1 / 59

The Power of an Integrated Curriculum through TBLT

The Power of an Integrated Curriculum through TBLT. JALT 2011 in Tokyo Nagoya University of Foreign Studies Department of English Language Teaching Kazuyoshi Sato & Paul A. Crane. Introduction.

kostya
Download Presentation

The Power of an Integrated Curriculum through TBLT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Power of an Integrated Curriculum through TBLT JALT 2011 in Tokyo Nagoya University of Foreign Studies Department of English Language Teaching Kazuyoshi Sato & Paul A. Crane

  2. Introduction Hinkel (2006) claims that “[in] an age of globalization, pragmatic objectives of language learning place an increased value on integrated and dynamic multiskill instructional models with a focus on meaningful communication and the development of learners’ communicative competence” (p. 113). Although integrating all language skills has been a recent trend in language classrooms rather than focusing on language skills in separate courses, there has been little research as to how skill integration influences student learning.

  3. Introduction Moreover, there has been little discussion about how to develop a TBLT curriculum. This study reports the results of an integrated English curriculum through TBLT over one year.

  4. Skills Integration Brown (2007, p.286) 1. Production and reception are quite simply two sides of the same coin; one cannot split the coin in two. 2. Interaction means sending and receiving messages. 3. Written and spoken language often…bear a relationship to each other; to ignore that relationship is to ignore the richness of language. 4. For literate learners, the interrelationship of written and spoken language is an intrinsically motivating reflection of language and culture and society.

  5. Skills Integration 5. By attending primarily to what learners can do with language, and only secondarily to the forms of language, we invite any or all of the four skills that are relevant into the classroom arena. 6. Often one skill will reinforce another; we learn to speak, for example, in part by modeling what we hear, and we learn to write by examining what we can read. 7. Proponents of the whole language approach… have shown us that in the real world of language use, most of our natural performance involves not only the integration of one or more skills, but connections between language and the way we think and feel and act.

  6. Models of Skills Integration Brown (2007) ・Content-based instruction ・Task-based language teaching ・Theme-based/topic-based instruction ・Experiential learning (e.g., projects, field trips, simulations)

  7. Definitions of Task “[T]asks are always activities where the target language is used by the learner for a communication purpose (goal) in order to achieve an outcome” (Willis, 1996, p. 23). “A task is a language-teaching activity where meaning is primary, there is some kind of gap, students are required to use their own linguistic resources, and there is an outcome other than the display of language for its own sake” (Ellis, 2008, p. 981).

  8. TBLT Framework Pre-task: Introduction of a topic (Impact Issues, Longman)bbbbbb Listening Conversation strategies Discussion questions Task cycle: Skills integration in four classes Recording in pairs Language focus: Transcription Self-evaluation Teacher feedback (Willis, 1996) Pre-task Task cycle Language focus

  9. Review of Literature Little longitudinal research on TBLT was conducted except for Sato & Takahashi (2008) Sato & Takahashi (2008) conducted a three-year long study in a high school using repeated task-based instruction which integrated writing and speaking in particular. Students were engaged in tasks collaboratively and improved both fluency and accuracy.

  10. Research Issue Ellis (2003) raised one issue by saying that “[i]t should be noted that the rationale for task-based syllabuses is largely theoretical in nature, there being little empirical evidence to demonstrate that they are superior to linguistic syllabuses” (p. 210). Moreover, few longitudinal studies were reported at a college level in Japan.

  11. Participants and Teaching Context ・43 first-year university students (two classes-A&B) in Department of English Language Teaching, NUFS. ・DELT was established in 2008 with an integrated English curriculum called CBEC. ・There are 7 English classes. Among them, four classes (D&D, IR, AW, PUT) are integrated according to the same topic. ・Each topic is covered in two weeks. ・The participants’ average score of TOEFL was 420 in April, 2009.

  12. Research Questions 1. How did the students perceive the integrated curriculum and engage in various tasks? 2. How did they view recording/self-evaluation and teacher feedback? 3. How did they improve their communication ability through the integrated curriculum ?

