Showing posts with label TESL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TESL. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

TESL 3051 Final Paper

Matt Altstiel
TESL 3501
5/7/07

TESL 3501: Final Paper

Introduction

Earlier in the semester, I completed series of learning style strategies instruments to help gauge the way I learned a language and to improve upon areas that might have hindered my learning ability. The series of instruments highlighted a number of positives learning tendencies which I possessed and allowed me refocus on underdeveloped reading and writing skills. I directed the focus of this final paper to answer the questions that had evaded my mid-term research. What, if any, was the correlation between study abroad duration and language retention almost a year afterwards even while all subjects took classes at a similar academic level? While each participant is taking classes at the 3xxx level, which was more important for language acquisition, academic experience or “real” language experience? To find answers to these questions, I asked several friends to help me in my research.

The Instruments and the Tasks

To fully understand my subjects’ abilities and tendencies as language learners, I distributed four language instruments and prepared two-multi level language tasks. The first instrument, <<>> assessed my test subjects’ general approach to learning and the overall preferences they possessed as long time students. The second instrument, <> highlighted many different strategies for acquiring and using a second language. This instrument provided a wide variety of linguistic tools, many of which we were entirely unfamiliar with. The third instrument, <>, catalogued strategies for cultural acquisition and retention relating to foreign study abroad experiences. My subjects took the final instrument, <>, before, during and after the first language task. Subjects were asked to read Pablo Neruda’s >>, provide a short three to four sentence summary, and circle unfamiliar words. Students were asked fill out the <> instrument at the task’s conclusion. The second task required my subjects to participate in a free-form conversation to gauge speaking strategies and their social dynamic as language learners.

Subject Profiles

Before jumping into my analysis, it is necessary to briefly provide background information regarding my students to better understand their results. All subjects involved shared a common second language background with Spanish. Additionally, all three students lived with a host family while studying abroad in Toledo, Spain. While their duration in Spain varied due to program length, all subjects studied abroad during the spring or summer of 2006. All participants continued taking Spanish academically at the University of Minnesota the following year, working to earn their Spanish Minor.

My first subject, Adam, is 21, a junior at the U and currently enrolled in the Carlson School of Business Management. He describes himself as <> and <>.Adam grew up in a middle-class family in the western suburban area of Minneapolis. As the president of a fraternity, he carries added responsibility and must balance academics and extracurricular obligations. I selected Adam because of his comparatively short duration abroad. After spending two and half months in Toledo through a summer study abroad program, he has continued studying Spanish Literature. However, Spanish is simply an academic language for Adam since he does actively seek out opportunities to speak with native speakers.

My second subject, Seth, is 22, a graduating senior at the U and currently enrolled in the CLA School of Journalism. He sees himself as <> and <>Seth was raised in a middle-class family in the northern suburban area of St. Paul. Seth balanced his classes with a journalism internship, but has little extracurricular responsibility since its completion. I picked Seth because he stayed in Spain the longest and because of his above average speaking skills. After spending five and half months in Toledo through the spring semester study abroad program, he has continued studying Spanish Linguistics. Seth has not looked for opportunities to use Spanish, but is considering attending conversation hours.

My third subject, Melanie, is 21, a junior at the U and currently enrolled in the CLA Honors Art program. She describes herself as <> Melanie grew up in a single parent family in rural, northern Wisconsin on an Indian reservation. Melanie takes on a rigorous course load with 19 credits and spends a lot of her free time taking pictures or painting. I selected Melanie because of her natural ability, but high affective language filter. After spending four and a half months in Toledo, is currently taking SPAN 3104. Melanie volunteers with the Latino community on campus and attends cultural events to improve her language and cultural awareness.

The Results of the Instruments - FINDINGS

The pre-study interviews some what reflected the results of the instruments and the tasks. The sheer number of questions produced some unexpected results as respondents found some of their personal learning assumptions to be misguided. As predicted, the subjects’ motivation varied from instrument and from task to task, but not significantly enough to skew the results of the study. The instruments and tasks were done in front of me so I could act as a guide and sounding board. The instruments and tasks were done in a sequential order over a two hour period with a ten minute break provided after the <> Only the results deemed most pertinent are included in the analysis of this study. The chart below outlines all of the participant responses.

Learning Style Strategy Results


P: 1

P: 2

P: 3

P: 4

P: 5

P: 6

P: 7

P: 8

P: 9

P: 10

P: 11

Adam

A:23 B:12

C:26

A:23

B:12

A:15

B:8

A:11

B:2

A:11

B:13

A:15

B:8

A:7

B:5

A:7

B:4

A:5

B:7

A:8

B:5

A:3

B:6

Seth

A:30

B:24

C:29

A:16

B:13

A:13

B:12

A:9

B:11

A:14

B:11

A:15

B:11

A:7

B:8

A:8

B:7

A:10

B:6

A:9

B:3

A:7

B:3

Melanie

A:22

B:27

C:16

A:7

B:20

A:9

B:21

A:7

B:5

A:12

B:11

A:8

B:15

A:7

B:6

A:3

B:9

A:5

B:7

A:0

B:4

A:4

B:0

Part 1: The results for Adam and Seth were not all that surprising, however I was somewhat intrigued by the results for Melanie. Adam, being the subject demonstrating the greatest qualities of upfront leadership, recorded high numbers for tactile learning. Clearly, organizing events and projects on a consistent basis results a preference more hands on learning. Seth had almost equal numbers between visual, auditory and tactile learning. I falsely predicted that Melanie would have a high tactile score and a low auditory score because of her self-admitted introverted nature, and her major choice. In short, Melanie’s results were almost the inverse of Adam’s.

