less commonly taught languages initial assessment report ... · study of foreign languages, which...

1

Less Commonly Taught Languages

Initial Assessment Report

Center for Advanced Study of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education

University of Virginia

January 2014

2

Less Commonly Taught Languages Initial Assessment Report

In an era in American higher education in which large enrollments and credit hours have become increasingly important for student access, revenue generation and curricular efficiency, small and intimate courses are becoming increasingly rare. This trend, however, is problematic for the study of foreign languages, which requires frequent interaction, constant practice, and smaller enrollments, in order to be the most effective for language acquisition and understanding. One solution is to offer several smaller sections of beginning language courses, such as eight sections of Beginning Spanish with 15-20 students in each section. Yet, while this practice may be beneficial for foreign languages that are popular among college students (e.g., Spanish, French), it is not feasible for less commonly taught foreign languages that cannot sustain such high enrollments. The implications of this are vexing for higher education: should institutions cease teaching these languages, simply because they have smaller enrollments? What about the students who enthusiastically wish to learn these languages for profoundly personal or professional reasons? Moreover, how might regions in which these languages are spoken benefit from having American students (and international students that U.S. higher education institutions serve) learn their languages? Finally, what does it say about American higher education if universities only offer instruction in languages that are most popular at any given point in time? In order to address this problem, Duke University and the University of Virginia partnered to establish the Less Commonly Taught Languages Program. Together, they proposed to offer courses in less commonly taught languages and allow each other’s students to co-enroll in them. For example, a foreign language instructor at the University of Virginia would offer a less commonly taught language at U.Va., and Duke students—using special classrooms that allow for live distance learning—could take the course alongside the U.Va. students. In the Fall of 2013, Duke and U.Va. launched the first two courses of the Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTL) Program: Elementary Haitian Creole I (Jacques Pierre, instructor) and Elementary Tibetan I (Tsetan Nepali, instructor). Both courses used CISCO Telepresence Rooms available on both campuses for their class meetings. The CISCO Telepresence Rooms use cutting edge technology to create the look and feel of a meeting space arranged in a circle, but one-half of the circle is situated in one location while the other half of the circle is situation in the other location. Using a large screen that parallels the circle’s diameter in each location, the video images and audio transmission create a distance learning opportunity unlike any other. (See the Figure 1 for a depiction of one of the UVa CISCO Telepresence Rooms.) Finally, since Mr. Pierre (Haitian Creole) teaches at Duke, and Mr. Nepali (Tibetan) at U.Va., the program hired teaching assistants to be present in the opposite classroom, so that students on the side of the classroom where the instructor was not based could have someone to speak with about the course and its curriculum.

3

Figure 1. Image of the U.Va. CISCO Telepresence Room

For the inaugural semester, the LCTL organizers decided to focus their assessment of the two courses (Elementary Haitian Creole I and Elementary Tibetan I) on primarily technical issues and initial impressions of the students. Given that this was the first time that the CISCO Telepresence Rooms were being used for instruction, and that this was the inaugural semester of both the LCTL Program and these two courses in particular, it did not seem appropriate to assess more complex outcomes, such as language acquisition or student learning, while the preliminary “bugs” associated with any new endeavor were still being addressed. The following report describes the findings from the first assessment of the Fall 2013 LCTL classes. The assessment consisted of two parts: first, a mid-term survey was administered in late October 2013, and second, follow-up qualitative focus groups of both classes were conducted in early December 2013. In order to develop the focus group questions, two CASTL-HE researchers attended meetings of the Haitian Creole and Tibetan courses in the CISCO Telepresence Rooms in order to obtain a sense of the experience.

4

Duke and U.Va. Samples Mid-Term Survey Assessment Thirteen students in total responded to the mid-term survey. Six were students at Duke, and seven were students at U.Va.. Eight of the students were enrolled in Elementary Haitian Creole I, and the rest (n=5) were enrolled in Elementary Tibetan I. The largest proportion of the students was graduate students (38.5%), but students from all other class levels (first-year through fourth-year) were represented in the sample. Table 1. Descriptions of the Mid-Term Survey Sample.

