In a Nutshell...
Most of us are familiar with the dreaded dictation exercise from our own school days, and this activity operates under the same principles except for one major difference - students are responsible for dictating to each other rather than listening to a teacher. This allows the activity to become more interactive, for information and details to be negotiated and checked between pairs of students. It requires a beginning text of some sort, and for pairs of students to have different texts or parts/versions of texts in order to be effective. One advantage of this activity is that it can be very quick for teachers to set up and apply, especially if existing reading or writing materials are on hand to draw from.
Background and Theory
I first started using Interactive Dictation for classes where the learners did not show much interest in speaking to each other at all, and/or did not really get into the different applications of Finding Out. While this activity gets students listening and speaking, it requires more attention to detail and accuracy, and allows students in pairs to focus their attention for an extended period of time on one other student in the classroom. It can be quite useful for students who need more practice and confidence with speaking even if they are not yet confident enough to start using a lot of their own language creatively - in many ways it forces them to try and apply new forms and words. It is excellent for reviewing or transmitting information from reading or writing work, and the ease with which it can be organized and set up makes it very useful for teachers 'on the run' and struggling to cope with a difficult schedule or workload.
One essential theory behind this activity is that it forces students to listen very attentively and also to be careful in the way they 'transmit' information. Students often need to repeat small manageable 'chunks' from the text multiple times in order to give their partner a chance to absorb and record it. This gives them valuable practice in going over the language in more detail to ensure accuracy without being repetititive purely for the sake of it (students are repeating the language as part of the overall quest to 'get it across' to other students, not to appease a teacher's need to hear a student repeat the same thing over and over).
Overview and Application
There are three worksheets associated with this activity, all contained in a single download available to English Raven platinum members in either PDF or Microsoft Word format. The first worksheet is a "reporting" sheet that should contain the text intended for transmission. The second page of the download is the lined "recording" sheet, where students attempt to transcribe the information being read to them. The third part of the download is a teacher's report card, for observing and assessing the students as they go about completing the task, as well as listing any notes about individual students and/or how the activity appeared to work in the class overall.
The first thing that needs to be arranged is some kind of text for transmission purposes, and obviously it can be beneficial to utilize reading or writing content completed in other areas of the overall curriculum. A copy of the text is pasted onto the reporter sheet or typed into the reporter template. It is important that the teacher allocates an amount of text that is 'doable' (that is, according to student age and level there is at least a reasonable chance that they will be able to finish it all in the class time allocated) and takes into account the fact that students are essentially dealing with two different texts (one of which they 'send' and one of which they 'receive'). It is also important that the text sufficiently challenges the students without blowing them out of the water in terms of new vocabulary and structure.
The next thing is a decision about how the activity will be applied and what sort of classroom management and seating arrangements will be required. Three general 'models' that I have tried out are presented diagramatically to the right and each of them subtly varies the way the activity could be carried out.
In Model A ("Simple/Pairs Approach"), students' chairs are lined up facing each other across the classroom. Students pair up with a student opposite them to form a single team, though A and B students have different versions or parts of texts that need to be transmitted. Basically, all the A or all the B students receive time to dictate while their partner across the room transcribes (asking also for any repetitions or clarifications to help them). After a set amount of time (2-4 minutes is what I usually use), the turn changes and the students who had been transcribing now start to dictate their texts to their partners. I usually use only two texts, with all the A and all the B students possessing the same version of one of them. This tends to fill up the room with noise that is 'similar', giving the transcribing students extra peripheral exposure to language they have already heard or are about to hear. It does get very noisy, especially if student teams are encouraged to compete against the other teams or the general objective is set that as much of the two texts as possible needs to be both transmitted and transcribed. In many ways this activity echoes some of the basic principles and considerations that apply to "Finding Out".
One way I break up the rhythm and occasional chaos of this activity is to have regular team time-outs, where everyone in the room ceases speaking and writing to allow one team to have a minute to talk to each other. Bringing it down to a one-on-one format like this gives students a chance to rest, but it also allows other students to listen carefully to an exhange between two other students without the customary classroom noise generated by the activity.
Model B ("Complex/Pairs Approach") is identical to Model A except for how the different texts are allocated. In the diagram, the blue boxes represent one part of the text while the green boxes represent the other version or part. So, in one round, students A1 and A2 will actually be delivering different texts to their partners, but what they hear being transmitted beside them is also identical to the text they need to listen to and transcribe in the next round. This allows a teacher to insert quick vertical rather than horizontal reviews, where students can talk not only to their partner across the room but also to a peer sitting next to them. This kind of arrangement has a pretty major effect on where and how information "comes from" different parts of the room, and in some ways it is both more difficult and easier than Model A (more difficult because transcribing students have more varied background noise to listen to, and easier because they can occasionally refer to a peer next to them for additional help in 'closer quarters').
Model C ("Groups Approach") is one of my favorite applications, because it tends to foster more cooperative group work, the noise level in the room is much more acceptable for my ageing tender ears, and it gives me a lot more options in terms of handling odd numbers of students and allocating strong-weak student mixes to groups. In this model (assuming 12 students in a class - it can handle greater numbers with relative ease), four students sit at the center of the room, facing outwards to two other members of their team/group. The students at the center of the room have one version of a text while the other team members on the perimeter have a different version. Turns are taken as per models A and B above, but in this case, one student is transmitting to two others (who can compare notes with and/or assist each other), and in the next round two students are transmitting to one student. If a relatively 'strong' student is placed in the middle area, it allows weaker students to still actively take part in the activity from the perimeter without too much pressure or attention focused on their difficulties or weaknesses.
