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

Why rhythm comes first in pronunciation teaching (Haptic Pronunciation Teaching Tip 63 or so!)

Rhythm, stress and intonation. There are, of course, phonaesthetic explanations as to why we list those concepts in that order, including having to do with relative "weight" landing to the right end and the intrinsic qualities of the vowels and consonants themselves. Try saying those three out loud in different orders. Give native speakers three nonsense words of similar syllable structure and they'll typically prefer hearing the 3-syllable word last. Same applies for compound nouns and many other collocations.

I did a quick survey of a few popular pronunciation student books, checking for order of presentation and practice of those three processes, independent of treatment of vowels and consonants. Some did introduce the processes earlier or later but in terms of actual oral practice, there was/is a general agreement, at least the relationship between stress and rhythm. Work on stress comes first.

Lado and Fries (1954)         S - I - R
Prator and Robinett (1972)  S - R - I
Bowen, D. (1975)                I - S - R
Dauer, R. (1993)                  S - R - I
Miller. S. (2000)                 *S - R - I
Gilbert, J. (2012)                  S - R - I
Grant, L. (2017)                   S - R - I

Haptic pronunciation teaching (v5.0)  R - S - I

Miller (2000) probably comes closest to the Rhythm-then-Stress-then-Intonation model, even though the subtitle of the book is: Intonation, sounds (including word stress) and rhythm, echoing Bowen (1975). I taught with Bowen 1975 for several years and loved it. (Still do, in fact!) Like in Lado and Fries (1972), the earlier introduction of intonation patterns always made sense, in part because we were often working from a structural perspective, with smaller clauses or sentences as we "built up" from the bottom.

When it comes to guidance from methodologists on setting up repetition and practice of words and expressions, however, in most cases the attention initially is almost exclusively on the stress syllable, not the rhythmic structure or tonal expression.  One effect of that is possibly to "train" learners in a global rhythm that is very much analytic, yet random . . . the way anyone's processing and speech would be when the focus is just on stress but not the overall flow and fluency of the discourse.

The new haptic pronunciation teaching system (v5.0 - available in Fall 2019) is close to Miller (2000) in approach, beginning with rhythm and then going to stress and intonation.

So, why not begin with rhythm, add the stressed syllable(s) and then the tone pattern for that thought or rhythm group? Many do, if only implicitly or inductively, using songs, poetry or verbal games initially.  More importantly, however, even at the level of requesting a simple repetition of a sentence, approaching it from an ordered perspective of R - S - I is a powerful heuristic, one basic to haptic pronunciation teaching. For example:

"He worked all day on the report."

.Before learners actually say the expression or word out loud, here is how it works. We use the terms: Parse, Focus, Move --- DO! (PFMD!)

• First, identify the rhythm grouping: (for example) He worked all day / on the report. 
• Second, identify stress assignment: (for example) He worked all day / on the report (underline = sentence stress)
• Third, identify the intonation (pitch movement or non movement): Rising slightly on 'day'; falling on 'port' (with louder volume indicating sentence stress.)
• Then (if you are doing haptic) as you say the sentence, add some type of pedagogical movement pattern/gesture (PMP) on the two stressed syllables, There are several way that can be done, synchronizing the gesture with stressed vowels, phrasal rhythm patterns or pitch movement on the stressed vowels (intonation).  

Our experience (in HaPT-Eng) has been that, both in terms of immediate verbal performance and memory recall for text, the order in which learners' attention is directed to attend to the three prosodic components of the sentence along with the accompanying pedagogical gesture may be critical: R - S - I. And why is that? In part it is probably because it uses gesture and touch to integrate or knit together the three features consistently.

Try that tomorrow. It'll change the way you and your students look at (and are moved by) both oral expressiveness and pronunciation.

And it you like that technique, you'll LOVE the next basic haptic pronunciation teaching webinar (hapticanar) on October 12th!

Grasping (and reaching for) pronunciation together improves memory!

There are countless studies demonstrating how under certain conditions repeating a word out loud enhances memory for it (e.g., Sciencedaily.com/Boucher, 2016), including a couple of earlier blogpost summaries here and here also associating that process with use of  movement, touch and gesture.

