Pete Sharma rocks Milan (with a little help from his friends): full report from the PSA Symposium, 2012 (Part 3)

Finally we reached the “main attraction” of the Symposium: Pete Sharma’s keynote presentation “New developments in language teaching and learning in the digital age”. As the founder and Director of Training of PSA, as well as being the author of the best-known book on integrating technology with language learning, Blended Learning (written with Barney Barrett), Pete’s reputation goes before him; and yet, as a public speaker, he is incredibly down to earth and is at pains to avoid the kind of hype that is often associated with web 2.0 and technology in general.

He started by describing some of the various hats he wears (apart from his PSA one) including his work as an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) lecturer at Warwick University.

PSA Symposium 2012 at the British Consulate-General, Milan

Referring to the difficulties earlier on in the Symposium, Pete said that there will always be technical problems, however advanced the technology gets. How we manage those problems is as much a part of the process of changing habits and attitudes as is the actual introduction of the technology itself.

Pete sketched out the main structure of his talk. Following an overview of blended learning, he would introduce a number of statements, take a critical analysis of several technologies, and then consider some current controversies concluding with practical ideas about effective, successful blended learning.

Picking up on many of the themes in the earlier talks Pete invited us to step back and take a critical look at blended learning and the use of technology in education in general. This is indeed a new era, and yet the basic needs of students (and teachers) have not fundamentally changed. While technology has brought new opportunities as well as challenges, it is very much a tool to be used to help students rather than an end in itself. The choice of technology and its implementation are key questions for any teaching and learning organisation; however, the key questions will always remain the same: how do we help our students learn, what is the most effective way of organising the language learning classroom – and how do we keep our students motivated and inspired to learn?

Technology adoption lifecycle by Bohlen, Beal and Rogers

The increased use of technology has, though, changed and complicated the language learning  - and teaching – environment. Teachers must now also be adroit in exploiting technology and yet, as was mentioned several times during the Symposium, students tend to be more familiar and comfortable with hi-tech than teachers (although Pete questioned whether the “digital immigrants v digital natives” tag is now falling out of favour). Another crucial aspect of blended learning is that technology is constantly evolving and there will always be innovators, early adopters and digital laggards (as suggested in Rogers’s Bell Curve) with the majority of people somewhere in the middle.

As web 1.0 gives way to web 2.0, user generated content (UGC) is becoming the norm (as we saw in all three of the previous speakers’ talks). Content is becoming more collaborative and social and extends well beyond the classroom.

Blended learning can be viewed from multiple perspectives: students, teachers, schools, publishes, authors and, of course, the various players in the technology industry. Who is driving the push towards the increased use of technology? Who stands to benefit most? Are we moving too fast – or not fast enough? These are questions that have to be resolved – and may never be adequately answered.

The only constant in the equation, however, is change itself: the one scenario that can be discounted is that language teaching will stay the same. Technology has already changed irrevocably the way language are taught. Just about every school is wired to a greater or lesser extent (and many, indeed, are wireless). Course books and dictionaries now depend heavily on corpuses and digital wordbanks that tell us in detail how native speakers really use the language (not just how prescriptive grammarians tell us we should us it).

With at least 32 separate definitions of what blended learning actually is, the average language teacher could be forgiven for a sense of confusion often bordering on bewilderment that often greets the term “Blended Learning”. Hardware (often in the form of interactive whiteboards) has been in the vanguard of the revolution, with virtual learning environments (VLEs) and learning management systems (LMSs) following hot on their heels. Is all of this actually necessary? How much demand is there for all this whizzy hi-tech magic? One of the most refreshing things about watching Pete Sharma talk is that he give you the feeling that you are actually in control: by shifting the focus from the hardware and the software to what students and teachers want to achieve you actually feel empowered and able to make much clearer – and better informed – choices that are right for your own teaching environment and students.

Sharma is even healthily cycnical about his own status and the business he is in. Referring to the title of his book “400 ideas for interactive whiteboards”, co-authored with Barney Barrett and Francis Jones he muses on the figure of 400 - why that number exactly? And what about schools that aren’t equipped with an IWB? His new ebook, Apptivities (also written with Barrett) helps the professional reader to get on top of another new buzzword technology: m-learning or mobile learning, where students can learn on mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets.

Pete has a very useful visual which crystallizes the “trinity” of the three main concepts in blended learning: it’s an iceberg with the three corners labelled Knowledge, Skills and Attitude. He asks each member of the audience to rate themselves on the their level of digital knowledge / skills – between one and five. Most people fall somewhere in the middle, but of course the most important point of all three is attitude: this is the key determining factor, rather than specific know-how or ability.