Which university do you attend? Frequency Valid Percent

Duke University 6 46.2

University of Virginia 7 53.8

Total 13 100.0

What is your current academic class level? Frequency Valid Percent

First year undergraduate 3 23.1

Second year undergraduate 2 15.4

Third year undergraduate 2 15.4

Fourth year undergraduate 1 7.7

Graduate student 5 38.5

Total 13 100.0

In which course are you currently enrolled? Frequency Valid Percent

Elementary Creole I 8 61.5

Elementary Tibetan I 5 38.5

Total 13 100.0

5

End-of-Term Focus Group Study Fourteen students in total participated in three end-of-term focus group interviews. Eight focus group participants were students at Duke, and six were students at U.Va. Three of the students were enrolled in Elementary Tibetan I, and the rest (n=11) were enrolled in Elementary Haitian Creole I. The Tibetan I focus group was comprised of two graduate students and one undergraduate student. The Creole I focus groups were comprised of three graduate students and eight undergraduate students. The three Tibetan I students were interviewed by a CASTL-HE researcher who was located in the Clark Hall CISCO Telepresence Room. The Creole I students were divided into two groups and interviewed separately by two CASTL-HE researchers. One researcher interviewed the four U.Va. students in the class in a private conference room in Clemons Library, while the other researcher interviewed the seven Duke students via the Clemons Library CISCO Telepresence Room. Interview questions were the same for all of the focus groups, while follow-up questions varied based on researchers’ observations of each class and students’ responses to questions. During all of the focus groups, a CASTL-HE researcher served as a scribe, taking notes on participant responses. Each interview was digitally recorded and then transcribed verbatim.

Findings Mid-Term Survey Assessment For the mid-term survey assessment, students were first asked about the extent to which four different types of class activities -- lecture presentations, discussions, group work, and hands-on activities -- helped their learning. Most students reported that they found lecture presentations by the instructor helpful, with 84.6% (n=11) responding that lecture presentations were “a lot of help” and 15.4% (n=2) responding that lecture presentations were “some help.” In terms of in-class discussions, most students also found discussions with their peers helpful, although students reported that they found class discussions with peers at their own university more helpful than discussions with peers at the other university. Just over 92% (n=12) of students responded that discussions in class with peers at their own university were “a lot of help,” while 76.9% (n=10) of students reported that discussions in class with peers at the other university were “a lot of help” and just over 23% (n=3) reported that these discussions were “some help.”

6

Perceptions of lecture presentations by the instructor

Perceptions of discussions with peers

Most students also reported that they found group work and hands-on class activities helpful. However, similar to our findings with respect to discussions with peers, students reported that they found group work and activities with peers at their own university more helpful than group work and activities with peers at the other university. Just over 69% (n=9) of students characterized group work in class with peers at their own university as “a lot of help” and over 23% (n=3) said it was “some help.” With regard to group work in class with peers at the other university, 46.2% (n=6) of students reported that it was “a lot of help,” 38.5% (n=5) reported that it was “some help,” and one student reported that it was “no help at all.” Similarly, in terms of

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

A lot of help

Some help

Very little help

No help at all

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

A lot of help

Some help

Very little help

No help at all

Discussions with peers at the other university

Discussions with peer at your university

7

hands-on class activities such as role plays, just over 69% (n=9) of students reported that work with peers at their own university was “a lot of help,” 23.1% (n=3) said that it was “some help,” and one student reported that it was “very little help.” When asked about hands-on activities with their peers at the other university, just over 69% (n=9) of students reported that it was “a lot of help,” one student said it was “some help,” and one student said it was “very little help.” Perceptions of group work in class

Perceptions of hands-on activities (e.g., role plays) in class

Students were also asked about their experience with the CISCO telepresence rooms and other aspects of the classes. Most students reported that they were able to clearly see, hear, and communicate with the instructors and the students at the other university all or most of the time.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

A lot of help

Some help

Very little help

No help at all

Group work in class with peers at the other university

Group work in class with peers at your university

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

No opinion

A lot of help

Some help

Very little help

No help at all

Hands-on class activities with peers at the other university

Hands-on class activities with peers at your university

8

Perceptions of ability to see and hear clearly in the CISCO Telepresence Rooms

In addition, most students strongly agreed or agreed that having a teaching assistant for the course was helpful. All but one student strongly agreed or agreed that it was easy to access online course materials. Percentage who found having a teaching assistant for the course to be helpful

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Ability to see instructor clearly

