Helping Learners Think for Themselves: A Task-Based Approach to Teaching Critical Writing

1. Helping Learners Think for Themselves:A Task-Based Approach to Teaching Critical Writing Maria Luz Elena N. Canilao Department of English, School of Humanities Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines lcanilao@ateneo.edu, elenacanilao@yahoo.com

2. How can I enhance the critical thinking and communication skills of students that will help them in developing substantial argumentative research papers? • How can I give students a sense of purpose in argumentative research paper writing? • How can I make them more aware of the current political, socio-cultural, economic, and environmental issues that affect the Philippines and the world through the process of research?

3. How can I encourage them to take a stand, become proactive, and solution-oriented about current issues? • How can I motivate students to engage in the research process and make it enjoyable for them?

4. Mission and Vision of the Ateneo de Manila University As a University, the Ateneo de Manila seeks to preserve, extend, and communicate truth and apply it to human development and the preservation of the environment. As a Filipino University, the Ateneo de Manila seeks to identify and enrich Philippine culture and make it its own. Through the education of the whole person…the University aims to contribute to the development goals of the nation. As a Catholic University, the Ateneo de Manila seeks to form persons who…will devote their lives to the service of others and, through the promotion of justice, serve especially those who are most in need of help, the poor and the powerless…. (Ateneo de Manila University Loyola Schools Faculty Manual, 2002, p. 2)

5. The Ateneo advocates the student-centered learning framework that emphasizes active participation, cooperative learning, and student empowerment (Ang, Gonzalez, Liwag, Santos, Vistro-Yu, 2001).

6. Effective Principles and Practices in the Areas of Writing, Critical Language Awareness, and Task-Based Language Teaching

7. “The writer is a lonely figure cut off from the stimulus and corrective of listeners.” - Rosen (1981 cited in Hedge, 1988, p. 5) “Compared with speech, effective writing requires a number of things: a high degree of organization... a high degree of accuracy...the use of complex grammatical devices for focus and emphasis; and a careful choice of vocabulary, grammatical patterns, and sentence structures...” - Hedge (1988, p. 5)

8. …We had realized that there is no one simple solution to how to write: different people do it in different ways in different circumstances. We discovered that it is not wrong to go backwards or forwards from one bit of text to another, or to start planning all over again when you are half-way through a draft: the writing process is of its nature recursive… - Clark and Ivanic (1991, p. 172)

9. The Process Approach • Pre-Writing Stage • Writing Stage • Rewriting Stage • Post-writing Stage • Publishing Stage (Hedge, 1988; Raimes, 1983)

10. Supports and Aids • Context • Peer-editing • Group Work • Fun factor (Raimes, 1983; Fleming, 1988; Hedge,1988; Hadfield and Hadfield,1990; Canilao, 1997 )

11. Critical Language Awareness • Why is this topic being written about? • How is the topic being written about? • What other ways of writing about the topic are there? • Who is writing to whom? • What is the topic? (Kress, 1989 cited in Wallace, 1992; Wallace, 1992)

12. Critical language awareness (CLA) is the heightened understanding of what language signifies and how language works. Enhancing it entails the process of identifying the relationship of language to one’s identity, one’s culture, and one’s world. It involves the honing of the mind in comprehending the power of language that may either build walls or build bridges. The whole point of promoting CLA in the classroom is to HELP LEARNERS THINK FOR THEMSELVES. Critical reading is the science of understanding, interpreting, analyzing, and evaluating texts effectively. It enables the readers to unveil the various layers and dimensions of the language used in the texts being tackled. Critical writing is the art of painting words to create a meaningful picture that challenges the readers to think and question and motivates them to create pictures of their own. It is the product of critical reading that requires a comprehensive analysis of topics, issues, or texts. How I describe CLA, Critical Reading, and Critical Writing

13. How can critical language awareness be enhanced effectively in the writing classroom? • Using authentic communication activities that focus on meaning and provide opportunities for learners to use the language in a lifelike context (Littlewood, 2003) • Using the three generations of tasks based on the framework and examples of Ribé and Vidal (1993 cited in Littlewood, 2003)

