Creating an Effective Learning - Essay Example

?Technology in TEFL Introduction Learning depends on the teacher as much as it depends on the learner. This is to say that for any effective learning to take place among students, it is very necessary that the grounds for learning be well prepared by how and what teachers teach. When teachers are not able to adapt the most workable and appropriate teaching approaches in teaching lessons in the classroom, understanding and comprehension among students become extremely difficult. Subsequent attempt by students to learn also becomes difficult. It is against this background that this assignment is being written. This assignment aims at exploring the rational by which computer-based learning material has been designed. The computer-based learning material was designed to aid teaching among a group of Arabic students who are learning English at the per-intermediate level. The assignment would also give the learning context for the creation of the computer-based learning material. The learning context shall be made up of a vivid description of the students who are to benefit from the computer-based learning material that has been designed. Portions of the description shall include the strengths and weaknesses of students, the learning needs of students as well as the prospects of the students in becoming excellent English students. It is worth emphasizing that the computer-based learning material was designed based on the needs, weaknesses and future prospects of the students in questions. 2. Learning context Type of lesson: General English Skills Covered - vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, reading, listening and speaking Level: Pre-Intermediate Time: 60 minutes Class profile The class to benefit from the computer based learning material is a group of Arab students at the secondary school level. The learning level of these students can best be described as being at the pre-intermediate level. As far as general English language is concerned, the class covers all skills under English language thus vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, reading, listening and speaking. This means that students cover all the four major skills or aspects of English language, which can be grouped into two major forms as receptive (reading and listening) and productive (writing and speaking). As noted by Gucker (2010), students generally acquire and master the receptive skills before productive skills and this is no different among the class. The students have a better command over reading and listening than writing and speaking. Clearly, the situation has arisen because with the receptive skills, much of the effort comes from teachers as compared to students. For instance in listening, it is the teacher who does the speaking for students to list. Students therefore hear the correct usage and pronunciation of English words. The same applies to reading as the teacher normally reads verbatim for students to follow. However with speaking and writing, students are expected to produce their own efforts, a situation that causes a lot of learning stress to students. Again, in students’ attempt to speak or write, it has been observed that they always have conflict of language usage with their native Arabic language. The class is made of fifteen (15) students, all of whom are females. The number of students is relatively handy and so class monitoring and feedback is not as difficult as would have been in classes with larger class size. This means that the problem identified does not have much to do with the class size. However the problem could be linked to the limited instructional period for English language. This is because students have English lessons only two hours in a week. This situation results in students having very little time to practice English language. Clearly, language learning is an interactive exercise that demands constant learning and application of ideas studied to ensure proper comprehension (Koduah, 2001:91). Needs of Students and Aim for Lesson The most immediate needs of students has to do with their pending end of year examination in English language, which measures their linguistic competence in all four major skills thus reading, writing, speaking and listening. Students shall also be examined in three systems which are grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation. The most immediate need of students however seem to center more on grammar as a greater majority of the examination focuses on grammar. A critical study of students examination papers reveal that grammar covers more than half of the entire marks at stake. Quite apart from the examination, there is no denying the fact that in students’ everyday interaction with friends, strangers and family members, they are expected to use to right grammatical expressions to make their ideas well understood. As Jabak (2009) notes, the difficulty of Arab speakers to learning English grammar arises due to conflict of construction when it comes to direct translation of ideas or sentences from Arabic to English. Closely related to the need for students to interact with others is the problem of pronunciation. The Using English Forum (2011) notes that difficulty if phonetic pronunciation remains a great challenge for most Arab students in their attempts to learning English language as a second language. These needs of students informs the aim of the lesson which has to do with the designing of an interactive computer-based learning material that will enable students to learn the English language in an easier and student-centered manner. Strengths and weaknesses The major strengths of students is in their ability to listen attentively and to read with much ease. Due to this, students are able to understand every bit of instructions given out in the teaching-learning environment. They