching-- and consequently the potential effectiveness of mediation procedures, needs to be reconsidered. Listed below, paraphrased and reorganized into three categories, are the set of recommendations from Schmidt's study: 

Pre-Conditions:

• Removing extraneous devices from workspaces
• Incorporating movement into classroom activities
• Promoting and implementing active learning
• Using a work-reward system

Classroom protocols: 

• Alternating intensive periods of focused work with preplanned bursts of pleasure
• Developing course content on topics of students' choosing 
• Having them teach it to other students

Cognitive and meta-cognitive:

• Encouraging development of internal locus of control
• Fostering a work-hard, play-hard mindset
• Encouraging setting of goals related to academic performance 

Nothing there, in itself, surprising, of course, but taken together or reconsiderd as a fuller set of strategies that may, in combination, work to moderate distraction--as a more primary/preliminary target of instruction with today's learners, with their evolving attentional systems, is worth "attending to!" 

Bottom line: The impact of both distraction and of those mediation strategies on "native media-ites," those who have grown up in computer mediated experience (and devices), probably those now in their mid to late 20s or somewhat earlier, may be evolving or emerging in new forms. In other words, multitasking for those learners is apparently becoming experientially and phenomenologically different than it is to earlier "pre-media" generations: they seem to be adapting in ways such that they can be both less . . .  distracted and, consequently, more amenable to pedagogical mediation. 

In a subsequent post, I'll continue this thread exploring specific mediations that apply to (haptic) pronunciation teaching. 

Sources: 

Shelly J. Schmidt. Distracted learning: Big problem and golden opportunity. Journal of Food Science Education, 2020; 19 (4): 278 DOI: 10.1111/1541-4329.12206

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, News Bureau. (2020, October 14). Distracted learning a big problem, golden opportunity for educators, students. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 17, 2020 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201014140932.htm

D. Hipp, S. Olsen, P. Gerhardstein. Mind-Craft: Exploring the Effect of Digital Visual Experience on Changes to Orientation Sensitivity in Visual Contour Perception. Perception, 2020; 030100662095098 DOI: 10.1177/0301006620950989

Binghamton University. (2020, September 30). Screen time can change visual perception -- and that's not necessarily bad. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 17, 2020 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/09/200930144422.htm

Pronunciation work driving you crazy? Could be "pronunciosis"!

Clker.com

Tigger warning*: This post is more "pro-fun" than profound . . . (What I like to refer to as a 3-beet piece!)

The usual negative rap on pronunciation teaching is that it is either boring/meaningless and/or filled with too many “phonetic” words. Neuroscience sympathizes . . . even inspiring me to create a great  new term: pronunciosis, real (mostly justifiable) dislike for pronunciation and its teaching.

In a catchy summary of the research by Rezaii, Walker and Wolff from Emory University, in what is becoming my go-to source for wacky neuroscience, Neurosciencenews.com, entitled, "The whisper of schizophrenia: Machine learning finds ‘sound’ words predict psychosis", we get this:

"Their results show that automated analysis of the two language variables — more frequent use of words associated with sound and speaking with low semantic density, or vagueness — can predict whether an at-risk person will later develop psychosis with 93 percent accuracy."

Does that not "sound" like your typical pronunciation class or lecture on phonetics? Of course what they are studying is the speech of clinically identified subjects with some degree of psychosis already, not classes. Now the actual abstract of the research says it a little differently:

"The results revealed that conversion to psychosis is signaled by low semantic density and talk about voices and sounds." 

Notice that the research focuses on "talk about" voices and sounds, not simply use of such features and apparently you need both variables to get some predictive value. (It is probably relevant that their baseline came from Reddit online chat data as well!!!) That does sound more pedagogical! Any student that I have who begins talking about "voices" they are hearing gets referred to professional help. If it is just sounds, on the other hand, I can help them. 

It is also relevant that the analysis is done using AI (artificial intelligence) systems. Now not to be overly Luddite-ly here, but this, from the summary, is a little spooky: 

"The results point to a larger project in which automated analyses of language are used to forecast a broad range of mental disorders well in advance of their emergence"

This just cries out for an "automated analysis" of pronunciation classes which (predictably) produce all kinds of bizarre speech patterns later as well, even "pronunciosis"? 

Watch your language, eh . . . 

*Tigger warning is used on this blog to refer to posts that contain some playful element reminiscent of the tiger, Tigger, in the classic Winnie the Pooh cartoon series.

Gesture the cause of pronunciation problems?

That's right! You should try it! Here's why . . .

