lunes, 9 de mayo de 2016

Mid-Semester Activities

1.      Name and explain 4 different teaching Approaches, describe the main features of those Approaches. Choose three that you would prefer to use as a teacher and discuss why you like them better than the others.

1)      The Oral Approach: according to Richards and Rodgers (2014), this approach was developed by Palmer and Hornby, and became “the accepted British approach to English language teaching” (p. 46) in the 1950s. Its methodological principles include: selection (choosing materials to teach grammar), gradation (organization of contents), and presentation (presentation techniques and practice). These authors mention that the main characteristics of this approach are: spoken language comes first, materials are presented orally before written, the target language is always used in class, language is introduced and practiced situationally, vocabulary is taught through selection procedures, simple grammar forms are taught before more complex ones, and when there is enough grammatical knowledge, reading and writing is introduced.

2)      The Communicative Approach: according to Richards (2006), this approach was first proposed in the 1970s, and its goal was to teach communicative competence, which refers to: the knowledge of language use for different purposes, changing language depending on the setting or participants, understanding different texts, and maintaining communication when one has limited language knowledge. In order to do so, the purposes for learning another language could be more specific, as well as the settings, which makes the role of the learners change, which depending on the communicative events, and the language functions they might use, they must learn the concepts, and the grammatical content along with vocabulary that they will need. Therefore this approach’s main characteristics are: making real communication the ultimate goal of learning another language, providing learners with the opportunity to practice what they know, being tolerant of errors because they prove that the learner is developing communicative competence, developing accuracy and fluency, linking the 4 skills (reading, speaking, writing, listening) together like they are in the real world, and letting the students induce grammar rules.
3)      The Eclectic Approach: according to Popova (2001), this approach is a combination of different approaches, put together in order to integrate them to form a better foreign language teaching syllabus. Its main characteristics are: providing freedom to overcome financial, administrative or pedagogical constraints, complementing techniques, methods and approaches, flexibility in order to fulfill objectives, making the target language more attractive through variety, and providing students with different learning styles to be able to acquire another language.
4)      Structural Approach: according to Mareva and Nyota (2011), this approach views the elements of language as linear and rule-governed. Richards and Rodgers (1995) as cited in Mareva and Nyota (2011) mention that this approach regards linguistic levels as “pyramidically structured from phonemes to morphemes to phrases, clauses and sentences” (p. 104), and therefore depends on grammatical rules. According to Nasr (1994), the main characteristics of this approach are: believing that language is a system of structures that apply to phonology and grammar, and that must be taught in their linguistic and cultural contexts; learning vocabulary is gradual, the 4 language skills must be learned by linguistic habits, the structures of the native language contrast and can be compared with those of the language being learned, and this will help explain the problems that the learners will have in the process of learning another language; and finally, believing textbooks in the target language will work for any type of native speaker.
I would choose the communicative approach because I believe language in real communication situations can be more relevant than just learning the form of a foreign language, and also because tolerance of errors is important for the learners to feel motivated and keep learning.  I would also choose the oral approach because I think that using the target language to speak is important because most situations in real life depend on speaking abilities; and I would choose this approach because simpler grammar forms are introduced before complex ones, and I believe that being familiar with simple forms helps understanding more complex ones. Finally, I would choose the eclectic approach because I believe that variety is very important for almost all of the aspects of language teaching, and if there are different people in a class with different learning styles, it isn’t fair to not help and not stimulate their learning process; and I would also choose this approach because of the flexibility with external factors, like the budget for material.

2.      Design an eclectic approach in which you include techniques and activities from the different teaching approaches and methods. Justify your choices. Using that Approach, how would you teach grammar, listening comprehension, reading, vocabulary, speaking or writing?

My eclectic approach is called: the Interlanguage Approach

Its goal is to be aware of the stages of the learners’ interlanguage, in a specific language and level, in order to create the syllabi. Its main characteristics are: to use techniques and methods from different approaches that can apply to the stages of Selinker’s theory of interlanguage for a specific group learning a foreign language at the same level. Learners will first be tested in order to find out what their interlanguage is like and then be placed in a level (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2).

