Why you shouldn't use text-to-speech software for e-learning
Many eLearning providers have decided to use Text To Speech (TTS) software to express their courses. With advances in Text To Speech in recent years, the result is less robotic sound than before, and people are getting used to computer-based voices like Siri and Cortana. Text To Speech software is reasonably cheap; It can be a one-time purchase and can be used to express any type of course material. It seems like a no-brainer to go for a decent TTS package and solve the annoying problem of hiring professional voice eLearning.
Like both a voice talent and someone who has taught eLearning and educational design, I have learned that the questions to ask are: Do you want to present instruction or make students learn? These are very different concepts. Presenting and transferring information is fairly easy; just get the software to read the copy. The possibility that a student retain information and learn is much more nuanced
If you think back to the time you were in school, or are in school, how much did you learn from a teacher who lectured and spoke during the class period? So how much did you learn, or remember learning, from an engaging teacher who was passionate about the subject and felt compelled to get the message across? Text To Speech is similar to the buzz teacher. These days, Text To Speech software may be better than a dry teacher as it may sound good, but I'd say learning won't be easy.
Why? It is a matter of commitment, talent and inflection. As Mike Harrison, an eLearning voice talent, notes: "TTS is nothing more than dictated words (manipulated data) so it is essentially a robot that has no idea what the topic is, so it cannot know the context with which to judge where the appropriate inflection is placed. The way inflection is applied can change the meaning of sentences. "
Widely used examples of how inflection changes meaning can be found only with a simple browser search. Here's one.
Here's another one Mike sent. Read each sentence aloud, emphasizing the bold word, and see how the meaning changes:
- "me I never said he ate your sandwich. "- (Someone else said so)
- "ME Never he said he ate your sandwich "- (I definitely didn't say anything)
- "I never He said she ate your sandwich "- (implied)
- "I never said she you ate your sandwich ”- (I said someone else did)
- "I never said that she ate your sandwich ”- (I said that she did something else with the sandwich)
- "I never said to eat you sandwich "(I said I ate someone else's sandwich)
- "I never said to eat you sandwich"- (I said that she ate something else)
Text To Speech software cannot differentiate between these 7 very different interpretations of the same sentence. The phrase may be enunciated by Text To Speech software, but the meaning will not be understood. Common sense will tell you that without the ability to emphasize, the meaning can end between muddy and lost. In normal speech, people inherently emphasize the correct word since they know what they are saying. Text To Speech software does not know what it says and the meaning is lost.
Engaging an audience of students is something that requires training and talent, and unless an audience is involved, they simply won't pay attention. It is often said that teaching is like acting. My partner, who taught secondary English for 29 years, told me that he performed every day; As a previous university professor, I completely agree. Conveying the message and even addressing the concept of carrying a concept of short and long-term memory requires a high degree of student engagement with the material and, on the other hand, the talent to present the material in a way that is engaging
It takes a good teacher to teach successfully, and it takes a trained voice talent to present learning using asynchronous technology so that learning can take place. The money spent on hiring that talent is well spent if it is important that words become learning.