Ability to hear instructor clearly

Ability to communicate with instructor

Ability to see students at other university clearly

Ability to hear students at other university clearly

Ability to communicate with students at other university clearly

Never Some of the time Most of the time All of the time No opinion/NA

9

Percentage who found it easy to access the online materials

With respect to course requirements as compared to other language courses at a university level, 30.8% (n=4) of students reported that course requirements were “somewhat harder,” 53.8% (n=7) of students reported that they were “about the same,” and one student reported that they were “somewhat easier.” Finally, when asked to compare using the CISCO Telepresence Room with their experiences in other language courses at a university level, 53.8% (n=7) of students reported that the experience was “about the same” and 15.4% (n=2) of students reported that the experience was “much better.” Percentage who thought course requirements were easier or harder than other language courses at the university level

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

10

Percentage who thought using the CISCO Telepresence Room for the class was better or worse than other language courses at the university level

End-of-Term Focus Group Study Once focus groups interviews and transcription were completed, interview data was uploaded into the qualitative data analysis software program Dedoose in order to facilitate the process of storing, organizing, and searching the data (Creswell, 2008). Open coding was used to categorize segments of data that seemed to pertain to the same phenomena (e.g., technical issues, class and instructors, future plans) (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Within these coded categories, data were then coded with micro codes that emerged upon further analysis. For example, micro codes

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

N/A

Much harder

Somewhat harder

About the same

Somewhat easier

Much easier

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

N/A

Much better

Somewhat better

About the same

Somewhat worse

Much worse

11

under “technical issues” included “microphones and visibility” and “technical malfunctions.” The write-up of our findings was drawn from the micro coded data. Data was coded by one CASTL-HE researcher and then checked by a second CASTL-HE researcher who confirmed and added codes. In order to establish the trustworthiness of our study, we included thick description and engaged in the process of peer debriefing (Guba & Lincoln, 1982; Marshall & Rossman, 2006).

Technical Issues When asked to elaborate on their experiences using the telepresence classrooms, students in the Creole and Tibetan classes described technical issues that they encountered. In particular, the Creole students discussed problems related to the microphones and visibility, and both groups of students discussed technical malfunctions. Both classes also discussed email communication and the use of visual aids. Microphones and Visibility Students in the Creole class characterized the beginning of the semester as confusing, as they and the instructor worked through problems related to the microphones and cameras. Students said that while at U.Va. the microphones are always on, at Duke the students have to push a button to activate their microphones, which in turn triggers the camera to focus on whoever is using the microphone. As Emma, a U.Va. student explained,

Well, we can be seen but the microphones make a difference. Duke microphones are individually turned on and off where they are seated. Whoever pushes the button for the microphone to come on, the camera automatically focuses on them…For us, we are either all on the mic or all off. They can always see us.

Students said that when the class first began, Duke students often forgot to activate their microphones. This resulted in situations in which the Duke students were engaged in discussions that the U.Va. students could see but not hear. As Nicole, a Duke student, explained,

…our mics are not always on, so it was a huge learning curve for us to remember to turn them on. So, since Jacques is here, we just ask a question but now we have to remember to turn the mic on so U.Va. can hear what we are talking about…

Nicole’s classmate Sam continued, “They just see everyone at Duke nodding their heads and U.Va. is like waving and yelling, ‘hey, do it again!’.” Participants

We sat in the back of the room for a few weeks because we thought they could see us better and then we realized we needed to be closer. Jacques would point at us and we couldn’t tell what he wanted or he couldn’t see us. It was really confusing.

12

noted that the Duke microphone arrangement also limited the extent to which individuals could communicate with one another. Emma, a U.Va. student, shared that students in each physical location could have side conversations with one another, but it was impossible for more than one U.Va.-Duke pair to converse at one time. As she explained, “That is one thing that can be frustrating. It can get mixed up…if I’m talking to Maya, someone else can’t be talking with Sam because it all comes through as one sound.” In addition to the issues with the microphones, the Creole students also described two issues with visibility. First, students seated in the rear of the U.Va. classroom were not visible to the instructor and students at Duke. The U.Va. students said that they did not realize this at the beginning of the semester, which resulted in a bit of confusion. As Emma, a U.Va. student, explained,

We sat in the back of the room for a few weeks because we thought they could see us better and then we realized we needed to be closer. Jacques would point at us and we couldn’t tell what he wanted or he couldn’t see us. It was really confusing.

