Grado en Educación Primaria

La mejora de la fluidez en inglés a

través del Pensamiento de Diseño

Improving English Fluency

through Design Thinking

Modalidad: Proyecto de Innovación Educativa

Autora: Eloísa Mínguez Sánchez

Tutora: Cristina M.ª Gámez Fernández

Curso académico: 2021-2022

ABSTRACT

This project will start by analysing the role fluency has in English as a second language
teaching-learning process and the beneficial factors of its learning will be presented.
Furthermore, the main obstacles that students find when dealing with their fluency in English
will also be discussed. After that, the main characteristics, and advantages of the use of
Design Thinking in classrooms will be described. This information will be used to design an
innovative intervention focused on the area of English with the learning objectives of
developing students’ fluency through the use of Design Thinking. However, the Design
Thinking methodology can be applied to all the areas. The relevant information of the context
and target group will also be included in order to customise the intervention as accurately as
possible. This proposal will be described by considering the aspects integral to the
planification process: timing, design, resources, and evaluation. Finally, a brief personal
reflection will be included focusing on the process of the project elaboration.

Key words:

Peer teaching, learning methods, verbal learning, English, teaching methods.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 4

2. Theoretical Framework 5
2.1. Fluency 5
2.1.1. The role of fluency in teaching English as a second language 5
2.1.2. Problems in non-native learners with English fluency 6
2.2. Design Thinking 8
2.2.1. Concept and origin 8
2.2.2. Phases of Design Thinking 10
2.2.3. Educational application and benefits 12

3. Context analysis 14

4. Objectives 15

5. Design of the innovation 15

5.1. Target group 15
5.2. Innovation phases 16
5.3. Methodology 18
5.4. Resources 22
5.5. Evaluation 24

6. Expected results 25

7. Personal reflection 26

8. Bibliographical references 27

9. Annexes 30
1. Introduction
In response to traditional educational models based on memorising and
repetition, new methods have been proposed in the last 10 years to help students learn
the necessary competencies . As a result, there has been a drive to design and implement
methods that achieve much more than just content learning. These new methods and
tools are aimed at the integral development of students and their meaningful learning.
That is to say, the main objective of these new methods is that students acquire
competencies for the sake of both learning and maturation as individuals. This is
intrinsically related to the notion that children do not lose their motivation and curiosity
to learn. This is a quite complex question, as each student has his or her own
personality. However, teachers can stimulate students by making them feel that they are
more than just spectators of a lesson.

This innovation project seeks to improve fluency in English as a second

language by making students the protagonists of their own teaching-learning process
through an active methodology such as Design Thinking. Therefore, a bibliographical
research will be carried out in which information about Design Thinking, its
development and implementation in the classroom will be provided. In addition, the
topic of fluency in English as a non-native language and the benefits of enhancing it
through active methodologies will be discussed as well.

After the theoretical background, an innovation proposal will be presented

articulated around a Design Thinking process that will ultimately be carried out in the
English classroom. Within this proposal, an analysis of the context will be made,
including relevant data such as the characteristics of the environment and the agents
involved. In the design of the innovation we will specify the phases of the innovation,
the timing, the methodology and a series of lesson plans. The development of the
lessons will be explained, and finally, the students’ learning process will be evaluated
according to the established criteria. After this intervention, the whole project will also
be evaluated to check its effectiveness and possible improvement in the future. Finally,
this work will end with a conclusion that will summarize the previous sections,
mentioning the expected results and a personal reflection.
2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Fluency

2.1.1. The role of fluency in teaching English as a second language

The use of the term “fluency” has been quite recurrent in the process of learning
English as a second language (ESL), and traditionally contrasted with “accuracy”—how
the speaker’s speech matches with what they want to express in the target language
(Nunan, 2003). Regardless of its recent popularity, it is difficult to give a precise
definition, as it might mix with other similar terms. Traditionally, this concept tends to
be related to native-like performance, as a feature of language mastery. However, many
linguists have emphasized the importance of fluency, no matter the level of proficiency
the learner has. One definition that broke with the traditional view of fluency was given
by Brumfit (1984), who viewed fluency as the natural use of the language, despite the
similarity with the native-speaker production or comprehension. Hence, nowadays the
idea of “being fluent” has considered suprasegmental aspects rather than others, such as
vocabulary or grammar proficiency (Chambers, 1997). Nunan (2003, p. 55) defines
fluency as “the extent to which speakers use the language quickly and confidently, with
few hesitations or unnatural pauses, false starts, word searches, etc.”.

These innovative definitions started to expand in the 1970s with the arrival of
the methodology known as Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), as a response to
previous approaches such as grammar-translation method or audiolingualism. It
regarded the language “not as interlocking sets of grammatical, lexical and phonological
rules, but as a tool for expressing meaning” (Nunan, 2003, p. 6). Hence, in this
methodology, fluency was emphasized over accuracy. Due to this reconceptualization,
this language teaching method changed its target and placed the emphasis on a different
purpose, which is the practical use of the foreign language rather than the accurate one.
This led to the conclusion that the target language must meet the communicative needs
of students. As a solution, the well-known methodology CLT started to be put into
practice by the “Task-Based Language Teaching” (TBLT), which is directly connected
to the learners’ daily-life needs. This methodology has to do with the fulfilment of
different tasks such as ordering a meal, going shopping, or planning a meeting (Nunan,
2003). Through these situations, then, the non-native learners develop their skills with a
useful purpose, not only for the sake of learning the language.
5
 According to the point of view of the teaching practice, the instructor must put
the emphasis on the message rather than the language forms in order to develop fluency:
“The goal of fluency-directed communication activities is to enable the learner to
integrate previously encountered language items into an easily accessed, largely
unconscious, language system as a result of focussing on the communication of the
messages” (Nation, 1989). Hence, the teacher has to prepare communication activities
that promote a conversation among the learners, as the importance is not on the lexicon
but on the conversation itself.

One of the most well-known techniques to improve fluency in a foreign

language is the 4/3/2 technique. Maurice (1983) described this technique involving
different steps. First, the second language learner has to prepare a topic for a talk
without making notes. Then, the learner talks about this topic for four minutes with a
peer, whose only task is just to listen. After his/her intervention, the speaker has to look
for another peer. The only difference is that the speaker now has three minutes to talk
about the given topic. Finally, the student has to talk a third time about his topic to a
different partner but now s/he has only two minutes. As a result, the learner will have
given the same talk but with less time for each partner.