Attitude is more important than knowledge and skills because this relates most closely to the fundamental questions: Why do we teach? What’s the best way to teach? How can technology help me to teach better? This isn’t about techniques and tips (although practical expertise is significant, of course). This is about motivation – both the teacher’s motivation and their willingness to embrace new technology that they can use to deliver better teaching and content to their students.

There will, for example, be detailed questions about different types of IWB and basic difficulties: Can you use finger to move things round the board or do you need a special pen? And what’s the best type of board to use? etc). But these depend on having a positive and open attitude in which the teacher is also willing to learn. Some educators may simply be technophobic, but even among the majority there is a healthy scepticism about technology – and, as Pete points out – that’s good. It’s good to be critical of any teaching approach or methodology. Everything we do or bring into the classroom should be assessed critically and we should always be on our guard for fads or unrealistic promises.

Audience at the PSA Symposium, Milan

The fact is that we are living through a major paradigm shift in which the teacher as the source of all knowledge is giving way to education as the activity of training learners to learn and discover things for themselves. This too opens up an increasingly wide divide between the digital haves and have-nots. (Pete points out that in Spain, for example, school equipped with the latest digital projectors still have chalk blackboards lurking behind the screens – and they are still used.)

It has taken time for technology to arrive in the classroom.  IWBs for example have taken ten years to come through. But there are also some surprising facts about the distribution of technology around the world: Mexico, for example, is the country with the greatest number of IWBs.

Language courses can take various forms, for example students can learn in a traditional face-to-face setting with a teacher present; a blended learning context which involves some face-to-face lessons and interaction with a computer; and distance learning where the whole course is delivered online (possibly with some teaching over an internet connection, e.g. via a video link or Skype, etc).

How important is pedagogy in a blended learning context? Experienced classroom teachers with limited knowledge or experience of technology should never feel stupid when confronted for the first time with a blended learning environment. Instead, they should remain healthily sceptical and ask the questions they would ask about any proposed learning approach or methodology: What is it? So what? How do I use it? Everyone who uses an IWB needs training – and this should be structured into teacher training courses and in-service training. You should never just accept something just because it exists: always question  the benefit of new technology and ask “How does this help me to teach more effectively – and how does it enable my students to learn more efficiently and increase their motivation?”

The way you see blended learning depends on your viewpoint

The great thing about technology is the affordances it gives to the teacher and learner, i.e. the things it lets you do. Pete quizzed the audience to find out how many people have access to or have use an IWB – the not-necessarily representative sample (since the people present have voted with the feet and attended an event about blended learning) was about a third. Pete looked at some of the pro’s and con’s of IWBs. Firstly, a lesson on an IWB can be more memorable and engaging (if the material is well presented and appropriate). Another advantage is its “saveability”. Once you have created a lesson for an IWB you can just “pull it out of the drawer” and run it. On the down side, IWBs can have quite a steep learning curve – and, of course, they don’t come cheap. As with all types of technology in schools, there is a cost-benefit ratio and the person furthest from classroom has the cheque book.

Schools might get distracted by current debates and fashions surrounding technology (e.g. “Should we get and IWB or wi-fi?” which can end up becoming a kind of “Don’t have fish, have meat” argument). Again, any choice about investing in technology and deploying it in an educational environment should start with the basic question: how does this benefit the learning process and enable both teachers and students? All other considerations should follow on from this fundamental consideration.

Distance learning – perhaps the most “extreme” form of blended learning where the teacher is “in the machine” e.g. on Skype  - can actually produce better results with students on distance courses outperforming those doing a conventional, “on-site” course. As Pete emphasises, when you put teachers and technology together you get an equation that is more than the sum of its parts (“1 + 1 > 2”).

Technology when used appropriately and in a way that respects students’ needs and expectations can be highly motivating. New platforms, such as M-learning, where students can access course material via their mobile devices – and also use these in class – can work particularly well, but again, as with all blended learning it has to be “embedded” into a course rather than simply “bolted on” as an extra. It is this ability to truly blend the technology into the learning process that represents the greatest challenge, but also opportunity, for the teaching profession.

As Nicky Hockley of the Consultants-E has demonstrated, teachers need to be aware of the scales and dimensions involved in m-learning (e.g. depending on whether students are in class or on the move and whether they are using their own devices or equipment provided by the school as class set – e.g. tablets).

