ClipFlair Pilot Use Report

CLIPFLAIR Foreign Language Learning Through Interactive Revoicing and
Captioning of Clips
LIFELONG LEARNING PROGRAMME - KEY ACTIVITY 2
LANGUAGES, MULTILATERAL PROJECT
519085-LLP-1-2011-1-ES-KA2-KA2MP
D5.1
ClipFlair Pilot Use Report
WP No. WP5
WP Title Pilot use of the produced activities by FL learners (final)
Activity description
This deliverable records the findings from the final stage of
the pilot use of the project outputs (academic year 2013-14).
They will be used as source material for the final evaluation
report.
End users: project members
Authors
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB): Lupe Romero,
Helena Casas-Tost, Anabel Galán-Mañas, Lucía Molina,
Patricia Rodríguez-Inés, Sara Rovira, Olga Torres-Hostench
Status (D: draft; RD: revised
draft; F: final) F
File Name D5.1.PilotUseReport.doc
Date 15 July 2014
July 2014 Page | 1

D5.1b. ClipFlair Pilot Use Report (final stage)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This deliverable records the findings from the final stage of the pilot use of the project
outputs (academic year 2013-14). They will be used as source material for the final
evaluation report. This document includes:
• Details on the organization of the final pilot test (general information on the
test, sample information, questionnaires, etc.)
• Teachers’ results
• Students’ results
• Conclusions from the pilot test and suggestions for improvement
• Results by universities
July 2014 Page | 2

D5.1b. ClipFlair Pilot Use Report
Table of Contents
1 ORGANIZATION OF THE PILOT USE OF THE PLATFORM.............................................. 7
1.1 The questionnaire for the teacher............................................................................................. 8
1.2 The questionnaire for the student............................................................................................. 8
2 RESULTS.............................................................................................................. 10
2.1 Description ............................................................................................................................ 10
2.1.1 Universities ................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.2 Teachers........................................................................................................................ 11
2.1.3 Students........................................................................................................................ 11
2.1.4 Languages ..................................................................................................................... 12
2.1.5 Activities ....................................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Teachers’ Results ................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1 Results regarding the activities........................................................................................ 12
2.2.2 Results regarding the technical problems......................................................................... 15
2.3 Students’ results .................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.1 Overall results................................................................................................................ 16
2.3.2 Students’ Profile ............................................................................................................ 16
2.3.3 About ClipFlair activities ................................................................................................. 25
2.3.4 About ClipFlair Studio..................................................................................................... 26
2.3.5 About the ClipFlair web application ................................................................................. 27
2.3.6 About the ClipFlair social network ................................................................................... 28
2.4 Pilot use by university ............................................................................................................ 32
2.4.1 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)....................................................................... 32
July 2014 Page | 3

2.4.2 Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF) ..................................................................................... 36
2.4.3 Imperial College London (ICL) and University College London (UCL) ................................... 41
2.4.4 Universitatea „Babeș-Bolyai”, Cluj-Napoca, Romania (UBB)............................................... 44
2.4.5 University of Deusto....................................................................................................... 49
2.4.6 University of Tallinn ....................................................................................................... 52
2.4.7 University of Warsaw ..................................................................................................... 55
2.4.8 National University of Ireland, Galway (NUI Galway)......................................................... 61
3 COMPARISON BETWEEN PILOT PHASES.................................................................. 65
3.1 Participating Institutions ........................................................................................................ 65
3.2 Participants ........................................................................................................................... 65
3.3 Activities................................................................................................................................ 65
3.4 Teachers' results .................................................................................................................... 66
3.5 Students' results .................................................................................................................... 66
APPENDIX 1. Teachers’ questionnaire .................................................................................................. 67
APPENDIX 2. Students’ questionnaire................................................................................................... 70
APPENDIX 3. Pictures from piloted activities......................................................................................... 74
APPENDIX 4: Reminder sent to students via email ................................................................................ 75
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of piloted activities…………………………………………………………………………………12
Table 2. Summary of UAB team work……………………………………………………………………………35
Table 3. Summary of teachers involved in the piloting at UAB………………………………………..36
July 2014 Page | 4

List of Figures
Figure 1. Where did students do the activity? ............................................................. 13
Figure 2. Where did students perform the activity? [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot
test)] 14
Figure 3. How often teachers use audiovisual materials ............................................... 14
Figure 4. How often do you use other kinds of audiovisual activities in this course?
[Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)]..................................................................... 15
Figure 5. Students’ native languages .......................................................................... 17
Figure 6. Students’ native languages [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)]............. 17
Figure 7. Students’ gender ........................................................................................ 18
Figure 8. Students’ age group.................................................................................... 18
Figure 9. Students’ current place of study................................................................... 19
Figure 10. Students’ current place of study [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)].. 19
Figure 11. Completed studies................................................................................... 20
Figure 12. Completed studies [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)] ..................... 20
Figure 13. Activity language proficiency level............................................................. 21
Figure 14. Previous use of multimedia in language lessons ......................................... 22
Figure 15. Like/Dislike the use of audiovisual material................................................ 22
Figure 16. Like/Dislike working with computers ......................................................... 23
Figure 17. Reasons for not having completed the activity ........................................... 24
Figure 18. Usefulness of ClipFlair activity for language learning ................................... 25
Figure 19. Technical problems.................................................................................. 26
July 2014 Page | 5

Figure 20. Main types of technical problems ............................................................. 27
Figure 21. About the ClipFlair web application........................................................... 28
Figure 22. Use of ClipFlair social network .................................................................. 28
Figure 23. Piloting at IES Esteve Terradas .................................................................. 34
Figure 24. Use of ClipFlair social network .................................................................. 35
July 2014 Page | 6

1 ORGANIZATION OF THE PILOT USE OF THE
PLATFORM
The UAB partner established the procedure for the final pilot test in coordination with
the Project Managers at UPF. The procedure consisted of the following steps:
• Developing the instructions to fill out the questionnaires.
• Controlling the development of the pilot phase.
• Analysing the results from the questionnaires.
The pilot procedure was shared with the rest of project partners. Questions and
comments regarding the pilot phase were posted and answered in the project
management tool. The instructions to be followed by all partners during the pilot
phase were the following:
1. All partners should use the following forms after the piloting of each activity. Both
forms are also available in the Documents area of Redmine.
a. Learner feedback form:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1oqBPyNDwVBEK33MwmSeNXEiBthjG5UdYHwJL
FTUphmo/viewform
b. Pilot test information form to be filled in by the
teacher: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1km6wmBgQczBehgZYyLhUGeXshF21Ekx
-8waeDDW3ACE/viewform
3. The deadline to pilot the activities and to submit both questionnaires is 17th May
2014.
4. You might need to translate the learner feedback form. In that case we will make a
copy of the form and give you rights to edit it and translate it. Then we will merge all
results in the same Excel file.
5. The UAB team will collect all the data from the submitted questionnaires and will
post it in Redmine as an Excel file.
6. All partners should check their data in Redmine and translate into English those
answers in languages different from English before 30th May.
7. Partners are kindly asked to post on Redmine team pictures from their piloting
experience.
July 2014 Page | 7

8. The UAB team will write the final pilot test report to be discussed in Barcelona’s
final meeting (June 2014).
The UAB Team encouraged project partners to participate in the pilot phase and, in
due time, reminded them of the deadline. Results from students and teachers
participating in the pilot phase were recorded in a GoogleDocs file. After deadline on
17th May the UAB team started analyzing the results in order to prepare this report.
It has to be noted that not all users of the platform filled in the questionnaire. The
complete and detailed pilot use by partner can be seen in section “ Pilot use by
university” page 32
1.1 The questionnaire for the teacher
A form to be filled in by every teacher after piloting one of his/her own activities was
originally designed by the UAB team and later agreed upon with several other
partners. The form consisted of three blocks (see Appendix 1).
The first block included teacher’s data, such as name and surname, e-mail address
and centre affiliation.
The second block focused on activity data, such as the title of the piloted activity
(identified by the URL link) and a question about the time students needed to
complete the activity.
The last block aimed to gather detailed information about the context where the
activity was piloted, such as the course, the learning environment (in class with the
teacher, in a lab without teacher supervision, or at home), number of students, how
often the teacher uses other types of audiovisual activities in his/her course).
A box was available for teachers to comment on any technical problems experienced
or any other aspect that could be useful as feedback.
1.2 The questionnaire for the student
The questionnaire to be filled in by students is divided into four blocks (see Appendix
2).
The first one, Pilot study data, collects three basic data:
July 2014 Page | 8