A new study by Rizzi, Coban and Tan of University of Basel. Excitatory rubral cells encode the acquisition of novel complex motor tasks. summarized by Sciencedaily.com, exploring the connection between fine motor engagement such as reaching for and grasping objects and enhanced brain plasticity (learning) adds another fascinating piece to that puzzle. (It is almost worth reading the original article just to have the term, "excitatory rubral cells," part of your active vocabulary . . . )

Why is this of such interest to haptic pronunciation teaching (HaPT)--literally, and language teaching in general, figuratively? At least three reasons. HaPT involves:
1. Synchronized movement between student and instructor or student and student.
2. Repetition of words, phrases or clauses in coordination w/#1
3. Use of gesture anchored by touch on stressed vowels in the words, phrases or clauses of #2, where one hand either grasps or taps the other hand in various ways. (To see demonstrations of some of those combinations, go check them out here.)

The study itself is perhaps something of a reach . . . in that Tan et al. are studying the effect in mouse brains, looking at the impact of fine motor learning on increased plasticity. (If those neuroscientists think the parallel between rodent brain plasticity and ours is worthy of research and publication, who am I to disagree?) See if you can "grasp" the concept from the ScienceDaily summary:

"The red nucleus, which, over the years, has received little attention in brain research, plays an important role in fine motor coordination. Here the brain learns new fine motor skills for grasping and stores what it has learned."

What this study adds for us is, to quote the authors, the potential impact of novel complex motor tasks on plasticity--in other words learning new patterning and relationships. In the HaPT-English system today there are over 300 novel complex motor tasks, that is combinations of gestures+touch associated with unique positions in visual field or on the upper body. They are "novel" in the sense that gesture complexes have been designed to be as distinct as possible from gestures associated with natural languages and cultural systems.

In fact, over the years probably 50 or 60 potential "pedagogical movement patterns" (PMPs) have been proposed and dropped due to possible parallel signalling of other meanings and significance to one culture or another. In that sense then the sound-motor-touch complexes, or PMPs should be both novel to the learner and physically and interpersonally engaging.

This same principle applies to use of gesture in teaching and learning as well, of course. Consistent use of movement and gesture in instruction appears to promote more general brain plasticity than often assumed. So, even if you consider systematic body work useful just to keep things "loose" and flexible, you may have had it right all along.

Start a new movement today!

Clker.com

BPTRRCE! (Better pronunciation through rubral red cell excitation!)
And don't forget to join us for the next bi-monthly Webinar, what we call "Hapticanar" on July 17th and 18th! (For reservations, contact:
info@actonhaptic.com)

Original source:
Giorgio Rizzi, Mustafa Coban, Kelly R. Tan. Excitatory rubral cells encode the acquisition of novel complex motor tasks. Nature Communications, 2019; 10 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-10223-y

Great memory for words? They're probably out of their heads!

Perhaps the greatest achievement of neuroscience to date has been to repeatedly (and empirically) confirm common sense. That is certainly the case with teaching or training. Here's a nice one.

For a number of reasons, the potential benefit of speaking a word or words out loud and in public

Clipart: Clker.com

when you are trying to memorize or encode it--rather than just repeating it "in your head"--is not well understood in language teaching. For many instructors and theorists, the possible negative effects on the learner of speaking in front of others and getting "unsettling" feedback far outweigh the risks. (There is, of course, a great deal of research--and centuries of practice--supporting the practice of repeating words out loud in private practice.)

In what appears to be a relatively elegant and revealing (and also common-sense-confirming) study, Lafleur and Boucher of Montreal University, as summarized by ScienceDaily (full citation below) explored under which conditions subsequent memory for words is better: (a) saying it to yourself "in your head", (b) saying it to yourself in your head and moving your lips when you do, (c) saying it to yourself as you speak it out loud, and (d) saying the word out loud in the presence of another person. The last condition was substantially the best; (a) was the weakest.

The researchers do speculate as to why that should be the case. (ScienceDaily.com quoting the original study):

"The production of one or more sensory aspects allows for more efficient recall of the verbal element. But the added effect of talking to someone shows that in addition to the sensorimotor aspects related to verbal expression, the brain refers to the multisensory information associated with the communication episode," Boucher explained. "The result is that the information is better retained in memory."

The potential contribution of interpersonal communication as context information to memory for words or experiences is not surprising. How to use that effectively and "safely" in teaching is the question. One way, of course, is to ensure that the classroom setting is both as supportive and nonthreatening as possible. Add to that a social experience with others that also helps to anchor the memory better.

Haptic pronunciation teaching is based on the idea that instructor-student, and student-student communication about pronunciation must be both engaging and efficient--and resonately and richly spoken out loud. (Using systematic gesture does a great deal to make that work. See v4.0 later this month for more on that.)

I look forward to hearing how that happens in your class or your personal language development. If that thread gets going, I'll create a separate page for it. 

Keep in touch!

Citation:
University of Montreal. "Repeating aloud to another person boosts recall." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 October 2015. .