Most students no longer carry printed dictionaries around with them: they are far more likely to access an app on their smartphone. Studying on the move, e.g. listening to an IELTS test on a train, for example, is both a natural and motivating way to learn. New and exciting technologies such as Augmented Reality (AR) which allow users to view the world through the “digital lens” of their handheld device (e.g. by displaying text or playing audio when a particular location or object is viewed through the device’s camera) also opens up a whole new dimension of possibilities for educators.

Switched on to m-learning

And, of course, there is the big question at the heart of m-learning: is it a good idea for students to be allowed to keep their phones switched on in the language class? Obviously, it will be very difficult to an m-learning activity if the phone is off; but what about if students are always tempted to check their facebook page while in class?

These questions are as much cultural and social as they are pedagogical or even to do with technology. How wired should the classroom be? Do we want “fully-enabled” classes with every possible plug and play device hooked up – or should the classroom be a sanctuary where phones remain taboo and only human communication is allowed? Pete cited The Flipped Classroom, which takes the line that instruction should take place at home and “homework” should be done in the class: students come to the lesson having already studied the material at home.

Some of the anomalies of blended learning include the fact that productive skills (speaking and writing) have been influenced less by technology than receptive skills (reading and listening). Will this change? Should there be more “heads up” learning in class, where students interact with the teacher and each other while “heads down” activity, such as doing exercises, is reserved for homework (or should this be flipped?)

Collaborative social media such as blogs and wikis can be a great way of encouraging students to write outside of the class, but can also be the focus for in-class teaching. Response devices (such as those described by Valeria in her presentation for SMART) can give a language class the feel of a “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?”-style quiz programme.

Overall, blended learning has gone from being a buzz word to a range of practical considerations about What? How? Who? Where? etc. Investment in educational technology has been greatest in the public (or “state”) school sector – where the “customers”, i.e. the students, have little say about whether or not they want it and how it should be organised. Universities still lag school in their use of technology for learning. And, of course, in the private language teaching sector many school still lack even the most basic equipment  (e.g. IWBs) and there is little or no agreement on questions such as whether m-learning should take place in the class or outside. The debates raging around resources and funding also impact heavily on the uptake of technology in education – but at the same time new generations of students that are perfectly au fait with technology take it for granted that resources will be available online and that learning should fit in with their digital behaviour (which includes ubiquity of access, gaming, messaging and the ability to share anything with anyone). Of course, as more digital natives go into teaching, the sight of the hapless teacher staring with horror at the complex array of buttons and plugs on the desk before them will eventually become trace memory of the educational world.

..............................................................................................

Open Forum at PSA Symposium, Milan 2012
From left to right: Seth Dickens, Paul Rogers, Pete Sharma,
Fabrizio Colombo and Cathy Smith

Finally, Seth Dickens, e-learning consultant and a PSA associate, chaired the Open Forum where many of the themes raised during the Symposium were widened out to include the thoughts and experiences of the audience.

One question was “Will people still be writing with a pen?” in the future, which took us into the whole debate about the impact technology will have on the way we communicate in general, not just in the language classroom.

Attendees were also keen to discuss the platforms and content they had discovered during the Symposium. Emer Gibson, Sales and Marketing Director of Engage Language Services (which I have founded with Emer), questioned Paul Rogers about the online safeguards of the Little Bridge community. Paul pointed to the fact that although all messages created by users typing are monitored, messages composed by using  the drop down menus are not moderated. (These can also be a good way of enabling beginners to make sentences.)

The main discussion in the Forum was how useful is technology for students? Does it help language learning? The overall feeling was that it does enable learning, but it has to be used appropriately and teachers have to have the support and training necessary to use it effectively.

The language teaching world is also somewhat behind the game in terms of deploying new technology. One speaker pointed out that if someone had been frozen 100 years ago and was brought back to life, where would be the best place to them out with inducing too much culture shock? A church, maybe? In fact, the ideal location would be the language classroom as it hasn’t really changed in over a century.
Is technology a threat to teachers? Will it eventually replace them? Seth pointed out that technology really provides a set of tools to help teacher; it’s main aim is not to replace human teachers, but to empower them. Luke from Richmond ELT agreed that there is actually very little research about this question: we just don’t know if doing a drag and drop exercise online is better than filling in the blanks on paper, for example.

There was also some discussion about who is actually driving the push for more technology. Book publishers might seem to have the least motivation – but as Luke and Cathy from Richmond both pointed out online is now inseparable from print as media converges. Technology providers such as SMART obviously have a vested interest, but their success is largely demand-led: they are responding to the growing need felt by schools and teaching organisations for adding greater functionality to the classroom.

