Search

Telecollaboration has been widely used in teacher training (Dooly & Vinagre, 2022) and several research projects have explored this field. However, these have been either case studies of student online exchange data in a single type of telecollaboration (eg Dooly & Sadler, 2020), or large-scale studies relying on student self-evaluation in several telecollaborations (as with the Evolve project, 2019). Our proposal aims to present a research project on a large interactional dataset from four virtual exchanges in order to identify which techno-pedagogical skills (Guichon & Cohen, 2016) can be developed in telecollaboration. This project is based on 84 videoconferencing sessions, each lasting around an hour. Our approach followed a multimodal conversation analysis integrating eye-tracking (Cappellini & Hsu, 2022) and a comparative approach (Cappellini & Azaoui, 2017). We will show two studies that have been carried out on this corpus in which we were able to identify which skills are developed during telecollaboration and, among these, which techno-pedagogical skills require formal training to be developed.

In this paper, we focus on the epistemological issues surrounding the use of verbalisations in language didactics research. After a brief history of the introduction of these methods in language didactics, we question them in light of recent results in cognitive science. This leads us to formulate a proposal for training interviews based on stimulated-recall interviews and to consider that while the use of these tools for research may be problematic, it offers very promising possibilities for the professionalisation and training of trainers. We then propose a methodological framework for assessing the influence of interviews on the development of teaching, using an initial online tutoring training system as our field of study.