The techniques and activities used to teach grammar would be: teaching the grammar structure in the target language with enough time for the learners to understand but not as much time for them to lose their concentration, then they would practice orally and then write down the new structure. The presentation of the grammar structure in the target language will be with a specific topic and a specific context in which the structure is more used. Finally they will talk or write (whichever their learning style is) with a native speaker about the same topic the lesson was about and practice the grammar structure.

The techniques and activities used to teach listening comprehension would be: a warm up with background information provided by the learners by asking them questions about a certain topic in the target language. If there is a bigger lack of vocabulary, they will listen to the text in the bottom up form, and if there are fewer problems with vocabulary, they will listen to the text in a top down form. Learners will listen as many times as they feel necessary, and then, they will use the vocabulary speaking or writing freely, or discuss the topic with the group and write an opinion about the text.

The techniques and activities used to teach reading would be: a warm up with background information provided by the learners by asking them questions about a certain topic in the target language. If there is a bigger lack of vocabulary, they will read the text in the bottom up form, and if there are fewer problems with vocabulary, they will read the text in a top down form. Learner will read the text as many times as they feel necessary, and then, they will use the vocabulary speaking or writing freely, or discuss the topic with the group and write an opinion about the text.

The techniques and activities used to teach speaking would be: depending on their level, learners will present a topic or act out a specific context, for content or form oriented purposes. If they choose a presentation, they will give it to the class, and then talk about the topic with a native speaker. If they choose to act, they will act for the lass, and then act out the context with a native speaker. They will compare their performance with the class and with the native speaker and discuss or write about their experience and what they learned.

The techniques and activities used to teach writing would be: a topic and a type of text will be chosen and background information will be provided by the learners by asking them questions in the target language. Then they will replicate as many texts of a certain type about the topic discussed as they feel necessary, and then create their own text about the topic and in the type of text studied. At the end, the texts will be read and evaluated, and finally re-written.

Errors will be corrected when the learner is perceived to be fossilizing them, and in the evaluations (exams), any changes in the interlanguage will be the sign for them to be able to change levels.

References:
Mareva, R. & Nyota, S. (2011). Structural or communicative approach: A case study of
English Language teaching in Masvingo urban and peri-urban secondary schools. Internal journal of English and literature Vol. 3(5), 103-111.
Nasr, R. T. (1994). Whole Education: A New Direction to Fill the Relevance Gap. USA:
University Press of America.
Popova, D. (2001). Eclecticism in Foreign Language Teaching. Greta: revista para profesores
de inglés, Vol. 9(2), 35-37.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. USA: Cambridge
University Press.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.

United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Article Review

In Jennifer Thurstun and Christopher N. Candlin’s article titled “Concordancing and the Teaching of the Vocabulary of Academic English” (1998), they describe a project in which they use concordancing programs, which are specialized corpus programs, to design teaching materials for academic English vocabulary learning for native speakers and non-native speakers. According to the authors, using concordance-based material helps students not only to become familiar with academic vocabulary, but they find it easier to guess words from context, developing writing competence. I find it effective because I think that finding any word used in academic texts and familiarizing with its context, within academic texts, is useful for developing writing competence.

For their project, Thurstun and Candlin used concordances with English learners, in which they were exposed to academic vocabulary in context, followed by practice activities, and finally using them in their own text. With this particular learning technique, learners are expected to familiarize with the vocabulary in a cumulative way, until they are capable of using it appropriately for their own purposes. An example of this occurred with the word “issue”, which appeared once every 3019 words, along with other defining words, like “environmental” or “political”, as well as prepositions, which the learners could notice, mark and learn to use if they are to write the word “issue” in their work. This grammar in context method turns the teacher into a research organizer, and lets language itself do the teaching.

This particular method seems to have advantages and disadvantages: on the negative side, it is tiring for learners to stare into a computer for too much and expecting to learn from the concordances, especially if their learning styles are not compatible with this type of exercise. However, learning with the corpus is just one part of this method because the practice activities and the production stages reinforce what the exposure to the concordances has done. Another positive aspect is that it not only works for teaching vocabulary, but also grammar, writing and reading skills at the same time. I recommend there be more studies on this particular teaching technique, and given the technology of the XXIst century, there should be more sophisticated conocordancing programs.

