The integration of engaging TV style content with the individualization and ‘intelligent’ content management offered by techniques from AI has the potential to provide learning environments that are both highly motivating and educationally sound. This paper describes why the area of language learning would be a particularly appropriate domain for interactive educational television to focus on. It also indicates some of the criteria to be fulfilled in order to provide optimal language learning conditions and how these might be satisfied using TV/Film content and techniques from AIED

Underwood, Joshua

English

UCL Discovery

6Language Learning and Interactive TVJoshua UnderwoodSchool of Cognitive and Computing SciencesUniversity of Sussex, BN1 2LE, UK.joshuau@cogs.susx.ac.ukAbstract. The integration of engaging TV style content with the individualization and ‘intelligent’ contentmanagement offered by techniques from AI has the potential to provide learning environments that are bothhighly motivating and educationally sound.  This paper describes why the area of language learning would be aparticularly appropriate domain for interactive educational television to focus on.  It also indicates some of thecriteria to be fulfilled in order to provide optimal language learning conditions and how these might be satisfiedusing TV/Film content and techniques from AIED.Keywords: Interactive TV, Language Learning, Learner Modelling, Engagement & Motivation.Introduction.As a language teacher and as a language learner I know that both TV and computer-based activities can give riseto highly rewarding, motivating and successful learning experiences.  However, certainly from the teacher’sperspective, lessons based on video material and classes in the computer room tend to be very different.  Perhapsthe most obvious difference is that with a single video and a group of learners it is somewhat more difficult toindividualise the learning experience than when single learners or small groups are working at multiplecomputers, of course this difference might be resolved by simply viewing video material on the computers.  But,then there is also the somewhat more fundamental difference between watching TV and doing something at thecomputer.  In fact, typically much of a teacher’s effort in a video-based class is spent on trying to turn what isfrequently seen as a passive experience (TV watching) into a more active learning experience.  Often the teacherwill use supplementary tasks that rely on the participants’ shared viewing experience to promote activity.  I findthe prospect of integrating the benefits of computer-based activity with highly motivating and authentic videomaterial in interactive television very exciting. In this paper, I imagine what interactive educational TV (ie-TV)for second language learning might be like.  First, I indicate why language learning is a particularly interestingdomain for ie-TV. Secondly, I outline some requirements for good language-learning experiences derived fromsecond language acquisition (SLA) theory.  Then I show how techniques from the field of artificial intelligencein education (AIED) might be combined with video content and delivered via interactive TV in order to satisfythese requirements.  I also hint at how research into current use of video in the classroom might contribute to thedesign of ie-TV learning experiences.  Finally, I provide a ‘scenario’ illustrating a use of ie-TV for languagelearning.Why language learning?Firstly, there is a significant demand for language learning delivered via TV; an EU report [1] cites two surveys,one ‘revealed that 41% of those surveyed wanted more language tuition on television’ another ‘found that 28%of men and 22% of women were prepared to pay for more language tuition on television’.  Secondly, languagelearning can make use of almost any material in the target language (i.e. it doesn’t necessarily require tailor-made content) consequently a huge amount of potentially appropriate raw content material that could be adaptedto support language learning already exists in the form of films, TV series, documentaries, quiz shows, etc.  Thishuge variety is in itself very significant as it potentially allows ie-TV language learning materials to cater for anenormous range of personal tastes and interests. Thirdly, as Alexander Nakhimovsky [2] notes, perhaps ‘of allsubjects foreign language instruction can benefit from multimedia materials most obviously … the most difficulttask facing a language instructor is to show the deep semantic and cultural differences hidden behind dictionary7equivalents… the movie and its script makes that task much easier … students can see the clash between theirexpectations and the realia of a different culture.’  The rich narrative structure and visual context provided by TVprogrammes and films help the learner to form a deep understanding of the language to be learnt and its culture.Fourthly, for language learners TV material is genuinely authentic.  As Liontas [3] observes, this is materialproduced by and for the native speakers of the foreign language and for many language learners watching,understanding and enjoying TV and films in the foreign language can itself be a learning objective.What kind of interactive TV will help language learners?Evidently, it is not enough to simply combine TV and computer-based activities.  Interactive educational TVshould be designed in a ‘theoretically’ founded way. It should at least attempt to provide optimal conditions forlearning as defined by current theories of learning.  Several conditions for good language learning experiencescan be drawn from theoretical work on SLA (see [4, 5]).  Here we summarize some of these:• Focus on meaning, activities should primarily focus the learner’s attention on the meaning of thelanguage.• Is there good ‘Learner Fit’, i.e. is the target language (material to be learnt) appropriate both in terms ofits difficulty given the learners’ current knowledge and also in terms of other factors such as thelearner’s motivation for learning, interests, needs, age, personality, learning style, etc?