Once the U.Va. students realized that they were not visible in the back of the classroom, they moved to the front row for the rest of the semester. A second problem was that students seated in the middle section of the Duke classroom were often not visible to the U.Va. students, since if the instructor was speaking he appeared on the screen instead of the middle section of students. As Emma explained, “If Jacques is talking on his microphone, the camera would shut off on the other students and then would focus on Jacques in the middle.” This was not a situation that was resolved over the course of the semester; rather, students seemed to become accustomed to the middle section of Duke students appearing and disappearing over the course of each class. Technical Malfunctions In addition to the microphone and visibility issues described by the Creole students, the Creole and Tibetan students discussed technical malfunctions that they experienced when using the telepresence classrooms. In the Creole class, students shared that for one or two weeks during the semester, there was a problem with the Duke camera. Because the camera was not working, the Duke students moved to three or four different telepresence rooms in an effort to connect with the U.Va. class. These other rooms, the students said, had smaller screens and appeared to be set up for meetings rather than classes. As Duke student Sam explained, “Those rooms are not…for as many people as we have. We were trying to scoot people over and get everyone in the frame and it was a mess.” In addition, during this same time period the Duke students were visually disconnected from U.Va., and had to figure out creative ways to work around this problem. As U.Va. student Thomas explained,

13

…we would use this group session client that Duke has and connect our computers. We couldn’t see them but we could hear them and we could connect our laptops to just see the PowerPoint. Jacques would have to point at things.

While the students said that they never had to cancel class during this time period, they expressed frustration about time lost due to the disruption, as well as the fact that there was no formal back-up plan in place when the cameras in their regular classroom failed to work. While the Tibetan students never had to switch classrooms during the semester, they did experience technical problems that disrupted class. The students described an ongoing issue with connectivity, explaining that the instructor often had to disconnect and reconnect his laptop multiple times in order for his PowerPoint to be visible to the Duke students. In addition, the students said that a few times the Duke video screen had not come on, and they had trouble locating technicians to assist with the problem. As Erin, a U.Va. student, explained, “…people don’t take it seriously when we say it isn’t working. A couple days, we had to fix it ourselves and we were all on Skype working on it.” Similar to the Creole students, the Tibetan students expressed frustration about the amount of time lost to these technical problems. Email Communication U.Va. students discussed difficulties with email communication. The students explained that they were assigned Duke email addresses for the purposes of class-related communication and class website access. Having a separate email account just for the Creole class, they said, had proved cumbersome, since they were unable to forward their Duke emails to their Virginia accounts. They said that they sometimes forgot to check their Duke email accounts before class, and – since the instructor often sent emails late at night or very early in the morning – they would sometimes arrive at class without information they needed for class. Visual Aids A final issue that students in both the Creole and Tibetan classes discussed was the use of visual aids. In the Tibetan class, the instructor often used a whiteboard to illustrate spelling, letters, or sentence structure. Students said that they found the use of the whiteboard helpful. As Erin, a U.Va. student, explained, “The whiteboard I like a lot…because Tibetan spelling is really, really difficult. If we didn’t have that, it would be really problematic.” In the Creole class, however, the instructor and students discovered early on that only half of the whiteboard – located with the instructor at Duke – was visible to the U.Va. students. So instead of employing a whiteboard, the instructor used PowerPoints to convey the type of information he would have typically written out on the whiteboard. In spite of the technical issues they identified and discussed, students in both the Creole and Tibetan classes agreed that the benefits of telepresence learning outweighed the challenges. As Thomas, a U.Va. student in the Creole class, said, “It’s very intuitive technology so we got used to it quickly.” Thomas’s classmate Emma agreed, sharing, “It’s really cool. It’s a little weird at first but you get used to it.”

14

Class and Instructors

In addition to discussing technical issues associated with the courses, focus group participants shared their thoughts about course logistics and the course instructors. Areas of focus included class schedules, class size, and the sense of community that developed within each class. Students also provided feedback on course instructors Jacques Pierre (Creole) and Tsetan Nepali (Tibetan) and their respective teaching assistants (TAs).

Class Schedule In both of the classes, students agreed that daily class meetings had been helpful in quickly learning Creole and Tibetan. As Yanmei, a Duke student in the Tibetan class, said,

…I think that if one really, really wants to learn a language, getting exposure to it every day is important. If you just remember two more new words every day, you can learn a lot when you put them all together. It adds up.