In conclusion, I find concordancing a useful practice for the specific purposes that the authors mention: learning academic vocabulary in English that is not focused on a particular study field, but general academic expression. I think that concordancing could be a fresh change in English classes for specific vocabulary, grammar and reading comprehension all in one practice, but not for the whole course because the same activities and too much of the virtual world can be tedious. Therefore, I recommend more research to be made about this subject, especially with the technology from the present.

Reference:

Thurstun, J. & Candlin, C. N. (1998). Concordancing and the Teaching of the Vocabulary of Academic English. English for Specific Purposes 17(3), 267-280.

Material Design


Observation Report 2

I think the objective of the class was: make the students aware of common errors in question formulations,
reminding them of past lessons and reinforcing their knowledge. After the reading comprehension activity,
students will become familiar with vocabulary from the text related to the topic of history as an academic
science.  Students will also become familiar with the structure of an academic essay. And finally be introduced to
the grammatical structure of making suggestions, and gerunds.
Name of the teacher: Eileen Dickens Gavito Date: April 12th 2016
Class: ING0111-INGLÉS I Hour: 10:00 – 11:15 Day of the Week: Tuesday
Name of the Observer: Sandra Almazán Guerrero

I.              Teaching Principles and Strategies
1.                  ___4____ The class started on time.
2.                  ___4____ There was a short warm-up question, comment or activity.
3.                  ___3____ The aims and objectives of the lesson seemed clear to the students.
4.                  ___4____ There was evidence of careful class preparation.
5.                  ___4____ The class was logically sequenced and paced.
6.                  ___4____ The activities were suitable for the level of the group and related to the objectives.
7.                  ___3____ The class contained a variety of activities appropriate for different learning styles.
8.                  ___4____ Instructions were brief and clear.
9.                  ___3____ Practice opportunities were provided for different skill areas.
10.              ___2____ Supplementary materials were integrated into the lesson.
11.              ___4____ The lesson related to the students’ lives and were of interest to them.
12.              ___3____ Student talk opportunities were maximized.
13.              ___2____ Teacher talk was minimized.
14.              ___4____ The teacher encouraged comments from the students by eliciting input (questions, etc.).
15.              ___4____ The teacher monitored student errors and corrected them effectively but humanely.
16.              ___4____ The teacher evaluated student performance by checking that learning was taking place.
17.              ___3____ The teacher ended the class punctually.
18.              ___1____ The teacher used technology of some sort (CDs, power-point, etc.) and used it well.
19.              ___4____ The teacher provided the class with a clear idea of their assignments or activities to                             prepare for the next class.
            II.       Classroom Atmosphere
20.              ___4____ The seating arrangement encouraged communication between students and teacher.
21.              ___4____ The writing on the board was legible and could be seen from all parts of the room.
22.              ___3____ The teacher had good rapport with the students (harmonious, stimulating atmosphere).
23.              ___2____ The teacher praised the student sincerely and gave positive feedback.
24.              ___2____ The teacher allowed time for the students to organize their thoughts before answering.
25.              ___4____ The teacher spoke clearly and loud enough for all to hear.
26.              ___3____ The teacher used gestures, body language, humor in teaching the class.
27.              ___4____ The teacher knew the names of the students and called on them by name.
28.              ___3____ The teacher made an effort to give attention to all the students equally.
29.              ___4____ The teacher spoke in the target language as much as possible (depending on the level).
30.              ___4____ The teacher genuinely seemed to enjoy teaching the class.
31.              ___3____ If you were a student in this class, how would you rate your level of enjoyment?

III.                Comments concerning to the teaching method the teacher used to plan and conduct the class.


The class started on time with a warm up activity that helped the students reinforce their knowledge about a previous lesson. The objectives seemed clear enough to the students, however more than one topic was introduced, which I found excessive for one lesson. 

