Skip to main content

So what about iPads for MFL?

Ipads are being deployed in vast numbers, it seems, across the nation's schools. How useful are they to MFL learners and teachers?

The first question to ask is what do we need our technology for? In MFL we are aiming to improve the four skills. Anything which can aid us in developing pupils' comprehension, grammatical command, vocabulary knowledge and oral proficiency should be welcomed if it can be afforded.

An ICT room of PCs fulfills many needs and can even be turned into a language lab for oral practice, but in schools it is not always easy to book time when you want it and you have to move classes around. The enormous attraction of the tablet is its portability, so there are certainly advantages to having it handy for instant listening/streamed video work, interactive grammar and vocabulary work. There's no need to book a room, no need to compete with other subjects for computer time.

One issue with the iPad, of course, is that it will not display any content in Flash and will not run all Hot Potato exercises successfully. With this in mind, I wonder how many schools have opted for Android devices.

It is also the case that publishers are now bringing out subject-specific resources for the ipad, for example Nelson-Thornes have just released topic based units of work downloadable from the iTunes store. I cannot vouch for the quality of these.

Practicalities are bound to be a concern. What if a pupil's iPad has no charge? What if it doesn't work? What if they have forgotten it? Well, I guess those issues arise in a computer room and you get by with sharing. Nor do I think we should ignore the environmental issue of electricity consumption with greater use of portable devices. In this regard, at least the iPad consumes a good deal less electricity than a traditional PC.

So, in sum, do we need iPads? Probably not. Would they (do they) add something to the MFL classroom? Almost certainly.

If I were in a position to be designing a departmental policy on iPad use, I would try to focus on using them for listening (preferably with video), either using interactive sites or added worksheets (such as the ones I have been making for frenchteacher.net). I would also stress their use for developing grammatical and comprehension skill via sites such as MYLO, Languagesonline, Audio Lingua the Carmen Vera Perez site and Bonjour de France. Overall I would see the tablet as a consumption tool more than a production tool. I would be a little wary of creative apps which pupils may fritter time away on.

For a more detailed assessment of iPads in the MFL classroom from someone who knows the field really well and trains people around the world, look at Joe dale's blog here.

For a list of apps for the iPad, you might find this useful, but this field will be changing rapidly.

Comments

  1. When using iPads in the classroom you need to be imaginative with NON MFL specific apps.

    For example, it's really important to stress the immediacy that the iPad affords you. The video camera beamed straight to your screen for analysing speaking (I'm NEVER together enough to book a camera in advance!), the stills camera for taking pics of written work to beam to your projector, PuppetPals app for students to create conversations in a safe environment, VideoScribe so that you never have to 'teach' the Passé Composé again(!), QR codes for treasure hunts.

    Steer clear of MFL apps. Be imaginative with non specific ones.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks, Neil. They all seem reasonable uses of an iPad, but I would put them at the more gimmicky end of the spectrum to be honest. I could only imagine doing those things very sparingly compared to consuming online content.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When I use the ipads in my classroom, I try to create activities that I couldn't do without the ipad. I have been integrating the ipads into my classroom to help improve my students oral communication. We do use them for other things as well such as building vocabulary at the beginning, however, in my opinion, it is most important for my students to be able to communicate orally in the the target language. So how can I use the technology to improve this? We record oral conversations, we listen back to our work so we can self reflect, we give eachother feedback, they email me conversations which I can give them feedback on. My students do more talking now, more than ever because of this technology (because of the metacognitive piece as well as it holds them accountable when working in small groups or with partners) and as a result, their communication in the TL is truly improving.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That sounds good to me. I am no longer teaching but can see how that would be useful. With the students I taught, who were quite able and were rarely reluctant to speak, I would still be looking at the iPad as a great portable source of input.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics