Survey of the use of Web Audio Lab in first-year Russian language courses
Responses to this survey were collected twice:
in 2004, from the 28 students in Russian 1121
who used the first disc-based version 1.1 of WAL; and in 2013, from the 13 students
who used the first online version 3.0 in Russian 1121 and Russian 1122.
In both cases, the 1121 students were assigned to complete two Lessons for every Monday and
Thursday; the 1122 students were assigned one Lesson for every Monday and Tuesday.
A typical Lesson involved listening to and recording 80 to 100 short statements in Russian;
it took 25 to 35 minutes to complete.
Slava reviewed all recordings on the server and for some of them (perhaps 20-25%)
provided short corrective notes. All other recordings were marked with a
one-word evaluative comment (Excellent. Very good. Good. OK.)
1) On the scale of 1 to 10, how helpful was the use of WAL when preparing for class?
WAL 3.0 (online):
8, 10, 10, 9, 8, 8, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 9, 8, 7
Average: 8.7
WAL 1.1 (disc-based):
7, 7, 8, 9, 8, 8, 8, 9, 8, 9, 8, 9, 8, 7, 7, 9, 10, 8, 7, 7, 10, 10, 9, 8, 8, 10
Average: 7.7
2) On the scale of 1% to 100%, how beneficial was using WAL to prepare for class compared to the
other materials you used when doing your homework--the
textbook, the dictionary, the COLLT Quiz program, and the online videos (the BRTF site)?
In other words, what proportion of your success in preparation for class came from WAL, overall?
WAL 3.0 (online):
60, 80, 40, 40, 50, 40, 20, 80, 50, 70, 50, 70, 30, 30
Average: 51%
WAL 1.1 (disc-based):
40, 40, 65, 70, 40, 45, 60, 20, 40, 40, 70, 70, 60, 30, 30, 30, 50, 55, 35, 20, 90, 33, 50, 40, 70, 60
Average: 45%
3) If you studied other foreign languages and used traditional audio tapes or compact disks, how
would you describe the difference in terms of your experience and benefits when using WAL?
- WAL was more directed than audio tapes. It also made you more accountable as your responses were physically recorded.
- It was greatly beneficial that I could record myself on WAL and play it back. Or compare my recordings with the model answer.
- The interactive side was different from many traditional audio recordings as it allowed us to actively record and listen
to our responses and then compare them with a model response. This is different from many recordings that just
involve listening and would teach you less.
- I have used tape recorders for german. I can do WAL anywhere, as
opposed to a language lab, it's easy to edit individual entries and, I assume much easier for the teacher to organize
than downloading a file from an electronic tape recorder.
- I've studied English as a second language and have
developed my way of learning it by utilizing audio tapes and sound files
that are available on the internet. WAL is more efficient than my
experience because it enables me to practice responding to a question
within a time limit. Also, when using WAL, I don't have to click a stop
button every single time to repeat or respond to what I've just heard. It
automatically gives me time to respond--which makes everything convenient.
- I have used tapes before in other language courses
(though not at Cornell), and I think WAL is much more convenient. I can use it at home and submit my
answers from home, which I really like. The only weakness of WAL in comparison to audio tapes is that
sometimes I end up reading the answer more than listening to it and
repeating what I hear.
- it is a quicker program, and very modern.
- other foreign language a/v material only involved
listening. I thought that the opportunity to speak and have pronunciation
commented on was useful.
- I find WAL to be much more interactive than other types
of tapes or audio programs that I have used in the past. Most other audio programs focus on just
listening rather than speaking and listening.
- WAL is much easier to use than audio tapes or compact
discs because both the recording and listening are provided in a simple
way with WAL; both aspects are part of one easy to use program that
provides for convenient re recording in the event of a mistake. There is no rewinding necessary! It is very easy to recheck specific
responses with the click of a button.
- No difference, wal provided the same service for my
studies as the other tapes i used for other languages. Same overall
benefits. How and why would things be different? Audio tapes, disks, and
wal all provide the same overall experience and benefits for learning.
- I learn better if I hear it and I need to say it, so this
definitely helped a lot.
- WAL is much more personalized and one has the ability to
test themselves much better that just tapes or compact discs.
- I found it much more versatile than any other
listening/recording medium I have used. I find the specific technique of
making parallel recordings that I can go back and compare (and get
comments on) extremely useful. Besides now using it with Russian I also
used this technique with Kazakh and I found it indispensable in developing
a near-native like accent.
- Far easier to use than tapes (ESPECIALLY when I was
expected to record) or online audio resources. Very nice to be able to
work from home without having to go to a language lab. The ability to
easily overwrite recordings made it much easier to recover when I
inevitably made mistakes.
