“¡Mira, mamá, sin manos!”: Herramientas de reconocimiento de voz para futuros traductores en la clase de lengua inglesa. Escribir sin teclear
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15381/lengsoc.v21i2.22723Palabras clave:
escritura, voz a texto, reconocimiento de voz, inglés como lengua extranjera, dictadoResumen
La demanda de una buena competencia escrita en una lengua extranjera es cada vez mayor en el ámbito laboral debido a la importancia del multilingüismo en nuestra sociedad actual. Por lo tanto, tampoco podemos obviar la necesidad de desarrollar la expresión escrita en el aula de lengua inglesa. El uso de las TIC ha adquirido cierto protagonismo en el desarrollo de las competencias en la lengua meta como factor motivador, y no menos en el desarrollo de la expresión escrita. En ese sentido, con este estudio pretendemos analizar los efectos que tienen las herramientas de reconocimiento de voz en lo que respecta a los niveles de motivación y a la mejora de la producción escrita. Este estudio se realizó en una universidad española con 55 estudiantes de primer curso de Traducción e Interpretación, quienes completaron una encuesta sobre la aplicabilidad de las herramientas de dictado disponibles en Microsoft Word® y Google Docs® en la redacción de textos escritos. Los resultados sugieren que, a pesar de sus limitaciones, los sistemas de reconocimiento de voz pueden ser de gran utilidad para el alumnado, al constituir una estrategia innovadora y motivadora que permite implicarlos en el proceso de escritura.
Referencias
Abbas, Z. (2018). Blended learning and student satisfaction: An investigation into an EAP writing course. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(1), 102-105. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.1p.102
Álvarez, G., & Bassa, L. (2013). ICTs and collaborative learning: a case study of a class blog for improving the writing skills of pre-university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 10(2), 254-268. https://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v10i2.1740
Ariyanto, M. S. A., Mukminatien, N., & Tresnadewi, S. (2019). Students’ and Teacher’s Perceptions towards the Implementation of ProWritingAid and Teacher Feedback. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 4(10), 1353-1363.
Attanayake, D., Hunter, G., Denholm-Price, J., & Pfluegel, E. (2013). Novel multi-modal tools to enhance disabled and distance learners’ experience of mathematics. International Journal on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer), 6(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.4038/icter.v6i1.6098
Aula, J. (2016). The relationship between writing anxiety, writing selfefficacy, and Spanish EFL students’ use of metacognitive writing strategies: a case study. Journal of English Studies, 14, 7-45.
Azmi, N. (2017). The benefits of using ICT in the EFL classroom: From perceived utility to potential challenges. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 7(1), 111-118. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2017.v7n1p111
Azmoon, Y. (2021). Dictogloss or Processing Instruction: Which Works Better on EFL Learners’ Writing Accuracy? Porta Linguarum, (36), 263-277. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.v0i36.20909
Bakeer, A. (2018). Effects of information and communication technology and social media in developing students’ writing skill: A case of Al-Quds Open University. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 8(5), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.30845/ijhss.v8n5a5
Balchin, K. & Wild, C. (2020). Exploring the role of context and collaboration in normalising technology use in English language teaching in secondary schools in Malaysia. Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1803360
Balta, E. (2018). The Relationships among Writing Skills, Writing Anxiety and Metacognitive Awareness. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(3), 233-241.
Basturkmen, H. (2002). Negotiating meaning in seminar-type discussion and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, 21(3), 233-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00024-2
Basturkmen, H. & Lewis, M. (2002). Learner perspectives of success in an EAP writing course. Assessing Writing, 8(1), 31-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1075-2935(02)00032-6
Bax, S. (2003). CALL-Past, present and future. System, 31(1), 13-28.
Bax, S. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 1(2), 1-15.
Bellés-Calvera, L. & Bellés-Fortuño, B. (2018a). Teaching English Pronunciation With OERs: The Case Of Voki. Sintagma, 30, 57-80. https://doi.org/10.21001/sintagma.2018.30.04
Bellés-Calvera, L. & Bellés-Fortuño, B. (2018b). Written corrective feedback with online tools in the Medicine classroom: Bombay TV. In C. López-García & J. Manso (Eds.), Transforming education for a changing world (pp. 106-119). Adaya Press.