Chris Heron, an educational entrepreneur and the founder and CEO of People Communicate Ltd, an innovative online learning platform, asked how will technology change the business model of the language teaching industry? This is a question that has largely been overlooked in the debates that have raged for and against blended learning, but surely one that will become more pertinent as the use of computer technology and digital media in education becomes the norm.

Finally, Pete Sharma said that new technology always has unexpected consequences and that although the current debates reflect our present concerns, no-one can say for certain what the impact will be in the future of the “digital revolution” that is currently taking place in the language teaching world (and beyond).

......................................................................................................

Following a thoroughly informative and lively morning – and having vindicated the role of technology by finally managing to get the presentations running – everyone moved out onto the British Consulate-General’s spacious and elegant terrace, where a buffet and sparkling white wine was served. The networking and discussions were both intense and highly useful.

A special mention should be made for Francesca Amami, Trade Assistant, UK Trade & Investment at the British Consulate-General Milan for her splendid effort in handling the invitations. Valeria Notari, Senior Trade Advisor and Head of E&T Unit, UK Trade & Investment Italy was also involved in the preparation for this highly successful event.

In conclusion, this was a very worthwhile and well-designed event that gave everyone present a great deal of insight into the impact of new technology on the language learning world. We look forward to seeing Pete Sharma – and everyone else involved in the Symposium – back in Milan very soon.

Buffet and informal networking at the British Consulate-General, Milan

Pete Sharma rocks Milan (with a little help from his friends): full report from the PSA Symposium, 2012 (Part 2)

Hold that thought: Luke Baxter of Richmond ELT

Next up were Luke Baxter and Cathy Smith of Richmond ELT, the Oxford-based publisher that is also part of the Santillana Publishing Group which is in turn owned by Prisa, the world’s leading Spanish and Portuguese-language business group in the fields of education, information and entertainment.

Richmond chose to ponder the theme of convergence and Luke started off by quoting the business technology consultant Ifeanyi O. Asonye, who defined convergence as 'the priming of underlying digital technology components and features such as voice, texts, video, pictures, broadcasts, presentation, streaming media, global connectivity and personalized services; the combination of all of these features and abilities from multiple electronic systems into a simplified, converged and computer-mediated communication system to enable individuals to interact, play, communicate, collaborate and share information in many new and different ways'. 

As an experienced EFL teacher, Luke brought along some realia to underline how “old media” from the real world – books and vinyl records are now available on just about any digital platform, including  the cloud. Newspapers and maps can be accessed from an iPad and even analogue gadgets such as a compass and a spirit level have been transformed into digital versions as apps.

In the field of language learning this process of convergence is well under way as content from books, audio and CD-ROM activities is gradually integrated with Virtual Learning Environments. 

Luke Baxter and Cathy Smith of Richmond ELT converge on
the British Consulate-General, Milan for the PSA Symposium

Convergence is also changing both attitudes and behaviour towards learning. As Luke pointed out, when he taught English in Spain, students used CD-ROMs but their teachers really knew exactly what they were doing with them. As learning becomes more integrated this kind of self-study activity can be managed more effectively by teachers with access to students’ activity profile and results (e.g. via the Learning Platforms accompanying several Richmond series – and also in Little Bridge, as we heard earlier).

Cathy demonstrated media convergence in action by introducing delegates to The BigPicture – Richmond’s new course for young adults. This includes wordlists, transcripts and online resources available through the Learning Platform, which has a special interface for teachers. Some of the features designed to enhance learning (and make teachers’ lives easier) include the ability to create drag and drop exercises, detailed student record-keeping functions, e.g. attendance and instant scores on exercises.

Cathy and The Big Picture Learning Platform

The Big Picture also features specially-made videos, Richmond Vodcasts, which are integrated with the course content. Other highlights include the Big Picture blog and the Forum which has a social networking interface. The Test Studio allows teachers to generate tests based on material from any part of the book being used in class and to get instant feedback from students, who can complete tests on the learning platform. Test material can be created as Word files or made interactive.

The Learning Platform also boasts an audio player where students can do listening activities either with or without the audio script. The Teachers Book for each course can be found online and there is a wealth of ready-made extension activities available.

Continuing with the theme of convergence, Luke looked at the (even) bigger picture of how new technology is impacting on teaching languages. He started by considering the Cloud, which, as he pointed out, is not really a new concept. Web mail accounts, such as Hotmail, which send messages to your account not your computer, have been around for a long time. Services such as Google Cloud and Dropbox now allow us access our media wherever we are. This is a huge boon for teachers working in different places who no longer have to cart books, student records and audio devices around. Integrated learning environments, such as Richmond’s, allow teachers to use different media in more flexible and productive ways. (The “golden age of EFL” when students would sit patiently watching their teacher spool through cassette tapes to find the right bit are now becoming a distant memory.) 

