AFFECTIVE LEARNING: SOCIO-
AFFECTIVE COMPETENCES TO ENABLE FOREIGN LANGUAGES LEARNING*
ABSTRACT
This article describes an action research
carried out by analyzing the affective learning and how it influences the
learning process of English foreign language in a group of tenth grade students
at a public school in Bogotá, while helping them to improve their oral
production in English. The research study follows Cohen and Manion model (2011) which contains the identification of
the problem in a real context, planning, action, observation, and
reflection in a continuous and cyclical process that allows the transformation
of the reality as well as the context where the research took place.
The research focused on the role that socio-affective competences play when
learning a foreign language: feelings, emotions, and attitudes were observed in
detailed. According to different authors: Brown (2000), Yashima (2004), among
others, the way we deal emotionally with different situations shows our
self-confidence, which is considered one of the most influential variables that
positively affect foreign language learning, and is especially related to the
lack (or not) of fluency, freedom, and willingness to participate in oral
activities in students of EFL. In this study, the legitimacy of these
statements was proven to be right since an increase in the oral production of
the participants was observed after the research was applied.
KEY WORDS:
Socio-affective
competences – English foreign language learning (EFL), self-confidence, oral
production.
APPRENTISSAGE AFFECTIF :
COMPÉTENCES SOCIO-AFFECTIVES POUR FACILITER L’APPRENTISSAGE DES LANGUES
ÉTRANGÈRES
RÉSUMÉ
Cet article
décrit une recherche-action autour de l’apprentissage affectif pour
l’apprentissage des langues étrangères dans un groupe de dixième degré d’un
lycée public à Bogotá, où son influence s’est avérée utile pour améliorer
l’expression orale des étudiants en anglais. La recherche a suivi le modèle de
Cohen et Manion (2011), qui propose des étapes telles
que : l’identification d’une problématique dans un contexte réel, suivie
de la planification, l’observation et la réflexion, dans un processus cyclique
et continu permettant la transformation de la réalité et son contexte, où la recherce a lieu.
L’étude s’est
centrée spécialement sur le rôle joué par les compétences socio-affectives
impliquant des sentiments, des émotions et des attitudes, dans l’apprentissage
de l’anglais langue étrangère. Selon des auteurs tels que Brown (2000), Yashima (2004), entre autres, la façon dont on gère
émotionnellement les différentes situations fait preuve de confiance en soi,
celle–ci étant considérée comme l’une des variables les plus influentes qui
touchent positivement l’apprentissage des langues ; est aussi associée au
manque d’aisance, à la liberté et la volonté pour participer à des activités
d’expression orale. Comme résultat de cette étude, on a constaté une augmentation
de l’expression orale des étudiants après l’intervention.
MOTS CLÉ :
Compétences
socio-affectives, apprentissage de l’anglais langue étrangère, confiance en
soi, expression orale.
APRENDIZAJE AFECTIVO: LAS COMPETENCIAS SOCIO
AFECTIVAS PARA FACILITAR EL APRENDIZAJE DE IDIOMAS EXTRANJEROS
RESUMEN
Este artículo describe
una investigación acción que giró en torno al aprendizaje afectivo y su influencia en el aprendizaje del inglés como lengua
extranjera en un grupo de alumnos de décimo grado de un colegio Distrital de
Bogotá ayudándoles así a mejorar su producción oral en inglés. La investigación
siguió el modelo de Cohen y Manion (2011) el cual desarrolla
los pasos de: identificación de un problema en un contexto real, planeamiento,
acción, observación, reflexión en un proceso cíclico y continuo que permite la
transformación de la realidad y su contexto en el que tiene lugar la
investigación.
El estudio se centró especialmente en el papel que desempeñan las
competencias socioafectivas en el aprendizaje del inglés como lengua extranjera,
competencias que involucran sentimientos, emociones y actitudes. De acuerdo con
diversos autores: Brown (2000), Yashima (2004) entre otros; la forma en
que lidiamos emocionalmente con las diferentes situaciones muestra nuestra
autoconfianza, la cual se
considera una de las variables más influyentes que afectan de forma positiva el
aprendizaje de idiomas extranjeros, así como también está relacionada con la falta
de fluidez, libertad y voluntad para participar en actividades orales por parte
de los estudiantes. Como resultado de este estudio, se evidenció que después de
aplicada la propuesta se observó un incremento en la producción oral de dichos
estudiantes.
PALABRAS CLAVES:
Competencias
socioafectivas, aprendizaje del inglés como lengua extranjera (EFL), autoconfianza,
producción oral.
INTRODUCTION
A significant and common aspect in almost all English Colombian students
at public schools is the great difficulty they have to express themselves,
accomplish oral tasks, and interact with other students and the teacher in the
class by using EFL. This can be seen, for example, in the public school in
Bogotá where this research was carried out. In there, school regulations stated
that tenth grade students had to participate in conversations where they could
explain their opinions and ideas about general, personal, and abstract topics,
and that their speeches when interacting with others had to be simple and coherent.
To demonstrate their competences, students must spontaneously
participate in conversations about their interests, using previous knowledge
and clear and simple language, and most importantly, doing oral presentations
about the topics included in the school curriculum. Despite de requirements, those
standards and competences had not being reached by the
students.
When I started teaching teenagers at this school,
I realized that some of my students were not really motivated to learn a
foreign language, thus, they attended the class only for academic requirements.
Besides that, some other students were not confident at the time to speak in
English or develop an oral activity in class, others did not even dare to do
it. At that point, it was clear the need to increase the socio-affective
competences which seemed to be negatively affecting students when learning a
foreign language.
As a consequence, and in order to know more about students’
lack of confidence when trying to speak in English, a qualitative research study
was developed with 10th grade students at this public school in Bogotá, Colombia,
to promote students’ English oral production through the increasing of their
self-confidence. The aim of the research was to positively enhance the English
classes by creating an environment which would instill confidence in the
students.