• Are the key linguistic features (grammatical features) in the language presented made salient to thelearner?• Is ‘negotiation of meaning’ supported, i.e. are there opportunities for the learner to take actions in orderto reach an understanding of material that they do not understand at the first encounter; perhaps viarepetition, simplification, non-verbal clues, decreased speed, access to reference material, or change ofmodality (e.g. from aural to written)?• Are tasks appropriate, i.e. do the tasks learners are asked to take part in provide genuine opportunities touse the target language for a communicative purpose and are they sufficiently close to ‘real life’ tasksthe learner is likely to want to engage in using the foreign language?• Are there opportunities for learners to correct their output (i.e. what they say or write), and are theyhelped to do this?• Are learners helped to keep track of what they are learning?From these criteria we can arrive at a description of the kind of ie-TV that might actively support languagelearning:  Authentic, richly contextualised language is presented through video content matched to the learner’scurrent knowledge, motivation, interests and preferences; perhaps clips from favourite films are used.  Key tothis is an accurate learner model enabling the system to provide the individual learner with material they reallywant to understand.   Significant linguistic features appropriate to the learner’s current language competenceand learning objectives are automatically highlighted, possibly using emphasis in subtitles with hyperlinks togrammar and other reference material.  Facilities to assist understanding are available; i.e. first language andforeign language subtitles, dictionaries, slow-down, replay etc.  Appropriate opportunities to interact using thetarget language are provided; maybe through chat rooms, discussion forums, VR role-playing, games, promptsto phone in or send text messages etc.  Learners are also prompted to reflect on their own language output andcorrect it, where feasible spoken and written interactions are recorded and can be replayed later, possibly withautomated highlighting of errors.  A ‘history of use’ provides a visible trail of what the individual learner hascovered and supports revisiting and revising of past learning experiences.In this section I have attempted to briefly indicate some conditions for optimal language learning experiencesderived from current SLA theory.  However, I have perhaps failed to place sufficient emphasis on the importanceof motivation; many educators believe that those who really want to learn will learn – motivation is key – andthis is where TV/Film comes into its own.What can TV provide?Existing TV/film material provides a huge quantity and variety of high quality content; i.e. language in authentic,motivating, and memorable contexts. This material is authentic not just in the sense that ‘scenes from real life’may be shown but also in that, for many learners, watching and understanding TV and film in a foreign languagemay itself be a learning objective.  And here it is the huge amount of material available covering an immensevariety of interests and tastes that is key.  TV and film-makers are highly skilled at engaging an audience and this8skill is what needs to be tapped by educationalists.  However, not all individuals have the same tastes, whatengages one learner may not engage another.  In order to provide good ‘learner fit’ existing TV and film materialneeds to be carefully managed and this requires labelling that enables matching of an individual’s interests toappropriate content. However, ‘interest’ is not the only dimension of ‘learner fit’; material also needs to beappropriate to current learning objectives.  Video material needs to be ‘marked-up’ in a number of dimensions;topic, linguistic content, appropriate age-range, etc.  Material also needs to be chunked at a number of levels; asingle scene may be appropriate for some learning objective, say language for ordering food in a restaurant,while a whole movie may be marked as suitable for those interested in science fiction.  Additionally, the numberof ways in which any chunk might be used is very large; the same clip might be marked as containing foodvocabulary, functional language for restaurants, language with polite register, examples of present continuousgrammar for describing a scene etc.  The objective should be to ‘mark-up’ TV and film content at a meta-level ina way that allows for extension as new users find other ways of using the same material.  Equally important isthat chunking and mark-up of content should support ‘reuse’ in a variety of language learning applications,suitably marked up chunks of film/TV content would become ‘learning objects’ in the sense described by Wiley[6] and these learning objects would be amenable to ‘intelligent’ content management.What can AIED provide?Evidently, the task of ‘marking up’ a suitable amount of video content is huge, although linguistic mark up mightbe partially achieved through automated analysis of scripts.  However, even after the content is suitably markedup the learning experience needs to be managed so as to satisfy the conditions for language learning describedearlier. This is where techniques from AIED are appropriate. A student model must be developed capable ofdescribing the learner’s current level of language expertise, interests, motivation etc… and keeping aninspectable history of the learner’s interaction with the content.  A pedagogical model is required to define whatsuitable content would be, given current learning objectives.  This component would also put together suitablecombinations of learning objects to produce appropriate tasks.  Knowledge from the pedagogical model and thelearner model could be used to conduct a search of available marked-up content and identify material with good‘learner fit’.  Scaffolding, through subtitles, slow-down, links to reference material, etc, would support‘negotiation of meaning’; i.e. bring material and tasks into range of the learner’s ability, this scaffolding wouldthen be faded as the learner’s competence improves.  A natural language processing component might be used toautomatically highlight ‘key linguistic features’ in the presentation material and possibly also ‘errors’ inlearners’ written output.  Techniques from computer-mediated communication and also from gaming could beused to provide ‘communicative opportunities’ to use the target language interactively.  The current state ofspeech recognition software rather limits the kind of opportunities for authentic spoken human-to-machinecommunication. However, it should be possible to design ie-TV supported tasks that provide opportunities forspoken communication with fellow viewers.  Ideas from current classroom practice might provide a usefulstarting place for the design of such activities.What can language-teaching practice provide?Language teachers have been using video in class for many years and addressing the issues of how to make TVwatching an interactive experience, how to address individual needs with multiple viewers and how to link toauthentic opportunities for communication.  Generally, collaborative and/or individual tasks are provided pre-viewing, during viewing and post-viewing; perhaps learners are asked first to watch a clip without the sound andthen discuss what they think is happening, then they watch with the sound to see whether their predictions areconfirmed.  Next, they may be provided with a partial transcript and asked to speculate collaboratively aboutwhat the missing words might be.  After this they watch and listen again and try to fill in the gaps, perhaps thistime they can control the video recorder making use of pause and rewind facilities.  Finally, maybe they re-enactthe scene as a role-play or discuss how it might be improved, or what happens next, etc.  A comprehensive studyof how video is currently used in the classroom will provide ideas for ie-TV task design; perhaps many ofcurrent classroom tasks can be ‘digitised’ in some way.  And these ‘digitised’ tasks would provide another partof the content; ie-TV content would not be made up of marked-up video clips alone. Language practice activitiesand reference materials would also be marked up and available for use and, to varying degrees for reuse, aslearning objects.Conclusion – An ie-TV language-learning scenarioIn conclusion, this vision of ie-TV for language learning consists of a large, varied and continually expandinglibrary of carefully labelled engaging film/TV content and ‘digitised’ language practice activities.  This library of9‘learning objects’ is managed ‘intelligently’ utilizing AI learner model and pedagogical components in order toprovide motivating and individualized learning experiences that satisfy ‘optimal’ criteria for language learningdrawn from SLA research.  An example of how such ie-TV might be used in practice is offered in the concludingscenario:Jon studies English at school.  Last class they watched an information video for visitors to Brighton.  As usual,they worked in pairs for most of the class, each pair sitting at an ie-TV console and working together at theirown pace to complete the electronic questionnaire prepared by the teacher.  Towards the end of the lesson thewhole class together discussed whether they would like to visit Brighton and gave reasons why and why not?The teacher has set the students a group project to make a short video for visitors to their own town.  Forhomework Jon is to extract and practise language, from the Brighton video and other tourism videos, that will beuseful in his video.  He logs into the ie-TV channel and requests the Brighton video. He watches again withsubtitles on and with language highlighted that the pedagogical model has flagged as potentially useful for thetask.  He is free to pause, rewind follow explanatory hyperlinks from the subtitles etc… he saves some clips,containing language he is interested in using, to his electronic notebook and practises by recording his voice overthe clips.  After working through the Brighton video again, he chooses to watch two other short tourism videossuggested by the system, one on Sydney and one Vancouver, towns he has always wanted to visit.  The teacherreceives an automated summary of what Jon has done using the system generated from Jon’s learner model.Later in the week Jon and the group he is working with discuss their video, previously they have shared ideas forcontent and the script electronically.  They also talk about the other ie-TV videos they have seen, Jon asks afriend to send the reference for one that he thought sounded particularly interesting.  Later in the term and overvarious sessions they use a digital camera and editing software to put together the video for their town.  Thisvideo becomes part of Juan’s electronic course notes and can also be exchanged with other learners through theie-TV system.  A month later the class receives some email questions about their video from a class in Germanyalso studying English, attached is a link to a short video about Bremen prepared by the German students.References[1]  pjb Associates, (1999) Development of Satellite and Terrestrial Digital Broadcasting Systems and Servicesand Implications for Education and Training, Final Report, UK, July 1999. : Online Version. Retrieved3, 30, 2002,  from the World Wide Web: http://www.pjb.co.uk/dbtfinal.htm[2]  Nakhimovsky, A. (1997) "A Multimedia Authoring Tool for Language Instruction: Interactions of Pedagogyand Design". Journal of Educational Computing Research vol. 17(3) 261-274. 1997.[3]  Liontas, J. I.  (2002) CALLMedia Digital Technology: Whither in the New Millenium? CALICO Journal,vol. 19 (2): 315-330. 2002.[4]  Chapelle, C. (2001) Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. CUP Cambridge. 2001.[5]  Chapelle, C.  (2001) Innovative Language Learning. ReCALL 13 (1): 3-14. 2001.[6]  Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor,and a  taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version.Retrieved 4, 20,  2002, from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc

Language Learning and Interactive TV

Institute of Education EPrints

6Language Learning and Interactive TV
Joshua Underwood
School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences
University of Sussex, BN1 2LE, UK.
joshuau@cogs.susx.ac.uk
Abstract. The integration of engaging TV style content with the individualization and ‘intelligent’ content
management offered by techniques from AI has the potential to provide learning environments that are both
highly motivating and educationally sound.  This paper describes why the area of language learning would be a
particularly appropriate domain for interactive educational television to focus on.  It also indicates some of the
criteria to be fulfilled in order to provide optimal language learning conditions and how these might be satisfied
using TV/Film content and techniques from AIED.
Keywords: Interactive TV, Language Learning, Learner Modelling, Engagement & Motivation.
Introduction.
As a language teacher and as a language learner I know that both TV and computer-based activities can give rise
to highly rewarding, motivating and successful learning experiences.  However, certainly from the teacher’s
perspective, lessons based on video material and classes in the computer room tend to be very different.  Perhaps
the most obvious difference is that with a single video and a group of learners it is somewhat more difficult to
individualise the learning experience than when single learners or small groups are working at multiple
computers, of course this difference might be resolved by simply viewing video material on the computers.  But,
then there is also the somewhat more fundamental difference between watching TV and doing something at the
computer.  In fact, typically much of a teacher’s effort in a video-based class is spent on trying to turn what is
frequently seen as a passive experience (TV watching) into a more active learning experience.  Often the teacher
will use supplementary tasks that rely on the participants’ shared viewing experience to promote activity.  I find
the prospect of integrating the benefits of computer-based activity with highly motivating and authentic video
material in interactive television very exciting. In this paper, I imagine what interactive educational TV (ie-TV)
for second language learning might be like.  First, I indicate why language learning is a particularly interesting
domain for ie-TV. Secondly, I outline some requirements for good language-learning experiences derived from
second language acquisition (SLA) theory.  Then I show how techniques from the field of artificial intelligence
in education (AIED) might be combined with video content and delivered via interactive TV in order to satisfy
these requirements.  I also hint at how research into current use of video in the classroom might contribute to the
design of ie-TV learning experiences.  Finally, I provide a ‘scenario’ illustrating a use of ie-TV for language
learning.
Why language learning?
Firstly, there is a significant demand for language learning delivered via TV; an EU report [1] cites two surveys,
one ‘revealed that 41% of those surveyed wanted more language tuition on television’ another ‘found that 28%
of men and 22% of women were prepared to pay for more language tuition on television’.  Secondly, language
learning can make use of almost any material in the target language (i.e. it doesn’t necessarily require tailor-
made content) consequently a huge amount of potentially appropriate raw content material that could be adapted
to support language learning already exists in the form of films, TV series, documentaries, quiz shows, etc.  This
huge variety is in itself very significant as it potentially allows ie-TV language learning materials to cater for an
enormous range of personal tastes and interests. Thirdly, as Alexander Nakhimovsky [2] notes, perhaps ‘of all
subjects foreign language instruction can benefit from multimedia materials most obviously … the most difficult
task facing a language instructor is to show the deep semantic and cultural differences hidden behind dictionary
7equivalents… the movie and its script makes that task much easier … students can see the clash between their
expectations and the realia of a different culture.’  The rich narrative structure and visual context provided by TV
programmes and films help the learner to form a deep understanding of the language to be learnt and its culture.
Fourthly, for language learners TV material is genuinely authentic.  As Liontas [3] observes, this is material
produced by and for the native speakers of the foreign language and for many language learners watching,