Part 2: As a language learner, I feel that an extroverted nature allows for greater language acquisition because learners are more willing to take risks, engage native speakers in conversation and seek out social situations to practice the language. Adam was noticeably the most extroverted of the group, recording a number of 23. Seth displayed a slightly more extroverted nature, but this varied according to task and mood. Melanie recorded a 21 for the section dealing with introversion, while only marking a 7 for questions pertaining to extroversion.

Part 3: As a leader charged with planning upcoming events of high pressure and importance, Adam is very future oriented and as shown later in the tasks, is very proactive modifying his plans as he experiments. Seth approaches learning and language acquisition on a task by task basis, obviously not demonstrating a clear preference for either approach. Melanie once again gave rather unexpected answers. One would think an artist would prefer abstract thinking and speculation over a calculated, metered approach, at least in an academic setting.

Part 4: This section yielded very contradictory results especially for Adam. While part 3 revealed that Adam preferred to speculate about possibilities, part 4 made it clear that deadlines were important for guiding his learning process. Clearly, these two sections must reach a balancing point to justify such a response. Seth recorded high numbers for both sections but did seem to prefer one approach over the other. Melanie, as part 3 would predict, showed a greater tendency to use deadlines to structure her learning process, but did not reflect the disparity of the previous part.

Parts 5 and 6: Adam has an extroverted nature and a random intuitive preference indicating a global method for processing information. However, he aligns more strongly toward the particular method. While he claims to be more particular, the instrument reveals another contradiction though his high number for synthesizing. Seth’s numbers appear to match up for both sections of processing and further processing allowing for a relative coherence of data. Melanie’s answers also paint a contrasting picture, but her methodical approach towards language lends more credibility to the numbers in part 6.

Part 7: How one commits a language, or any learning to memory is (in my mind) one of the most important determiners of success. Unlike other parts of this instrument, subject disparity was not as noticeable. Adam tended to prefer accuracy, learning certain parts of grammar to deduce how each part fit into the whole. Seth focused more upon learning certain conventions and speech acts. Melanie showed more inclination towards leveling although her previous answers reveal her to be more methodical, with more focus on form than on expediency.

Part 11: Finally, I examined the results of this part because of its cultural implications. Those like Melanie and Seth who are more metaphoric are more likely to understand pragmatics and colloquial expressions. Adam, taking things at face value may have a problem with negative transfer between languages, especially in certain structures where there is no literal translation.

Language Strategy Use Inventory

This instrument is divided into <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, and <> Thus, it encompasses many of the required linguistic skills to effectively use a language, providing a wide variety of strategies. This section of data analysis will summarize the most interesting findings on an individual level. Comparisons between the three respondents will follow.

Adam: The majority of the strategies for the listening strategy usage section went unused. However; he demonstrated desire to use these strategies in the future. Adam indicated that he frequently asks for clarification, repetition and slower speech from native speakers. This suggests a proactive stance in language listening, but a lower level of linguistic familiarity. In reference to vocabulary strategy use, Adam shows no general affinity for the strategies advocated in the instrument. Contextualizing new words and creating mnemonic devices to remember these words were the only two frequently used strategies. However, Adam had at one time used every strategy and indicated that he would use some strategies again.

For someone with such an outgoing personality and tactile method, it was strange <> was one strategy that did not interest him. The majority of the strategies received a checkmark for <>. None of the reading strategies received frequent usage and only three earned any usage at all. Using bilingual dictionaries and reading level appropriate texts revealed a lack of motivation, a wholesale rejection of Krashen’s I+1 hypothesis. Conversely, Adam was much more proactive in his writing strategies frequently seeking the opinion of native speaker to improve his writing. Taking notes in the target language and making frequent revision of his writing also gained frequent usage. Finally, Adam’s use of translation strategies shows a general insecurity in his language usage.He has not yet reached a level where he can fully think in the target language and create meaning without translation.

Seth: In his strategy usage, Seth frequently uses most of the strategies to increase his exposure and to prepare for listening to conversation. In the first three sections under this heading, there is not one strategy that he has not used or does not fit him. Listening in to conversations in the target language contributes greatly to his ability to understand native speech speed and patterns. The tone, context and stress of the word greatly interest Seth, whereas as asking for classification does not his fit his language ego. When learning vocabulary, Seth frequently repeats new words and periodically reviews them so they stay fresh in his memory. In many ways, the strategies used by Seth appear almost the opposite of those used by Adam. As familiarity with the language increases, more and more strategies are discovered and used.