- The benefits were being not only being able to hear
spoken Russian, but also to repeat and compare the phrases with my own.
- The recordable response definitely helped with
pronunciation, more so than a group repeating what a tape says.
- WAL is probably the best language-learning tool I've ever
used. In addition to the pronunciation and vocabulary development with
whicht raditional tape/cd sets have helped me, WAL also allowed me to hear
my own pronunciation. Also, although they drove me crazy sometimes,
the "fill-in-the-blank" sections of the later WAL exercises were
great for forcing me to actually listen to and then use the language as
opposed to simply repeating it.
- The fact that I actually had to turn in recordings that
tested my comprehension forced me to learn the language better. It also accelerated my pronunciation of
the language.
- The fill-in-the-blanks part of WAL requires much more
thought and comprehension than other language tapes. Also, regular tapes
don't give you feedback on your pronunciation.
4) If you never used tapes or CDs when studying a foreign language, how would you describe the
benefits of using WAL this semester?
- The main benefit for me was learning to recognize the words as they were spoken which is not always how they look
when they are written. Listening to the accent of the words given in the prompt and answer allowed me correct my own pronunciation.
When I was in Russia this winter, I was very surprised by the difference in my accenting of some words vs. the accent of
the native speakers. The other thing that I learn is the flow and accents involved in the entire phrase that is being said.
I think WAL is really the only place where we could learn this. In class we often speak in fragmented sentences, and
when professors are speaking, we are usually more focused on the meaining than the nuance of the sentence. In WAL,
because the exercises are repeated, because we interact with them to learn both as we hear and respond, and because
I often have to re-listen to many of the prompts and answers, it reinforces my intuition of the nuance involved in speaking
both individual words and complete sentences.
- I really liked that it was online and that I could do it from home. I thought this was also helpful because
we could get feedback on our recordings.
- It gave me a chance to practice fluency and pronunciation outside of class.
- Forced you to learn and understand the grammar -- also helped with pronunciation.
- WAL is easier to use since I can use it anywhere (no other equipment needed) and it's probably faster.
- I thought it primarily helped with pronunciation and tempo.
- Great benefits!
- Crucial pronunciation practice.
- It's great that I can access WAL from home and from my personal computer. Highly convenient.
- It helped a lot to hear the accent and pronunciation of words. It also makes the conversation in class
a lot easier, as well as being one of the only sources of instant feedback in the course.
- WAL helped me to try to understand Russian as I hear it and prepare an immediate response.
- good to hear
the correct way to say words and the speed tests allow you to figure out the
proper endings based on the case we are learning.
- pronounciation
would be wrong.
- it really helped in hearing and speaking the language in
real time.
- It's certainly beneficial as it allows for verbal
practice and for an interactive supplement to the material covered in
class. Among other aspects, I appreciate the opportunity to hear my own
speech and to compare it to the correct way of speaking.
- Much better than not using it. It allows me better
understanding of the material by the time I get to class. WAL gives me a
much better idea of how lessons, exercises, homework, dialogues, etc. are
supposed to sound than I would have just from reading the book.
- Very good, my experience in learning russian would not
be complete without using wal everyday before class to prepare.
- I probably wouldn't have learned as much as I have.
- I liked being able to hear how to pronounce the words and
also the ability to speed up my pronunciation with practice
- I like using WAL because it gives me different native
speaker to listen to and helps me hear how my Russian sounds. If I were to
study abroad or something, i could go back over my recordings and see
where I'm lacking in pronuncation or speed.
- Plenty of practice, especially the difficult phrases I
had to say over and over to get them right. Also, in conjunction with the
quizes, these helped a lot with understanding grammatical rules - I learn
better by example than by book definitions.
- I think that I might have spent more time in the book,
but would have less mastery of the conversational/spoken aspect.
- It would mostly just hurt pronunciation - though some of
the cases would suffer as well, especially the later ones.
- It would have been disastrous. I mean, I would have still
been able to learn the cases, conjugations, etc., but would not have had
the chance to actually use them. Also, I feel as though my pronunciation,
while still not very good, has improved immensely over the semester, and,
as I mentioned above, I think that this improvement has resulted mostly
from the WAL exercises.
- The WAL software was a useful tool for going through and
practicing the lessons from class, but I found it required much
preparation through writing the lessons out before I felt I was
understanding what I was doing in the WAL lessons.
- The WAL program was much more useful, not only in quality
so that it could be heard, but for the feedback it provided.
- Listening to the tapes and trying to imitate how the
speakers sounded was very helpful, especially with pronounciation
- WAL helped me to fine-tune my pronunciation. I don't
think I could learn Russian effectively without WAL.