 Referring to ways in which learners' L1s differs from their L2s is generally not a priority in pronunciation teaching--or in general language instruction. In some contexts, however, especially EFL-like courses where phonetics or translation serve as the point of departure, the structure of the L1 may be among the early topics addressed. For a number of reasons, nonetheless, many contemporary methodologists avoid it. A quick, informal poll among colleagues recently came up with a nice range of opinion:

"Why confuse things?"

"Best avoided."

"Not that confident, myself."

"May cause even more interference."     

That last comment is interesting. Clearly, if not done carefully or well, that could be the case. So, how might you "do that well?" (If you have some suggestions in that regard, in addition to the one I am about to recommend, please post a comment w/it!)

In haptic pronunciation teaching, we often and very effectively lead learners across "gestural bridges" between L1 and L2 phonological elements, such as individual sounds (vowels and consonants), rhythm patterns and tone movement (intonation). We do that by having learners mirror us or a video  as they perform "pedagogical movement patterns" (PMPs),  gestures synchronized speaking, that represent both the L1 and L2 sounds or sound patterns--and often the relative distance between them--in the visual space in front of the learner. 

Recently published research by Carlson, Jacobs, Perry and Church in Gesture, The effect of gestured instruction on the learning of physical causality problems, suggests why the "contrastive haptic PMP approach" may work. (Now granted, the analogy between video instruction on how gears work and the relationship between how an L1 sound is physically articulated and that of its L2 near-equivalent--that may cause serious interference or negative transfer--may be something of a stretch! But stick with me here!)

In the study, subjects either viewed a video where the instructor (a) explained the process without gesturing or (b) the "speech plus gesture" protocol.  Their conclusion: 

"Results showed that . . .  instruction was . . .  significantly more effective when gesture was added. These findings shed light on the role of gesture input in adult learning and carry implications for how gesture may be utilized in asynchronous instruction with adults."

What the conclusion misses, but is unpacked in the article, is the potential importance of the nature of the concept being taught in the first place, as it says in the title: physical causality, meaning that the contact and motion of one  gear as it affected the state and movement of the other gear. In other words, the impact of the gestural protocol was so pronounced, in part, because it was portraying and embodying a physical process.

Studies of the connection of gesture to more abstract, far less embodied concepts such as interpretation of emotion or intent are much less consistent, understandably. Pronunciation of a language is, on the other hand, an essentially physical, somatic process. Hence, using gesture (and touch) to anchor it makes perfect sense. 

Just thought I'd point that out . .

Haptic pronunciation teaching workshop at TESOL 2015 in Toronto!

For the 8th year in row, a haptic pronunciation teaching workshop has been accepted for presentation at the TESOL conference in Toronto, March 25th ~ 28th, 2015. Below is the program summary and excerpts from the proposal. We'll also have a "gathering of hapticians" at the conference, as usual. Join us! 

Program summary

This workshop introduces a set of six haptic (movement + touch)-based techniques for presenting and correcting English L2 pronunciation, applicable for intermediate English language learners and above. Guided by research on kinaesthetic approaches to L2 pronunciation instruction, the presenters train participants to use the instructional techniques in their classrooms.
------------------------------------------------------------
Participants learn a multiple-modality system, designed to be used throughout the curriculum—not just in stand-alone pronunciation classes. The workshop is predominantly experiential, where a set of six haptic techniques are introduced and practiced in break-out micro-teaching sessions. The sections of the workshop are:

A. Principles of haptic integration
B. Haptic anchoring vowels and word stress
C. Haptic anchoring phrasal stress and rhythm
D. Haptic anchoring of basic intonation contours
E. Haptic anchoring of general fluency

This haptic-based system for pronunciation instruction was formed under the premise that, while our general understanding of L2 phonological development has increased substantially, most methodologists would concur that preparing a new EFL/ESL instructor adequately for pronunciation work remains a challenge. The reason for this, in part, is that there is currently no easily accessible, comprehensive model that integrates pronunciation instruction in general speaking and listening instruction. 

The perspective of this workshop is that systematic use of body movement, especially using haptic anchoring (touch tied to pedagogical movement and gesture) is essential to that synthesis. The techniques presented are designed to be integrated into either general or specific pronunciation instruction whenever use of a problematic sound pattern occurs.

The theoretical basis of this approach is derived principally from four sources: (a) the voice and stage movement work of Lessac (Lesssac,1967), (b) Embodiment theory (Holme, 2012) as applied to TESOL, (c) current neuro-physiological research on the role of movement and touch in learning in general (Minogue & Jones, 2006) and of sound systems in particular (Acton, 2012), and (d) kinaesthetic approaches to L2 pronunciation instruction (e.g., Acton 1984).

By the conclusion of the workshop, participants will be able to use the haptic pronunciation integration techniques in their classrooms.