This method can provide several benefits. There are three main aspects to
highlight. Changing partners would allow the student to concentrate only in the
communication of the message, with no pressure to keep the partner interested with new
information. What is more, as the learner is constantly repeating the same information,
s/he would develop confidence in his speech, having “less difficulty in accessing the
language he needs to deliver the talk” (Nation, 1989). Lastly, the time availability will
allow the student to talk more fluently as s/he would not be thinking about new
information to add in these short periods of time. All in all, by assessing the way
students shorten their speech, the teacher will be able to control not only the contents
but also the fluency competence.

2.1.2. Problems in non-native learners with English fluency

The development of productive skills such as writing or speaking seems to
encounter more difficulties than the other two receptive competences (listening and
reading). The reason for that is that non-native speakers find it harder to transform their
mother tongue into a written or spoken production in the target language. What is more,
regarding the speaking competence, it may be even more difficult as the time to think is
6
shorter, and students will need to communicate faster than in writing (Alaraj, 2017). The
production of utterances seems to be a difficult task for English learners to achieve.
Actually, the lack of research on the possible strategies to solve these problems makes
this situation even worse.

In order to deal with the fluency competence in English teaching-learning

process, the most common difficulties among students must be identified and solved. A
great number of scholars such as the ones to be cited below agree that these problems
have to do with attitudinal and psychological aspects: “Generally speaking, students’
weakness in learning English language has its roots in the method of teaching, lack of
motivation, the teacher, practice and interest and in the curriculum design” (Al Zoubi,
2018). Several studies have researched problems that English as a Foreign Language
(EFL) students have to face, such as self-confidence and motivation. Nunan (2003)
measures success according to the level to which the learner is able to develop a
conversation in the target language. However, most of EFL students become
demotivated with the foreign language as they do not make use of the spoken language
in the lessons. Hence, if the teaching methodology and planification is not
well-provided with the right strategies, the learner will lose interest. Regarding
psychological aspects (shyness, anxiety, low self-esteem, etc.), these are proven to have
a negative impact in the students’ efficiency. Last but not least, the mother tongue
inference also hinders speaking skills acquisition (Alaraj, 2017). Regarding these
problems, it can be concluded that practically the teaching practice bears the
responsibility for putting forth a learning environment in which learners will develop
their fluency.

As a solution, Deubel (2009) advocates for the fostering of interpersonal

communication among non-native speakers. He suggests six speaking strategies. First,
the psychological aspect must be solved by decreasing students’ sense of fear. This can
be acquired by providing a relaxed and safe environment in class. Secondly, as
mentioned in the above section, the teacher should help students to focus on the act of
communication, not the non-suprasegmental aspects of the language. With these
strategies comes the third one, that proposes taking turns during communicative acts.
These talks should be about tasks that foster students’ motivation. So, learners must be
interested in what they have to talk about. For instance, they can talk about news,
current topics at school, or even their own lives. Finally, the pace of interpersonal

7
communication must be directed by the teacher, providing students with time to
visualise the conversation in their minds and encouraging them to move on to making it
happen. Standing up and moving around the classroom will make the situation even
more natural for them and, consequently, learners will feel more confident and relaxed.

Finally, it can be concluded that no matter the level of the students of ESL, the
first aspect that has to be solved is the psychological one. After this, the teacher will be
able to provide the contents with more ease, as the students will have more confidence
to participate and follow the lesson. Before the information arrives to the students’
mind, the teacher has to be sure their students’ mind is ready to acquire those contents.
What is more, apart from the strategies proposed, teachers must adapt their strategies to
the classroom and the context, as there is no universal rule or method for every student
group.

2.2. Design Thinking

2.2.1. Concept and origin

Design thinking is thought to be one of the most successful strategies in order to
propose innovative solutions to complex problems. As this concept can be applied to
several fields, the definitions encountered can be quite different. First of all, the term
“design” is directly related to engineering, and it leads to the relationship between a
problem and the need to solve it. As a result, engineers design a solution. In general
terms, design thinking is a process whose target is to go beyond the limits of an issue to
address in a proper way the questions proposed through a well-structured process
(Brown, 2009). Hence, participants in the Design Thinking process must face the
constraints of such problem and look for innovation.

This methodology has also been defined as a “meaningful approach to tackle

wicked problems” (Buchanan, 1992). Wicked problems are those that “have a wide,
unbound problem space and complexity, are open for interpretation, surrounded by
competing or conflicting opinions for solutions and unlikely to be completely solved”
(Hawryszkiewycz, Pradhan, & Argawal, 2015). The importance of design thinking does
not focus mainly on the result but on the process by which designers are taken out of
their comfort zone. Buchanan (1992) supports this idea stating that “the results are
typically not directed toward a technological ‘quick fix’ but toward new integrations of
signs, things, actions, and environments” (cited in Panke, 2019). As it is unlikely that
8
these problems are solved straightforwardly, participants can set not only the mere
solution of the problem as a goal, but also understand that the process of
problem-solving, which is the enriching part of this methodology, is at least as
important as the end result.

In relation to the history of design thinking, there have been several perspectives
of this method. Considering this as a methodology or way of thinking, it is quite young.
This mindset started to become widespread since the second half of the 20th century.
Several authors started to write approaches that paved the way to the most renowned
authorities of this field nowadays. That is to say, the term “design thinking” was being
employed already before the coinage of the term when it was first used by Peter Rowe
in 1987 in the context of analysing design thinking in the field of architecture and urban
planning. Since then, the combination of this methodology with other theories, such as
psychology or education, led to the creation of numerous other models. As a result,
Johansson-Sköldberg et al. (2013) categorized five theoretical perspectives: design
thinking as the creation of objects; as a practice towards reflection; as a problem-solving
tool; as a mindset; and as the creation of artifacts that convey meaning. Although its
popularity among researchers began to grow in the 1980s, most of the research were
published during the first decade of 21st century (Luka, 2014). Concerning this method’s
growing ramification through history, there is no doubt that the study of design thinking
connected to pedagogy is considered as a young discipline, and there is not as much
research as in other fields. Nevertheless, the connection between problem-solving,
reasoning and creativity (boosted through design thinking) with the competences that
are to be developed in school is undeniable.