14. first generation tasks focus on communicative development (e.g. providing a situation that requires the use of polite expressions in asking directions) second generation tasks focus on communicative development and cognitive development (e.g. asking students to conduct interviews, gather data, and report their findings); and

15. third generation tasks focus on communicative development, cognitive development, and global personality development (e.g. providing venues for students and teachers to brainstorm on an issue such as the environment; grouping students according to common interests and asking them to research on their areas of interests and present their findings; asking students to evaluate the activity) (Ribé and Vidal, 1993 cited in Littlewood, 2003)

16. The Materials Design Model (Hutchinson and Waters, 1987) • Input • Content-Focus Activities • Language-Focus Activities • Task

17. MY FORMULA C + GW + PAW x CLA + TBLT = REALM Learning Experience [Context + Group Work + Process Approach to Writing x Critical Language Awareness +Task-Based Language Teaching = Relevant, Enjoyable, Active, Lifelike, and Meaningful Learning Experience]

18. Strategy: Use oral communication tasks (informal debates; formal debates; formal speeches)

19. Making a Difference in the 21st Century • Context Pretend that you are members of the Philippine Youth Council (PYC) that has been commissioned by the government to propose bills that will help in the improvement of the country’s social, political, economic, environmental, and/or cultural conditions. You belong to various cause-oriented parties and you work together to come up with significant, effective, and feasible solutions to particular problems that the country faces today.

20. Stages • STAGE 1: FORMING CAUSE-ORIENTED PARTIES • STAGE 2: TAKING A STAND • STAGE 3: PRESENTING AND INTERPRETING DATA • STAGE 4: PREPARING FOR INTERVIEWS AND MINI-SURVEYS • STAGE 5: PREPARING THE TENTATIVE OUTLINE • STAGE 6: DEVELOPING THE INTRODUCTION • STAGE 7: REVISING THE OUTLINE • STAGE 8: DEVELOPING THE DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION • STAGE 9: PREPARING FOR THE PYC DEBATE • STAGE 10: PRESENTING THE PROPOSAL AND SUBMITTING THE PAPERS

21. Feedback of Students on the Use of Oral Communication Tasks in the Argumentative Research Paper Module • Total Number of Respondents: 117 • Period: 2nd sem SY 2005-2006 (60 students); 2nd sem SY 2006-2007 (57 students) • Sections: En12 SO9; En12R34; EN12R14; EN12R40 • Profile of students: male and female first year and second year college students from various business, math, science, humanities, and social sciences courses; age range - 16 to 19; proficiency level in communication- average and above average

22. 1. Participating in informal and structured debates enhanced their a. critical thinking skills. b. political and socio-cultural awareness. c. listening skills. d. speaking skills. e. research skills. Majority (more than 70%) of the respondents indicated that

23. 2. Being in a team that had a “common cause” (general topic for the debate/research) a. helped them in defining their own research topics. b. lessened their fear in doing research work. c. made research work more enjoyable.

24. 3. The PYC debate was a. a challenging experience. b. a worthwhile experience. c. an exciting experience.

25. Majority of the respondents (89%) stated that they would recommend that the oral communication tasks be incorporated in the research component of En12.

26. We were able to practice our speaking skills and talk (argue) about certain issues and topics important to us. We got to express our own thoughts; learned more techniques in researching; it was nice to experience speaking in front of a crowd and having them listen to you. I liked the fact that I’ve learned a lot of things and that I boosted my confidence as a person. I learned how to speak in front of people without much fear. I liked the PYC debate especially the open forum because it allowed us to really debate and voice out our ideas; the two-minute speech (individual) was also great because it was fun and challenging. I enjoyed the PYC debate although it was a bit unnerving particularly because it was a refreshing change from paperwork. Items the respondents liked in the argumentation/research/oral communication tasks and activities: (+)

27. The procedure for research was made that much more colorful and interesting. I enjoyed the oral tasks because we were given a chance and opportunity to share our proposal. I think the idea of having a “group” lessened the fear and helped very much in practicing/preparing for the speeches. done by groups but still involved a lot of individual effort I liked the idea of having a party with a “common cause.” The grouping was cool because we could help each other out. democratic deadlines from Mrs. Beckham [Ms. Canilao] The tasks and activities were organized and followed according to schedule. These tasks somehow make the research and oral activities easier.

