It is a common cliché that people fear public speaking more than death – just search the Internet using the terms public speaking and death and check out the statistics. While scientifically speaking it might not be true that people would prefer dying to delivering a presentation before an audience, it is quite true that public speech might be quite a challenging experience for many of us and it is even more so when we present in a second language. Furthermore, today many academic courses are guided by the principles of active learning, delegating the responsibility for learning to the students and in-class student presentation has become a common means for assessment. In IEP contexts, it calls for supporting the development of not simply speaking skills but specifically presentation skills; however, there is often not enough time to provide students with the opportunity to practice their speech and presentations in low-anxiety environments that would allow for self-monitoring and individualized teacher and peer feedback. In this article, I would like to share my experience with technology for overcoming these barriers.

The Hows of Technology Implementation

As educators we are influenced by a number of factors when making pedagogical decisions; this is especially true in the realm of technology-enhanced teaching. There are at least four factors that should guide us in our decision on what technologies to include in teaching: (1) pedagogical objectives, (2) institutional decisions, (3) personal curiosity, and last but not least, (4) trends and fashion (Stockwell, 2007, p. 107). Of course, while the guiding factor should be the pedagogical objectives, the current trends in technology use in real-life settings play a key role as well. Today we understand language learning objectives to be closely related to real-life communication needs, practices, and tasks; thus, the implementation of Web 2.0 applications that allow for user-generated content to be shared and discussed brought the notion of Pedagogy 2.0 (Thomas, 2009). Within the framework of this pedagogy, the transmission model of teaching with Web 1.0 technologies is replaced by the constructivist approach that encourages the provision of communication channels and tools for blending cultures, building communities, sharing experiences, and practicing skills through Web 2.0 applications.

The Technology

The Web 2.0 software which I would like to present here is VoiceThread (VT)—a cloud-based application for recording voice comments that can help us create multimedia presentations based on the principles of Pedagogy 2.0 and focusing on presentation skills development. The Web 2.0 nature of VT allows not only for the delivery of these presentations but for text-based and voice communication with selected viewers in the presentation context. The free account option of the application, its user-friendly design, and the low learning curve make VT quite popular among educators (Romano, 2009). It can be an excellent tool for developing mini-projects that aim to prepare learners for presenting in academic settings.

The Students and the Program

The Bridge Program at Saint Leo University is designed for international students who meet the academic requirements for university admission but need further support in the development of their academic communication skills in English; typically the language proficiency of the students who enter the university through the program is intermediate or high-intermediate level. The majority of these students plan to pursue their undergraduate degree at Saint Leo University.

Based on the informal interviews I had with the students currently enrolled in the program and the observations conducted in the fall and spring semesters of the 2012–2013 academic year, most of the students perceived in-class presentations to be challenging because of both the language skills and the technology implementation required in these projects. While the students seemed to be proficient users of mobile technologies and basic computer applications for personal purposes, they appeared to be insecure and therefore inconsistent in their use of basic e-communication tools for learning, presentation, and academic communication. These observations shaped the objectives and the tools implemented in the Learning Laboratory I course offered in the first semester of the program.

The Course

The Academic Learning Laboratory I course is designed to support the academic development of Bridge students through the provision of opportunities for (1) early and structured introduction to the Saint Leo campus and academic resources and community, (2) development of academic speaking and presentation skills, and (3) guided reflection on their language acquisition process and academic skills development. The emphasis of the course is on the active use of information resources for academic purposes and the developments of academic communication skills for oral presentations.

The meaningful inclusion of technology and its active application during the course is an important part; it is intended to engage the students in collaborative learning activities designed to facilitate their use of various academic resources. The course learning activities are exploratory in their nature; in the process of their explorations, learners collaborate with each other and reach to the broader university community.

