- Email: [email protected]
The teacher and the machine
L. Ross and B. D. Sadler
7
The Teacher and the Machine It seems to us that the title of this essay gives a clue why its subject matter has required the collaboration of a teacher and a technician. Over ten years have now passed since the Language Laboratory was first introduced for general use into this country and during this time a wide variety of models have been provided by the manufacturers. Both authors are fortunate in having worked in close association for the whole of the above mentioned period, which has meant that all the problems, queries and ideas arising out of use and adaptations of the equipment have been approached from both a teaching and a technical angle. Right from the beginning, we have been concerned with the extreme complexity of the teachers' control desks. This complexity, we feel, is due to the Language Laboratory then being in its infancy. At the state of knowledge at that time, it was difficult to foresee the precise usefulness of the facilities provided, their sequence of operation, and consequently the most economic layout of controls. In this article we outline a number of designfeatures aimed at flexibility and simplicity of operation which we intend to incorporate into one of our language laboratories. This greater flexibility and simplicity is particularly desirable to ensure that the change-over from one working mode to another can be achieved with ease and minimum effort, allowing the teacher to concentrate on instruction and supervision. The importance of this is obvious, considering that the teacher is usually unaccustomed to handling machinery. The modifications that we envisage are as follows: (a)
Removal of the seldom-used programme-sources (e.g. radio, record player, extra tape recorder) onto an external portable trolley, which need only be used when desired.
(b)
The control-desk recorder to be designed for use as a playback machine only. This necessitates the removal of the record facility usually provided, thus eliminating the danger of erasing a valuable teaching tape. Furthermore, the record button and its associated safety device are unnecessary.
(c)
Removal of all Group Switches which excessively complicate the Control Desk. The main functions of these switches are now transferred to the switchingsystem discussed in item (d).
8
(d)
That all the main function sWitching (transfer from desk, student control, intercommunication, etc.) be achieved by a panel of heavy-duty interlocking buttons, which allow the immediate changeover from anyone function to any other. These push-buttons are the nucleus of our design, around which our other simplifications have been made.
(e)
The alteration of the Individual Booth Switches to enable the instructor to immobilise the booths which are not required for use during a particular period. To ach1eve this immobilisation the switches are physically depressed on the ballpen principle thus also giving a visual indication of which booths are unused.
There is, however, one main function which needs explanation. It provides the means of an immediate change-over from a manual working mode to live communication, which breaks the artificiality and monotony.x l~hen we requested this facility on our previous installation the manufacturers provided an add-on unit, which allowed us to establish general intercommunication with the whole class. Unfortunately the byfactor was unacceptable background noise. We solved this problem in a different way, by providing an extra earphone attached to the desk microphone. This allowed a live conversation, based on a just-worked laboratory exercise between the teacher and a selected student, to be heard by the whole group. Other students who may be in difficulty can attract the teacher's attention by use of the Call Button (this situation corresponds to the raising of the hand in the classroom). The caller may then be switched into the group and also be heard by everyone. We have now decided to incorporate this facility, and the appropriate main function switch is called Group Intercommunication. This Intercommunication Button is provided as a facility which was not previously available. On the other hand, we have deprived the instructor of the possibility of the simultaneous transfer of two or more programmes, because we feel that this facility is very rarely, if ever, used; if the instructor is ever faced with heterogeneous groups the answer is to give them individual stock tapes. We have also removed the facility of using the control desk for the preparation of materials because we, ourselves, have both a studio and preparation room, but if we did not have these we would simply arrange to couple the External Trolley to the Control Desk Recorder. X)Details of the use of this procedure can be found in the article "Improving the effectiveness of Language Laboratory Work" by L. Ross, Audio-Visual Language Journal, Spring, 1970.