28. The whole process was taken in steps so everything was organized. regular evaluation I like the feedback for the research paper. It opened my mind to a lot of things that are happening in our country today; it taught me how to research better; it made me less ignorant. became more socially aware; made me more responsible (which I liked) Everyone was free to choose a topic; team names; everyone was able to present their proposal I liked the fact that we were given freedom in these things. I do not have any dislikes for I think all activities and tasks led only to the improvement of my paper.

29. Time was too short. I disliked the time pressure (every due date) The time that I had spent in working for my research paper ate up a lot of time but it was worthwhile. too much workload very tiring. Hehehe  The debates we had before the research making became sort of a hassle to prepare for especially since it was held weekly. Actually, the only thing I didn’t like was the need for a really, really detailed and comprehensive research. Well, I think that it’s required for us to do it in order to really strengthen and substantiate our papers.  Items the respondents did not like in the argumentation/research/oral communication tasks and activities: (-)

30. Paperwork is exhausting yet necessary… very tedious work; gets frustrating sometimes. Haha It was scary and it made me nervous; it was so time consuming and hard; people asking questions about your topic. the nervous jitters I experience before my speech snooty, annoying people who bash other groups’ proposals  the bibliography/note card was tedious even if it was necessary Resources for certain topics were hard to come by The PYC was quite formal (in terms of clothing) and there was not enough time for questions during the debate. 2 mins only for individual speeches (2x) I didn’t like the fact that we had a common cause/general topic because my choice for a topic was limited Choosing own group mates

31. Yes, it helps students in oral and organizational skills; also enhances listening skills. Yes, because it will enhance the communication/research skills of the students which is vital in the real world today. Yes, it definitely supplements our learning experience. Yes. It is an opportunity to practice our speaking skills and a way of confirming that we know our topic. It prepares students in making a good research/argumentative paper. Yes. Because it gives sense to the research that we have done. Yes, for sharing of knowledge, etc. Would you recommend that oral communication tasks (informal debates and PYC debate) be included in the research component of En12? [YES!]

32. Yes, it integrates written and oral skills and elevates research to a higher cause: social good. Research itself should be for a purpose and PYC debates created that purpose. Yes. Research entails communicating and sharing one’s findings. Yes. It can be more effective than having regular, individual work since there are more group interactions and more chances for people to be heard out. Yes, makes research paper writing more meaningful. Yes, because it gives students more experience in speaking in public and it trains the students to research well about their topics. Yes. Because it will help in formulating a better research paper.

33. Yes, because the oral tasks greatly affected our performance in writing the research paper (with respect to preparedness in data, etc.) Yes, I think it is very beneficial. By having a debate, it requires that you be prepared and more active in all activities. Yes because the PYC debate helped us change our outlook on research paper writing as a daunting task. Yes, because it can help us stand for our cause and develop our skills more. It also allows us to be more open regarding the topics/proposals. Yes; good practice; shows how well you know and can defend a paper Yes. Because through the debates, the proposal/research papers were somehow improved and further clarified/illustrated.

34. Yes, because this actually helps the researcher understand his/her research topic more. Communicating your opinions and expressing your beliefs can actually help you evaluate the logic with which your topic is based on. Also, this can boost up your confidence on your argumentative skills. Yes. It developed us in speaking better and in having confidence in our own research papers. Yes. It is a more efficient way of evaluating what we have learned from research. Yes. This will help in focusing more on the research topic. Yes, because it helped a lot in the thorough discussion of the topic at hand and allowed the researchers to be more critical. Yes, it develops a lot of things---from writing a good paper to be presented to becoming aware of the outside world. I recommend that the debates be included in the research component because it gives the whole class an understanding of the research of others.