(1) the centre in which the activity was performed;
(2) the name of the teacher who piloted the activity;
(3) whether the student completed the activity or not. A negative answer to the last
question would not allow the student to fill in the questionnaire of the activity, but led
him/her to a window with possible reasons for not having finished the activity. The
rationale behind these items (I didn't have time, It was too complicated, I had
technical problems, I did not like the video, I don't like computers, I didn't understand
what I had to do, I don't feel comfortable recording my voice) was to provide data on
both the activity and the platform.
The second block, About the ClipFlair Activity, aims to describe the learner
experience with the activity. Therefore, the most important item within this part is
“The activity was…interesting, fun, useful for language learning, useful for improving
my competence in translation, easy, had clear instructions, I would like to do more
activities like the one I did”. Students choose their answers from an ordinary scale
(Not at all, No, More or less, Yes, Very much). This block also includes an item
regarding technical problems.
The third block, About the ClipFlair Studio, seeks to show the learner experience with
the web application. It consists of two questions, one related to the platform and the
other to the social network. The first question crosses opinions (The ClipFlair Studio
is user-friendly, The interface is attractive, On the whole, I enjoyed the ClipFlair
experience) with an ordinary scale (Not at all, No, More or less, Yes, Very much).
The second question is “Did you use the ClipFlair Social Network?” and the possible
answers are Yes or Not. At the end of this part students can also add their
comments.
The fourth and last block is About the learner. It collects personal data (country of
origin, native language, gender, age, centre where he/she is studying, his/her
proficiency level in the language of the activity), and data about the learner’s
experience with audiovisual materials (I like working with clips and audiovisual
material to learn foreign languages, I like working with computers).
July 2014 Page | 9

2 RESULTS
2.1 Description
2.1.1 Universities
A total of 20 academic centres have participated in both pilot tests: 7 ClipFlair
Partners and 13 associate partners. From those, 13 are universities and 7 non-university
centres. In first pilot test, 8 universities participated: 6 ClipFlair partners
and 2 associate partners (also universities).
Partner Universities Associate partners
ClipFlair P3. UAB, Barcelona (Spain)
ClipFlair P5. UBBCLUJ, Cluj (Romania)
ClipFlair P7. TLU, Tallinn (Estonia)
ClipFlair P10. NUI, Galway (Ireland)
ClipFlair. Algarve (Portugal)
ClipFlair. Deusto (Spain)
ClipFlair. UCL (UK)
UNED, Madrid (Spain)
HOU, Athens (Greece)
Polygyros School (Greece)
University of Leeds (UK)
IES Esteve Terradas
Kurutziaga Ikastola
Lawdale Primary School
Private Lessons at Worksite
Warsaw University of Technology
University of Pavia
Mercy College, Sligo
Kazimierz Wielki University
EUROPASS Centro Studi Europeo
July 2014 Page | 10

2.1.2 Teachers
A total of 37 different teachers have taken part in the piloting of activities (12 in the
first pilot test). Some of these teachers have piloted activities with groups from other
teachers, disseminating the platform to teachers not involved in the project. The rest
of teachers are active members of the ClipFlair project.
2.1.3 Students
A total of 1219 student questionnaires (318 in the first pilot test) were answered by
students during the pilot phase. A total of 84 different ClipFlair activities were done.
There are 23 questionnaires that cannot be related to a particular activity due to
missing data.
Centre Learners Teachers
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain 433 9
University Babes Bolyai, Romania 394 7
Tallinn University, Estonia 38 3
National University of Ireland, Galway 54 6
Imperial College London, UK 21 2
University of Leeds, UK 11 1
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia,
41 1
Spain
Hellenic Open University, Greece 24 1
First Primary School of Polygyros, Greece 18 1
University College London, UK 7 1
Universidad de Deusto, Spain 11 1
University of Algarve, Portugal 16 1
July 2014 Page | 11

Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain 44 2
Other Secondary Education and Adult Learning
107 5
Institutions:
(Institut Esteve Terradas, Warsaw University of
Technology, Università di Pavia, Europass Centro
Studi Europeo, Mercy College, Kurutziaga Ikastola)
TOTAL 1,219 41
Table 1. Summary of completed questionnaires
2.1.4 Languages
Twelve different languages have been used in the final pilot test (as opposed to 7
languages in the first pilot test): English, Portuguese, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese,
Catalan, Romanian, Polish, Basque, Irish, Estonian and Italian. 20.7% of activities in
the ClipFlair Gallery were designed to practice English and around 13.8% of activities
to practice non-EU languages: Chinese, Japanese and Arabic. From the
questionnaires provided by teachers we know that there is a small proportion of
activities (13%) designed to practice translation with different language combination.
2.1.5 Activities
In total, 84 activities have been piloted.
2.2 Teachers’ Results
This section presents the results collected using the teacher’s feedback form known
as Pilot use information (see Appendix 1). This form had to be filled in by every
teacher after piloting one of his/her own activities. It includes the results received until
the 17th May, which was the deadline for the activity pilot phase. Below is a summary
of where the students carried out the piloted activity, how often the teacher used
other kinds of audiovisual activities in his/her course, and a classification by
categories of the technical problems reported by teachers. A total of 25 teachers
answered the teacher’s form.
2.2.1 Results regarding the activities
Where did students perform the activity?
July 2014 Page | 12

Most activities were piloted in class together with the teacher; only 30% of them were
piloted without teacher supervision, either in a language lab or at home.
Some of the activities were done in class with the teacher, but students did not have
enough time to fill in the feedback questionnaire and were asked to do it at home.
This may be the reason why not all students filled in the questionnaire.
Where did students do the activity?
70%
24%
6%
In class with the teacher
At home
In a lab without teacher
supervision
Figure 1. Where did students do the activity?
In order to be able to compare total results with first pilot results, see below the
results from the first pilot test:
July 2014 Page | 13

Figure 2. Where did students perform the activity? [Source:
Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)]
Length of activity
The length of activities ranged from less than 5 minutes to more than 30 minutes,
except for two activities that were done at home and the teacher did not know how
long students took to do it.
How often do you use other kinds of audiovisual activities in this course?
Only around 25% of the teachers involved in the piloting phase use audiovisual
materials often or very often, while most use them every now and then or seldom.
How often teachers use audiovisual
materials
43%
11%
19%
Seldom (once every two
months or less)
Now and then (once
every 2-4 weeks)
Never
Often (once a week)
Very often (more than
once a week)
Figure 3. How often teachers use audiovisual materials
13%
14%
Notice that some teachers that never use audiovisual materials (14%) and have
decided to use ClipFlair in the second pilot test, which is good news. In the first pilot
test, more teachers were used to audiovisual materials in class (see below):
July 2014 Page | 14

Figure 4. How often do you use other kinds of audiovisual
activities in this course? [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot test)]
2.2.2 Results regarding the technical problems
As far as technical problems experienced during the second pilot phase is
concerned, teachers reported technical problems in only 23% of the cases, slightly
lower than in the preliminary pilot test (26%). Most technical problems during second
pilot test were not due to ClipFlair but to other causes, such as:
“Some students had problems with Silverlight”
“A bit of buffering at the video, but the internet connexion was slow”
“Students experienced problems using University PCs (Windows xp) and their
laptops (Windows 7 and 8)”
Concerning audio, teachers reported the following technical problems:
“One revoicing was extremely low (mic was working properly), another one recorded
student's voice over original audio without and one could hear both voices. In another
case, sentences were clipped (recordings seemed to be incomplete).”
“Initially, but due to the way the sound was organized in that particular lab. Once the
proper programmes were activate, everything worked very well.”
“They had problems trying to record their voices”
July 2014 Page | 15