ADHD and good pronunciation teaching: Move it or lose it?

Have had this "intuition" for decades that most (if not all) great conversation and pronunciation teachers are basically ADHD or close to it. Conversely, great reading and writing instructors (and all tenured researchers in the field) tend to go in the opposite direction.

During my decade in Japan I was fascinated by one of the tenets of the Aikido school of martial arts: Do not block the thrust of your opponent but redirect the energy and movement for your purposes. That is also a first principle of early elementary education, especially in dealing with boys . . .

Now comes a study by Shaver and colleagues at Central Florida University, summarized by Science Daily - full citation below) demonstrating how leaners with ADHD function and learn. In effect, they learn better on cognitive tasks when they "squirm" as they do, to quote the researchers. Apparently what is happening is that the movement is activating areas of the brain controlling executive/control functions to maintain alertness. But here is the more interesting finding:

"By contrast, the children in the study without ADHD also moved more during the cognitive tests, but it had the opposite effect: They performed worse."

That must apply to adult learners as well. The delicate balance between the  facilitative role of movement and gesture in pronunciation teaching and the potentially disruptive effects is key. Pronunciation teaching is, of course, somewhat unique in that regard, some aspects are more motor-training-centered; others are more cognitive in nature, such as rules and explanations. 

This study helps in understanding more about how movement affects or interferes with some kinds of  cognitive processing--and the obvious aversion to kinaesthetic work by some on the other end of the ADHD scale.  We know that most cannot learn better pronunciation just by talking or thinking about it--or by simple, mindless repetition. It does suggest what an optimal instructional model may look like, however . . .

A modest example: Haptic pronunciation work is based on the idea of managing extraneous, random movement so common in unsystematic (but enthusiastic) use of gesture in the classroom, while at the same time still keeping both mind and body engaged. Try it or something like it. (It is impossible to sit still while you do!)

Full citation:
University of Central Florida. (2015, April 17). Kids with ADHD must squirm to learn, study says. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 22, 2015 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150417190003.htm

Why using gesture in (pronunciation) teaching (sometimes) doesn't work well--or at all

Reviewed a manuscript recently that reported on a study exploring the use of gesture in pronunciation teaching, based on a method that seemed to require learners to repeatedly mirror

Clip art:
Ckker

instructor movements. The case made was not convincing, for at least a couple of reasons.

Research on mirror neuron function (even in monkeys, according the Association for Psychological Science - see full citation below!) has important implications for use of gesture in teaching, especially pronunciation. Normally, our mirror neurons mimic observed movement, giving us something of the sensation that we are actually doing what we are seeing, or perhaps moving along in synchrony with a person in our visual field. (Watch the audience at a dance recital, most discretely "moving along with" the dancers.) That should, in principle, make using gesture a potentially powerful vehicle for instruction. For most it probably is; for some, it isn't.

There are any number of reasons why gesture may not be that effective or why some learners and instructors simply do not feel comfortable with much "co-gesticulation." After decades of wondering exactly why gestural techniques were not more generally adopted (and adapted) in pronunciation instruction--when it was so natural and easy for me, personally--I got an answer from a student: the REVEG and ADAEBIP effects.

Rui was what I would term extremely "visually eidetic," meaning that she had a near photographic memory, such that if she learned a gesture in one position in the visual field and an instructor used that motion even very slightly off the original pattern, she could not process it or at least became very frustrated. Likewise, even looking in a mirror at herself performing gestures was maddening, since she, too, could not consistently move her hands in precisely the same track.

That encounter was a game changer. Within 6 months the EHIEP methodology had been changed substantially.

Since then we have encountered any number of learners who appear to have had varying degrees of "REVEG" (Rui's extreme visual-eidetic "gift") or "ADAEBIP" (aversion to doing anything potentially embarrassing with your body in public!) What that means is that for them, whatever the underlying cause, being required to mimic with any degree of accuracy someone's gesture can be maddening, near-traumatic or impossible.

The solution, at least in part, has been "haptic"-- to use touch to anchor the patterns to the relatively same locations in the visual field--along with anchoring the stressed syllable of a targeted word or phrase at the same time with touch. In addition, instead of the sometimes "wild and crazy" or "over the top," spontaneous gesturing used by some instructors, the idea is now to use highly controlled, systematic, "tasteful" and regular movements for pointing out, noticing and anchoring, and homework.

In fact, one of the advantages of using video models in EHIEP (as in AHEPS, v3.0) is that at least the patterns students are trained on are consistent. In that way, when a pattern (what we call a "pedagogical movement pattern) is used later in working on "targets of opportunity," such as modelling and correction, learners tend to be more accepting of the instructor's slight deviations from the "standard" locations.

