Training Future Teachers through
Online Exchanges
François Mangenot
Training future teachers for and
through Online Exchange


Online interaction and collaboration is
‘infamously’ difficult to organise and
implement [O’Dowd, Epal 2009]
It is quite clear that our capacity to make
effective use of information technology in
educational settings is impaired by
inadequate preparation of teachers (as well
as learners) [Spector, de la Teja, 2001]
Outline



1. Overview / parameters of online exchanges
(i. e. telecollaboration)
2. A case study: training future teachers into
e-learning (and IT) through an online
exchange, Le Français en (première) Ligne
3. Planning online interaction through
communicational scenarios?
1. Some parameters of on-line
exchange

« A great diversity » (O’Dowd, Epal 2009)…








Language(s) used during the exchange
More or less focus on the cultural dimension
Tasks, project, collaboration?
Number of participants, individuals or groups
Tutoring (or no online guidance)
Mode of integration (=>assessment), blended
learning
Communicational tools / scenarios (see part 3)
References: Warschauer & Kern (2000), Belz (2003), Belz &
Thorne (2006), Dejean & Mangenot (2006), O’Dowd (2007),
Degache & Mangenot (2007), EPAL Conference Proceedings
2007 & 2009 (EPAL=« échanger pour apprendre en ligne »).
Language(s)




Two languages, reception & production: reciprocal
learning (Tandem as archetype)
Two languages but production only in L1 (Cultura)
Several languages of the same family (Galanet:
Romance languages)
Only one language:




not all partners are language learners (O’Dowd, 2006)
English as lingua franca (Japan-Korea in O’Dowd)
participation in non-educational networks (Hanna & de
Nooy, 2003, Ollivier, 2007)
future teachers interacting with learners
More or less focus on the cultural
dimension


Cultura as archetype
Language always linked with culture, but more or
less focus on ICC development:
« The move from exchanging information to intercultural
learning is very hard to achieve » (O’Dowd, 2009).

The issue of « failed communication » (Belz, Thorne,
Ware, etc.):



Differences in communication style, tools culture-of-use
Online intercultural interaction requires specific skills and
attitudes
Issue of visible and invisible culture: facts and
communicative ethos (Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 2004).
Tasks? Project? Collaboration?






Task-based design (see Müller-Hartmann 2000,
2007): frequent but not unique model
Le français en (première) ligne = task-based
No compulsory tasks (e-Tandem)
Questionnaires + forum discussions (Cultura)
Projects (i. e. collective realisation of a
« product » over a rather long period,
Progetto Incontro, Tridem)
Combination of above approaches: Galanet
Different distance working modes
(Mangenot
& Dejean-Thircuir, 2009)
Joint problem
space, negotiation
of meaning
Small
group
work
Common output
Sharing
Not necessary
No
No (parallel outputs)
Discussing
Yes
No
No (but interactivity)
Cooperating
Yes
Yes
Collaborating
Yes
Yes
Yes (but division of
labor)
Yes (all steps in
common)
Participatory structure (Ellis, 2003)



“The participatory structure of a lesson refers to the procedures
that govern how the teacher's and students' contributions to the
performance of the task are organized ” (Ellis, 2003).
“ Careful design ” of “ work flow processes ” (Dooly, 2007)
A lot more possibilities online than in F2F class:



One to one / e-mail (Tandem)
One to one to one / audioconferencing + blogs (Tridem)
Small collaborative groups with different tools:


Groups of 6 to 10 performing tasks in forums under the guidance
of 1 or 2 tutors (Français en (première) ligne)

Larger groups performing discussions (Cultura)
Example: desktop or room-based videoconferencing (O’Dowd,
2007)


At a distance: Projetto Incontro, Tridem
Locally: On fait de la radio?, Galanet
Guidance? Integration?




No online tutors but integration into F2F class
(Tandem, Cultura, Progetto Incontro)
Online tutors who are more moderators +
integration into F2F class (Galanet)
Online tutors = future teachers (Le français
en (première) ligne)
Assessment…
(« very little of course grade is awarded for
completion of exchanges despite high work load »,
O’Dowd, Epal 2009)
2. Le français en (première)
ligne

Learners of French / Pre-service teachers (Masters
Program) communicate in French [project devised by Christine
Develotte, Lyon, and launched in 2002 by F. Mangenot in Besançon]