35. Yes. Sobra [Extremely]! Memorable hardships and giggles guaranteed Yes. It makes learning En12 challenging and fun. Yes. It made the research paper more fun and worthwhile. I would recommend it. The PYC was fun and made us bond with our group mates. The oral component provided the students with a respite from the mind-numbing mechanical dredging of research and should definitely be included. Yes because it would make the research paper more useful and fun. Yes, I believe that it is a unique experience to be able to work together /help each other in the research paper; makes things fun and easy. Yes, because it was a great experience to belong to a group during a debate. There are others you can relate to.

36. No. It doesn’t really connect with research. Since En12 is about research then the oral shouldn’t be part of the research paper. It’s good that it’s part of the curriculum though. No, I wouldn’t recommend that the oral comm. task be part of the research component. Students will not enjoy it as much since it may/might greatly affect their class standings/grades. It would probably be a good idea to separate these debates from the research component so as not to make the compartmentalization of grades not seem so steep; I think it is important to have a core team to ensure the smooth flow of the PYC debates. No. The research paper is enough hassle in itself. No because I like individual tasks better than group efforts…(judges are also students…??) Would you recommend that oral communication tasks (informal debates and PYC debate) be included in the research component of En12? [NO!]

37. No, because they are an entirely different thing from research which is paper work. Debates and PYC test different skills. • No, because research is heavy already. But I would like the informal debates and PYC debate to be supplementary to this. • Actually, I find the debate more relevant than the research paper. What students really need is the skill to talk in public for oral defenses. The research paper has too many needless details.

38. The task-based approach to critical writing may be an effective means of motivating and challenging learners to think for themselves. The use of lifelike tasks may be considered in providing a clear context for writing. The incorporation of oral communication tasks that provide students opportunities to evaluate language and use it appropriately may be done to enhance their critical thinking skills. The research process may be less daunting and more appealing by forming research teams or groups. The results may be considered in evaluating research writing courses or program. Many students stated that they benefited from debating, sharing their findings, and listening to their classmates’ findings. Therefore, course and program evaluators and designers may consider integrating oral communication components in writing courses. The results suggest the importance of training teachers in the use of TBLT in enhancing CLA in the classroom. What do their responses indicate?

39. Ang, Rodolfo P., Gonzalez, Ma. Celeste T, Liwag, Ma. Emma Concepcion D., Santos, Benilda, & Vistro-Yu, Catherine P. (2001). Elements of student-centered earning. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Loyola Schools. Ateneo de Manila University Loyola Schools. (2002). Faculty manual (2002 ed.). Quezon City, Philippines: Author. Canilao, MLE. (1997). Facilitating writing activities through the small group work approach in the Philippine public secondary school context. Unpublished manuscript, Lancaster University. Clark, Romy & Ivanic, Roz. (1991). Consciousness-raising about the writing process. In C.N. Candlin (Gen. Ed.); Carl James & Peter Garrett (Eds.) Language awareness in the classroom. New York: Longman, Inc Fleming, M. (1988). Getting out of the writing vacuum. Focus on Collaborative Learning. USA: National Council of Teachers of English. 77-84. Hadfield, C. and Hadfield J. (1990). Writing games. UK: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. References

40. Hedge, T. (1988). Writing. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. Hutchinson, Tom & Waters, Alan. (1987). English for specific purposes. UK: Cambridge Univ. Press. Littlewood, William. (2003). Task-based language teaching: principles and practice. The ACELT Journal, 7:1, 3-12. Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. England: Oxford Univ. Press. Ribé, R. and Vidal, N. (1993). Project Work: Step by Step. Oxford: Heinemann. Wallace, Catherine. (1992). Critical literacy awareness in the EFL classroom. In Norman Fairclough (Ed.), Critical language awareness (pp. 59-92). New York: Longman Publishing.