In terms of speaking strategies usage, Seth shies away from a structured grammatical acquisition model in favor of engaging a conversation partner and experimenting. While he frequently directs the conversation towards familiar topics, he also actively participated in conversations above his ability level. Using gestures, asking for corrections looking for different ways to express himself features prominently in his speaking strategy. By his own admission, <> Consequently, staying within a comfortable level of his own reading ability was an important strategy for him. Writing strategies garnered usage as he frequently revises his writing, uses reference materials and rephrases his writing to make it more accessible. With translation strategies, Seth indicated that he often <>

Melanie: Melanie’s results seemed to fall in between the two strategies and preferences of Adam and Seth in this instrument. Given her current volunteering and stay with a host family, most of her strategies for language listening were used frequently or would be used again. Given her tendency for leveling when committing something to memory, listening for grammar structures and for specific details received the <> checkmark. A language learner with an auditory learning style, learning clusters and clues of language earned frequent usage. Melanie’s strategy for learning new vocabulary practically mirrored Seth’s strategy preferences, although their personality types and learning styles were markedly different.

While much more auditory and introverted in her approach to learning, Melanie would engage native speakers indicating that <> and <> were strategies she has tried and would use again. Because of her auditory and introverted nature, she frequently practiced new expressions to herself and plan out in advance what she wants to say. Melanie uses more of the reading strategies than Adam or Seth, and frequently makes predictions and ongoing summaries of the text. One glaring exception to the correlation between her learning style preferences and her language strategy usage is her general disregard for writing strategies. Examples like, <> did not suit her. For Melanie, certain language skills in Spain had higher importance in daily life. Finally, like Seth, her translation strategies went largely unused but, her reliance on some translation indicated that it remained an important skill.

Culture Learning Strategies Inventory

Adam: In all three major sections, certain things stuck out about his cultural and linguistic behavior. Adam revealed that he did not really care to think of cultural difference and be mindful of avoiding stereotypes before his arrival. While in Spain, significantly, he mentioned he liked to call home frequently and often discussed his experiences with people of his own culture. He said he arranged an intercambio, but never followed up on the meeting, marking <>. Reading newspapers and observing media was something that did not appeal to him. He said he liked and used the strategy of establishing ground rules with his family, but denoted that sharing culture and living as a family did not fit his strategy. For the return arrival section, Adam marked that none of the readjustment strategies fit his personality style. In general, culture acquisition was either something that did not fit, or something that he had not yet tried. Due to his short duration, he likely did not notice many of the cultural differences. Even if he did, perhaps he didn't have the (perceived) time necessary to really engage the language and people of Toledo.

Seth: The participant with the longest stay, and most extensive travel experience within Spain itself, Seth was also the most aware of the many cultural strategies of the instrument. While his pre-departure strategies roughly mirrored those of Adam, his in country strategies were much different, suggesting the length of his stay changed the way he approached language and culture. Most categories suggesting maintaining strong connections with the country of origin received a <>.As Seth used the familiarity of home as a coping mechanism, but was more independent once he became comfortable with the language and culture,. He mentioned he liked joining clubs and playing sports while abroad, allowing Seth to maintain his interests while meeting new people and experiencing new situations. Finally, he marked he liked having a host family in all categories, revealing a real desire to share culture and himself with his host family. Upon arriving home, Seth practiced many of the strategies included in the instrument, liking to maintain connections with those he had met in Spain.

Melanie: Melanie, similar to the previous instrument represented a balance of the other two subjects. In general, she was much more mindful of perceived stereotypes and said she used and liked <> and <> While in Toledo, she was less likely to communicate with those back home than either Adam or Seth, marking that <> While she did not mark the <> box as much as Seth, she did have a high degree of familiarity with each strategy.Even despite her introverted nature, she realized making friends with natives would enrich her experience, and liked seeking them out through intercambio programs and not through random conversation. Much like Seth, Melanie used and liked every strategy under the heading <> Likewise, she highly valued the experience of living with a host family. When she returned home, she employed the majority of the strategies saying she liked using them. Obviously, her current volunteer work in the community is a good indication of this.

It appears in the case of both Melanie and Seth, study duration was a very motivating factor. Not willing to do the bare minimum, both realized acquiring language and cultural skills would create a more meaningful and enjoyable experience. Also, both participants went through the phases culture shock, place acculturation, cultural acceptance, and many more subliminal experiences.

THE TASKS

Pre –Task Motivation

After a ten minute break following this portion of the project, all three participants placed their pre-task motivation level at 3’s out of a possible four. This indicated that each subject perceived themselves to like taking Spanish, were aware of its importance, and were somewhat competitive concerning the language task at hand.

The First Task

The first was completed over a 15 minute period, with a five minute period for discussion and for filling out the motivation instrument included afterwards. The task was to determine the academic level of their reading comprehension and writing ability. The second portion, in which they circled vocabulary words, would test the correlation between style strategy and linguistic skills they gained while studying abroad.

