(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.!)

Teaching aggression--right out of the gait!

Your "perceived pedagogical physical presence" (PPPP) in the classroom not all that it could be?  According to new research by Satchell and colleagues at the University of Portsmouth reported by Science Daily, it may well be your . . . gait! According to their study, the way you move your upper and/or lower body may be perceived by students as overly (or micro-ly) aggressive. And we know what that can mean, if your classroom is not a "safe space" today!

Clker.com

In the study, subjects did both a paper test that looked at aggressive tendencies and were video recorded walking on the treadmill. Degree of upper body, lower body movement and gait speed were then correlated with various indices of aggression and gender.  My summary of the results:

Overall tendencies:

• More combined upper and lower body motion was correlated with tendency toward physical aggression.
• More upper body motion was correlated with tendency toward conscientiousness.
• More lower body motion was correlated with tendency toward extroversion.

Male tendencies: 

• More upper or lower body motion was correlated with tendency toward verbal aggression.
• More upper body motion was correlated with tendency toward extroversion.

Female tendencies:

• More combined upper and lower body motion was correlated with tendency toward physical aggression. 
• More upper body motion was correlated with tendency toward conscientiousness.
• More lower body motion or overall speed of gait was correlated with tendency toward agreeableness. 

See how those can add up on you and at the same time become confounded? Viewed and critiqued any video recording of your teaching lately? Regardless of how well your upper or lower body tends to move, whether in class or on the dance floor, regular review of your current PPPP is the only conscientious thing to do! You agreeable to that? 

Citation:
University of Portsmouth. (2016, September 13). Link between walk, aggression discovered. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 26, 2016 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160913125309.htm

The business of correcting and remembering pronunciation

Clker.com

Doing a workshop today on correcting pronunciation with Rebeka delaMorandiere, based on her recently completed MA Thesis at the BC TESOL annual conference in Burnaby, BC. The conference attendees are generally public school teachers, so the focus is on classroom correction strategies for key pronunciation problems. Will see about posting some version of the Powerpoint later.

One  new addition to the overall framework is the inclusion of a (somewhat) common sensical 5-point framework from Business Insider website piece entitled "5 strategies for remembering everything you learn". That, in turn, is based on a neat book, Make it stick: the science of successful learning that I have linked to in earlier posts. The key strategies, along with my read on the application to pronunciation correction, are:

• Force yourself to recall (Before you provide a student with the correct pronunciation, see if they can do it themselves first.)
• Don't go easy on yourself (Practice a new word or sound like mad, especially in homework.)
• Don't fall for fluency (Just because a student can recall the right pronunciation or you can get them to do it in class, don't assume that the change will take without practice and conscious work on it.)
• Connect the new thing to the old things (Very important to connect a corrected word or corrected sound to as many other words with it in it as possible. That can be done many ways, but it is generally essential for there to be consistent uptake.)
• Reflect, reflect, reflect (Especially with older learners, from middle school on, research shows that they have to be meta-cognitively in the game, managing at least some of their practice and exploring ways of improving at their own initiative, or you may be wasting your time.)

That is a pretty cool list. Using the 5 tips. see how quickly you can memorize it . . . and recall it later!

And, of course, keep in touch!

 

(Really) great body-enhanced pronunciation teaching

If you are interested in using gesture more effectively in your teaching, a new 2016 study by Nguyen, A micro-analysis of embodiments and speech in the pronunciation instruction of one ESL teacher, is well worth reading. The study is, by design, wisely focused more on what the instructor does with her voice and body during instruction, not on student learning, uptake or in-class engagement.

The literature review establishes reasonably well the connection between the gesture described in the study and enhanced student learning of language and pronunciation. I can almost not imagine a better model of integrated gestural use in pronunciation teaching . . . The instructor is a superb performer, as are many who love teaching pronunciation. (Full disclosure: From the photos in the article I recognize the instructor, a master teacher with decades of experience in the field teaching speaking and pronunciation.)

From decades of work with gesture, myself, one of the most consistent predictors of effective use of gesture in teaching is how comfortable the instructor feels with "dancing" in front of the students and getting them to move along with her. The research on body image and identity and embodiment are unequivocal on that: to move others, literally and figuratively, you must be comfortable with your own body and its representation in public.

Knowing this instructor I do not need to see the video data to understand how her personal presence could command learner attention and (sympathetic, non-conscious) body movement, or her ability to establish and maintain rapport in the classroom. Likewise, I have not the slightest doubt that the students' experience and learning in that milieu are excellent, if not extraordinary.

The report is a fascinating read, illustrating use of various gestures and techniques, including body synchronization with rhythm and stress, and beat gesture associated with stress patterning. If you can "move" like that model, you got it. When it comes to this kind of instruction, however, the "klutzes" are clearly in the majority, probably for a number of reasons.