However, in the Creole class, one Duke student and all of the U.Va. students shared that the class meeting time had been problematic. Duke student John said that the class was “at a really hot time for classes. Like, it conflicts with so many classes and…my major classes. It makes it hard.” The U.Va. Creole students said that the class meeting time had been problematic since it met on Duke’s schedule as opposed to U.Va.’s. As Thomas, a U.Va. student, explained,

It runs 11:45-12:45 and that is really bad for U.Va. classes. It takes up both the 11-11:50 hour and the 12-12:50 hour, four days a week, and those are really popular class times here…I’m glad I took it but it’s not sustainable for my schedule. It’s two hours of sacrifice for U.Va. students and only one for Duke.

Students at both institutions suggested moving the class to another time block or holding class meetings on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays in an effort to reduce scheduling conflicts. Class Size Focus group participants in both Creole and Tibetan spoke positively of the small number of students in each class. The students said that the small class sizes meant that they had more opportunity to actively engage in the immersion setting, reading aloud and engaging in conversation with one another. As Jenny, a Duke student in the Creole course, shared, “I like that this is a smaller class, being able to know the other students and to have the connection with U.VA. makes it less intimidating to learn a new language.” Students also felt that in a smaller class, instructors were better able to attend to their progress. As Lena, a Creole student at Duke, explained, “…being in a smaller environment has really helped me because [Mr. Pierre] likes to make sure we are all on track and knows our stuff and he wants to make sure we are doing well.” Sense of Community within Class

15

A key theme that emerged from all of the focus group discussions was the way in which the telepresence technology fostered a sense of community between students at U.Va. and students at Duke. As Nicole, a Duke student in the Creole class, said,

…I think that as we get more advanced…we can ask more engaging questions, we can learn more about each other, and that has helped us create community across the technology as our Creole is getting better.

Similarly, other students in the Creole class shared that because the class was so small, and emphasized the development of conversation skills, students had been able to get to know one another over the course of the semester. As Emma, a U.Va. student, explained, “I consider the people on the other end my friends now and that’s nice. I am getting to know people I wouldn’t have known.” While the Creole students enjoyed getting to know one another during class meetings, the U.Va. students in particular expressed a desire to meet their Duke classmates in person. As Thomas, a U.Va. student, said,

We like them, we think they like us too. You don’t get to know them outside of class – nothing exists outside of formal classroom time with Duke students. Like in a regular class, I’d talk to people before or after class and get to know them. That doesn’t happen in this setting.

Indeed, students in the Tibetan class felt so compelled to meet in person that they organized a weekend get-together in Charlottesville during the semester. All of the students shared that they very much enjoyed the chance to spend time together outside of class. As U.Va. student Erin explained,

It’s like we already knew them. It was weird not to see them on the video but I had seen them so many times before…we kind of were talking right away…and when they went back it was really sad…I think it was good that we were able to see them in person, and now we’re all on Facebook and we keep in touch more and we are going to Duke to see them after school gets out.

Erin’s Duke classmate Tenzin agreed that the visit was a positive experience, sharing:

Language is a way of communication and communication is not just in class. It was really good – it expanded our friendship, and just expanded my world…It’s like a window and we opened it.

Students in both the Creole and Tibetan classes suggested that future classes include opportunities for in-person interaction among Duke and U.Va. students.

Language is a way of communication and communication is not just in class. It was really good – it expanded our friendship, and just expanded my world…It’s like a window and we opened it.

16

Instructors Creole With respect to Mr. Pierre, the Duke students praised his approachability and willingness to work with students outside of class time. As Lena, a Duke student, explained, “I think personally that he’s very helpful because he opens up his office hours to students who need help and you can email him whenever you want.” U.Va. students said that while they had the opportunity to practice with Mr. Pierre via Skype, their relationship with him was somewhat impersonal until he came to visit their class at U.Va. As Sarah, a U.Va. student, said, “After we met in person, I could see his motivation and passion for teaching his native language and how he wants to share it with us…It was a tipping point for me to continue.” Challenges noted by students included Mr. Pierre’s immersion approach, as well as limitations caused by the fact that Mr. Pierre is based at Duke. In terms of immersion, some students said that the approach could be frustrating. As Jenny, a Duke student, shared, “Jacques communicates at a level that I’m not ready for.” Her classmate, Duke student Lena, agreed, stating that the fact that Mr. Pierre does not speak English while teaching had sometimes made it difficult to follow along in class. Duke student Nicole added, “…sometimes important information is said in Creole with the assumption that we know what he’s saying and we don’t know what he’s saying. Like, information about the course. About our assignments and finals.” Other students, however, praised Mr. Pierre’s immersion approach. U.Va. student Thomas stated,

He really pushes us in class. He pushes us much more than the textbooks we use…we are reading full-length news articles and watching movies in Creole. You go back and look in the book and it’s just these little dialogues and we are reading much more. It will be things that he taught us three weeks earlier. He moves much faster than the curriculum does. I’ve been taking Chinese since I got [to U.Va. three years ago], and I’m better in Creole in two months than I am in Chinese.