understanding and enjoying TV and films in the foreign language can itself be a learning objective.
What kind of interactive TV will help language learners?
Evidently, it is not enough to simply combine TV and computer-based activities.  Interactive educational TV
should be designed in a ‘theoretically’ founded way. It should at least attempt to provide optimal conditions for
learning as defined by current theories of learning.  Several conditions for good language learning experiences
can be drawn from theoretical work on SLA (see [4, 5]).  Here we summarize some of these:
• Focus on meaning, activities should primarily focus the learner’s attention on the meaning of the
language.
• Is there good ‘Learner Fit’, i.e. is the target language (material to be learnt) appropriate both in terms of
its difficulty given the learners’ current knowledge and also in terms of other factors such as the
learner’s motivation for learning, interests, needs, age, personality, learning style, etc?
• Are the key linguistic features (grammatical features) in the language presented made salient to the
learner?
• Is ‘negotiation of meaning’ supported, i.e. are there opportunities for the learner to take actions in order
to reach an understanding of material that they do not understand at the first encounter; perhaps via
repetition, simplification, non-verbal clues, decreased speed, access to reference material, or change of
modality (e.g. from aural to written)?
• Are tasks appropriate, i.e. do the tasks learners are asked to take part in provide genuine opportunities to
use the target language for a communicative purpose and are they sufficiently close to ‘real life’ tasks
the learner is likely to want to engage in using the foreign language?
• Are there opportunities for learners to correct their output (i.e. what they say or write), and are they
helped to do this?
• Are learners helped to keep track of what they are learning?
From these criteria we can arrive at a description of the kind of ie-TV that might actively support language
learning:  Authentic, richly contextualised language is presented through video content matched to the learner’s
current knowledge, motivation, interests and preferences; perhaps clips from favourite films are used.  Key to
this is an accurate learner model enabling the system to provide the individual learner with material they really
want to understand.   Significant linguistic features appropriate to the learner’s current language competence
and learning objectives are automatically highlighted, possibly using emphasis in subtitles with hyperlinks to
grammar and other reference material.  Facilities to assist understanding are available; i.e. first language and
foreign language subtitles, dictionaries, slow-down, replay etc.  Appropriate opportunities to interact using the
target language are provided; maybe through chat rooms, discussion forums, VR role-playing, games, prompts
to phone in or send text messages etc.  Learners are also prompted to reflect on their own language output and
correct it, where feasible spoken and written interactions are recorded and can be replayed later, possibly with
automated highlighting of errors.  A ‘history of use’ provides a visible trail of what the individual learner has
covered and supports revisiting and revising of past learning experiences.
In this section I have attempted to briefly indicate some conditions for optimal language learning experiences
derived from current SLA theory.  However, I have perhaps failed to place sufficient emphasis on the importance
of motivation; many educators believe that those who really want to learn will learn – motivation is key – and
this is where TV/Film comes into its own.
What can TV provide?
Existing TV/film material provides a huge quantity and variety of high quality content; i.e. language in authentic,
motivating, and memorable contexts. This material is authentic not just in the sense that ‘scenes from real life’
may be shown but also in that, for many learners, watching and understanding TV and film in a foreign language
may itself be a learning objective.  And here it is the huge amount of material available covering an immense
variety of interests and tastes that is key.  TV and film-makers are highly skilled at engaging an audience and this
8skill is what needs to be tapped by educationalists.  However, not all individuals have the same tastes, what
engages one learner may not engage another.  In order to provide good ‘learner fit’ existing TV and film material
needs to be carefully managed and this requires labelling that enables matching of an individual’s interests to