The one popular technique described, using stretching of rubber bands to identify stressed or lengthened vowels is often effective--for at least presenting the concept. It is marginally haptic, in fact, using both movement and some tactile anchoring in the process (the feeling of the rubber band pressing differentially on the inside of the thumbs.) In teacher training I sometimes use that technique to visually illustrate what happens to stressed vowels or those occurring before voiced consonants, in general. There is no study that I am aware of, however, that demonstrates carry over of "rubber banding" to changes in spontaneous speech or even better memory for the specific stressed syllables in the words presented in class. I'd be surprised to find one in fact.

In part the reason for that, again well established in research on touch, is that the brain is not very good at remembering degrees of pressure of touch. Likewise, clapping hands on all syllables of a word or tapping on a desk but a bit harder on the stressed syllable should not, in principle, be all that effective. That observation was, in fact, one of the early motivations for developing the haptic pronunciation teaching system.  By contrast, isolated touch, usually at a different locations on the body, seems to work much better to create differentiated memory for stress assignment. (All haptic techniques are based on that assumption.)

I, myself, taught like the model in the research for decades, basically using primarily visual-kinesthetic modeling and some student body engagement to teach pronunciation. The problem was trying to train new teachers on how to do that effectively. For a while I tried turning trainees into (somewhat) flamboyant performers like myself. I gave up on that project about 15 years ago and began figuring out how to use gesture effectively even if you, yourself, are not all that comfortable with doing it, a functional . . . klutz.

The key to effective gesture work is ultimately that the learner's body must be brought to move both in response to the instructor's presentation and in independent practice, perhaps as homework.(Lessac's dictum: Train the body first!)  Great performers accomplish that naturally, at least in presenting the concepts. The haptic video teaching system is there for those who are near totally averse to drawing attention to their body up front, but, in general, managed gesture is very doable. There are a number of (competing) systems today that do that. See the new haptic pronunciation teaching certificate, if interested in the most "moving and touching" approach.

Citation:
Nguyen, Mai-Han. (2016). A micro-analysis of embodiments and speech in the pronunciation instruction of one ESL teacher. Issues in Applied Linguistics. appling_ial_24274. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/993425h1

Picture this! Affective use of smart phones in (pronunciation) teaching!

Clker.com

Tigger warning: The following post contains both fun and "happy talk" of various stripes!

Although the research on the effect (and affect) of classroom smartphone presence runs the gamut, from minus (BBC) to plus (Inside Higher Ed.), every new pronunciation textbook or system must be at least highly handheld-compatible or have its own app. Something apparently all studies to date missed, however, was to what extent using a handheld, especially taking and posting pictures, contributes to . . . HAPPINESS!

Chen, Mark and Ali, of University of California-Irvine have happily filled in that gap: Promoting Positive Affect through Smartphone Photography, linking happiness with use of selfies and shared photos. From the Science Daily summary:

Researchers collected nearly 2,900 mood measurements during the study and found that subjects in all three groups experienced increased positive moods. Some participants in the selfie group reported becoming more confident and comfortable with their smiling photos over time. The students taking photos of objects that made them happy became more reflective and appreciative. And those who took photos to make others happy became calmer and said that the connection to their friends and family helped relieve stress.

Without getting into the somewhat suspect methodology and conclusions of the research--which would obviously detract from the fun of drawing out the implications for pronunciation teaching (or any kind of teaching for that matter), let's just focus on a few of the more fascinating possibilities:

A. Selfie's promote confidence and comfort with one's own photos.
Teaching application: In addition to just added confidence, being more comfortable with "objectively" critiquing one's voice production, especially pronunciation would be for many learners exceedingly valuable. 
B. Photos of things that make one happy encourage reflectiveness and "appreciativeness".
Teaching application: Reflectiveness is now the "gold standard" for both learners and instructors. Just imagine the implications for instructor and course evaluations! In addition, some of the most interesting and productive work with smart phones has been with learners exchanging and discussing favorite photos where peer and self monitoring of language form and content is involved (See C, below, too.)
C. Photos to make others happy make one calmer and relieve stress.
Teaching application: Calm, stress-free working milieu is invaluable in pronunciation instruction but exceedingly difficult to maintain. The connection to the connectedness of the other members of the class is, of course, key. A good example of that is having students creating and talking about various kinds of photo collections, collages or web-applications that organize and display pictures with unlimited numbers of contributors.

Just doing this post made me feel, well . . . happier! There are, it seems, even more good (affective and pedagogical) reasons why students should be encouraged to use their smart phones in class! Get the picture?

Citation
University of California, Irvine. (2016, September 13). Study links selfies, happiness. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 5, 2016 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160913173436.htm

Why feedback on pronunciation (often) fails--and how to make it work better.

