Development of Productive Skills and Language ego through pair work and teacher-student interaction

Texto completo

(1)Development of Productive Skills and Language ego through pair work and teacher-student interaction. Karin Letizia Olguín Villegas 1. ABSTRACT: The objective of this article is to promote the concept of “language ego” and “foreign language anxiety” and its importance in the development of productive skills as well as in teacher-student interaction. Some authors have already stablished teacher-student interaction as a fundamental element in language learning and teaching (Brown, 2011; Scrivener, 2005; Wubbels, T. et al., 2006) but how this can be fought in a vulnerable teaching-learning context, that is the question. This article attempts to show an experience of this sort. It also promotes the integration of the four skills with an emphasis on productive skills in an EFL context as our Chilean th classrooms. This experience came from the implementation of a pedagogical unit to a 9 grade which had English lessons in the English room of their subsidised school –equipped with sound system, Internet access, a projector, among other elements – but despite having all this, their language learning did not reflect it.. Key words: productive skills, pair work, language ego. In the Chilean context, the English language teaching-learning process usually takes the form of the Grammar Translation method and/ or it is translated into the teacher following English textbook guidelines (Mckay, 2003). But this approach to the English language teaching-learning process could not be farther from the Chilean reality as well as our postmodern times, in the sense that, learners need an English class that takes into account their social context interweaving it with their personal interest for the learning to take place (Mckay, 2003). This type of methodology can reach all Chilean students when teacher are made aware of the importance of their role in the English language teaching-learning process (Mckay, 2003).. 1. BA in English Language and Literature from Universidad de Chile, senior student of Pedagogy for professionals at Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Professional Practice Workshop guided by state English teacher from Universidad de Playa Ancha and Med from Universidad Alberto Hurtado Alicia Páez Ubilla, 2016.. 1.

(2) 1. Theoretical Framework The following concepts are going to be addressed in this section to fully understand the implementation’s development: Communicative Language Teaching, Integrated Skills, Productive Skills, EFL context, foreign language anxiety, teacher’s role, language ego, Collaborative work, pair work, and Communicative Systems Approach. The Chilean curricula states to be aligned with the Communicative Approach: “(…) [la] visión de integración, además de estar alineada con el enfoque comunicativo, presenta el idioma de una forma más natural, más cercana (…)” (Bases Curriculares, 2013, p. 246). Therefore, it supports the idea that language learners have the ability to interact with others creating meaning or using language in a creative manner, and this being distinct from their ability to recite dialogues or performed in grammatical tests (Savignon, 1997). The Chilean curricula also states that “Los objetivos de aprendizaje de [las] Bases Curriculares han sido organizados (…) en función de las cuatro habilidades del idioma inglés (…)” (Bases Curriculares, 2013, p. 246), which means it considers the new trend of ‘the whole language’ paradigm to be the right path in the teaching of a foreign language. In other words, the Chilean curricula asserts that the English teaching process should be taken forward by applying the ‘integrated four-skills’ methodology in order to assure students greater motivation as well as retention of effective principles of reading, writing, listening, and speaking (Brown, 2011). Although, not long ago the Ministry’s perspective was totally the opposite specifying that 40% of the English curricula had to “be devoted to developing reading comprehension” (Mckay, 2003, p. 141) in contrast to the 20% for speaking and writing. In relation to the latter, the development of the productive skills –speaking and writing– has become a must-do objective in the Chilean classroom because of the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context in which students do not encounter the studied language outside their classroom (Brown, 2011; Ellis, 1994). And, it must be considered that the most commonly used method for English Language Teaching (ELT) in this context is not necessarily Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in spite of having the Ministry’s recommendations on the matter (Mckay, 2003). Having said what an EFL context is, it is important to consider what is known as ‘foreign language anxiety’ as well as ‘language ego’. The first, refers to the feelings of tension and nervousness that people undergo when exposed to a foreign language learning situation inside a classroom (Horwitz, K., Horwitz, M., Cope, J., 1986). And the latter, alludes to having a second identity which is constituted by a new way of behaving, feeling, and thinking. These lead the learners to “a sense of fragility, a defensiveness, and a raising of inhibitions” (Brown. 2011, p. 61) and they may experience an identity crisis, however, it is important to inform them that this development of a second self is a completely natural and normal process (Brown, 2011). Furthermore, the learners’ language ego state can help the teacher determine “who to call on, how ‘tough’ to be with a student, who to ask to volunteer information” (Brown, 2011, p. 62) among many other considerations a teacher has to go through in the everyday classroom management.. 2.