Design thinking also started to earn its place within the business field, as a
method by which companies could come across different ideas for their products
(Dunne & Martin, 2006). Following this line, experts in education began to consider the
impact of this methodology in academic environments. This term was popularized by
David Kelley, founder of IDEO, a design company. He looked forward to solving the
wicked problems of education, such as delivering personalized learning, meeting the
needs of EFL students or the “achievement gap” (Gallagher & Thordarson, 2020, term
which refers to “the disparity in academic performance between students” (Ansell,
2011). However, the usage of design thinking in education can go much further; it can
be used not only in bureaucratic or administrative issues, but also inside the classroom

9
as another educational tool. In fact, it may be one of the solutions of those problematics
Kelley was trying to solve.

2.2.2. Phases of Design Thinking

One of the main characteristics of design thinking provided by Baek & Gremett
(2012) is that it is iterative. This means that there is no linear process but a cyclic one,
where although one step is based on the previous one it can always iterate to the
previous one to be refined. Despite this attribute, there is not one design thinking
process that is similar to another. This is because, although the steps of the process are
well-established, the execution of design thinking itself is highly flexible and
customizable. The time devoted to the five phases that constitute the method can vary as
the participants prefer, always depending on the needs of the problem at stake. What is
more, phases can even overlap, be skipped or repeated. Hence, design thinking process
can be considered as a “messy and nonlinear process” (Gallagher & Thordarson, 2020).
To conclude, the design thinking method, although classified in different phases, has to
strength to adapt to the participants’ needs.

According to the classification given by Stanford University’s Hasso Plattner

Institute of Design (Stanford d.school), this process can be divided in five steps:
empathise, define, ideate, prototype and test. “Empathise” is not only the first step to be
taken but also the fundamental one in order to start the design thinking process. Its
procedure is about understanding the needs and way of thinking of the users to be
addressed. Knowing what is meaningful for them will show the accurate directions to
create meaningful solutions. In relation to the techniques that can be applied, the best
options are observation and engaging. For instance, viewing the users in context
through an interview can be an appropriate technique. What is more, if the interview is
done in a proper environment, such as their workplace or home, it will give interviewers
more information than the interview actually does. The interview must be
non-structured, giving users freedom to deviate from the scheduled questions so that the
interviewer can come up with more ideas. Finally, before reaching the next step, the
interviewer must unpack, i.e., process the information and share it with him/her
workmates in order to create a visual representation of what the problem is about.

The second step is “Define.” The main aim of this is to gather the previous
information and make it meaningful to the project in order to express the problem that is
being addressed. This concept is called “point-of-view” (POV). Consequently, the
10
proper expression of the problem will guarantee higher quality ideas to solve it. To
reach this, designers must know the main characteristics of a fully-operating POV,
which are the following ones:

- Motivate the team

- Give an exact frame to the problem to be addressed
- Give criteria for the following ideas to be proposed
- Take into account the limited set of needs of the users
- Be discrete.

If these criteria above are considered, then the problem will lead the team
automatically to “ideation,” which is the next step.

“Ideation” is usually put into practice through brainstorming. This term has to do
with the outcome of several ideas for the problem proposed. To meet the needs of the
problem, the team must generate solutions combining information and imagination.
That is to say, gather the knowledge available to them and be creative as a team.
However, the aim of this step is not about finding the best solution but about generating
the widest possible range of ideas. All in all, obvious solutions should be discarded. The
fundamental aspect of this activity is to think outside the box with the objective of
bringing various ideas among the many others generated to the next step, which is
“Prototyping.” For example, some efficient techniques to come up with useful ideas are
mind mapping, building or sketching, among others.

Finally, the design team has to face “Prototyping” and “Testing.” When the
previous steps have been completed and the ideas are clear, they need to be put into
practice. Prototyping and testing can be done together as they are usually twisted. To
start with, after the team has come up with several ideas, the prototype should be as
quick and cheap as possible, so that they lose neither time nor money, at least in
business related fields. What is more, the variables tested by each prototype must be
clear, so it is at this point that the team has to become more specific. After prototyping,
the test is done. It is about soliciting feedback, but it can be also interpreted as a way of
getting to know the user even better apart from the interview already carried out in the
first step. This test should not be about whether the users liked the solution or not, but
about how the design proposed can be improved or about discovering the reasons why it
did not work as expected.

11
 To sum up, this process is quite well interconnected into its different phases and
can lead to a successful designing experience. However, there is another aspect that
designers must bear in mind, mentioned in the first paragraphs of this section: iteration.
This concept deals with the act of cycling more than once through the whole process.
Actually, although design thinking may seem to be linear, the more the team goes back
and forth on the design process, the better it will end up. Then, this will provide them
the confidence that the project is as concise as possible.

2.2.3. Educational application and benefits

When it comes to applying this methodology into the classroom, the objectives
must be clearly defined. “Design-based learning”—as it is called education design
thinking—is described as “a model for enhancing creativity, endurance, engagement and
innovation’ (Dolak et al., 2013, p. 2). Hence, the main aim of this application is to foster
several competences in the students, most of them related to self-discipline, imagination
and teamwork skills. What is more, the decision-making competence is also developed
during the whole process. There is no necessity to solve problems at the level of large
enterprises, the solution of daily life problems would result as successful as any other
one (Rauth et al., 2010). The teacher is free to program the activity according to the
needs of the target group in relation to these competences.

Regarding the procedure of design-based learning, it can be developed following

the model presented in section 2.2.2. However, certain aspects of each part of the
process must be adapted to each student group. Ray (2012) proposes an activity adapted
to school and adds to the model devised by the University of Stanford one more step. As
a result, the target group will work in groups with the following methodological steps:

Step 1. Find the need. In this first phase the students must work together to find
the reason why the problem needs a solution. An interesting way to deal with this part
of the process is having an interview with someone foreign to the education
environment. The teacher can take advantage of this situation and involve the group in
an activity out of school, increasing even more the motivation of the work teams.