Clker.com

We are getting a much better idea from research as to what kind of feedback from teachers seems to produce best results in a range of contexts (various mixes of explanation, modeling and guided practice). Notice that I said SEEMS to produce best results. New research by Winstone and colleagues at the University of Surrey and Aston University (summarized by Science Daily) suggests there may be something else going on here that significantly contributes to the puzzle: what learners DO with the feedback, not the feedback, itself.

In a meta-analysis of a large number of studies in education, they found that the actual form of feedback was not contributing as much variance to results as was how students followed up on that feedback, either on their own, or preferably in some kind of ongoing dialogue with their instructor. Their primary recommendation is that we "talk" with learners more, seeing feedback more as a process rather than an event. If you do process writing, you certainly know what they are getting at.

A good example of "one way" feedback in pronunciation work is a nice study by Darcy and Ewert (2013) where explicit feedback and improvement on suprasegmentals (rhythm, stress and intonation) was associated with the kind of feedback provided. From the absract:

An analysis of classroom treatment recordings demonstrates that explicit phonetic instruction that makes learners notice L2 features (i.e., explicit presentation of contents, guided analysis and
practice, and corrective feedback.

What that research report did not look at systematically is how those four classroom activities actually happened. You could imagine a wide range of "interactivity" between instructors and students going on during any of those. In other words, something worked . . . but why exactly. According to Winstone et al., just listing those classroom pedagogical practices, especially the last does not tell really tell us much--or help us predict how well the same study would go with a different instructor who might be more or less "dialogic" in her teaching style.

In a 2016 study which complements that research, Feedback on second language pronunciation: A case study of EAP teachers beliefs and practices, Baker and Burri examine what EAP teachers believe about feedback and providing it. From the extensive literature review and the data analysis one question or theme in effect, did not even come up: What do students actually DO with the feedback you (or teachers, in general) provide--and how important is that?

That the researchers did not probe that line of inquiry, itself, reflects the near complete absence of research on what students consistently do either in class or out of class with pronunciation feedback, i.e., correction of various kinds. Teachers in the study did see the value of individualized feedback, which, if done face to face, would almost certainly involve monitoring of student response to feedback and a more dialogic approach to exploitation of feedback.

Granted, studying dialogic classroom engagement between instructors and learners to find out what is really going on is both time consuming and expensive, but you almost have to go there to figure out some of this. You can at least do that in your own classroom. 

Baker and Burri conclude by recommending use of oral journaling, for example, where students can be directed in any number of ways to actively work with teacher-provided feedback. That practice is, in fact, quite popular with language instructors in general, but I have been unable to find published research examining, in depth, what learners actually do with feedback in journaling or elsewhere that may significantly impact effectiveness of learning and uptake of targeted forms.

Welcome your contribution of other research sources and  feedback on this! 


Citations:

Baker, A. and Burri, M. (2016) Feedback on second language pronunciation: A case study of EAP teachers beliefs and practices, Australian Journal of Education 41(6). 
Gordon, J., Darcy, I., and Ewert, D. (2013) Pronunciation teaching and learning: Effects of explicit phonetic instruction in the L2 classroom. In J. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th
Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference. Aug. 2012. (pp. 194-206). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.University of Surrey. (2016, September 21). Research shows that how students engage with feedback is as important as its content. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 2, 2016 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160921084806.htm

What (a window into the brain of) the mouse can teach us about learning pronunciation

Clker.com

Trigger warning: If you are especially attached to your mouse, you may want to skip over the third, italicized paragraph below . . . 

Fascinating research by Funamizu, Kuhn and Doya of Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, "Neural substrate of dynamic Bayesian inference in the cerebral cortex", originally published in Nature Neuroscience, summarized by Science Daily as, "Finding your way around in an uncertain world". (Full citation below.)

Basically, the study looked at how the (mouse's) brain uses movement of the mouse's body in creating meaning and thought. Reading the research methodology is not for the faint of heart. Here is a piece of the Science Daily summary describing it:

The team performed surgeries in which a small hole was made in the skulls of mice and a glass cover slip was implanted onto each of their brains over the parietal cortex. Additionally, a small metal headplate was attached in order to keep the head still under a microscope. The cover slip acted as a window through which researchers could record the activities of hundreds of neurons using a calcium-sensitive fluorescent protein that was specifically expressed in neurons in the cerebral cortex . . . The research team built a virtual reality system in which a mouse can be made to believe it was walking around freely, but in reality, it was fixed under a microscope. This system included an air-floated Styrofoam ball on which the mouse can walk and a sound system that can emit sounds to simulate movement towards or past a sound source.(ScienceDaily, September 16, 2016).

Got that? They then observed how the mice "navigate" the virtual space under different conditions, including almost complete reliance on body movement, rather than with access to any visual or auditory stimulus. The surprising finding (at least to me) was the extent to which kinesthetic memory or engagement took over, directing the mice to the "reward." There is much more to the work, of course, but this "window" into the functioning of the cerebral cortex is really consistent with a wide range of studies that point to "body-based" meaning creation and control.