5) If Russian 1121/1122 did not use any audio as part of the homework, how do you think that would
affect your learning this semester?
- My learning of grammar and vocabulary would not have suffered. Perhaps my formulation of sentence
structure would have been slightly impaired. My ability to remember long words and properly conjugate
some of the long verbs would have been reduced. I also would not have been able to recall words to converse
in class as well. I think WAL probably had a positive effect on my overall pronunciation as well.
I think the feedback we get in our WAL History is particularly helpful in allowing me to notice differences
in my speech from Lyuba’s when we converse, as well as try to make particular corrections to my pronunciation.
- I think my speaking would have been worse. It was nice to be able to hear how things were supposed to
sound and to then listen to my recordings and compare it.
- I would not have learned as much about pronunciation.
- Would have been much worse, probably would speak more slowly.
- It would have made class more difficult as more time would be needed
to go over practicing pronunciation and grammar practice.
- WAL was helpful since we don't have time in class to go over everything,
and it's helpful to do the exercises on my own.
- It would have to be augmented with a different addition.
- It would affect the pronunciation a lot.
- Yes, pronunciation and reading would suffer.
- My pronunciation would be much worse.
- I would have a lot more trouble conjugating verbs and hearing where the stress falls
to know how to pronounce words. (I know it's marked in the book, but hearing
brings it all together.)
- I think WAL is very important for my pronunciation. Without WAL, my pronunciation
would have been much worse.
- I think my reading skills and pronunciation in particular would be less advanced.
- It would have been much harder for us to become familiar
with the sounds of Russian. I feel priviledged to utilize this great
software. I really thought that these educators of Russian at Cornell
actually KNOW how to study a foreign language.
- I'm glad Russian 1121 uses audio homework, I think it's
really important to have something to listen to in order to understand
correct pronunciation, etc. It was
especially helpful when we were learning how to pronounce palatalized
consonants.
- We would spend a lot more time in class discussing the
endings of words and how to pronounce them.
- I think the practice speaking, and listening to people
clearly enunciate on the headphones, helped, especially as Russian
pronunciation and sounds are more difficult than many other languages.
- pronunciation, knowledge of the language, and quickness
in responding in russian would all be less.
- My pronunciation of words would be significantly
worse. I think WAL also helps with
learning to respond orally to oral material rather than just writing and
reading.
- It'd certainly have had a negative impact. Some of the
likely results would be weaker verbal comprehension and expression, weaker
command of the material and the language as a whole, lower level of
understanding in class, and lower level of self-confidence when
communicating in the language.
- The class would be more difficult, harder to keep up with
and harder to understand.
- I would not have had as much oral practice, which is
essential in order to train myself to recognize correct sounds and
pronunciations.
- Yes, of course.
- I do not think I would be as proficient in speaking
Russian without WAL
- I'm not sure, I guess it would make my listening
comprehension and spoken Russian weaker ,but it may give me much more time
to focus on harder grammatical aspects of the language
- Yes, significantly. It was a big time commitment, but I
think one that pays off.
- This would negatively affect my learning. I would have a greater difficulty
learning pronunctiation and stress.
- I don't think that there is enough class time for the
instructors to give the needed individual attention to develop correct
pronunciation, stress and intonation.
- I would be a much slower speaker, less confident, easily
tripped up by long words or unfamiliar sounds---and all with horrible
intonation.
- My learning would have been severely impeded without the
use of audio.
- I think I would have practiced out loud less often, and
this would have hurt me. The WAL program forces you to actually speak the
language outside of class as opposed to just reading it.
- I don't think I would have learned the language as
quickly without the WAL recordings. I think it was the most effective learning tool (excluding the
textbook) of the class. I know that
I would not have learned the new sounds, pronunciations, and alphabet as
quickly without it.
- I would spend more time studying the textbook some days,
but to be honest, I probably wouldn't spend so much time on the lessons.
- I might take twice or three times as long to reach the
same level
6) What other teaching/learning methods could be used to replace the type of work you did
with WAL? How would that be better or worse?
- Shadowing (imitating sentences as a native speaker speaks
in a media file): This helps us be able to read out Russian sentences with
a normal speed, as read by native speakers. It doesn't give us an option
of reading them in our pace while WAL allows to repeat sentences slower
than normal. Role-play with classmates: It may replace the
question-and-answer part of WAL. But WAL is preferred to this because
students don't want to go through a hassle of meeting up at a certain time
and a place to do this assignment. Dictation Practice: First, have
students listen to an audio or a video clip and, as they listen, have them
write out the Russian sentences in words. This may require listening to
the clip countless times. Then, let them compare their work with the real
texts used in the clip. It helps learners catch up the Russian sounds more
carefully.