are also able to make meaning out of what they read because they have mastered reading to a very large extent. Another strength of students has to do with the use of computers. Because students can read English easily, they are able to use academic and interactive websites and in some cases, participate in website forums and social networks. Students however have weakness in writing, grammatical constructions and speaking. This limits students’ ability to write long essays and make useful meaning when speaking English language. Language analysis and L1 Contrast Shoebottom (2011) notes that “Arabic is from the Semitic language family, hence its grammar is very different from English. There is a large potential for errors of interference when Arab learners produce written or spoken English.” Such difference in basic grammar creates a lot of difficulty for Arab students in their endeavor to learn and master English language. Generally, rules governing the use of English grammar such as subject-verb-agrement, plural ans singular forms of nouns and prepositions differ among the two language sets (Boakye, 2001:32). Materials The computer-based learning material was created using the Hot Potatoes Software. This includes authentic web-based texts, pop song lyrics, a magazine article and hyperlinks to Corpus Linguistics and grammar web pages. Timetable fit The computer-based learning material that has been designed fits perfectly in the CALL lessons because the material is learner-centered, interactive, easy to use and makes use of students’ previous knowledge. The material was designed with the awareness that students have been taken through as many vocabulary exercises as possible. This consideration was particularly important because students needed to abreast with the words and sentences that accompany the learning material. Without this, it was going to be extremely difficult for students to use the learning material on their own. 3. Rationale Doughty (1991:1 cited in Levy 1997: 53) and Chapelle (2009: 750) note that pedagogical research and second language acquisition theoretical base should be the guiding principles around which the successful use of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in language teaching should be judged. To this effect, the approach used in this rationale focuses on six major areas which are: raising schema activity, grammar teaching approach, language teaching approach, CALL as a form of learning motivation, self learning and the role of teacher in CALL. These different areas of the rationale make the rationale more of eclectic in nature. Raising schema activity Lim (2009) posits that schemas are “patterns of repeatable behaviour which can often be noticed in young children’s play.” Building on the phenomenon of schemas, the proponents of cognitive processing models in second language acquistions have advocated the need for raising scheme activities in the successful learning of second languages. Though the class in question is not a very young class but a secondary school class, it could be said in terms of their level of mastery of the English language that these students are young and therefor have all the implications of the raising schema activities concepts applying to them also. The raising schema activity places emphasis on the relevant previous knowledge of students. This is because schema in itself deals with children’s repetitive actions; meaning things that children might have done in the past and continue to do. Writing on the importance of students’ previous knowledge or experience in learning second language, Levy (1997:56) states that “can assist retention by providing a framework for storage, altering the new information by making it fit the schemata and allows the learner to make inferences to fill the knowledge gaps (Levy 1997: 56). It is not therefore surprising that crusaders of the cognitive process model such as Doughty (1991), Ascraft (1993) and Bonner (1998) have all embraced the essence of raising schema activities. From the analogue built above the computer-based learning material, ‘Use Hot Potatoes’ have been designed in such a way that makes use of students’ previous knowledge and experience. The application of the learning material also depends largely on students’ previous knowledge and experience. With the design of the computer-based learning material, students’ previous experience was put to play by using words and vocabularies that are at the level of students’ learning and of which students are very familiar with. Most of the vocabularies that were chosen were picked from the stduents’ own textbooks and in some cases textbooks of their preceding classes to ensure that students have used all such vocabularies before. What is more, the exercises chosen in the learning material have been grouped in formats and style that students are familiar with. Some of these styles include matching pictures to words and crossword. These are types of exercises that students are very familiar with. Again, there are several portions and areas of the computer-based learning material that makes use of student’s L1, which is Arabic. Some key words are given in Arabic whereas certain relevant examples of what students are expected to do are also given in Arabic. These approaches have make judicious use of raising schema and are therefore the teacher’s hope that students will be able to follow the use of the learning material more easily even as they use the materials on their won. Grammar Teaching Approach Paradowski (2007) explains the difference between inductive and deductive approaches to teaching grammar by stating that the deductive approach takes place simply by “providing learners with the ready grammar rule, describing en detail how the new structure is formed, what its components are, and in what type of context it can be used.” The inductive