ELT through videoconferencing in primary schools in Uruguay: first steps

Abstract

Plan Ceibal is an interinstitutional undertaking which has distributed XO laptops and Internet connectivity among primary school learners and teachers across Uruguay and developed a wide range of educational programmes. Ceibal administration believes that it is imperative to introduce English as a Foreign Language in primary education through the use of new modes of teaching which incorporate the OLPC XO laptop as a tool for learning engagement and democratisation. Uruguay has secured funds for a project based on blended learning which integrates remote teaching through videoconferencing, the use of a learning management system, and professional development. Plan Ceibal seeks to demonstrate that lessons delivered by remote teachers via videoconferencing with support from classroom teachers (CTs) with very limited or no command of English can facilitate successful learning outcomes in learners and CTs. In this article, I describe the pilot phase of this project which aims at delivering 5000 remote lessons by 2015.

Keywords:

• blended learning
• videoconferencing
• remote teaching
• XO laptop
• EFL

Introduction

Current innovations in foreign language classrooms may be linked to the presence of digital technologies as mediating tools in the social construction of knowledge. Within the technology domain, it is well known that the One-Laptop-Per-Child organisation promotes the reduction of the digital divide by allowing children in developing countries to become computer literate through the use of an XO laptop (Randerson 2008). Considering education a political concern, the Government of Uruguay adopted the OLPC spirit and XO laptops through the implementation of the Plan Ceibal project with the aim of ‘offering equal opportunities, the democratisation of knowledge, and the promotion of new forms of literacy’ (Cyranek 2011, 32).

Plan Ceibal is an interinstitutional undertaking which has distributed XO laptops and Internet connectivity among primary school learners and teachers across Uruguay and developed a wide range of educational programmes which place Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) at the heart of pedagogical innovation. The implementation of such a project has given rise to the current investigation of aspects such as computer supported collaborative learning and autonomy (Mitra and Quiroga 2012).

Embedded in this nation-wide scheme, a project called ‘Plan Ceibal en Inglés’ was born in 2012 to combine inputs from Plan Ceibal, Ministry of Education of Uruguay, other Uruguayan national bodies and the British Council. Ceibal administration believes that it is imperative to introduce English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in primary education through new modes of teaching which incorporate the XO laptop, called Ceibalita in Uruguay, as a tool for learning engagement and democratisation. Although there is general consensus about the importance of EFL, English does not constitute a core subject in the school curriculum and therefore joining the programme is voluntary.

While the country lacks qualified teachers evenly distributed in all cities to support this initiative, the national government has secured funds for a project based on blended learning which integrates remote teaching through videoconferencing, a learning management system (LMS) and professional development. Plan Ceibal seeks to demonstrate that lessons delivered by remote teachers (RTs) via videoconferencing with support from classroom teachers (CTs) with little command of English can facilitate successful learning outcomes in learners, including effective interaction with the RT, CT and between learners. To this effect, Plan Ceibal released an international call and the bid submitted by the British Council was awarded the tender.

As part of the bidding process, in 2012, a pilot phase was implemented in 20 primary schools thus reaching almost 1000 Year 4 learners aged 10–11. It involved 45 CTs who volunteered to be part of the pilot phase, 20 RTs, three e-moderators, and a managing team from Plan Ceibal and British Council. The project aims at delivering 5000 remote lessons a week by 2015.

Based on my experience as part of the team through the pilot phase, I will describe the main features, impact and implications behind Plan Ceibal en Inglés as an example of innovative practice in English Language Teaching (ELT).

Project design

Argentinian trainers Banfi and Rettaroli (2012) developed a three-level course for Years 4, 5 and 6 of primary education combining telepresence and face-to-face teaching. For the pilot phase RTs and e-moderators were based in Buenos Aires and Bogota. Uruguayan teachers of English based in Montevideo are expected to join the project in the expansion phase.

Defined as ‘a language course which combines a face-to-face classroom component with an appropriate use of technology’ (Sharma and Barrett 2007, 7), blended learning is the teaching model underpinning Plan Ceibal en Inglés. According to Nissen and Tea (2012), blended learning solutions are more frequent given the benefits of combining media, contexts, modes of web-based technology and traditional learning. In this model where ICT resources become powerful mediating tools, sociocultural and cognitive perspectives of learning underlie the experience (Helms 2012). Within this theoretical view, ICT use in ELT, or in learning in general, could be envisaged as a continuum which moves from ICT for teaching where only teachers use technology for managing and organising the classrooms to ICT for learning where learners are encouraged to develop their own resources (Erben, Ban, and Castañeda 2009). The movement from a teacher-centred practice to a learner-centred one entails the creation of tasks that consider learners' potential, computer literacy level, and the offering of new cognitive challenges (Starkey 2011). In turn, this shift towards negotiated practices promotes learner autonomy, motivation and web-mediated self-regulated learning (Shen, Lee, and Tsai 2011; Ushioda 2011a, 2011b).