- Audio tapes could replace the learning done through WAL,
but as I said above, I think WAL is much more convenient and
interactive. However, maybe it
should be more difficult to READ the answers, because this is an easy
shortcut to get around actually listening. Also, the exercises where we have to fill in the blanks in the
sentence (with the correct case) are easy to take shortcuts on....for
instance, you can skip ahead to read the answer, and then go back and just
say it. The ease of doing this
makes it undesirable to actually sit down and go through the book and make
sure you understand the cases and know the answers before doing the WAL
homework. Maybe a better solution
would be to have the answers available only at the end of the exercise.
- I don`t know what could replace it and have the same
effects
- i like WAL
- more written work-we would lose all that i mentioned in
5.
- Going through an oral exercise that is of a longer
duration might be helpful, especially one that doesn't prompt an exact
answer. For example, we could have
to say several sentences (like a paragraph worth) about what we did the
previous weekend, etc.
- No suggestions
- I feel that WAL is an effective teaching method, I cannot
think of reasons why it would need to be replaced
- There is no substitute for Wal. I, frankly, would not be able
to imagine a more thorough form of pre-class preparation.
- I can't think of anything at the moment. It was nice to
be able to compare your recording with the pre-recorded recording to
figure out how you were pronouncing words incorrectly. There are so many
subtle changes in pronounciation, expecially in the beginning that the
program really helped me with.
- The only thing that I can think of to replace WAL would
be more personal speaking time with the instructors one-on-one
- We could use tapes, but that's clumsy, old fashioned and
very very tim consuming. I guess we could send mp3 and stuff on the
internet, but I like the way we can listen and record in the same program
with WAL.
- The use of tapes or CDs might replace it. However without the self and instructor
evaluations the experience might be slightly worse.
- If you could put WAL onto a portable device, that would
definitely extend its usefulness. On the negative side I find some of the
grammar substitution drills mind-numbing. I still need a lot of effort to
produce some of the longer responses so if there is no immediate model, I make and perpetuate pronunciation
errors when I am working on producing the correct grammatical response.
From your comments in class today about how one certain word was
mispronounced I wonder if that is a more common experience. With my
present ability I might do better
with the simpler, more traditional model-cue substitution drill.
- Nothing that would be better: cassette tapes are annoying
and require a tape deck; CDs or online resources don't support recording
and are too easy to skip. (Being able to skip the homework will, by the
end of the semester, guarantee that I don't do it.) I like this crazy WAL
thing. I suppose an hour-long personal interview with the teacher would
accomplish the same thing better, but that's not in any wise practical.
- I honestly can't think of anything that would compare to
it; the only suggestion I have would be to maybe have a few
"basics" interspersed throughout the recordings-- it sometimes
feels like I don't know exactly what I'm saying when I say it. If there
were a little bit of grammer actually on the screen, with the lesson, that
would be beneficial.
- The only think I can think of here is one-on-one sessions
with the instructors, as that would give better feedback and amore dynamic
environment - as that's not entirely feasible, WAL is the next best thing.
- I can't think of anything I would change. I've taken lots
of languagecourses, and this is easily the most complete class I've been
in.
- I found the most important benefit of the WAL lessons was
in pronunciation, and there may be another method to teach pronunciation
without extensively speaking through the lessons.
- I don't think that anything that could replace the
program would have been more useful.
- When the classes were very small, I found that to be much
more helpful.
- I don't see any practical alternatives to the WAL program
that would teach the language as well.
- We could do the textbook drills in class, but that would
take time away from what we do right now (grammar questions, dialogs,
etc.). We could also watch more films, but that doesn't require as much
comprehension or allow for feedback.
- I don't think "replace". How about supplement?
More opportunity for simple self-expression would be nice.
7) Assuming that the use of technology always involves some hassle because of the glitches, user
errors, and just having to go to the lab, how would you describe the trade-off
of benefits vs. the hassle?
WAL 3.0 (online)
- Since this can be done on a home computer, having to go to the lab was not a problem.
However, user errors and glitches added a significant portion of time to the recordings.
- I haven't experienced many glitches. Sometimes WAL won't record, but then I just
refresh the page. It's not a serious problem.
- The hassle of WAL is relatively minor, definitely worth it.
- I didn't experience much hassle at all throughout my usage of WAL this whole year.
I am very pleased with it.
- Generally, no trouble, sometimes WAL wouldn't save the recordings and I have to repeat the exercise.
- Almost no hassle and very significant benefits.
- Any extra resource is useful.
