ПЕДАГОГИЧЕСКОЕ ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В РОССИИ. 2016. № 4
УДК 37.016:811.111&38 ББК Ш143.21 -9-55
ГСНТИ 16.21.27
Код ВАК 13.00.02
Кларк Патриция,
профессор, Институт театрального искусства и танца, Университета Восточной Каролины, Гринвиль, США; e-mail: minyurova@uspu.ru
Кейн Элеонора,
доцент факультета политических наук, университет префектуры Симанэ, Япония; е-mail: minyurova@uspu.ru
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: видеообщение; драматургия; предметно-языковое интегрированное обучение; четыре составляющих; английский язык как иностранный.
АННОТАЦИЯ. Программа «Глобальное партнерство в образовании» делает акцент на видеообщении студентов всего мира, позволяя им общаться и сотрудничать по глобальной сети со своими сверстниками. В данной статье описываются американские и японские студенты, ранее сотрудничавшие только по Интернету, до и после участия в реальном практическом занятии по драматургии. Студенты были опрошены о различиях между видеообщением и реальным сотрудничеством лицом к лицу по четырем составляющим предметно-языкового интегрированного обучения: содержание, познание, общение и культура. Авторы обнаружили, что, хотя студенты весьма положительно оценивали видеообщение, все-таки они предпочитали реальное общение лицом к лицу. Японские студенты в качестве преимуществ реального общения выделили возможность овладения языковыми умениями, в то время как американские студенты отдали приоритет межкультурным возможностям такого общения. Дальнейшее сотрудничество этих групп показало, что проведение реального практического занятия лицом к лицу стимулировало более активное виртуальное общение в последующие месяцы, когда студенты более часто просили организовать виртуальное сотрудничество и чаще общались в социальных сетях.
Clark Patricia,
Professor, School of Theater and Dance, East Carolina University, Greenville, USA.
Kane Eleanor,
Associate Professor, Faculty of Polictical Studies, University of Shimane, Shimane, Japan.
ABSTRACT. The Global Partners in Education initiative focuses on telecollaboration for students around the world, allowing students to communicate and collaborate virtually with their peers. In this study American and Japanese students, who had participated in these virtual links, were surveyed before and after taking part in their first face-to-face drama workshop. Students were asked about the differences between telecollaboration and face-to-face interaction according to the 4Cs of Content and Language Integrated Learning: content, cognition, communication, and culture. It was found that although students were very positive about telecollaboration, they preferred face-to-face interaction. The Japanese students emphasized the content they had learned over traditional language skills, while the American students emphasized intercultural awareness, such as learning how to work with nonnative speakers of English. Later interactions between the two groups showed that the face-to-face workshop led to more virtual communication in the months afterwards, with students requesting more video links, and interacting more frequently with each other via SNS.
ВИДЕООБЩЕНИЕ И ОБЩЕНИЕ ЛИЦОМ К ЛИЦУ:
ВОЗМОЖНОСТИ СОСТАВЛЯЮЩИХ ПРЕДМЕТНО-ЯЗЫКОВОГО ИНТЕГРИРОВАННОГО ОБУЧЕНИЯ В ОБЛАСТИ ТЕАТРАЛЬНОГО ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ И ОБУЧЕНИЯ АНГЛИЙСКОМУ ЯЗЫКУ
TELECOLLABORATION VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTION: A CLIL 4CS PERSPECTIVE ON COLLABORATION IN DRAMA AND EFL.
dents report learning from video linking and face-to-face interaction; (ii) Cognition: which to-face interaction over video linking with cognitive processes did students report using
overseas students from a CLIL 4Cs perspective. during the different interactions; and (iii)
The 4Cs model, outlined by Coyle et al., is a Communication: which communication tools
framework to ensure balance between content did students report using during the different
and language in English as a Foreign Language interactions. This paper outlines reported
(EFL) courses in regard to content, cognition, learning outcomes (content), cognitive procommunication, and culture. The paper inves- cesses, and communication tools based on surtigates three themes: (i) Content: what did stu- veys administered before and after a face-to© Clark P., Kane E., 2016
face workshop taught by a Theatre Studies professor and three students from East Carolina University (ECU) to eight EFL students from the University of Shimane (US J).
Seven female students, members of English seminar, aged between 20 and 21 took the survey on a video linking course (Appendix 1 available at eleanorannekane.wordpress.com). The pre-workshop survey was administered to students, via Moodle in July 2015, after taking a 15-week course, where they had linked with Taiwan, Peru, and also with ECU&s Storybook Theatre (Clark Kane, 2013).