The VoiceThread Learning Projects

In the context of the Bridge Learning Laboratory I, students explore the academic community and resources of Saint Leo University; they work on their academic communication skills and engage in an active discussion and reflection on their learning experiences. One of the key presentation tools, along with PowerPoint and Prezi, is VT. Students develop their presentation skills through a sequence of three mini-projects:

Mini-Project 1: The Culture Shock and I

Objectives: (1) to support students’ reflection on their first experiences at Saint Leo University within a specific framework, (2) to allow for practicing of prepared speech in a low-anxiety environment which provides means for self-monitoring and self-correction.

In the beginning of the semester, students were introduced to VT and explored the application. After this introduction, they recorded personal reflections on their first experiences at Saint Leo University; these reflections were done within the framework of culture shock—a topic discussed during international student orientation sessions and in class. The mini-project required leaving voice comments to a teacher-prepared VT presentation discussing the images representing different stages of the culture shock continuum. The written instructor’s feedback addressed content, pronunciation, and fluency of students’ recorded presentations. In class, students discussed their presentations working in small groups. The far-reaching goal of this assignment in the context of the learning laboratory was to support the writing the end-of-semester learning portfolio reflection paper.

Mini-Project 2: My Mystery Story

Objectives: (1) to encourage the collaborative exploration of the new academic community, (2) to practice prepared speech when interpreting visual prompts, (3) to practice delivering in-class informal presentations.

Working in dyads, the students developed and posted on VT image-only presentations featuring a “mystery story” about the university community and/or their first learning experiences; this story was presented by a collection of images related to the university community, and no audio or text discussion was included. The peers had to view the stories presented via VT and record their voice comments interpreting the image sequences shared by each dyad in the attempt to reconstruct the mystery story. Once this out-of-class communication exchange was completed, the authors of each mystery story presented in class the actual story behind the images and commented on their peers’ interpretations. These sequences of exchanges and presentations were completed toward the middle of the semester. Written feedback on the recordings and in-class presentations were provided by the instructor.

Mini-Project 3: What I Learned About Academic Skills

Objectives: (1) to provide opportunities for practice of in-class presentations using slides with text and images, (2) to receive preliminary instructor feedback.

The students chose a topic related to learning skills and practices they developed during their first semester. They designed a PowerPoint presentation following the criteria discussed in class, inserted the slides into VT and recorded their presentation for each slide. They shared this preliminary presentation with the instructor for feedback. The feedback was provided using a rubric developed collaboratively in class based on reading materials and discussions on effective presentation visual support and strategies.

At the end of this semester, I intend to include links to the best VT projects to the multimedia collection which will become part of the Bridge program e-resources for new students. The aim is to build a student-to-student communication through multimedia records and support future students who join the Bridge Program at Saint Leo.

Conclusions

These VT mini-projects were motivated by my observations of students’ needs and their interpretation within the framework of Pedagogy 2.0. It was also guided by contemporary research which shows that learners are motivated to a greater extent when engaged in learning through activities that create tangible learning outcomes and are intended for a real audience (Hawkes, 2011). Further, I believe that this type of projects supports the development of academic literacy and communication skills through meaningful guided authentic interaction (Evans, 2011). My observations are that the VT environment promotes effective interaction, scaffolding, and collaboration among learners and between learners and the instructor.

References

Evans, M. (2011). Digital technology and language learning. In M. Evans (Ed.), Foreign language learning with digital technology (pp. 7–31). London, England: Continuum.
Hawkes, R. (2011). Digital technology as a tool for active learning in MFL: Engaging second language learners in and beyond the classroom. In M. Evans (Ed.), Foreign language learning with digital technology (pp. 80–103). London, England: Continuum.
Romano, A. (2009). 7 things you need to know about VoiceThread. Retrieved from http://tlt.psu.edu/2009/01/03/hot-team-voicethread
Stockwell, G. (2007). A review of technology choice for teaching language skills and areas in the CALL literature. ReCALL, 19(2), 105–120.
Thomas, M. (2009). Handbook of research on Web 2.0 and second language learning. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.