Other students echoed these sentiments. Emma, a U.Va. student, said,

Jacques holds you to a really high standard and you want to meet his standard. He is good at praising you for small little victories and he will say, “Stop and think about what we were doing a couple months ago and look at what you can do now.”

Similarly, Lena, a Duke student, shared:

I feel like in a short amount of time, I was able to learn more of the language than I expected and I can carry on conversation with my friends who speak fluently and it goes well.

17

With regard to Mr. Pierre’s physical location, students at both institutions noted that it affected their experience in the class. Duke students expressed that having Mr. Pierre in the room with

them made it possible for them speak with him before and after class, as well as ask him questions during quizzes. As Jenny explained, “because we physically have him here…we can call him over and whisper our questions. [The U.Va. students] have to kind of disrupt the whole room to get his attention and then ask their question in front of

everyone.” U.Va. students agreed that having easier access to Mr. Pierre might be an advantage for the Duke students. As Emma, a U.Va. student, said, “they can talk with him before and after class and are able to physically go see him. We can’t do that and there is another class that comes in after ours so he has to get out pretty quickly.” In spite of the limitation of Mr. Pierre’s Duke location, U.Va. students noted that the U.Va. TA for the class had been a valuable resource throughout the semester. The TA attended classes every day but Monday and also held office hours on Grounds every Wednesday. Students shared that the TA helped them practice speaking Creole, and also helped them during class by assisting with grammar and vocabulary. As U.Va. student Emma said, “The TA is like an active dictionary for us. We can learn from her and practice before presenting ideas to Jacques. We learn a lot from her.” Tibetan Participants in the Tibetan focus group spoke of Mr. Nepali in universally positive terms, describing him as “really nice and helpful,” the “nicest language instructor ever,” and “like a grandfather.” Students at both U.Va. and Duke praised his teaching ability and his generosity. Duke student Tenzin shared that Mr. Nepali made himself available to the Duke students by phone or Skype. In addition, as U.Va. student Erin shared, Mr. Nepali “really involves you outside of class…We went to his house for dinner. He let the Duke students sleep over at his house when they visited.” In addition, Erin continued, Mr. Nepali always attends a weekly Tibetan conversation practice session at U.Va. called “Tibet Corner,” which she had found helpful. Indeed, students agreed that between his in-class instruction and his involvement in Tibetan language and cultural activities outside of class, Mr. Nepali had not only enabled them to learn the complexities of Tibetan script and grammar, but also made them feel a part of the broader Tibetan language community.

Future Plans

In light of their experiences with the Tibetan and Creole courses, focus group participants were asked how they anticipated using the languages they had studied. Students planned to use Creole and Tibetan in a variety of ways, including medical work and communication with family and friends.

I feel like in a short amount of time, I was able to learn more of the language than I expected and I can carry on conversation with my friends who speak fluently and it goes well.

18

Creole For some Creole students, future medical work was a driver behind their desire to learn Creole. Another student planned to use Creole when conducting research. U.Va. student Emma, who planned to attend medical school, said that what she learned in the Creole class will “definitely play a role in my career and understanding what is important in working with people from Haiti.” Similarly, Emma’s U.Va. classmate Liz said, “I am planning on applying to medical school. It is cool to spend some portion of time working in Haiti or, I think I want to be a surgeon, and there is a surgical team that works there and it would be especially helpful if I could speak.” Lena, a student at Duke, had already conducted medical mission work in Haiti. She planned to draw upon her Creole experience when she returned to Haiti. As she explained, “I’ll be going back to the hospital I volunteered for in Port Au Prince and they want me to come back when I am good so I can interpret.” Nicole, a graduate student at Duke, plans to utilize Creole when conducting research with the Haitian community in the Dominican Republic. Knowing how to speak some Creole, she said, “will help me build relationships and develop a rapport with the community.” For other students, making connections with family and friends has been an important part of learning Creole and is the primary avenue for future use. According to Sam, a graduate student at Duke, “For me, I was in the Peace Corps and I served in Haiti and I keep in touch with my host family and contacts so that was my motivation.” Duke student Jenny said, “My dad is St. Lucian and they speak a form of Creole so I am interested in that region and I also thought about working in Haiti.” Similarly, Jenny’s Duke classmate John said, “Half my family is Haitian on my father’s side and growing up I never got the chance to learn…I thought this was a good opportunity and I could learn to communicate with my family a bit better.” Tibetan Students enrolled in the Tibetan course also planned to use the language for both personal and professional endeavors. According to Erin, a recent transfer student to U.Va. who has declared Tibetan Studies as her major,