Step 2. Look for solutions. This can be called “the brainstorming phase,” as
students are supposed to propose every idea that comes to their minds in order to
communicate and express themselves. Consequently, not only will they come up with a

12
possible solution but also improve their communicative skills and other interpersonal
attitudes and values such as respecting each other’s opinion.

Step 3. Create a prototype. When teams find a possible solution, it is time to put
it into practice. For example, students can discuss about the feasibility of the solution
proposed through the design of a mind-map.

Step 4. Ask for external feedback. During this phase of the design-based
learning, students organized in smaller groups must share their solution with an expert
in the field. It could be useful that they present the solution to the same person they
interviewed, or that they communicate with an expert, if they are given the opportunity.
For instance, if the problem proposed is related to the school, they can hold a meeting
with the coordinator or the headmaster in order to have a professional perspective.

Step 5. Look for alternatives. After feedback, the groups may need to modify
certain aspects of their solution. It is in this part when students have the opportunity to
go back to any of the previous steps so as to find the final solution.

Step 6. Show your project. The last phase of this procedure (although not the
most important one) is about presenting their final idea to the people who have
participated in the process of design thinking. This includes teachers, interviewed
people and classmates.

The benefits that implementing design thinking contribute to the

teaching-learning process are manyfold. Owen (2007) supports the idea that knowledge
is achieved through action, i.e., the student body will generate ideas through discovery
(observing, communicating and researching). Then, the ideas need to be tested. It is in
this step when action takes place. Consequently, through the process of ideation,
prototyping and testing, students will process the information previously observed in a
more meaningful way. Furthermore, the fact of working in teams will also provide
benefits to learners: “Working in groups to solve the tasks helps students enhance team
working, collaboration, communication skills and develop their design thinking skills
that will later be useful in solving every day and work-related problems in a creative
and innovative way” (Luka, 2014). With the practice of this method students will
discover that the solution itself is not important, as there is not a precise or unique
solution to some problems, particularly wicked ones. The pivotal point of this process is
the process itself, not the result. This is connected to the last benefit mentioned: values.

13
Learning how to listen and respect opinions, developing empathy towards someone’s
problem, creating a sense of responsibility and team spirit among students, and reducing
the fear of expressing one’s opinion are some of the principles that this innovative
technique can provide to a holistic teaching-learning process.

3. Context analysis
This Innovative Project is going to be developed in a school located in Cordoba.
Specifically, this is a private school situated in the city centre that receives public funds.
The agents implied in this educational institution are the teaching body, students,
families, and some organisations that collaborate with them during the academic year.
The organisations can vary as they are always found thanks to the collaboration of
families. In addition, the greatest agent is the Church, as this is a Catholic school.
Hence, most of the projects are sponsored by the bishopric in Córdoba.

Despite its location, the vast majority of students come from different areas of
Córdoba, which also implies different socioeconomic and cultural characteristics that
the school community has to face. Due to this, the school offers certain facilities and
schemes such as scholarships, bus service, before-school care and canteen.
Consequently, most families do not find difficulties with school access or location.

As for its internal context, the school is characterized by its history. It was built
in 1555, passing through different names and teaching models. It currently consists of
two lines from Pre-school to Secondary Education, a Special Education classroom, two
classrooms for active research and personal development and a classroom for the Basic
Development Program (psychomotor skills). It also has three large playgrounds, a
dining room, a chapel and a small sports centre.

The resources used are mostly digital whiteboards, Chromebooks and active
research classrooms. In addition, Google Classroom platform is used to maintain daily
contact between students and families and teachers as well as keep track of sessions
schedules. The school’s teaching staff participates quite actively in the school projects
being carried out, with training sessions almost every week and annual courses that
keep them engaged in what is called “lifelong learning.”

14
4. Objectives
This section can be divided into two separate sets of objectives. The first set
refers to the objectives of this Final Degree Project whereas the second set revolves
around the learning or didactic objectives of the innovative project itself as an
educational proposal.

Therefore, the main objective of this Final Degree Project is to develop an

innovative proposal which employs the techniques proposed by Design Thinking in
order to foster student’s fluency in English in 6th year of Primary Education. This
proposal intends to be a new, creative way of developing fluency, considered one of the
main difficulties in the ESL teaching-learning process.

The learning objectives to be achieved through this innovative intervention are

in consonance with the stage and cycle objectives presented in the Real Decreto
157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen la ordenación y las enseñanzas
mínimas de la Educación Primaria (2022).
1. To listen and understand oral and written expressions referring to situations
related to the vocabulary and grammatical structures—in this case, recycling, and
environmental issues.
2. To express and interact with fluency, using either verbal or non-verbal
procedures, respecting the different contributions of the classmates.
2.1. To create an educational atmosphere which promotes social skills such as
empathy and active listening through enriching conversations among students
and experts.
3. To read comprehensively and produce short texts related to the subject matter,
understanding the vocabulary and the grammar.
4. To manifest a receptive attitude and self-confidence in their own capacity of
learning English as a second language.
4.1. To avoid or overcome shyness or other stress-related manifestations
when speaking a foreign language.
5. To boost entrepreneurial and creative potential in students through collaborative
work.

15
5. Design of the innovation

5.1. Target group

The direct beneficiaries of this innovation project are the students of the 6th year
of Primary Education in the school. Specifically, this intervention will be done in line B
of the level, which has 26 students (12 male and 14 female) around eleven and twelve
years old. According to their physical distribution in class, they will be always in 4
groups of 4 tables and 2 groups of 5 tables, as it can be seen in the scheme (see Annex
1). There are no significant learning adaptations in this class, but there is one student
with special needs. He has Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Deficit (ADHD). Hence,
the teacher will need to make the changes that she considers necessary to make this
intervention as accessible as possible to this student.

There are two main groups of indirect beneficiaries: the teacher and the families.
First, the teacher is supposed to be the one the students are about to be helped by
through the Design Thinking project. Hence, the teacher will be enriched by the positive
results of this intervention. What is more, the teacher will be given an innovative tool to
apply in her lessons, as Design Thinking is thought to be applied in any possible area.
Apart from that, students will be more motivated, and the learning atmosphere will be
more propitious for the teacher to deliver her lessons. Students will show more interest
and be more participative. With regards to the second group, families will appreciate in
their children a great improvement in terms of responsibility. Consequently, it will be
easier for them to hold conversations with them, to discuss any topic at home, or even to
talk to them and receive the necessary attention. The final beneficiary of this innovative
project will be society in general, since pupils are the citizens of the future.

