SUBSCRIBE

Animating All Students

Gregory van Zuyen reports on the way Terry Thoren and Rudy Verbeeck are using cartoons to help teach language skills and learning habits in class

One of the many challenges facing educators at this time of year is getting students back into the right behavioral mode for learning. It’s natural for students to slip out of “school habits” during the summer, but reinstating good learning practices can be time-consuming and frustrating. Unfortunately, there’s now so much pressure on teachers to stick to the curriculum on a day-by-day basis that there’s little time to ease students back into the educational rhythm.

Terry Thoren, the former CEO of Klasky Csupo, Inc. — the animation studio behind Nickelodeon’s world-famous Rugrats and The Wild Thornberrys — is working with business partner Rudy Verbeeck to produce WonderGrove Learn an education website intended to be used in the classroom by educators to teach social skills, functional life skills and bilingualism.

“We produced the twelve new back to school lessons to help make the transition back-to-school easier for students and educators alike. Because teaching appropriate behavior during the first few weeks of school encourages better behavior throughout the entire school year, the lessons are a strong foundation for our year-round tool for success,” explains Thoren.

These back-to-school lessons address critical challenges that educators face when students transition to the first few weeks of a new school year. Each animated video models behavior for students in pre-K through second grade, such as “listening when the teacher is talking,” “using polite words,” “lining up quietly,” and “how to handle a bully.”

WonderGrove Studios is also applying its animation to language development. Its Dual Language Enrichment Solution includes 150 instructional animations and 1,500 printable extension lessons in Spanish and English. “Young students develop language skills rapidly, and they quickly absorb whatever they see and hear in cartoons. This accelerates their understanding of new words in two different languages at an incredibly fast rate. Research shows when young children form an emotional connection with animated characters, they model the behavior of the characters. We’ve created engaging, age-appropriate characters who reinforce positive behaviors in Spanish and English,” adds Verbeeck, who speaks six languages and is the brains behind Wonder­Grove’s proprietary animation software.

The back-to-school initiative is only one element of the resources WonderGrove Learn offers educators. The instructional videos focus on important areas of learning such as social skills, life skills, health, science, nutrition, safety, and vocabulary. There are also unique “words of the day” episodes — in both English and Spanish — where animated characters teach words in the proper context in less than sixty seconds. The instructional animations come with printable extension lesson plans that align to 90% of the Common Core State Standards. The idea is to give educators a tool to engage students by showing animations during the school day and then extend each theme to printable extension lessons that address CCSS standards.

Thoren has spent decades studying the effects of animation on children. As CEO of Klasky Csupo, he was the executive in charge of production of 600 TV episodes. He oversaw the production of Rugrats when it was Nickelodeon’s number one animated show, as well as the popular cartoons Rocket Power, The Wild Thornberrys, and the Emmy-nominated As Told by Ginger.

“Cartoon characters are the biggest stars in entertainment. They are in countless TV series, in video games, and in Hollywood’s most profitable movies. Every waking hour before and after school, cartoon characters are prevalent in most children’s lives,” says Thoren. “However, between 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., when students are in a classroom, there are no animated characters. The classroom is a wasteland for animation. There are very few animations that satisfy educational standards that can be used in a classroom today.”

To develop the lessons, Thoren went straight to the source — the classrooms. “We worked with educators to define the core intention of each lesson. Then we created storylines that used our age-appropriate characters to address each lesson. We produced instructional animations to bring the stories to life. Then, we tested the animations in the classrooms and made alterations and edits.” The finished product is the result of direct teacher and student feedback, addressing the needs of everyone in the classroom.

Janelle Vargo, an educator at Morrison Elementary in Dayton, Ohio, uses the lessons several times a day in her classrooms. “This is the first time I’ve ever seen anything that is literally at my fingertips all day,” says Vargo. “You never know when you’re going to need it.

“Even if it’s just adding a cartoon to your fluency group, or adding a cartoon to your behavior check-ins, it’s going to make a huge difference in your day and in your relationship with students,” she adds. “Videos that model appropriate social skills, like ‘respecting others on the playground’ and ‘asking the teacher for help’ are lessons that every student needs. But no one talks about them until you and the student are both frustrated, and this frustration never ends with a positive outcome. The nice thing about WonderGrove is that you can implement a video each day for only three minutes and know that the students are learning the right way to behave.”

Guidance counselor Joan Swank also understands the importance of the program. “Because I’ve been doing this for 28 years, I have resisted technology and animation. But when I watch how the kids relate to these characters, I feel they do have a way of reaching the kids that’s very different than anything else I’ve seen,” says Swank. “The bottom line is that if students are going to be successful in school, they have to have good behavior and good social skills. And the stories featuring the WonderGrove Kids give me a great tool to cut right into what that skill is.”

Teacher Betsy Jones says her pre-K through fourth-grade classes are benefiting as well. “I was using the lesson ‘Using Polite Words,’ and we did some role playing after they saw the video. One of the students really struggles with using polite words, and you could see the light bulb go on when he knew what he was saying wasn’t nice. The videos help reinforce social skills by giving students an age-appropriate visual and by giving them ideas and strategies of what they should do. And they start acting that out in the classroom.”