…I really want to go to Tibet eventually. Whatever I do in the future, I want to work with Tibet or with Tibetans. Hopefully that will help me a lot. It’s really limited, it’s not like Spanish or French where the people are all over the place speaking, but you’d be surprised how many Tibetans there are everywhere. If you get involved with the community, you’ll meet Tibetans everywhere. I think there are more opportunities than I originally thought.

Yanmei, a graduate student at U.Va., is hoping to use Tibetan to assist U.Va. students through her assistantship and to further personal goals. She shared,

My original goal was to talk to Tibetan parents and students about their cultural adaptation to the United States, that was my primary goal. I am a Buddhist, so I’d like to be able to read scholars and scriptures, if I can eventually achieve that.

19

Tenzin, an international student at Duke, said that while he is from Tibet, his family speaks a different dialect from the one taught in the Tibetan class. Learning the new dialect, he explained, would enable him to communicate more effectively when he traveled home. In addition, he said, “I’d like to introduce my grandparents to this dialect since it’s different but we do share some of the words. Maybe one day I can do that and I think they would be happy to learn.”

Suggestions Offered by Focus Group Participants

Focus group participants offered a variety of suggestions regarding the Tibetan and Creole classes:

• Connect students with university and community resources, such as professors who are conducting research in areas where Creole or Tibetan is spoken, or community organizations that would benefit from volunteers who speak rudimentary Creole or Tibetan.

• Offer advanced Creole language training beyond Creole 2. • Publicize the Less Commonly Taught Languages course offerings more broadly. • Provide technology training for language instructors and students utilizing the

telepresence rooms at the beginning of the semester, to better equip them to handle technology-related problems when professional assistance is not available.

Conclusion

Findings from this initial assessment shed light on students’ perceptions of their experiences in the Creole I and Tibetan I courses. Students’ mid-term survey responses provided insight into aspects of their courses including class activities and telepresence technology. Focus group contributions, offered at the end of the semester, allowed for a more in-depth exploration of students’ thoughts on issues related to classroom technology, as well as course logistics, course instruction, and future plans for using Creole and Tibetan. In their responses to the mid-term survey assessment, students indicated that lecture presentations helped their learning. Most students were also positive about their experience with the CISCO Telepresence Rooms and noted that in-class discussions, group work, and activities were peers were helpful. However, students’ survey responses showed that students found interactive learning more helpful when it involved peers at their own university as opposed to peers at the other university. Focus group findings suggest that students’ preference for working with peers at their own institution was likely due to issues related to microphones, visibility, and technical problems in the Creole class. While these issues were largely resolved after the middle of the semester, they nonetheless affected the ease with which Creole students at Duke and U.Va. could communicate with one another during the first several weeks of class. With respect to course instruction and logistics, students were largely positive about their instructors and teaching assistants, noting that they were approachable and helpful. Students felt that the small class size enhanced their learning experience and – while students in the Creole class had complaints about the midday meeting time of their class – all students agreed that

20

challenging but effective instruction, combined with daily immersion-style class meetings, enabled them to become conversant in Creole or Tibetan by the end of the semester. In addition, students felt that telepresence technology fostered a sense of community within the classes. In terms of future plans, students noted a variety of ways in which they hoped to use Creole and Tibetan. Some students anticipated utilizing Creole or Tibetan in their careers, while others shared that they planned to conduct research or do volunteer work in places where Creole or Tibetan is spoken. Some students also shared that they would use their Creole or Tibetan skills to communicate with friends, family members, or students. Findings from both the mid-term survey assessment and the end-of-semester focus groups suggest ways in which language classes taught in the CISCO Telepresence Rooms might be improved moving forward. First, the technical problems encountered in both courses indicate a need for more immediate technical assistance when issues arise. Ideally, this assistance would be provided by on-site personnel at Duke and U.Va. who are on call throughout class meetings. In addition, instructors and teaching assistants might benefit from more thorough technical training prior to using the telepresence classrooms, and students might benefit from an orientation session at the beginning of the semester to familiarize them with the telepresence technology. Second, based on feedback from the Creole students in particular, we recommend that classes be scheduled at a time of day that is more mutually convenient than the midday time block, in order to better coordinate the class time with both institutions’ schedules. Similarly, we would encourage the development of course technology that permits cross-institutional access and thus precludes the need to assign new email addresses to students. Finally, we would encourage more opportunities for in-person interaction. Doing so might facilitate the development of greater rapport among students and instructors, and enable all students to benefit from language-related resources within the Duke and U.Va. communities.