9 To demonstrate the simplicity and flexibility of our streamlined model, we would like to offer just one example of a Laboratory Teaching Procedure. Imagine a structure drill is transmitted to the students (which means that the Desk Recorder Transfer Button is depressed). By monitoring, the instructor discovers that the students cannot cope satisfactorily, e.g. the pauses are too short, and decides to change over to a live recording in order to provide longer pauses. He presses the Microphone Transfer Button , which automatically stops the Desk Recorder without affecting the booth machines, and he co~~ences his reading. If the tape was a recording of the teacher's own voice, the change from tape to live recording might not even be noticed by the students. Alternatively, if, by monitoring, the instructor discovers that the students cannot cope with the material, not because the pauses are too short, but because they have insufficient knowledge of vocabulary or grammar, the Group Intercommunication Button could be depressed. This would stop both desk and student machines and the instructor could then ask individual students one by one to form the required sentences, correcting and explaining the mistakes as in the classroom. Having finished a particular exercise in this way, the instructor could then present this same material for the students to do all together by depressing the Desk Transfer Button and restarting the progr~~e. On our existing equipment, the changeover from Desk Recorder transfer to Microphone transfer is also possible, but it requires the manipulation of eight controls, five of which are multi-positional. L. Ross Lecturer Department of Russian Language and Literature University of Birmingham England B. D. Sadler Chief Technician Language Laboratories University of Birmingham England
7
The Teacher and the Machine It seems to us that the title of this essay gives a clue why its subject matter has required the collaboration of a teacher and a technician. Over ten years have now passed since the Language Laboratory was first introduced for general use into this country and during this time a wide variety of models have been provided by the manufacturers. Both authors are fortunate in having worked in close association for the whole of the above mentioned period, which has meant that all the problems, queries and ideas arising out of use and adaptations of the equipment have been approached from both a teaching and a technical angle. Right from the beginning, we have been concerned with the extreme complexity of the teachers' control desks. This complexity, we feel, is due to the Language Laboratory then being in its infancy. At the state of knowledge at that time, it was difficult to foresee the precise usefulness of the facilities provided, their sequence of operation, and consequently the most economic layout of controls. In this article we outline a number of designfeatures aimed at flexibility and simplicity of operation which we intend to incorporate into one of our language laboratories. This greater flexibility and simplicity is particularly desirable to ensure that the change-over from one working mode to another can be achieved with ease and minimum effort, allowing the teacher to concentrate on instruction and supervision. The importance of this is obvious, considering that the teacher is usually unaccustomed to handling machinery. The modifications that we envisage are as follows: (a)
Removal of the seldom-used programme-sources (e.g. radio, record player, extra tape recorder) onto an external portable trolley, which need only be used when desired.
(b)
The control-desk recorder to be designed for use as a playback machine only. This necessitates the removal of the record facility usually provided, thus eliminating the danger of erasing a valuable teaching tape. Furthermore, the record button and its associated safety device are unnecessary.
(c)
Removal of all Group Switches which excessively complicate the Control Desk. The main functions of these switches are now transferred to the switchingsystem discussed in item (d).
8
(d)
That all the main function sWitching (transfer from desk, student control, intercommunication, etc.) be achieved by a panel of heavy-duty interlocking buttons, which allow the immediate changeover from anyone function to any other. These push-buttons are the nucleus of our design, around which our other simplifications have been made.
(e)
The alteration of the Individual Booth Switches to enable the instructor to immobilise the booths which are not required for use during a particular period. To ach1eve this immobilisation the switches are physically depressed on the ballpen principle thus also giving a visual indication of which booths are unused.
There is, however, one main function which needs explanation. It provides the means of an immediate change-over from a manual working mode to live communication, which breaks the artificiality and monotony.x l~hen we requested this facility on our previous installation the manufacturers provided an add-on unit, which allowed us to establish general intercommunication with the whole class. Unfortunately the byfactor was unacceptable background noise. We solved this problem in a different way, by providing an extra earphone attached to the desk microphone. This allowed a live conversation, based on a just-worked laboratory exercise between the teacher and a selected student, to be heard by the whole group. Other students who may be in difficulty can attract the teacher's attention by use of the Call Button (this situation corresponds to the raising of the hand in the classroom). The caller may then be switched into the group and also be heard by everyone. We have now decided to incorporate this facility, and the appropriate main function switch is called Group Intercommunication. This Intercommunication Button is provided as a facility which was not previously available. On the other hand, we have deprived the instructor of the possibility of the simultaneous transfer of two or more programmes, because we feel that this facility is very rarely, if ever, used; if the instructor is ever faced with heterogeneous groups the answer is to give them individual stock tapes. We have also removed the facility of using the control desk for the preparation of materials because we, ourselves, have both a studio and preparation room, but if we did not have these we would simply arrange to couple the External Trolley to the Control Desk Recorder. X)Details of the use of this procedure can be found in the article "Improving the effectiveness of Language Laboratory Work" by L. Ross, Audio-Visual Language Journal, Spring, 1970.
9 To demonstrate the simplicity and flexibility of our streamlined model, we would like to offer just one example of a Laboratory Teaching Procedure. Imagine a structure drill is transmitted to the students (which means that the Desk Recorder Transfer Button is depressed). By monitoring, the instructor discovers that the students cannot cope satisfactorily, e.g. the pauses are too short, and decides to change over to a live recording in order to provide longer pauses. He presses the Microphone Transfer Button , which automatically stops the Desk Recorder without affecting the booth machines, and he co~~ences his reading. If the tape was a recording of the teacher's own voice, the change from tape to live recording might not even be noticed by the students. Alternatively, if, by monitoring, the instructor discovers that the students cannot cope with the material, not because the pauses are too short, but because they have insufficient knowledge of vocabulary or grammar, the Group Intercommunication Button could be depressed. This would stop both desk and student machines and the instructor could then ask individual students one by one to form the required sentences, correcting and explaining the mistakes as in the classroom. Having finished a particular exercise in this way, the instructor could then present this same material for the students to do all together by depressing the Desk Transfer Button and restarting the progr~~e. On our existing equipment, the changeover from Desk Recorder transfer to Microphone transfer is also possible, but it requires the manipulation of eight controls, five of which are multi-positional. L. Ross Lecturer Department of Russian Language and Literature University of Birmingham England B. D. Sadler Chief Technician Language Laboratories University of Birmingham England