“Students complained about the fact that they cannot see how long their recordings
are. In addition, when students pause the video to listen to their recordings, their
recordings keep going on and cannot be paused.”
“Revoicing didn't work properly. Students' voices were mixed with the original
soundtrack so that both English and Italian audio could be heard.”
Concerning captions, one teacher reported that “*It'd be good if the platform allowed
the teacher to set a maximum number of characters allowed per subtitle”, and
actually, the program allows to mark a maximum number of characters.
It is worth mentioning that in Ireland, for the ClipFlair website to become accessible
to secondary school, a request had to be sent to the National Teachers’ Council. The
petition was sent and accepted.
2.3 Students’ results
2.3.1 Overall results
In this section the results of the questionnaire filled out by students are presented:
results about students’ profile; results about ClipFlair activities; results about ClipFlair
Studio and results about the ClipFlair web application.
2.3.2 Students’ Profile
These data have been obtained from the Students’ Questionnaire (see Appendix 2).
Although 1173 students participated in the pilot tests, only 1076 completed a ClipFlair
activity. Thirty-seven teachers coming from 13 different universities were involved in
the pilot studies: National University of Ireland (Galway), Universitat Autònoma de
Barcelona and Universitatea Babeş-Bolyai, Tallinn University, Hellenic Open
University, Algarve, Deusto, UCL, HOU, University of Leeds and UNED, plus non-university
centres such as Polygyros, IES Esteve Terradas, Kurutziaga Ikastola,
Lawdale Primary School, and Private Lessons at Worksite.
The students participating in the pilot tests came from 30 different countries. Most of
them come from European countries (98%), although there are respondents from
Africa, America, Asia and Australia. Among all the students, 65% said they have a
July 2014 Page | 16

single mother tongue; 16% considered him/herself bilingual and 19% trilingual.
Compared to the preliminary pilot test, many more students considered themselves
to be bilingual and trilingual.
Native speaker of
65%
1 language
2 languages
3 languages
Figure 5. Students’ native languages
16%
19%
Notice differences between final results and first pilot test below:
Native speaker of
89%
9% 2%
One
language
Figure 6. Students’ native languages [Source: Deliverable 1136
(first pilot test)]
Regarding gender, the vast majority, 75%, are women, just 3% less than in the
preliminary pilot test.
July 2014 Page | 17

75%
Figure 7. Students’ gender
Regarding age, the vast majority of students, 74%, belong to the age group between
18 and 35. The group aged between 13 and 18 represents 13%, the group aged
under 13 represents 10% and the group aged over 35 represents the remaining 3%.
Compared to the first pilot test, there are considerable less students in the age group
between 18 and 35 (from 93% to 74%) and there has been an increase in the age
groups below 18 years old, while the group above 35 has remained more or less
steady.
Figure 8. Students’ age group
25%
Gender
Female
Male
74%
13%
10%
3%
Age group
18 - 35 years old
13 - 18 years old
< 13 years old
> 35 years old
July 2014 Page | 18

In the item “I am a student at”, the answer "University" was the most popular (77%),
which is probably the case because most of the activities were piloted by teachers
from universities involved in the ClipFlair project.
I am a student at
Figure 9. Students’ current place of study
These results can be compared with those of first pilot test:
Figure 10. Students’ current place of study [Source: Deliverable
1136 (first pilot test)]
77%
18%
4% 1%
University
Secondary School
Other
Language School
0,35 0,35
99,31
Student of
Language
school
Secondary
school
University
July 2014 Page | 19

The fact that almost all the students who participated in the pilot test were currently
pursuing studies at university conditions the results from another item: “Level of
Studies completed”. More than half of the students, 60%, answered “school”, while
another significant percentage of the students, 27%, stated they hold a university
degree. We assume that they are currently pursuing their second or third university
degree.
Figure 11. Completed studies
3% 2%
These results can be compared with those of first pilot test:
Figure 12. Completed studies [Source: Deliverable 1136 (first pilot
test)]
60%
27%
8%
Level of studies
School
University degree
Other
Post-graduate (MA, PhD)
Vocational Training
37%
4%
3%
48%
8%
Level of studies
University
degree
Post-graduate
(MA, PhD)
Vocational
Training
July 2014 Page | 20

The item “Proficiency level in the language of the activity” shows that most
participating students rated their knowledge of the language as upper intermediate
(4) or intermediate (3).
Proficiency level in the language of
the activity
10%
14%
22%
28% 26%
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 13. Activity language proficiency level
The questionnaire includes three questions inquiring about the students’ familiarity
with using audiovisual material and interest in the technical and pedagogical
environment of ClipFlair activities: computer and clips.
It should be noted that nearly a quarter of the students rated “I have used video or
multimedia as a language student before doing any ClipFlair Activity” with the lowest
score.
July 2014 Page | 21

I have used video or multimedia as a
language student before doing any
ClipFlair Activity
22%
15%
13%
29%
21%
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 14. Previous use of multimedia in language lessons
In contrast, 75% of the students responded very positively to the statement “I like
working with clips and audiovisual material to learn foreign languages”, scoring 4 or 5
out of 5.
I like working with clips and
audiovisual material to learn foreign
languages
3%
5%
17%
33%
42%
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 15. Like/Dislike the use of audiovisual material
July 2014 Page | 22

The same positive result can be observed in relation to the last statement, “I like
working with computers”.
I like working with computers
3%
5%
15%
33%
44%
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 16. Like/Dislike working with computers
Finally, the reasons provided by students who did not finish their activity are
displayed below. It can be observed that the vast majority, 76%, argues lack of time.
We think that this “lack of time” is probably related to the novelty that the ClipFlair
environment represents for the student. Probably, if the student were familiar with the
platform, he/she would have been faster.
July 2014 Page | 23

I did not complete the ClipFlair
activity because
76%
1%
Figure 17. Reasons for not having completed the activity
2%
6%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
0%
I didn't have time
I had technical
problems
It was too complicated,
I didn't understand
what I had to do
I didn't have time, I
don't feel comfortable
recording my voice
It was too complicated
I didn't have time, I
had technical problems
It was too complicated,
I didn't understand
what I had to do, I
don't feel comfortable
Ir edcidonrd'ti nugn dmeyr svtoaincde
what I had to do
July 2014 Page | 24

2.3.3 About ClipFlair activities
Over 80% of students answered “yes” or “very much” to the statements “The activity
was useful for language learning” and “The activity was useful for improving my
competence in translation”. In addition, over 60% considered that the instructions
were clear. According to this, it can be said that the answers that got best results are
those related to the pedagogical usefulness of ClipFlair activities.
Figure 18. Usefulness of ClipFlair activity for language learning
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Yes
Yes, very much so
More or less
No
Not at all
July 2014 Page | 25

2.3.4 About ClipFlair Studio
Over 80% of students had no technical difficulties in the second phase of the piloting
of the platform as shown in the questionnaires filled in by students during 2014. Even
though the figures are similar to those in the first phase, most of the problems
pointed out in the interim report have already been solved. It is important to highlight
that some technical problems were experienced by just one user and were related to
rather personal circumstances (e.g. their PC at home, their Internet connection).
I had technical problems
No
Yes (please specify in the
next question)
Figure 19. Technical problems
83%
17%
It is to be highlighted that several problems mentioned in the interim report have
been solved satisfactorily and are not mentioned anymore. These problems are the
loading of videos and compatibility of the system with the computer, as well as the
fact that, in captions, it was not possible to write from right to left, as in Arabic.
Additionally, 13 users said that they had experienced technical problems but never
specified of what type.
July 2014 Page | 26

Main types of technical problems
The audio The captions The synchronisation The video
28%
14%
23%
35%
Figure 20. Main types of technical problems
2.3.5 About the ClipFlair web application
Generally speaking, the three web application-related items included in the
questionnaire have had positive answers. In the first item, “The ClipFlair Studio is
user-friendly”, almost 80% of students have answered “yes” or “very much so”. In the
second, “The interface is attractive”, the response has been less enthusiastic, with
“yes” and “more or less” rating almost the same. The third, which is a global question,
“On the whole, I enjoyed the ClipFlair experience” has been rated highest if we take
into account both answers “yes” and “very much so”.
July 2014 Page | 27

Figure 21. About the ClipFlair web application
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
2.3.6 About the ClipFlair social network
Figure 18 below shows that almost half of the students (46%) used the ClipFlair
social network facilities. Although the percentage is not very high, it increased a lot
compared to the first pilot phase, when only 23% of students had used it. Lack of
time when doing the activity and answering the questionnaire may be the cause of
these results.
Clipflair Social Network
Figure 22. Use of ClipFlair social network
0
The Clipflair
Studio is user-friendly
The interface is
atractive
On the whole, I
ejoyed Clipflair
Yes
Yes very much so
More or less
No
Not at all
54%
46%
No
Yes
July 2014 Page | 28