Students at school generally have a good disposition
and interest in learning different subjects, however, this is not the case when
learning a foreign language. It can be because they do not realize about its
importance for their future personal and professional life, or
because they find it difficult to
learn and use in their daily basis. During the English learning process at the school,
while some tenth-grade students try to interact orally with other classmates
and teachers, others have great difficulty while expressing themselves or
simply cannot do it. Some of the
students who took part in this research study, had great difficulties with grammar
structures at the time to speak and most of their sentences were fractured and
rendered by words rather than structures, as a result, they gave up not only because of their syntax issues but
also due to their shyness, lack of motivation and low confidence, among other
reasons.
In this regard, Horwitz (1986) states that “Anxious students may avoid
studying and in some cases skip class entirely in an
effort to alleviate their anxiety.” (p. 127), such demotivation would probably
make 10th grade students give up easily when, according to Horwitz, they have
to: 1) face situations when they do not feel confident enough, or 2) solve
tasks they find difficult in the English class. That “anxious student is also
inhibited when attempting to utilize any second language fluency he or she has
managed to acquire.” (1986, p. 127).
Communication makes the progress and development of the human being possible,
seeing it as an essential part of his/her nature. Hence, when communication is
in the social and academic sphere, it has a great influence in the formation of
the student`s self-concept. As a consequence, when the EFL process is not
properly developed, due to different reasons like the lack of interest or discipline,
interruptions or disrespect, it may cause problems in the development of
activities in the class making the students' learning more difficult.
In order to contextualize the reader, the tenth grade
students group we refer to in this paper, belonged to a public school in
Bogotá, Colombia, where the number of students per group range from 35 to
40 students, attending to 3 hour EFL class per week. Students’ oral production,
at the beginning of the research showed simple phrases and sentences use to
briefly describe where they lived, their families and hobbies, placing them
barely in an A1 proficiency level according to the Common European Framework
for Foreign languages (CEFL). Furthermore, we noticed that students did not have
EFL physical textbooks to use in class, but rather worksheets prepared
(designed/adapted) by the teacher, as well as internet access and audiovisual
resources to work with.
To learn more about the reason why of students’ lack of oral performance
and fluency, a Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM) (see appendix
1) and a “Speaking Rubric for fluency (see appendix 2) were used to evaluate
and monitor the students' EFL oral proficiency. The SOLOM check list gave the
researcher an insight in terms of oral production and the level of all the
students in this competence, since it includes aspects like comprehension,
fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar.
The matrix was applied to the whole group of 35 students, but we chose a
sample of seven random students (four girls and three boys) to analyze the data,
focusing specially on their speaking fluency. Some of these students had
studied in the school for more than 4 years and others came from other schools
where they affirmed, did not have to participate in oral presentations (or oral
projects) to the point they did not even use the English language to
communicate or interact with others. In fact, they had just been attending classes where only grammar, writing, and reading
aspects were considered.
The numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 on the SOLOM[1]
determine the value of each scored checked. Based on the observation to the
students, each category indicates: (A) comprehension, (B) fluency, (C) vocabulary,
(D) pronunciation, and (E) grammar), thus describing the student’s abilities. As
an example, we can state that students who score a level 1 in all categories do
not have proficiency in the language. The scores for individual domains can be
considered, or they can be combined into a total score with a range of five
through 25, where approximately 5 can represents Pre-Production- 6 to 10 is Early
Production -11 to 15 is Speech Emergence – 16 to 20 is Intermediate Fluency and
21 to 25 would be Advanced Fluency. Once the characteristics of SOLOM Matrix
are understood, we would like to share some of our findings when analyzing the
obtained data from our students’ production:
Student
1. Fluency is usually hesitant and forced into silence
by language limitations (2), It is difficult to comprehend what the speaker
says, it is difficult to follow what it is said. He/she can comprehend only
social conversations with frequent repetitions (2). The student makes frequent
mistakes in grammar and word order (1) He/she has pronunciation problems (3)
Vocabulary limitations (1). SOLOM score= 8 (Early production).
Student
2. Comprehension: The student cannot understand simple
conversations (1). Fluency: Speech is very halting and fragmentary (1).
Vocabulary: Limitations in vocabulary are severe (1). Pronunciation: The student
has utmost pronunciation problems, conversation is virtually impossible (1). High
number of errors in grammar and word order (1). SOLOM score= 5 (Pre-
production).
Student
3. Comprehension: the student understands most of what
is said at slower than normal speed (3). In fluency, the student usually
hesitates, often forces him/herself into silence by language limitations (2). In
vocabulary, he/she misuses words and has limited vocabulary (2); It is very
hard to understand the utterances because of pronunciation problems (2). In
grammar, he/she makes frequent errors which occasionally obscure meaning (3).
SOLOM score= 12 (Speech emergence).
Student
4. Comprehension: the student cannot understand simple
conversation contents (1). Fluency: speech is halting and fragmentary (1).
Vocabulary: limitations are extreme (1). The student has pronunciation
problems, conversation is virtually impossible (1). Errors in grammar and word
order are severe (1). SOLOM score= 5 (Pre-production).
Students
5. Fluency is usually hesitant and forced into silence
by language limitations (2), Comprehension is difficult, the student can
comprehend only social conversations with frequent repetitions (2). The student
makes frequent errors in grammar and word order (1). Pronunciation problems require
concentration from the listener (3). Vocabulary limitations (1). SOLOM score= 8
(Early production).
Student
6. Comprehension: the student understands most of what
is said at a slower pace from normal speed (3). In fluency: the student usually
hesitates, often forces him/herself into silence by language limitations (2).
In vocabulary, he/she misuses words and portraits limited vocabulary (2); it is
very hard to understand what is uttered because pronunciation problems (2). In
grammar, the student makes frequent errors which occasionally obscure meaning
(3). SOLOM score= 12 (Speech emergence).
Student
7. Comprehension: the student cannot understand even a
simple conversation (1). Fluency: Speech is halting and fragmentary (1).
Vocabulary: limitations in vocabulary are extreme as to make conversation
virtually impossible (1). The student has severe pronunciation problems,
conversation is virtually impossible (1). Errors in grammar and word order are (1).
SOLOM score= 5 (Pre-production).
In order to contextualize the previous analysis, we applied the speaking
rubric to rate the leaners’ speaking competence in oral fluency, where it is
clearly seen that there was an evident lack of students’ oral production in
terms of vocabulary, grammatical errors, better communication, as well as
interaction.
