Search

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness, and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (1) students’ scientific literacies (i.e., students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science, and the development of transferable skills); (2) student engagement (i.e., motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration, and engagement in open research), and (3) students’ attitudes towards science (i.e., trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.

Examining the effectiveness of multimodal cues using the Human Simulation Paradigm (HSP).

Acquiring non-native speech contrasts can be difficult. A seminal study by Logan, Lively and Pisoni (1991) established the effectiveness of phonetic training for improving non-native speech perception: Japanese learners of English were trained to perceive /r/-/l/ using minimal pairs over 15 training sessions. A pre/post-test design established learning and generalisation. In a follow up study, Lively, Logan and Pisoni (1993) presented further evidence which suggested that talker variability in training stimuli was crucial in leading to greater generalisation. These findings have been very influential and “high variability phonetic training” is now a standard methodology in the field. However, while the general benefit of phonetic training is well replicated, the evidence for an advantage of high over lower variability training remains mixed. We propose a large-scale replication of the original studies using updated statistical analyses to confirm whether learners generalise more after phonetic training using multiple talkers over a single talker.

Input variability is key in many aspects of linguistic learning, yet variability increases input complexity, which may cause difficulty in some learning contexts. The current work investigates this trade-off by comparing speaker variability effects on L2 vocabulary learning in different age-groups. Existing literature suggests that speaker variability benefits L2 vocabulary learning in adults, but this may not be the case for younger learners. In this study, native English-speaking adults, 7-8 year-olds, and 10-11 year-olds learned six novel Lithuanian words from a single speaker, and six from eight speakers. In line with previous research, adults showed better production of the multi-speaker items at test. No such benefit was found for either group of children either in production or comprehension. Children also had greater difficulties in processing multiple-speaker cues during training. We conclude that age-related capacity limitations may constrain the ability to utilize speaker variability when learning words in a new language.

Unpublished manual providing a short overview of the basics of acoustics that people might need to know when trying to create stimuli for Word Monitoring Tasks, but when they are unfamiliar with acoustic phonetics.

Analyses of the data collected at the Bloomsbury Festival 2016 (public outreach event). Data from the Word Monitoring Task, in which participants from the general public listened to sentences and pressed when they heard a specified word in that sentence.

Acquiring non-native speech contrasts can be difficult. A seminal study by Logan, Lively and Pisoni (1991) established the effectiveness of phonetic training for improving non-native speech perception: Japanese learners of English were trained to perceive /r/-/l/ using minimal pairs over 15 training sessions. A pre/post-test design established learning and generalisation. In a follow-up study, Lively, Logan and Pisoni (1993) presented further evidence which suggested that talker variability in training stimuli was crucial in leading to greater generalisation. These findings have been very influential and “high variability phonetic training” is now a standard methodology in the field. However, while the general benefit of phonetic training is well replicated, the evidence for an advantage of high over lower variability training remains mixed. In a large-scale replication of the original studies using updated statistical analyses we test whether learners generalise more after phonetic training using multiple talkers over a single talker. We find that listeners learn in both multiple and single talker conditions. However, in training, we find no difference in how well listeners learn for high vs low variability training. When comparing generalisation to novel talkers after training in relation to pre-training accuracy, we find ambiguous evidence for a high-variability benefit over low-variability training: This means that if a high-variability benefit exists, the effect is much smaller than originally thought, such that it cannot be detected in our sample of 166 listeners.

This infographic was presented at the University of Hull Teaching Excellence Academy International Teaching and Learning Conference 2022. The conference theme this year was " Personalised Pedagogies: inclusive, empowering and progressive higher education for all" The infographic presents research undertaken by Denisa and Sannimo for their final year project, investigating whether visually depicting academics on university teaching materials can help increase awareness of diversity (or lack thereof) within the research field. It finds that adding visualisations of the researchers seems to help increase awareness of diversity when it is present, and there are some indications that it seems to make students aware of a lack of diversity when it is present as well. DOI: 10.25416/NTR.20089961

Input variability is key in many aspects of linguistic learning, yet variability increases input complexity. Our study investigated this trade-off by comparing speaker variability effects on second language vocabulary learning in different age groups. Previous literature suggests that speaker variability benefits adult second language vocabulary learning (e.g., Barcroft & Sommers, 2005): Is this true for younger learners? Native English speaking adults, 7-8 year olds, and 10-11 year olds, learned six novel Lithuanian words from a single speaker, and six from eight speakers. As predicted, adults showed better production of the multi-speaker items at test. No such benefit was found for either group of children (Bayes Factor analyses provide substantial evidence for the null). Younger learners also had greater difficulties in processing multiple-speaker cues during training. We conclude that age-related capacity limitations may constrain the ability to utilize speaker variability when learning words in a new language.