OBSERVATIONS
Not all students provided observations in their questionnaires. However, some
students gave valuable feedback for the partners. Below there is a summary:
Suggestions for improvement
Actions taken and situation by the end of
from first pilot 2013
project
On the interface:
 It is a bit unclear Solved
 It is a bit blurry Solved
 The resolution of the screen
should be improved Non-ClipFlair related
 The quality of the subtitles on
the screen was not very good Solved
 The zoom should be
adjusted somehow because it
zooms out of page, and the
windows cannot be positioned
freely Solved
 The interface should be more
"compact" Solved
 The recording with the
instructions about how to use
ClipFlair are repeated, and they
could be deleted Activity-related
 The number of characters
should be limited in captions, as
in professional subtitling Added feature
 It could be useful to save the
project as a video file
Elements can be saved separately and
together
 It should be possible to
pause the video by pressing the
space bar Pause button
On technical problems:
 Problems with recording
audio and video Solved
 Microphone should be
checked beforehand Non-ClipFlair related
 System needs to be adapted
to allow for writing from right to
left Added feature
Some students also provided feedback to improve the design of activities and the
overall learning experience:
July 2014 Page | 29

1) “I think students could benefit with a demo in class before using it at home
themselves. After I was shown it all made sense.”
2) “Idea for activity: listening to the video without the captions”
3) Difficulty:” trying to understand the exact words/tenses spoken”
4) Difficulty: “recording the clips”
5) Difficulty: “revoicing the clips in the time allowed was difficult & needed lots of
practice.”
6) Suggestion: ”I think a more detailed explanation of how to set up would help. Our
tutor addressed this issue on our second on campus session and then all was fine.”
7) Suggestion: “ClipFlair should be used to work with vocabulary in a more
intensive manner”
8) Suggestion: “activities should be more interesting”
Positive students’ observations, exactly as they themselves wrote them, are
presented below:
POSITIVE OBSERVATIONS (First pilot First semester 2013)
I'm using it for the first time at Chinese class. I find it very interesting, and for being
in a beta stage it's very complete: It has so many features that give so many
different exercise opportunities to make. I only would make the interface more
"compact", but I like it.
It is a fun way of improving your translations' skills.
ClipFlair is an easy to use, yet really useful system. I especially liked the way in
which it combines knowledge and learning with fun. I enjoyed using it, since it is
something new for me. I will definitely use it again, since I find it interesting.
I think it is a very useful and attractive activity, not only for students but for any
speaker of foreign languages who would like to improve his/her knowledge. We all
love movies, and the activity is so interesting that it could be done as a hobby too.
I hoped for a bit more interesting exercises.
In my opinion, the exercises which were proposed were very useful for the
vocabulary enrichment, so I think it is very useful.
This activity make you to learn different adjectives and practice your pronunciation.
It´s very fun and useful for tourism´s students.
This activity was more difficult than the another one about Edinburgh, because here
you need to speak about senses and feelings and emotions more than only you
need describe the images. But it´s was amazing.
July 2014 Page | 30

In my opinion the web is very well structured.
I think this is a very useful web, given the low number of available webs to learn
languages currently
It's an interesting activity and useful for improving your knowledge on this language.
I think the most attractive aspect of this program is how easy it is to use it, and how
it helps to discover new things about your language combination.
POSITIVE OBSERVATIONS (Second pilot 2013-2014)
I like the Clipflair application.
I think the platform is a good learning tool.
It was a very interesting and useful experience.
ClipFlair Studio helped especially in the listening/audio section.
I think this is an easy-to-use platform, very useful for students and teachers alike, I
enjoyed working with it.
I like watching videos and do practical exercises there. I think the exercises are very
useful.
July 2014 Page | 31

2.4 Pilot use by university
2.4.1 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)
Summary of figures related to the Clipflair Project by UAB
56 activities created
25 activities piloted
433 questionnaires
395 questionnaires answered
6 teachers involved in the creation of activities
10 teachers involved in the piloting
Table 2 Summary of UAB team work
Apart from the six UAB teachers who are members of the Clipflair project (who have
been in charge of creating and piloting activities), there have been four more
teachers who have piloted our activities. Two of these teachers belong to the same
institution (UAB) and the remaining two come from the secondary school IES Esteve
Terradas. The following table summarizes these figures:
Clipflair members UAB teachers
Secondary school
IES. Esteve Terradas
Anabel Galán Maria Regina Dora Garde
July 2014 Page | 32

Clipflair members UAB teachers
Secondary school
IES. Esteve Terradas
Saraiva Mendes
Helena Casas Tost Xianghong Qu Francesca Ceres
Lucía Molina
Olga Torres Hostench
Patricia Rodríguez-Inés
Sara Rovira-Esteva
Table 3. Teachers involved in the piloting at UAB
IES Esteve Terradas published an entry on the piloting of Clipflair activities in their
web page (see snapshot below). For more information click on the following
link: http://www.esteveterradas.cat/index.php/noticies-ies-125/cicles-formatius/llenguees-estrangeres/
1082-el-projecte-clipflair-al-centre:
July 2014 Page | 33

Figure 23. Piloting at IES Esteve Terradas
The activities created by the UAB team that have been piloted include the following
foreign languages and language combinations, in the case of translation activities:
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Arabic Chinese Portuguese translation
English>
Catalan
Translation
English>
Spanish
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
July 2014 Page | 34

Figure 24. Use of ClipFlair social network
The UAB team has made wide use of the social part of the Clipflair platform. It has
resulted in the creation of following groups, together with the amount of users of each
one of them:
• Iniciación a la traducción (31)
• TB-A3 (23)
• Traducción científico-técnica FTI (28)
• Tradumatica UNIOR (15)
• Tradumatica (29)
• TAV Chinese-Spanish (UAB) (44)
• TAV Lleida (4)
• Learning Arabic (17)
• Learning Chinese (7)
Finally, the UAB team has contacted different authorities from the Education
Department of the Catalan Government (Generalitat de Catalunya), who attended the
Clipflair Conference:
• Head of Primary and Secondary school: Neus Lorenzo
• Head of Foreign Language Schools (EOI): Neus Figueres
Below are some pictures of the piloting of activities at the UAB (see more pictures in
appendix 3).
July 2014 Page | 35

2.4.2 Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)
UPF Barcelona carried out its piloting activity in a university context but with groups from different
undergraduate programs, collaborating in one project.
Summary of figures related to the Clipflair Project by UPF
35 questionnaires
Table 1 Summary of UPF team work
The following UPF teachers have created and piloted the activities:
UPF staff
Elena Voellmer
Rebecca Walter
Table 2. Teachers involved in the piloting at UPF
The activities created by the UPF team that have been piloted include the following foreign languages:
English, German, (Spanish and Catalan). The piloting project was carried out April to June 2014. The
July 2014 Page | 36

main questions of the research where; how can ClipFlair be implemented into a university context and
iIs its implementation useful for the students. On a theoretical level, the activity tried to look at the
competencies it could potentially foster and finally asked for the motivational component and on what
students thought about the activity. The particularities of the project were the work with students from
different undergraduate studies (Applied Languages and Translation Studies) and having one group
translating between two foreign languages (L3 and L4 for most of the students).
The UPF team used the social network of the Clipflair platform during the pilot lessons both for revoicing
and captioning. The following groups were created:
Group 1 Group 2
Studies Applied Languages Translation
Group profiles 2nd year, 24 students
(in-course obligatory participation)
3rd year, 11 students
(voluntary participation)
Language profiles Majority bilingual (ES/CAT)
Learn several foreign languages
Majority bilingual (ES/CAT)
Learn several foreign languages
Activities -Creating conversation in German
(Written to be spoken: modal
particles)
-Subsequent revoicing
(error correction)
Translating German dialogue into
English (Captioning)
Competencies used -Plurilingual competence
- Multiliteracy competence
-Plurilingual competence
-Multiliteracy competence
Table 3. The two groups involved and their activities
The overall responses to the use of ClipFlair were very positive. The UPF team could also detect some
issues as on how to implement the tool and on how much “control” and observation by the teaching staff
is required so they don’t give up due to technical problems. Below the results of some of the
questionnaires, separated by groups:
July 2014 Page | 37

July 2014 Page | 38

July 2014 Page | 39

Below are screenshots of the two activities created on the ClipFlair platform:
July 2014 Page | 40