Animation is particularly beneficial in bilingual classrooms, according to Verbeeck. “The lessons are both comprehensive and detailed, with a number of activities that take into account the academic and linguistic developmental growth of children who are still developing their native languages while adding second languages.

“It’s a valuable tool for biliteracy, because it targets children at the age when they are most receptive to developing language skills. Cartoons are a universal language that children consume day in and day out over and over again. Animation is a great way to model language acquisition because animated characters know no borders. No linguistic borders, no cultural borders, no gender borders. The WonderGrove Learn animations will stand the test of time because they can model positive, appropriate behaviors for young students everywhere.”

Animation can have a magical effect on young children and can help eliminate anxiety. Terry Thoren, Rudy Verbeeck, and their team are using animated magic to improve classroom behavior, and language acquisition and to keep children motivated to learn new ways to communicate.

Gregory van Zuyen is creative director of Language Magazine.

Report Claims Most US Teachers Not Trained to Create Readers

According to a report by the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), a Washington-based think tank funded by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, which received funding from the Bush administration to support No Child Left Behind, many states fail to maintain the necessary requirements regarding elementary and special education teachers’ knowledge of reading instruction. The NCTQ has been critical of teacher education programs in the U.S. since its founding in 2000.

According to Strengthening Reading Instruction Through Better Preparation of Elementary and Special Education Teachers, 40 states still either do not have sufficient licensing tests in place for elementary and special education teachers, or have no test at all. A handful of states have adequate tests in place for elementary teacher candidates, but not special education teacher candidates, a perplexing stance given that 80% of all students are assigned to special education because of their struggle to read.

Those states that have adopted adequate tests of teachers’ reading knowledge for both elementary and special education teacher candidates are Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Virginia, and Wisconsin. “The failure of such a high percentage of our children to learn how to read is tragically unnecessary,” says Kate Walsh, NCTQ President. “We’ve known for decades what needs to change. Educational trends and priorities ebb and flow. Our responsibility to children should not.”

Many states maintain teacher preparation program standards that require the science of reading to be part of the elementary and special education teacher curricula, but the NCTQ claims that “standards alone have proven insufficient to ensure that these teachers are prepared to teach the science of reading, generally because they are hard to enforce.”

“If states want to use standards as their primary mechanism for delivering well-prepared teachers, they have to be prepared to also provide constant monitoring and enforcement. Few states have shown themselves to be so inclined,” continued Walsh. “The most efficient means available to states are strong tests backed up by annual reviews of how successful programs are preparing their candidates to pass this test.”

To promote universal literacy, NCTQ recommends:

  • All states should require elementary and special education teacher candidates to pass a rigorous test in reading knowledge that is aligned with the scientific findings about how to produce the highest numbers of successful readers.
  • When states adopt an assessment serving multiple purposes–that is, one that tests knowledge of other subjects alongside reading knowledge, it must report a separate subscore on a candidate’s reading knowledge.
  • States should increase transparency by reviewing their teacher preparation programs and making information reflecting programs’ success in preparing candidates available to the public.

Read the full report here.

 

English Learners Succeeding

A new study finds that scores from students who speak a language other than English at home have improved dramatically over the last 15 years. Students who speak a language other than English at home have improved in reading and math much more substantially since 2003 than previously reported, according to a study published this month in Educational Researcher. “Hidden Progress of Multilingual Students on NAEP” by Michael J. Kieffer, associate professor of literacy education at New York University’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, debunks a common myth that multilingual students and English learners have made little progress in academic achievement in recent years and that U.S. schools continue to fail these students.

“Educators and policymakers have been misled by traditional ways of looking at achievement data for English learners,” said Kieffer. Kieffer and the study’s co-author, Karen D. Thompson of Oregon State University’s College of Education, analyzed National Assessment of Educational Progress data from 2003 to 2015. The data demonstrated that although all students’ scores improved, multilingual students’ scores improved two to three times more than monolingual students’ scores in both subjects in grades four and eight. There is little evidence that these trends can be explained by cohort changes in racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, or regional composition.

The research also demonstrates that multilingual students are about one-third to one-half of a grade level closer to their monolingual peers in 2015 than they were in 2003. The data cannot identify the specific sources for the change in achievement but suggest that a bundle of policy changes which occurred between 2003 and 2015 may have moved schools in the right direction in serving multilingual students. “Despite the dominant perception that these students have made little academic progress in recent years, our findings indicate there is real evidence of progress for this population,” said Thompson. 

America’s Bilingual Roots

Dominika Baran reminds us of the history and value of America’s multilingual past

Every September, or August in some cases, teachers welcome into their classrooms students whose first language is not English. Some of these may be immigrant or refugee children who have just arrived in the U.S. and know not a single English word. Others may have grown up in immigrant households and first encountered English literacy in kindergarten, so that even as bilingual speakers in higher school grades they are daunted by academic English.