5.2. Innovation phases

This innovation will be developed through the following phases that will be
structured in weeks following the schedule of the English subject. This area is the most
appropriate for the intervention as the main linguistic skill aimed to practice is fluency
in the second language itself. The stages (see Figure 1) will be the following:

16
1. Situation and context analysis. The target group will be observed in order to
obtain the most relevant information about their English level, their speaking
skill (fluency) and their capacity to work during the lessons. This will be done
with the aim of adapting the intervention as much as possible to the target
group and to modify (if necessary) the objectives or any other sections in the
innovation designed.
2. Information about the Innovation design and its planification. Families will be
informed about the Design Thinking process that students will experience; in
so doing, they can actively collaborate during the intervention providing ideas
at home. The teacher will plan the intervention taking into account the data
collected in phase 1 (Situation and context analysis).
3. Innovation implementation. The target group will be provided with all the
materials needed for the practice in advance. What is more, they will be told
about the whole process they are about to experience. The different stages will
be explained in order to create an atmosphere of motivation and commitment.
This intervention will last six lessons, with a total duration of three weeks in

17
 the school schedule. Specifically, the lessons will be developed during the
third trimester (from 29th May to 9th June), as a way of settling the contents
related to oral production skills and reading comprehension dealt with in the
first two trimesters. What is more, this period has been selected because the 5th
June is the World Environment Day and will be related with the project the
students are to work with.
4. Evaluation. Taking into consideration the objectives proposed, students will be
assessed by the teacher through direct observation. For the final stage of the
intervention, the teacher will use a rubric (see Annex 3) with criteria related to
the objectives established above. What is more, two surveys (see Annexes 5
and 6) will be completed both by the student group and by the teachers about
their performance of the implementation of the innovation proposal to provide
relevant feedback for necessary modifications in future innovative
interventions.
5. Divulgation. To make the most of the innovation, the final results will be
published by the school through social media. Teachers and families involved
can also share their own views through comments or interviews.

5.3. Methodology

The student groups that will be made will use the second language to
communicate in order to develop their fluency skills. As students will be speaking
among equals, we predict that the fear of making mistakes will be lower. In addition, as
they will have certain responsibilities during the innovative implementation, they will
be motivated enough to take it seriously and perform properly.

As mentioned above, the Design Thinking method is about finding a creative

and innovative solution to a problem proposed. Thus, the group will be given a problem
in the first lesson “Empathise” (Phase 3 "Innovation implementation”) related to the
school community that they will have to solve following the steps of Design Thinking
(empathise, define, ideate, prototype and test). As an extra step, they will have to
present their final solution in an oral presentation to the participants involved in the
process (students, teachers and experts invited).

18
 The school will need to contact the organization Greenpeace Córdoba to invite a
person to visit the school for at least two days during the intervention. This will be done
during phase 2 (Information about the Innovation design and its planification).

According to the Real Decreto 157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen

la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Primaria (2022), the student
body will be dealing with the following key competences in this innovation proposal.
First of all, the main competence they will achieve is Competence in Linguistic
Communication (CLC), as they will be communicating within practices during the
lessons. The students will interact with each other not only orally, but they will also read
texts and listen to English discourses. Furthermore, another basic competence that will
be crucial for them during the intervention will be Social and Civic Competences
(SCC). Students will have to employ their knowledge in order to solve a problem in
society—in this case, environmental problems. Decision making and problem solving is
pivotal during the whole intervention, as this is the basis of the work they will have to
do for their final project. Connected with this previous competence, they will develop
the Sense of Initiative and Entrepreneurship (SIE) as well. This competence deals with
the fact of transforming their knowledge into actions. This is, then, what they will do
after they ideate their project. They will have to develop the necessary skills to solve the
situation as if it was real.

Other competences that are going to be dealt in a transversal way are the Digital
Competence (DC) and the Learning to Learn Competence (L2L). During the lessons,
students will use digital devices and will have the opportunity to work with new
technologies in class such as the computers or tablets. They will look for new ideas or
information for their project, or they can even make their presentation digitally through
slides. Due to the fact that they have a purpose during the whole intervention, students
will feel responsible and motivated. This is where the competence L2L takes place.
Students will have to manage their own learning process; the teacher will only be a
guide.

The vocabulary that students will need to use will be taught the week previous to
phase 3 (Innovation implementation). Students will employ during the implementation
this vocabulary as a way to settle it after its learning. This will be done in agreement
with the teacher of Sciences where students are becoming familiar with the importance
of taking care of the environment by recycling and avoiding polluting practices.
19
 The activities designed for each lesson will be developed during phase 3
(Innovation implementation), and are the following:

Lesson 1. Empathise
- Warming-up. In this first lesson the problem will be presented to students. In
this case, in order to have a closer experience, the wicked problem proposed will
be related to the school. The teacher will tell the students that she has found some
fragments of a letter that seems to come from the future. Due to the time travel it
has undergone, the letter has broken into pieces. Students will be divided in 6
groups of 4-5 people. Groups will be created according to their original
distribution in class. These will be the teams that will work during all the
intervention. The student with ADHD will be given an important role in his
group (he will be the team leader and moderator), so he feels more motivated and
focused on doing a good work. Each group will have one letter broken into 6
pieces, so each member of the group has to read at least one fragment. But first,
the group must fix the letter. In groups, they will have to order the fragments and
read together the whole letter (see Annex 2).
- Development. When they finally order the letter and read it, the problem will be
proposed. The teacher will also explain to them about Design Thinking and its
process, so that they are aware of what they are doing. Once the problem is
proposed, the rest of the lesson will be devoted to the following activity of
observation and empathy: each team member will have to share with their group
their opinion about school current recycling initiatives as if they were
“eco-experts,” showing the problems they think people in the school have about
the following aspects: recycling and waste of resources. After this, the group will
create a list with all the problems they came up with through this activity.
- Closing. Before ending the lesson, the teacher will ask the students to talk about
this problem at home, so their families can give them ideas or their opinion about
the school recycling problems. By doing so, families will be implied in the
process.
Lesson 2. Define
- Warming-up. At the beginning of the lesson we will introduce to students the
volunteer from Greenpeace Córdoba, who is an expert in recycling and
environmental problems.