Observation Report 1

I think the objective of the class was: after the generalizations and adverbs of frequency lesson, students will be
able to identify and produce sentences using the adverbs correctly.
Name of the teacher: Eileen Dickens Gavito Date: March 8th 2016
Class: ING0111-INGLÉS I Hour: 10:00 – 11:15 Day of the Week: Tuesday
Name of the Observer: Sandra Almazán Guerrero

I.              Teaching Principles and Strategies
1.                  __4_____ The class started on time.
2.                  __4_____ There was a short warm-up question, comment or activity.
3.                  __4_____ The aims and objectives of the lesson seemed clear to the students.
4.                  __4_____ There was evidence of careful class preparation.
5.                  __4_____ The class was logically sequenced and paced.
6.                  __4_____ The activities were suitable for the level of the group and related to the objectives.
7.                  __4_____ The class contained a variety of activities appropriate for different learning styles.
8.                  __4_____ Instructions were brief and clear.
9.                  __4_____ Practice opportunities were provided for different skill areas.
10.              __NA_____ Supplementary materials were integrated into the lesson.
11.              __4_____ The lesson related to the students’ lives and were of interest to them.
12.              __1_____ Student talk opportunities were maximized.
13.              __2_____ Teacher talk was minimized.
14.              __4_____ The teacher encouraged comments from the students by eliciting input (questions, etc.).
15.              __4_____ The teacher monitored student errors and corrected them effectively but humanely.
16.              __4_____ The teacher evaluated student performance by checking that learning was taking place.
17.              __2_____ The teacher ended the class punctually.
18.              __NA_____ The teacher used technology of some sort (CDs, power-point, etc.) and used it well.
19.              __4_____ The teacher provided the class with a clear idea of their assignments or activities to                             prepare for the next class.
            II.       Classroom Atmosphere
20.              __4_____ The seating arrangement encouraged communication between students and teacher.
21.              __4_____ The writing on the board was legible and could be seen from all parts of the room.
22.              __3_____ The teacher had good rapport with the students (harmonious, stimulating atmosphere).
23.              __4_____ The teacher praised the student sincerely and gave positive feedback.
24.              __3_____ The teacher allowed time for the students to organize their thoughts before answering.
25.              __4_____ The teacher spoke clearly and loud enough for all to hear.
26.              __3_____ The teacher used gestures, body language, humor in teaching the class.
27.              __4_____ The teacher knew the names of the students and called on them by name.
28.              __4_____ The teacher made an effort to give attention to all the students equally.
29.              __4_____ The teacher spoke in the target language as much as possible (depending on the level).
30.              __4_____ The teacher genuinely seemed to enjoy teaching the class.
31.              __3_____ If you were a student in this class, how would you rate your level of enjoyment?

III.                Comments concerning to the teaching method the teacher used to plan and conduct the class.

The class started on time with a warm up comment related to the lesson of the day. The objectives seemed clear to the students. I perceived the class to be prepared, and it was logically paced. The activities were appropriate for the level (a learner’s book was used) and other activities were appropriate for other learning styles. Instructions were brief and clear, and grammar and writing skills were enhanced. There were no supplementary materials, but the class related to the students’ lives and recent topics. Student talk opportunities were not as maximized as I think they should be, and there was plenty of teacher talk. However, the teacher encouraged the students to comment by eliciting input. The teacher monitored, and corrected the students’ errors effectively and humanely, but some of the students didn’t seem to be paying attention and were asked to stop looking at their phones. The teacher evaluated the students’ performance and made sure, walking around to check on every student, that learning was taking place. No technology was used. The seating arrangement encouraged communication between students and teacher, and the writing on the board was legible and could be seen from all parts of the room. The teacher had good rapport, but I felt a little more enthusiasm from the teacher or another type of activity would have been even better. The teacher gave positive feedback to the students, and allowed them to organize their thoughts before answering. Most of the students were able to keep up with the teacher and her questions. The teacher spoke clearly and loud enough for all the students to hear, and used gestures and body language, but not enough humor (at least for my idea of a good class). The teacher knew the names of all of the students and asked them to participate individually, and made an effort to give all of them attention. The teacher spoke in the target language all of the time, unless there was a specific word or phrase that the students couldn’t figure out, Spanish was used briefly. I found it interesting how harmonious the class was in the target language, since it’s a basic level of English. The teacher seemed to enjoy teaching the class, she had a good attitude even when some students got distracted at times. Before ending the class, the teacher explained clearly what the students needed for the next class. The class ended a bit early, and I think some of those spare minutes could still be used for the class. If I were a student in this class I would enjoy myself but I think it could be more interesting or fun if there was less teacher talk and a wider variety of activities.