- I didn't have any hassles. Everything in WAL worked really well. And it's handy
to be able to record one at a time.
- I did not experience any significant errors that made my experience difficult.
- Not nearly enough glitches to make the program not worth it.
- There were times I couldn't finish my WAL work because of glitches, but it was useful overall.
- SInce I did not go to the lab, I thought it was great. And Slava was very patient when it came to dealing with glitches.
- The benefits include simulating real conversation, at least some freedom of when to do speaking
assignments, and the ability to work at your own pace. Some of the hassles are various browsers having
issues, failure to record entries, sometimes slow connection, and the machine cannot react and interpret the human.
- WAL used to freeze up a lot when navigating forward and backward to listen to the answers and questions repeatedly,
but this has been fixed by use of the “go back1” and “go back 2” buttons.
The most difficult or largest headache I have using WAL now is finding a quiet space. I spend a lot of time each
day on campus in classes, libraries, or labs. None of these spaces is suitable for me to do the recording,
and I feel it is also too far for me to travel to the Language Lab to do it since that is not near where I am
on campus or where I live. I usually try to do it before I leave my house in the morning or after I return in the evening,
but sometimes, that is not possible. On campus, I often find empty classrooms, but that is unreliable, and I recently
tried Sage Chapel which was ok, but sometimes people play the organ and even that is too loud.
I suggested earlier, that I think WAL for the iphone would be a popular idea among students and this would I think
mitigate this problem for me. The iphone has the internet connectivity for me to do WAl outside, or in a halway
or other places, and the microphone/ear buds record only close range sound for a telephone conversation,
only picking up I think a moderate amount of background noise. There would perhaps be some navigation issues and
the screen size of the iphone may be a problem for WAL in its current form, but if there was a dedicated app with
different sections for history and feedback, the assignment, and the actual recording, it could be a version of
WAL offering a lot of utility for students. If the language lab was more centralized on campus, perhaps that would
be a good solution as well.
WAL 1.1 (disc-based)
- WAL has a lot more benefits than hassles. It's worth it.
- I don't think there's too much hassle with WAL, thus I
would say the benefits greatly outweigh the hassle.
- better to have it without a doubt
- not a lot of hassle.
- WAL was very easy to use. Going to the lab was not too
much hassle for me, as I usually had time during the day.
- i really didn't run into very much trouble, and i have a
copy on my own computer, so there wasnt much hassle. so the benefits
definitely win
- I think WAL directs the amount of time spent going over
the lesson by walking me through each one rather than having to learn it
all on my own.
- I believe that the benefits should outweigh the costs in
this case.
- It's not too much of a hassle and the benefits are
important. I can't get to the lab on certain days but the WAL work is
spaced out enough that on less busy days I can stay for a couple of hours
and get two or three classes' work done. Any hassles are worth enduring to
be prepared for class.
- There are certainly less hassles than tape
recording. The convenience of the
program outweighs the rare and minor glitches.
- I had experienced no technical glitches. And buying the
CD from the lab and being able to use it at home for the who year was
defintely a great idea. In other words, i experienced no hassles.
- well, once I got a copy for home, the only problem I had
with it is that I needed to set aside a lot of time and concentration to
do it, but it was definately worth it. I never really encountered any
problems with the program itself.
- There were only rare problems, which I feel can be
forgiven
- The trade off is generally worth it, although if you were
to ask me when I just closed WAL after not fully submitting all my work,
I"d answer differentely.
- I didn't have many technical troubles. There was the
hassle of going to the lab, because I live off campus - in the future I
will make sure to get the program on my computer.
- The benefits of having one's speaking ability evaluated
at a personal level outweigh the hassle of having to go to the lab.
- Negligible hassles, great benefits.
- I encountered no glitches, and WAL recovered remarkably
well from user errors. If I had been forced to go to the lab, though, all
ease-of-use ratings would be lower. As mentioned about, that can be a real
hardship for some people.
- The hassle was very minimal.
- I would have to say it is worth the hassle, though some
parts of the listening are difficult to understand.
- I had a few problems during the first few weeks with my
submissions, butafter that everything was fine. The benefits of the
program definitelyoutweighed what little hassle there was.
- The benefits dominate.
- I only had one issue with the WAL program, and it was a
problem with my computer, not the program itself. I thought the program
was very easy to use, and the ability to use the program at home was a big
benefit.
- The biggest hassle was probably the language lab itself.
The hours they were open were so limited.
- The benefits far outweighed the hassles, which were
minimal. I did not find the system
difficult to use as well. And the
server had few problems or glitches
- It;s good to have a predetermined block of time that
_must_ be spent on Russian. The only problem I've had consistently is
headsets not working, but overall it's worthwhile.