According to the graphic (see fig. 1) Students 1, 2, 4 and 5 used
very basic vocabulary and expressions, they hesitated too much when speaking
and had a lot of problems with pronunciation and intonation. Students usually did
not respond appropriately or clearly. Students 3, 6 and 7 used
limited vocabulary and expressions, they spoke with hesitation which often
interfered with the communication exchange. Even though, they tried to
communicate and interact, they did not respond clearly enough.
DEMONSTRATED
COMPETENCE Rating 1-4
Figure 1 Results from: Authentic
Assessment for English Language Learners. O'Malley and Valdez Pierce (2005).
The
above information showed that the learners’ prior experience in speaking
English was very limited. These students have been attending, mainly, to teacher
centered classes where they have just received grammar content along with the
corresponding set of rules, there was very little exposure to listening and
speaking practice. Apart from that, tenth grade students seemed to be really
nervous and insecure, they constantly said that they were not good at speaking,
that it was too difficult for them and that they forgot everything when they
faced situations where speaking was required.
In order to know more about the English class and tenth
grade students´ self-confidence level
and to confirm how the low confidence in some of them could possibly affect
their oral production and willingness to participate in the speaking activities
proposed throughout the school year, we used an interview to the students at the
beginning of the study to collect more data. . (See
appendix 3)
Three aspects were considered during the interview to
know the students’ perception together with what they wanted to get from their
English class and how they felt towards it. Summarizing some of their answers
we may conclude that:
1) Oral participation in the
English class: Most of the students recognized that a space to practice
speaking is given in class. They also had had enough repetition drills to
improve pronunciation, they also thought that the way classes were oriented,
reinforced their communication competence.
2) Cognitive
domain: Students agreed on having a
lot of rote drills, repetitions, grammar rules and practicing vocabulary
through metaphor, analogies, contrast and matching exercises along with the way
they help them to improve and enhance their communication ability. Only two
students claimed the need for more dialogues to interact with others.
3) Self-confidence:
Mostly all the students agreed they need more reinforcement and assistance to
overcome their fear and insecurity at the time of participating in the
communicative activities. They said they feel ashamed, inhibited, and
intimidated when having to develop oral activities in the English class; even
though they have good preparation, it is because their peers might make fun of
them as a result, they said they felt better when being allowed to present
their work in groups.
There was also a concern on the importance of having teacher's support
and assistance, and how well students felt when receiving such help from teachers
and other students. According to them, this interactive assistance boosted
their self-esteem, strengthened their oral production and encouraged to strive
and do a good job.
In the revision of previous studies at a national level, we found some research
that have being developed and that aim to analyze the affective competences in EFL
learning, as stated by Prada (2015, 21):
·
Zapata (2007) conducted a case study with first
semester students in an English language teaching program in Colombia. Findings
revealed that anxiety is one of the factors affecting students’ oral
participation and is caused by internal (self-esteem, motivation, introversion
and extroversion, lack of vocabulary, beliefs, ability to take risk), and
external factors (methodology and interaction). The findings concluded that
anxiety affects oral competences of language students.
·
Mendoza (2007) conducted a case study in a
public high school with 6th grade students who showed symptoms of anxiety in
specific situations as conversations, role plays and oral participation or any
other speaking activity. Findings showed that students felt anxiety and
nervousness during oral activity participation.
·
Castrillon (2010) found that
there are different learners’ factors that may influence participation in a
classroom such as unwillingness to participate and fear of making mistakes in
front of their classmates.
· Urrutia and Vega
(2010) found that oral participation of foreign language learners was affected
by their lack of vocabulary, shyness, and fear of being humiliated. Also, this
study showed that students’ cooperation, involvement, self-confidence,
knowledge of vocabulary, and the class environment motivated them to improve
their speaking abilities.
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK
The theoretical framework covered two main aspects: EFL students' oral production in terms of
fluency, the use of socio-affective competences and the student's
self-confidence, which is a personal factor that plays an important role in the
achievement of EFL learning.
Learning a foreign language can be either a fascinating and challenging
experience or a very traumatic one. This process involves a great range of
variables such as neurological, psychological, cognitive and affective aspects
which must be considered when teaching teenagers, like in our case. Brown
(2000) stated that the affective domain is the emotional side of human behavior
and involves a variety of personality aspects such as motivation, anxiety, and
self-confidence. Foreign language learners cannot speak
the language or express themselves freely and fluently without some degree of
self-confidence as Brown (1994) affirmed.
The above information made the researchers decide to work on improving 10th
graders oral skills, their motivation and confidence. Besides, it is important
to consider what Yashima et al. (2004) cited by Prada (2015) affirmed “the practice
of different oral communicative activities and the enhancement of
self-confidence are essential factors that determine learners’ willingness to
participate in oral activities in class.” (p. 141) What is clear
is that where there is self-confidence and motivation there is a chance to
increase oral communication.
As it can be seen in Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) not only the
cognitive domain (knowing, or head), but also the affective domain (emotions,
feelings, or heart) must be considered in language learning education. Consequently,
EFL school teachers can increase their effectiveness
by considering the affective domain while planning their lessons, giving
lectures, developing class activities and/or assessing
student's learning.
Additionally, Dornyei (2005) pointed out that “students lack of
confidence is a sensitive area in primary/secondary school learning because
students are in the developmental age and doubts and worries about oneself are
more common feelings than confidence or pride, those feelings emerge from the
accumulation of inter and intrapersonal experiences.” (p.87). In the case of our research participants, the development
age ranged from 6 to 12 years old. During this period of time the language
skills of children continue growing and many behavioral changes occur as they
try to find their place among their peers, especially when they are learning a
foreign language.
In a foreign Language class, students with
lack of confidence do not participate successfully in oral activities that
require interaction while presenting information; they tend to remain silence
while others take the center stage, in such case, teachers should help them to
develop their speaking ability in many ways, for example, by asking them to be
aware of the scripts for different situations, so that they can predict what
they will hear and what they will need to reply. In relation with that, Brown
(1996) pointed out that “teachers can use six approaches that will promote
fluency: a) encourage students to go ahead and make constructive errors, b)
create many opportunities for students to practice, c) create activities that
force students to focus on getting a message across, d) assess students’
fluency not their accuracy, and e) talk openly to the students about fluency.” (p.