So, what is the possible relevance of that to pronunciation teaching? (I never thought you'd ask!) Our work in haptic pronunciation teaching, for example, is based on the assumption, in effect, that "gesture comes first" (before sound and visual phonemes/graphemes) in instruction. (Based on Lessac's principle of "Train the body first" in voice and stage movement work.) For the most part today, pronunciation methodologists and theorists still see the role of gesture in teaching as being secondary, at best, an optional "reinforcer" of word-sound associations or a vehicle for "loosening up" learners and their bodies and emotional states-- or even just having fun!

What the "mice" study suggests is that sound, movement and vision are more integrated and interdependent in the brain than we generally acknowledge--or at least that movement is more central to meaning creation and retrieval. There are a number of body and movement-based theories that support that observation. In other words, the use of gesture in instruction deserves much more attention than it is currently getting. Much more than just a gesture . . .

Citation:
Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University - OIST. "Finding your way around in an uncertain world." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 19 September 2016. 

Remembering new pronunciation (or anything) . . . in a flash!

Here is another for your "So THAT's why it works" file, from neuroscience. (Hat tip: Robert Murphy.)

Clker.com

The phenomenon, explored by Morris and researchers at Edinburgh reported by Neuroscience News, is called: flashbulb memory. (See full citation below.) Working with mice, they found, basically, that a vivid, striking event can cause the release of dopamine by the locus coeruleus, which, in turn " . . . carries dopamine to the hippocampus . . . " which affects how effectively memories are stored.

So, if you (and your mouse) are about to learn something new--or just did, it will be remembered more efficiently if it is "bookended" by a "flashbulb" event . Talk about counter-intuitive! I have done dozens of posts over the years on how attention figures into learning. (In our haptic work, for example, we often note that we need the attention of the learner for only 3 seconds to anchor a new sound.) In the Neuroscience news summary it is noted that "Our research suggests that a skillful teacher may be able to take advantage of these little surprises to help pupils learn and remember.” Really? How so? They don't speculate--for good reason. How might you adopt that insight?

My first thought was to go find one of those camera flash attachments and try it out next week. But wait. There may be more to this, more than just dopamine.

About 35 years ago, I was very much interested in clinical hypnosis, in part as a way to better understand unconscious communication and learning in the classroom. One basic feature some models of trance work was that you had to be very careful to distract the learner (or client) immediately after a significant suggestion has been provided or "uploaded".

The explanation was that that would keep the conscious mind of the learner from deconstructing and dismissing or undermining the suggestion or metaphor, not letting it be absorbed in toto, in effect. That could be accomplished in any number of ways, such as switching topics abruptly, showing a picture or doing something more physical or kinaesthetic, such as standing up or a gesture of some kind.

In other words, the principle, of selectively partitioning off classroom experience makes sense. Rather than thinking in terms of always integrating the entire class period and lesson so that learners are metacognitively "on top of it all", so that they constantly know why they are learning what and consciously (metaphorically) attempting to file everything away for later use, think: switch-flash-divert-surprise.

I knew that my distinct tendency toward ADHD-like excessive multi-tasking was really a good thing! If you have a good "Flash dance" technique that you can share w/us, please do!

Keep in touch!

Full citation:
University of Edinburgh. (2016, September 8). How New Experiences Boost Memory Formation. NeuroscienceNews. Retrieved September 8, 2016 from http://neurosciencenews.com/experience-memory-neuroscience-4991/

Haptic (10-year pronunciation teaching) birthday party!

v1.0

v4.0

We are planning a couple of parties next month, celebrating 10 years of haptic pronunciation teaching. If you are a haptician in the Vancouver or Kamloops areas of British Columbia, please join us. (More specifics on that soon!) Should you not be (either in the area or a haptician by practice) you'll still be invited to join us "virtually" in celebrating! That will include:

• New video released describing the history and development of  Essential Haptic-integrated English Pronunciation (EHIEP).
• Birthday webinar/party  (We'll post a series of "success stories" before that happens. If you have one you'd like to contribute, please pass that on to me.)
• Release of new student self-study course.
• Recognition of "shrewdnesses, pandemoniums and zeals" of hapticians worldwide! (Each local group needs to choose its respective collective noun, based on which best describes their collective "personality", of course.) 



v3.0



v2.0

• We are also working on setting up a new professional organization or "shrewdness" of Hapticians or reviving the earlier International Association of Haptic-integrated Pronunciation Teaching Researchers and Instructors (IAHPTRI) from a few years ago. (If you belonged back then, we'll be in touch.) 

It has been an amazing "haptic" decade. It all began with the discovery that kinaesthetic, gesture work in pronunciation teaching could be considerably enhanced with just a "touch of touch!"