The challenge for publishers is to get the content right and produce material that can work both in class and at home or on the move – which is increasingly where a lot of learning and practice takes place (a point picked up during the Open Forum later). Mundane but valuable “heads down” activity, such as grammar exercises can more profitably be done outside of the classroom, while valuable class time can be spent on more engaging activities, such as discussing language problems. (This is especially true nowadays as there is less and less time available for class teaching.)

Richmond's New Framework series for adults and young adults

However, publishers also face an increasing threat from the phenomenon of convergence and digitalisation. While photocopying may become less of an issue as more content goes online, the publishing industry increasingly faces the problems that have beset the music industry. Trying to retain ownership of the music, as Luke pointed out, the music industry nearly managed to kill itself. Publishers should make material available in the cloud, but also ensure that they can generate sufficient revenue from it.

In order for content to appeal to both students and teachers it should be social, updated, fresh and alive. Interest can only be sustained if there is a constant supply of new material , podcasts and blogs. Sourcing and distributing this content sets publishers an extra challenge.

As with Little Bridge, Richmond’s Learning Platform allows students to interact socially. Indeed, it is this social element of online learning that could become the most significant factor in the convergence of “old” and “new” media, a process that could still up to five years in the ELT publishing industry.

The gradual process of media convergence (Richmond ELT)

It should be noted that convergence does not mean “total digitalisation”. There will always be books, for example, and publishers such as Richmond have no intention of completely abandoning printed or “optical” media (CDs / DVDs etc). The key thing is to make content available on as wide a range of platforms as possible – including online – and to give teachers and students the widest possible choice in how they decide to access material. Cathy and Luke pointed out that they themselves are a good example of convergence in action: while Cathy still has a Filofax, Luke is fixated on his iPad. People are free to choose the medium they are most comfortable with.

Interested in Learning Management Systems? Read my write-up of the Pearson / British Council Digital Transformation in the English Teaching World event earlier this year on NetworkMilan.com, which featured Pearson's LMS / VLE MyEnglishLab. 

..........................................................................................................

Valeria Mordenti of SMART Technologies at the PSA Symposium

Valeria Mordenti, Marketing Manager Italy and South East Europe at SMART Technologies, spoke (in Italian) about solutions for teaching foreign languages using SMART’s Interactive Whiteboards (IWBs) known in Italian as Lavagne Interattive Multimediale (LMI).

She started by giving an overview of the company and its mission. As the creator of the world’s first interactive whiteboard in 1991 SMART remains the world’s leading provider of this technology to mainly educational institutions around the world. (It has just under half of the IWB market according to a 2010 study by Futuresource Consulting.)

SMART has been providing solutions for the education,
business and government communities for 25 years.

SMART is based in Calgary, Canada, and has offices worldwide. More than two million SMART Board interactive whiteboards are used by over 40 million students and their teachers, and SMART products are used in more than 175 countries. The company has over 1700 employees, of which 500 work in R&D (40% hardware, 60% software R&D). SMART is the market leader in collaborative solutions for education


SMART’s global distribution network includes 300 resellers in North America and 65 distributors worldwide. Over 400 SMART resources are available for sales, service training and support through its Ecosystem network. SMART Ecosystem Network (SEN), a community designed to nurture the growth of companies and individuals interested in working with SMART. The network provides technical resources, accreditation programs and marketing support to its members, ensuring they are given the resources they need to develop and market software and content that work well with award-winning SMART products, such as the SMART Board interactive whiteboard, the SMART Table interactive learning center and the SMART Response interactive response system.

SMART’s company mission is to improve the learning and teaching experience through the use of technology in lessons. To achieve this objective, the company brings vast technical experience in both hardware and software. It also has extensive experience and know-how in the areas of integrating technology in educational contexts; pedagogy and methodology; and, of course, in implementation and support for its products and services. SMART is also particularly strong in developing online communities, particularly those in the Ecosystem Network.

What will the school learning environment look like in the future?

Valeria then painted a picture of how SMART technology is currently used in different learning environments and she also looked forward to consider what the school of the future will be like.

Typical learning environments include the classic situation of a teacher standing at the front of a class arranged in rows. Another environment is group learning where students work more collaboratively (often the case in communicative language classes). More modern settings include personal learning, where different technologies and devices are integrated and customised for each individual student and finally remote learning, which allows students to share material without the need for the teacher being physically present.

SMART solutions can help educational institutions and
teachers transform the classroom as we know it.