32)
Furthermore.
Arnold (2011) refers that “there is a strong relationship between competence
and confidence, developing greater competence leads to more confidence but also
having confidence makes it easier to acquire greater competence”. (p.12)
Students with low self-esteem are excessively fearful and timid, as a
consequence, they are unable to make decisions concerning the development of activities
and group work, they expect failure and are reluctant to express opinions. Those,
among other reasons, make the affective domain more difficult to assess than
the cognitive one, that is because it is related to judgment and changes in
feelings, interests, and values (caring), as Burwash & Snover
(2016) remarks.
Hence, effective teachers must motivate, understand and involve students and as
Pattavina (1981) affirmed, “they need to: a. establish the affective climate of the class, b. Manage conflicts and crisis, and c. Use positive classroom management
practice." (p 142) It is interesting to see how these actions encourage students to take
part in speaking activities where they have to interact orally with others, be
part of a group discussion, or while watching a video, all in a friendly
atmosphere and without the pressure, be evaluated or judged.
In
general, the speaking ability includes three areas of language: 1) Mechanics
(pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary); using the right words in the right
order with the correct pronunciation, 2) Functions: transaction or information
exchange and, interaction or building relationships: knowing when clarity of the
message is essential, and 3) Social and cultural rules and norms (turn- taking,
rate of speech, length of pauses between speakers), understanding how to take
into account who is speaking to whom, in what circumstances, about what and for
what reason (Stovall, 1998).
Authors like Skehan (1996 and 1998), Bygate (2001), Fortkamp (2000)
and D'ely (2004, 2006) agreed that mastering a
foreign language involves speaking it with complexity, fluency, and accuracy. From
the three aspects previously considered, fluency is specially studied in this
project, as this is the skill our research subjects needed more. We
supported our investigation in this regard on theorists like Bygate (2001) who stated that
“it is unlikely that a single task (or even a short series of tasks) will
result in measurable changes in general language skill (e.g., fluency)” (p.23) as well as,
Ellis (2003) describes
fluency as “the extent to which the language produced in performing a task
manifests pausing, hesitation, or reformulation.” (p 342) In the same
direction, Skehan (1996) affirmed that “the speaking fluency pertains to the
ability to produce the spoken language without undue pausing or hesitations.” (p
22).
In this research we found Essberger´s
strategies (2004) on oral presentations very useful, henceforth, we adapted
them to implement oral projects in the classroom to encourage students to
practice their English speaking skill while producing
oral content spontaneously. According to this author, oral presentations have
the following advantages:
• Give the presenting student
a good opportunity to practice unaided speaking
• Give the other students good
listening practice
• Increase student`s confidence when using
English. It can be a good practice for students to speak in English to develop
abilities for their future professional lives (p. 38).
Such advantages were used in this research as a way
to encourage students to speak and feel comfortable while doing so.
METHODOLOGY
The relation between self-confidence and foreign language oral
production was evident in tenth grade students at a public
school in Bogotá through the initial speaking rubric for fluency activities in oral
projects 1 and 2, and the language plus testing set.
A pedagogical
proposal that included a number of oral projects presentation and
lesson plans, was designed, applied, and evaluated in order to help tenth grade
students to become more confident and fluent at the time to make the oral
presentations while interacting with others in EFL. The proposal which we presented,
not only considered the cognitive domain, but mainly the affective and the
social domains as well.
We
must recall that oral Projects presentations are important to develop
communicative skills, since they are supported with audio-visual aids such as
videos, listening tracks, posters, pictures or technology resources which give
students a great amount of cultural background and information, as stated by Mizuki (2003) “A reason for promoting the inclusion of oral
presentations in the English class, concerns the development of learner
autonomy rather than teacher dependent” (p. 144).
The two oral projects (see
appendixes 4 and 5) were
assigned to first and second term school of the academic school year, as
follows: First term, daily routines and second term, past holidays. These
oral projects presentation include videos and activities related to the
cognitive and socio-affective aspects. The researcher provided a classroom setting where
students were engaged in collaborative learning along with the teacher´s participation so there was a suitable environment for students facilitating
like this their learning process. The undertaking of the oral presentations
involves continuous peer review as well as feedback, therefore the goal of EFL
oral projects was to value students` effort and participation.
According
to Harmer (2001) “the ability to speak fluently presupposes not only the knowledge
of the language features, but also the ability to process information and
language on the spot.” (p. 269), then, among the necessary elements for oral
production, the researchers of this study, considered the following aspects as
the most relevant traits to work with tenth graders at School:
·
Connected speech: Effective
nonnative English speakers need to be able not only to produce the individual
phonemes as in saying “I have gone” but to use “the connected speech” (as in “I
́ve gone”).
·
Lexis and grammar: Teacher
should provide a variety of expressions for different functions such as
agreeing or disagreeing, expressing surprise, shock, or approval.
·
Language Negotiation: Effective
speaking benefits from the negotiator language used to seek clarification and
to show the structure of what is said. e.g.: - I ‘m sorry. I did not quite
catch that, I am sorry. I did not understand, could you say that again, please?
·
Interacting with others: Most speaking utterances involve
interaction with one or more participants. Excerpt taken from Prada (2015)
The
previous aspects are the ones to be reached with this pedagogical proposal. Looking
forward to evaluating the oral presentations, the researchers considered students’
projects content and information, as how they presented and delivered that
information. At the time to speak, the
students´ fluency (smoothness and confidence), interaction (clarity and use of
conversation management strategies), and role playing, were also relevant to
this research.