Different objectives for the 2 groups:

learn French / be in contact with French culture through
native partners / tutors
 train ICT & e-learning through a « learning by doing »
approach / reflect upon this experience
Since 2002 : Australia (Sydney, Melbourne), USA (North Virginia,
Berkeley), Spain, Japan, Latvia // universities of Besançon,
Grenoble 3, Lyon 2, Luxembourg (>500 students)
All online tasks and interactions have been saved…
Project website (description, tasks, interaction samples):
http://w3.u-grenoble3.fr/fle-1-ligne



Some features of Le français en (première)
ligne

Fully integrated project (part of study plan – and

Asymmetric roles of the partners (peer / tutor, Dejean-

Task-based approach, strong guidance (=> pre-service

assessment - on both sides)
Thircuir & Mangenot, 2006)
teachers learn how to design tasks for distance learning and
how to be a tutor)
For the future teachers, ICT training through a
situated learning approach (Develotte, Mangenot,
Zourou, Recall 17(2), 2005, Mangenot, Zourou, 2005)


e. g. Audacity (see Mangenot, Zourou, 2007, Alsic)
A cultural dimension exists for both groups
Which teaching skills aimed at through
this project?






Two different versions in Lyon and in Grenoble:
synchronous vs. asynchronous interactions (which
lead to different skills, see Guichon, 2009, Salam &
Valmas, 2009)
Technological know-how: LMS, sound, picture and
video software, communication tools
Integrating technology into a syllabus,
conceptualising CALL (Levy)
Task design: more accurate instructions, input
Online tutoring: socio-affective, socio-cognitive and
organisational dimensions, corrective feedback
Intercultural competence
How are the future teacher evaluated?

No grade for task design nor for tutoring
(high motivation, see Develotte, Mangenot, Zourou,
2005)



Interaction analysis of a previous year (done
in dyads) = 50% of the grade
Reflective blog advised…
Reflective report due after the end of the
exchange = 50% of the grade
Two difficult dimensions


A time consuming project (for the future teachers)
 Problem: task design and tutoring takes approx.
10 hours / week (+ 4 h in class)
 Solution: a course with 7,5 credits (ects)
 Another solution: task design by a pair for the
whole group, synchronous exchange (Lyon)
Intercultural competence:
 Cultural differences may remain unnoticed or
not enough deepened. Example 1
 Reflective practices, but not enough time… and
no change in attitude. Example 2…
Forum message extracts from Japanese students
(the task consisted in comparing the course of an ordinary student’s
day in France and in Japan – French tutors had provided a
multimedia description of their day)






So, I don’t do much homework. I think you work more
than me.
Me too, I watch TV in the evening, but I don’t work
much. I think you are more hardworking than me.
I work less than you after dinner; hence you are a
better student than me!!!!
Then, you work much better than me…
After [dinner], I do my homework for the next day. But
I am more whimsical than you; hence I stop at 10 pm.
Example taken from (Mangenot, Zourou, 2007)
A « revisited rich point » (Thorne, 2006) which
did not elicit a change in attitude

As I already said it in class, I had a hard time coping
with our learners behaviour: they were
underestimating themselves all the time, and were so
perfectionist with their productions. Whereas at the
beginning, I could give attention to their anxiety,
later I got fed up with repeating all the time « Don’t
worry! You manage pretty well, go on like this! ». I
had a feeling of dishonesty (“j’ai eu l’impression
d’être hypocrite”) and I really didn’t appreciate this
situation.
[Extract from a reflective report, 2008]
Tokyo – Grenoble exchange: a
communicative challenge





Partners do not know each other
Dissimilar cultures / attitudes / ethos
Communication mainly through asynchronous forums
(exchange of audio files)
One or two tutors for up to 12 students (like in a real
e-learning course)
Different settings of the Moodle working space
(“espace d’exposition discursive”, Develotte, 2006).
=> Examples showing how communication may be
affected by the way tools are set up.
3. Communicational scenario



The range of activities available in online settings and the
multiple conditions of time in which they take place are
evidence that the technology demands placed on online
teachers are somewhat more significant than those
associated with classroom teachers.
[Spector, de la Teja, 2001]
Bringing future teachers to think in terms of
communicational scenarios (for a given task) might
be heuristic: pedagoggical and instrumental
dimensions.
Definition: planning of envisaged online
communication (linked to a task)
Learning scenario
Communicational scenario (tools)
Task(s) (outcome)
Genre ?
Interactions
Resources
Sub-tasks
student/tutor
Chronology
Mangenot, 2008
between peers
Parameters of a communicational scenario