The challenge for educational institutions in the 21st century is to transform the classroom as we know it today, while retaining the benefits of traditional teacher-led instruction. The needs of educators themselves are changing. Digital natives now represent the majority of students in today’s classrooms and the relationship between students and computer technology is growing ever stronger. Encouragingly, the levels of IT competence among teachers is generally increasing and the role of personal devices in education (netbooks, tablets, e-readers, smartphones) is set to increase. 

In SMART’s vision the class of the future will integrate the various learning environments into a single system in which teachers can move easily from environment to another. This will allow them to create and share materials and use them to teach. They will also be able to check students’ progress in learning and provide support both in and outside the classroom.

While SMART is very much a technology company, it recognises that educational institutions often make basic errors when they decide to introduce or upgrade their computer technology. The most common mistake is to consider the various phases as separate projects without a coherent strategy or familiarity with the software architecture that supports the whole system. There are four main “sub projects” that need to be viewed within a single frame. These are: selecting IWB technology, accessing content on the system, intergrating personal devices and setting up distance learning.  While the development can happen in different phases it is critical that the choice made at the outset is correct.

The main advantages of the SMART platform are that it is easy to implement and easy to extend later. The architecture at its core emphasises ease of use. And, of course, the SMART classroom is an integrated learning environment which allows training and professional development to take place, as well as community resources to be accessed and developed. Additional services and support are also easily accessible.

The SMART software architecture has three main benefits. These are that the system is:

1. Open – Software Development Kits (SDKs) to integrate 3rd party applications and its Application Programming Interface (API) allows third party developers to create resources that can be integrated into the LMS and VLE.

2. Interoperable – SMART works with a wide range of platforms and operating systems including Microsoft, Apple, Linux and cloud-based services. It uses standard file formats to allow the widest possible use of existing and new material.

3. Scalable – based on a modular concept using software plug-ins that can be downloaded and customised, it is easy to extend and integrate new SMART hardware components and devices.

The SMART architecture also allows ICT solutions to be developed over time. It is able to meet new demands in training environments and it also “future proof” as technology evolves.

SMART has a range of software solutions designed to complement its state-of-the-art hardware. These include its SMART Notebook collaborative software; SMART Sync classroom management software; SMART Response CE assessment software; SMART Notebook SE (Student Edition) software; and the new SMART Classroom Suite, the first integrated learning software suite specially created for teachers and students, which organises and simplifies all entire teaching and learning activity.

The company also provides a range of complementary hardware including the SMART document camera which allows a teacher give students a close-up of both documents and 3D objects on the screen. The SMART Response handheld devices allow students to give instant feedback and take part in “Who Wants to Be A Millionaire”-style votes and quizzes, which can be highly motivating. Other technology on offer includes SMART Audio and the SMART Wireless slate, an input device specially adapted for class teaching.

Despite the relative lack of research about the efficacy and impact of new technology in the classroom, SMART’s IWB has been studied by Fabienne Gérard and Jamey Widener [1]. The authors of the study found that the SMART IWB can facilitate both the learning and teaching processes by supporting oral skills and cognitive processes  and by sustaining student motivation and encouraging emulation. However, the researchers also pointed to potential problems with the technology if teachers are not properly trained in its use. (The study also highlighted certain practical problems relating to pens, which have to replaced in the pen tray in order for the system to recognise that the teacher no longer wishes to write on the board.)

Overall, then SMART’s interactive whiteboards in conjunction with their supporting software and community resources can provide a bridge that allows the benefits of computer technology to be accesses while encouraging human-to-human communication. Its SMART classroom enhances new kinds of learning and it brings the internet into every foreign language class. The technology also provides access to authentic documents and both represents and encourages a major shift in attitudes and practice in modern language learning and teaching practices.

As a postscript to her talk, Valeria added an example of SMART technology in action in the language learning classroom. She showed us “Teacher's Kitchen”, a resource created by Maite Cervera, Susana Zaera at Colegio Montserrat, which allows students to followa recipe in a bilingual class.

Using the Document Camera, the teachers created “A Tasty Salad” that included some useful lexis along with video “explanations” (e.g. chop, slice, etc). The lesson also involved a multiple choice component, which students could complete using their SMART Response devices. (Ingredients that you don't find in a salad: a) Vinegar b) Olives, c) Flour d) Pepper e) Lettuce – if you’re not sure of the answer, you’re either a) not a very good cook b) English or c) both!)

1. Gerard, F., &Widener, J. A SMARTer Way to Teach Foreign Language: The SMART Board Interactive Whiteboard as a Language Learning Tool[online]. Edcomapss. 1999. [cit. 2011-06-17]. Available at: http://edcompass.smarttech.com/en/learning/research/SBforeignlanguageclass.pdf.