appropriate content. However, ‘interest’ is not the only dimension of ‘learner fit’; material also needs to be
appropriate to current learning objectives.  Video material needs to be ‘marked-up’ in a number of dimensions;
topic, linguistic content, appropriate age-range, etc.  Material also needs to be chunked at a number of levels; a
single scene may be appropriate for some learning objective, say language for ordering food in a restaurant,
while a whole movie may be marked as suitable for those interested in science fiction.  Additionally, the number
of ways in which any chunk might be used is very large; the same clip might be marked as containing food
vocabulary, functional language for restaurants, language with polite register, examples of present continuous
grammar for describing a scene etc.  The objective should be to ‘mark-up’ TV and film content at a meta-level in
a way that allows for extension as new users find other ways of using the same material.  Equally important is
that chunking and mark-up of content should support ‘reuse’ in a variety of language learning applications,
suitably marked up chunks of film/TV content would become ‘learning objects’ in the sense described by Wiley
[6] and these learning objects would be amenable to ‘intelligent’ content management.
What can AIED provide?
Evidently, the task of ‘marking up’ a suitable amount of video content is huge, although linguistic mark up might
be partially achieved through automated analysis of scripts.  However, even after the content is suitably marked
up the learning experience needs to be managed so as to satisfy the conditions for language learning described
earlier. This is where techniques from AIED are appropriate. A student model must be developed capable of
describing the learner’s current level of language expertise, interests, motivation etc… and keeping an
inspectable history of the learner’s interaction with the content.  A pedagogical model is required to define what
suitable content would be, given current learning objectives.  This component would also put together suitable
combinations of learning objects to produce appropriate tasks.  Knowledge from the pedagogical model and the
learner model could be used to conduct a search of available marked-up content and identify material with good
‘learner fit’.  Scaffolding, through subtitles, slow-down, links to reference material, etc, would support
‘negotiation of meaning’; i.e. bring material and tasks into range of the learner’s ability, this scaffolding would
then be faded as the learner’s competence improves.  A natural language processing component might be used to
automatically highlight ‘key linguistic features’ in the presentation material and possibly also ‘errors’ in
learners’ written output.  Techniques from computer-mediated communication and also from gaming could be
used to provide ‘communicative opportunities’ to use the target language interactively.  The current state of
speech recognition software rather limits the kind of opportunities for authentic spoken human-to-machine
communication. However, it should be possible to design ie-TV supported tasks that provide opportunities for
spoken communication with fellow viewers.  Ideas from current classroom practice might provide a useful
starting place for the design of such activities.
What can language-teaching practice provide?
Language teachers have been using video in class for many years and addressing the issues of how to make TV
watching an interactive experience, how to address individual needs with multiple viewers and how to link to
authentic opportunities for communication.  Generally, collaborative and/or individual tasks are provided pre-
viewing, during viewing and post-viewing; perhaps learners are asked first to watch a clip without the sound and
then discuss what they think is happening, then they watch with the sound to see whether their predictions are
confirmed.  Next, they may be provided with a partial transcript and asked to speculate collaboratively about
what the missing words might be.  After this they watch and listen again and try to fill in the gaps, perhaps this
time they can control the video recorder making use of pause and rewind facilities.  Finally, maybe they re-enact
the scene as a role-play or discuss how it might be improved, or what happens next, etc.  A comprehensive study
of how video is currently used in the classroom will provide ideas for ie-TV task design; perhaps many of
current classroom tasks can be ‘digitised’ in some way.  And these ‘digitised’ tasks would provide another part
of the content; ie-TV content would not be made up of marked-up video clips alone. Language practice activities