20
- Development. The 6 groups will have the whole lesson to ask questions to the
expert about how he/she feels about recycling problems. They can ask as many
questions as necessary spontaneously, but at least every student should ask once.
They will have to use expressions given by an Empathy Map provided by the
teacher. In this map (see Annex 7) they will jot down the answers of the expert.
- Closing. The teacher will explain that they have all the necessary information
gathered, and that they have also become “eco-experts.” Now it is time to look
for solutions in the next lesson. Students can also ask at home about their
families’ opinion and bring them to the next lesson.
Lesson 3. Ideate
- Warming-up. Based on the materials they have generated in the last two lessons
(the problem list and the empathy map), groups will start working defining the
problem so that they can find a solution in Lesson 4. They will have 5 minutes to
comment among them how they feel after the previous lessons.
- Development. They will use sticky notes to identify the main problems they
gathered and create a mind map on the blackboard. Each group can come up with
as many notes as they want, but they have to justify why they see that as a
problem. With this the teacher can see how different students’ behaviour is in
front of a small group and the whole class, as well as to appreciate possible group
dynamics that need particular attention. The teacher will also monitor the
performance of the student with ADHD in order to carry out adjustments, if
necessary.
- Closing. In order to come up with proper solutions, problems must be
well-defined, so each group will work together to choose only between 4-5 big
problems they want to solve through their project. When they are done deciding,
they can start brainstorming ideas and note them on a paper for the next lesson, in
which they will have to find the definite ideas. They can ask their families at
home also about possible ideas.
Lesson 4. Prototype & Test
- Warming-up. Now students will need to discuss the different solutions they have
proposed in the previous lesson to narrow the scope of solutions. They will also
gather the ideas they were given at home.

21
- Development. In the previous lesson they did a brainstorming activity, so now
they will have to decide and create their initiative. They will be provided with
computer access, paper and materials to draw in case they want to design a draft
of their project. It can be anything: a school project, a new eco-classroom,
different activities of environmental awareness, a poster, etc. They should be
creative with their idea.
- Closing. The teacher will ask about their draft and will see it in case they need
some help, but they will not be assessed until the next lesson.
Lesson 5. Prototype & Test
- Warming-up. The Greenpeace expert who visited in lesson 2 will come back so
that he/she can solve the possible doubts that students have at this stage. So,
students will have the opportunity to go back to the previous steps and address
the possible mistakes they have made or to change the prototype of their work.
This lesson is devoted to work on their projects and to give them the finishing
touches.
- Development. This will allow them to create the definitive solution to the
problem and present it during the next lesson. In this lesson, the expert will see
the groups ideas and will suggest any advice for them in order to make their
solutions more appropriate. They can also make the most of this lesson by
preparing more materials for their presentation (cardboards, Power Point
presentation, videos, recordings, etc.). Every prototyping material will be
accepted as one of the main objectives in this innovation is to boost their
creativity.
- Closing. The teacher will ask the students to practise their presentation at home
with the families, so that they can arrive the next day more relaxed. The families
can suggest any extra idea for the presentation (costumes or decoration) but the
work has to be done by the students themselves.
Lesson 6. Presentation and feedback
- Warming-up. In this last step of the intervention, students will present their
projects in front of the other groups. If the expert who participated in the
interview is available, his/her visit will be useful to foster students’ motivation.
Before starting with the presentations, the teacher will ask the students about the
ideas they were given at home.

22
 - Development. They will have approximately 7 minutes to present their projects
with a solution to the problem. The presentation must include 1) a group
introduction, 2) a brief explanation of the problem, 3) the solution the group
offers and 4) a conclusion. Each student of each group will have approximately
2-3 minutes to speak. The group can divide the presentation as they want, but
everyone has to talk. For that, they can use any resource in the class (computer,
speakers, digital board, blackboard and so on). Regarding the student with
ADHD, there will be two main adaptations during the presentation. First, he will
be the one in charge of the presentation, so he will either pass the slides or point
to the different sections of the poster while his classmates are speaking (it
depends on the format the group decides to do the presentation). With this, we
guarantee that he is going to be paying attention to his own presentation.
Secondly, he will be the first to talk, so he avoids being nervous for a long time.
During the presentations, students will have one rubric per group with which they
will have to assess their classmates. This rubric will be explained before the
presentations start, in which they will assess mostly the creativity and speaking
skills of their classmates. By paying attention to these features, students will
focus more on their own and will make a bigger effort to do it as best they can.
What is more, it will be useful to have their opinion, because it will guarantee
their attention to their classmates’ presentations. This rubric (see Annex 4) will
be described in section 5.5.
- Closing. The teacher will also have a rubric (See Annex 3), in which she will
assess if students have achieved the learning objectives. When students finish
their presentations, the teacher will thank them for all the great job done and they
will have time to ask questions to the other groups about their projects.

5.4. Resources

The resources that will be needed during this intervention can be classified in
three different groups (See Table 1):

- Personal resources: the people engaged to this process are going to be mainly the
students, an expert from Greenpeace Córdoba and the teacher. They will be the
ones that will totally experience the Design Thinking process. However, families
will be also involved by encouraging and helping their children at home.

23
 - Material resources: for this intervention, the use of technological devices is going
to be compulsory. The information and notes taken will be displayed in the
students’ computers or tablets. Furthermore, the teacher can make use of the
digital board and speakers to play some relaxing music during the lesson, as they
can help their students to release stress and focus on their work. The Empathy
Map (see Annex 7) is going to be printed as a Flashcard so as the students can
have one copy per group to work with it. Finally, some fungible material such as
sticky notes, paper, cardboards and drawing materials (crayons, markers or
pencils) will be also at the disposal of students.
- Spatial resources: the activities will be developed mainly in the classroom, as it
provides the ideal distribution to work in teams (see Annex 1). However, for
some of the activities that require more space (such as those implemented in
lessons 2 and 3), participants will use the Active Research classroom. In the
Active Research classroom there are no chairs, Therefore, they sit on cushions, so
they will be distributed in their teams easily.