USJ students were asked an open-ended question about what they had learned in terms of skills and knowledge. They could answer in English or Japanese. Although this course had not been taught as a typical CLIL class, the results show that students emphasized the declarative knowledge they had gained from the course, in addition to language skills, in contrast to traditional EFL classes where students generally refer only to the language skills they have learned. The students& unedited responses are shown in Table 1.
USJ students& self-reported learning outcomes after a video linking course
Student number What did you learn in this class? Skills? Knowledge?
Students were then asked to recall which cognitive processes they had used, according to Bloom&s revised taxonomy (Anderson
Krathwohl, 2001). Their responses focused on Understanding, despite the fact that they all created a collaborative presentation with their overseas partners.
USJ students& self-reported cognitive processes during a video linking course
Bloom&s Revised Taxonomy Student responses
Remembering No responses
Understanding 2. There were some cross-cultural things through video link and exchanging messages.
Applying 1. When I made some mistakes or say something not good way to response, I was try to correct to for next time.
Analyzing No responses
Evaluating No responses
Creating 4. In this class, I made a lot of presentations. In making it, I thought how should I explain what I want to say.
Students were asked about the communication tools they had used. Facebook&s Messenger was the most popular. Two students wrote that they used Facebook to introduce information about Japan, and six students used Messenger, citing the ease of sharing files and documents, and the fun of sending amusing stickers.
USJ students had also had a face-to-face class with Australian students on a short-term Japanese language course. When asked which
they preferred, the class was evenly split: half preferred video linking over face-to-face. The survey did not ask them why they felt this way, but it may be that this face-to-face interaction took place in Japanese, and they only met these students once, making it difficult to befriend them. In contrast, USJ students video linked with their overseas partners between four and six times, and also contacted them online after each link.
Three ECU students, two men and one woman, members of the department of Theatre and Dance, aged 21 took the survey (Appendix
ECU students were asked open-ended questions about what they had learned in terms of skills and knowledge. Their answers are shown in Table 3. ECU students emphasized the content they had learned, specifically children&s stories and Japanese culture.
ECU students& self-reported learning outcomes before the face-to-face workshop
Student number Student responses
ECU students were then asked to recall which cognitive processes they had used, according to Bloom&s revised taxonomy. Their answers are recorded in Table 4. They answered about all of the skills.
ECU students& self-reported cognitive processes before the face-to-face workshop
Bloom&s Revised Taxonomy Student responses
Remembering 1. I&ve been able to remember the students& faces since we first started linking.
Understanding 1. After linking USJ students would talk about their interests and their English is wonderful.
Applying 1. We&re creating a new peach for our story because we&ve learned that peaches are different in America.
Analyzing 1. When we are given a story, we analyze the story before we adapt it.
Evaluating 1. After analyzing the stories, we evaluate the meaning and themes for the stories and how it affects the children.
Creating 1. Once we&ve analyzed and evaluated the stories, we then begin to adapt and stage the show.
ECU students reported using video linking, organized by their professor, email, and Facebook to contact USJ students before the face-to-face workshop.
Eight USJ students completed an anonymous paper-based survey after the face-to-face workshop. (Appendix 3 available online).
USJ students reported improved listen-ing/ speaking skills (five students); learning how to act from the Theatre students (four students); and cultural differences (three students). Their comments are recorded in Table 5. Recent research has introduced the role of
drama pedagogy in CLIL (Eurydice, 2015; Roman Nunez 2015), and students responded very positively to the drama workshop. Students seem to be reporting a balance between content and language learning outcomes during the workshop.
USJ students& self-reported learning outcomes after a face-to-face workshop
Student number Student responses
Students were then asked to recall which cognitive processes they had used, according to Bloom&s revised taxonomy. Their responses focused on Remembering and Creating, the lowest and highest skills respectively. USJ students emphasized the amount of remembering they had to do for song lyrics, actions, and lines during the performances (six students). They also referred to the creation of joint performances (five students). Their comments are recorded in Table 6.
USJ students& self-reported cognitive processes after a face-to-face workshop
Bloom&s Revised Taxonomy Student responses
Remembering 1. I remembered how I should act during the play.
Understanding 1. I need to understand what they say and act. It was fun.
Applying 3. Asking questions about the play
Analyzing 6. I analyzed the good point and bad point of acting and conveying something.