In general, haptic anchoring of patterns (PMPs) tends to keep positions of prescribed gestures within range even for the more REVEG among us. Extreme accuracy in actually producing the PMPs in practice and anchoring is really not that critical for the individual learner.

So, if gesture work is still not in within your perceptual or comfort zone, we may have a (haptic) work-around for you. Keep in touch.

Citation:
Association for Psychological Science. (2011, August 2). Monkey see, monkey do? The role of mirror neurons in human behavior. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 10, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110801120355.htm

Blocking poor (and improved) pronunciation with Mindfulness

Mindfulness is big. It is described a number of ways, according to Wikipedia:

"Mindfulness is a way of paying attention that originated in Eastern meditation practices."
"Paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and non-judgmentally"
"Bringing one’s complete attention to the present experience on a moment-to-moment basis"

In earlier blogposts, I have focused on the possible benefits to our work of M-training. I may have been missing something . . . In a provocative 2013 study by Howard and Stillman of Georgetown University, (summarized by Science Daily) they conclude that:

 " . . . mindfulness may help prevent formation of automatic habits -- which is done through implicit learning -- because a mindful person is aware of what they are doing." 

Clip art: Clker

And in addition:

"The researchers found that people reporting low on the mindfulness scale tended to learn more -- their reaction times were quicker in targeting events that occurred more often within a context of preceding events than those that occurred less often."

The study is, of course, more complex and the tasks involved may not be all that analogous to what we do in pronunciation teaching. Nonetheless, the striking preliminary finding, that conscious, meta-cognitive attention to the ongoing learning process may, in fact, work counter to some types of "implicit," or body-based learning is indeed very germane. So, when it comes to pronunciation work tasks, such as repetition, pattern recognition, drill--and even haptic anchoring-- to paraphrase Nike's classic moniker, perhaps the secret is to: Just do it! 

At least something to be "mindful" of . . .

Stop using excessive repetition in pronunciation teaching! (Especially if your student almost gets it right the first time!)

 "Words, words, words." (Hamlet)

There is probably no topic more controversial in pronunciation teaching than the role of repetition in learning and change. Key in "repetition in pronunciation teaching" into Google and you get about 1,000,000 hits. Educated opinion ranges from "use only sparingly and strategically, if at all" to highly sophisticated routines with multiple repetitions.

Applicability of repetition of language forms varies greatly, in differing forms and with learner populations. The operating principle may, in fact, be--to paraphrase an old pop song--neither "too much repetition-- or not quite enough."

The former injunction, to use repetition sparingly in at least some contexts, is seemingly supported by a 2014 study by Reagh and Yassa of the University of California-Irvine (summarized by Science Daily) in which repeated viewing of pictures seemed to " . . . increase factual recall but actually hindered subjects' ability to reject similar "imposter" pictures. This suggests that the details of those memories may have been shaken loose by repetition." Their model, Competitive Trace Theory, also is said to postulate that " . . . details of a memory become more subjective the more they're recalled and can compete with bits of other similar memories."

Now granted, that study focused only on repeated viewing of pictures, rather than oral (or haptic) repetition. What that does at least in part explain, however, is why repetition may not only be ineffective at times but possibly counterproductive, downgrading even further the memory of the target sound, word or phrase. In cases where there is a competing or "dangerously similar" L1 or L2 sound, word or phrase in the neighbourhood, either phonologically or semantically, the effect may be significant.

Recall that Asher's 1970's pre-Total Physical Response research was, in part, based on the concept that the fewer the number of repetitions when a word is learned for the first time, the better the chances of it being remembered.)

There are any number of approaches to effective repetition in pronunciation teaching, depending on what is being learned and when. If just articulation of a specific sound is the purpose, multiple, rapid repetition may be in order. If, on the other hand, the pronunciation of new or "repaired" vocabulary is the goal, then the effect alluded to by Reagh and Yassa may be in operation: the "uniqueness" of the target being hammered off or dulled.

In EHIEP work we generally try to limit the number of repetitions of words or short phrases to 3x, and even then requiring as much intense "full body" engagement as possible, accompanied by haptic anchoring--movement and touch on a stressed syllable.

Coming soon!
AHEPS v3.0 Bee & Butterfly
(Artist: Anna Shaw)

Repetition, like all aspects of instructional design must be intentional, meaningful and developmentally appropriate. Working 1x1, as in tutoring, that is more manageable. At the class level or during independent study, however, it is another question entirely.