Adam: Adam, jumped right into the text. Adam actively circled the words and write them down on the bottom of the page and stopped for a about a half a minute. Then he wrote his summary of the poem taking a long time to pause after every sentence. Like his style preferences suggested, he took the meaning of the poem very literally in his summary and failed to account for multiple meanings of words. Although he had misread the poem, his grammar and generally writing accuracy were commendable. Like part 6 in the first instrument, his answer showed a tendency towards synthesizing. He choose a bi-lingual dictionary as his method of deriving meaning for unknown words revealing over-generalizations and language simplifications to be common linguistic problems.

Seth: As a self-described poor reader and writer, Seth approached this task carefully, focusing on every word and asking me for the directions twice before starting. Seth wrote notes on the side of the page, rephrasing certain lines before going back to circle the words. Finally, after reflecting for two minutes, Seth began writing down his summary. The summary was not as well organized, not as grammatically accurate of that of Adam’s. However, his summary was global in its focus, more metaphorical and more correct in its totality than Adam’s. In addition, he decided to use a synonym book to look up unfamiliar words and contextualize them within the text. The strategies used clearly show that learning style is not the only factor, but cultural learning and language strategies play key roles as well.

Melanie: In first two instruments, Melanie appeared to enjoy both reading and writing exercises more than her counterparts. As reader Melanie has the unique ability to combine a calculated, metered approach with the ability to pull together a more global picture in her summarization. When reading she took the text slowly, but did not write in notes as Seth had, or even circle words before beginning her summary. The nature of the task, in her estimation was <> and hindered her motivation. The summary was generally correct in its idea, but not in structure. Her summary was also noticeably shorter than either Adam’s or Seth’s response. She reflected that if she has circled the words and tried to define them, she would have used a mono-lingual dictionary. In this example, the nature of the task and its irrelevance to her daily life prevented its completion.

During and Post-Task Motivation

For Adam, his motivation dropped on average during task to a 2, down from a 3. The task was neither as interesting nor beneficial as he would have liked. However, during the task his self-confidence jumped up to a 4. Seth saw his numbers rise to a 4 almost without exception, (the exceptions being <>, which dropped to a 2. Seth did not like reading, but was aware he had figured out the main gist and thematic elements of the poem. Melanie marked down 1s for the majority of the during task motivation section, a task which she did not complete in its entirety.

The post-task numbers also shifted after I revealed the results and whether or not they had properly interpreted the text. Adam saw his answer on drop to a 1 for feedback, and stay at 2 in motivation to do another, similar task. Despite his extroverted nature, it appeared he was more easily frustrated and used more language avoidance. Seth’s numbers stayed at high at 4 because he performed the best out of the three. Although the task was academically focused, his language coping strategies and handle of speech clusters allowed him to negotiate meaning from the text. Melanie saw her number’s go up to 3 after she realized that she had done a better than anticipated job in her summary. As a language learner, one could see Melanie’s affective filter varied widely according to task and reviewer feedback.

The Second Task

For the second task, I required all three subjects to interact with each other in a free form, five minute conversation only in Spanish. In this task, I observed the social dynamic of each member and whether their study abroad experience length carried over into their ability to maintain conversation. Coming into the this task, I assumed that after a certain time, language cues gained from study abroad would be triggered to provide motivation regardless of personality type. While the previous task was academic in nature, this task was strictly extra-curricular.

In the beginning, Adam dominated the conversation although he did appear to auto-correct his forms before speaking. Negative language transfer was very obvious for Adam as he made noticeable, at one point saying <>. As mistakes mounted and corrections from Melanie and Seth became more frequent, his amount of speaking fell off drastically. Used to negotiating meaning and describing an object when they could not name it, Seth and Melanie essentially drove the conversation for the final three minutes. After reading, writing and finally hearing Spanish being spoken, the skills they had picked up in Spain were reactivated. Although the subject matter was familiar to all three, (Toledo and Spaniards), some of the cultural markers such as gestures and personal space that Melanie and Seth discussed escaped Adam. In terms of speaking ability and listening comprehension, the length of study abroad experience was the clear determining factor for language retention.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Although there is ample commentary included within the findings of the instruments and tasks, it is necessary to further elaborate on a number of thematic elements. In particular, there was a general correlation between the pre-study interviews and the results of the first instrument. How students learn in general depends to a large part on their personality and also upon their intrinsic motivation. Even still, there were several aberrations between perception and reality between these two sections. For example, an introverted, more analytic and metaphorical person could be detail oriented and deadline focused at the same time. Within each person, there exists contradictory measures of personality, and this is by no means a negative reality when it comes to learning.

Length of Study Abroad Duration Does Make a Difference

Language learning for some (Adam and Melanie) seems to operate much differently than they way it does for their approach to other academic subjects. Thus, the language ego is a crucial component for analyzing these results. The language ego when confronted with difficult situations may rise or it may fall depending on several factors. Therefore, the duration of the study abroad session is crucial to understanding the general direction of the language ego.