  13. Data Collection 1. Videotaped conversations (12 topics): No.1, 6, and 12 were evaluated by 3 NETs based on the rubric. 2. Essays (12 topics):No.1, 6, and 12 were evaluated by 3 NETs based on the rubric. 3. Self-evaluation reports (twice, at the end of each semester 4. Interviews with 6 selected students from B class (by Sato in Japanese) 5. TOEFL tests (April, January)

  14. 6 selected students (B class)

  15. Essay Evaluation Criteria • Content (15 points) • Organization (5 points) • Vocabulary and Grammar (5 points) • Total: 25 points

  16. Essay Evaluation Criteria Content (15 points possible) • Provides only a small amount of information; ideas present but not developed; not always keeping to the requested topic 6-8 • Provides a pretty fair amount of information; some development of ideas; some ideas lacking supporting detail or evidence 9-12 • Provides lots of information; very thorough; well developed, and stays on the requested topic 13-15

  17. Essay Evaluation Criteria Organization(5 points possible) • Has a clear topic sentence Yes = +1 No = 0 • Has a logical and effective order to the reasons and support Yes = +2 No = 0 • Used transition words and uses them correctly Yes = +1 No = 0 • Has a clear conclusion Yes = +1 No = 0

  18. Essay Evaluation Criteria Vocabulary and Grammar(5 points possible) • Many errors in grammar; word choice; spelling; computer spell check and grammar check ignored 1 • Some errors in grammar; word choice; spelling 2-3 • Almost no errors in grammar, word choice, or spelling: 4-5

  19. Video Evaluation Criteria • Interactive Communication (10 points) • Delivery (5 points) • Content (5 points) Total: 20 points

  20. Video Evaluation Criteria Interactive Communication (10 points) • Initiating/Responding • Initiates and responds appropriately • Development • Maintains and develops the interaction and negotiates towards an outcome with very little support • Use of conversation strategies • Uses CS appropriately

  21. Video Evaluation Criteria Delivery (5 points) • Pronunciation / Intelligibility • Is intelligible • Intonation is generally appropriate • Sentence and word stress is generally accurately placed • Volume • Can be clearly heard • Fluency • Produces extended stretches of language despite some hesitation • Eye contact • Maintains comfortable eye contact

  22. Video Evaluation Criteria Content (5 points) • Cohesive / Coherent • Uses a range of cohesive devices • Relevant • Contributions are relevant despite some repetition • Depth/Extent • Can develop the topic and include support for the reasons

  23. Result (Essay)Total Essay Average (25 points)

  24. Total Essay Content(15 points)

  25. Total Essay Vocabulary & Grammar(5 points)

  26. Total Essay Organization (5 points)

  27. Results (Speaking)Total Video Average(20 points)

  28. Total Video Content (5 points)

  29. Total Video Interactive Communication(10 points)

  30. Total Video: Delivery (5 points)

  31. Improvement Summary

  32. Students A & F Video Sample Topic 1 • Let’s watch a sample video. • What do you notice about: • Interactive communication (IC)? • Initiating and responding • Development • Use of conversation strategies

  33. Student A Video SampleTopic 1 • What do you notice about: • Delivery (D)? • Pronunciation/Intelligibility • Volume • Fluency • Eye contact

  34. Student A Video SampleTopic 1 • What do you notice about: • Content (C)? • Cohesive/coherent • Relevant • Depth / Extent

  35. Student A Video SampleTopic 1 Evaluators’ comments about IC 1: No use of CS except HAY, very mechanical 2: Reading, few CS, little interaction 3: Reading, few CS, no FUQ

  36. Student A Video SampleTopic 1 Evaluators’ comments about delivery 1: Pron. OK, fluency not good if not reading, no eye contact 2: Little eye contact, very stiff, not natural 3: no eye contact, pron. OK, good intonation

  37. Student A Video SampleTopic 1 Evaluators’ comments about content 1: coherent, but just reading, no contrib. outside of “script”; 2: reading, reading 3: relevant, provides some support

  38. Student A Video SampleTopic 12 Let’s watch Student A’s last recording and see how she improved!

  39. Student A Video SampleTopic 12 Evaluators’ comments about IC 1: Great develop. of topic, good shadowing, many CS 2: Managed to negotiate lack of vocab. well, checks partner’s understanding; clarifies/helps partner 3: Lots of CS, listens actively & carefully, helps partner, great interaction

  40. Student A Video SampleTopic 12 Evaluators’ comments about delivery 1: Easy to understand; few mistakes, fluency good, good eye contact 2: clear, intelligible, good inton. good volume, confidence, long cohesive reasons 3:good volume & confidence, self-corrects pron.