Just ask Zig Zigler: “Repetition is the mother of learning, the father of action, which makes it the architect of accomplishment.” 

Pre- and Post-haptic English Pronunciation Teaching

Get ready . . . AH-EPS does NOT (by design) do everything! What it does it does exceedingly well, however. It focuses on integrated teaching and change, real time interaction between instructor and student: how to talk and anchor change in class, live.

In some cases and classes it may need to be complemented or expanded upon. ("Compliments," it always has lots of!)  Here are my three recommendations, what you should have either on your bookshelf or bookmarked:

Well Said by Linda Grant
     For more detailed explanation and academic application, especially for more advanced students, use Grant.
Clear Speech and Clear Speech from the Start by Judy Gilbert
     For colourful visual models, related listening comprehension training and communicative pair work, use Gilbert.
Accent Coach and its mobile app by Ron Thomson
     For more focused, personalized drill and effective repetition after haptic vowel work, use Thomson.

AH-EPS haptic video work (in 30-minute weekly lessons with optional homework) presents the English sound system as a whole and teaches students a set of gesture-based procedures that they and their instructor can use every day in modelling and correcting pronunciation.  (There are additional video lessons with each module for students to practice on their own, if their instructor does attend to pronunciation in regular speaking and listening instruction.)

It is generally adaptable to any proficiency level, any age learner or amount of instructor experience in pronunciation teaching. If, however, you only have time or money to go with one system,  I'd still recommend this for starters:

Hmm! . . . Correcting English pronunciation (the Haptic-mimetic method)

Clip art:
Clker

Have been holding back on publishing this post on a somewhat different application of the EHIEP (Essential haptic-integrated English Pronunciation) or AH-EPS (Acton Haptic - English Pronunciation System) for some time. One reason was that I didn't have a term for how it works: mimesis or mimetic. In essence, by "rich" imitation. (There is actually much more behind that choice of term, which will be unpacked in upcoming blogposts.)

The other consideration was part theoretical, part bottom line: In some contexts, "Hmm!" can be carried out quite effectively-- without the students even being introduced formally or trained in the haptic system. That would be slick, of course, and also very inexpensive. (I need to make at least a little money on this, eh!)

Here is how EHIEP usually works:
A. Typically, students and instructor work through a 30-minute training video that teaches a haptic pedagogical movement pattern/technique for correction or presentation. (See previous posts for PMP description and links, including this one for lax vowels and this one for tense + off-glide vowels. Note: A PMP is one movement + touch for one vowel in those cases.
B. From there, students can either practice the technique in short dialogues or word lists immediately.
C. An additional option is for students to do 1-3, additional 30-minute homework assignments working with special practice video lessons.
D. Ideally, after A or B or C, the instructor begins using the PMP or technique in class for correcting or presenting.

Note: AH-EPS will work in classes of almost any size; Hmm! seems to work best in small classes where the Instructor already has good rapport and communication with students.

Here is how Hmm! may work: 
A. Instructor simply uses the PMP for correction in integrated classroom instruction-- without any explicit explanation or previous training of students.
B. Students "uptake" the correction almost as if they had been trained in haptic anchoring previously.

To train yourself to work with Hmm!, all you have to do is get the Instructor's Guide and accompanying videos (either off Vimeo or DVD format) and practice along until you can do the PMPs for the most typical pronunciation problems that you encounter daily in your classroom. To get it, go to the GETONIC shop and order it!

More on Hmm! shortly, Keep in touch!

Pronunciation teaching without repetition?

Clip art: Clker

Indeed. In a good paper in the Proceedings of the 2011 PSLLT Conference, Messum, applying his application of Gattegno's work, Teaching pronunciation without using imitation: Why and how," makes that argument persuasively. As noted in previous posts, I am a fan of Messum and Young's PronSci. The problem with their framework, as he readily concedes, is that it takes a rather radical change of approach and re-training to work within "Silent Way" methodology. That it works in some contexts is irrefutable, with over 50 years of "data" and experience to draw on.

(To repeat again!) my reservations about that approach are only that it (a) is relatively difficult and time consuming to learn to do well, that it (b) has a strong "visual-auditory" bias in basic classroom "inter-diction," and that it (c) depends on associating approximation of motor control of sounds with auditory schema, mediated by color-coded symbols. In other words, the anchoring and keys to accessing anchored sounds are essentially visual-auditory, not haptic as in EHIEP. Our experience is simply that haptic-integrated anchoring is more efficient and accessible to instructors, especially for those with little or no previous training in linguistics and pronunciation teaching.