and reference materials would also be marked up and available for use and, to varying degrees for reuse, as
learning objects.
Conclusion – An ie-TV language-learning scenario
In conclusion, this vision of ie-TV for language learning consists of a large, varied and continually expanding
library of carefully labelled engaging film/TV content and ‘digitised’ language practice activities.  This library of
9‘learning objects’ is managed ‘intelligently’ utilizing AI learner model and pedagogical components in order to
provide motivating and individualized learning experiences that satisfy ‘optimal’ criteria for language learning
drawn from SLA research.  An example of how such ie-TV might be used in practice is offered in the concluding
scenario:
Jon studies English at school.  Last class they watched an information video for visitors to Brighton.  As usual,
they worked in pairs for most of the class, each pair sitting at an ie-TV console and working together at their
own pace to complete the electronic questionnaire prepared by the teacher.  Towards the end of the lesson the
whole class together discussed whether they would like to visit Brighton and gave reasons why and why not?
The teacher has set the students a group project to make a short video for visitors to their own town.  For
homework Jon is to extract and practise language, from the Brighton video and other tourism videos, that will be
useful in his video.  He logs into the ie-TV channel and requests the Brighton video. He watches again with
subtitles on and with language highlighted that the pedagogical model has flagged as potentially useful for the
task.  He is free to pause, rewind follow explanatory hyperlinks from the subtitles etc… he saves some clips,
containing language he is interested in using, to his electronic notebook and practises by recording his voice over
the clips.  After working through the Brighton video again, he chooses to watch two other short tourism videos
suggested by the system, one on Sydney and one Vancouver, towns he has always wanted to visit.  The teacher
receives an automated summary of what Jon has done using the system generated from Jon’s learner model.
Later in the week Jon and the group he is working with discuss their video, previously they have shared ideas for
content and the script electronically.  They also talk about the other ie-TV videos they have seen, Jon asks a
friend to send the reference for one that he thought sounded particularly interesting.  Later in the term and over
various sessions they use a digital camera and editing software to put together the video for their town.  This
video becomes part of Juan’s electronic course notes and can also be exchanged with other learners through the
ie-TV system.  A month later the class receives some email questions about their video from a class in Germany
also studying English, attached is a link to a short video about Bremen prepared by the German students.
References
[1]  pjb Associates, (1999) Development of Satellite and Terrestrial Digital Broadcasting Systems and Services
and Implications for Education and Training, Final Report, UK, July 1999. : Online Version. Retrieved
3, 30, 2002,  from the World Wide Web: http://www.pjb.co.uk/dbtfinal.htm
[2]  Nakhimovsky, A. (1997) "A Multimedia Authoring Tool for Language Instruction: Interactions of Pedagogy
and Design". Journal of Educational Computing Research vol. 17(3) 261-274. 1997.
[3]  Liontas, J. I.  (2002) CALLMedia Digital Technology: Whither in the New Millenium? CALICO Journal,
vol. 19 (2): 315-330. 2002.
[4]  Chapelle, C. (2001) Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. CUP Cambridge. 2001.
[5]  Chapelle, C.  (2001) Innovative Language Learning. ReCALL 13 (1): 3-14. 2001.
[6]  Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor,
and a  taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version.
Retrieved 4, 20,  2002, from the World Wide Web: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc


A Multimedia Authoring Tool for Language Instruction: Interactions of Pedagogy and Design&quot;.

CALLMedia Digital Technology: Whither in the New Millenium?

Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. CUP Cambridge.

Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In

Development of Satellite and Terrestrial Digital Broadcasting Systems and Services and Implications for Education and Training,

Innovative Language Learning.

http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/17376/1/Underwood2002language.pdf

Language Learning and Interactive TV

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery

Institute of Education EPrints