(3) As it was implied above, the role of the teacher is fundamental when dealing with learners’ anxiety towards language learning. In that sense, there is one role2 the teacher should embody in that situation according to Scrivener (2005): the enabler. The teacher is supposed to know how learners are feeling in the class as a group and as individuals; the teacher should be able to respond to this by “building effective working relationships and a good classroom atmosphere” (Scrivener, 2005, p. 6) through her personality and attitude being able to encourage student learning. In a concrete manner, the teacher can contribute to lowering the students’ anxiety through implementing a not threatening form of Collaborative work mixed with teacher’s mediation: pair work. In other words, you can have the benefits of Collaborative work –as the peer tutoring and criticism, not forgetting that learners assimilate “their ideas through interacting with others” (Golub, 1988, p. 1) – but with a format that allows learners to experience the group work as much as to perform in a low anxiety environment, in addition to teacher’s mediation in some low self-esteem contexts where the learners need to be made aware of their own knowledge for them to actually undertake any activity presented by the teacher (Brown, 2011). In this respect, one fundamental element for the teaching-learning process to take place comes to the scene: teacher-student interaction. When the teaching-learning process is considered to be successful is thought to be because of either the great teaching strategies and methodology of the teacher or that the students were highly motivated with the subject (Wubbels, T. et al., 2006). Nevertheless, there is the teacher-student interaction factor to be taken into account which is very well explained through the Communicative Systems Approach (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967 in Wubbels, T. et al., 2006) which proposes communication to be “every behaviour that someone displays in the presence of someone else” (Wubbels, T. et al., 2006, p. 3). It focuses on the effects that a specific person’s behaviour can have on others, especially the non-verbal ones; therefore, teachers’ behaviour towards learners “can be considered a form of communication” (Wubbels, T. et al., 2006) crucial for the teaching-learning process to be successful.. 2. Diagnosis of the school and the 9th grade The diagnosis was developed to analyse the 9th grade teaching-learning environment, this class belongs to a Catholic School Society. The school states in their PEI (2016): “Proponemos los Valores Cristianos para nuestro Colegio, como estilos de vida, donde el amor a la persona, el respeto y aceptación, hacen visibles la presencia del Dios que consuela”. It is a subsidized school where the students’ parents complete a payment that can go from CLP$10.001 to CLP$25.000; this payment does not correspond to the student’s tuition which is free (Ministry of Education, 2016). This school is a technical and vocational school with a single area of studies: Accountancy. In this respect, it is worth mentioning that the Accounting Teacher developed a project where students from 11th grade could receive lessons of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) from The British 2. Scrivener calls them ‘kinds of teachers’ in relation to teaching styles which is different from the perspective taken in this article. This article considers teachers to take on different facets depending on the specific characteristics the class s/he is teaching, therefore, ‘the enabler’ from Scrivener is a role.. 3.