But don't take my word for it or Messum's. Get trained in the Silent Way so you can work with it in one class and see how it works . . . and then get the complete EHIEP system of haptic videos (which will be available in late Spring 2013) and let it train you and your students in 8, 30-minute weekly segments . . . Note: Versions of many of the basic EHIEP system haptic videos are linked off the blog in earlier posts. If you are interested in seeing some recent, pre-release stuff and perhaps field testing it in your class for us, let me know (wracton@gmail.com)!

Full citation: Messum, P. (2012). Teaching pronunciation without using imitation: Why and how. In. J. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.). Proceedings of the 3rd Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Sept. 2011. (pp. 154-160). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.

Three mistakes pronunciation instructors may make (especially if they play guitar badly)

Clip art: Clker

 It is not a coincidence that language instructors who gravitate toward speaking and pronunciation instruction tend to be musical. (My guess is that they play or have played an instrument or are singers of some sort as well. That connection is mentioned in several studies but I can find no systematic research on it.) Being a guitar player, one of the sites I stumbled on, Guitarscalesystem.com, has a list of 3 mistakes to avoid and 6 principles to practice. (Unfortunately, to get to this list you have to sign up for the newsletter, etc.!) The "translation" to pronunciation work is very straightforward . . . if you play an instrument, especially the merging of motor learning and meaning (My extrapolations are in italics):
Mistakes:
1. Too many scales and keys without ever deeply mastering a single scale - Acting like simply "pointing out" problems is effective technique.
2. Not making real music out of the scales - "Rich" repetition of targeted sounds, with haptic-integration and/or engaging expressiveness is the antidote.

Clip art: Clker

3. Mindlessly repeating scale patterns - If you do "mindless" repetition, without multiple-modality involvement, you should be teaching something else, not pronunciation. 
Principles of good practice:
1. Memorize your scale patterns - Yes, teach learners how to memorize more efficiently, based on their personal cognitive style preferences.
2. Learn to jump to anywhere on the neck - Link target sounds across lexical sets and exemplars. (Pedagogical movement patterns, based on haptic research in several areas, should do that.)
3. Learn to switch direction in the blink of an eye - Use the visual field for anchoring targeted sounds consistently. 
4. Know the building block shapes and how they interact together - Yes . . . the "sense" half of "felt sense" means having very concise, clear cognitive and rule schemas for learners as well.
5. Learn your scales on single strings, as double stops and beyond . . . This is critical, focusing on targeted sounds with maximal attention, in an "uncluttered" visual and emotional setting in class.
6. See the entire keyboard as one "monster pattern!" - Both instructor and learner need to understand how the whole system functions, instructors at a theoretical level; learners, by being equipped with a simple set of explanations, practices and anchoring procedures--especially the latter. 

Time to face the music on how you manage drill, repetition and anchoring? 

Rhythm and prominence: The place of effective haptic anchoring

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

I have been aware of the "Interactive Metronome" program, linked above, for several years. For a number of conditions it has been used very successfully. (The promo says that there are over 20,000 certified trainers!) It uses a combination of audio input of a rhythmic beep, along with hand clapping and feet tapping for steps, for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. I was asked if it fit within the HICP framework of haptic procedures. Yes and no.

On the one hand (no pun intended) it does involve movement and touch. In general, however, I am not a proponent of hand clapping and repetitious foot tapping for anything other than just getting the "feel" of the rhythm of speaking. I do not recommend tapping out or clapping out the syllables of a word or phrase, for example, as the primary technique for anchoring prominence (word or phrasal stress). One reason for that relates to the research reported earlier on the blog focusing on the nature of tactile and kinaesthetic memory. Tactile memory, relative to audio and video memory, for example, tends to be more easily "overwritten," or sensitive to cross-modal competition. In other words, another anchor or distraction in the same "vicinity" will, in effect, be more likely to "erase," downgrade or get confounded with the earlier one.

What that implies is that a pedagogical movement pattern (PMP) that attempts to anchor stressed syllables haptically in one area of the body and unstressed syllables in another, for instance, should be more effective than simple, repetitive clapping of hands or tapping of feet, which tries to anchor or write in both stressed and non-stressed on the same location. The rhythmic practice versions of four EHIEP protocols do that in using a regular rhythm "tempo," not all that different from a metronome. (I sometimes do use a metronome with learners who do not have much of a felt sense of rhythm--of any kind!) The body location combinations are: deltoid--elbow, hand touch--outside hip, index finger tap--to center palm or fingernails to center palm in various positions in the visual field. No excessive applause or foot stomping to "get" attention for prominence needed--or all that effective either!