SMART Board 885ix interactive whiteboard system:
Up to 4 students can work together anywhere on the surface

Pete Sharma rocks Milan (with a little help from his friends): full report from the PSA Symposium, 2012 (Part 1)

Pete Sharma (left) talking at the PSA Symposium, Milan 2012 with Fabrizio Colombo,
Area Manager Italy, Greece & SEEU at SMART Technologies (centre) and
Cathy Smith, Sales & Marketing Director of Richmond ELT (right)

The theme of this “mini summit”, presented by Pete Sharma Associates at the British Consulate-General in Milan on 5th Ocotber 2012 was “The Impact of New Technology on Language Teaching”. It's almost a law of nature that whenever the subject of a conference is to do with technology, the gremlins will swarm. Such was the case with the Symposium, although to be fair to the people who came Milan to present their sites, materials, equipment and ideas, the technical problems that beset the first part of the proceedings were due rather to the extra-robust security at the British Consulate-General, rather than with any flaws in the technology on display. Indeed, the all the speakers who appeared early on were not only prime examples of British stiff upper lip, but also inadvertently underlined an important  point: while people can manage without technology, technology on its own cannot substitute for real, live humans (especially the redoubtable techies who were on-hand to sort everything out) - at least, not yet.

Vic Annells, the British Consul General in Milan (left), addressing
 the PSA Symposium, with presenter Byron Russell of PSA (right) 

Byron Russell, a PSA director, kicked off the event by welcoming everyone and explaining that Pete Sharma Associates is an international blended learning consultancy that aims to help people get over their fear of technology. In addition to its consultancy activities, PSA runs online courses and helps institutions integrate technology into their learning programmes.

Byron then introduced Vic Annells, the British Consul General in Milan and Director of UK Trade Investment Italy. He apologised for the tech difficulties and reassured everyone that the tight security at the British Consulate General is necessary in these difficult times, a point which everyone present accepted. Having recently completed an online course himself at Cambridge University, Vic was very enthusiastic about the motivating power of technology in the educational sphere.

Paul Rogers, founder and Director of Little Bridge (left)

With the original running order re-jigged, it fell to Paul Rogers of Little Bridge to open the batting, a task which he accepted manfully despite some continuing technical hitches.

Paul introduced us to Little Bridge, which is a virtual world which young learners can explore and learn English in a highly engaging, entertaining and safe environment.  Paul explained that he has a background in school teaching, at both primary and secondary level, as well as in universities. He has taught French, German, Spanish and English. The key to getting children involved in language learning, he feels, is to capture their imagination.

Teaching in the language classroom is somewhat strange. Paul likened it to teaching someone to swim without actually getting into the in water: what’s missing is the reality.

A bird's eye view of Little Bridge (plant not included)

Little Bridge is a small town, with a quintessentially English look and feel (stone buildings nestling among trees and hedges), but with a modern, diverse cast of characters that make it inclusive and accessible for a wide range of learners from around the world. 

The beauty of Little Bridge is that every story, song and activity is related to the Little Bridge world. This gives language learning a context, which is especially important for maintaining interest among young learners.

According to Paul there are two key requirements for language teaching. The first of these is motivation: all learners, not just children, have to want to learn if they are going to succeed. The second requirement is practice. However, given the constraints of school life and the competing demands of other subjects, there just isn’t enough classroom time for children to get the amount of practice they need in order to really develop their language skills: Little Bridge aims to address both of these issues, by providing kids with a highly absorbing and motivating virtual world and also the opportunity to gain extensive language practice both within and outside the classroom.

Little Bridge is matched to the CambridgeEnglish: Young Learners levels (Starters, Movers and Flyers). 

Inside the Little Bridge School

Paul took us into the School, where learners can access activities from familiar-looking drawers in the classroom. Activities include songs, speaking and extras. There is also a range of accompanying materials, including books, audio, worksheets. This is significant and proved to be one of the main themes of the Symposium: how “old media” works both alongside and in conjunction with the brave new digital world. Little Bridge in this context forms an actual bridge linking traditional media with new online resources that together form a continuum. (By the way, Little Bridge takes its name from the hump-backed bridge at the centre of the town.)

Little Bridge caters for a group of people who are for the most part perfectly comfortable with new, interactive forms of digital media: children. They are also some of the most demanding and critical consumers of learning resources. “We have to rise to the expectations of the kids,” says Paul.