(4) Institute using the financial aid from SEP – from next year on, the 12th grade will be also included. As far as the English SIMCE is concerned, 11th grade students have improved their score from a 45 in 2010, to a 96 in 2012 resulting in a 0,074% of all students were certified. In relation to the student and the 9th grade profile, there are a total of 2,082 in the school and this class is constituted by 45 students higher than the school average of 41 (Ministry of Education, 2016). This class has one student who has openly declared her wishes to study English at a university level (over-achiever student); there are other five students who also do well in the class (classroom observation throughout the whole semester); and more than half the class has stated to find Speaking the most difficult language ability according to the students’ survey applied in June, 2016 (which will be dealt with in the next section). Regarding teaching practice in the classroom, it can be said that the English lessons take place in the English room which is equipped with sound system, a projector, a computer with Internet access, a bookcase full of English-Spanish dictionaries as well as old English text books. The lesson is focused on the Grammar Translation method in which the L1 is the main communication media leaving the target language only to be use in 30% of the times (class observation throughout the semester) which translates into no consistent input for the students as well as in a lot of translation exercises from the L1 to the L2 – “Quiero que me traduzcan las oraciones, es un super buen ejercicio” (Bitácora, April 25th, 2016). In relation to teacher – student / student – student interaction, it is worth mentioning that there was barely any student – student interaction as part of the class design, there was only one group assignment in the whole semester, and three pair work formative assessments focused on reading; the teacher – student interaction was also barely present in the class observation period and the one it was observed was lacking an interpersonal perspective. What was present in all the sessions observed was a teacher-centred classroom in which the teacher developed a lecture about that day’s grammatical topic (Scrivener, 2005). Furthermore, the teacher’s attitude towards the learners throughout the semester shows a low language ego in the students which is evidenced in the following quotation: “P: La claúsula ‘–s’, ‘-es’ se usan con todos los verbos que terminen en consonante. E: Profesor, no entiendo. P: Se ocupa en todos los verbos que no terminen en vocal, es decir, lo tienen que ocupar cuando los verbos terminen en B, C, D, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N (…) ¿No sabe rd cuáles son las vocales? Pero si las ven en kínder básico” (Bitácora, May 23 , 2016). 2.1 Initial student’s survey The students were asked to answer an anonymous survey which had the objective of finding out their preferences in sports, music in English, what they like to do in their leisure time, as well as, what they thought to be the best working modality (individually, in pairs, in groups) for them, what past activity they considered to be most useful in learning English, and they were also asked to order the language skills 1 to 4 in relation to what they thought to be their weakest to the strongest point (the survey sample can be found in the Appendix 1).. 4.

(5) The results of the survey showed that 80% of students considered speaking as their weakest skill, the remaining 20% was divided between an approximately 10% that thought writing as their weakest point, 7% thought all skills were their weakest ones and another 3% considered all skills as their strongest points. The survey also showed that 70% of students liked doing sports, spending time with friends and playing computer games; and the other 30% liked to sleep, sing, play an instrument, and ride a bike in their leisure time. In balance, considering all the information gathered, the following preliminary conclusions were made in order to develop the unit planning: the teaching - learning environment of the 9th grade seems to be needing a more student – centred class, together with a Productive Skill class design with an emphasis on Speaking through the teaching of chunks in a stem based model included in a guided practice before they can achieve a free stem speech (Brown, 2011). And the following learning challenges were posted for the learners:    . A sense of purpose for the English class An opportunity to participate in the English class A sense of achievement Opportunities to obtain good grades in the English class that reflect their learning. 3. The Implementation – Didactic decisions 3.1 Description of the unit The general guidelines for the planning were taken from the national curricula for 9th grade, unit 3 “Young people’s lives in other countries” was implemented on the basis of integration of the four skills and with the objective of creating and performing a short dialogue (12 interchanges) to promote productive skills performance through pair work. The content of the unit was adapted to some of the students’ preferences obtained in the survey; the study programme proposes as related vocabulary to young people’s lifestyle the topics of ‘summer camps’ and ‘outdoor activities’, among others. The summer camps topic was presented in relation to video games and popular teenager topic vocabulary through a selection of five ‘insane summer camps’ which were called ‘Zombie camp’, ‘Hunger Games camp’, ‘Ninja camp’, ‘Circus camp’, and ‘Wizards & Warriors camp’. In the case of outdoor activities, these were adapted to the learners’ context considering what activities they really might have done or may be able to perform –fly a kite, have a picnic, ride a bike, go swimming, ride a horse –, and to not limit their horizons, some activities they already knew the name in English and/or may find interesting for the adrenaline factor such as bungee jumping, snowboarding, scuba diving, mountaineering, among other. In the case of grammatical content, the use of modal verbs ‘may’ and ‘might’ in predicting future events was covered with time expressions specific to the topics that were dealt with, as ‘next summer’, ‘next summer holidays’, ‘next winter holidays’; and for the relative clause markers proposed by the study programme, only ‘when’ was really dealt with and very well covered in the two vocabulary topics presented to the learners. The phonological aspect was not considered in the implementation, despite being suggested in the study programme, because considering the shortness of the implementation and the survey results on learners acknowledging speaking as their weakest skill, to focus on pronunciation accuracy was going to be against the ultimate objective of developing the productive skills, especially speaking. 5.