In our contribution, we will discuss the notion of multimodality in human interactions. First, we will present the different definitions of the concept of multimodality currently used in linguistics. Then, we will focus on some of the current studies on multimodality conducted at the LPL, showing the variety of theoretical and methodological frameworks used as well as the interaction situations considered, ranging from face-to-face to online interactions, from conversations between speakers of the same language to exolingual communication. Finally, in the last part, we will show that despite the variety of approaches, our studies are complementary. We will conclude this chapter by proposing some avenues for future research, particularly based on the phenomenon of interactional failure. 1. The concept of multimodalityInterpersonal communication (Goffman, 1974) is “multimodal” in its broadest sense, if we take into account the research work carried out in linguistics on oral speech (Colletta, 2004), on gestures (Cosnier et al. 1982, McNeill, 1992), in conversational analysis (Mondada, 2005) as well as in social semiotics (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001) or in computer-mediated communication (Develotte et al, 2011) and digital discourse analysis (Paveau, 2017). In this first part, we define our main theoretical anchors, one not excluding the other.1.1 Insights from linguistics When we analyze speech in interaction as a multimodal phenomenon, we generally consider three main modalities: the verbal, the vocal (including prosody) and the posturo-mimo-gestural elements (Colletta, 2004). A multimodal linguistic perspective thus takes into account the different modalities and analyses them by putting them in relation. Studying prosody or analysing gesture (or other kinesic aspects such as postures, gazes, and facial mimicry) without the verbal would isolate the modalities and would not show their articulation (Ferré, 2011).1.2 Insights from social semioticsA conception of multimodality through the input of sensory modalities can be complexified if we think that a single modality can be the channel for several semiotic modes. Thus, through the visual modality, it is possible to perceive several semiotic modes: facial expressions, gestures and proxemics among others. Therefore, multimodality can be defined as a characterization of interaction not only in terms of the modalities at work, but also in terms of semiotic modes.In the 1990s, the development of audio-visual and digital technologies led to the emergence of another vision of the concept of multimodality, rooted in the field of social semiotics. The works of Kress and van Leeuwen (2001) have allowed to define new contours of this notion by integrating the different modalities of the communication allowed by the different artifacts. Thus, multimodality is defined as the massive and joint use of various modes of expression (verbal, visual, audio, tactile, etc.) in communication. 1.3 Emerging insights of “digital multimodality”The concept of “digital multimodality” (Wachs & Weber, 2021) is rooted in several fields of research, close to each other but each with its own particularities. The first, founding and precursor field is Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) which has been focused one in online exchanges, mainly in their textual form (Herring, 1996; Anis, 1998), since the beginning of the Internet (and even of the minitel in France). Then come two emerging fields of linguistics in the lineage of CMC: the field of Screen-Based Multimodal Interactions, which has developed in particular around videoconference interactions (Develotte, Kern & Lamy, 2011, Develotte & Paveau, 2017; Guichon & Tellier, 2017) and that of Digital Discourse Analysis (Paveau, 2017). Finally, in the field of language didactics, we will highlight the field of Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (Guichon, 2012) which studies the integration of technologies in communication situations specifically related to language teaching and learning. 2. Research on multimodality at LPLResearch on multimodality at the LPL is divided into three main theoretical frameworks: 1) multimodal speech (verbal, vocal and posturo-mimo-gestural), 2) social semiotics, and finally 3) digital multimodality, and sometimes even a combination of the three. The LPL researchers who are interested in the question of multimodality each study different contexts such as face-to-face interactions, online interactions and hybrid interactions.2.1. Face-to-face interactionsFace-to-face interactions can be of different nature (e.g. conversation, doctor-patient interaction, work meeting…). In this section, we will present some research on face-to-face conversation. Our work focuses on prosody during disfluencies (Pallaud et al., 2019) and on smiling in two phases of conversation: thematic transitions and humor phases (Amoyal et al., 2020). In the study of face-to-face interactions, there is also interest in exolingual communication (between participants who do not have the same first language) (Porquier, 1994). These are particularly interesting to study from a multimodal perspective, especially from the point of view of the adaptation of modalities to facilitate access to meaning (Tellier et al., 2021). 2.2. Online interactionsWith the spread of computers and increasingly powerful Internet connections, several computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools have developed and spread over the years, from the first e-mail exchanges to the recent widespread use of videoconferencing and videophone calls. On the one hand, these new tools have been the object of a projection of interactional processes coming from face-to-face interactions, while on the other hand, new communicative phenomena linked to the multimodality of different forms of CMC have emerged (for example, emoticons in chat rooms). Some research at the LPL has thus turned to the emergence of discursive techno-genres and their characterization, for example in terms of ethos. Others are interested in the pedagogical potential for language didactics, both in terms of second language acquisition and teacher training.2.3. Hybrid interactionsHybrid interactions mix face-to-face and distance learning and can take place in different configurations. An interdisciplinary and collective research between several laboratories, including the LPL (see Présences numériques corpus), studied a poly-artifact doctoral seminar (Develotte et al, 2021), i.e. a seminar where one part of the participants is physically present and the other part is present via different artifacts (a tablet articulated on a base, a human-sized robot mobile on wheels and an interactive multimodal platform) which featured, among other modules, a videoconference space, a chat space, a collective note-taking and a document sharing. Each artifact was itself operated through multiple screens (of computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.). Such a multimodal poly-artifact communication context is therefore eminently complex to use for the participants, as well as to study and transcribe for the researchers. 3. PerspectivesAt the end of this chapter, which highlights the main directions of research carried out at LPL on multimodality, several perspectives are identified. For example, studying the phenomenon of “interactional failure” seems particularly interesting, especially to show how speakers draw on their multimodal resources to overcome these failures. Different phenomena can be observed: disfluencies, lexical searches, misunderstandings and repairs, explanations and finally anticipation of the failure through a multimodal didactic discourse.A first avenue of research that could be explored is the multimodal nature of disfluencies in interaction: is there only a synchronization of the suspension of gesture and speech or are there specific gestures linked to lexical research? A research perspective at LPL could be to compare the occurrence of disfluencies in L1 vs. foreign language speech to see if language proficiency affects how this phenomenon is expressed multimodally. Among the perspectives to be explored in research on multimodality, we can mention the study of conversational alignments. In the model proposed by Pickering and Garrod (2004, 2021), alignment is a psychological phenomenon concerning the mental representations of interlocutors, which is reflected in the articulation and often the repetition of communicative behaviours. While alignment was initially studied through the phenomenon of priming at different language levels (lexicon, morphosyntax, etc.), recently there has been an interest in multimodal communication, including gestures and facial mimicry (Cappellini, Holt and Hsu, 2022). By including the study of facial mimicry, a study of the smiles of interlocutors in the repair phase could highlight the importance of this facial expression in this interactional process. Another avenue of research would be to question the place of the smile in lexical research. Finally, it seems that we could also study the complexity of the interactional scheme of the YouTube platform (a video discourse to which written comments respond in asynchrony) and how vloggers anticipate possible interactional failures by resorting to a didactic discourse (Moirand, 1993) which calls on different multimodal elements.

This article focuses on the social dimensions of autonomy. Firstly, the context of the studies reviewed is explained, in order to situate the observations within the framework of a self-directed and language learning system integrating advising sessions. Secondly, the social dimensions are discussed in three aspects. The first is horizontal interactions between learners to support metacognition. The second is that of interactions between learner and tutor, with the cognitive biases that it generates and proposals to exploit them for pedagogical purposes. The third is the link between learner autonomy and general autonomy, or citizenship, taken from the perspective of digital citizenship. A brief review of the situation leads to proposals for pedagogical avenues that can be explored in language and culture didactics.

