From the content analysis of the teacher interviews and focus group transcripts, two themes emerged: the increased independence of learners and the increased number of one-to-one interactions occurring in the lessons. They indicated that there might be a relationship between using AfL in TEYL and interactions that occur in lessons. Both are discussed in this section.
Theme 5: When AfL was used, learners were able to sustain independent and pair work
144
A. providing scaffolding
‘they get used to this that they’re given steps in what to do and they need this and they want this and they really (1) and it makes them actually complete the whole task rather than shout out finished (1) because they know exactly what they need to do’ (T5/INT)
B. encouraging the learners to become more responsible for own learning
‘first of all they are more responsible for their learning and this is something very very important (1) this is something that when you use AfL really small kids start feeling’ (T3/INT)
‘it was amazing how quickly kids got used to taking some responsibility and when you think about young learners they still don’t have that concept of taking responsibility for their learning until you start using AfL and then somehow it clicks for them so for me that does it (1) I no longer have to be responsible for everything in the classroom when I use AfL’ (T4/INT)
Many teachers reported that by using AfL techniques they were able to create conditions in which students became aware of how to proceed with task completion independently and that this was facilitated in two ways. First, the teachers were able to set tasks which better scaffolded the learners’ work. This meant that the AfL techniques provided the support necessary for students to complete the task at hand. In doing so, it seems that AfL might have facilitated the process of learners acting as instructional mediators for themselves or their peers. The effectiveness of this approach may be explained by Vygotsky’s theory of the zone of proximal development (Section 2.2.2.2). The second process, which teachers identified as an impact of AfL in their lessons, was creating conditions in which even the youngest learners were able to take responsibility for their own learning. This demonstrates how AfL helped to scaffold learning. It also seems to indicate that the roles that teachers and learners played in the lessons changed in the classrooms where AfL was used. In other words, the learners took ownership of their learning such that the teachers were not solely sources of language but became facilitators of language learning. However, fully examining the roles of the teachers and the learners and changes that occurred is beyond the scope of this study but would undoubtedly constitute a worthwhile focus for future research.
145
Theme 5 also resonates with an extract from the focus group (Extract 4.2, below). The focus group data indicated that when learners required less assistance to complete the tasks in hand, the teachers could spend more time interacting on a one-to-one basis with the learners and in doing so could focus on facilitating leaning. This is summarised in Theme 6 below.
Theme 6: Using AfL allowed for a larger number of one-to-one interactions between
teachers, learners and peers.
A. When the students were able to work without a teacher’s help, the teacher could
spend time on monitoring work more effectively and on providing individual support (T-1L interactions).
Extract 4.2
(Focus Group discussion, May 2012, for an extended version see Appendix 27)
[1] T2: with time input from teacher should be smaller (…) because they know their [2] success criteria how to do it or they should be aware of what is expected but I think
[3] at that point monitoring becomes more effective to make sure that they’re actually [4] doing it properly
[5] T4: I think this is a very good point= [6] T1: =yes more time to monitor better (…)
[7] T2: yes and how you would do that is an important element of this discussion [8] when you monitor and how you monitor and what you say to individual students
B. Using AfL enabled the teachers to introduce more pair work in the lessons (L-L
interactions).
‘the one that I also found the most useful has been the learning partners idea (1) obviously there is benefit to the students in taking a bit of the control themselves and in doing that helping each other’ (T4/INT)
‘I used this with primaries mainly to involve more pair work and it sort of helps them get what pair work is about.’ (T7/INT)
C. The students collaborated rather than competed when working together (L-L
146
‘I think the biggest benefit for my groups has been the peer learning working together and not being competitive in their English but being supportive of each other’s learning’ (T1/INT)
Theme 6A seemed to complement Theme 5 by explaining what teachers tended to do when students were working independently. The discussion during the focus group indicated that, in the lessons when AfL was used, teachers had more time to monitor the students’ work (Turn 6). The teachers who participated in the discussion believed that the time could be spent on T-1L types of interaction, offering individual support to the learners (Turns 7-8), thus recognising that the quality of such interactions was important (Turn 8).
Themes 6B and 6C offered insights into the teachers’ reflections about the relationship between L-L interactions and the use of AfL. Theme 6B suggested that using AfL techniques made it more possible, or perhaps easier, for teachers to introduce pair work activities in TEYL classrooms hence naturally increasing the number of L-L interactions. Whereas Theme 6C indicated that what happened during L-L interactions was perceived by teachers as collaborating to complete a task together and not competing with each other. This finding may also provide some explanation as to why the learners were able to sustain pair work for longer (Theme 5). They did so by collaborating and supporting each other in completing tasks.
The findings reported in the current section have pointed to a possible relationship between the use of AfL and interactions in TEYL classrooms. Empirical findings about the impact of AfL on the interactions are reported in Part Three of the current chapter.