(6) In relation to the development of the productive skills, speaking and writing, a guided practice perspective was used as well as stem based chunks and dialogues in every activity throughout the implementation for learners to build their language ego by fully developing the activities themselves. In the case of seating arrangement, a different seating chart had to be implemented because of disciplinary reasons and to fully achieve an adequate atmosphere to develop the lessons. 3.2 Lessons The implementation was constituted by nine lessons of ninety minutes each (having two lessons per week) and were developed along four weeks from August 18th to September 15th. All lessons were composed of the following sections: Introduction, Motivation, Modelling, Independent Practice, and Closing. Moreover. Each lesson included the strategy of SHOW objective –meaning the Objective is Student centred, it expresses the When and the How learners are going to achieve the intended goal of the lesson –; a word bank where the vocabulary meant for the students learning and usage in the lesson is shown throughout the class; a vocabulary section where new words that could be needed or mentioned during the development of the class were added; and, the class routine, which consisted on asking the learners each class date, what time was at the time of the class, alter on the question about the weather was added to the lessons (what is the weather like today?), and finally, asking some student to read the objective in English and all together deciphering its meaning in Spanish to fully comprehend the class objective (a sample of the class planning can be found in the Appendix 2). 3.3 Assessment Three different instruments were developed: two rubrics and one checklist. The first rubric was designed to assess the students’ first assignment, the creation and performance of a dialogue based on a stem dialogue about their favourite summer camps, the reason why they liked it, and what other summer camp they might/may participate next holidays. The assessment contemplated class work (whether the learners worked on the handouts and the completion of it in class), the use of the vocabulary dealt with in class, the modality of the assignment (if the learners worked in pairs as it was required). This instrument was not originally intended for the implementation, it had to be designed mainly because the learners showed so little language ego that were unable to perform the dialogue in class. The second instrument applied was also a rubric and it was designed to assess the second assignment: the writing of a post in a blog on Internet. In this assignment the learners had to write about past holidays in which they had done some of the outdoor activities seen in class, and to share what outdoor activity they might/may do next holidays (summer or winter). The instrument contemplated the reading comprehension activity done in class –as part of the first encounter with the format of the text –, the writing of the five sections of the text that were divided into two lesson of the class, and finally, the writing of the post in the blog online. The third instrument was a checklist, but originally it was considered to be a rubric as well. This instrument was thought to be applied to the final dialogue which was meant to be created by the students without a stem provided by the teacher. Decisions had to be made in this matter because only a few pair of students actually completed the assignment and instead of applying a 6.

(7) rubric only a checklist was applied at the end (all instruments can be found in the Appendix 3, 4, 5). 3.4 Learning results Only the last instrument results were not conclusive, considering just a few pair of students submitted it, it was not possible to arrive at the conclusion the students had learn the vocabulary and the content seen throughout the implementation, but the other two instruments were successful enough. The first rubric showed students were able to use the vocabulary seen in class as it was meant to by the teacher, and students showed great motivation to do the recording of the stem- based dialogue. The second rubric produced similar positive results, but in this case, the assignment that was being assessed was more complex and students were able to write their own post following a simple stem text applying the vocabulary as well as the modal verbs seen in class on the bog online, and they also showed great excitement about their writing. Students obtain good marks in both assignments going from the 5,5 to the 7,0, and only a few students who did not handed in the assignment got marks lower than the minimal 4,0. 4. Analysis of the Implementation The goals of the implementation were to stablish a more student – centred class, together with a Productive Skill class design with an emphasis on Speaking through the teaching of chunks in a stem based model included in a guided practice before achieving a free stem speech. Likewise, four learning challenges were proposed to the students: a sense of purpose for the English class, an opportunity to participate in the English class, a sense of achievement, and opportunities to obtain good grades in the English class that reflect their learning. A student-centred classroom was not really achieved although students’ participation was greatly increased. This can be explained by the students’ very low language ego because they were not ready for too much prominence in the classroom, they had to be guided through the process of developing speaking and writing taking baby steps. This was done by the application of the guided practice and the stem-based dialogues and texts. Furthermore, students did move forward in their speaking development process because they lost the fear of uttering words and short sentences in English reflected on the increase of students’ participation and enthusiasm during the lessons. In relation to having opportunities to obtain good grades in the English class was also achieved because the majority of the class obtain good grades in the assignments. The final evaluation (recording of a dialogue) was completed only by a few students. One of the reasons of this was because the deadline was after the end of the implementation, therefore students knew there was not going to be any real repercussion in their English class if they did not submit their last assignment – considering the end of the implementation meant to return to their normal English class with their school teacher in charge. A second reason, which complemented the first, is that the last session with the class was done in the computer lab and it was meant to be the end of the implementation as well as the final stage in the assessment process, the process finished there that is why the students did not felt the obligation of submitting the assignment. In the case of the teacher-student interaction, the students were able to increase the language ego and received the assurance during the classes they needed; they also become aware of the knowledge of English they had which was unknown to them and to the implementing teacher at the beginning of the intervention. 7.