2.4.3 Imperial College London (ICL) and University College London (UCL)
ICL and UCL have carried out the piloting of activities in a variety of contexts: with
undergraduate and postgraduate students, with primary and secondary school
students, and with independent learners. However, it should be noted that we have
encountered many issues to implement the piloting of activities as expected due to
the transfer of the Translation Studies Unit from Imperial College London to
University College London. As a result of the transfer, the team has not been able to
rely on the support of language tutors teaching Arabic, Chinese, Portuguese and
Japanese (who stayed at Imperial College London) to pilot activities. This is the main
reason why most of the activities piloted by UCL are Spanish activities, as this was
the language taught by members of staff who were transferred to UCL. The team
attempted to involve tutors from the new institution for the piloting of activities, but
this was not possible given the time frame, and given that teaching finished in March.
As a result, an attempt has been made to involve independent learners, who have
been mainly contacted through social media.
The purpose of this section is to provide detailed information about the piloting
activities carried out at UCL and with independent learners. Since the activities
carried out at ICL have been included in the final report, these will not be discussed
here.
Piloting carried out by UCL
Piloting activities with translation students at UCL
On the 23rd of March 2014, Rocío Baños, from the UCL team, piloted the
activity http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=Friends_en_Rev_C1_ANY.clipflair with 30
students of the MSc in Scientific, Technical and Medical Translation at UCL. The
activity was integrated in the module Translating for Voiceover and Dubbing, where
students translate a wide range of audiovisual material for the purposes of voiceover
and dubbing. In this activity students were asked to translate the clip for dubbing,
making sure the translated dialogues sounded natural and spontaneous, and then to
revoice the dialogues to find out if their translation fitted in the space provided, and to
make sure that it sounded natural. Students translated into a wide range of
languages: Chinese, Spanish, Italian, Polish and Portuguese.
The session lasted 2 hours, and the activity was introduced in the last 40 minutes. As
there was not enough time for students to complete the task in class, they were
asked to finish it at home, to post it on ClipFlair Social Network, and to complete the
feedback form. No major issues were experienced during the piloting. There were
only minor issues with the revoicing component (some fragments were recorded but
could not be heard by students, and there was some overlapping between
July 2014 Page | 41

fragments). These issues were reported after the session and looked into by the
ClipFlair team in charge of the platform’s development.
A couple of days after piloting the activity, a reminder was sent asking students to
complete the activity and to fill in the feedback form (see Appendix 1). Since not
many students filled in the feedback form, feedback was sought informally when
meeting students in other lectures. Overall, students liked ClipFlair Studio and some
of them even tried to complete other activities available in the Gallery. Both during
and after the piloting session, some students mentioned that they were not
comfortable listening to their own voice. Some mentioned they were not comfortable
recording audio in class, but that they felt more at ease doing the recording at home.
Piloting Spanish activities at Lawdale Junior School
On the 23rd of May 2014, Marga Navarrete, from the UCL team, ran four sessions at
Lawdale Junior School. Four different sessions were held: two with Y4 students (8-9
years old kids) and two with Y5 students (9-10 years old kids). Each session was
attended by about 28-30 pupils.
Two different activities to learn Spanish, designed for primary school children were
tested: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=Lucas_y_sus_hermanos_Cap-A1A2-SP.clipflair
and http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=Lucas_y_sus_hermanos_Rev-A1A2-SP.clipflair.
The activities consisted of a short clip where an eight year-old boy was interviewed
about personal information, family and leisure activities. Pupils really enjoyed the clip
(because it was filmed in their local park and also because they could easily relate to
the boy in the clip). In the first activity children had to complete the captions, and in
the second, they had to dub the main character and change his responses with their
own personal information.
The first activity was very successful, most students managed to complete it, and
there were no technical problems of any sort. Also, they found ClipFlair Studio easy
to use and enjoyed writing the captions. However, when a group of pupils tried to test
the second activity based on a revoicing task, problems arose, and none of the
students managed to complete the activity successfully. The school borrowed the
microphones from another school, and they had not tested them properly, the
settings were slightly wrong, so most microphones did not work properly. Although
pupils enjoyed the clip, and learnt a lot from it, not being able to complete their task
was frustrating.
Almost a hundred students tested these activities. However, there was not enough
time to fill in the learner feedback. As it was an online form, some links had to be
typed in and there were a lot of questions to be responded to in a very short period of
time. For this reason, the teacher assistant and the UCL tutor piloting the activity
July 2014 Page | 42

helped a few students to complete the form, but unfortunately, not as many as we
would have liked to.
Use of ClipFlair Social Network
The UCL team has also made use of the social part of the Clipflair platform, mainly
through the creation of the group MSc Translation UCL.
Piloting with independent learners
Independent learners were contacted both directly and through social media in order
to be able to gather relevant feedback about the platform and about specific activities
targeted at independent learners. UCL tutors were also encouraged to ask language
learners to test some activities as independent learners. A key aspect raised
informally by learners was obtaining support while carrying out the activity. Some
learners found the available video tutorials and the manual useful, but others
preferred to be able to access this material in their main language, an issue which
has been addressed in the project. Another issue raised was obtaining feedback after
completing the activity: leaners particularly appreciated being able to check a
document with solutions or sample answers. Again, feedback from learners was
frequently gathered informally, but some of the responses obtained during the last
stages of the project are available in Appendix 2.
July 2014 Page | 43

2.4.4 Universitatea „Babeș-Bolyai”, Cluj-Napoca, Romania (UBB)
UBB Cluj-Napoca carried out its piloting activity in different contexts: high school
students, university students, MA degree students, and professors.
Summary of figures related to the Clipflair Project by UAB
394 questionnaires
Table 2 Summary of UBB team work
Apart from the nine UBB teachers who are members of the Clipflair project and have
been in charge of creating and piloting activities, there have been four other high
school teachers who have piloted our activities. Two of these teachers belong to the
Colegiul Național „Emil Racoviță” (CNER); the others belong to Seminarul Teologic
Ortodox (STO) and Liceul Teoretic „Mihai Eminescu” (LTME) Cluj-Napoca. The
following table summarizes these figures:
Clipflair members and UBB staff Secondary school teachers
Cristina Varga Diana Todoran (CNER)
July 2014 Page | 44

Clipflair members and UBB staff Secondary school teachers
Cristina Felea Irina Nădășan (LTME)
Adriana Neagu Nicoleta Popa (STO)
Liana Muthu
Sanda Moraru
Alexandra Cotoc
Anamaria Radu
Table 3. Teachers involved in the piloting at UBB
The activities created by the UBB team that have been piloted include the following
foreign languages: English, Spanish, Romanian, Catalan, Russian, and Ukrainian.
The Russian pilot activities were postponed by Russian Language and Literature
Department of UBB by October 2014 and will be carried out as soon as possible.
One activity in Norwegian which is not published for the moment in the Clipflair
gallery was also carried out because the Nordic Languages Department of UBB
would like to involve Clipflair platform in a Norwegian learning project, they will
submit by the end of 2014.
July 2014 Page | 45

Figure 1. Use of ClipFlair social network by UBB users
Figure 2. Use of ClipFlair social network by college students in Cluj-Napoca
The UBB team used the social network of the Clipflair platform during the pilot
lessons especially for upload the activities of the students. It has resulted in the
creation of following groups (the number of members for each group is also
mentioned):
• UBB (217);
• Romanian;
July 2014 Page | 46

• Ukrainian;
• Russian;
• English;
• Spanish;
• Catalan;
• CNER (62);
• STO (18);
• Liceul Teorectic „Mihai Eminescu” (14);
• NTLD2014 (18);
Therefore, UBB users are organised in 5 main groups and 329 members.
Finally, the UBB team has contacted different authorities:
• Head of Russian Cultural Center in Cluj-Napoca: Iudith Bartalis;
• Head of Liceul Teoretic “Mihai Eminescu”: Dobrescu Simona Raluca
Below are some pictures of the piloting of activities at the UBB. Please find more on
the Clipflair Social Network, group UBB.
July 2014 Page | 47

July 2014 Page | 48

2.4.5 University of Deusto
The University of Deusto has collaborated with the Kurutziaga School of Durango to
design and test activities. These activities have been developed in Basque.
Kurutziaga school is an Associated Partner in ClipFlair project.
Other activities have been piloted at the University of Deusto with students from
“Euskal Irakaslegoa”, the Basque language school. Kurutziaga School students who
participated in the pilot are in fifth and sixth grade, so they are under 13 years.
Pilot data
The following table shows the list of activities in Basque that have been tested, the
number of learners who have tested each activity, the educational institution and the
teacher responsible for each piloting activity.
Title of activity (URL link)
Number of
Learners
Center
Teacher
Responsible
NOR NAIZ
NI?: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=
UD_euskera_nornaizni.clipflair
9
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
MARITEILETAKOAREN
IPUINA: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activ
ity=UD_euskera_mariteiletako.clipflair
8
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
GABONAK, OLENTZEROAREN
KANTAK: http://studio.clipflair.net/?act
ivity=Kurutziaga_euskera_gabonak.clipflai
r
6
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
SURRANDIAK: http://studio.clipflair.ne
t/?activity=Kurutziaga_euskera_Surrandia
k.clipflair
18
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
ZEZENAK
DIRA: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity
9
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
July 2014 Page | 49