Even in schools with robust English as a second language (ESL) support, some teachers struggle to meet the needs of their English language learners (ELLs)—or emergent bilinguals. The situation is much worse in areas where bilingual education is discouraged or disallowed. One well-known example of this is Arizona, where the passing of Proposition 203 in 2000 eliminated bilingual education programs, replacing them with so-called structured English immersion (SEI) that has left many students and parents traumatized, but Arizona is hardly unique.

So why does bilingual education induce so much anxiety among policy makers and the English-speaking public, even though research and classroom practice have shown time and again that supporting students’ home languages actually helps them learn English and leads to better academic performance overall?

MULTILINGUAL PIONEERS

There are arguably few images of young America as iconic as the pioneers. In Westerns, Hollywood portrayed them traveling in covered wagons across the prairies, inevitably speaking English—or, more precisely, an unmistakably American, somewhat country-accented variety of English. But contrast that with a different scene featuring pioneers, one taken from the Texan countryside in 1854. A group of about 100 Polish families from Upper Silesia have just arrived, under the leadership of a priest from their hometown, Reverend Leopold Moczygemba.

Having expected an established settlement, they find themselves in untouched wilderness, overgrown with grass and brush so tall that people cannot see each other from just a few feet away, filled with rattlesnakes, barren of anything edible, hot, and unforgiving. In the absence of any dwellings, they sleep in dug-out burrows. Day by day, they work tirelessly to clear the hostile land. Eventually, they build a village: houses, a church, a school. In the church, Reverend Moczygemba preaches in his native Silesian Polish, and the school is taught in Polish as well.

Similar stories can be told of Czech, Slovak, German, Swedish, Norwegian, or Danish settlers, to name but a few—and in the American West, of course, Chinese, Japanese, and other non-Europeans likewise settled often difficult terrain, and built railroads and mined. Although the English introduced by the British colonizers is now the dominant language in the U.S., it was by no means the only language spoken by early Americans. In fact, at the time of the American Revolution, less than 50% of people in the colonies were English speakers or of English-speaking descent.

Today, on the other hand, while we hear thousands of languages spoken in America, as many as 80% of Americans are native—and often monolingual—speakers of English. Two facts about language in America emerge from this history: that multilingualism has always been a feature of American society, and that English remains the dominant language with little danger of a challenge.

Yet both of these ideas appear to elude many people, like the angry customer at the Manhattan eatery Fresh Kitchen whose rant against employees addressing customers in Spanish went viral on May 16, 2018. The man’s assertion that the restaurant’s staff “should be speaking English” because “this is America” is an old yet common slogan. It assumes, incorrectly, both that English is the only American language and that English is somehow assaulted when other languages are used in public.

Another incident that took place on the same day was the detention by a Montana Border Patrol officer of two American citizens because, in his own video-recorded words, they were speaking Spanish, which is “very unheard of up here.” The officer’s actions and the reasoning behind them reflect, again, the idea that languages other than English are un-American and present a threat. These misconceptions underlie many educational policy decisions aimed at immigrant children.

ENGLISH IS NOT GOING AWAY

Research has consistently shown that across immigrant communities in the U.S., a complete shift from the heritage language to English occurs by the third generation. In other words, even if first-generation immigrants do not speak English at all, their grandchildren tend to be monolingual in it. Furthermore, languages other than English have a comparatively tiny number of speakers in America. Even Spanish, the only serious partner to English in American public spaces, is spoken only by a little over 12% of the population, and its relative vitality is mostly due to its history as the dominant language in the North American West and Southwest and to the Spanish language’s continuous contact with Central and South American Spanish via ongoing transmigrations.

The lesson here should be that English is not going away. It is not embattled or disappearing. Consequently, it is irrational to worry about the welfare of English when hearing or seeing other languages used in American public spaces. When such fears inform educational policy, leading to the elimination of bilingual or dual-language programs in favor of English immersion, emergent bilingual children suffer, because immersion is not, contrary to common popular belief, the quickest way for children to learn a new language.

In fact, recent research shows that children are not necessarily better at learning new languages than adults. When “immersed” in English and deprived of a way to make meaningful connections between the new L2 (second-language) input and their existing L1 (first-language) knowledge, children struggle to comprehend academic material, they lose motivation, and their self-esteem plummets. And in addition, they become isolated from their communities: their heritage language begins to undergo attrition and they may develop negative feelings about it, while at the same time their parents, who often do not speak English, are unable to help them with homework or engage with school activities.

BILINGUALISM IS GOOD FOR YOU—AND FOR SOCIETY

As early as 1979, University of Toronto professor and scholar of bilingual education and second-language acquisition James Cummins criticized immersion programs as “submersion” that runs counter to all available research. He, and many other researchers since, emphasized the developmental interdependence of L1 and L2, pointing out that children who continue to develop their L1 as they acquire L2 perform better on reading tests than children whose L1 education is replaced with L2. This is not to say that emergent bilinguals cannot succeed when placed in English immersion programs, but that they succeed in spite of, and not because of, such placement.