teaching on the other hand involves “explicitly telling them off the bat what the rule is, s/he may supply them with carefully selected intelligible linguistic data in context, usually in the form of a text illustrating the use of the particular grammatical structure” (Paradowski, 2007). As a matter of fact, both inductive and deductive approaches to teaching grammar come with their own merits. To this effect, the computer-based learning material, ‘Use Hot Potatoes’ was prepared by factoring both inductive and deductive teaching into account. Portions of the material use deductive teaching as much as other portions use the inductive teaching. The selection process as to which area was worth using inductive teaching and which areas were worth using deductive teaching was made as a result of the concept of grammar that the material was addressing at a particular point in time. Basically, in lessons were the teacher wanted grammar learning to be based more on students’ own experience and exploitation, the inductive approach was used. On the other hand, in lessons were the teacher wanted to take center stage in the learning process, the deductive approach was used. The idea to incorporate both deductive and inductive approaches to teaching grammar makes the computer-based learning material student friendly because it caters for individual needs of all students in the class. In a typical classroom situation, the teacher uses both inductive and deductive approaches to teaching grammar. Though students are more familiar with deductive approach to teaching grammar than the inductive teaching approach, the teacher has observed that there are some students who are generally comfortable with the deductive approach to teaching grammar. This is why the teacher believes that the combination of both approaches would make the computer-based material student friendly. It is however worth noting that because the class is generally familiar with the deductive approach to teaching, most portions of the material makes use of this teaching approach. Szkolne (2005 cited in Abuseileek 2009: 321) notes that when deductive approach to teaching grammar is used, it “prevents students from making incorrect conclusions that need to be verified and corrected.” Writing on the benefits of the inductive approach, Szkolne (ibid.) and Long (1996 cited in Kessler 2009: 79) posit that “inductive grammar teaching can be beneficial as it engages learners in the process of knowledge construction.” By using both approaches, it means that the teacher and students are going to benefit from all the advantages that come with the two approaches to teaching grammar. Language Teaching Approach Just as in the case of grammar teaching approach, the language teaching approach also made use of more than one approach. This time round, the prescriptive and descriptive approaches to language teaching were in place. Hagen (2010) observes that “when we study language descriptively, we try to find the unconscious rules that people follow when they construct sentences.” He continues to state that in prescriptive approach however, “tells you how you should speak and write.” This is to say that whereas descriptive approach to teaching language focuses more on getting the rules right, prescriptive approach to teaching language focuses more on saying what needs to be said at a particular point in time. This assertion therefore makes it right to argue that the need to use either description or prescriptive approach to teaching language arises from the kind of purpose or that the teacher wants to achieve out of the language learning class. To this effect, Hagen (2010) notes that “linguists would describe the rules of a language, and pedagogues would use those descriptions to make textbooks to teach language.” Taking the background of Arab students into consideration, it is worth mentioning that most Arab teachers of English follow the prescriptive approach to language teaching whereby they focus on students’ ability to speak English without giving much premium to rules of the language. Arab teachers of English are more mindful of the linguistics aspect of English language thereby focusing on prescriptive approach to teaching English. Chapelle (2009: 747) states that for teachers whose attention is on prescriptive approach, language tasks should be made “in such a way to provide learners with optimal amounts and circumstances of exposure to the targeted linguistic areas to be learnt.” The realization that Arab teachers use and focus much on prescriptive approach to teaching language not withstanding, the teacher in designing the computer-based learning material did not use the prescriptive approach to teaching language exclusively. This is because the teacher recognizes the need for students to write and pass their final examination. With the final examination, students are expected to very wide scope of knowledge in the basic rules that govern the English language. This is to say that the final examination of students is not just about the ability to speak English or use English expressions but also the need to understand every bit of the semantics, rules and guiding principles of the language. To this effect, the computer-based learning material was designed with a conscious realization of both linguistic and pedagogical intentions in mind. This way, both prescriptive and deductive approaches to teaching the English language were accounted for. This means that by the end of the use of the CALL, students would be in a position to both do well in their end of year examination and in their daily interactions with other people in English. CALL as a Form of Learner Motivation Motivation is a very important aspect of learning. Motivation is essentially important when it comes to learning of second language and learning among beginners. This is because the beginner of a