Having this rationale in mind, I shall describe how blended learning was implemented during the pilot phase between June and November 2012. This description is based on my knowledge of the programme and data informally collected by means of classroom observations, email exchanges, meeting with key stakeholders, interviews, feedback through an institutional LMS, and online surveys with RTs and CTs, and recorded lessons. These data were collected from August to November 2012.

Each week, learners had three one-hour lessons called Lessons A–C. While Lesson A was taught remotely through videoconferencing by a qualified RT, Lessons B and C were led by the learners' CT, who had little or no knowledge of English. Certainly, this entailed collaborative work between RTs and CTs channelled through a weekly one-hour session through Skype. Following Banfi and Rettaroli (2012), this complex picture could be represented as follows (Figure 1).

Figure 1.  Lesson cycle.

Lesson planning and materials development

All materials and lesson plans were tailor made and discussed with Uruguayan stakeholders to produce culturally responsive pedagogies (Erben, Ban, and Castañeda 2009) anchored in blended learning and collaborative professional development. Such contextualised pedagogies were achieved through teaching techniques, materials and contents normally employed by Uruguayan teachers. Materials and activities were designed considering, for example, large classes, difficult circumstances and varied learner's backgrounds. These actions entailed regular meetings with materials writers, feedback from CTs and RTs, and views from Uruguayan primary education authorities.

Through blended learning, the aim of the project was twofold: (1) learning English for social interaction purposes and (2) learning English for curriculum purposes (Banfi and Rettaroli 2012). It may be noticed that the first part of the aim seems to be underpinned by Task-Based Learning (Willis and Willis 2007). Conversely, the second part may be associated with language-driven Content and Language Integrated Learning (Banegas 2012) as the authors of the course (Banfi and Rettaroli 2012) drew on curricular content to teach English and established curricular and procedural bridges with the Uruguayan primary school curriculum. The course authors justified the adopted approach on the necessity to encourage language use related to learners' experience of the world and their formal education trajectories. This led to developing lessons and materials which responded to learners' interests and context.

Banfi and Rettaroli (2012) developed complete syllabi and detailed lessons plans for each week with instructions in English and Spanish to be understood by RTs and CTs. Each set of Lessons A-B-C started with the following information in a table: level, unit, week, lesson, topic, vocabulary, grammar, phonology, functions, text genres, classroom language, tasks, and a list of digital materials with hyperlinks and printed materials to be used (Appendix 1). This table was followed by the three lesson plans in the cycle (Figure 1). Each lesson plan consisted of these stages: warmer, presentation of learning outcomes, presentation of new language items in context, recognition of new language items, practice, focus on pronunciation, tasks for language skills, self-assessment, optional activities and homework. In addition, the set included the printed flashcards, game boards and handouts that supported some of the activities found in the lessons.

With regard to lesson plans, CTs and RTs were ensured that these should not be regarded as prescriptive. Teachers could customise them according to their needs. They could delete, modify or add activities and sources provided that these were arranged as discussed between RTs and CTs. This means that they could not modify the linguistic content of the lesson but they could adapt the procedural component of the lesson.

In order to support teachers and encourage their use of the XOs, Plan Ceibal developed a LMS called CREA. Although there exist similar systems in the market, Ceibal wished their technology teams to develop their own customised system. Conceived as a platform for constructive learning by enabling course management, access and tracking of progress (Cavus 2011), CREA hosted all lesson plans and materials such as flashcards, videos, audio files, songs, online games and handouts to be accessed by the teachers involved. In addition, CREA offered various fora through which CTs, RTs, e-moderators and lesson plan writers could share their views on lesson planning and materials and language development before and after lesson delivery. However, CREA was never accessed by the learners, and therefore, it was a collaborative environment for course developers, RTs and CTs.

Teacher development courses

Compton (2009) remarks that digital technologies in education prompt the need for new teaching approaches and teaching skills as there is a shift in perceptions of time, space and ways of engaging students, and constructing knowledge. In Plan Ceibal en Inglés time and space are not constrained to learning inside the classroom. Learners can access activities from other environments through their XO laptops. Learners, CTs and RTs can actively construct knowledge through blogs.1

Based on Hampel and Stickler 2005 skills pyramid for online language teaching, Compton (2009) developed a framework in which a set of technical, pedagogical and evaluation skills are suggested along a continuum of teacher expertise. These aspects were considered to develop teachers professionally to ensure project success and involvement. In order to understand the dynamics and rationale behind the project, CTs participated in a four-day in-service orientation course two weeks before implementing the project. In this course, they had the opportunity to meet the lesson plan and course writers, some RTs and the e-moderators for the language improvement course. They also received input and experiential sessions on communicative language teaching, language development, the use of some online resources, and CREA navigation as they would find there all the necessary materials and sources. It was also explained what the project entailed and the time it demanded on their part given the fact that CTs were volunteers in this endeavour and would not receive extra salary for active participation.