=Kurutziaga_euskera_zezenakdira.clipflair
OLENTZEROREN
ISTORIOA: http://studio.clipflair.net/?a
ctivity=Kurutziaga_Olentzeroren_istorioa.
clipflair
1
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
LAZKAO
TXIKI: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activit
y=Kurutziaga_euskera_Lazkao_txiki.clipfla
ir
10
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
ITSUTUTA
ABENTURA: http://studio.clipflair.net/
?activity=UD_euskera_itsututa.clipflair
2
Kurutziaga
School
Gaizka Uriarte
BIZKAIAN TURISMOA
EGITEN: http://studio.clipflair.net/?acti
vity=UD_euskera_bizkaia.clipflair
4
University of
Deusto
Iratxe
Mentxaka
KUTSADURA: http://studio.clipflair.net
/?activity=UD_euskera_bizkaia.clipflair
5
University of
Deusto
Iratxe
Mentxaka
Table 1: List of piloting activities
In conclusion, we have tested 10 ClipFlair activities in Basque and 72 students have
participated.
Teachers´ comments
After the piloting, teachers gave us feedback about their experience using ClipFlair.
• It´s difficult to test an activity when students have to record the voice with a
microphone, because there are multiple students in the same classroom and it is
noisy.
• In their opinion, there should be an option to lock the edited activity, because
sometimes students close a window and it´s not possible to recover it.
• They suggest including in the activity the auto-save option, to avoid losing
information.
• It would be very useful to use videos from YouTube, without downloading.
July 2014 Page | 50

• It would be very interesting to include external activities, such as Hot potatoes or
Google Form, without the need to get out of ClipFlair.
• It would be interesting to have more activity-models and examples.
• Finally, teachers pointed out that they consider useful ClipFlair Studio to work areas
such as listening, translation or pronunciation.
July 2014 Page | 51

2.4.6 University of Tallinn
TLU carried out its piloting activity in two different contexts: secondary school
students and university students.
Figures related to the Clipflair Project by Tallinn University
The activites were created and piloted by project partners Kristiina Rebane, Kristiina
Tedremaa – Levorato, Markus Oder, piloting in the secondary school was carried out
by teacher Vittoriano Reno. The piloting took place in Tallinn University. The
feedback from the students was mostly positive. The problems occurring were mostly
technical (Silverlight installation, Macintosh).
To encourage the Estonian foreign language teachers (FL) to start using audiovisual
material in their classes we have been introducing Clipflair project on different
occasions:
1. Tallinn Winter School 2013 (07.01 – 25.01.2013).
2. International education day 21.02.2013. A newsstand of different language
study options was put up at the university for secondary school students.
CLIPFLAIR leaflets were distributed and a mini-lesson was conducted on TV.
July 2014 Page | 52

3. TLU Open doors day 15.03.2013 where the prospective students (secondary
school students now) were introduced to the study possibilities at our
university. There was an excursion to the language centre, during which
Clipflair project was introduced and leaflets distributed.
4. TLU Summer School 2013 (15.07 - 02.08.2013). Target group are foreigners
who study Estonian. We targeted about 60 students of Estonian at elementary
level.
5. Foreign language teachers methodology days at Tallinn University
22.11.2013 (98 participants).
6. TLU days at our partner schools (students of secondary school, about 1000
students). Autumn 2013.
7. Presenting Clipflair to TLU Institute of Estonian Language and Culture
foreign language teachers. 12.12.2013.
8. TLU Winter School 2014 (06.01 – 24.01.2014). Target groups are foreigners
who study Estonian. We targeted about 35 students of Estonian at elementary
level.
9. Tallinn University Language Centre international conference of foreign
languages methodology (about 100 teachers) that was held in 04.04.2014.
July 2014 Page | 53

10.TLU Summer School 2014 (14.07 – 31.07.2014). Target group are foreigners
who study Estonian. We targeted about 40 students of Estonian (elementary and
intermediate levels).
July 2014 Page | 54

2.4.7 University of Warsaw
Pilot study report
The report aims to present the evaluation procedures undertaken by University of
Warsaw as part of the ClipFlair project and also to explain the lack of the data from
pupils and teachers’ evaluation forms in the project database.
Students’ involvement at the pre-pilot stage
Students of the Institute of Linguistics, University of Warsaw, have been involved in
the project work since the beginning of the project. In October2012, a group of 110
students of the Institute of Linguistics, University of Warsaw, were introduced to the
idea of Clipflair (CF). 60 of them were involved in the creation of video clips for the
project. They worked in groups of four. Due to various levels of technical and content
quality, four clips (Święconka, Pyszna zapiekanka, Abecadło Ślubnych obrzędów,
Polskie tańce narodowe) were uploaded to the ClipFlair video gallery and used for
Cliplair activities.
First piloting stage
At the first piloting stage in 2013 (summer semester 2012/13) the piloting process of
ClipFlair activities took place at the Faculty of Polish at the University of Warsaw. 20
students of extramural studies for teachers of Polish as a foreign language used the
activities and evaluated them. However, both their academic supervisor and the
students refused to fill in CF evaluation forms. They sent evaluation reports to the
supervisor and to the Polish partners as written commentaries (see file: Teachers of
Polish commenatries March 2013). In their evaluation, the teachers appreciated the
attractive and innovative approach to teaching and learning languages, but they also
emphasised the technical problems at that stage. They looked at them in a very
creative way and suggested other ways the clips could be used for other linguistic
and cultural purposes. They stressed that the activities need to be ordered in a
traditional way which is clear to the teachers and students: separation of grammar
tasks from discussion tasks, clear introductory and revision tasks. They used
ClipFlair activities willingly to get to know its idea and implementation, but all
explained that as the activities were available on the Internet for free, filling in the
forms for the sake of bureaucratic CF procedures were not meaningful to them at all.
Their supervisor participated in the evaluation interview and she said that for some
teachers of Polish the technology is still a barrier. She asked for authoring tools to
July 2014 Page | 55

make teachers more autonomous in creating activities and adopting them to the
students’ needs. As far as the language level was concerned, she opted for activities
forA1 and A2 only because most of the teachers of Polish as a foreign language
need materials for these levels. For higher levels they may use other materials such
as copies of commercial clips. She also complained about the quality of the clip
about Warsaw, and some colloquial linguistic forms used in the activity instruction,
which are not accepted by Polish purist teachers as they may be misleading to
students of Polish as a foreign language.
A teacher at a lower secondary school in Warsaw piloted some activities with 50
students (2 classes). She was interviewed for evaluation, but again neither she nor
her students were willing to fill in any evaluation forms. They simply treated the
activities as part of the Internet resources, and used them in the way they wanted
without an extra effort unrelated to learning and teaching. She tried activities based
on Rosetta Stone’s clip from the Khan Academy as it related to the topics they
worked on History class. Although the students are familiar with the topic, the
language level was too high for them. However, she evaluated ClipFlair activities as
an interesting approach to learning and teaching.
50 third-year students of the Institute Applied Linguistics Bachelor Programme
participating in a course Methodology of teaching English (pre-service teachers of the
following languages (French, German, Spanish and Russian)) were shown how to
use audiovisual materials in ClipFlair activities to develop all four language skills and
audiovisual skills. As the group was big, 27 students, and the computer lab is only for
20, they could use the activities at home computers, because ClipFlair was not
available at their mobile devices in class. As the classes did not take place in the
computer laboratory, group work was only possible. In class they were discussing
activities based on Maggie the Witch and Rosetta Stone clips. The evaluation was
done in the form of focus group interviews. The students presented balanced
opinions. On the one hand, they appreciated the interactivity of the tasks, and the
clear and natural context for language learning, e.g. a visit in the museum in the
Rosetta Stone video. On the other hand, they noticed the gap between the time
pupils get to know about the Rosetta Stone at school and their language level not
high enough to understand the text with ease.
The second piloting stage
Winter semester 2013/14.
July 2014 Page | 56