Keep in touch!

Bill

Great pronunciation teaching? (The "eyes" have it!)

Clker.com

Attention! Внимание!

Seeing the connection between two new studies, one on the use of gesture by trial lawyers in concluding arguments and one on how a "visual nudge" can seriously disrupt our ability to describe recalled visual properties of common objects--and by extension, pronunciation teaching--may seem a bit of a stretch, but the implications for instruction, especially systematic use of gesture in the classroom are fascinating.

The bottom line: what the eyes are doing during pronunciation work can be critical, at least to efficient learning. Have done dozens posts over the years on the role or impact of visual modality on pronunciation work; this adds a new perspective. 

The first, by Edmiston and Lupyan of  University of Wisconsin-Madison, Visual interference disrupts visual knowledge, summarized in a ScienceDaily summary:

"Many people, when they try to remember what someone or something looks like, stare off into space or onto a blank wall," says Lupyan. "These results provide a hint of why we might do this: By minimizing irrelevant visual information, we free our perceptual system to help us remember."

The "why" was essentially that visual distraction during recall (and conversely in learning, we assume), could undermine ability to describe visual properties of even common well-known objects, such as the color of a flower. That is a striking finding, countering the prevailing wisdom that such properties are stored in the brain more abstractly, not so closely tied to objects themselves in recall.

Study #2: Matoesian and Gilbert of the University of Illinois at Chicago, in an article published in Gesture entitled, Multifunctionality of hand gestures and material conduct during closing argument. The research looked at the potential contribution of gesture to the essential message and impact of the concluding argument to the jury. Not surprisingly, it was evident that the jury's visual attention to the "performance" could easily be decisive in whether the attorney's position came across as credible and persuasive. From the abstract:

This work demonstrates the role of multi-modal and material action in concert with speech and how an attorney employs hand movements, material objects, and speech to reinforce significant points of evidence for the jury. More theoretically, we demonstrate how beat gestures and material objects synchronize with speech to not only accentuate rhythm and foreground points of evidential significance but, at certain moments, invoke semantic imagery as well. 

The last point is key.  Combine that insight with the "Nudge" study. It doesn't take much to interfere with "getting" new visual/auditory/kinesthetic/tactile input. The dominance of visual over the other modalites is well established, especially when it comes to haptic (movement plus touch). These two studies add an important piece, that random VISUAL, itself, can seriously interfere with targeted visual constructs or imagery as well. In other words, what your student LOOK at and how effective their attention is during pronuncation work can make a difference--an enormous difference, as we have discovered in haptic pronunciation teaching.

Whether learners are attempting to connect the new sound to the script in the book or on the board, or are attempting to use a visually created or recalled script (which we often initiate in instruction) or are mirroring or coordinating their body movement/gesture with the pronunciation of a text of some size, the "main" effect is still there: what is at that time in their visual field in front of them or in their created visual space in their brain may strongly dictate how well things are integrated--and recalled later. (For a time I experimented with various system of eye tracking control, myself, but could not figure out how to develop that effectively--and safely, but emerging technologies offer us a new "look" at that methodology in several fields today.)

So, how do we appropriately manage "the eyes" in pronunciation instruction? Gestural work helps to some extent, but it requires more than that. I suspect that virtual reality pronunciation teaching systems will solve more of the problem. In the meantime, just as a point of departure and in the spirit of the earlier, relatively far out "suggestion-based" teaching methods, such as Suggestopedia, assume that you are responsible for everything that goes on during a pronunciation intervention (or interdiction, as we call it) in the classroom. (See even my 1997 "suggestions" in that regard as well!)

Now I mean . . . everything, which may even include temporarily suspending extreme notions of learner autonomy and metacognitive engagement . . .

See what I mean?

Sources: 
Matoesian, G. and Gilbert, K.  (2016). Multifunctionality of hand gestures and material conduct during closing argument. Gesture, Volume 15, Issue 1, 2016, pages: 79 –114
Edmiston, P. and  Gary Lupyan, G. (2017) Visual interference disrupts visual knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language, 2017; 92: 281 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.002

Conducting a great (pronunciation) class--according to Hazlewood!

If you haven't seen this phenomenal 2011TED talk by Charles Hazlewood--and you plan to be an even better (haptic pronunciation) teacher--this is definitely REQUIRED VIEWING! Hazlewood, one of the world's premier orchestra conductors, demonstrates beautifully both the "gestural" art of conducting and the central role of trust in the relationship between the conductor and the musicians. (The finale, from Haydn, alone is worth watching the talk for.)