Apart
from the oral practice, a set of “building self-confidence” activities and
videos on how to become more confident, were also included and consistently
worked with the students throughout the entire lessons in the two oral projects
developed. Those affect -based activities (role plays, chats with other
peers, videos, discussions, improvisation, and presentations) aimed to become
more confident, that is, relating self-confidence with self-esteem and mentioning some steps to gain confidence
in that sense e.g., - have a good posture, smile often, be grateful for what
they are, praise others’ achievements, speak more in public and interact with
others, etc. One effective
way to do this is in the context of a game and as stated by Krashen (1981),
“building up their confidence is therefore of the essence because it is one of
the key affective domains facilitating language learners’ spoken production.” (p.52)
As a result of that
cooperative work, students reflected about their role in the class, their
values, their right to be there, associating such processes with supportive
people to keep their thoughts positive; they also became aware of their
abilities to participate in the oral projects in English, shared their
experience, and interacted with others in a foreign language.
The
activities done in class were student centered and communication was authentic.
To do this, the researchers adapted the curriculum and included a relevant affective component
to establish that the affective climate we mentioned before ( including
materials and topics of meaningful work, physical development, creative
expression, transformation activities, and learning skills to reach a positive
management practice,) help to build relationships and connect to this age group
with a good management of conflicts and crisis.
FINDINGS
This pedagogical proposal was evaluated with a lesson plan checklist
proposed by Scrivener (2005) (appendix 6). This was used to describe every
aspect of the classes and see how helpful they were to help most of the
students to improve their oral production with cognitive and affective
strategies. Every aspect of the “lesson plan checklist” was analyzed according
to the two oral projects developed:
-
Aim: The aim of the lesson plans and oral
projects was to help tenth grade students to become more confident and fluent
in EFL.
- Profile of the students: Tenth grade
students at a public in Bogotá, with a beginner’s English level.
According
to the analysis of our findings, we can determine that the objectives were
reached in the sense that reading and writing practice were carried out to
improve structure and sentence formation, along a set of repetition drills were
done to reinforce speaking skills like pronunciation and fluency.
In the case of the Warm-up activities,
they were found to be interesting by the students, they had the opportunity to
interact with others, learn, and be ready for the lesson that would follow. Same
case with the presentation of the materials. Since teaching inductively made students take part in their
learning, through meaningful and contextualized sentences as well as exercises
that motivated them to speak. In other words, students’ self-reflection became part
of the teacher ́s work to transform their learning.
Checking
the guided practice, teachers are now more conscious about the value of the
observation, reflection on the teaching practice, the importance to listen to
others, the student needs in both cognitive and affective domains of learning, like
this, taking into account the needs they have based on the requirements of the
society. The teacher acted as a facilitator in all the tasks related to the
aid.
In
the independent activities, students used all the concepts or information they
have learnt independently in meaningful and creative activities. While in the evaluation
processes, the students´ tasks were properly evaluated according to the aims
and objectives proposed. As a result, we designed follow-up activities for students to practice on
the topics worked during the subsequent lessons, in order to
reach the goals.
RESULTS
Based on the same
three aspects, but focusing too much in the students' self-confidence level, we
conducted a second interview in order to know the students' progress. Hence, we
analyzed Oral
participation in the English class. From that, we can conclude that most of the
students recognized that a wider space to speak was given in class, and that
they had more repetition drills to improve pronunciation, which reinforced
their communicative competences. Whereas in the cognitive domain, students
agreed on the importance to study grammar structures, vocabulary, reading and
writing exercises to improve communication in FL.
Moreover,
we could see that regarding self-confidence most of tenth grade students felt a
lot more comfortable to attend class and eventually participated in in the
proposed activities when being asked to.
They said they received more reinforcement and assistance from the
teacher, which helped them to overcome fears to speak in public, as a result,
they felt more secure and confident at the time to participate in the
communicative activities.
Apart from increasing student's self-confidence, the researcher wanted
to have a group of students willing to communicate, get their message across
smoothly, and understand that making mistakes, speaking reasonably quick and
stopping sometimes (oral pauses) were part of their learning process so they
could reach some fluency in their oral interactions and improve their
performance in their presentations. The emphasis of the projects was more on
content and the delivery of the information, that could be assessed with a
speaking rubric focused on fluency.
As an EFL teacher, the
researcher observed that those students with high self-confidence had a better
disposition and willingness to participate in class activities and get involved
in their learning process in a higher level than those with low self-confidence.
As a consequence, those outgoing students learnt English much easier. This is, ''the way we feel about our capacities and
ourselves can either facilitate or impede our learning.'' (Arnold and Brown,
1999, p. 8)
Apart from the previous
evaluation, the “speaking rubric” was used at the end of the two projects to rate
the learner's speaking competence in fluency in oral activities. In the following
charts, (fig. 2-3) we can
identify the results in which students showed their outcome at the end of the
first and the second project (OP1-OP2); in there, it is clearly seen that there
was a significant increase in the students’ oral production in terms of
vocabulary, in addition to a better communication, and more interaction.
Speaking Rubric for Fluency Activities- ORAL PROJECTS 1 AND 2
Student 1. Student
2. Student 3.
Student4.
Student 5. Student 6. Student
7
Figure 3 Results
from: Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners. O'Malley and Valdez
Pierce, (2005). Adapted from Prada (2015) p 81
|
|
ORAL PROJECT 1 RATING |
ORAL PROJECT 2 RATING |
TOTAL OF RATINGS |
|
Student
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Student
2 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
Student
3 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
|
Student
4 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Student 5 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Student 6 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
|
Student 7 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
Figure 3 Results from: Authentic Assessment
for English Language Learners. O'Malley
and Valdez Pierce, (2005). Adapted from Prada (2015) p 81
Once the oral projects were applied and evaluated, the students’ progress
was evident in some fields. We can observe that, as to what is related to fluency
when speaking:
Oral Project 1. Students 1, 2, 4 and 5 showed an evident
progress, they: use
only basic vocabulary and expressions together with basic structures.Making frequent mistakes, hesitating too
often when speaking - which often interferes with communication- was identified
too; their purpose while communicating was not clear, inferring that they need
a lot of help to communicate. They usually do not respond appropriately or clearly,
we identified frequent problems with pronunciation and intonation. However, students 3, 6 and 7 increased significatively their progress and
performance in the activities proposed, they used
limited vocabulary and expressions,a variety of
structures with frequent errors, or use basic structures with only occasional
errors; this group of students spoke with some hesitation, which often
interfered with communication, they tried to commune, but sometimes did not
respond appropriately or clearly, pronunciation and intonation errors sometimes
made it difficult to understand the student.