By contrast, there is clear evidence that encouraging the simultaneous development of L1 and L2 through bilingual and dual-language education helps children make connections between what they are learning and what they already know, leading to better performance and stronger self-esteem. Researchers Lesley Bartlett and Ofelia García describe the success of dual-language development in the bilingual program at Gregorio Luperón High School in New York City, noting that when Spanish is used as scaffolding to learn English, even teenagers who come to the school with only limited English are able to acquire it rapidly.

The fact that bilingualism benefits our brains has been written about copiously in recent years. Bilingualism is reported to aid brain development, enhance cognitive functions such as prioritizing and organizing information, and help ward off early signs of dementia. When immigrant children’s bilingualism is encouraged—when they are treated as emergent bilinguals and not just future English speakers—their chances of academic success increase. It is time that these research-based facts, not irrational fears of other languages “taking over,” informed bilingual education policy in the U.S.

America was settled by speakers of many languages, and as long as immigrants continue to come to the U.S., multilingualism will remain a fact of American life. At the same time, those who fear for the future of English can rest assured that it is more than secure. English is here to stay. Supporting other languages is neither un-American nor a threat to English.

Dominika Baran is an associate professor in the English Department at Duke University. She works in the fields of sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology, and her current research focuses on the intersections of language, identity, and migration. Her book, Language in Immigrant America, was published in October 2017.

FOXP2 Role in Language Evolution Challenged by Genome Study

It was previously thought that the changes to a certain gene, Forkhead box protein P2 (FOXP2), was the principal link to the evolution of human language. Researchers believed that the changes in this gene were so beneficial that they spread through the human species rapidly, helping homo sapiens to develop complex language skills. A new study, however, indicates that the changes to FOXP2 didn’t happen during homo sapiens recent history, and that previous studies indicating such were false flags.

The study, No Evidence for Recent Selection at FOXP2 among Diverse Human Populations, published in Cell, reanalyzed the genes in hundreds of globally distributed genomes to test for recent selection.

The gene FOXP2 affects function in language-related parts of the brain, and is the only known autosomal-dominant (inherited) language-related gene. According to the study, “Initially investigated as the first gene implicated in speech and language…this led to speculation that FOXP2 played a key role in the development of modern language, unique to Homo sapiens.” A previous paper found that humans carried two mutations of FOXP2 not found in other primates. The paper found indications of a ‘selective sweep’ where a mutation happens quickly across a population, and inferred that the mutation happened in the last 200,000 years. The problem with the initial 2002 study was that only 20 participants. Author Elizabeth Grace Atkins (and other researchers on the paper), used a much larger data set of both 53 high-coverage genomes from global human populations and populations from the 1000 Genomes phase 1 dataset to study.

Figure thumbnail fx1

The study found that no sweep signal of FOXP2, indicating that the mutated gene is just a small part of the complicated puzzle of human language development.

 

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(18)30851-1?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867418308511%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

Reading Your Rights

The first federal civil-rights lawsuit in U.S. history to secure the right of access to literacy is currently being argued in Michigan (see News, p. 9). The district judge has ruled that, despite its importance, children have no constitutional right to learn to read and write, but the plaintiffs see otherwise and are preparing their appeal to a circuit judge. The basis of their case—that minorities and other less privileged factions of society do not receive adequate attention or resources—is a familiar one.

Universal literacy is not only beneficial for society in general, it is fundamental to democracy—but asserting that it is, or should be, a constitutional right may seem to be an overreach of federal power. After all, the Tenth Amendment has traditionally been interpreted to shift responsibility for education to the states, and recently, there has been a reassertion of state power and opposition to federal intervention. However, the constitutional principle of equity may override such concerns, as it did in the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision.

The 14th Amendment prohibits any state from denying “to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The equal protection clause was enacted by Congress after the Civil War to help former slaves from the South participate in society. For readmission to the Union, Congress required Southern states to adopt the 14th Amendment and rewrite their state constitutions to conform to a republican form of government with universal education.

By the time the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, state constitutional law and congressional demands had established education as fundamental to citizenship.
Despite the amendment, a hundred years later, in the Jim Crow era, education, or rather the lack of it, was used as a tool of minority oppression through the imposition of literacy tests for voter registration.

“Universal literacy is not only beneficial for society in general, it is fundamental to democracy.”

Now, all 50 state constitutions guarantee education. Once it can be established that education is a constitutional right, it’s a short walk to extend that right to literacy. Every elementary teacher will tell you that the first few years of school are spent learning to read and the rest reading to learn. Without adequate literacy, education collapses.
Establishing access to literacy as a civil right through the judicial system is an arduous process that would not be necessary were our schools adequately funded and wholeheartedly supported, but public education in the U.S. is under attack and may need to rely on the Constitution for protection.

Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe called the lawsuit “both creative and rock solid” and added: “If you think of Brown v. Board as one shoe that dropped, this is the other shoe.” Once that shoe is neatly tied and shined, it will provide underserved communities with a powerful tool to kick state lawmakers into line when they fail to ensure that allocation of resources to schools is fair. Every child deserves the constitutional right to thrive, participate, and question through literacy.