Photo credit: Hazlewood.com

The parallel to what we do (or what we could do) is striking. One "problem" with pronunciation teaching is that it demands both serious risk taking on the part of the learner and the ability of the instructor to "conduct" the class in a atmosphere of genuine trust with strong musical overtones of rhythm and melody. Hazlewood's depiction of the "degrees of freedom" between the conductor and members of the orchestra is a fine analogy to what is foundational to any "great class". 

Enjoy!

Haptic Pronunciation Teaching Certificate Course (v4.1) Preview - FREE!

HaPT-E v4.1

v4.1 includes several new "touching" features. The Preview includes:

• Modules 1 and 2 (of the 10 modules system)
• 1 month free access to the course videos
• The Instructor's manual
• SKYPE consultation upon completion of the Preview.
• Option to purchase the course at a reduced price (until January 2017)

For more detail on the system itself, check out the Certificate Description, including the Certificate Forum. v5.0 is now scheduled to be available in January or February, 2017.

If you purchase v4.1 you will automatically be given access to the new v5.0 beta videos as they come on line for field testing this fall. 

To get the preview, contact: info@actonhaptic.com

Haptic dance, Aikido and the future of language (and pronunciation) teaching

Clker.com

For an intriguing glance at what future language (or pronunciation) teaching may "look" like, check out the following "haptic dances" by media artist, Landau: Exploratory Dance 1.1, and Motor Imagery Dance. Computer-mediated mirroring will be key; not just culturally appropriate body movement and gestures, for example, but gesture-synchronized speech as well (not unlike what we see in haptic pronunciation teaching, not surprisingly!)

Another piece or theoretical model of what that process will involve is evident in this article in Gesture focusing on the full-body, dialogic "dance" between opponents in Aikido,"The coordination of moves in Aikido interaction." Lefebvre's 2016 framework was developed examining the interplay involved, created with the goal of being able to better characterize the way entire bodies communicate with each other, the intricate synchrony of moves and counters that characterizes all "conversation".

Aikido embodies the moves of your opponent, in part by almost subliminally synchronizing the body to the motion coming at you. Bouts are "won" often by simply redirecting or escorting one's opponent to the floor or out of the ring. (That was, by the way, my wife's basic approach to dealing with first graders: You cannot possibly just block them or stop them, but you can almost always deftly redirect their energy and motion more to your purposes!)

What those two systems in part provide us with is the beginnings of a framework by which to design methodologies that (literally) embody language models, including technology that "manages" articulation as well. There have been for quite some time haptic systems that assist patients with various articulatory conditions, guiding the vocal apparatus in producing more "normal" speech patterns.

Embodied, computer-mediated language learning, something analogous to the Aikido experience, will provide learners with a way to (safely and completely) give themselves over to the "dance" as they are guided to speak and move with models, and ultimately be able to adopt and use the energies, words and moves of the L2, themselves--faster and more efficiently.

This is one dance you'll not want to miss! In the meantime, of course, you might prepare by doing some Aikido--and Haptic Pronunciation Teaching!

Full citations:
Daniel Landau - http://www.daniel-landau.com/about
Lefebvre, A. The coordination of moves in Aikido interaction. Gesture 5(2) 123-155.

Becoming an "expert" at English pronunciation: practice may not make perfect!

The recent (and welcome) debunking of the "10,000 hours of required practice to become an expert" myth by several studies, including that by Macnamara, Moreau, and Hambrick, summarized by ScienceDaily.com, has interesting implications for pronunciation learning and teaching. Gladwell's popular theory was that the only path to true expertise was by practicing for years until you reached the 10,000 hour threshold. That, of course, did not guarantee "master" status, but there seemed few "masters" who did not appear to have similarly paid their "hourly" dues, so to speak.

What the Macnamara et al. research focused on was the variability associated with excellence in various disciplines or arts. Results varied widely. In a report on a meta-analysis described in "Psychological Science", Macnamara and colleagues note the following:

However, the domain itself seemed to make a difference. Practice accounted for about 26% of individual differences in performance for games, about 21% of individual differences in music, and about 18% of individual differences in sports. But it only accounted for about 4% of individual differences in education and less than 1% of individual differences in performance in professions.

There is obviously a lot going on there, but of particular interest for us is the overall range of "skill areas" sampled. In a very real sense, ALL of those relate to pronunciation proficiency, in part due to the relative degree of physical and cognitive involvement required, especially for adult-age learners. My guess is that pronunciation probably falls somewhere in the middle, around 10 to 15%.

So, if that is the case, what would that mean for instruction? One obvious question is how much practice is effective at different stages of the acquisition process. A new study getting underway here, which will be reported on in a Panel presentation on the role of homework in pronunciation teaching, at the TESOL convention in Seattle next March 27th, will address that question.

Some preliminary interview work with a broad slice of learners about their pronunciation practice  suggests that something like the 26-21-18-4-1 ratios may actually map on to beginning through highly advanced L2 phonological proficiency and "accent retention".