AHEPS v3.0 "Bees and Butterflies"
(Serious fun!)
The best, fastest, most moving
 and touching way to teach,
learn and correct English pronunciation!

TESOL 2015 Haptic Pronunciation Teaching Proposals!!!

Proposals are due by the first of June. Here is the list of tentative topics that we are considering for TESOL 2015 in Toronto:

• Reports from the classroom: Haptic pronunciation teaching (academic sessions)
• Research project on haptic-assisted fluency (paper)
• Haptic-assisted Rhythm instruction (Butterfly and Fight club) workshop
• Haptic phonetics (anchoring L1s in addition of L2s) demonstration
• Haptic techniques for consonant repair (workshop)
• (Haptic-enhanced) Embodied confidence (Research paper)
• Haptically anchoring word stress rules and word stress (workshop)
• Linking linking with fluency: haptic circles (mini-workshop)
• Basics of haptic-integrated pronunciation teaching (1/2 day pre or post convention ticketed session)
• From intonation to expressiveness: dramatic, haptic bridges for Non-native speakers
• Haptic and kinaesthetic listening (Research paper)
• On the spot, impromptu haptic pronunciation modelling, feedback and correction (workshop or research paper)
• Haptic anchoring of Academic Word List vocabulary (demonstration or workshop)
• Sentence diagramming with movement and touch (I did a demo of this that went great!)
• Songs that touch on pronunciation: haptic anchoring of rhyme and reason (workshop)
• Teaching pronunciation to young children (workshop)
• Embodied conversational discourse markers (demonstration)
• Phonics "a la haptique!" (demonstration or workshop)
• Haptic Handwriting for L2 English learners (demonstration)
• Embodied conversational listening: haptic anchoring of attending skills
• Haptic self-monitoring

See anything you like? Even if the topic is of interest to you, I could at least connect you up with somebody who is interested in it or does it already.

Keep in touch!

Time to change your (pronunciation) teaching system?

Yes. Well . . . maybe. Systems change theory as it relates to pronunciation teaching and body-based training methods has always intrigued me. (See several previous posts on that and related topics.) One of the delights (and basics) of graduate instruction is helping practitioners articulate explicit models of how they, themselves, do things--before they encounter or are forced to work with new frameworks.

Not surprisingly, most who have a coherent method that they have either developed or adopted/adapted and have substantial experience using it in the classroom--prove to be reasonably good at evaluating, modifying and/or dumping it. (Definition of coherent method: internally consistent and held together by a simple, transparent theory of some kind.)

Photo credit: Mens Fitness.com

There was recently a nice article posted on the Men's Health website by Dan John, a popular trainer. I have not linked to that piece directly because of "adjacent" material in the margins that might be distracting . . . but it ends with this note: "Dive into a new program every so often and immerse yourself in it. Then, after you finish it, go ahead and critique it. Mine the gems, and then adapt and adopt them into your normal training. But, first, finish what you started." You can, by the way, find  Dan's awesome kettlebell program --which I am dying to try in its entirety, of course, sometime--here!)

Bottom here. Pronunciation teaching is in a very important sense a "physical (as well as cognitive) practice." Haptic pronunciation teaching balances brain and body engagement better than most anything else around. If you are happy with your pronunciation method now--and can fairly assess its results based on experiencing it as a "coherent system," . . . good! If not, try out AH-EPS v2.0 from Dan's experiential perspective: Do it, then critique it. It'll at least ring your "kettlebell." Promise. (Email me at actonhaptic@gmail.com if you want more information before it rolls out next week.)

Art, Music, Physical Education--and Pronunciation

Clip art:
Clker

Here is a document showing essential K-5 outcomes in Art, Music, and Physical Education. Careful examination (with your "analogy-detector" activated) reveals any number of ways in which pronunciation instruction shares features and fundamental pedagogical strategies with those three disciplines, including being seen by many as peripheral to core instruction.

In fact, many of the current shortcomings of contemporary pronunciation teaching relate quite directly to its not being sufficiently artistic (tied to expressiveness), musical (attending to prosodic features such as intonation and rhythm) and "physical" (cf. HICP, of course!)  Likewise, when the education culture sees art, music and physical education as first in line during budget cutting, it should come as little surprise that pronunciation instruction falls in the same category. Although there are any number of reasons within the recent development of the field from communicative language teaching forward for the declining interest in pronunciation teaching, the trend represents a more general evolving, post-modern societal attitude toward form, body and person.

Pronunciation teaching as we know it, as a more or less discrete, "skill-based" specialization that is of sufficient value to the field such that it should be reestablished in teacher training programs in these times of fiscal and form-based restraint may well be beyond resuscitation.