Testing Reformed

Lance Knowles explains how advances in technology and cognitive neuroscience allow us to assess and modify the quality of learning and practice

A major benefit of the technology revolution in education is the ability to monitor student learning activities in much greater detail than previously possible. Not only can we measure progress, but we can, for the first time, measure the quality and efficiency of the learning process.

This article presents some of the innovations we have developed for our English language learning programs, which are now used in more than 50 countries.

Standards
Assessing the learning of any subject or skill requires a learning theory and a learning sequence to measure against. These define the standards necessary to make informed judgments. In other words, there must first be a theory about how learning takes place in the brain and how to optimize the order of learning steps and activities.

For language learning, it isn’t enough to memorize vocabulary and rules of grammar. Language fluency requires the skill to process language at a subconscious level, or language automaticity. Learning or acquiring that skill becomes the primary learning task, and that requires practice.
But what is effective practice?

In our blended learning programs, we see practice as having four dimensions: (1) amount of practice, (2) frequency of practice, (3) quality of learning activities in the practice, and (4) level and sequence of learning activities relative to student proficiency level.

By monitoring and analyzing these dimensions, we can measure the effectiveness of practice and make predictions about learning outcomes. We can also use this information to coach learners in how to modify and improve their practice.

Dimension 1: Practice Amount
In many learning programs, the amount of practice is determined by time on task or by the number of lessons completed. There is little or no distinction made about how the time is spent or how lessons are completed. Learners may practice with varying degrees of attention, sometimes just observing or watching passively, at other times performing some kind of learning task. Sometimes they are simply bored and unengaged.

What we assume is that effective language practice requires active engagement with the language, which means that learners interact with the language, such as to answer questions, repeat or record a sentence, or compare recorded language with a model. We call this kind of interaction a learning step; and it is the number of learning steps that determines the amount of practice. Passive learners will therefore take much longer to accumulate the necessary number of learning steps to complete a lesson. At any given time, learners can see their completion percentage for a lesson, which indicates their level of active engagement and progress within the lesson. The completion percentage also depends on how well the learner performs on various comprehension tasks. Learners who comprehend at a higher level accumulate learning steps at a faster rate.

To summarize, we measure practice amount by determining how often the brain actively interacts with the target language.

Dimension 2: Practice Frequency
From cognitive neuroscience, it is well known that practice frequency is important. Distributed practice is more effective than mass practice, even when the total amount of practice time is equal. Creating new neural connections requires practice over time, with enough frequency to strengthen new connections and prevent other connections from disappearing altogether. The goal is long-term learning and automaticity, not short-term memorization.

So it isn’t enough to measure only practice time. Three hours of practice in one session is less effective than three hours of practice distributed over several sessions. For language learning, we recommend that learners practice at least three times per week, and preferably more — with additional classroom or tutor support to extend and personalize the content. For learners who need to make faster progress, daily practice will reduce the total amount of time necessary to reach a specific proficiency goal.

The challenge, therefore, is to get learners to build practice into their schedules. They need to understand how important practice frequency is, and they need to be motivated to make this happen. This motivation in large part comes from classroom activities that support and extend their practice. In our blended learning model, teachers are important, as well as parents or the learner’s working environment. Having a goal is essential for learners to continue the learning process, especially since much of the practice has little intrinsic interest. Research shows that having an unconscious goal can be very effective in keeping learners engaged (Bargh & Morsella, 2008). It is important that teachers and others help to instill and reinforce the tremendous value of English fluency in terms of life goals rather than as an academic subject.

Dimension 3: Practice Quality
Assessing the quality of practice requires a learning theory. Without a learning theory, it isn’t possible to decide whether a particular learning activity facilitates or impedes learning. While developing listening comprehension, for example, the inappropriate use of text, which is spatial, can interfere with the development of language chunking skills. In some tasks, the presence of text is a distraction which desensitizes the neural pathways and subconscious processors necessary to search out, recognize, and employ language patterns to process spoken language, which is temporal, not spatial. With spoken language, there is no time to reflect or analyze the language. It must be processed subconsciously.

In our learning theory, Recursive Hierarchical Recognition (RHR) (Knowles, 2013) language chunking, which is a subconscious process, is essential for fluency, so anything that impedes its development has a negative value. We therefore suppress the initial use of text and encourage students to engage with the spoken form of English first.

This view of text is nothing new. In the classic work from almost a century ago, The Oral Method of Teaching Languages, linguist Harold Palmer wrote:

“A considerable number, probably the majority, of those who have successfully mastered the spoken form of one or more foreign languages maintain that their success is due to the fact that, when they began their study, they plunged straight into the spoken language without doing any preliminary book-work. They advise others to do the same thing.” (Palmer, 1922, pp. 1)

In line with this thesis, learning activities where learners listen to and then repeat a phrase or sentence without reference to text support are more effective than listening and repeating with text support.