Bellés-Calvera, L. & Martínez-Hernández, A. (2021). Written discourse competence and asynchronous online learning: an analysis of lexical errors in higher education. In O. Buzón García, C. Romero García, & A. Verdú Vázquez (Eds.), Innovaciones metodológicas con TIC en educación (1st ed., pp. 4009-4033). Dykinson S.L.
Bellés-Fortuño, B. & Martínez-Hernández, A. (2019). English in the Healthcare Setting: the Use of Wordcloud and Quizlet With Psychological Pathologies. EDULEARN19 Proceedings, 1, 5263-5271. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2019.1293
Boumediene, H., Bavaharji, M., & Berrahal, F. (2018). The Effect of Using Twitter on Improving EFL Students’ Writing: A Case Study. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 7(5), 26-32. http://www.ijhssi.org/papers/vol7(5)/Version-2/D0705022632.pdf
Demir, C. (2021). Determining Efficient Post-Writing Activity for Error Correction: Self-Editing, Peer Review, or Teacher Feedback? Porta Linguarum, (36), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.v0i36.15824
Dongyun, S. (2017). Application of post-editing in foreign language teaching: Problems and challenges. Canadian Social Science, 13(7), 1-5.
Drigas, A. & Charami, F. (2014). ICTs in English Learning and Teaching. International Journal of Recent Contributions from Engineering, Science & IT (iJES), 2(4), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijes.v2i4.4016
Elola, I. & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51-71.
Gonzales, M. (2015). Las dificultades de estudiantes universitarios en la expresión oral. Lengua y Sociedad, 15(1), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.15381/lengsoc.v15i1.22596
Gottardi, W., Fernanda De Almeida, J., & Soufen Tumolo, C. H. (2022). Automatic speech recognition and text-to-speech technologies for L2 pronunciation improvement: reflections on their affordances. Texto Livre, 15. https://doi.org/10.35699/1983
Graham, S., Harris, K., Kiuhara, S. & Fishman, E. (2017). The relationship among strategic writing behavior, writing motivation, and writing performance with young, developing writers. The Elementary School Journal, 118(1), 82-104.
Handayani, F. & Handayani, N. (2020). The Potential of Online Writing Tools for EFL University Students During The Covid-19 Pandemic. Journal of English Education, 6(1), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.30606/jee.v6i1.406
Homans, N. & Vroegop, J. (2021). The impact of face masks on the communication of adults with hearing loss during COVID-19 in a clinical setting. International Journal of Audiology, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2021.1952490
Koval, V., Polyezhayev, Y. & Bezkhlibna, A. (2018). Communicative competences in enhancing of regional competitiveness in the labour market. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(5), 105-113. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-5-105-113
Kway, E., Salleh, N. & Majid, R. (2010). Slate and stylus: An alternative tool for braille writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7, 326-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.045
Lastres-López, C. & Manalastas, G. (2017). Errors in L1 and L2 University students’ writing in English: grammar, spelling and punctuation. RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 16(1), 118-134.
Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1-16.
Lee, I. X. C. (2011). The application of speech recognition technology for remediating the writing difficulties of students with learning disabilities. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington]. ProQuest Dissertations.
Leki, I. & Carson, J. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-101. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587199
Leopold, L. (2016). Honing EAP learners’ public speaking skills by analyzing TED talks. TESL Canada Journal, 33(2), 46-58.
Lew, L. & Tang, T. (2017). “Beyond EFL Writing Anxiety”: Tapping into the Individual Emotionality of Proficient EFL Writers Through Semi-structured Analysis and Wearable Sensing Technology. In P. Zaphiris, & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Technology in Education (pp. 170-181). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58515-4_14
Lozano, M. B., Mayo, M. D. P. G., & Leeser, M. J. (2014). Pushed output and noticing in a dictogloss: task implementation in the CLIL classroom. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, (22), 7-22.
MacArthur, C. (2006). Assistive technology for writing: Tools for struggling writers. In L. van Waes, M. Leijten, & C. Neuwirth (Eds.), Writing and digital media (pp. 9-20). Brill.