21

References Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic

inquiry. Educational Technology Research and Development, 30, 233-252. doi: 10.1007/BF02765185

Marshall, C. & Rossman, G.B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures

and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

22

APPENDIX A: Full Mid-Term Survey Results

How much do the following class activities help your learning?

Lecture presentations by the instructor Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

No help at all 0 0.0

Very little help 0 0.0

Some help 2 15.4 1 1

A lot of help 11 84.6 7 4

No opinion N/A 0 0.0

Total 13 100.00 8 5

Discussions in class with your peers at your university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I



Some help 1 7.7 1



Total 13 100.0 8 5

Discussions in class with your peers at the other university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I



Some help 3 23.1 3



Total 13 100.0 8 5

23

Group work in class with your peers at your

university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I



Some help 3 23.1 3


No opinion N/A 1 7.7 1

Total 13 100.0 8 5

Group work in class with your peers at the other university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

No help at all 1 7.7 1


Some help 5 38.5 5



Total 13 100.0 8 5

Hands-on class activities (e.g., role plays) with your peers at your university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I


Very little help 1 7.7 1

Some help 3 23.1 3



Total 13 100.0 8 5

24

Hands-on class activities with your peers at

the other university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I


Very little help 1 7.7 1

Some help 1 7.7 1



Total 13 100.0 8 5

Please rate the following aspects of your course in the CISCO Telepresence Room.

Ability to see the instructor clearly Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0

Some of the time 0 0.0

Most of the time 4 30.8 4

All of the time 6 46.2 3 3

No opinion N/A 3 23.1 1 2

Total 13 100.0 8 5

Ability to hear the instructor clearly Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0





Total 13 100.0 8 5

25

Ability to communicate with the instructor Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0





Missing 1 1

Total 13 100.0 8 5

Ability to see the students at the other university clearly Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0


Most of the time 5 38.5 4 1



Total 13 100.0 8 5

Ability to hear the students at the other university clearly Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0

Some of the time 1 7.7 1




Total 13 100.0 8 5

26

Ability to communicate with the students at

the other university Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Never 0 0.0


Most of the time 5 38.5 4 1



Total 13 100.0 8 5

Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements.

Having a teaching assistant for the course is helpful. Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Strongly disagree 0 0.0

Disagree 0 0.0

No opinion 3 23.1 2 1

Agree 3 23.1 2 1

Strongly agree 7 53.8 4 3

Total 13 100.0 8 5

It is easy to access the online materials. Frequency Valid Percent Creole I Tibetan I

Strongly disagree 0 0.0

Disagree 1 7.7 1

No opinion 0 0.0

Agree 7 53.8 4 3

Strongly agree 5 38.5 4 1

Total 13 100.0 8 5

27

So far the course requirements for this class are ______ than other language

courses at a university level. Frequency Valid Percent

Creole I Tibetan I

Much easier 0 0.0

Somewhat easier 1 7.7 1

About the same 7 53.8 3 4

Somewhat harder 4 30.8 3 1

Much harder 0 0.0

N/A 1 7.7 1

Total 13 100.0 8 5

So far using the CISCO Telepresence Room for this class is ______ than your

experiences in other language courses at a university level.

Frequency Valid Percent

Creole I Tibetan I

Much worse 0 0.0

Somewhat worse 0 0.0

About the same 7 53.8 5 2

Somewhat better 0 0.0

Much better 2 15.4 2

NA 4 30.8 3 1

Total 13 100.0 8 5

If you took language courses at a university other than Duke or U.Va. please write the name of those universities in the s

3 Spanish Language courses at Duke

Pomona College

less commonly taught languages initial assessment report ... · study of foreign languages, which...

Documents