- Any hassle is worth it.
8) Compared to your general experience with computers, please rate the effort that was
required to learn using WAL on the scale of 1 (very easy to learn) to 10 (very
hard to learn).
WAL 3.0 (online):
2, 5, 1, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2
Average: 1.76
WAL 1.1 (disc-based):
1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 4, 2, 1, 4, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1
Average: 1.6
9) If you were to advise a teacher who is setting up a beginning course in some foreign language
at Cornell, would you recommend that WAL be used in that language? Use the
scale of 1 (not recommended) to 10 (highly recommended).
WAL 3.0 (online):
9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 9, 10, 8, 10, 8, 9, 8, 8
Average: 9.1
WAL 1.1 (disc-based):
10, 10, 8, 10, 10, 9, 9, 9, 8, 10, 10, 9, 9, 7, 8, 10, 10, 9, 9, 10, 10, 5, 10, 8, 9, 10, 9
Average: 8.8
10) Please explain your rating in question 9, above. What considerations influenced your response?
- I hope the value of WAL to my learning experience has been made evident in some of he above responses.
I think that a very valuabe part of WAL is the feedback, if not instructively critical, it at least confirms
that the professor values your work, has listened to it, and is satisfied with your progress. I feel if this
element was compromised by the teacher setting up a beginning course because the feedback was shoddy or
lagged several weeks in an untimely manner, then that would cause my reccomendation to be less strong. As
far as the benefit to the students is concerned, I think if a student takes the task seriously and puts forth
the effort to do a good job of the recordings, he will be rewarded by seeing a gain in his ability to pronounce
and recall sentences for participation in class and other conversations.
- I think it was helpful.
- Connection issues, sometimes it refuses to load a sound it has recorded.
- It helps with speed, structure, and forces students to spend time with the language.
- It was great practice, and it's always good to just keep hearing the target language.
- Especially at the beginning stages of learning, drills are handy for copying foreign sounds.
- It adds a positive dimension to learning.
- Easy to use, and makes you practice reading and pronunciation.
- Students can access the internet WAL from home--convenience. It helps pronunciation greatly.
It allows me to learn things at my speed.
- Language courses need more speaking components, so talking becomes more natural.
- WAL aids in so many respects of language learning. (You must read, listen, speak, and understand.)
- It is very helpful in both improving speaking and listening skills, and grammar.
- I have found it very helpful to be able to practice speaking at home. The only reasons
I don't give it a higher rating are that WAL can be glitchy sometimes, and it may be inconvenient
for students without computers with built in microphones.
- To be able to listen and speak in a foreign language, it
is crucial to listen to the sounds of the language A LOT and to practice
speaking out loud in the language A LOT. It's an axiom in language
learning. This WAL program efficiently provides students with an
opportunity to do these activities!!!
- Again, it's really convenient to use, it aids in learning
pronunciation, and I think it's better than audio tapes. However, the ease of reading the answers
instead of really having to listen to them should be addressed.
- The biggest problem for me is the length of some of the
programs. It is sometimes hard to find an hour or two to sit down and do
the WALs for that day. Even if they were split up for everyday that might
make the especially long ones easier.
- I like the program, it keeps my mind in the language
every day but only for an hour or so, so it's not annoying.
- Since students usually have no one-on-one interaction
with the teacher, I think WAL is the only chance people get to have
specific problems with accents or pronunciation corrected
- I think hearing and responding helps more than most
anything else in learning a new language.
- WAL is very helpful for pronunciation, spelling, reading,
listening, etc. I think that the
sections with question-response are very helpful and the mimicking
sections particularly facillitate good pronunciation.
- It translates the text in the book into the audio format
necessary for learning words and grammar points in the
speaking/conversational context. Class time is more productive if I have
already had some practice speaking and have an idea of how words and
phrases should sound. Most importantly, WAL offers feedback with the
correct pronunciation sounded out right before or after my attempts, so
there is the chance for repetition and correction of mistakes that's often
impossible in the class setting (for instance, there are certain words I
know I'd never be able to pronounce if I hadn't had to say them about 100
times apiece before getting them right in WAL).
- WAL has been an excellent tool in learning how to
pronounce words and phrases, especially stresses and the
"raise-drop" that varies according to intended tones or
messages. Simply reading a phrase
in a book does not fully show me how to pronounce it.
- Russian vocabulary is hard to pronounce. Wal helped me on
that. No forign language learning is sufficient without it.
- The program was definately a big help with learning
russian and would probably be a good tool for learning many other
languages.