Clker.com

In other words, as learners improve, the demand for pronunciation practice diminishes accordingly. That, of course, makes perfect sense--as long as the "bottom" is addressed. Without the 26-21-18 in the early stages--which entails significant degree of body or physical engagement--learning the sound system to "intelligibility" level can be seriously compromised for many learners.

When the "education" approach is taken from the outset, with its resulting 4% variance--and its generally strong cognitive vs physical practice approach to pronunciation--little wonder some conclude that practice (primarily insight, plus aural comprehension and oral drills) often does not appear to make much difference.

Reminds me of Tom Scovel's wonderful tongue-in-cheek definition of an "expert": "ex-" (former, "has been" out of touch) plus "spurt" (gush out forcefully but be gone quickly)

See you in Seattle, if not before!

Original source reference:
B. N. Macnamara, D. Moreau, D. Z. Hambrick. The Relationship Between Deliberate Practice and Performance in Sports: A Meta-Analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016; 11 (3): 333 DOI: 10.1177/174569

Pronunciation "workabouts": brain train or drain?

Clker.com

There are decades of research on the potential effects of exercise of various kinds on the brain, from cognitive training (such as Luminosity) to physical training such as jogging or working out in the gym.  Interesting recent study (Summarized by ScienceDaily.com) by Chapman, Aslan, Spence, Keebler, DeFina, Didehbani, Perez, Lu, and D'Esposito of the University of Texas explores the relationship between exercise (mental and physical), decision making and memory, "Distinct Brain and Behavioral Benefits from Cognitive vs. Physical Training: A Randomized Trial in Aging Adults."

 A key finding was how the two complement each other: "Aerobic activity and reasoning training are both valuable tools that give your brain a boost in different ways." In essence what they found, not surprisingly, was that mental training/exercise, like Luminosity, improves executive functions (planning and decision making); whereas physical exercise enhances memory.

So, how might enhancing general cognitive and physical conditioning improve learning pronunciation? As opposed to other dimensions of language learning, pronunciation involves a unique degree of physical engagement. In adults, that must generally be balanced with effective conscious, cognitive involvement (explanation, insight, discovery, planning, communicative practice, etc.) What the research suggests is that although cognitive training and engagement should be good for the brain (and pronunciation), without sufficient, "body engagement and training" learners, especially adults, may not be able to remember well what they have been taught.

My guess is that before long we will be doing much more specifically non-language related cognitive and (and even aerobic) physical training in preparing students and maintaining optimal brain conditioning for learning. Many programs and methods do that now randomly or intuitively, but the research points toward much more systematic and targeted training approaches.

For example, Marsha Chan's entertaining "Pronunciation workout" videos attempt to use high energy, highly kinaesthetic exercises to get the body and motivation activated in learning sounds and selected prosodics (e.g., rhythm and stress). What the cognitive/physical training study suggests is that "fun" may motivate and present aspects of pronunciation well, but the critical connection to that sound pattern may be weak, at best, in part because kinesthetic/body experience is remembered more as a whole--not just isolated pieces of the "moving" event. As Willingham (2005) puts it: "What is critical is that the child is taught in the content's modality." (not simply in her preferred or isolated modality such audio or visual or kinesthetic.)
 

What cognitive science has taught us is that children do differ in their abilities with different modalities, but teaching the child in his best modality doesn't affect his educational achievement. What does matter is whether the child is taught in the content's best modality. - See more at: http://www.aft.org/ae/summer2005/willingham#sthash.CvS6lakm.dpuf

What cognitive science has taught us is that children do differ in their abilities with different modalities, but teaching the child in his best modality doesn't affect his educational achievement. What does matter is whether the child is taught in the content's best modality. - See more at: http://www.aft.org/ae/summer2005/willingham#sthash.CvS6lakm.dpuf

And what is the "content modality" of pronunciation in teaching? A delicate balance of cognitive and kinesthetic engagement. In practical terms, one implication of the research is that we too often, to paraphrase Damasio (2005), commit "Decartes' error" of separating mind from the body ("I think, therefore, I am learning pronunciation!") For most learners, understanding and insight (at least in pronunciation teaching) must be well-integrated with physical, experiential learning and practice if new sound is to be efficiently remembered and available later in spontaneous speaking and listening.

A complementary approach balanced with Nike's nonsequitur--"Just do it!, is essential. If you are not sure about how to make that happen in your classroom, one way is to "Just ask (your neighborhood haptician)!" 

Citation:
Center for BrainHealth. "Mental, physical exercises produce distinct brain benefits." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 18 July 2016.

Why your avatar (could/will) make a better pronunciation teacher than your are!

Clker.com

Since the emergence of Second Life in 2003, I have been fascinated with the prospect of avatars teaching language. At the time, for technical reasons, I could not get my avatars to respond quickly enough with good audio to do much and gave up. (From recent reviews, it appears that most of those issues, including monitoring of offensive content, have been resolved and I may give it another look.)

