Assignment - ORLC

SUBJECT RESIT:
OBSERVATION & RESEARCH / PRÁCTICA REFLEXIVA Y
DESARROLLO PROFESIONAL

GENERAL INFORMATION:

This assignment has to fulfil the following conditions:

- Length: 5 pages (without including cover, index or appendices –if there are any-).
- Type of font: Arial or Times New Roman.
- Size: 11.
- Line height: 1.5.
- Alignment: Justified.

The assignment has to be done in this Word document and has to fulfil the rules of
presentation and edition, as for quotes and bibliographical references which are
detailed in the Study Guide.

Also, it has to be submitted following the procedure specified in the “Subject

evaluation” document. Sending it to the tutor’s e-mail is not permitted. Once the
student submits the assignment, he/she shall write to the subject’s professor at that
very moment so that the professor is aware of the student’s assignment and can grade
it.

In addition to this, it is very important to read the assessment criteria, which can be
found in the Study Guide.

The assignment mark is 100% of the final mark.

1
 Assignment - ORLC

Assignment:

Read the six case studies in the pdf document, each of which investigates a
different topic: literature, grammar, oral English, teaching techniques, language
learning, writing. When you have finished reading, follow the instructions below.
(From Wallace 1998: 166-169). Of the six case studies outlined above, which
topic would be of most interest/relevance for a group of students with which you
are familiar? Think about how you would need to adapt the case study for your
target group's needs by considering the following questions:

1. Clearly outline the population for your adapted case study.

2. How would you adapt the structure of the case study to fit in with your
target group and teaching context?

3. What sort of data would you generate and how would you generate it?

4. How would you analyse the data?

Important: you have to write your personal details and the subject name on the
cover (see the next page). The assignment that does not fulfil these conditions
will not be corrected. You have to include the assignment index below the cover.

2
 Assignment - ORLC

INDEX

1. Introduction….………………………………………………………………… 5
2. Population……………………………..………………………………………. 5
3. Adaptation…….…………….…………………………………………………. 5
4. Data……….……………………………………………………………………. 6
5. Data analysis…………………………………………………………………. 8
6. Conclusions…………………………………………………………………... 9
7. Bibliography…………………………………………………………………... 10

3
 Assignment - ORLC

Introduction

I am going to focus on case study 2. In my own experience, most adult elementary-pre-

intermediate students want grammar as a main part of their program of L2 instruction.
My students alleged they found grammar very helpful, and I did believe them since
then. I usually structure my grammar teaching around their stated expectations and
needs. Thus, together we find fun and dynamic ways to include grammar teaching into
our classes. I think it is indispensable for teachers to pay special attention to their
students and work in partnership with them.

I adopted a presentation-practice-production (PPP) pattern and include evaluation

pattern which is a feature of the deductive approach to the teaching of grammar. By
doing this, I accept students will comprehend the rule governing the target grammar
form and, after sufficient practice, will apprehend the rules and then, be able to use
them naturally. This is not always true, though. On the other hand, in the inductive
approach, teaching comes from examples, often contextualized to make grammar
concepts noticeable enough to be perceived by students. Students are at that point to
induce the rules underlying these concepts autonomously. Exercises given under this
approach are generally context-based and problem-driven. Fotos and Ellis (1991)
described the advantages of this approach: ". . . directly by providing opportunities for
the kind of communication which is believed to promote the acquisition of implicit
knowledge, and . . . indirectly by enabling learners to develop explicit knowledge of L2
rules which will later facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge"

In fact, the process by which students acquire rules and use them has been and will
be a debatable subject for a long time. Debate started when grammar was downgraded
to secondary positions in language teaching as a result of the arrival of new
approaches and methods. And it will go on.

Population

Two classes of 12 students (each) aged 17 to 25, Elementary EFL part-time learners in
a Culinary Institute in Bogota, Colombia.

Adaptation

4
 Assignment - ORLC

The objective of this case study would be to try to find students' feedbacks to both
approaches by two main queries: first, asking for their assessment and predilection
(after being taught under the light of both approaches in a progressive way) and,
second, asking them to answer a survey on learning styles, so it could offer further
evidences about which type or types of learners react better to one type of approach or
the other.

Therefore, my study will focus on the following inquiries: 1) which approach will the
learners prefer in terms of effectiveness and interest? 2) is there a clear difference in
gains between learners who received preferred instruction type, and between learners
who rated the different aspects of the approach better and those who did not? 3) Is
there a difference in gains depending on students' learning styles as evaluated through
a self-report survey? 4) Did learners with certain learning styles rated the lesson
differently or expressed different learning preferences?

Data

In order to answer the previously presented questions, I would first design two
grammatical instructional sequences focused on stated students, one using a
deductive approach and the other one, an inductive one. It is necessary to board a
different grammar feature in each unit: determiners in the deductive unit and object
pronouns in the inductive unit. A pre-test evaluating the correct use of the targeted
grammatical feature would be given to students at the beginning of each unit. At the
end of each unit, students receive a similar post-test in order to measure the gains from
the beginning of the approach to the end. As well, a unit feedback questionnaire would
be filled by students at the end of each unit, with some extra questions at the end of the
second one to inquire about their comparative appreciation of both units. As the
teacher, I would collect information regarding my students' motivation to learn grammar
and the experience they already have to the targeted grammatical feature.