In the case of Adam, he only had time to pass through the initial euphoria of a new place, but left on a low note. He likely went home with the realization that his language ability could not compare to that of native speakers, and was aware of cultural difference, but could not yet accept it at face value. This carries through to the second and third instruments very clearly. His use of language strategies appears underdeveloped by the high number of used or disliked options that were chosen. Across most levels, the transitional level between academic Spanish we learn in class and every day Spanish we learn through extended contact requires a very different set of linguistic and cultural skills. The two most academic sections of this second instrument received the greatest strategy use, while the three more practical, survival oriented skills sets were not very highly developed. In addition, his reliance on translation, not just linguistically, but culturally as well, denoted a low level of desire to make Spanish something tangible to him. As a result, the personal learning ego and the language ego of Adam were not balanced. While I believe any study abroad experience is positive, the nature and length of the program probably produced a great deal of discouragement within his language strategy development.

In the case of Melanie and Seth, the longer duration of their stay produced some positive personal changes that no doubt affected the way they learned and approached language. The majority of the strategies proposed in the instruments two and three received if not frequent usage, at least some usage during the length of their stay. Many of these strategies, such as negotiating meaning and taking into account cultural/pragmatic differences served each well during the competition of the tasks. While, certain academic skills did not noticeably improve during the stay in Spain, the basic communicative skills were markedly better than Adam’s despite a similar Spanish class level at the University.Linguistic problem solving skills were used much more effectively because both participants on the spring program encountered more types of people, more problems and more surprises because they were there longer. Their language ego also differed from regular learning ego in that, because of the nature of the tasks, the use of Spanish was relevant and intrinsically motivating for both.

The language and cultural skills gleaned by Melanie and Seth also had a very real effect on the nature of the study itself. In general, both were much more patient when confronted with the material, not as likely to complain about the length of the instruments and less willing to concede defeat when faced with negative feedback.

After a Certain Level, Experiential Knowledge is Preferable

Obviously, academic learning has a definite value and emphasizes the development of numerous linguistic skill sets. However, once a student has a reached a certain academic level, such as late high school or early college, there is an expected level of competency. This competency provided the appropriate background for language and also provides a framework that allows students to learn and adapt to new settings. Even in conversation classes that emphasize the communicative portion of language, there appears to a plateau. Students can simply not replicate the patterns of native speakers or learn their pragmatics in a cultural vacuum. In this study, even though Adam had the greatest reading and writing skill sets, (although all were roughly around the same level), the cultural knowledge of speech acts that Seth gained abroad allowed for the correct interpretation. Even in a purely academic task, this outside acquisition of knowledge took the learner above the linguistic plateau.

While there is a great deal of problem solving involved in academic tasks, there is no real risk / reward apart from grades. In experiential learning, being linguistic incompetent or unable to negotiate meaning can bring much more immediate, tangible rewards or losses. For example, taking the wrong train resulted in a very costly (both in time and money) detour for Seth that forced to learn train/transportation related phrases in ways academics never could. Basic grammar structures should be taught inductively and academically. However, culture and communicative skills are best learned in a manner combining visual, auditory and tactile senses.

Limitations of the Study

For more accurate results, a larger cross section is necessary. Three test subjects simply does not give the desired amount of data to eliminate possible personal bias. Another possible fault of the study is timing and time requirement. In general, two hours on any specific task is too long. However, while my participants showed excellent energy and motivation throughout, perhaps the surveys would be best completed at home. At home there is likely less pressure and more time to truly think about each strategy. The personal interviews also should probably been have conducted over the phone with a preset list of questions, not done informally in the presence of the other test subjects. This may have led changed some answers to reflect a greater than normal level of (outward) linguistic confidence. Finally, after the completion of the task, there should have been more positive re-enforcement on my part and the delivery of an immediate reward.

Personal Recommendations

Adam: I recommended to Adam that he carry over more of his helpful strategy and personality traits that he uses for most types of learning over to his language learning. The majority of the strategies mentioned in the second and third instruments went on used. Therefore, I urged him to conscious try many of those strategies, see what worked, what didn’t work and incorporate those that were most effective. Above all, I told him that he needed bridge the cultural disconnect between his language learning and cultural acquisition that he had missed out on in Spain. His language ego got in the way of effectively engaging native speakers and taking risks.I recommended that he concentrate less on accuracy and more on expediency, noting from the examples of Seth and Melanie that accuracy would eventually come as well. His general approach towards vocabulary and translation also could take be improved by incorporating such strategies like: going over new words often, trying new words in variety of ways, and avoiding bi-lingual dictionaries in favor using more context clues.

Seth and Melanie: I grouped the latter two subjects together because of the similarity of culture and language instrument responses. In large part, Seth and Melanie had acquired a through knowledge of most of the strategies and had an excellent idea which strategies matched his personality and which didn’t. There was also an excellent correlation between Seth’s learning style strategy and his language and culture use strategies. Therefore, his language ego corresponded with his learning ego. However, Melanie seemed much more confident with her language ego, than she did with her overall learning and personality ego. Melanie’s motivational level also showed large variance, and keeping a higher motivational focus should be a priority for her. With Seth, his motivational level on reading and writing tasks however, was a cause for concern. By attempting some of the strategies they had neglected and retrying those which they had rejected they could definitely improve their academic performance. I explained how I personally changed my strategy towards reading comprehension and my writing process. The positive results encouraged me to examine some of assumptions, and it could do the same for them.