The integration of technology in language teaching has been one important topic in language education and teacher training. Teacher education has been one of the aims of telecollaboration since the beginning of the 2000’s. While the first pioneers worked with small groups of students (Develotte, Mangenot, & Zourou, 2005; MüllerHartmann, 2006), more recent projects are widening the application of telecollaboration for teacher education (Baroni et al., 2019). In the present article we present an adaptation of the model of Le Français en (Première) Ligne (hereafter F1L) proposed by Develotte et al. (2005) in two telecollaborative projects aiming at developing trainees’ techno-semiopedagogical competences.

ABSTRACT This article presents a model of teletandem, i.e. tandem through desktop videoconferencing (Telles 2009). The aim of such a model is twofold: heuristic and pedagogical. It is heuristic because it enables us to understand teletandem at all its levels and partially to predict (in probabilistic terms) what can happen in a teletandem environment. It is also pedagogical because it helps us formulate plans of action to improve future use and environment design. To build this model, we have drawn upon complexity theory (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron 2008, Morin 1990), which leads us to distinguish different levels of analysis before discussing the relationship between the different elements and levels leading to the complex final (yet dynamic) model.

Nous interrogeons les formes d’interactions des apprenants dans un parcours d’autoapprentissage guidé en langues. Le dispositif comprend un centre de ressources en langues, des entretiens et un journal de bord réflexif sur leurs activités dont certaines visent des interactions : tandem, réseaux sociaux, etc. À partir de questionnaires et d’extraits de journaux de bord, nous proposons une typologie des interactions qui nous conduit d’une part à interroger les apprentissages formels, non formels ou informels, d’autre part à relier ces interactions aux différentes catégories de l’autonomisation : autodirection, planification et choix des ressources, autorégulation et choix des stratégies, autoévaluation. We analyze the way interactions take place among learners in a self-directed language learning environment. It gathers a language learning centre, individual interviews and a reflexive learning journal describing their activities, which may include interactions such as tandem, social networks, etc. We rely on questionnaires and learning journal extracts that help us build a typology of interactions. This leads us to discuss the notion of formal, informal and non-formal learning and to associate these interactions with several categories for the development of autonomy: self-direction, planning and choosing resources, self-regulation and choice of strategies and self-evaluation.

This paper focuses on interactions through desktop videoconference between learners in a tandem studying French and Chinese as a foreign languages. The aim of this study is to characterize language acquisition as it is visible through negotiation of meaning routines. Tandem through desktop videoconference is a type of telecollaboration (Belz & Thorne, 2006) where two learners of different mother tongues cooperatively learn each other’s language (Helmling, 2002). We adopt an approach combining tools from the input-interaction framework (Gass, 1997) and the study of multimodal interactions through desktop videoconference (Develotte et al., 2011) in order to study three different types of negotiations of meaning in both languages.

review

In our article, we propose to carry out a review of the literature published over the last five years (2015-2019) on the intersection between telecollaboration and teacher education in the field of computer-assisted language learning and more specifically online tutoring. The aim of this literature review is threefold. First, by situating them in the broader framework of teacher training models for integration of ICTs, it will map the models of telecollaboration that have been put in place for the training of future foreign language teachers and tutors. Second, we will highlight the most recent research findings and relate them to each other, distinguishing between three dimensions: organisational, social, and interactional, with the latter focusing on exchanges via videoconferencing. Third, on the basis of the various studies and the tension between them, the research questions that remain to be explored will be identified.

Our article presents an exploratory study on trainee teachers' techno-semio-pedagogical competence within a telecollaboration project exploiting different digital environments. More precisely, one of our objectives is to formulate a method to observe evidence of teachers' techno-semio-pedagogical competences in different environments. Within a relevance theory framework, we study how a pair of trainee teachers produces pedagogical regulations through the affordances of two environments: an asynchronous learning management system on the one hand and a webconferencing platform on the other hand. Our data come from the recording of the exchanges within these two environments and from trainee teachers' self-reflective data. We compare the production of pedagogical regulations in order to understand if some interactional dynamics are present across the environments. Our analyses show that for instructions, trainee teachers entirely adapt their actions to the environments. On the contrary, in the case of feedbacks, some interactional dynamics are present across the two environments. We end the paper with a discussion on the epistemological and methodological significance of our study and its results.

This article discusses the possible relationship between research on telecollaboration and research on exolingual communication, in order to show how studies in these two fields could potentially complement each other. The article is divided into two parts. First, we offer an overview of studies in the aforementioned fields and indicate possible conceptual articulations. Secondly, we provide one example of a possible articulation by drawing upon a study that focuses on a teletandem exchange.