Oral Project 2. Students 1, 4 and 5 reached higher
levels, and they were a little more communicative. They used limited vocabulary
and expressions, along with a variety of structures with frequent errors - or
uses basic structures with only occasional errors-; they spoke with some hesitation, which often
interfered with communication, tried to communicate, but sometimes did not
respond appropriately or clearly. Pronunciation and intonation errors sometimes
made it difficult to understand them. While students 2.3.6 and 7 rocketed to a
significant level. They used a variety of vocabulary and expressions but made
some mistakes in word choice; a variety of grammar structures was used, but
some mistakes were found. They also spoke with some hesitation, but that did
not usually interfere with communication; and stayed on task most of the time while
communicating effectively; generally, they responded appropriately and kept
trying to develop the interaction, pronunciation and intonation, which were
usually clear/accurate with only a few problem areas identified.
From the oral
presentations we can affirm that students are now more willing to speak in class and take part in the
oral projects, also that there are fewer hesitations and more interaction which
shows that students’ level of self-confidence has increased. We may say they
believe in themselves and feel more capable to accomplish their tasks.
During the whole school
year, especially during the first and the second project, there was a lot of
work and practice, not only in the students` speaking ability to interact with
others, but also considering all the benefits (input) they received from
reading, writing, and listening exercises. However, the expected improvement in oral production took much more time
than it was Expected, but definitively the constant affective support to
students' self-confidence made the process easier.
As
a consequence of the previous actions, students are now less inhibited or
intimidated by their peers, they do not feel the pressure to reach a grade, on
the contrary, they acknowledge the necessity to improve. Some of them worked in
groups while others think they are responsible for their own work and decided
to work alone. They expressed their appreciation for the teachers support and assistance while reaching
their goals.
The results obtained by the researcher were according to the general objective expected for
this study which was to increase self-confidence level in tenth grade
students at a
school level in order to improve their EFL oral production and fluency seeking to benefit their
English performance. Since the
topics and vocabulary had already been worked in previous classes, students had
the opportunity to “recycle” it and integrated it to new communicative
situations. The researcher also observed
that the students were taking advantage of corrections made by their peers,
which made them improve in every speaking activity.
CONCLUSIONS
The increase in self-confidence of the students who took part in this
study as how it affected their oral production in foreign languages was evident;
as seen in the initial speaking rubric, the speaking rubrics for the fluency
activities for the oral projects 1 and 2 and the language plus testing set. The
general question was answered during, and at the end of
the implementation of the pedagogical proposal described above when the
researcher developed a set of Oral Projects presentations and lesson plans with
a high component of “building self-confidence” activities. As a result, they
became aware of their abilities to participate in the oral projects in EFL,
shared their experiences and interacted with others in the target language.
What is more, other students who did not use to participate, were motivated and
supported by their peers.
This research study also showed us the importance to increase the socio-
affective component which should be taken into account in any school curricula for EFL classes.
Smith (1999) and Scimonelli (2002) argued that affective and social language learning strategies
as well as communication strategies are the areas in which the teacher's
intervention should come first in order to develop positive frames of mind in
the students and help them overcome the stress and sense of discomfort that a
poor or low oral command of English sometimes causes as cited in Fandiño (2007).
At the end of this research project, there was an evident
progress in students’ oral production, interaction, but above all, disposition
to communicate with the teacher and other peers. Some students still depend on
the listener for clarification and put ideas across with some difficulty, but
their speeches were generally comprehensible and to accomplish their oral tasks
they d for vocabulary at times.
The fact that students are now less reluctant to speak in English class
and more willing take
part in the oral projects, helped to fulfill students’ needs in both:
the cognitive and the affective domain of EFL learning, taking into account,
then, the needs they have based on the
requirements of the society.
Based on this study, the researcher suggests that it is extremely
necessary that language teachers use different
techniques to build up positive attitudes among students so they can feel free
to speak in class. Teachers must understand the importance of affection in the
classroom, believing then that all students can learn. Teachers who boost
students’ confidence in the classroom can provide the scaffolding for more
effective and efficient learning. Besides that, as Andres (2002) affirms ''if we want our students to develop their
inherent potential to learn, the affective variables such as anxiety,
motivation, self-esteem, and inhibition... [and] the inner needs of the
learners can no longer be neglected''. (p 9)
The findings of this
study can be replicated or adapted to other groups because it is well known
that the “attention to affect can improve language teaching and language
learning , but
the language classroom can , in turn,
contribute in a very significant way to educating learners
affectively” Arnold (1999)
p 3. We can determine that students´ participation improved in all the developed
activities, proposing his approach to other teachers so as to achieve the integration
of those projects into the English programs. This pedagogical proposal have also
contributed to help students develop their personal and professional goals plus
to enhance their opportunities
for the future.
REFERENCES
Anderson,
L.W. and Krathwohl, D.R.., et al (eds...) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning,
Teaching, and Assessing: A revision of Bloom`s Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston: Pearson Education Group.
Andres,
V. (2002). The Influence of Affective Variables on EFL/ESL Learning and
Teaching. The journal of the imagination in language learning and teaching, 7.
Retrieved from http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/andres.html
Arnold,
J. (1999). Affect in Language Learning. Madrid: Cambridge University
Press.
Arnold,
J. (2011). Attention to affect in language learning (in) “Anglistik.
International Journal on English Studies.” 22 (1) 11-22.
Brown, H. (2000). Principles of
Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood New York: Prentice-Hall.
Brown,
J.D. (2003). Promoting Fluency in EFL Classrooms. Tokio.
Paper presented at the 2nd annual JALT pan-SIG Conference.
Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press .
Burwash, S. C., Snover, R., & Krueger, R.
(2016). Up Bloom’s pyramid with slices of Fink’s pie: Mapping an occupational
therapy curriculum. The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy. 4(4). https://doi.org/10.15453/2168-6408.1235. p.5.
Bygate, M. et al. (Eds.) (2001). Researching
Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow:
Longman.
