The courses in Trials 1 and 2 were very varied. However, the teachers did agree on a list of tasks that they believed the system must support in wder to make language teaching and learning feasible. They listed the essential activities as: conversation, grammar, spelling, gap-filling, reading, writing, vocabulary, pronunciation. The list was useful because it underlined the importance of the whole set of multimedia conferencing tools, not just the shared workspace. It was possible for an observer who was not a language teacher to identify these activities and the list was used in the research as part of an observer checklist (see section 6.10.1). It is acknowledged that, as a tool for analysis, it is flawed, since the categories are not mutually exclusive.
In addition to this, the list of activities using shared printed materials (Chapter Five, Table 5.1) was used in conjunction with observation data and saved screen shots, in order to discover vriiether the shared workspace allowed a range of activities similar to that supported in classroom language and literature classes.
6.9.2 Tasks for Trial 3
To understand the tasks, it is necessary to have some information about the Written Russian course and its relationship with the Russian language programme. Information has been obtained from an initial interview with the class teacher and from the Russian Department's web site^. The Written Russian class is an integral element of the Year 1 language programme^®. The thematic content of language work (topics from Russian life, history, society and culture) relates to the rest of the degree course, so language is also central to the whole study process. Students also have classes on listoiing comprehension, grammar, translation, oral (one hour per week for each aspect). All parts of the language programme are co-ordinated; they share the same text or subject and aim at the same lexical and grammatical task. Thus, the Written Russian course places emphasis on developing skills to create a coherent written text, using the linguistic and background information provided by the rest of the programme.
It is important to point out that this course, with its emphasis on written accuracy and grammatical construction, represents a big change for the students, compared with their previous Russian language classes. This is the first time in the language course that written skills are emphasised, and at this stage, students begin to write essays in Russian. The course moves from work on individual words (vocabulary enrichment is a priority) to activities on sentences and paragraphs, to the point where students are collaborating to construct texts.
At this stage, studaits are supposed to be aware of distinctions in registers, to the level where they can choose the most appropriate words for the type of text they are constructing. From a syntactical point of view, a written text is often more complex than a spoken one. At this level, students are expected to learn to form compound and complex sentaices, with subordination, to use participle phrases and passive construction, certain grammatical forms characteristic of literary Russian, 'introductory* words (to express attitude), and conjunctions.
6.9.3 Trial 3 key tasks: paraphrasing and creative writing
During a transition from paper-based to screen-based work, people toid to work with a mixture of the two (Luff et a l, 1992). This class was no exception. In Year 1 especially, many of the computer exercises that were used to develop these written skills were adapted from paper-based exercises from previous years. Although gap-filling, matching and listing tasks were used frequently, this was specifically a writing course, about the construction of texts, and two kinds of task were particularly important. Information about these is obtained from the teacher.
The first task is paraphrasing. Students are asked to replace words or phrases in a paragraph with synonymous Russian constructiœ. They can change the grammar or the vocabulary or both. This type of exercise is included in the Year 1 examination and considered useful preparation for the acquisition of summarising skills. The purpose of paraphrasing is to enrich vocabulary and teach students how to use complex expressions and phrases actively and effectively. Changing a word or phrase almost always leads to changes in the structure of the whole sentence.
^ SSEES Department o f Russian; http://www.ssees.ac.uk/russhome.htm
Students usually find this type of exercise difficult and it is almost impossible to check it in a traditional classroom. In previous years, students had been asked to do the exercise at home and the paraphrased sentences were then read out or written on the whiteboard and discussed. It was a very time-consuming process which participants found boring. In addition, certain points would escape unnoticed and there was never enough time to look through every version of a given smtence. As section 7.5.1.3 shows, this activity was felt to be much more successful using the shared editor.
The second was a creative writing task. A topic would be suggested (to give a description of a typical middle class Russian, for instance). Students would work on this individually. Some students would cope with it more quickly than others, in whidi case they were asked to look through another participant's text, to concentrate on the linguistic form of the constructed text and make suggestions about how to improve it. In a classroom, this involved waiting for others to finish, moving round the room and negotiating. The shared editor worked better for this task, (see Chapter Seven, section 7.5.1.3).
6.9.4 Trial 3 teacher goals
The teacher had identified some problems when using traditional classroom equipment to teach this course:
• It is difficult for the teacher to monitor students' individual writing during a lesson or to know what everyone is taking away fi-om the class. Consequently, the teacher has little control over the material used for revision.
• It is difficult to organise collaborative writing of texts, using paper and/or a traditional classroom whiteboard.
• A classroom whiteboard provides insufficient space for constructing texts. Repeatedly erasing the
contents to create space also erases a potentially useful record of the lesson.
• Increasingly, the skill of typing in the Russian language is important for students, particularly if they hope to work using the language. Writing by hand does not help them to develop this skill. • Language teachers usually spend a large amount of time photocopying material for every lesson,
even when they have the materials available in electronic form. This can be wasteful of time and paper.
The teacher's initial motivation for using a shared text editor was the hope that it might alleviate some of these problems. Using the text editor solved the first three very effectively (see Chapter Seven, section 7.6.3). The students also developed their Russian typing skills, but not without difficulty (see section 6.13.3). The teacher continued to use the photocopier, although this was now in order to distribute materials afla- the lesson, rather than in wder to distribute lesson activity sheets, (see sections 7.4.3.3 and 7.5).