Towards an evidence-based language curriculum at KMUTT

1. Towards an evidence-based language curriculum at KMUTT

2. 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s EST Self-access Task-based ??? History of language education at KMUTT

3. Basis for curriculum decisions • Currently decisions about curriculum revision are based on beliefs and feelings, not evidence. • Alternatives: • Basing decisions on clear principles • Basing decisions on evidence

4. Principle-based curriculum decisions • Example: Evaluation of course assessment • Principles for evaluation: 3 theoretical constructs important in assessment: validity, reliability, practicality • Problem: Still reliant on evaluator’s beliefs • About what principles to use • Applying the principles • Limited number of focuses with generally agreed principles

5. Evidence-based language education • “The integration of professional wisdom with the best available empirical evidence in making decisions about how to deliver instruction” • (Whitehurst, 2003 quoted in Moran, 2004: 4)

6. Sources of evidence • Advice from effective teachers • But who is an effective teacher? • General published research leading to lists of best practices • Meta-analyses • Large-scale multiple-location studies • Lists of best practices derived from synthesising research • Research conducted at KMUTT

7. General research for best practices • Meta-analyses • Task-based teaching, especially where a linguistic feature is essential for completing the task, aids acquisition (Keck et al. 2006) • Strategy training can be effective where the number of strategies trained is limited to less than eight (Plonsky, 2011) • Explicit teaching of reading strategies helps reading comprehension, especially for students of university age (Taylor et al., 2006)

8. General research for best practices • Large-scale multiple-location studies • The most effective teachers are ‘class enquirers’ who emphasise whole-class interactive teaching • Use of challenging tasks • Ensuring that students have some responsibility and independence

9. General research for best practices • Syntheses of research explicitly identifying best practices (for writing) • Process writing is an effective approach to teaching writing • Writing strategies should be taught • Collaborative student writing is effective • Tasks should have high but realistic expectations • Students write (and learn writing) best when they are writing for a real audience and purpose and when their writing is shared (e.g. by publishing it) • Feedback on writing should be given on multiple drafts and is most effective when selective in the errors treated • Feedback should be provided from multiple sources

10. Research at KMUTT • 2005-2015: 30 studies • Findings concern: • teaching objectives • classroom practice • classroom interaction • administration

11. Research at KMUTT • Teaching objectives • Employers of KMUTT graduates use TOEIC • Students are weakest at writing • Classroom practice • Peer feedback is effective (using Facebook?) • Collaborative writing is beneficial (using Google Docs?) • Student work should have real-world impacts

12. Research at KMUTT • Classroom interaction • Use meaning-focused referential questions • Use L2 for most purposes • Administration • Student learning drops when classes are larger than 25, and drops again above 45 • Need systems to provide evidence

13. Evidence-based findings • A task-based element should be retained in the curriculum. • These tasks should be challenging and encourage student responsibility and independence. • Strategy training should be included, although only a limited number of strategies should be covered. • A substantial part of the teaching-learning process should be based around whole-class interactive teaching incorporating meaning-focused referential questions. • Writing needs to be emphasised in the curriculum. • Writing can be taught through a process writing approach, and writing tasks should be aimed at a real audience with some form of publication. Some tasks may involve collaborative writing (possibly using Google Docs). • Opportunities should be provided for students to receive feedback from multiple sources, including peer feedback (possibly using Facebook).

14. Curriculum approach • Majority of findings at the level of curriculum approach i.e. large-scale decisions that concern the way teaching is delivered in the classroom

15. Future directions • Implementing the 7 evidence-based findings • Some curriculum approach findings already used in some courses • Add to other courses? • Changes involve course manuals for teachers

16. Future directions • Identifying key areas to address • Teaching of speaking • Use of formative assessment • Need for more sources of evidence • Need for more findings from existing sources • Need for more research studies

17. Future directions • Need for more sources of evidence • Missing source of evidence: Advice from effective teachers • Use student evaluations of teachers? • Other ways of identifying effective teachers?

18. Future directions • Need for more findings from existing sources • Further searching for general research for best practices • Wider collection of KMUTT-based research (e.g. MA theses) • Expand coverage to similar Thai universities?

19. Future directions • Need for more research studies • Conduct a coherent set of research studies at KMUTT focused on identifying beneficial curriculum approaches • Possibility of a seminar and book as with the task-based approach (2001)

20. Work to do • Agree on the use of an evidence-based approach as the future direction for the undergraduate language curriculum • Implement changes to course manuals for the 7 key findings already identified • Enlarge the knowledge base • Identify effective teachers and collect advice • Further searching for best practices from the literature • Collate evidence from MA theses • Identify best practices from Thai publications outside KMUTT • Conduct new research to identify best practices