Castrillón (2010). Students’ perceptions about
the development of their oral skills in English as a foreign language teacher
training program. Unpublished master’s theses. Universidad Tecnológica
de Pereira. Common European Framework (cef).(n.d.). Retrieved June 12, 2012 from: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/framework_en.pdf.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison,
k. (2011). Research methods in Education, 7th edition, London:
Routledge.
Dornyei, Z. (2005). Motivational
Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge Language Teaching Library. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00207.x
Essberger,
J. (2004). English Speaking Practice
through Presentations. England: ©1997-2020English Club.
Harmer,
J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex: Pearson-Longman
Horwitz,
E; Horwitz, M; Cope, J (1986) Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety in The Modern Language Journal, 70 (2) 125-132.
Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language
Teachers Associations.
Krashen, S. (1981) Second Language Acquisition and Second Language
Learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Mendoza, J. (2009). Factors that affect students’ oral participation.
Master thesis for master degree. Universidad Del Norte: Barranquilla.
Mizuki, P. (2003). Metacognitive
strategies, reflection, and autonomy in the classroom. Barfield & Nix
(eds.).
Patavina, P. (1981). Generic
affective competencies for teachers of socially and emotionally
disturbed
adolescents. Austin: Paper presented at the regional conference on Emotional Disturbance.
Scimonelli, P. (2006) Language Learning
strategies: Helping the students find “il metodo”. In
Norwich institute for language education: Main assignment, 2002. Retrieved
August 2006 at 226
http://web.tiscalinet.it/colabianchi/NorwichSITE/BRUNA%20main%20assign.-
%20LLS.doc
Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning Teaching. Oxford: MacMillan.
Stovall,
G. (1998). Spoken language: What it is and how to teach it. Washington, DC:
Center for Applied Linguistics.
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the
implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1). 38.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to
language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Prada (2015). Students’ self-confidence as a way to
improve english oral production in tenth grade
students at Ricaurte school. http://hdl.handle.net/10901/7878
Urrutia, W. y Vega, E. (2010). Encouraging Teenagers to Improve Speaking
Skills through Games in a Colombian Public School. PROFILE. 12 (1),11-31.
Yashima,
T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The
influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to
communicate and second language communication. The Modern Language Journal, 54,
119-152.
Zapata (2007). Students’ Personality Type and Attitudes toward Classroom
Participation. Proceedings of the CATESOL State Conference, 2005.
APPENDIX 1
LANGUAGE PLUS TESTING SET
The number at the top of each column on the SOLOM determines the value
of each box checked in the column. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 score)
Based on your observation of the student, indicate with an “X” across the
square in each category which best describes the student’s abilities.
1. The SOLOM should only be administered by persons who themselves score
at level 4 or above in the language being assessed
2. Students scoring at level 1 in all categories can be said to have no
proficiency in the language. Pre-Production 5- Early Production 6 to 10 -Speech
Emergence 11 to 15 Intermediate Fluency 16 to 20 -Advanced Fluency 21 - 25
|
|
1.Pre production |
2. Early production |
3. Speech Emergence |
4. Intermed. Fluency |
5. Advanced Fluency |
Score |
|
A. Comprehension |
Cannot be said
to understand even simple conversation |
Has great
difficulty following what is said. Can comprehend only “social conversation”
spoken slowly and with frequent repetitions |
Understands
most of |
Understands
nearly everything at normal speech, although occasional repetition may be
necessary |
Understands
everyday conversation and normal classroom discussions without difficulty |
|
|
B. Fluency |
Speech is so
halting and fragmentary as to make conversation virtually impossible |
Usually
hesitant: often forced into silence by language limitations |
Speech in
everyday conversation and classroom discussion frequently disrupted by the
student’s search for the correct manner of expression |
Speech in
everyday conversation and classroom discussion generally fluent, with
occasional lapses while the student searches the correct manner of expression |
Speech in
everyday conversation and classroom discussion fluent and effortless
approximating that of a native speaker |
|
|
C. Vocabulary |
Vocabulary
limitations |
Misuse of words
and very limited vocabulary: comprehension quite difficult |
Student
frequently uses |
Student
occasionally uses inappropriate terms and/or must rephrase ideas because of
lexical inadequacies |
Use of
vocabulary and |
|
|
D. Pronunciation |
Pronunciation
problems so severe as to make speech virtually un- intelligible |
Very hard to
understand because of pronunciation problems. Must frequently repeat to be
understood |
Pronunciation
problems necessitate concentration on the part of the listener: occasionally
may be misunderstood |
Always
intelligible though one is conscious of a definite accent and occasional
inappropriate intonation |
Pronunciation
and intonation approximate that of a native speaker |
|
|
E. Grammar |
Errors in
grammar and word order so severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible |
Grammar and
word |
Makes frequent
errors of grammar and word order which occasionally obscure meaning |
Occasionally
makes grammatical and/or word errors which do not obscure meaning |
Grammatical
usage and word order approximate that of a native speaker |
|
©
2009 Dr. Catherine Collier. (Taken from Prada, 2015)
APPENDIX 2
Speaking rubric for fluency activities
Name: __________________________________________ Rating:
__________
Level / Segment: _______________
Activity: ____________
Comments: _____________________________________________________________________________
|
Rating |
Demonstrated Competence |
|
4 |
• Uses a variety of vocabulary
and expressions • Uses a variety of structures
with only occasional grammatical errors • Speaks smoothly, with little
hesitation that does not interfere with communication • Stays on task and communicates
effectively; almost always responds appropriately and always tries to develop
the interaction • Pronunciation and intonation
are almost always very clear/accurate |
|
3 |
• Uses a variety of vocabulary
and expressions, but makes some errors in word choice • Uses a variety of grammar
structures, but makes some errors • Speaks with some hesitation,
but it does not usually interfere with communication • Stays on task most of the time
and communicates effectively; generally, responds appropriately and keeps
trying to develop the interaction • Pronunciation and intonation are
usually clear/accurate with a few problem areas |
|
2 |
• Uses limited vocabulary and
expressions • Uses a variety of structures
with frequent errors, or uses basic structures with only occasional errors • Speaks with some hesitation,
which often interferes with communication • Tries to communicate, but
sometimes does not respond appropriately or clearly • Pronunciation and intonation
errors sometimes make it difficult to understand the student |
|
1 |
• Uses only basic vocabulary and
expressions • Uses basic structures, makes
frequent errors • Hesitates too often when
speaking, which often interferes with communication • Purpose isn’t clear; needs a
lot of help communicating; usually does not respond appropriately or clearly • Frequent problems with
pronunciation and intonation |
Adapted
from Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners by J. Michael O'Malley
and Lorraine Valdez Pierce, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
World View Levels 1-4: Video/DVD
Speaking Rubric for Fluency Activities Copyright © 2005 by Pearson Education,
Inc. Permission granted to reproduce for classroom use.
