GOAL-BASED INSTRUCTION

“Proficiency-oriented instruction,” “5Cs,” and “performance-based learning” are all ways of describing teaching and learning based on explicit goal statements. In that light, a syllabus is a contract between teacher and student: “If you, the learner, do X, Y, and Z successfully during this course, I promise that at the end of the term, you will be able to do the following things in the target language.” To take a specific example, I promise that students of Russian who do well (B or above) during the first 240 hours of instruction will reach Intermediate Low in speaking and Intermediate High in the receptive skills.

I use technology to the extent required to assure that those explicitly stated goals are achieved.

That means that my classroom is not technology driven. Less than twenty percent of my students’ class time is taken up with activities that involve something other than face-to-face talk. After all, the main resource that teachers can offer their students in class is directed communication.

HOMEWORK

For that reason, most of the tech parts of my teaching have to do with homework, which come in two forms: (1) assignments that use materials compiled specifically for students with an authentic or semi-authentic core surrounded by scaffolding and (2) the Internet “raw.”

Compiled materials. During the first three years of Russian-language instruction at GW (nearly 400 contact hours), students work with semi-authentic materials that I have collected or created as part of textbooks that I have authored or co-authored. The greater portion of these have to do with listening comprehension. (See Tech for Textbooks and Webcasts). Other “created” homework, especially in the elementary courses, involve aural and written mechanical exercises. (See Interactive Online.) All in all, I have created and maintained hours and hours of interactive video and audio targeted at beginning and intermediate audiences across the globe. But my guiding principles here have always been: (1) Let the computer do what it does best. (2) Use technology that everyone else already has; language learners are already “adopting” another language; they shouldn't have to adopt a technology that isn't ready for prime time.

The Internet Raw. One of the things that the computer does best is to provide learners a wealth of searchable sources of comprehensible input that they can use independently of the classroom and the teacher. I explored this world extensively in my 2007 article “Learner-Based Listening and Technological Authenticity.” What follows is a brief summary. We teach our students strategies for the four language skills. We have been less vigorous in teaching students how to use technology independently as part of skill-enhancement. For example, students at subscribing schools can go to SCOLA and see the news with accompanying transcripts — with a significant delay. But in fact, students can see today's news and transcripts on countless media sites directly from target-language countries. Wikipedia gives students access to quick information in the language of their choice. Students experimenting with new words and phrases (“Is превратиться the right word?”) can Google contexts to verify their guesses faster than they can switch to the other side of a dual-language dictionary. Wiktionary is sure to put books like “501 Verbs” out of business. Google Docs spellchecks in dozens of languages. YouTube allows language learners to watch a range of video from real television to gong-show like productions and to exchange video with others. Skype exchanges provide direct communication. I would even go so far as to argue that translation bots and the use of texts from the Internet as templates, long the object of derision by language teachers, can be useful tools in the hands of students who know how to wield them.

CLASSROOM

Some classroom activities require technology beyond a boom box or a DVD player. A laptop connected to a projector allows teachers to target-caption so that culturally rich video that would otherwise be I+20 can be brought down to I+1. PowerPoint presentations may save chalk, but they become most useful when students are engaged directly by anonymous polling.

Occasionally, I can harness a familiar technology to bring a bit of fun and games into the classroom. For example, the HTML Jeopardy template I wrote for a Russian Club activity when put on an LCD projector has the look and feel of real Jeopardy, and the questions can be changed from semester to semester.

Perhaps the most powerful classroom technology is the use of Skype. Even after 200 contact hours with Russian, most students are too coy to seek out native speakers on their own. But Skype conversations mediated by an instructor go a long way in convincing students that they have “arrived.” They can hold their own in an authentic conversation with a native-speaker / non-teacher.

STUDENT INVOLVEMENT

The audience for most of what I produce is made up of undergraduate students. But I like to believe that students can be more than technological consumers. For that reason I have tried to involve students in the very production of instructional technology. As paid interns, undergraduates have served as continuity checkers for scripts and transcripts. They have entered data into Quia for exercises and Javascripted webpages (see Interactive Online). They have shot video and occasionally appeared on camera or on mike (see Tech for Textbooks).

THE GREAT DEMOCRATIZER

Technology has become the great democratizer for those who know how to use it. As a fervent believer in a technological component to teaching and learning, I have sought out opportunities to share what I have learned with others through numerous workshops and presentations in the hope that they will produce even greater innovations.