Table 1. Resources. Author’s own elaboration.

Personal resources - Expert from Greenpeace Córdoba.
- Teacher.
- Families.
- Students.
Material resources - Computers and/or tablets.
- Digital board.
- Blackboard.
- Speakers.
- Flashcards of the “Empathy Map.”
- School material: sticky notes,
paper, cardboards and drawing
materials.
Spatial resources - Regular classroom.
- Active Research classroom.

5.5. Evaluation

To evaluate every aspect of the innovation, the following features will be taken
into account:
24
 a) Student’s performance during the lessons. All the different activities
done during the lessons before the final presentation will be evaluated through direct
observation. The teacher will have to note the different aspects he/she observes during
the lessons, such as participation, motivation, or implication in the project. The
attendance to the lessons will be also noted on this list. The last lesson, consisting of the
students’ presentations of their final projects, will be assessed by a rubric where fluency
and self-expression should be evaluated. The rubric has a set of items related mostly to
suprasegmental features and speaking skills in general so that the students can focus on
this during the presentation rather than grammatical aspects. The aim of this is to
promote even more the importance of fluency over accuracy and make the students
aware of that (See Annex 4). The teacher’s rubric will deal with the same items, but it
will also include other aspects related to the competences mentioned in section 5.3. (see
Annex 3).
b) Teacher’s attitude towards the intervention. The teacher involved in the
intervention will have to complete a questionnaire to evaluate the whole process of the
innovation project so that its strengths and weaknesses are dealt with for future
interventions (see Annex 6). This questionnaire will consist of four open questions
about the opinion of the teacher towards the project and of one Likert-scale question to
know their level of satisfaction about the experience in general. At the end, they will
also have a section to add some comments that may help us to evaluate the project as a
whole and see which aspects can be improved.
c) Student’s attitude towards the intervention. Students will complete
another questionnaire to evaluate their experience and their sensations during the
development of the lessons. This questionnaire will consist of four open questions
because closed questions may not give us the information needed to change or improve
our intervention. What is more, it is crucial to consider the emotions of students during
the intervention, so that they can see that their feelings are taken into account as part of
their learning process. The results of this questionnaire will be shared with students and
families to open up spaces of collective reflection in the teaching and learning
environment. What is more, these results will help to improve the intervention in the
future (See Annex 5).
d) Innovation proposal as a whole. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of
this innovation proposal, the results gathered in the questionnaires will be analysed.
Furthermore, the strengths and weaknesses of the whole process will be prepared in the
25
form of a report that will finally help to suggest some improvement proposals emerging
from the educational community involved in it.

6. Expected results
The innovation proposed in this project would be a great step forward in
providing more tools for the development of the suprasegmental features of ESL. The
combination of such an innovative tool as Design Thinking and the use of English as a
means of communication will provide students with a more real context in which to use
the foreign language. In addition, as discussed in the above sections, peer-to-peer
communication will ensure a decrease in the feeling of stress caused by speaking a
language that is not their mother tongue.

We expect that the outcome of the intervention will be very favourable if

students participate actively throughout the process. To achieve this, the whole
educational community must actively contribute to the experience. Teachers should
motivate students in the classroom, while families could participate at home by
providing ideas to their children and motivating them to investigate both inside and
outside the classroom.

Among the objectives of this methodology, apart from those already mentioned
in the area of English language, this innovation aims to favour the integral development
of the students. This means that, through the Design Thinking tool, students will foster
several social skills. Among these are the ability to work in a team, listen, empathize,
give their opinion and listen to the opinion of others. In addition, the creative capacity
of students will benefit other aspects, since the class-group will have to consider any
innovative idea that may occur to them and develop it. Students’ self-esteem will
increase because they will be given a role during the whole process and feel that they
have a responsibility to exercise. This will make this innovation a student’s centred
learning experience that will place teachers in the role of lesson guiders only. Students
will be provided with a great improvement of their fluency level as the atmosphere in
the class will be better, because they will have the opportunity to get to know each other
even better. Another important benefit in the implementation of the innovative proposal
is the development of students’ critical thinking, which is useful to differentiate between
appropriate and truthful information that surrounds them nowadays, as they will be able

26
to do research and contrast data in order to determine which of the information they
manage is fact or fake.

The classroom environment will also benefit from the employment of Design
Thinking in this innovative proposal because it advocates that all ideas and opinions
contributed by students are worthy. The ultimate goal to be understood through this
process is that not one single solution is the best and definitive, but that all proposals are
welcome. This will ensure that there is no sense of competitiveness in the classroom and
that all students value the work developed by other teams.

7. Personal reflection
The realization of this work and the discovery of a new methodology such as
Design Thinking allowed me to expand not only my knowledge about teaching but also
my curiosity to improve the teaching practice. This innovation proposal is much more
than a list of sessions different from traditional methodologies. It is also a call for the
need to find ways to adapt to the new and increasingly demanding circumstances of
younger generations.

First, the need to focus on fluency in English as a second language comes from
my experience during my internships in schools and as a primary school student years
ago. Focusing English language teaching on correct language acquisition by merely
assessing grammatical or lexical aspects leaves much to be desired. Students need to
learn a second language to communicate and express their thoughts. Obviously, the use
of the language must be adequate, but the suprasegmental aspects must also be taken
care of and be worked on in the classroom. That is why strategies such as this one
should be sought to diminish the fear students bear when speaking in another language
without resorting to artificial conversations and dialogues taken from a textbook.

Second, Design Thinking tool offers many opportunities for the area of English
as well as for any subject, promoting in a transversal way many competencies necessary
for the integral development of students. Although there is little information yet about
the application of this tool in education, it is the teacher’s responsibility to take the
initiative and experiment in their daily practice. A teacher must always be trained in the
latest methodologies, approaches and tools. This does not mean that he/she uses all of
them, but that he/she has certain resources to be applied in the classroom at any given

27
moment, as long as they are in accordance with the context of the school and the
students.

These years of university education have contributed greatly to the preparation

of this Final Degree Project. My practical experience is the one that has had the most
impact during the Degree on me as a future teacher of Primary Education, but a
foundation is needed on which to build that experience. Therefore, my training on
subjects such as Planification and Innovation, Orientation, English Didactics or School
Environment and Relations have helped me to come up with the idea of combining
these two key elements of fluency and Design Thinking in the preparation of this
innovative project.