A 2016 study of avatars teaching math to kids by Cook, Friedman, Duggan, Cui and Popescu provides an interesting perspective. The focus of the study was to attempt to isolate the effect of gesture, independent of facial expression, body motion and other features of the presenter's persona. As the researchers note, one of the problems with identifying the impact of gesture (from the abstract) is that it is "known to co-vary with other non-verbal behaviors, including eye gaze and prosody along with face, lip, and body movements . . . "

The avatars presented a fixed background such that only the hand movement varied. (The voice used and various graphic figures remained constant.) The effect was "pronounced". The subjects who viewed the gesturing avatar not only learned the concepts more successfully but also were later able to apply the material better. (That is not really surprising since a number of studies have established that students just learn better when teachers gesture more.) But avatars bring something more to the party--or less!

In principle, how much of pronunciation could an avatar teach (either with or without gesture assist)? Probably most of it. (And I predict that that day is not far off.) One reason for that, mentioned above by Cook et al. is the fact that gesture tends to co-vary with other "non-verbal behaviors" such as . . . prosody? (Prosody is nonverbal? Really?)The basis of effective gesture use in instruction often depends critically on the learners' attention being "locked" on the cuing or anchoring motion; the gesture in tern is also strongly associated with a sound or process.

As reported in several previous posts, loss of attention or distraction is a most important variable in haptic (gesture plus touch) pronunciation teaching as well. The video models that we use now are for the most part black and white, with black background and no subtitles on screen, designed to focus learner attention on the movement and positioning basically of my hands, not the model's face or body. Addition of color, extraneous movement, or additional graphics will always pull at least some learners away from the focus of the lesson embodied in the pedagogical gestures. (Research on competition between visual, auditory and kinaesthetic or haptic, has demonstrated consistently that visual displays almost always trump the others, even in combination.)

For gesture-based pronunciation or other kinds of instruction for that matter, interactive "thinking" and responding Avatars offer real promise. The technology has been around for over a decade, in fact. Advantages of avatars include:

• Individualized, more affordable computer-based instruction 
• Systematic application of gesture in instruction, especially providing consistent placement of gesture in the visual field.
• More effective attention management, neutralizing potential visual distractions
• Emotionally "comfortable" instruction for a wider range learner personalities
• Avoids unconscious transmission of:
• Instructor "bad day" images and attitudes
• Typical "hyperactive" pronunciation teacher behavior
• Overreactions, positive or negative, to student miscues or "victories"
• Instructor bias toward "teacher pets" or gaze avoidance in eye contact patterning during instruction

 Time to reactivate my Avatar. Will upload a demo later this summer.  

 Cook, S. W., Friedman, H. S., Duggan, K. A., Cui, J. and Popescu, V. (2016), Hand Gesture and Mathematics Learning: Lessons From an Avatar. Cognitive Science. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12344

A "reptilian brain" approach to pronunciation teaching (What Haskel says neuroscience says!)

Clker.com

Fun, superficial, slightly funky 2015 blogpost by Haskel at Neurosciencemarketing.com on marketing, appealing to the "Reptilian brain". "Appeal to neuroscience" (what was formally called "brain research") has now become one of the favorite foils of both educators and comedians. A recently discovered "bug" in the use of fMRIs may cast some additional, welcome doubt on that, in fact.  No matter what you want to "sell" . . . there seems to be some neuroscientist's often pseudo-scientific research study to back you up.

Haskel identifies 7 findings of neuroscience that suggest how to market anything (even your pronunciation teaching, I assume!) as long as you aim your pitch right at your students' "reptilian brains": pain, selfishness, contrast, tangibility, beginning and endings, visual metaphors, and "strike an emotional chord".
 
A. Pain - "All native speakers hate you because of your pronunciation or accent! Shed it!"
B. Selfishness - "Your accent is your identity, your inner Komodo. Next time somebody criticizes it, just tell them to be more multicultural and get over it!"
C. Contrast - "Have a good snake as a model: Justin Trudeau, David Cameron, Vladimir Putin or Barack Obama--take your pick."
D. Tangibility - "You do these tongue twisters long enough, they'll fix anything--including your lizard-like sun-tanned appearance."
E. Beginning and end - "Imagine your pronunciation now and how it will sound at the end of this course. Fill your mind with new sounds . . . Channel your inner cameleon (See C!)"
F. Visual metaphor - "Watch this CT-scan of me pronouncing 'th' several times tonight, especially my darting tongue." 
G. Strike an emotional chord - "All those notes in the book and in research about how hard it is to change your pronunciation are just a crock! You can do this!"

Coming soon: A pre-frontal (brain) peon to Teacher Cognition research in pronunciation teaching.