Aha! Insight into (at least) why we don't try to learn at times

Clip art: Clker

One of the real achievements of recent research in cognitive psychology has been to demonstrate the importance of both "Eureka! moments" and systematic forgetting of moments which are not. What the research by (summarized by from Science Daily) contributes is evidence that children come to understand new words not so much gradually by repeated exposure as they do by insightful events. The precise meaning may be adjusted or expanded by later events and attempts at usage but the basic meaning, once caught in a clear, unambiguous context is well-established.

That is a much closer parallel to how adults learn than once thought and accords very closely with one of the central claims of cognitive phonology, that such insights into the structure of the sound system have great potential payoff. Just as the demand for "Eureka!-like" explanations holds, in our work so does the corresponding requirement for "sticky haptic" and emotionally engaging anchoring in the process of setting up integration of new sounds into spontaneous speech.

Clip art: Clker

In HICP/EHIEP it is critical in the practicing of target sounds that there be as little clutter and "body-less" repetition and drill as possible. However, given this research, it may be that doing a few random activities and meaningless drill isn't all that ultimately distracting or counterproductive anyway. A waste of time, perhaps, but the good news is that the brain appears to be wonderfully designed to ignore what it doesn't need now or yet--and most of the rest of the lesson as well for that matter, just waiting on your next "Aha!" Having a class that loves you and the lesson, has learned to anticipate your little gems and is amazingly patient goes only so far, however. Anchor away, eh!

The revenge of the canonical and "why the haptic in HICP?"

Clip art: Clker

On a pronunciation-related discussion board, Gary Carkin, Chair of the Spech-Pronunciation-Listening Interest Section in TESOL--and drama instructor, makes a very interesting point. (See the link to Gary's website on the sidebar.) The topic related to how to teach "attitude" along with intonation:

 " . . . Getting students to express that intent through their intonation and stress, slowly ingrains a habit. It takes a lot of repetition and is a slow process, but at least it is likely to stay with them more than when the problem is simply explained to them because they are feeling what they need to express (through character) and how that feeling will be successfully expressed . . . " 

One aspect of pronunciation teaching where explanation, good explanation, is critical is in working with the canonical in conversational discourse, that is the regular or expected locations in conversation where words are stressed and attitudes are relatively transparent. (See these examples of canonical poetry, that is basically more traditional poetry with regular rhythm patterning.) That generally indicates new or foregrounded information in English. Students' ability to even begin to interpret instances where sentence stress does not fall where anticipated depends, first of all, on having what Carkin terms a "feeling" for the canonical. 

One of the most serious shortcomings of much classroom work on focus and attitude today is the tendency to attend to explanation and the exceptions before the canonical is sufficiently established, creating a chaotic mix for the learner and no real basis on which to quickly identify the non-canonical, and, pulling back to the overall intent of the conversation momentarily, take a guess at what is up. That requires two things in tandem: First, as Carkin notes " . . . repetition" (exactly how much and when is the key question here) and an understanding of why it lands there. The latter can only be done in the context of a conversation, not in isolated sentences. Second, the feeling has to be anchored well. 

A clear (proactive, cognitive) framework for learners, along with haptic anchoring at least makes the process more efficient for those who do not learn as well inductively. (For those gifted "inducters" who can, drama is the only way to get it!)  With that balance "in hand," repetition, listening, drama--even habits(!), become more potent and engaging. So, ignore the canonical at your peril . . . most everything depends upon it. 

Three points: reinforcement for less reinforcement

Clip art:
Clker

Shooting a 3-point shot successfully from 22 feet out in basketball is certainly a "haptic" event, requiring both exquisite (depending on your appreciation of the game) movement and touch. It is a rush of the first order for most, even professionals.Turns out, however, that making one does not predict whether you'll make another--to the contrary. According to this research by Loewenstein and Neiman at the Hebrew University, summarized by Science Daily (Hat tip to Charles Adamson), you have a better chance at making one if you missed on the previous try. In other words, reinforcement is not always the best guide. We learn as much from our mistakes or at least in that context we tend not overgeneralize as much.

That principle, of course, is at the very heart of behaviorist learning theory. Three points from a HICP perspective: (1) repetition does not insure success--anchor it quickly and move on, (2) context is critical--the phonotactic environment of a sound in a word or phrase is all important, not just the felt sense of the sound itself, and (3) the affective or emotional charge that often accompanies our attempts to "just make it fun and enjoyable"--or even communicative--can work against the learner, creating an event that involves so much visual and experiential "clutter" that the essence of the great move is nearly inaccessible later, inapplicable elsewhere. Shoot . . . that makes it a new ball game . . .