(8) The students’ perception on the implementation was also considered and register through the final survey done online (it can be found in the Appendix 6). For the question “From the different activities that you developed during this period, which one do you think you learned the most?” 45% of students answered that the fact of having performed different types of assessment help them learn English better, 30% of students answered that having the content explained and an application activity at the end of the session help them the greatest. For another question, “how do you feel now when you attempt to do an activity in the English class?” 40% of students answered 4 and 30% of them answered 3–in a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 was “I feel I’m not going to be able to do it” and 5 was “I feel I’m going to be able to do it without any difficulty”. Another question asked students to identify their weakest skill again, 40% of student identified speaking as their weakest and another 40% identified writing, taking these results into account there was this other question: “Do you think you have moved forward in the development of your weakest skill?”. 35% of students answered they had moved forward in the development of several of the skills including the one they consider the weakest, and 30% answered they had moved forward in all skills especially in the one they considered their weakest. 5. Self-Evaluation When I finished my implementation, and even during the whole process, I analysed my performance and the decisions I made regarding the classroom management skills, the strategies I was applying to develop the productive skills, how to manage the lack of motivation from the students, how to improve teacher-student interaction, among other aspects. I considered my implementation to have been successful because I saw the students’ language ego higher than I never expected, because participation was improved beyond what I had imagined, and because students realized they had more knowledge of English of what they thought they had and that surprised my more than anything. I believe the implementation did not really accomplish the goals that had been set, although it did move in the right direction to take the learners to a better future in the English class. I also considered that a lot of problems need addressing, such as time management, students’ conflict solving, including more VAK (visual – auditory – kinesthetic) exercises for the students’ different learning styles as well as for keeping the English class refresh where it is important to have routines but not let it become monotonous. 6. Conclusion The implementation process and all that it was involved in it –the diagnosis of the school and the class, the development of the planning, the gathering evidence of the students’ opinions, the didactic decisions made throughout the process, the dealing with the school’s culture and set of rules, the design of the instruments, the teacher-student interaction and problem solving skills – has had the greatest impact on the researcher, and soon to be proper teacher, because it showed everything that it is involved in the teaching-learning process but with a special emphasis on the teacher-student interaction. This last factor, has proven itself to be one of the fundamental pillars in the teaching-learning process. But what comes as an unpleasant feeling is the fact that the students from the 9th grade can achieve so much and their wings are going to continue to be limited by the school’s culture.. 8.

(9) REFERENCES -. -. -. Brown, D. 2011. Teaching by Principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Longman. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Golub, J. (1988). Focus on Collaborative Learning: Classroom Practices in Teaching English. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English. Horwitz, K., Horwitz, M., Cope, J. (1986). Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 70, n° 2, pp. 125-132. New York: Blackwell Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/327317?origin=JSTORpdf&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents [February, 10th 2012] Mckay, S. (2003). Teaching English as an International Language: the Chilean context. English Language Teaching Journal, Volume n° 57/2, pp. 139-148. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ministerio de Educación. (2013). Bases Curriculares 7° básico a 2° medio, Idioma Extranjero Inglés. Santiago: Ministerio de Educación, Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio de Educación del Gobierno de Chile. (2016). http://www.mime.mineduc.cl/mvc/mime/portada PEI, 2016. Complejo Educacional Particular Monseñor Luis Arturo Pérez. Savignon, S. (1997). Communicative Language Teaching: Linguistic Theory and Classroom Practice. New York: McGraw Hill. Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning Teaching: A guidebook for English language teachers. 2nd ed. Oxford: McMillan. Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., den Brok, P., van Tartwijk, J. (2006). An interpersonal perspective on Classroom Management in Secondary Classrooms in the Netherlands. Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues. Utrecht: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.. 9.