The students of the Institute of Applied Linguistics were involved at the piloting stage
at different levels and through different courses.
110 participated in a course Intermedial Teaching of Languages at the University of
Warsaw Masters Programme. They were introduced to the ClipFlair project aims and
activities. As the course was based on students’ access to their own mobile devices
(Bring your own device approach), some of them couldn’t get access to ClipFlair
activities through Android or iOS system on tablets in class. They all joined the
ClipFlair community at social group Students at Warsaw University and their
evaluation of various ClipFlair activities prepared in various languages is available
there. The course puts emphasis on reflective and autonomous approach to learning
and teaching. Thus, forms of documenting work were negotiated with the students.
Oout of thetwo forms of evaluating the activities social media or forms, they chose
social media as more qualitative. One of them reported later in an informal talk with
the teacher that she used ClipFlair activities with some of her private learners, and
they found them attractive, enjoyable and effective.
50 third-year students of the Institute Applied Linguistics Bachelor Programme
participating in the course Evaluation in glottodidactics (pre-service teachers of
English) evaluated various elements of ClipFlair activities separately and activities as
such. The ClipFlair activities were introduced to illustrate evaluation of audiovisual
materials, listening and writing activities as well as audiovisual writing and speaking.
The criteria for evaluating clips worked out within ClipFlair methodology were
introduced as general tools for clip evaluation. They evaluated the clips as
audiovisual materials to be used in language teaching and learning. They were all
given the ClipFlair evaluation form address but they did not use it. 10 of the students
provided written report as a document for their extra voluntary work. They are
available in the zip file: Students’ evaluation October November 2013. They also
evaluated ClipFlair activities, in group discussions in class, from the perspective of
developing different skills as part of the use of various class tasks, but they did not
prepare any written documents to summarise the results of the discussions. They
also evaluated the authoring functionalities of the portal from the perspective of
teachers who wanted to create their own activities. The appreciated the idea of using
either films prepared by students or with students from the workstation without the
need to publish them on the Internet.
Summer semester 2013/14
July 2014 Page | 57

Course in Current tendencies in glottodidactics – lecture
130 students participated in the course. ClipFlair was used to illustrate current trends
in methodology of teaching languages. However, because of the type of the course,
that is the lecture, the students did not use ClipFlair activities in class. They
evaluated the activities in the interactive way during the lecture. At this stage of their
professional development, they could evaluate the materials both from the students’
perspective and from the teacher’s perspective. And it turned out the perspectives
differ. As students they were positive about the idea of using audiovisual materials by
adding captioning and revoicing. They stressed the role of interlingual translation in
learning with audiovisual materials. However, as teachers they would recommend the
materials to pupils for individual work at home, but in class they will use them only on
the condition they had easy access to computers, which is unlikely, and if the pupils
were computer literate enough to focus on the language task. As the only course
requirement for them was to pass the final exam at the end of the semester, it was
impossible to ask them to formally evaluate the activities through filling in the
ClipFlair forms.
The table below presents the number of users involved in the creation and
evaluation of ClipFlair activities
Stage Time Number of
secondary
school
students
Number of
in-service
teachers
Number of
pre-service
teachers
Production Winter
sem.2012/2013
0 0 60
First piloting Summer sem.
2012/13
50 20 150
Second piloting stage Winter sem.
2013/2014
0 0 160
Second piloting stage Summer 0 0 130
July 2014 Page | 58

sem.2013/2014
Total 50 20 500
Final explanations
To explain the context and reasons why students and teachers refused to fill in the
evaluation forms, it is worth mentioning that in those days they were paid for
participation in another project, and they also regularly received money for
participation in surveys introduced by marketing companies. Thus, they were willingly
learning the methodology how to use audiovisual materials in language learning, how
to use interactive learning environment for learning and teaching languages, how to
include multimodal translation into teaching and learning with technology, but they
were not willing to invest their time and effort in filling in project questionnaires for
free. As the activities were available on the Internet, the pupils used them in a way
they wanted.
At the institutional level it was also discussed to include the use of a ClipFlair activity
as an obligatory task for one lesson taught by pre-service teachers during their
pedagogical internship, which takes place in either primary or secondary schools.
The university internship supervisors, after consultations with mentors at schools,
refused to include this task, because of technical problems. The mentors were not
able to provide the students with access to school computer laboratory. As the
requirements for all students have to be the same, the task was not implemented.
A teacher training centre in Warsaw was asked to include the ClipFlair activities in
their teacher training courses. They refused to do it as they had to follow a strict plan
and syllabi of the courses which had been approved the management team and the
supervising local authorities a year before.
As the reflective and autonomous approach to teacher training is implemented in
some of the courses presented above, the students have a selection of tasks to be
done as course requirements, or optional forms of documenting the work done with
the emphasis on how meaningful the task is for them. They selected a narrative form
of evaluation in a social group as more meaningful than filling project forms.
Conclusions
July 2014 Page | 59

The project activities were introduced to 20 teachers of Polish as a foreign language,
50 pupils and 500 students of the Institute of Applied Linguistics and evaluated by
them with the use of various qualitative tools, e.g. ClipFlair social group, interviews,
focus group interviews, class discussions. The evaluation is more qualitative than
quantitative in its nature, but well fitted to the course requirements and conditions.
From this perspective, qualitative evaluation is complementary to quantitative one
done by other partners. This also shows that ClipFlair activities may constitute a part
of regular methodology courses for pre-service teachers of languages without
changing syllabi of such courses. Piloting ClipFlair activities with pre-service teachers
of various languages adds an extra value to the implementation of ClipFlair project
results, which can also be perceived as extra unpredicted result of the ClipFlair
project.
July 2014 Page | 60

2.4.8 National University of Ireland, Galway (NUI Galway)
NUI Galway carried out its piloting activity in a variety of contexts: with undergraduate
university students, independent learners, adult learners in e-learning environments
and secondary school students.
Summary of figures related to the ClipFlair Project by NUI Galway
28 activities created + 15 extra activities created for Italian, 1 French, 1
German*
Students involved: approx. 400 students (some of these students tested
several activities)
questionnaires answered: 54 **
8 teachers and students involved in the creation of activities
5 teachers involved in the piloting with students
3 extra teachers were involved in the peer-review process and also individually
piloted Irish activities (Lisa Ní Fhlatharta, Belinda McHale & Fiona Ní Chualáin)
Table 1. Summary of NUI Galway team work
* Additional activities in French and German were created specifically for piloting
purposes with Mercy College Secondary School.
**Because some activities were tested in tandem with Associate Partners (specifically
Università degli Studi di Pavia and Uned, many answered questionnaires do not include
reference to NUI Galway or to one of our teachers, for that reason they are not included
here).
July 2014 Page | 61

In addition to the three NUI Galway teachers who are members of the ClipFlair
project, one additional teacher (Dr Jennifer Lertola) created and piloted activities with
both teacher-dependent and independent learners. In particular, during the Academic
Year 2013-2014, Dr Lertola carried out a two-semester pilot of activities with online
mature students in order to test the feasibility of use of ClipFlair in e-learning
environments. This was successful and it will be repeated again during the Academic
Year 2014-2015. 13 students participated in this pilot, which tested 9 different
activities, for a total of 117 tests.
Two more teachers (Sara Buscio and Alessandro Luchetti) piloted activities within
NUI Galway, while three others peer-reviewed and carried out individual pilots of
some of the Irish-language activities. A student (Sinéad Nic Aodha) and two other
members of staff (Éamon Ó Cofaigh, Pilar Alderete-Díez) also helped in the creation
of a couple of the activities. Outside NUI Galway, our activities were piloted at the
following institutions:
- Dublin Institute of Technology
- Mercy College Secondary School, Sligo
- Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
- Università degli Studi di Pavia, Italy (in collaboration with Associate Partner),
- Europass, Florence, Italy
- Uned, Madrid (in collaboration with Associate Partner)
Clipflair members NUI Galway
teachers Outside NUI Galway
Laura McLoughlin Jennifer Lertola Dublin Institute of
Technology
Dorothy Ní Uigín Sara Buscio Mercy College, Sligo
(secondary school)
Rose Ní Dhubhda
Alessandro
Luchetti
Kazimierz Wielki
University, Bydgoszcz,
Poland
Università degli Studi di
Pavia, Italy
Europass, Florence, Italy
July 2014 Page | 62

Clipflair members NUI Galway
teachers Outside NUI Galway
Uned, Madrid, Spain
Table 2. Teachers and centres involved in the piloting by NUI Galway
Unfortunately not all students completed a feedback questionnaire or registered in
the Social. In the case of the Mercy College Secondary School, teachers advised us
that they were not in favour of the registration of under-age students. In other cases,
for example the online course, the same students were involved in the pilot of several
activities during two semesters. These students registered and filled in
questionnaires only once.
The activities piloted by the NUI Galway team (also in close collaboration with
Associate Partners) include a number of languages to reflect the interests of the
students involved in the pilot. They include the following languages and language
combinations:
ANY LANGUAGE - 1
ENGLISH – intralingual - 13
IRISH – intralingual - 3
ITALIAN – intralingual 15
ENGLISH-ITALIAN - 10
ENGLISH-FRENCH 1
ENGLISH-GERMAN 1
SPANISH - 1
Use of ClipFlair social network
The NUI Galway team has also made use of the social part of the Clipflair platform. It
has resulted in the creation of the following groups:
• NUIG 17
July 2014 Page | 63