(taken from Prada, 2015)
APPENDIX 3
QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW.
Name._________________________________________________________
Grade____________
Dear student with the
following questions we want to know your opinion about the English class in
aspects like: Participation, methodology, and how you feel being part of it.
Please, feel free to answer on your own.
•
ORAL PARTICIPATION IN THE ENGLISH CLASS.
1. Does the teacher provide
you a space to speak English in class? Which one?
_________________________________________________________________________
2. When do you speak English
in class?
__________________________________________________________________________
3. Do your classmates help you
to develop speaking skill?
__________________________________________________________________________
B. COGNITIVE DOMAIN.
4. Are your classes full of
rote activities such as rote drills, rote dialogues, reciting rules and
practicing patterns?
_________________________________________________________________________
5. Are you learning vocabulary
and expressions through comparisons, contrasts, or matching?
_________________________________________________________________________
6. Do you receive feedback
from your teacher of your presentations? How?
__________________________________________________________________________
7. Question: Are the topics of
your oral projects meaningful and interesting for you?
________________________________________________________________________
C. SELF-CONFIDENCE:
8. Do you feel comfortable
when you speak English in front of the class?
_________________________________________________________________________
9. What do you prefer at the time
to present your projects, working in a group, or by yourself? Why? How do you
feel?
_________________________________________________________________________
10. How do you feel when you
have an oral language activity in the classroom?
_________________________________________________________________________
11. Does your teacher “project
positive expectations” and reinforce positive behavior through expressions of
appreciation?
________________________________________________________________________
12. How do you think other
students and your teacher in class will react if you make mistakes?
__________________________________________________________________________
13. Do you think that you are
good in English; are you confident of your ability?
Source: Taken from Prada (2015)
APPENDIX 4
|
Oral Project 1. Daily Routines |
||||
|
TOPICS |
ACTIVITIES |
TIME |
RESOURCES |
ASSESSMENT |
|
*Routines *Schedules *My perfect
day |
*Video
Our Teachers –My daily routine” *Power
Point Presentations on schedules and daily activities. *specific vocabulary about daily activities *Listening activities
*repetition and drills on pronunciation *voice
recording reporting
(cooperative) Role
plays *matching activities *verbs activities (bingo) *songs |
9 HOURS |
-English
grammar in use-online- Raymond Murphy/Cambridge University Press. -Our Teachers –My
daily routine- British Council. www.britishcouncil.org.hk Hobbies
& free time (handout). |
Evaluate Oral Presentations base on: *content
and delivery. *fluency (smoothness and
confidence). *interaction
(clarity and use of conversation management strategies). *role
play *sharing reactions
and opinions *debating
different sides of an issue
*providing a summary *providing a “critical review” Speaking Rubric for Fluency Activities |
|
Oral Project 2. Past Holidays. |
||||
|
TOPIC |
ACTIVITIES |
TIME |
RESOURCES |
ASEESSMENT |
|
*Holidays and free time activities *Biography *Historical events |
*Video *Power Point Presentations on schedules
and daily activities. *specific
vocabulary *Listening activities *repetition and
drills on pronunciation *voice recording reporting (cooperative) Role plays *matching
activities *verbs
activities (bingo) *songs |
9 HOURS |
Video.”Past Tense English with Sound and Light” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-XNvlR_YEY *Holidays (handout)http://www.EFLsensei.com/ Me-bag ( Seeds of confidence, 2010 Arnold & De Andres) |
Evaluate
Oral Presentations base on: *content and delivery. *fluency (smoothness and
confidence). *interaction
(clarity and use of conversation management strategies). *role
playing *sharing
reactions and opinions
*debating different sides of an issue *providing a summary *providing a
“critical review” Speaking Rubric for Fluency Activities |
APPENDIX 5
Lesson Plan Checklist. Scrivener, Jim
(2005)
1. Aim: Is this a topic that can be continued in
future classes as well?
a. Is it meaningful to your students?
b. Do you use it throughout the entire
lesson? (I.e. are you consistent?)
2. Profile of students: who are they?
a. Does your material match the interest,
age and language level of your students?
b. Have you taken into consideration the
size of the class?
3. Objectives: Are your objectives observable?
a. Do your reading objectives involve the
use of skills that will improve comprehension?
b. Do your writing objectives focus on
communication?
c. Oral repetition and simply reading out
loud do not guarantee comprehension. Nor do
reading
and writing a grammar point.
4. Warm-Up: Is it interesting?
a. Does it get the students' attention and
prepare them for the lesson that will follow?
b. Can you be creative and use something
more interesting?
5. Presentation of new material objectives: How are
you teaching your students?
a. Is it all taught deductively? Can you
do it differently?
b. Is the teacher doing all of the
teaching? Is it a teacher-centered class? Can the students take a bigger part
in their learning? Is it a student-centered class?
c. Are you teaching something beneficial
to the students’ acquisition of English?
d. Are sentences and exercises meaningful
and contextualized?
6. Guided activity: Is it something more than simply
repeating and filling in the blanks? (Including teacher's help)
a. Are you acting as a facilitator while
your students are practicing their language?
b. Can you be more interactive and
creative?
c. Is it
meaningful and related to your aim?
7. Independent activity: Are students practicing the
objective? (Excluding teacher's help)
a. Is it meaningful?
b. Is it creative?
8. Evaluation: Are you evaluating properly on your
objectives?
a. Is it meaningful? b. Is it related to
your aim?
9. Follow-up: Are you
providing more practice on today's lesson?
(Taken from Prada (2015)