One of the main features of Little Bridge is its wealth of different activity types – essential for holding the very limited attention span of its young guests. Interaction is at the heart of the project. For example, you can record yourself  taking part in dialogues and then play them back (normally a relatively simple task which somehow even the Consulate General’s fiendish security managed to thwart on the day).

Little Bridge is multi-sensory. Every unit contains a song, which is played from a cool animated mp3 player.

Learning in Little Bridge is carefully structured: it’s highly enjoyable, but it’s not “just” fun. Of course, learning should be enjoyable and motivating but there also needs to be a pedagogical backbone and logic to the learning that is taking place.

An interactive exercise on Little Bridge - with Domino (left)

There are however, some nice touches that are tailored to a younger audience. For example, Paul demonstrated a gap fill exercise in which the learner has to drag and drop the correct word. In addition adult voice saying either “Yes” or “No”, there is also a dog Domino, Little Bridge's mascot, who sits in the corner of the screen and helpfully nods or shakes his head.

This kind of instant feedback is critical in maintaining interest an attention. It also encourages learners to take more risks and be prepared to make mistakes, which as Paul pointed out, is how we learn, e.g. you learn to walk by falling over. “Mistakes get a bad press,” he said. One of the advantages of interactive, online learning is that you can make your mistakes in private.

However, Little Bridge also has an integrated Learning Management System. All the results from every activity undertaken by learners is sent through to the LMS, where the teacher can analyse an individual student’s progress and keep a check on how the entire group is performing.

Little Bridge supports learning with a naturalistic and engaging enviornment

Another subtle but very powerful feature of Little Bridge is that it uses sophisticated non-verbal – often visual – cues to support learner’s understanding and create a rich, naturalistic context for communication. For example, in a relatively straightforward dialogue between a boy and a girl we discover that the girl has been shopping and as bought a tee-shirt. While the language is fairly simple and well adapted to the learner’s level, the reaction of the boy when he sees the less-than-covetable fashion item the girl has bought is one of exaggerated horror (that would roughly be rendered as “Yeech!” if it were in a US sitcom). In another example, the sentence “I don’t like table tennis” is set in a mini animated drama in which the ping-pong ball glances off the table edge past the bemused player. Reactions, expressions  and “collateral” content that isn’t verbalised tend to provide human depth and naturalness, even though the grammar structures and lexis (vocabulary) employed are pitched at an accessible level.

Manufacturing content: the Grammar Factory in Little Bridge

Another area where Little Bridge can appeal to children is grammar - again, another area of language learning that more often than not is greeted in class with groans rather than grins. Paul suggested that grammar is really a short cut to the underlying concepts of what’s going in the language: it allows us to understand what’s going on behind the scenes. Little Bridge aims to make grammar more engaging and not just treat it as a separate part of learning the language. The Grammar Factory looks like real fun: it attempts to demystify grammar by presenting it as matter-of -fact set of structures and procedures all beautifully animated with industrial machinery, robot arms and conveyor belts. Watching bits of language being transformed in the Little Bridge Grammar Factory induces a strangely calming, almost hypnotic state in which grammatical structures literally appear before your eyes: it’s almost like watching a cognitive process externalised and set in a friendly, non-threatening environment – a grammar factory.

Little Bridge is used in schools worldwide, for example the US, Scandinavia, Turkey, Russia, where it is a mainstay of English teaching in some of the largest schools in St Petersburg). Every school in Mexico has Little Bridge.

The feedback from teachers has been both positive and insightful. ‘Our students talk about the characters as if they are friends’ is a typical comment.

Another important feature for learning English in a global context is that you can switch the whole platform between British and American English. This is significant especially in regions where US English is the preferred variety, such as Asia.

(Chatting to Paul later, I asked him if they had considered making a version of Little Bridge which looks more American – Little Bridge, USA? However, he told me that international students are quite happy with the typically British look and it is the ability to switch between UK / US English that has proved more significant.)

Learners can create their own character and room in the
safe, moderated Little Bridge community environment

As with all the other platforms and products presented at the Symposium, the social element of blended learning is an integral part of the Little Bridge experience. All users can access the online community, which is moderated to ensure safety. All comments on the community have to be in English and there is a messaging system (DigiTalk) that allows children to share their experiences and feelings about learning English in the Little Bridge microcosm. (You can find more discussion of this in the Open Forum section of this report.)

Perhaps the main advantage of Little Bridge is that it can be used both at school and at home, allowing students to maximise practice time away from the classroom but also to benefit from their familiarity with the environment in classroom activities. Teachers can also save valuable time as all results are sent to the LMS, which cuts out the need for endless marking.