(10) APPENDIX 1 ENCUESTA La presente encuesta tiene como objetivo conocerlos a ustedes y saber cómo se sienten con su clase de inglés. Se les solicita honestidad en sus respuestas. 1. ¿Te gustan los deportes? ¿Cuál es tu deporte favorito? _________________________________________________________________________ 2. ¿Tienes un cantante o grupo favorito que cante en inglés? _________________________________________________________________________ 3. ¿Qué te gusta hacer en tu tiempo libre? _________________________________________________________________________ 4. ¿Cómo crees que puedas aprender más en la clase de inglés? ¿Trabajando sólo/a, en parejas, o en grupos? _________________________________________________________________________ 5. De las distintas actividades que has hecho en la clase de inglés, en este año o en años anteriores, ¿Cuál fue la actividad que más te gustó? ¿Con cuál crees que aprendiste más? _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ 6. ¿Qué te gustaría hacer en la clase de inglés? _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ 7. ¿Qué es lo más difícil para ti en la clase de inglés? Enumera las siguientes habilidades del 1 al 4, siendo 1 lo que es más difícil para ti y 4 lo que se te hace más fácil.. Escribir. Leer. Escuchar. Hablar. 10.

(11) APPENDIX 2. Lesson 2 2 hours – August, 22nd. AE O3 Expresión Oral: Expresarse a través de monólogos y diálogos breves y simples e incorporar las funciones de informar y expresar predicciones presentes y futuras.. Introduction:. Indicadores: -Responden preguntas simples relacionadas con probabilidades futuras y predicciones asociadas al vocabulario de la unidad, usando expresiones como ‘It may…’ o ‘I might…’. -SHOW Learning Outcome (Read by a student, translated by others, written by everyone in their notebooks). - Expresan probabilidades futuras por medio de expresiones como ‘I may go next summer o ‘it might be fun to participate’. SHOW Learning Outcome: By the end of this class, we will do a dialogue about Summer camps using ‘may’ and ‘might’. Materials: Computer, projector, PPT presentation, white board, students’ notebooks, pens, a small sheet with the stem dialogue. Strategies to develop Speaking: -Modelling through the ‘I do, we do, you do’ strategy (provide a stem, give an example about yourself, get some students involved in the modelling to show the accessibility of the task and lowering anxiety level about the speaking activity).. -Materials Checking (notebook and pen) -Daily routine (Time, Date and New Vocabulary section). Motivation: -Review vocabulary that was introduced the previous session through a PPT presentation, visual aid using pictures about vocabulary (the same 10 words) and elicit the words (they can use their notebook to look for the words and their meaning). -‘Which Summer camp you may participate in?’ Give an example about yourself. Ask some students to read out loud their sentences from the previous class. Modelling: -Present activity: To complete a dialogue with a partner about which Summer camps they may participate in using their sentences. (Student A/ Student B) -Project the stem dialogue and perform it with a student (a different student from the previous lesson – ‘We do’). -Check for understanding (CCQs). -Assign time to do it (CCQs). -Check partners A/B (‘Show me your partner’) Independent Practice (‘You do’): -Project the stem dialogue together with the word bank throughout the whole activity.. 11.

(12) Strategies to promote peer work:. -Hand out the dictionaries for any additional vocabulary they need.. -Pair interaction. -Monitor and assess moving around the class.. -Completing a dialogue in pairs. After everyone has finished (or the great majority of the class) ask for some volunteer couples to perform their dialogue from their seats. Later, choose some other couples randomly to do it. (*Nobody wanted to do it, not even the over achiever students). Strategies to promote Learning: -Teacher Monitoring -Positive feedback -Classroom doubt solving (promote assurance) -Classroom management; classroom rules: peer respect, comfortable environment at all times. -Provide and show a word bank with the presented vocabulary throughout the ‘while’ activity to promote personal assurance (AE – OFT: muestra confianza en sí mismo y sentido positivo ante la vida).. Closing: -Reread the objective of the lesson, ask the students if they think we achieved it and what they learnt through it (some individual responses). -Ask the students how did they feel with the activity (a choral response) -Hand in the small dialogue sheet*. **Stem dialogue used Complete a dialogue with a partner about which summer camps you may participate in using the information from your sentences. A: I may participate in_______________________ next summer. And you? B: I may register in_________________________ for January. A: Why you may participate in_________________________? B: Because__________________________________________________. And, why you may register in___________________________? A: Because__________________________________________________. B: You might consider participating in______________________________. What do you think? A: Yes, I might. / No, I might not.. 12.