• Learning English 9
• Learning Irish 3
• Italian is fun 22
• Bydgoszcz 6
• UNED 65 (In collaboration with Associate Partner)
• Commercials to Learn English 2 (In collaboration with Associate Partner)
• RECORDS Project 9 (In collaboration with Associate Partner)
While piloting activities in the Mercy College Secondary School and presenting
ClipFlair to the language teachers, it was discovered that the www.clipflair.net website
was not accessible from within the school. The teachers explained that, for security
reasons, only approved websites can be accessed from within schools and provided
contact details so that the ClipFlair website could be proposed for addition to the list.
The PDST (Technology in Education Section) was therefore
contacted, www.clipflair.net was vetted, approved and added to the list and it is now
accessible from all secondary schools in Ireland.
Finally, the NUI Galway team has contacted a number of different players in the field
of Education, who have multiplying capacity – the School of Education within our own
university for example; a national organisation – the Professional Development
Service for Teachers (PDST) as well as some individual players (teachers, schools
etc). Some have become Associate Partners while the project was being developed:
• One Voice for Languages (Associate Partner)
• Association of Teachers of Italian (Associate Partner)
In addition, the following bodies were Associate Partners from the beginning of the
project:
• Post-Primary Initiative for Languages
• An Chomhairle um Oideachas Gaeltachta & Gaelscolaíochta (COGG)
July 2014 Page | 64

3 COMPARISON BETWEEN PILOT PHASES
To conclude we will briefly compare the data obtained after the two pilot phases. It
has to be noted that not all users at the pilot phase completed the questionnaire,
which means that the below results are partial. The complete results are presented
in section 2.4 Pilot use by partner.
3.1 Participating Institutions
The number of participating centres in the second pilot phase were twice as many in
relation to those participating in the first pilot phase: from 7 to 16. In the first pilot
phase all centres were universities, mostly ClipFlair partners. In the second phase,
besides 10 university partners, 3 more universities participated, plus 2 primary
schools and 1 high school.
3.2 Participants
The number of teachers piloting activities also doubled: from 18 to 37. The number of
questionnaires answered by students, i.e., completed activities, increased from 318
to 1173.
3.3 Activities
The number of activities piloted in the second phase increased tremendously.
The quantity of piloted activities in the second phase (84) is four times larger than
that of the first phase (20). The range of languages worked on in the activities almost
doubled, going from 7 to 12. It is worth highlighting that only 20.7% of activities were
designed to practise English, 13.8% were designed to practise non-European
languages (Chinese, Japanese and Arabic), and 13% were designed to practise
translation (different language combinations).
July 2014 Page | 65

3.4 Teachers' results
The data obtained from the first and second pilot phases are very similar as far as
teachers' results are concerned. The results for the questionsWhere did students do
the activity? and How often teachers use audiovisual materials? are almost identical
to those in the interim report. RegardingTechnical problems, a decrease of 3% has
been observed.
3.5 Students' results
The most relevant data observed when comparing the first and second pilot phases
is the big increase in the number of activities completed (as observed in the
increased number of questionnaires filled in by students, going from 318 to 1173).
Another relevant piece of data is the students' country of origin and age. In relation to
origin, students participating in the first pilot phase came from 17 different countries,
while there were 30 different countries in the second phase. Regarding students' age,
the fact that in the second phase primary and secondary students took part in the
piloting, has made this data change, with the range of 18-35 years of age
representing 93% in the first phase and 74% in the second.
July 2014 Page | 66

APPENDIX 1. Teachers’ questionnaire
July 2014 Page | 67

July 2014 Page | 68

July 2014 Page | 69

APPENDIX 2. Students’ questionnaire
July 2014 Page | 70

July 2014 Page | 71

July 2014 Page | 72

July 2014 Page | 73

APPENDIX 3. Pictures from piloted activities
Some teachers took pictures during the piloting of activities in the language labs.
Here are some examples.
July 2014 Page | 74

APPENDIX 4: Reminder sent to students via email
July 2014 Page | 75

Banos Pinero, Rocio
From: Banos Pinero, Rocio
Sent: 26 March 2014 10:15
To: Felices Gutierrez, Ana; Barcena Panero, Ana; Zamagni, Benedetta; Gioia, Cecilia;
Song, Chang; Di Stadio, Elisabetta; Zhang, Feifei; Zhou, Heran; Chen, I-Chun; Fang,
Jing; Acha Villaro, Judit; Filicicchia, Laura; Kozinski, Marcin; Napoli, Marianna;
Cecino, Martina; Zhang, Qian; Banos Pinero, Rocio; Chen, Ran; Piras, Simona; Haro
Guerra, Sofia; Poerschke Freitas, Thaise; Ning, Tianbai; Gaudenzi, Valeria; Labianca,
Viviana; Cai, Wangyu; Zhou, Wei; Tan, Tina; Jin, Xinchun; Ni, Sharon; Peng, Yao;
Zhao, Yingwen; Chou, Yu-Hua; Liang, Zhenming
Cc: Navarrete Ramirez-Montesinos, Marga
Subject: IMPORTANT: TRANG012 Task to be completed
Dear all,
This is a reminder about the ClipFlair task to be completed for TRANG012. I know it’s a long email, but please read
it to the end.
What do you have to do?
1) Translate Friends dialogue into your target language, making sure that your translation contains features
typical of spontaneous conversation. For this you will have to follow these steps:
a. Open the activity by going to http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=Friends_en_Rev_C1_ANY.clipflair
b. If you want to carry on where you left it on Monday, load your work there by clicking on the button
Load Activity from file, at the bottom of the screen
. Select the file you saved after the session on Monday. It will
1
have a .clipflair extension.
c. If you prefer to, you can start from scratch. In this case, make sure you save your work frequently by
clicking on the floppy disk icon. When resaving your work, it will ask you to replace the file you
created the first time you saved it, which is fine.
d. Carry on with your work: enter the translation in the caption spaces provided (the timing has been
set up for you, but you can change this if you want to). Remember that this text is not for subtitling
in this case, but to help you record the dialogue.
e. Once you have entered your translation, revoice each of the captions separately by clicking on the
recording button ( ). When you have finished reading your translation aloud, click on .
f. You don’t have to play the video as you record!
g. Once you have recorded a few utterances, click on Play to see how your translation will sound. Bear
in mind that synchronisation won’t be perfect, but this is not important here (you’re not a voice
talent!). What matters is that you realise: 1) if your translation sounds oral; 2) if your translation fits
within the time given.
2) IMPORTANT: Fill in the feedback form available at: http://tinyurl.com/clipflairfeedback.
This is very important as it will enable us to improve the platform to be able to use it for teaching purposes.
By filling in this form you will be contributing to the ClipFlair project by helping to develop this free online
and easy to use platform for subtitling and dubbing!
***When filling in this form, you will be asked to include the name of the tutor (Rocío Banos), as well as the
URL of the activity: http://studio.clipflair.net/?activity=Friends_en_Rev_C1_ANY.clipflair
3) OPTIONAL: Upload your activity in ClipFlair Social Network
a. Go to http://social.clipflair.net/.
b. If you haven't registered yet, do so by clicking on
http://social.clipflair.net/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f.
c. Go to the MSc Translation group and post your activity there.

Why should I post my activity there? I’ll try my best to make sure that feedback is provided to
those who post their activities on the platform. Also, you will be able to check what other peers
have done and learn from others’ work.
2
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me!
I hope you enjoy working with ClipFlair.
Rocío
Dr Rocío Baños
Lecturer in Translation
Centre for Translation Studies (CenTraS)
University College London
Room 206, 50 Gordon Square
London WC1H 0PQ
Tel. +44 (0)2076799361
r.banos@ucl.ac.uk
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/centras

ClipFlair Pilot Use Report

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (7)

En vedette

En vedette (12)

Similaire à ClipFlair Pilot Use Report

Similaire à ClipFlair Pilot Use Report (20)

Plus de ClipFlair

Plus de ClipFlair (6)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

ClipFlair Pilot Use Report