second language class is being introduced to a relatively new concept, which he or she may not be familiar with. For this reason, if conditions that create motivation are not put in place, the learner or student may see the concept as extremely difficult and unsurmountable. The Human Resource Journal (2011) defines motivation as what a person’s intrinsic enthusiasm is about and drive to accomplish activities at work. This statement means that motivation is an inner will to get something or an activity accomplished. In our situation the said activity could be linked or related to second language acquisition tasks. We also get the idea from the definition that before a learner can effectively master a set of learning tasks, the learner or student need to be aided by the presence of conditions and factors that can boost an inner enthusiasm to learn. In the field of psychology, such conditions and factors are referred to stimuli and can be used appropriately in the classroom situation also. In a typical classroom situation, it is important that the learner has a stimulus that would condition him or her to learn. In most cases, teachers use rewards of various kinds to stand for these stimuli. Hasan (2007) explains that “Motivation is something that comes from within the individual to prompt him to an action. Motivation is a function of individual will.” From Hasan’s explanation, there is a realization that motivation in itself cannot be put in a student or simply put, a student cannot be motivated. Rather, it takes a student to motivate him or herself. But if motivation is needed to make the student learn, what role then does the teacher have to play? The teacher needs to create the environment for motivation to take place among students. This is different from saying that the teacher needs to motivate students because motivation is an individual will. The use of CALL is one tool that every teacher can rely on as a workable means of creating a motivating environment for second language learners. This argument is built from a series from factors. In the first place, CALL and computer-based learning materials like ‘Use Hot Potatoes’ are interactive. Once second language learners are presented with interactive tools, it becomes easier for them to motivate themselves because learning seizes to be boring. Secondly, CALL and computer-based learning materials are student centered, catering for the immediate needs of students. This is a factor that ensures motivation because the student sees him or herself as the focus of learning and therefore the need to participate in learning. Finally, the use of CALL and computer-based learning materials makes learning easy and full of fun. To the Arab student, using the computer-based learning material; ‘Use Hot Potatoes’ would be more of an entertaining rather than a stressful learning period. As the student entertains him or herself with the music in the background, different colors and different animations, learning will be taking place indirectly. Self Learning Self learning is an important aspect of education. Clearly, it is not every time that there will be a teacher available to issue out instructions in the classroom. This makes the need to be a self-learner inevitable if one aims at becoming very successful in his or her attempt to learn a second language such as English. The Motivation Tools (2010) posits that “self-educated people are not dependent on others for knowledge. If they need a specialized skill, they know how to acquire it without dependence on authority.” As much as self learning is an almost-mandatory ability that should be possessed by every student, it does not happen easily or automatically for every student. The ability to be a self-learner becomes even more difficult when one has to learn a new language. This is because unlike learning a new concept in ones own language where the person can read and understand what is being read, learning a new language entails learning a group of words and sentences that cannot even be read or understood. This therefore means that a lot of work is needed from teachers of second and foreign language to ensure that their students reach that stage where the students can do self learning. To attain a stage where students will become self learners, teachers must first focus on making their learners master the basis of the second, especially reading and comprehension. This is because almost all self learners depend on the ability to read to do self learning. The ‘Use Hot Potato’ software is a very useful tool for ensuring and promoting self learning. But as stated above, the software and all other forms of computer assisted language learning materials can be used for self learning purposes only after the teacher has achieved maximum learning among students where students can read and understand what they read. After this is ensured, the computer-based learning material then becomes an excellent avenue for promoting and self learning. One means by which the computer-based language learning material designed becomes useful and essential is the fact that it serves as “a means of checking the accuracy and completeness of the processed secondary sources, dictionaries etc” Scott et al. (1993: 9 cited in Levy 1997: 65). Very typical of the ‘Use Hot Potato’ software, there are areas and columns where students can assess their performance and be given the correct options to their wrong answers. This way, students are able to use the material even without the presence of the teacher. What is more, there are aspects of the learning material where the meaning of text and other forms of instructions are given in the first language of learners. This is also avenue for creating self learning because when students read the instructions in their first language, it becomes easier for them to understand what is expected of them in using the