I have experimented with Model C in a variety of other ways as well. For example, by taking one long text on a central theme and breaking it up into segments numbered 1-8, the four groups can all be working on different sections of the one overall text. Once the groups have completed their two sections, the text sections and student roles can be rotated. If group A completes sections 1 and 2 of the overall text, as rotation group A could be given sections 3 and 4. However, student A1 moves to group B and becomes student B2, (previous) student B2 becomes B3, and (previous) student B3 moves to group C and becomes C1, (previous) student C1 moves to group D and becomes D2, (previous) student D2 becomes D3, and (previous) student D3 moves to group A and becomes A1 etc. Although it sounds complicated, achieving this kind of rotation is not as difficult and confusing as it seems on paper, and it is a wonderful way to mix up the content as well as what different students do and who they work with around the classroom.
In terms of the teacher's role in this activity, note that it generally requires some careful classroom management. Generally the teacher should not need to interrupt or correct students' production while the activity is taking place, as a natural homework exercise can be to give students copies of the original text they were attempting to transcribe and worlk at home on finding discrepancies between what they thought they heard and what is actually present in the text.
As students get better at the activity, I usually also demand that things such as punctuation are included in the transcriptions. This gives me a chance to show the students what commas, periods, quotation marks, etc. look like and mean, and if students can get used to giving punctuation information to each other it can have a beneficial effect on other aspects of general instruction (for example, when I am explaining to students how to edit their writing or eliciting the function and effect of something like an exclamation mark in a text).
Linking to the Activity from a Reading Syllabus
There is an obvious link between dictation and reading through the necessity that a text be provided, and it is relatively easy to take readings or parts of readings from the regular curriculum and utilize them for this kind of activity.
In general, it is recommended that interactive dictation be set up around a single text or part of a reading, which is divided into two parts for each member of a pair or group to work on transmitting or transcribing. This is so that the dictation exercise (if successfully completed) results in one complete text or united part (one part of which each student was responsible for transmitting and the other part for which they had to listen and transcribe). This lends a feeling of completion to the exercise, but it can also reinforce the fact that understanding what one is listening to can have connections to and hints from the text the student can already see.
It is also a good idea to utilize readings from the regular curriculum some time after they were used in a reading class. The activity can then be used to see just how much students retained and/or can still relate to. Generally speaking, the more the students enjoyed or related to a reading during the reading class, the more likely they are to feel at ease with using that text as part of follow-up interactive dictation.
Teachers could also try to ensure that students utilize a range of different readings from different styles and genres.
Linking to the Activity from a Writing Syllabus
It can be really fun and beneficial for students' own written work to comprise 'texts' for transmission and transcribing. In this way, students are actually 'telling' their story after having written it, or listening to and reconstructing a new story made by a classmate.
Using students' own writings also allows the activity to be extended into feedback and editing. Following the composition of a first or initial draft, interactive dictation can be applied. This can help students to realize how their stories or essays actually 'sound', which in itself can help students to realize their own errors or chances to express something more accurately or meaningfully. In a cooperative classroom, the person responsible for listening to and transcribing the writing could also be encouraged to give feedback to the writer - noting spelling errors or unclear sentences or expressions.
Another, more fun, application is to have students write different versions of a single story and then dictate what they came up with to other students. By setting up tasks whereby one student writes a 'before' account and another student writes an 'after' account, interactive dictation can become more of a discovery process where students play a more integral part in the production of the texts to be used.
Note that this kind of application can also be extended to other kinds of writing (not necessarily full texts). For example, students could be asked to transmit their answers to a grammar or reading exercise and then listen to and transcribe another students' answers to the same or a different grammar/reading exercise. This could lead to students discussing whether the answers are correct or not. In the same way, it could be used to transmit and transcribe example sentences applied to vocabulary lists, providing each student with different sentences and models in addition to the ones they came up with themselves.
Assessment Considerations
This activity utilizes a similar grading scale to "Finding Out" (click here for details), but has only four assessment criteria, listed on the 'recording' worksheet for each student. These four criteria are:
Effort/Cooperation: This is key to the success and 'ideal' of the overall activity, so it is listed first and I always make the biggest deal about it. Basically, did the students try hard to engage the other students in communication, and how helpful and responsive were they?
Pronuciation/Clarity: Clarity and ability to accurately apply the base range of sounds in the English language. I also consider intonation and word and sentence stress in the students' production, as well as their attempts to sound words out to partners and make them as comprehensible as possible.
Elicitation: Did students try hard to get more out of their partner 'reporters' when they did not understand or get something down clearly, how did they efficiently address 'starting and finishing' points in the changes of turn, and did they successfully help partners express where there was a problem or a miscommunication?
Review/Editing: This could be related to how willing students were to check their work and ask for clarification or corrections from partners, but it could also be applied in a homework sense, where following the activity students compare what they have transcribed with what actually appears in the original text and endeavor to correct themselves accordingly.
As per suggestions for "Finding Out" assessment, the ultimate goal should be to eventually develop students to the point where they are responsibly assessing their own performances and those of their peers.