In the RHR learning theory, a key neural switch is temporal tension, which automatically and unintentionally activates when processing a stream of language in working memory, which has limited capacity. For processing spoken language in working memory, the language must be chunked. One can feel temporal tension when listening to and then repeating sentences without text support. It is this temporal tension that activates neural pathways to recognize and use language patterns to chunk the language (see figure). These language chunks are constructed automatically. When text is present, the urgency of language chunking is reduced or absent, and the temporal tension switch is not activated. Text is spatial, with time for reflection. Spoken language is temporal.

Other factors in determining the quality of language input and practice include cognitive load. Extraneous information, such as distracting or unclear visuals, results in cognitive overload. Pictures may be entertaining, but may not be effective if they have extraneous information that interferes with the learning process. In many cases, simple, iconic images are more effective.

Therefore, the design of the learning materials and how they interface with learners are factors that affect the quality of learning activities and must be guided by the learning theory.

Also to be considered are the choices learners make when interacting with all modalities of the language input: visuals, audio, and text. When learner activity shows a sequence of actions that reduces temporal tension, such as overreliance on text, the activity is scored lower than activities where temporal tension is optimal.
It is well known that the brain seeks to fill in incomplete patterns. Whether patterns are visual or auditory, the unintentional action of trying to complete patterns is a learning force that we systematically use when designing our courses. Gaps create tension, and the brain responds automatically by trying to fill them, provided that they are appropriate for the learner’s proficiency level. Visual cues, life experience, and other long-term memories help the brain guess and fill in meaning and thereby bootstrap the learning process. We determine and maintain optimal temporal tension through proper placement and frequent testing in the learning sequence.

To measure the quality of practice, our system monitors and tracks every learning action or series of actions. We know when learners listen, repeat, record, or see text, and in what combination. Each learning activity is monitored and scored. If a learner is overusing text support, for example, the system catches it, adjusts the study score downward, and, at critical points, alerts the learner and teacher so that the learning pattern can be modified. The metrics used to do this are adjusted for each type of lesson and learner. The role of text, for example, is much different for young learners than for adults.

Dimension 4: Practice Level and Sequence
For language practice to be effective, activities must be at the right level and sequenced properly, which means that there is sufficient linkage between lessons and the temporal-tension level is optimal. In other words, the learning theory guides both assessment-level testing and lesson sequencing.

While some syllabi are situational or grammar based, we employ a hierarchical learning sequence, from concrete concepts to abstract concepts. The ability to chunk language around concepts is enhanced by systematically using temporal tension, which activates pattern recognition and subconscious language processors to extract meaning for insertion into working memory and further subconscious analysis. Without the ability to chunk information, much of it is missed. Even when vocabulary items are all familiar, if learners lack the ability to chunk, comprehension is partial at best. Meanings of words depend on how they are used and on the words around them. In the real world, words have multiple meanings or at least a continuum of meanings that are only decided in context. This explains why so many students with large passive vocabularies are unable to converse in real time.

In RHR, language chunks are built around concepts and language functions. They are not built around grammar rules, though an awareness of grammar is developed implicitly as a means to accurately express concepts. The focus is on meaning first and form second. Concepts are the building blocks of meaning and reflect how our brains structure our perceptions. Simple concepts include “object,” “location in time or space,” “frequency,” and “manner.” More complex concepts include how events are sequenced or connected in a conditional relation. Higher level concepts are abstract and include counterfactual suppositions and fine distinctions in logic.

So our proficiency testing must determine what level of conceptual complexity learners can comprehend and express. Once they are placed into the learning sequence, learners interact with multimodal language inputs that reinforce and then expand their ability to comprehend and express longer and more-complex phrases and sentences.
To score this dimension, we must determine whether learners are working at the right level and in the proper sequence within lessons. Learners move from a general understanding, with gaps, to a detailed understanding with fewer and fewer gaps, and then to full comprehension and the ability to express the information with little or no conscious analysis, which requires automaticity.

If learners practice outside their optimal levels, we reduce their score. If they focus on lessons out of sequence or spend too much time on one lesson, the result creates boredom and a lack of meaningful engagement, for which they are marked down. Practice must be distributed over a range of activities and lessons, minimizing boredom and cognitive overload.

To guide learners, our smart system automatically opens new lessons when certain conditions are met, including the passing of Mastery Tests, which become available only when a target-completion percentage is reached. Ideally, learners should also demonstrate their mastery in classroom activities, which is an important factor in keeping them motivated. This is an important reason why we support a blended model over a self-study model. Teachers have an important role to play.