MacArthur, C. (2009). Reflections on Research on Writing and Technology for Struggling Writers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(2), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00283.x
Martínez-Hernández, A. & Bellés-Calvera, L. (2021). “How do I know what I think until I see what I say?”: Dictation tools in academic writing. In L. Vega Caro & A. Vico Bosch (Eds.), Igualdad y calidad educativa: oportunidades y desafíos de la enseñanza (pp. 1672-1695). Dykinson.
McDougald, J. (2009). The use of information and communication technology (ICT) in the EFL classroom as a tool to promote L2 (English) among non-native pre-service English teachers. [Master’s thesis, University of Jaén]. Asia EFL Journal.
McDougald, J. (2017). Innovating with ICTs in content and language environments. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 10(2), 181-187. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2017.10.2.1
Meddeb, E. & Frenz-Belkin, P. (2010). What? I Didn’t Say THAT!: Linguistic strategies when speaking to write. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(9), 2415-2429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.022
Moore, K., Rutherford, C. & Crawford, K. (2019). Supporting postsecondary English language learners’ writing proficiency using technological tools. Journal of International Students, 6(4), 857-872.
Nosratinia, M. & Razavi, F. (2016). Writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency among EFL learners: Inspecting their interaction with learners’ degree of creativity. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), 1043-1052. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0605.19
Pennington, J. (2020). Beyond the Keyboard: Connecting Universal Design for Learning with Speech Recognition Technology for Writing [Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa]. Scholar Space.
Prince, P. (2013). Listening, remembering, writing: Exploring the dictogloss task. Language Teaching Research, 17(4), 486-500.
Richards, J. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Pearson Education.
Selvarasu, E., Thomas, A., Sundareswaran, I., Rahaman, A., Farzana, S. & Pareli, M. (2021). Teaching writing using online tools: An Experimental Study at the University of Technology and Applied Sciences. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(6), 196-201.
Snider, R. (2002). The effectiveness of oral expression through the use of continuous speech recognition technology in supporting the written composition of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. [Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Stöhr, T. (2015). The returns to occupational foreign language use: Evidence from Germany. Labour Economics, 32, 86-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2015.01.004
Storch, N. & Tapper, J. (2009). The impact of an EAP course on postgraduate writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(3), 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.03.001
Van Beuningen, C., De Jong, N. & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1-41.
Vigil, P., Acosta, R. & Andarcio, E. (2020). Interactive English Teaching: The Line of American Writers. Mendive, 18(3), 661-676.
Walkinshaw, I., Fenton-Smith, B. & Humphreys, P. (2017). EMI issues and challenges in Asia-Pacific higher education: An introduction. In B. Fenton-Smith, P. Humphreys, & I. Walkinshaw (Eds.), English medium instruction in higher education in Asia-Pacific: From policy to pedagogy (pp. 1-20). Springer.
Warni, S., Aziz, T. & Febriawan, D. (2018). The use of technology in English as a foreign language learning outside the classroom: An insight into learner autonomy. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 21(2), 148-156.
Xu, Z., Banerjee, M., Ramirez, G., Zhu, G. & Wijekumar, K. (2019). The effectiveness of educational technology applications on adult English language learners’ writing quality: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(1-2), 132-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1501069
Zou, D. & Xie, H. (2019). Flipping an English writing class with technology-enhanced just-in-time teaching and peer instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1127-1142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495654
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Ana-Isabel Martínez-Hernández, Lucía Bellés-Calvera
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
LOS AUTORES RETIENEN SUS DERECHOS:
a. Los autores retienen sus derechos de marca y patente, y también sobre cualquier proceso o procedimiento descrito en el artículo.
b. Los autores pueden presentar a la revista Lengua y Sociedad, trabajos difundidos como pre-print en repositorios. Esto debe hacerse conocer en la carta de presentacion del trabajo.
c. Los autores retienen el derecho de compartir, copiar, distribuir, ejecutar y comunicar públicamente el artículo publicado en la revista Lengua y Sociedad (por ejemplo, colocarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en la revista Lengua y Sociedad.
d. Los autores retienen el derecho a hacer una posterior publicación de su trabajo, de utilizar el artículo o cualquier parte de aquel (por ejemplo: una compilación de sus trabajos, notas para conferencias, tesis, o para un libro), siempre que indiquen su publicación inicial en la revista Lengua y Sociedad (autores del trabajo, revista, volumen, número y fecha).