(13) APPENDIX 3. Entrega de la grabación. Modalidad de trabajo en clase Desarrollo de diálogo. SUMMER CAMP DIALOGUE’S RUBRIC Nivel 3 (7 pts.) Entrega grabación en la fecha acordada.. Comenzó y terminó la actividad el día que se presentó (clase uno).. Desarrollo de guía. Vocabulario de la unidad. Utilizó vocabulario en sección A y B.. Nivel 2 (5 pts.) Entrega grabación con un día de atraso.. Nivel 1 (3 pts.) Entrega grabación con dos días de atraso (última instancia). Trabajar individualmente Comenzó y terminó la actividad en la clase dos.. Nivel 0 (0 punto) No entrega la grabación.. Desarrolló sección A y B el día asignado.. Desarrolló sólo una sección el día asignado (A o B).. No desarrolló guía el día asignado.. Utilizó vocabulario sólo en sección B.. Utilizó vocabulario sólo en sección A.. No utilizó vocabulario.. Trabaja en pareja. Comenzó, pero no terminó la actividad en la clase uno.. Puntaje total:. No trabaja. No desarrolló el diálogo en clase.. /35. 13.

(14) APPENDIX 4 WRITTEN POST’S RUBRIC. Nivel 3 (9 pts.) Contestó las cinco preguntas de comprensión por sí mismo el día de la actividad.. Nivel 2 (7 pts.) Contestó dos a cuatro preguntas de comprensión por sí mismo el día de la actividad.. Desarrollo de la primera parte del ‘post’.. Desarrolló las dos primeras secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello.. Desarrollo de la segunda parte del ‘post’.. Desarrolló las tres últimas secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello. Escribió las cinco secciones de su ‘post’ en el sitio web.. Desarrolló sólo una de las primeras secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello. Desarrolló sólo dos de las secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello. Escribió solo cuatro o tres secciones de su ‘post’ en el sitio web.. Desarrollo de la sección ‘Reading’. Escritura del ‘post’ en sitio web.. Nivel 1 (5 pts.) Contestó sólo una pregunta de comprensión por sí mismo o sólo copió las respuestas desde la pizarra el día de la actividad. Desarrolló las dos primeras secciones del ‘post’ en la siguiente clase.. Desarrolló sólo una de las secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello. Escribió solo dos o una sección de su ‘post’ en el sitio web.. Nivel 0 (0 pts.) No contestó ninguna pregunta por sí mismo ni copio las respuestas el día de la actividad. No desarrolló las dos primeras secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello ni en la siguiente clase. No desarrolló ninguna de las tres secciones del ‘post’ en la clase asignada para ello. No escribió su ‘post’ en el sitio web.. 14.

(15) APPENDIX 5 Indicadores Desarrolla diálogo en pareja como fue solicitado.. FINAL DIALOGUE’S CHECKLIST SI (1 PUNTO). NO (0 PUNTOS). Utiliza vocabulario de la unidad ‘Summer Camps’ o ‘Outdoor Experience’. Utiliza verbos en pasado o verbos modales ‘May’ y ‘Might’ Utiliza conectores como ‘when’, ‘that’, ‘which’, ‘who’. Sube archivo a la página web como fue acordado. Entrega diálogo en la fecha acordada. TOTAL:. 6. 15.

(16) APPENDIX 6 SURVEY Esta encuesta tiene como objetivo saber cómo se sienten con su clase de inglés, considerando el periodo desde vuelta de vacaciones de invierno hasta ahora.. 16.

(17) 17.

(18)