Final Conclusions

In this study, I attempted to determine through the data provided by three test subjects what impact, if any, studying abroad had on language acquisition and retention. A second question examined whether academic learning was preferable to experiential learning, and if so, at point in the learning curve. My subjects all came from a fairly similar personal and education background, and all studied abroad in the same place through a home stay. Through 4 separate survey instruments and two language based tasks, I was able to collect verifiable data about the nature of my subjects and language in general.

Over the course of the study, my subjects and learned several important lessons. There was a clear correlation between length of the study abroad program in terms of language development, cultural legibility and long term retention. Similarly, after a certain point, experiential learning is much more beneficial than academic learning because of the level of multiple inputs. Personality type, as well as learning style preference impact learning, but not as much as individual intrinsic motivation and personal relevance. Long term success requires a proactive nature to engage a language community and learn cultural norms. Above all, one should not disregard a certain strategy until one has diligently tried it.

Bibliography

Chi, Julie and Cohen, Andrew. <>

Chi, Julie, Cohen, Andre and Oxford, Rebecca. <>

Chi, Julie, Cohen, Andrew. Kappler, Barbara, Lassegard, James, and Paige, Michael. Maximizing Study Abroad: A Student’s Guide to Strategies for Language and Culture Learning and Use. Minneapolis, MN; University of Minnesota Press (2004).

Cohen, Andrew and Dornyei, Zoltan. <>

Cohen, Andrew. Teaching and Assessing L2 Pragmatics: What Can We Expect from Learners. TESL 301 – Practical Language Learning. 1701 University Ave., University of Minnesota – Twin Cities. Minneapolis, MN. 17 April 2007.

Kappler, B, Paige, M, Rong, J, and Zheng, W. <>

Lightbown, Patsy and Spada, Nina. How Languages are Learned. Oxford, U.K: Oxford University Press (2006).

Neruda, Pablo. Sus mejores Poemas. Santiago de Chile, Chile: El Mercurio SAP (2004).

Perdue, Adam. Personal Interview, 2 May. 2007.

Perdue, Adam. Task 2 Dialogue. 2 May. 2007



Vertelny, Seth. Personal Interview. 2 May. 2007.



Teaching Reflection

Matt Altstiel
4/23/07
TESL 3001

Reflection Paper

Over the course of my brief teaching career, several specific situations, particularly my first successful implementation of group work activity stands out in my mind. The concepts taught in class readings, lectures and activities all provided a background and framework to use in actual lesson planning and completion. The group of students I worked with were all Latinos between the age of 18 and roughly 55 or 60 at CLUES in the Powderhorn neighborhood of Minneapolis. As a facilitative type of teacher, I sought to provide guidance but tried to force students to think critically for themselves, especially in small group work. For a variety of reasons, however; the group exercises often frustrated the students and myself. It was not until I switched approaches, applying the techniques learned during class, that students really engaged and acquired the material.

Principles, techniques and In-Class Insights

Class materials and insight provided from the Brown textbook revealed that certain activities I had been using for group work, that is, for groups of 3-4 were really only appropriate for pair work, and vice versa. Longer problem solving activities that required a lot of on spot, creative dialogue often left pairing with nothing to say after only a short time. Course materials led to an understanding that, pair tasks ideally were controlled in structure, short and linguistically simple.[1] This principle of pre-selecting appropriate group techniques rather than simply assigning groups according to random order and attendance resonated deeply with the students. The principal of task selection therefore was crucial to proper implementation.

The typical tasks mentioned under the group task headings also sunk immediately for me as a teacher when we tried each activity as a class and then broke into a modified jigsaw to teach each new activity. Various activities such as: games role-play simulations, interviews, brainstorming, information gap and jigsaw all embodied several important principles of teaching. For example, these activities were fun; effectively lower the affective filter as normally introverted students were no longer nervous to speak within the group. Secondly, the course material was all student derived making the material completely relevant and giving the students a real sense of intrinsically driven motivation. Activities like the Jigsaw modified the difficulty as students first had to complete tasks of differing skill sets and skill levels, and then recount what they had learned to the rest of the group. Therefore, not only did these activities break the monotony of a standard group lesson and overdependence on curriculum based material, they also brought together reading, writing, listening and speaking skills.

Selecting the appropriate tasks is but one facet on effective group exercise planning. I realized that my ineffective or non-existent planning often ruined the chance for success before I even walked into the classroom. During class material, we reviewed important rules for preparation such as “Introducing the technique, justifying the use of small groups, modeling the technique and giving explicit detailed instructions.”[2] All of these rules helped clarify techniques for the students as well as giving the teacher his or her proper methodology for using the techniques. In particular, modeling the technique and giving explicit detailed instructions really stood out to me. When examining reading exercises, Mike Anderson showed how different explicit instructions completely changed the nature of the task and the level of difficulty. The reading exercise employing the summarization and post-reading questioning of an old English text became much easier when accompanied with coherent instructions. Therefore, proper planning and modeling could greatly enhance student understanding of the task and lead to successful and efficient completion.