Throughout the pilot phase and beyond, CTs took a self-access language improvement online course and received guidance from e-moderators whose mission was to encourage the teachers and provide extra learning and technical support. CTs were divided into groups of 10 participants and were linked to an e-moderator based in Buenos Aires. Each e-moderator facilitated two Skype meetings a month to help with self-assessment and evaluation of the course and also to discuss concerns or ideas which the CTs wished to share as regard the lesson cycle. One aim of enrolling CTs on an English course is to teach them English even when it means that they will be only a few steps ahead of their own learners. However, the long-term aim is to train them to become future RTs so that ownership and sustainability of the whole project moves to the hands of Uruguayan teachers.

In relation to RTs, they were offered orientation days and webinars during the development of the pilot phase. These instances did not take place in advance as the RTs’ profiles indicated that they had experience in teaching through blended learning. By means of webinars and face-to-face discussions, RTs had the opportunity to discuss lesson plans and the rationale behind lesson planning (Banfi and Rettaroli 2012) with the lesson plan writers. This was prompted by the need to discuss the relationship between Task-Based Learning, teacher development and technology (Hauck 2010; Raith and Hegelheimer 2010) in this particular context. They also took the opportunity of webinars to exchange experiences and offer feedback. They also received training on the use of digital technologies, file sharing, videoconferencing handling and CREA navigation. Furthermore, RTs organised themselves in such a way that peer observation emerged during the first weeks of remote lessons.

Lesson cycle

As shown in Figure 1, the lesson cycle was initiated with a planning and evaluation (PaE) session. This was followed by the videoconference-supported lesson led by a RT and two face-to-face lessons in the hands of a CT. Within the framework of collaborative professional development mediated through digital technologies, PaE was envisaged as a space to be carried out through Skype since one of its main advantages is that it has enabled ‘video-enhanced tandem learning’ (Godwin-Jones 2012, 3) not only among learners but also teachers.

I should point out that both EFL RTs and CTs were experienced professionals who shared an understanding of general pedagogy and classroom dynamics. However, the latter lacked subject-matter knowledge and specific didactics and therefore it was necessary that they worked collaboratively in an environment which promoted equality, awareness and informed decisions.

During each PaE meeting through Skype, each RT and CT went over the set of three lessons in order to discuss adaptations of activities and materials and agree on the roles and strategies to be used in each lesson and anticipate certain challenges and how to overcome them. Cycle after cycle, this PaE session also acted as a space for evaluation and reflection which would then be passed on to the lesson plan writers and materials developers for future adaptations and revised versions. In general terms and as the pilot phase evolved, these PaE sessions were around 30 minutes as the bond between RT–CT became solidified and there was full understanding of the pedagogical intent behind the overall course.

Undoubtedly, Lesson A was the most innovative component of the project. Delivery of remote lessons on a large scale via videoconferencing is an exciting and challenging departure in the field of foreign language teaching and learning. This required the installation of videoconferencing equipment and fibre optic cables in Uruguayan classrooms as well as Argentinian and Colombian premises from where RTs delivered the lessons. Each videoconferencing set included cameras and sound equipment which could be handled remotely, this means that a RT in Buenos Aires could control the camera in a school in Uruguay.

In this lesson, RTs were expected to introduce and practise new language content in an interactive manner using the full functionality of the videoconferencing technology and file/desktop sharing from RTs’ own computers. Consequently, the lesson featured the use of desktop sharing through commercial software and therefore the RTs could show digital flashcards, PowerPoint presentations, online games, video clips or digital interactive activities such as puzzles or jigsaws. Learners would use the XO laptop to keep a record of the content of each lesson qua a copybook.

Lesson A was envisaged as highly interactive but the main focus was on interaction between RTs and learners with the RTs providing a good model. In this sense, Lesson A was the most important lesson in the cycle since it was the only time in which learners could have quality input from a qualified EFL teacher. It should be mentioned that the lesson was carried out in English but also in Spanish so as not to leave the CT outside. Although initially conceived as a co-led lesson, the CTs provided support for the RTs, for example, by assisting in classroom management, organising learners into groups, and suggesting a change in the lesson pace or activities depending on learners' mood and classroom atmosphere.

On the one hand, RTs were perceived as second generation tutors (Nissen and Tea 2012) as they did not design the course but their feedback led to improved versions of lesson plans and materials. However, as Nissen and Tea (2012) recommend, RTs were periodically asked to provide feedback through online surveys and interviews in order to allow them to influence course design. On the other hand, RTs were considered the experts, which they were in a subject-specific sense. However, this did not seem to create any power issues in the RT–CT relationship since, after all, both were teachers with many years of experience. While the RTs knew English, the CTs knew the context and the learners.