Evaluating 3. Cheering [for] each other
Creating 4. Making a story with them
USJ students emphasized face-to-face talking as a communication tool, and three wrote that they had become Facebook &friends& with their ECU partners, &liking& their comments and sharing photographs. All of the USJ students preferred the face-to-face workshop
over video linking. Students wrote &I enjoyed video chat, but face to face is more efficient&. They noted that it was easier to see facial expressions; to start conversations; it was easier to &jump into the conversation&.
ECU students reported learning about Japanese customs, some Japanese phrases, and Japanese animal noises. They reported that their own communication skills improved: they could no longer rely on colloquialisms and common references to communicate with someone from a different culture. They also reflected on more technical content such as the importance of character movement, and how
ECU students reported that they relied on talking with the students face-to-face. They used Facebook, instant messaging, and phone calls, but there was a very strong preference for face-to-face communication. ECU students& reasons for this preference were the pleasure of seeing someone&s reactions clearly; making friendships; ease of communication; and being able to have more meaningful conversations. After the workshop, they all reported having more confidence in working with people from different cultures, and greater sensitivity to cultural issues.
This project shows how video linking can produce similar results to face-to-face contact, although students show clear preference for face-to-face interaction. These students had video linked with each other only twice in the year before the face-to-face workshop. However, after the face-to-face workshop in October 2015, the students linked four times in the following four months. Face-to-face contact made
to explain theatre direction to someone whose first language is not English.
Students were then asked to recall which cognitive processes they had used, according to Bloom&s revised taxonomy. Their longer responses focused on evaluating and creating.
students wish to link more frequently, and led to more collaborative projects. Despite a four-teen-hour time difference, the students coordinated to perform via video link at a public event in Japan. In addition, online contact via a dedicated FB group increased, and informally the students reported messaging each other more frequently.
Wilkinson and Wang&s research on videoconferencing between Taiwanese English majors and American journalism majors showed that, despite the difference in their fields, both sets of students gained from the experience: the English majors practiced their foreign language, while the journalism majors practiced interviewing nonnative speakers (p. 109). Similarly in this study, the EFL learners practiced their language skills, while the Theatre Studies majors practiced their own professional skills and gained intercultural awareness.
During the linking sessions, ECU students performed stories for the USJ students gathered during the telecommunications sessions which lent itself to separate responsibilities during all interchanges. The face-to-face inECU students& self-reported cognitive processes after a face-to-face workshop
Bloom&s Revised Taxonomy Student responses
Remembering 1. Recalling parts of the Japanese language
Understanding 1. Using different languages and gestures to communicate ideas
Applying 1. Workshop execution
Analyzing 1. Realizing the moral of the story, and using that as a basis for the performance
Evaluating 1. Adjusting everyday behavior to make students feel more welcome and comfortable
Creating 1. Turning the story into a mini-play with aspects of drama
teraction, however, provided opportunities for both partners to unite and use critical and creative thinking skills to explore and discover a collaborative way to perform as one ensemble. Students worked together to problem solve and create storytelling skills, translations and interpretations. Before rehearsing a final performance during the face-to-face class, USJ students worked alongside ECU students to prepare presentations of stories. Throughout the process, students brainstormed, explored, and developed theatre techniques, communication skills and how to incorporate the strengths of both groups. ECU students learned pronunciation and interpretive skills from the USJ students, who in turn, learned performance techniques including adaptation of stories for the stage, participatory theatre techniques, and vocal projection.
ECU students developed lasting friendships with USJ students. The face-to-face meetings and classes provided students with not only the opportunity to work together, but to also share insights, personal thoughts, laughter, and a new sense of understanding. Upon returning to the United States, ECU students were excited about sharing their experiences with others from their university and made several presentations to the interest of
many other students. ECU students gained a greater appreciation for and understanding of the Japanese culture and their USJ partners and also looked forward to linking sessions following the face-to-face experience. The linking sessions now reflect a deeper understanding and shared history between the partners and a lasting relationship for the future.
To prepare students to compete in an increasingly globalized job market, content knowledge alone is not enough. They must be able to work with colleagues from different cultures. The surveys here have shown that although students prefer face-to-face contact, they are still learning content, using Higher Order Thinking Skills, and a variety of communication tools during video linking.
Acknowledgements
The writers wish to thank East Carolina University for funding three students& travel to Japan. ECU wishes to thank the students, faculty, community and the University of Shimane for their wonderful hospitality during our face-to-face visit in the fall of 2015. This work was also supported by JSPS Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) Grant Number (c) 26370688, Principal Investigator: Eleanor Kane.
REFERENCES
Статью рекомендует д-р пед. наук, проф. С. А. Минюрова.