  41. Student A Video SampleTopic 12 Evaluators’ comments about content 1: Very coherent & logical; goes into depth; 2: clear & cohesive; nice depth; 3: develops topic well, structures ideas clearly, presents good reasons

  42. Results (Interview) 1. CBEC was fun (all six students). ・It was fun. I could listen to different ideas from my classmates. I could change and deepen my ideas through four integrated classes. (Student D) ・I could share and compare my ideas with my classmates’. Then, I could come up with my new ideas. That’s why I enjoyed the program and I think it was useful. (Student C)

  43. Results (Interview) 2. CBEC was different from HS English classes (all six students). ・There was no pair work in my HS. The teacher mainly talked and checked the answers of the books for university entrance exams. However, it was boring and many students did not listen to the teacher and just did what they wanted to do. (Student B) ・We have to express our opinions in CBEC; however, we just memorized in HS. (Student D)

  44. Results (Interview) 3. Advantages of CBEC (All six students) (1) Developing ideas by sharing ideas with classmates (six students) ・I could develop my ideas through the program. For example, I could learn different ideas from IR and changed my ideas. I sometimes changed my ideas in PUT through listening to others’ ideas. I could choose better ideas by myself. As for “working women,” I had an initial idea that women should continue to work to save money by putting their children to day-care centers. However, someone told me that putting a child to a day-care center costs money. Then, I changed to the idea that women should stay home for one year to raise their babies. (Student A)

  45. Results (Interview) ・We started with D&D on Friday. Then, I thought the topic was difficult and I didn’t like it. Next we came to understand the topic better in IR on Monday. After that, I could rewrite my opinion better by finding more information in AW on Tuesday. Then, I came to like the topic. Finally, in PUT on Thursday I had chances to listen to others’ ideas and were often impressed by others’. I thought they were clear and found the topic more interesting. (Student B) ・I could listen to many ideas from different classmates and expressed my ideas in all four classes. Because there were four classes, I could deepen my understanding about each topic. (Student D)

  46. Results (Interview) (2) Receiving teachers’ feedback (four students) ・I could see if my ideas in writing were good or not by actually communicating them in class. Then, I could receive feedback on my errors from the teacher. It was good that I could receive feedback about the same topic. After that, I rewrote my ideas and received feedback again. I really like the system. I also enjoyed listening to others’ opinions. (Student E)

  47. Results (Interview) (3) Using more conversation strategies (three students) ・I was not good at asking follow-up questions so there were many silences at the beginning. It was a torture. Then, I learned what kinds of questions I should ask through the program and got used to asking follow-up questions. (Student B) ・I could keep talking by using conversation strategies such as shadowing and follow-up questions compared to April. (Student E)

  48. Results (Interview) (4)Learning vocabulary (two students) ・I also learned new vocabulary from news articles in IR. Those new words were useful in writing and speaking. (Student D) ・I came to use new words by encountering them many times. (Student B)

  49. Results (Interview) 4. Topics (four students) ・International marriage and same-sex marriage were difficult because I had never thought about them. I could not find any good reasons and ended up with unclear ideas. (Student D) ・I enjoyed talking about women’s place and capital punishment. As for capital punishment, I thought it was the most difficult one. However, I heard the most ideas from my classmates of the 12 topics and I became interested in it. On the other hand, I had difficulty talking about same-sex marriage because most of the classmates had the same ideas. (Student B)

  50. Results (Interview) 5. Recording/Self-evaluation was effective (five students) ・I could evaluate my ability objectively by watching the video. So it was useful. Also I was glad to see my progress. Through self-evaluation, I could notice my errors and my bad habits. (Student E) ・I hated recording and felt like crying at first because I got stuck and there were many silences. I could not express my ideas and just nodded to my partners. So I didn’t like watching myself in the video. However, I think it was useful because I could set up my next goals. So I think it was useful. (Student D)

More Related