The Use of Blackbaord Collaborate in an Online Chinese Class presented by Sijia Guo at the Taking Educations Beyond Borders Forum in Cairns, June 2014.

1. The use of Blackboard Collaborate in
an online Chinese class
Sijia (Angeline) Guo
Department of International Studies

2. The purpose of this action research
study
• To investigate the implementation of a task-
based language teaching (TBLT) approach in
a web conferencing-based online beginners’
Chinese class and its influence on learners’
SLA

3. Figure 1. A screenshot of Blackboard Collaborate
online session (Guo, 2013)

4. Background of the research
Multimodal interaction and language
learning
• How participants use different modes to make meaning
and facilitate collaborative learning has become the focus
of research interest (Hampel & Stickler, 2012; Stickler &
Shi, 2013)
• Stockwell (2010) argues, “[t]here is a need, then, to
investigate how task-based learning (TBL) may be
conducted in [multimodal] environments, and how the
medium has the potential to affect the way in which
learners interact, the language they produce and the
strategies they use”

5. Sociocultural theories and TBLT
• The implications of sociocultural theories for
task-based learning are:
1. Task itself does not contribute to creating
the context of learning, but how the
participants do the tasks.
2. Learning occurs in rather than as a result of
interaction.
（Ellis, 2003)

6. Use of TBLT in synchronous CMC
(SCMC)
A number of studies have shown that SCMC has great
potential in
• facilitating learner-learner interaction
• increasing equality of participation
• enhancing language output
• contributing to negotiation of meaning

7. Research Question
• How do the teacher and learners adopt
multiple modes to make meaning in a web
conferencing environment?

8. Participants： 8 BA students of CHN104 Introductory
Chinese 1 ， 2013 participated in this study
Task design and procedure:
Followed Wills’s (1996a, 1996b, 1998) and Ellis’s
(2003) TBL framework, also took into account Hampel’s
(2006) task design framework in audio-conferencing
environment

9. An excerpt of the multimodal
transcription

10. Stages
Main room
or
breakout
rooms
Activities Time limits
Modes
mainly
used
Pre-task
stage
Main room
Warm-up
activities
20mins
Audio/video
/text
chat/whiteb
oard/polling/
emoticons
The task
Breakout
rooms
The tasks 20mins
Audio
(mainly)/vid
eo/whiteboa
rd
The report
stage
Main room
Task
presentatio
n and the
teacher
providing
feedback
20mins
Audio/video
/text
chat/whiteb
oard/polling/
emoticons

12. Research Methodology: Mixed methods
• Quantitative methods:
Post session questionnaire
Multimodal interaction analysis (speaking & video
dominance, use of text chat and feedback tools, such as
emoticons, raise up hand and polling)
• Qualitative methods:
Discourse analysis;
In-depth interviews

13. Findings
Multimodal interactions (teacher-learners)
• Speaking dominance
67%
11%
2%
1% 3%
1% 10%
3% 2%
Speech dominance in the first session
Tut St 1 St 2 St 3 St 4 St 5 St 6 St 7 St 8

14. 73%
5%
3%
5%
3%
2% 4%3% 2%
Speech dominance in the second session
Tut St 1 St 2 St 3 St 4 St 5 St 6 St 7 St 8

15. Video dominance
37
7 8
0
20
40
Tut St 3 St 6
Video dominance in the
first session
Video
dominance
38.5
2.5
20
24.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
Tut St 3 St 5 St 6
Video dominance in the
second session
Video
dominance

16. Use of text chat
Chinese (Character and
Pinyin)
English
Tut 7 7
St 1 0 11
St 5 0 2
St 7 0 7
Table 1. Use of text chat in the first session
Table 2. Use of text chat in the second
session
Chinese English
Tut 20 15
St 2 0 6

17. Use of Emoticons, Raise-up hand and
Voting
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Tut St 1 St 2 St 3 St 4 St 5 St 6 St 7 St 8
Emoticons 8 5 0 2 1 1 3 0 2
Raise up hand 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
Voting 0 3 2 1 3 0 5 2 2
frequency
Use of Emoticons, Raise-up hand and
Voting in the first online session

18. 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Tut St 1 St 2 St 3 St 4 St 5 St 6 St 7 St 8
Emoticons 3 1 1 2 1 2 2 4 1
Raise up hand 5 5 2 5 2 2 4 5 3
Voting 1 2 2 2 1 0 2 3 2
frequency
Use of Emoticons, Raise-up hand and
Voting in the second online session

19. Analysis of questionnaires
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Audio
Whiteboard
Feedback menu
Text chat
Video
Average Rating
Audio Whiteboard
Feedback
menu
Text chat Video
like 2 1.8 1.1 0.7 -0.5
find useful 1.9 1.4 1.1 1.1 -0.6
Participants rating of Blackboard Collaborate
features in the two online sessions

20. Analysis of interviews
• St 2: I think the most helpful thing would be the audio
because as you speak, that's the fastest way I guess.
• St 5: I like the idea of the whiteboard. We’ll meet in
our groups and we’re all sharing it. We’re all on the
same kind of page. It’s a lot easier to collaborate.
• St 2: I think it's pretty helpful, mainly because I'm able
to discuss with other people and be able to speak.
….I think it's more useful that way…group's better.

21. Conclusion
• The web conferencing environment provides a wide
range of channels, which can simultaneously
reinforce each. It shows great potential in creating an
online collaborative learning environment to foster
their listening and speaking skills, especially for
distance learners to bridge geographical barriers (c.f.
Blake, 2005; Wang, 2008).

22. Limitation and Future research
• A small cohort over limited time
• In the second semester 2013 (August to
November) five online tutorials were
conducted based on the findings and
feedback of the current research.
• Comparison of distance learners and on
campus learners.
• Training for learners and teachers

23. Thanks our Faculty Partnership Program
(FPP) team
• Sijia Guo,
• Natalie
Spence,
• Dr Helena Sit,
• Dr Ming Ming
Diao,
• Cathy Mewes,
• Tom Kerr

24. 谢谢你们！
Thank you!
Email: sijia.guo@mq.edu.au

25. Reference
• Blake. (2005). Bimodal CMC: The Glue of Language Learning at a Distance. CALICO
Journal, 22(3), 497-511. doi: citeulike-article-id:1772067
• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
• Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, Interaction and Output: An Overview. AILA Review,
19, 3-17
• Guo, S. (2013). Applying Web-conferencing in a Beginners’ Chinese Class. Paper
presented at the Electric Dreams, Proceedings ascilite 2013, Sydney.
• Hampel, R. (2006). Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework for language
teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL, 18, 105-121.
• Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2012). The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal
interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL, 24(02), 116-137.
• Stickler, U., & Shi, L. (2013). Supporting Chinese speaking skills online. System, 1-20.
• Stockwell, G. (2010). Effect of Multimodality in CMC Tasks. In M. Thomas & H. Reinders
(Eds.), Task-based language learning and Teaching with Technology: Bloomsbury
Academic.
• Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for the
negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
• Wang, Y. (2004). Supporting synchronous distance language learning with desktop
videoconferencing. Language Learning & Technology, 8(3), 90-121.
• Willis, J. (1996a). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.),
Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford: Heinemann.
• Willis, J. (1996b). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.
• Willis, J. (1998). Task-based learning? What kind of adventure