Study Scores
In our experience, learners are extremely interested in their study scores. They notice when their scores go up or down and can view their scores at any time by accessing the Intelligent Tutor. Tutor messages might be very positive, such as the following:
Total Time: 56:16 hours

1. Not monitoring recorded voice enough in Speech Recognition
lessons
2. Good use of repeat button
3. Good use of voice record compared to the number of sentences heard
4. Good Mastery Test score(s)
5. Good study frequency in the last two weeks
6. Good success with comprehension questions
7. Good study time in the last two weeks
Total Study Score = 11

This student is practicing well. Study scores above six are good. In this case, twelve is the maximum score possible. Learners who don’t use their time well will have a low or negative score, such as:
Total time: 98:07 hours

1. Too much text button compared to repeat button
2. Not using voice record enough compared to the number of sentences heard
3. Not repeating sentences enough compared to the number of sentences heard
4. Not monitoring recorded voice enough in Speech Recognition lessons
5. Too much use of translation
6. Good study frequency in the last two weeks
7. Good study time in the last two weeks
Total Study Score = -4

Though this student is practicing enough, the quality is poor. The data shows that the student is passive and avoiding temporal tension, so we expect progress to be slow. As a result, the teacher should coach the student on how to improve practice. Overuse of the text button, for example, needs to be addressed. A further examination of the data shows that the student tends to study the same lesson too many times in succession. This means that the level of attention is probably very low and the level of boredom is probably high, which means very little learning is taking place.

Summary
By now it should be clear that time on task, though important,
doesn’t go far enough. Advances in technology and cognitive neuroscience allow us to assess and modify the quality of learning and practice. Learners who study well are more likely to study more frequently and feel their progress. Learners who don’t study with enough frequency may study well, but because of slow or no progress are more likely to give up and be demotivated. All four dimensions of practice are important and interrelated.

High rates of attrition are very common in language-learning programs (Nielson, 2011), and our data shows that learners with high study scores remain active much longer and reach their goals faster than those in traditional or self-study approaches. For large users of our system, such as ministries of education, our analytics program mines the data and makes it available through quick and easy summaries. This data shows which schools, districts, and cities are doing well or are in need of additional training or support. It shows learner trends, such as changes in study scores, and helps to identify problems in time to address them. Having access to this kind of data is revolutionary.

References
Bargh, J. A. & Morsella, E. (2008) The Unconscious Mind, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1) 74-79
Knowles, Lance (2008) “Recursive Hierarchical Recognition: A Brain-based Theory of Language Learning,” FEELTA/NATE Conference Proceedings (pp. 28-34), Far Eastern National University, Vladivostok, Russia
Knowles, Lance (2013) “Redefining Roles: Language Learners, Teachers and Technology,” DOI: 10.1109/ICETA.2013.6674431 in Proceedings of 11th IEEE International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications, Slovakia
Nielson, K. B. (2011) “Self-Study with Language Learning Software in the Workplace: What Happens?” Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 110-129
Palmer, Harold E. (1922) The Oral Method of Teaching Languages, W. Heffer & Sons, Ltd., Cambridge

Lance Knowles is president and head of Courseware Development at DynEd International (www.dyned.com). Knowles has pioneered the development and use of CALL for more than 25 years. His innovative learning theory, Recursive Hierarchical Recognition (RHR), is based on cognitive neuroscience. DynEd’s award-winning programs are used by millions of students around the world.

‘They’ Create Controversy in Australia

An initiative to encourage the use of non-gender-specific language by the government of Victoria, Australia’s second most-populous state, has caused public outcry and been labeled as “ugly, authoritarian language control,” according to The Australian.

As part of the promotion of “They Day,” by Victoria’s Department of Health and Human Services on the first Wednesday of every month, government employees are being asked to avoid using “gendered” language and instead use pronouns such as “they” or “them” to encourage acceptance of gender-fluidity, but critics have attached he move. Parnell McGuiness, a communications specialist, is calling it bullying on Australia’s Sky News.

A DHSS spokeswoman said the campaign “is about improving understanding, respect and inclusiveness within the Department, and feedback from staff has been positive”.

The video did not receive government or departmental funding, she added.

Dale Park, co-convenor of the Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, told SBS News the campaign was crucial in helping to break down gender identity barriers.

“No-one likes being referred to by the wrong gender. Using the gender and pronoun someone identifies with shows respect and is the decent thing to do,” he said.

“Most people would have grown up with a rigid view of gender and may not have not met people who identify as gender non-binary or use they/them pronouns. Therefore it is vital that these terms and why they are so important to people is explained.”

They Day is an initiative of the department’s Pride Network. In 2016, Victoria published an Inclusive Language Guide to encourage public employees to “avoid using heteronormative language” such as “husband” and “wife”.

U.S. Judge Denies Right to Literacy

In Detroit last month, U.S. District Judge Stephen Murphy III asserted that, despite its importance, the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a fundamental right to literacy.

The plaintiffs (students and families), who accuse Michigan Governor Rick Snyder and other state officials of depriving Detroit children of their right to literacy said they would appeal the ruling to the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Last year, Public Counsel, the nation’s largest pro-bono law firm and Sidley Austin LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of a class of Detroit students to confirm the right of access to literacy for all students.

“[The] decision is as deeply disappointing as having to file a lawsuit in the first place to ensure that the state of Michigan denies no child the opportunity to thrive in schools worthy of their desire to learn,” Mark Rosenbaum, an attorney with the Los Angeles-based Public Counsel, said in a statement.