Lessons B and C were delivered by the CTs mostly in Spanish following the received lesson plan and using some classroom language in English. These lessons built on the language presented and practised by the assigned RTs, using a variety of activities which promoted language skills, classroom organisation patterns and the XO laptop. CTs particularly favoured drilling, choral repetition and communicative activities such as information gap activities. Through informal contact, they reasoned that they felt comfortable with those instances where they could still exercise some control and pace in the lesson. In addition, CTs showed videos, suggested online games, and asked learners to produce their own materials. Based on the professionally developed resources, learners made their own flashcards, slides, games such as dominoes, and digital stories using their Ceibalitas.

Since CTs knew the context and their learners more than their remote counterparts, they were in a better position to introduce changes in the lessons. This resulted in CTs developing their own activities based on the lesson plans and CREA or their learners' preferences and styles. CTs who were proficient in the use of digital technologies exploited the benefits of the videoconferencing equipment by employing the 52″ screen as a board. These CTs used Word and PowerPoint to scaffold sentence patterns, vocabulary and collaboration. Some teachers went further and developed tests for their own classes but this was discouraged as the tests contained several language mistakes and the procedures did not correspond with the course aims or activities.

Similarly to RTs, CTs were also interviewed and their feedback was taken into account for lesson plan and materials development. Feedback was frequently concerned with the nature and number of activities per lesson and technical aspects of materials development such as flashcard size or target audience of videos.

Opportunities ahead

This contribution is the first attempt to disseminate this innovative practice. My report is descriptive and does not seek to analyse or evaluate the project. However, there are a number of areas which could be viewed as opportunities.

The innovative nature of this project in the Uruguayan context is precious territory for research. Starkey (2011) points out the need for research to make the link between digital technologies and teaching/learning explicit through reliable examination of the extent to which this link is effective. Along these lines, research needs to explore the quality of language learning in Uruguayan settings and its outcomes through blended learning and the collaboration of qualified EFL RTs and CTs with little knowledge of English. This latter aspect is an invitation to investigate teacher identities and status underpinned by an emancipatory approach in which teachers' little command of English could be turned into a positive and engaging experience (Rancière 2007) since the teacher's role is not only to explain but also to engage, inspire and empower.

Other equally crucial areas to examine are ownership and sustainability. In relation to ownership, it should be remembered that all the ELT experts in the project are not based in Uruguay. Rather than perceiving this fact as a challenge, it may be a good opportunity for Plan Ceibal to delineate actions which aim at longer teacher training programmes which prepare Uruguayan teachers to take full control of both face-to-face and remote teaching once the current partnership with the British Council finishes. Although the project administrators hope that CTs could become RTs after involvement in the experience, this aspect of the programme calls for a closer examination of teacher status and the relationship with unionised EFL teachers in the national education context. It also raises issues about CT's English language improvement in a short-time period.

I see project ownership inextricably bound to sustainability particularly beyond 2015. Sustainability is dependent upon involving Uruguayan stakeholders in all aspects of the project, not only lesson delivery but also course design and materials development perhaps as envisaged as a joint venture. During the pilot phase and at least the first year of the expansion phase, the project relies on CTs’ voluntary work and goodwill. However, CTs have reported that lesson preparation, the language improvement course and PaE are more time consuming than initially agreed.

Conclusion

In this brief article, I described the pilot phase implementation of an English course for primary school learners in Uruguay through a teaching model which integrates XO laptop computers, videoconferencing led by remote EFL teachers, face-to-face lessons delivered by CTs and teacher development courses. I explained the project design and how it is inscribed in the intersection between Task-based Learning and blended learning. I described the lesson cycle and how PaE served as a collaborative space for discussing, adapting and planning lessons. I finally outlined the opportunities ahead connected to research, ownership and sustainability.

Plan Ceibal en Inglés is a territory full of opportunities given its scope and large-scale implementation. Future publications will need to scrutinise the ecology of implementation and how the project shapes and is shaped by the interrelations among all stakeholders. Most importantly, readers will be interested in research reports about digital technologies as successful mediators for foreign language learning in a model where teachers learn English together with their students.

Notes on contributor

Darío Luis Banegas is a PhD student at Warwick University. He is a secondary school teacher, teacher trainer and curriculum developer for the Ministry of Education of Chubut in Argentina. His main interests are: CLIL, materials development, teacher development and blended learning in state education.

Notes

1. http://inglesescuela1salto.blogspot.com/ or http://cuartogradobescuela99salto.blogspot.com.ar/

Appendix 1: Section of a lesson plan