Another very important preparative rule involved forming groups or pairs of students who would complement each other abilities. This requires a substantial personal investment on the part of the teacher to truly know other student’s personality types, interests, linguistic ability and target language goals. Too often I had simply paired up students who were sitting next to each other not taking into account the vast differences within proficiency levels even though all of my students feel into the CASAS range of 620-650. Furthermore, one particular student could not be prodded into group work and would work on specific task himself even if a technique such as role play mandated multiple student interactions.

While proper planning following the rules of implementing, and choosing proper techniques ensures the possibility for success, proper monitoring during the task also is vital to encouraging learning. The list Brown provided listing a few don’ts gave me insight into several things I had done wrong in the past. For example, I had left class on one particular occasion to grab coffee. When I returned, most of the students had switched groups and speaking Spanish, joking with their friends about the past weekend. While they returned to their previous groups, the level of focus had faded and the task remained essentially uncompleted.

One particular area that I had always positive interacting and engagement from students was the post-activity wrap up as summarized in the techniques of Reporting on task objectives and establishing affective support. Through this post-activity, students gave me valuable insight into what they liked about and activity and what could be changed to increase the effectiveness the next time. Unfortunately, miscalculations in the planning and implementation stages probably affected students’ responses during this informal question and answer session. Our teacher, Mike Anderson always seems to encourage students to report on a specific task as a motivational temperature gauge[3] and logical progression point to begin a new activity or thematic subject.

The Incident

Gaining insight into these techniques, principles and insights armed me with the knowledge to properly plan a lesson and carry it out much differently than in previous weeks. In general, better planning leading up to the sixth teaching week had given me better class participation, increased attendance and more confidence in my abilities. However, my group work teaching epiphany only occurred when I utilized all of the principles I had been taught in class in tandem. The particular situation occurred around 7:30 when I had decided to transition from weekly journal time, (usually a free writing, informal kick back time for students) directly into a section involving apologizing and giving explanations. I remembered the barking dog - neighbor role play that we had used in class and designed an activity accordingly. In this activity, I told the class I was going to them into groups of three, explaining what the technique entailed and how this pragmolinguistic theme occurred on a daily basis.

After explaining the validity of the technique, I effectively modeled it by using my own example (I used to different voices to change characters) and traced the route of the conversation on the bored. I had them think up situations that would occur or already did occur in their every day life and based off their suggestions filled out the blank conversation bubble boxes to provide an outline. Finally, I put together students of differing ability and but similar personality types. Less advanced students were helped by more advanced students, and more introverted students did not have the activity dominated by more talkative students.[4]

I walked around the class careful to monitor students in a non-intrusive, but helpful manner. I avoided my tendency to overcorrect and even when asked would deflect questions through recasting and elicitation techniques. I noticed that the students; well aware of the task at hand, prepared with a class generated list of pertinent vocabulary and comfortable with the group selections really opened up within the exercise as never before. Careful to give the students a one minute warning, I could hear the students naturally change their pace to match the time limitation I had provided. Walking around, I heard students using a command of language they had seldom displayed during whole class exercises and concluded to myself: this is it! This is what I’ve wanted to see out of my class. I knew they could do it.” Students began writing down unfamiliar activity generated words and genuinely were having fun forming creative answers to common situations.

During post-activity wrap up and activity summarization, students seemed abnormally eager to share their opinions and stories from the activity. I no longer felt as if I had to pry information from the students by asking an excessive amount of questions or using gestures. I felt as if the exercise contained the right balance of fun and relevance to provide truly meaningful language acquisition. I began to plan all of my group activities in a similar way within the allotted boxes contained in the High Intermediate classroom binder. As each group activity became easier to teach and involve a higher degree of difficulty, I realized that this particular role play really represented a turning point within my teaching experience. Not merely feeding students information and hoping they digested it, it was if I had taught them to cook and enjoy what they themselves had made.

Connection

Reflecting upon this pedagogical change I realized the direct correlation between research, practice and perfection. In order to facilitate optimal group work results, I first had to learn techniques and see for myself the validity of their theory. This was accomplished through in class practice which familiarized students with ways to effectively introduce new activities. The book and course notes served as a refresher and a great way to compare theory and practice. The combination between learned and acquired knowledge allowed me to create a multi-step, multi-level activity that could reach all students regardless of ability or personality type. In short, the connection between theory and practice is always apparent, the only question is whether you combine these in the correct way.



[1] Brown, 183-184

[2] Brown, 187-188

[3] In class notes

[4] Brown, pg. 189

Thursday, May 3, 2007

Listening Comprehension

Matt Altstiel
5/2/07
TESL 3001

Listening Comprehension

Listening comprehension is a vital language skill without which one can not carry out a conversation, understand any type of auditory media and recall some events. Therefore, Brown outlines many specific related concepts for an interactive model of listening comprehension. The <> involves the brain’s capability for short term memory and image creation. The clustering nature of speech, colloquialisms and redundancies can often interfere with this image creation since certain expressions are often take far too literally. Regardless of the language or the listener, they do have the natural ability to divine the type of speech (lecture, speech, conversation), (Brown 249). Beyond that however, speech acts involved in everyday conversation can be baffling for the listener if they are unaware or unfamiliar with pragmatics and the general speech patterns. While a small feature of my natural speech, I was informed that several expressions I used hindered comprehension. As such as I would say things like <>, <> and <>.