- It is the closest thing to personal instruction without
an actual teacher, so it saves time
- I really like WAL and what it provides us, but wish it
was for mac users!! It could also be a little updated, I see so much of
the program it makes me feel like i'm working on my apple iie
sometimes.... there are some hidden aspects that take a while to find and
figure out, but generally very easy.
- It allowed a mastery of pronunctiations and stress that
just doing homework or other written work did not allow. There is also a
more personalized evaluation with WAL than with classroom participation.
- (I would hope that you can see if there is any difference
in the students' performance. I would be interested in your evaluation!)
My subjective reasons are given in point 3.
- Unless the teacher feels the entire out-of-class
listen-and-record concept is unnecessary, WAL is the best way I've seen of
doing it. And if they do feel it's unnecessary, they're wrong. I spent a
little over half the out-of-class time on WAL, and it was more helpful
than most things other than reading the new information (grammar, etc.) in
the book.
- It's a great idea, well-implemented, and with perhaps a
few touch ups, it'd provide a perfect supplemental tool to language
learning.
- WAL is useful enough to merit using for any language, so
suggesting it would only help the students.
- As I mentioned above, WAL has been invaluable. The
program is easy tolearn, easy to use and helps with all facets of language
learning, bothtechnical and conversational. I wish there was a WAL program
for Arabic.
- My rating of five reflects my appreciation for the
material and potential and thoroughness of the WAL assignments, but I do
not know if I would recommend the extensive use of WAL, dissecting each
and every dialog and substitution, to all foreign language courses.
- Any size class will have some people talking more than
others, and the program allows everyone ample time. The largest
consideration was the fact that it was a beginner class, and so many new
things are going into it. Basic pronunciation can be a challenge
initially, and the program is able to pick up on these things before they
become habits.
- It is very helpful, but the small glitches in the program
could cause trouble for people unfamiliar with computers.
- I have used tools in other foreign language classes that
just required listening, but not speaking. They did not force the students to learn, understand, and speak the
language. WAL makes sure that
students really comprehend the material.
- It's been extremely easy and helpful.
- WAL might be more useful for languages which are less
phonetic or have phonemes simlar to English. (I don't know what I'm saying
here) Certainly it can also be used for phonetic languages but maybe in
that case we might want to focus more on expression or listening to native
speakers talk than correct pronunciation.
11) Additional comments
- I liked WAL!
- WAL is difficult and time-consuming, but it's worth it!
- It sometimes crashes still.
- Fix problems mentioned in #7 (sometimes wouldn't save).
- More exercises, fewer long words like "unsatisfactory."
- It was great! Very easy to use.
- Overall great system.
- One glitch I keep experiencing is that I have to click every black dot for WAL
to allow me to record my response. This is on Safari on a Macbook Air.
[This has now been fixed.]
- I personally think more listening and repeating (plus
memorizing) of Russian sentences is necessary for us to achieve the
satisfactory level of second language acquisition. But, as everybody
realizes, Cornell students cannot devote themselves only to learning a
foreign language. I think it's already taking up a large portion of their
studying time. So we can only do the best we can do. But for those of us
that are eager to master Russian, it might be a good idea to distribute a
cassette tape or a CD version of WAL so that students can play it as they
walk around the campus or in their spare time. Thank YOU for developing
this great software for us!!! I'm really proud of Conell's Russian
language program.
- Not really a comment, but there's a bug with uploading in
the mac version that will sometimes cause the program to crash or freeze
during an upload. Don't know exactly what it is.
- Overall, I think that the WAL program is very beneficial.
However, a few small modifications may make it even better; it may also be
supported by a speech recognition capability, allowing us to see how
understandable our speech is before submitting the file.
- EVERYTIME we are asked to repeat something, we should be
able to see the definition of what the heck we are saying right on the
screen. I dont want to have to keep switching between reading my Beginning
russian book and the computer screen to find out what im saying into the
microphone.
- The earlier I did the WAL for the lessons we were doing,
the more I understood and got out of class.
- The enter key on the numeric part of the keyboard doesn't
function the same as the enter key on the qwerty side. It would be nice if the
uploading connection didn't delay moving on to the next exercise. It would
be nice if there was a pane that would more or less instantly show us the
status of the uploaded exercises (what is now done by the web page and the
"updating" feature). My personal preference is to do some audio
work before learning grammar, but just keeping up with the homework, I
missed the earlier audio input. I don't know how I would restructure the
homework to make it come out right for me, though. (I think I personally
just need to be a day ahead on the homework!)