Correcting pronunciation: from mime to meme

Clip art: Clker

One of the best analogies for the felt sense of using haptic techniques in correcting pronunciation is pantomime, or miming. Some of the best video examples on Youtube are those of "robot dance." Unfortunately, I have yet to find a good one that does not have X-rated comments appended to it . . . So we'll have to settle for the text-based document from the drama club at UA-Monticello. It describes several of the basic mime moves that are used in training. Three or four of them focus on "box" structures that actually quite close to both the felt sense and the pedagogical movement patterns of HICP. The "meme" side of the process, to quote Wikipedia, " . . . acts as a unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols or practices, which can be transmitted from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals or other imitable phenomena."

Following on the earlier post, by both instructor and student having developed a good felt sense of the sounds represented through PMPs, the feedback is "transmitted" more efficiently. What exactly do you meme in class? Could it use some correction? Try starting with mime . . .  Better seen; better heard. 

Choral repetition + haptic anchoring: Doing more with less!

Clip art: Clker

I have described the work of Olle Kjellin previously. Reports on his "extreme" choral repetition-based pronunciation teaching method by Kjellin and his followers are persuasive in demonstrating that getting students to repeat a phrase up to 100 times " . . . generate[s] a kind of statistical "feel" for the phonological, syntactical, semantic, and pragmatic aspects of the phrase, i.e. to really "learn" it."

 I don't doubt for a minute that that anchors the "feel" or felt sense described--assuming that you can get learners to stay with you in the process. The question is, however, if our target is "just" pronunciation change, with well-executed haptic anchoring can we cut back some on the number of reps? (For some examples of HICP-type "haptic anchoring," see the first comment below.) Although Kjellin has not published hard evidence on the long term effects of "mega-rep" work--other than alluding to having witnesses consistent results throughout his 30 years in the field,

I'll accept his claims on similar grounds to those made here for the efficacy of HICP work: the extensive research on haptic-based learning in several fields, and our experience with EHIEP protocols over the last decade or so (and, of course, my 30+ years in the field, as well!) So, about how many "haptic-choral-repetitions" are necessary? If learners are in "full-body-attention mode," as described in earlier posts, only a few in class and a few more in homework practice sessions should be sufficient to enable some integration into spontaneous speech. Trust me. I've seen it work repeatedly, "hundreds" of times, in fact.

Listening (for pronunciation improvement) with your hands

Clip art: Clker

In this Science Daily summary, the research of Dodds, Mohler, and Bülthoff demonstrates the impact of both speaker and listener gesture in a virtual reality setting. As the two avatars (represented by humans in VR suits) "conversed," gestures of the listener contributed substantially to the effectiveness of the communication, apparently providing feedback and  showing need for further elaboration or clarification.

The same goes for HICP work (which will one day also be done solely in VR). Learners both mirror the (pedagogical movement patterns) PMPs of instructors at times and the instructors are able to "monitor" learner individual pronunciation or  group haptic practice visually--and then signal back appropriately. As strange as this may sound, providing feedback by means of haptically anchored PMPs generally seems more efficient (for several reasons) than is "correcting" or adjusting the production of the sound, itself, by "simply" eliciting a repetition, etc. (See earlier posts on how that is done.)

That, of course, is an empirically verifiable claim which we will test further in the near future.  So listen carefully and haptically--and give your local avatar's pronunciation a hand.

Disembodied Pronunciation done well--by Rosetta Stone

Although there appears to be no readily accessible published research as to the efficacy of the widely promoted language teaching program, Rosetta Stone, if the testimonials on the website are to be believed,  it certainly works for at least some learners.  Having reviewed the Korean and ESL programs, I am struck by how well it does a little--a good business model.

Image: Rosetta stone.com

For the visual-auditory, literate learner (See previous posts on the myth of learning styles, however!)  for whom pronunciation will not be much of an issue, it offers reasonably good, low cost, individualized access to at least functional vocabulary and structure. In fact, that it does not do active pronunciation instruction (other than repetition with some feedback) may almost be a plus, as opposed to presenting it even more "disembodied," as is the case with many current, computer-based systems.

A haptic interface could certainly be developed to use with it. I suggested that when I talked to one of the designers a couple of years ago. Basically, he confidently informed me that according to Krashen and most experts in the field, comprehensible input and aural comprehension were generally sufficient for developing acceptable pronunciation--and selling the product. Well . . . duh. He was at least half right. And besides, recall that the pronunciation of the original Rosetta Stone took over three decades to figure out . . .