computer-based learning material. The Role of the Teacher in using CALL Materials Though the ‘Use Hot Potato’ software is student-centered and ensures self-learning among students, there still remains a lot that teachers are supposed to do regarding the computer-assisted language learning materials or software. First and foremost, it is important for teachers to realize their role as facilitators of the software. The role of teachers as facilitators means that teachers are not supposed to take center stage regarding the manipulation of the material but that they are supposed to guide the students on the use of the material. The teacher is supposed to give vivid and down-to-earth explanation to students regarding the use of the learning material. In the classroom, the teacher must ensure that every student has gained maximum understanding on the use of the material. Next, the teacher is supposed to be available to give out constant support to students who may encounter difficulties along the line with the use of the material. As students are only at the pre-intermediate level and are coming from a background that has so much contrast with the English language, it is common that students would have occasional challenges understanding certain components of the software as they use it. In such cases, teachers are supposed to be around to help students. Yet again, the teacher as a responsibility as far as giving feedback is concerned. Sauro 2009:97 advises that the practice of giving feedback should go beyond merely informing students whether their answers are correct or wrong but should move a step further to involve the provision of information on how students can improve their performance. Computer assisted language learning materials have been identified as an effective way of ensuring the teachers give feedback to students. This advantage is achieved even more quickly when the computer assisted language learning materials are integrated into the regular classroom section such that teachers give immediate feedback on assignments that students take with their ‘Use Hot Potato’ language learning materials. As constantly as possible, the teacher must accept his role regarding the use of computer assisted language learning materials. This advice is in line with an argument put forward by Ahmad et al. (1985: 2) who state that “a teacher should support language development among learners through creating learning opportunities and assistance in achieving language aims.” REFERENCE LIST Gucker M (2010). Language Development Strategies for Stage 3 English Language Learners. Assessed May 21, 2011 from http://www.ehow.com/m/list_6526311_language-3-english-language-learner.html Koduah I (2001). Language as an everyday Exercise. PrintMark Group Limited. Kumasi: Ghana Using English Forum (2011). Pronunciation Problems among Arab Speakers. Accessed May 21, 2011 from www.usingenglish.com/forum/pronunciation-phonetics/37267-pronunciation-problems-among-arab-speakers.html Jabak O. (2009). Analysis of the Most Commonly Recurring Difficulties Facing Arab Students when Translating into English. Accessed May 21, 2011 from http://www.king_saud.academia.edu/OmarJabak/Book/152856/Analysis_of_the_Most_Commonly_Recurring_Difficulties_Facing_Arab_Students_when_Translating_into_English_MA_Dissertation_ Showbottom P. (2011). Language Difference. Assessed May 22, 2011 from http://esl/fis.edu/grammar/langdiff/arabic.htm Boakye E.O (2011). Communication in Language Learning and Teaching – The Differences and Similarities. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Chapelle, C. (1998). 'Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA'. Language Learning and Technology. 2/1: 22 – 34. Doughty, C. (1991). 'Theoretical Motivations for IVD Software Research and Development'. Cited in Bush, M. D., A. Slaton, M. Slayden and M. Verano. 1991. 'Interactive Videodisc: The 'Why' and the 'How'. CALICO Monograph Series. Brigham Young University. Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Context and Conceptualisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ashcraft, M.H. (1993). Human Memory and Cognition. New York: Harper Collins. Bonner, J. (1988). Implications of Cognitive Theory for Instructional Design: Revisited. Educational Communication and Technology Journal. 36/1: 3 – 14. Lim G (2009). Early Years Childcare. Accessed May 21, 2011 from http://earlychildcare.wordpress.com/2009/12/11/schemas-how-to-understand-and-extend-children-behaviour/ Paradowski M.B. (2007). Deductive vs. Inductive Teaching. Accessed May 20, 2011 from http://knol.google.com/k/deductive-vs-inductive-teaching# Szkolne, W. 2005. 'Approaches to Teaching Grammar'. Cited in Abuseileek, A. F. 2009. 'The effect of using an online-based course on the learning of grammar inductively and deductively'. ReCALL. 21/3: 319 – 336. Hagen K (2010). Descriptive vs. Prescriptive Polysyllabic. Accessed May 21, 2011 from http://www.polysyllabic.com/?q=navigating/intro/prescriptive Chapelle, C. 2009. 'The Relationship Between Second Language Acquisition Theory and Computer-Assisted Language Learning'. The Modern Language Journal. 93: 742 – 753. Human Resource Journal (2011). What is Employee Motivation? Accessed May 13, 2011 from http://humanresources.about.com/od/motivationrewardretention/Employee_Motivation_Recognition_Rewards_Retention.htm Hasan G.Y. (2007). Understanding Motivation. Accessed May 6, 2011 from http://www.dirjournal.com/guides/motivating-your-staff/ Motivation Tools (2010). Self Education – Learning without Instructors. Assessed May 14, 2011 from http://www.motivation-tools.com/youth/self_education.html Scott, M., T. Johns and S. Murison-Bowie. 1993. MicroConcord. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sauro, S. 2009. 'Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar'. Language Learning and Technology. 13/1: 96 – 120. Read More