- Unless
the teacher feels the entire out-of-class listen-and-record concept is
unnecessary, WAL is the best way I've seen of doing it. And if they do
feel it's unnecessary, they're wrong. I spent a little over half the
out-of-class time on WAL, and it was more helpful than most things other
than reading the new information (grammar, etc.) in the book. It is very
important that students be able to use WAL from home. For upperclassmen,
it can take +30 minutes to get to the language lab, which means at least 2
hours must be budgeted to do the homework on campus. This is a significant
investment of time, and no student should be forced to modify her class or
work schedule just to find time to get to Noyes. Since it is very
difficult (and probably not a good idea) to work ahead of the syllabus,
it's very helpful to have the added flexibility in working from home. The
only complaint I had with the original version of WAL (that sometimes
submission took too long, and could be interrupted too easily by network
traffic) was resolved with the beta version (11.03.04) Slava gave me. (All
ratings are based on this more recent version.) Running from CD is
difficult (or rather annoying), as the CD spins down too quickly/often.
Everything still works, but there is intermittent lag when loading the
next sound file. (Nothing unexpected here, just how CD drives work.)
Fortunately, moving the files from CD onto disk resolves this problem and
makes everything fast. A very basic installer (just copy files and create
a shortcut) might help students who would not be able to move the files
manually, but could still benefit from running WAL from disk. It might be
nice (depending on how concerned you are with security) to allow saving of
passwords between sessions. Perhaps this could be permanently allowed/disallowed
at install time, letting home users enable the option, while still letting
it be disabled on the lab computers. Sometimes in the call-and-response
sections, when the template for the response was long and unfamiliar, I
would find myself forced to open the book and read along just so that I
could get through the sentence. Just showing the template on screen would
be helpful. Sometimes the responses given seemed a bit arbitrary (that is,
I felt my "incorrect" response was equally valid), and this was---irrationally,
I admit---sort of annoying.
- There's not much more to say. Without sounding too corny,
it actually makes learning a language decently fun; listening to
recordings and repeating them (as opposed to recording them) doesn't have
the same sort of... motivation behind it. All in all, I'm glad it's part
of the class.
- The server is a bit inconsistent, and sometimes the
submission ofresponses freezes up or aborts fro no particular reason.
Other than that,maybe slow down some of the listening sections, when a
word blurs into anearly incomprehenisble flurry of sound, it's hard to get
itspronunciation correct.
- The WAL assignments were easily the most important
elements in my class preparation.
- I have been impressed all semester with the cohesiveness
of all the teaching materials in the course and WAL is an excellent
supplement to the text, dictionary, writing assignments, and classroom
dialog.
- On very few of the spoken parts, the reader is a little
difficult to hear or understand. The only helpful thing about the program
might be to re-record a few of these parts. I think the individualized feedback was
essential for the class, and I don't know how that could have been done on
such a scale without submitted recordings. I thought the program was helpful,
but I also thought the comments left were even more helpful than the
preparation it provided. The WAL program was very helpful, especially since it followed
the text. (While some of the quizzes didn't seem to correlate as closely.)
- It is very helpful, but the small glitches in the program
could cause trouble for people unfamiliar with computers. I liked the WAL program. I
learned the lessons much better once I used the program. It was very helpful in
learning how to pronounce the new words. It was easier to remember the
new material once I had used the WAL program, then it was to just read the
beginning russian book.
- I have used tools in other foreign language classes that
just required listening, but not speaking. They did not force the students to learn, understand, and speak the
language. WAL makes sure that students really comprehend the material. The only issue I had was hooking up the
headset to my own PC.
- It's been extremely easy and helpful.
- I think that WAL has been a crucial part of Russian 1121
this semester. As a student living off campus, having to go the the lab
twice a week did present some hassle, however, the benefits received from
the program far outweighed the inconvenience. (Also, I would like to note
that part of this hassle was due more to the hours that Noyes Lab is open,
rather than simply having to go there.) I think that WAL was especially
helpful in preparation for class, although it was also somewhat helpful
when preparing for written work. Overall, I do not think that I would have
gotten half as much out of this course if it did not include WAL.
Personally, I found it very easy to learn and navigate and with only a few
exceptions, the program ran very smoothly for me. I appreciate that the
program provides options such as "easy mode" and the length
allowed to record. Some of the assignments were very lengthy, but I think
that most were very reasonable. This is my first experience using media in
language learning, however, I would definitely recommend this program to
professors in other languages or to other students. I hope that this
information is helpful. Thank you to those who were involved in making the
WAL program available to us.
- WAL might be more useful for languages which are less
phonetic or have phonemes simlar to English. (I don't know what I'm saying
here) Certainly it can also be used for phonetic languages but maybe in
that case we might want to focus more on expression or listening to native
speakers talk than correct pronunciation. Personally, I did not use WAL to prepare for
class, but to reinforce what I had learnt during class.