I’ve been asked about using interactive video on ChinesePod to give learners speaking practice. When we launched ChinesePod last September we considered this, but decided not to use it. Why?
First of all, let’s be clear what we’re talking about. Video, in it’s broader application certainly has a role in the classroom. It can be instructional, experiential, and just plain interesting. It can function well in the documentary format and it also suits lectures. But what I’m talking about is the use of video to conduct interactive classes over distance, with groups of students, over an extended period – enough to actually make fluency progress. The most likely solution for us would be software that opens up small screens on a monitor. Through web cams, learners could join in a class and practice speaking with a teacher. This kind of software already exists and seems attractive on the face of it, but does it work?
In my experience, no. One problem is the tech. There are a number of existing off-the-shelf products, but I’ve never seen any of them work very well. At a recent demonstration, I could make out only about half of what was said between the learners. Bad picture quality, poor sound, bandwidth problems (if one person in the classroom doesn’t have enough bandwidth it can screw up the whole thing) make for a less than satisfying experience, if not a downright frustrating one.
There are other problems. This format wouldn’t deliver input very well, so it would have to focus exclusively on speaking practice. Would that work? I think it could, but awkwardly and not terribly efficiently. From what I’ve seen, video class discussions tend to be very teacher centered. It means that learners can’t really practice in pairs or groups – they all have to listen as the teacher engages with the learners one-by-one. It looks to me like something of a rigmarole. It’s also a very poor use of time if there are 4 or more learners – you have to wait for the teacher to practice with each of the others before she comes to you.
For real fluency development, the learners must be allowed to take control of the message as much as possible. They must also maximize their time by turning every practice hour into 60 minutes of communication, rather than waiting for the chance to actually say something. (Imagine if there are 6 learners.)
Finally, I’m not sure I’d want to do this type of video lessons.
Of course, that’s just me. Perhaps I’m biased. If you have a very compelling case to make in this context I’d be open to what you have to say. Am I missing out on something here?
Ken Carroll
pretzellogic on 
Andrew Cockerham on 
Dave on
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Ken
I would agree with everything you said.
Skype I think permits everyone who does not have the luxury of a face to face partner/ teacher to practice. What I would wonder if there will ever get to the point of a virtual call in center with truly certified (by CPod facilitators/teachers). I would hope it could be virtual. I am not sure why the Indian call in centers are bricks and mortar. If it is associated with insuring high bandwith access or something else.
But can you imagine a service by CPod where you call in get your own instructor for practice who maybe specializes in Newbies or Advanced or something in between who also is aware and following CPod. This way we would all have our own Jenny’s . Well close anyways.
In my case in Taiwan I can find on any Saturday if I chose maybe 100 people I could trade Chinese for English in Hsinchu. All I would have to do is go to the street where all the ESL Schools are and talk to the kids outside. But the only issue is they are not trained. So I think this is where your teacher forum may end of going unless you have a better idea. Using CPod for certification, training, payment…. might be something to consider.
Mike in Jubei
Good idea, Mike. And you could have a 900 number for especially interesting conversations!
Quite agree – one of the problems with traditional language classes are the other students: not with who they are; but the time you have to spend either waiting your turn, or listening to discussions either above or below your level (nothing more frustrating than understanding some point and then waiting for half an hour whilst others grapple with it – or not understanding some point, and being denied the chance to discuss it because everyone else wants to move on). Why replicate the problem online?
If you were to do something like this, you could have slots of say 30 minutes which students could prebook for one-one interaction with a particular tutor (you’d probably want the same one each time). However, unless you have an army of tutors, I can’t see this as being a viable… no doubt demand would be high!
However, some video podcasts of ‘lectures’ could be good, where a lecture is appropriate; but using video for the sake of it is a waste. Equally, some of the podcasts could be good as filmed situations, so long as you can act! The visuals could provide a visual context within which to remember a dialogue, with character+pinyin subtitles (changing colour as spoken?) to aid learning the characters, and distinguishing q’s and ch’s for example.
However, most language programmes on TV, no matter what the language, that I’ve seen in the past fail do not impress. Were you to do any, I’d suggest sticking to exactly the same format and length as the audio-only podcasts; but having the dialogues acted out for real or sampled from TV. Deviating further from the audio-only podcasts could simply dilute their usefulness.
Just my 2 pence worth.