Based on the lesson in class and the guest speaker on this subject I knew I should incorporate speech acts into the lesson plan. Students even mentioned afterwards how helpful that type of instruction had been. For instance, I spent ten minutes sections each class on speech acts which logically build into the original lesson plan like talking to your boss, talking to your son’s/daughter’s teacher and the like. After they understood various ways to apologize and accept/reject those apologies, they were eager to use them. This led naturally to a role play between a employee and their boss in which they apologized for missing work and continued into asking for a couple of days off. The triggers I taught them to listen for that introduced a speech act helped them recall background relevant information consistent with schema building.

Another major problem for students was the difference between intended and perceived meaning. Sarcasm and humor were very hard for students to detect. Therefore, while I did try to make class any less fun or alter the way I taught too much, I did try to eliminate any sarcasm and pragmatically based humor. Instead, I relied more on general humor that students would be more likely to understand and avoided colloquialisms. Some speech acts and clusters are unavoidable, so I learned which occurred most commonly and taught them accordingly. While they may learn them through coincidence, explicit teaching, practice and being mindful of the techniques in Brown can’t hurt.

Pronunciation

Matt Altstiel
5/2/07
TESL 3001

Pronunciation

Pronunciation can mean success or failure in conveying a message. Unfortunately, many foreigners and immigrants carry the burden of heavy accents which prevent communication or change the meaning of their sentences. Therefore, CLUES attached specific focus onto teaching pronunciation, which a specific sound every week. Similar to the methods they advocate for teaching grammar, (explicitly) each individual sound has its own accompanying worksheets, minimal pair lists and speaking drills. The <> approach does not carry much weight within this program.

Teaching pronunciation has always been one of my strengths considering that the majority of the students retained proper pronunciation for sounds long after the individual lesson. Brown mentions <> as one of the most important factors / barriers. Therefore, some sounds are much more difficult for Latinos to produce, than other ethno-linguistic backgrounds, and vice versa. Certain sounds such as the <> sound do not exist in Spanish and these unique sounds provided singular challenges. Luckily, the students were aware of the sound and their inability to produce it only pushed them to further motivation. At the beginning of each sound I would show through minimal pairs how confusing the sounds hindered meaning and could cause embarrassment. This was consistent with Brown’s principal <>. The clarity of speech became a priority as they saw how it shaped their self-image and language ego.

The most difficult of these sounds was the aforementioned <> sound. Students were inclined to make a b sound instead. To show the difference, I used techniques to clearly illustrate the mouth and lip position. I had students hold their finger up to the lip to see how it vibrated with the V sound and how it did not with the B sound. I had them watch as my front teeth touched my bottom lip when making the V sound, and how my lips moved apart with B sound. Watching me say tongue twisters with the two different sounds from a side position, students could mimic by mouth position. Another thing that helped was making the content distinction that occurred between <> and <>, which caused them to laugh, but it stuck. After 20 minutes of solid practice, students didn’t make the same mistake and were way ahead of students in other sections.

Teaching Writing

Matt Altstiel
5/2/07
TESL 3001

Teaching Writing

Personal journal entries were one of the writing strategies introduced a long time ago at MLC training. However, they didn’t really go over guidelines for assigning journal entries, time limits or ways to clearly connect reading and writing. When I introduced the concept of writing journals, the students kind of groaned and didn’t seem too into it, but they did put forth some effort. I assigned ten minutes each class period for the students to write about anything they wanted to, essentially free form. I would then give students feedback commenting on both content and form, sure that the students would pick up my subliminal recasts and error correction. While I noticed students noticeably relax when writing, it appeared in their writing it was seen as slack off time since the quality of the writing never really improved.

The class lesson emphasizing teaching writing and also the Brown chapter made some concepts clear to me that I later implemented in the second go around at CLUES. For one, while I provided error correction, I did not provide authentic, non-textbook reading examples frequently enough. Secondly, the reading examples were not geared towards my Latino student body, and therefore not all that interesting or relevant. Thirdly, I did not give them enough time or the idea to brainstorm ideas before writing. Error correction helped, but in the additional journal entries I should have them rewrite their entry correctly as a revision. Fourthly, I did not balance the process and product and like the previous concept, they did not receive composition training. Finally, I did not connect reading and writing well enough. Although it might have made them somewhat self-conscious to show other students their writing, it could have intrinsically motivated them after receiving praise from their peers.

Knowing this, I took cues from the lesson plan and had them initiate a photo-project / story. The idea was to keep it relevant to their cultural background and also to their home in the Twin Cities. Therefore, I had them take pictures or get pictures for the first week and begin writing the second week about their homeland and what they would do there. Using the pictures as a cue and the overarching theme of continuation of the project, students were much more eager to write. Rather than having the average journal length be four sentence, the average length was an almost half a page! Students like the idea of building into something, especially something they can show off to their fellow students and families. This new direction incorporating the above concepts from Brown and from class yielded immediate results.