He said the court “got it tragically wrong when it characterized access to literacy as a privilege, instead of a right held by all children so that they may better their circumstances and meaningfully participate in our political system.”

He also noted that students in the Detroit Public Schools Community District have the worst literacy scores among big-city districts on a rigorous national exam. “I don’t think you can square that constitutionally or morally,” Rosenbaum said.

In his 40-page ruling, Murphy said, “The conditions and outcomes of plaintiffs’ schools, as alleged, are nothing short of devastating.”

Murphy also noted that literacy, and the opportunity to obtain it, “is of incalculable importance. As plaintiffs point out, voting, participating meaningfully in civic life, and accessing justice require some measure of literacy.”

But those points, Murphy said, “do not necessarily make access to literacy a fundamental right.” And, he said, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the importance of a good or service “does not determine whether it must be regarded as fundamental.”

The lawsuit sought remedies that included literacy reforms, a systemic approach to instruction and intervention, as well as fixes to crumbling schools.

In a parallel case (Ella T. v. State of California), also filed by Public Counsel, the defendant sought to have the case dismissed at a hearing last month. The lawsuit claims that the state has violated the fundamental right to education of these children, who are mostly low-income and students of color, by requiring them to attend school yet depriving them of access to the most fundamental educational building block: literacy.

The Los Angeles Superior Court ruled that a lawsuit seeking improved literacy education for California public school students can move ahead.

Law firm Morrison & Foerster and Public Counsel filed the case on behalf of 10 students and the advocacy organizations CADRE and Fathers & Families of San Joaquin.

Morrison & Foerster partner Michael Jacobs, who is leading the firm’s pro bono representation on this matter, said, “We are pleased that the court is allowing us to proceed with this lawsuit. We are optimistic that we will be able to demonstrate that the State can and must do more to ensure that all students have access to literacy.”

Defendants in the case—the State of California, the State Board of Education, the State Department of Education, and the State Superintendent—had filed a demurrer to complaint. Morrison & Foerster and Public Counsel filed on behalf of the plaintiffs an opposition to the defendants’ demurrer.

With the order by Judge Yvette Palazuelos, the lawsuit will be able proceed and hear evidence that the state of California is failing hundreds of thousands of public school students.

Leanna Robinson

New Zealand University Launches Indigenous & Māori Exchange Program

A new program has been launched at the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand, to increase the number of indigenous students studying abroad and to connect them with members of first nations in their respective host countries. The University, which lies on New Zealand’s South Island, hopes to see an increase of Māori students from their University leaving to study abroad in Australia, Canada, and the U.S., and in return, an increase of indigenous students from those respective countries.

The program was founded by director of the University of Otago’s Māori Development Office, Tuari Potiki. “There weren’t many Māori taking advantage of international mobility opportunities, and we wanted to know why that was. For a long, long time these sorts of opportunities were really only available to an elite and select few.” he told the PIE News, adding that many barriers including financial ones were thwarting the number of Māori students taking advantage of study abroad opportunities.

The program aims to be a learning experience for indigenous participants to engage with cultures of the first nations in their host countries, and to learn about their traditions, languages, and history, and to contribute in community-based relationships. The program is set to eventually expand to different countries, including Universities in Taiwan and South America.

The exchange program is in line with University of Otago’s Māori Strategic Framework 2022, which laid out six goals in order for the University to engage with iwi and Māori, to deepen the University’s commitment to achieving equitable Māori participation and success rates in tertiary education, to champion an environment in which scholarship and partnership will flourish to advance Māori development aspirations, and to set and pursue ambitious goals around embedding mātauranga

Māori within the University’s core functions. The Strategic Framework, which was first introduced in 2007, aims to use the following goals to achieve more Māori engagement:

  1. Leadership and Partnership: To demonstrate strong, accountable leadership which contributes to whanau, hapu, and iwi development.
  2. Māori Research: To undertake research that is transformative and beneficial for Māori communities, including research that increases understanding of te ao Māori and matauranga Māori, and supports the University’s commitment to excellence in research.
  3. Quality Programmes and Teaching: To create and enhance exemplary learning and teaching environments which allow staff and students to engage capably with te ao Māori and matauranga Māori through the provision of outstanding and innovative degree and support programs, and excellence in teaching.
  4. Te Reo and Tikanga Māori: To increase the use of te reo and tikanga Māori (Māori language and cultural practices) across each level of the University.
  5. Māori Student Success: To increase Māori student success at Otago by providing an environment in which Māori students are supported to thrive and succeed as Māori.
  6. Māori Staff Growth and Development: To increase the number of Māori staff at the University of Otago and support their professional and cultural development.

Source:

The PIE News https://thepienews.com/news/uni-otago-launches-indigenous-exchange-program/

University of Otago https://www.otago.ac.nz/maori/otago667421.pdf

 

1...191192193...332Page 192 of 332

Subscribe for exclusive content

Language Magazine is a monthly print and online publication that provides cutting-edge information for language learners, educators, and professionals around the world.

Subscribe

LanguageMagazine 2023

Language Magazine