Degree of collaboration, participatory structure,
roles
“Work flow processes” (Dooly, 2007),
information to be exchanged
Chronology (synchronous / asynchronous)
Tutoring
Tools and their affordances (ex. blog), their
“habitual uses in society” (O’Dowd, 2007)
Examples from Tokyo – Grenoble (1)





Task: « Would you prefer to study in Paris or
in Grenoble? »
Type/genre: Discussing an issue
Resource: Internet sites about both cities
Challenge: finding the right arguments
Participatory structure: dyads of Japanese
students record their voice (mp3); ideally,
one prefers Paris, the other Grenoble…
Transcript of an oral production in French
(Paris –Grenoble, total length = 1 min.)







Where do you want to study?
I prefer Paris.
Why?
Because it is more convenient, there is a
subway, buses, etc. And you, where do you
want to go?
I prefer Grenoble, because I love skiing.
I envy you. In Paris, there is a lot to see, for
instance the Louvre or Orsay Museum.
In Grenoble, there is a lot of nature. […]
Examples from Tokyo – Grenoble (2)





Task: « Tell me about a Japanese tradition »
Type/genre: Explaining something
Resource: a self-made (by the tutors) video
about the ritual of tasting wine
Challenge: managing to explain traditions
Participatory structure: dyads of Japanese
students record their voice (mp3) for the
French tutors
Transcript of an oral production in French
(Japanese tradition, total length = 1 min.15)




Hello, I’m Takuya
I’m Naokazu
Today, we are going to present you with
Japanese traditions. I think a unique and
funny tradition in Japan is the crowded train.
There are a lot of people in a car. I often hear
foreigners who get surprised at seeing the
crowded trains at peak hours. It’s quite tiring
for the people who go to work that way. So,
we go to Hanami [Cherry blossom feast] to
take a rest in spring.
[Naokazu tells about the Hanami tradition]
Examples from Tokyo – Grenoble (3):
instructions




Task 5: The land of the rising sun and me
Step 1: You are going to listen to short interviews of 4 French
people of different ages: Romain (10), an elementary school
pupil, Camille (17), who is in her last secondary school year (just
before entering university), Ludovic (39) and Françoise (55), who
are both employed. We asked them what Japan called up for
them.
Step 2: […] fill in the comprehension sheet […]
Step 3: You are going to reply to at least 3 French people you’ve
just listened to. Tell them about Japan taking into account what
they have said. Work individually. Record separate monologues
(at least 1 min each) for each person. Speak to the person:
« Hello, Romain, you are right », « Hello, Camille, you ought
to… ».
Transcript of oral productions
Interview : (French tutor, her son Romain 10)


So, Romain, I’d like to hear what you know about
Japan.
I know… er… there are many mangas… there are
many videogames, there are many people… So is it…
Reaction from a Japanese student:

Hello Romain. You are right, in Japan there are quite
interesting mangas. I like Dragon Ball most of all.
Which mangas do you like? And then, I also like
videogames. I love…
The land of the rising sun and me





Task: replying to 4 French people of different
ages (other than the tutors) who express what
Japan calls up for them
Type/genre: Dialogue (but asynchronous)
Resource: 4 brief interviews (audio files, 1’)
Challenge: to establish a contact with unknown
interlocutors despite asynchronicity
Participatory structure: one to one (a Japanese
student talks to one of the 4 French people, and
then to another); French people may reply.
Summary of part 3




Communicational scenario: tools, participatory
structure, working mode, chronology, guidance,
information flow…
Exploiting tools in relation to their affordances
Importance of a real information exchange (see
TBLT)
Input / Output as social genres (ex. 2 & 3)
Conclusion : our future teachers have
been trained to…


Design online tasks (internet as input and as medium)
and communicational scenarios
Communicate socially online (socio-affective role of a
tutor)



Explain/Correct/Assess online (cognitive role)
Reflect upon their practice
Reflect about cultural differences (Intercultural
Communicative Competence)

And last but not least: they have learnt how to
organise an online exchange…
Extract from a reflective report (translation)

After a 3 months participation in « Le français en
première ligne », it is time for me to reflect on this
experience and to assess it. This project has been
terribly time-consuming throughout the whole
semester and demanded a strong personal
commitment. It has taken me a lot of time to put this
experience at a some distance and I still don’t always
manage to do it, because I became so much involved
both personally and emotionally.

Thank you for your attention !
Descargar

Eurocall 2009