Finally, my personal evaluation of this intervention focuses mainly on the

opportunities that can be offered in schools. It is not necessary or possible to apply in a
classroom all the existing methodologies, but every school should have as many tools
available as possible so that they adapt as much as possible to the students’ way of
learning. Students must sometimes adapt to a learning process that requires effort, but it
cannot be forgotten that students must have the desire to learn and to submit to this
process.

8. Bibliographical references
Al Zoubi, S. M. (2018). The impact of exposure to English language on language
acquisition. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 5(4),
151-162.

Alaraj, M. M. (2017). EFL speaking acquisition: Identifying problems, suggesting

learning strategies, and examining their effect on students’ speaking fluency. The
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 4(1),
3215-3221.

Ansell, S. E. (2011, 7 July). Achievement Gap. Education Week.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/achievement-gap/2004/09.
Baek, A., & Gremett, P. (2012). Design Thinking. In: H. Degen, & X. Yuan (Eds.), UX
best practices: How to achieve more impact with user experience (pp. 229-233).
New York: McGraw-Hill.

28
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How Design Thinking transforms organizations
and inspires innovation. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Brumfit, C. J. (1984). Communicative methodology in language teaching: the roles of

fluency and accuracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design issues, 8(2), 5-21.
Chambers, F. (1997). What do we mean by fluency? System, 25, 535-544.

Deubel, D. (2009). Getting your students “speaking” some strategies. Retrieved from
http://ddeubel.edublogs.org/2009/05/08/getting-yourstudents-speaking-some-stra
tegies.

Dolak, F., Uebernickel, F., & Brenner, W. (2013). Design Thinking and Design Science

Research. DESRIST 2013, Eighth International Conference on Design Science

Research in Information Systems and Technology, 11. 12.6.2013, Helsinki,

Finland, 1–11. https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/Publikationen/223547.

Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design Thinking and how it will change management

education: an interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning &

Education, 5(4), 512–523.

Gallagher, A., & Thordarson, K. (2020). Design thinking in play: An action guide for
educators. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford. (n.d.). An introduction to design thinking
process guide. Stanford. Retrieved from
https://dschool-old.stanford.edu/sandbox/groups/designresources/wiki/36873/att
achments/74b3d/ModeGuideBOOTCAMP2010L.pdf.

Hawryszkiewycz, I., Pradhan, S., & Agarwal, R. (2015, January). Design thinking as a
framework for fostering creativity in management and information systems
teaching programs. In Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, PACIS
2015-Proceedings.
Johansson‐Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: past,
present and possible futures. Creativity and innovation management, 22(2),
121-146.

29
Luka, I. (2014). Design thinking in pedagogy. The Journal of Education, Culture, and
Society, 5(2), 63-74.

Maurice, K. (1983). The fluency workshop. TESOL Newsletter 17, 429.

Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377-384.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York:

McGraw-Hill/Contemporary.

Owen, Ch. (2007). Design Thinking: notes on its nature and use. Design Research
Quarterly, 2(1), January, 16-27.

Panke, S. (2019). Design thinking in education: Perspectives, opportunities and

challenges. Open Education Studies, 1(1), 281-306.
Rauth, I., Köppen, E., Jobst, B., & Meinel, C. (2010). Design thinking: An educational
model towards creative confidence. In Taura, T. & Nagai, Y. (Ed.), DS 66-2:
Proceedings of the 1st international conference on design creativity (ICDC
2010) (pp. 1-8). Kobe, Japan: Springer Publishing.

Ray, B. (2012). Design thinking: Lessons for the classroom. Retrieved from: George
Lucas Educational Foundation website:
https://www.edutopia.org/blog/designthinking-betty-ray.

Real Decreto 157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen la ordenación y las

enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Primaria. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 52, de
2 de marzo de 2022. https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2022/03/01/157.

30
9. Annexes
Annex 1.

Class distribution. Author’s own elaboration.

31
Annex 2.

Letter from the future for Lesson 1. Author’s own elaboration.

32
Annex 3.

CATEGORY 4 3 2 1
Vocabulary Uses vocabulary Uses vocabulary Uses vocabulary Uses several
appropriate for appropriate for appropriate for (5 or more)
the audience. the audience. the audience. words or
Extends audience Includes 1-2 Does not include phrases that
vocabulary by words that might any vocabulary are not
defining words be new to most that might be understood
that might be of the audience new to the by the
new to most of but does not audience. audience.
the audience. define them.
Comprehension Student is able to Student is able to Student is able Student is
accurately accurately to accurately unable to
answer almost all answer most answer a few accurately
questions posed questions posed questions posed answer
by classmates by classmates by classmates questions
about the topic. about the topic. about the topic. posed by
classmates
about the
topic.
Preparedness Student is Student seems The student is Student does
completely pretty prepared somewhat not seem at
prepared and has but might have prepared, but it all prepared
obviously needed a couple is clear that to present.
rehearsed. more rehearsals. rehearsal was
lacking.
Stays on Topic Stays on topic all Stays on topic Stays on topic It was hard to
(100%) of the most (99-90%) some tell what the
time. of the time. (89%-75%) of topic was.
the time.
Content Shows a full Shows a good Shows a good Does not
understanding of understanding of understanding of seem to
the topic. the topic. parts of the understand
topic. the topic very
well.
Collaboration Almost always Usually listens Often listens to, Rarely listens
with Peers listens to, shares to, shares with, shares with, and to, shares
with, and and supports the supports the with, and
supports the efforts of others efforts of others supports the
efforts of others in the group. in the group but efforts of
in the group. Does not cause sometimes is not others in the
Tries to keep \"waves\" in the a good team group. Often
people working group. member. is not a good
well together. team
member.
Teacher’s rubric for the presentation. Author’s own elaboration.

33
Annex 4.

Student’s rubric for the presentation. Author’s own elaboration.

34
Annex 5.

Student questionnaire. Author’s own elaboration.

35
Annex 6.

Teacher’s questionnaire. Author’s own elaboration.

36
Annex 7.

Empathy Map for Lesson 2. Author’s own elaboration.

37