Lessons: Two teaching units would be developed in order to depict both approaches
and guarantee students seized the difference by having them practice both types of
teaching. Probably, parts of each sequence would be a review for some students, but
rather new for others. Students would be given an exercise book for each unit that
include all the materials they need to go through the sequence. The use of the exercise
books will be restricted at the end of each unit so as to ensure that the research is
taken place as expected. Students whose exercises are not completed as planned

5
 Assignment - ORLC

would not be included in the study, because some would have a lack of involvement
and spoils the future data analysis. The design, format and length of each unit must be
similar. They both start by introducing the type of texts to be read. Similar types of texts
must be chosen: tales (or fairy tales) for one unit, and fables for the other one. The
grammar features, possessive adjectives and possessive pronouns for one unit and
object pronouns (you, me, him, her, us, them) for the other, are chosen on the basis of
their similarities from a morphological and a syntactic point of view. Besides, from a
pedagogical point of view, they are both a major source of errors for ESL learners at
this level. The objective grammar feature will be showed deductively in the case of the
first unit about tales, and inductively in the case of the second unit about fables:
students read texts in which the grammar feature is highlighted; each reading will be
followed by comprehension exercises; the exercise books then give students rules in
the case of the deductive unit, or have them determine the rules in the case of the
inductive unit; each presentation or finding of a rule or part of a more encompassing
rule is followed by one or two practice exercises; finally, a written production task invite
students to reuse the grammar feature. It is important to retell the fact that both the
inductive and deductive instructional sequences were presented similarly; the only
difference is present in the deductive presentation of the rules in one case, and the
discovery of the rules in the other case.

As the teacher I must collect important information such as: length, successes, and
difficulties. The deductive unit will be taught first, followed immediately by the inductive
unit. The units and the instruments would hopefully be tested with one class before
carrying out the research. So that, adaptations would be made to both; these typically
consist mainly of correcting possible language mistakes, shortening some activities,
making clearer instructions, simplifying the surveys and survey, and avoiding loss of
interest or motivation in students.

Two forms of a grammatical test, would be created for each teaching unit. They should
be given at the beginning and end of each unit. They will consist of three parts: in the
first, students read a story and then fill blanks with proper possessives or object
pronouns out of choices of three; in part two, students have to supply the proper
possessive pronoun, adjective or object pronouns in ten out-of-context sentences;
finally, in part three, students had to give examples of specific types of pronouns or
specific types of possessives. This last part is intended to test metalinguistic
knowledge, rather than usage (as per Widdowson's, 1978, definition: ability to produce
correct sentences, or manifestation of the linguistic system) as in the first two parts.

6
 Assignment - ORLC

Feedback questionnaires: The first questionnaire, the one students have to fill in at the
end of the first unit (the deductive unit), request them to evaluate varied aspects of the
unit: liking of the unit in general, the readings, the grammar exercises and the way
grammar was presented (presentation of a rule vs. discovery of a rule). The
questionnaire also asks about their feeling of improvement regarding the use of the
targeted grammar feature. Two additional questions would be asked with the first
questionnaire: they would ask about their degree of satisfaction in general in regards to
grammar learning and in regards to reading. The second questionnaire, the one
administer at the end of the second unit (the inductive unit) asks the same first six
evaluating questions as in the first questionnaire, but additionally asks students to
specify their preference of approach by choosing between the two units based on: the
one they like overall; the one that included the types of readings they liked the most;
the one that included their preferred types of grammar activities; the one that dealt with
grammar in the most effective or useful manner; and, the one that fits their learning
style or preferences the most.

Data analysis

From conducting the initial surveys, we could see if any initial tendencies will appear.
This would be easy to do for many reasons including the fact that there is a limited
number of students in the research target group (only twelve per class) and also due to
the surveys having closed or multiple-choice questions. Consequently, the
questionnaire itself is quite restrictive with options, but will offer the teacher easier and
more concise data analysis. Therefore, due to the restrictiveness of each question’s
options, I would have to plan the surveys quite carefully and with enough detail to
accommodate to the students’ backgrounds. Also, I have to anticipate what their
possible opinions might be.

In order to better comprehend what happens in the language classroom, teachers

should become familiar with the methods and techniques for conducting research into
classroom. The modern trends seem to be focused on two central ideas, reflective
thinking and action research. When teachers comprehend that they are the primary
leaders of research and not the theorists, these teachers will start evolving
professionally. Directing action research offers insight and information into the learning
experience and the reflective practice that experienced teachers to apply their day to
day work provides a wealth of situations for investigation.

7
 Assignment - ORLC

Conclusions

A number of conclusions can be drawn if I would carry this research out, while keeping
in mind that it would be carried out with a limited number of students, representative of
a small subsample of all the L2 learners in the world, and that there are of course a
number of overwhelming factors with any kind of classroom research as this one. From
my own experience I would say first, grammatical learning gains can be made with one
approach or the other. Secondly, learners seem to prefer to learn grammar deductively;
however, they find both approaches equally effective. It is impossible to say if their
preferences come from their degree of familiarity with the deductive approach or with
the less cognitively demanding nature of the approach. I suspect it is both. Thirdly,
preferences in terms of approaches and learning styles have no significant effect on
learning gains. I feel that it definitely could be a vast field to explore in further research.

8
 Assignment - ORLC

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to

second language teaching & testing. Toronto: Centre de recherches en
éducation franco-ontarienne, Institut détudes pédagogiques de lOntario.

Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to Learn English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about Grammar: A Task-based Approach.
TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 605-628.

Widdowson, H.G., 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford University

press, Oxford.