TAKING TO TASK(S)

Exploring task design by novice teachers in technologically mediated and non-technological activities

Shona Whyte

17th International CALL Research Conference, Tarragona, 7 July 2015

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

Tarragona soundbitespoor teaching: “teaching methods were atrocious” (Monica Ward)

poor technology: “infinite mindless feedback” (Kris van den Branden)

poor interactional context: no “communicative privacy” (Kurt Kohn)

poor gladiators: correct application of sword to one’s own jugular is a matter of honour (Gemma)

academics saidBest TBLT hedge: Kris van den Branden

“create interaction which leaves memory traces and changes in behaviour often associated with learning”

Optimism award: Vance Stevens

“experts will emerge”

TAKING TO TASK(S)Exploring task design by novice teachers in technologically mediated and non-technological activities

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

Shona Whyte Wordpress

My students took to tasks like a duck to water.

taking to task(s)I took my students to task

after their poor performance on the assignment.

backgroundteacher education projects (iTILT)

difficulties in getting to grips with task-based or task-oriented teaching

technology as only one element of teaching/learning environment

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

contextEnglish Language Teaching in French state school contexts (upper, lower secondary; primary)

pre-service teacher education: Masters in Teaching English at ESPE/University of Nice

first year Masters students: short teaching placements with mentor teacher

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

education reform

Inspection

Paid teaching placement (mentor teacher) + college courses

Entrance exam (English studies)

undergraduate English studies

undergraduate English studies

undergraduate English studies

Inspection MA Teaching English

Paid teaching placement (mentor teacher)

university courses

Entrance exam (English studies)

teaching placement

teacher

undergraduate English studies

Language programmesParcours spécifiques / nouvelles disciplines

1. Les classes bilangues permettent de commencer la deuxième langue dès la classe de 6e. Les sections européennes ou de langues orientales, généralement proposées en classes de 4e et de 3e, proposent un enseignement de langue renforcé de 2 heures hebdomadaires. Des ateliers de pratique de la langue ont lieu dans le cadre de l’accompagnement éducatif.

2. Les sections européennes ou de langues orientales offrent un enseignement disciplinaire en langue étrangère (histoire et géographie, mathématiques...) sur une partie de l’horaire de cette discipline.

3. En série littéraire un enseignement de littérature étrangère en langue étrangère est désormais proposé. Il s’appuie notamment sur des adaptations ou des interprétations au théâtre, au cinéma ou à l’opéra. La pratique de l’oral est inscrite au coeur de ce nouvel enseignement.

Apprendre à communiquer en langue étrangère

1. La pratique de l'oral est prioritaire dans l'apprentissage des langues étrangères en classe. Les élèves doivent être capables de communiquer pour favoriser leur mobilité en Europe et dans le monde.

3. Pour atteindre cet objectif, l’enseignement des langues a profondément changé et s’inscrit dans une perspective européenne commune forte.

5. Un nouveau programme commun à l’ensemble des langues vivantes étrangères et régionales met l’accent sur la communication orale et vise des niveaux de compétences à atteindre par les lycéens qui prennent appui sur le Cadre européen commun de référence pour les langues

French Ministry of Education, 2013

new opportunitiesuniversity role in pre-service teacher education beyond disciplinary knowledge

collaboration among student teachers (MA students), experienced teachers (mentors) and university tutors

access to classroom learners following task-oriented teaching programmes

3 ideas

“it is one thing for educators and curriculum developers to promote TBLT as a pedagogy; it is quite another for teachers to implement

this innovative way of teaching at the grassroots level of the classroom”

Erlam, 2013

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

1 Practice orientation

Erlam 2013 L2 Task Description Task criteria

listing Samoan, Year 4

designing a puletasi or ielavalava

‘Designer’ students interview their ‘client’ classmates, note names, ages, ’design’ choice, preferred colours. Whole class

fashion parade.

information gap, focus on meaning, real-world

activity

ordering/sorting

French, Year 10

agreeing on priority survival

items

Learners as survivors of desert plane crash agree on ordered list of survival items to be

retrieved

information gap, outcome, rely on own linguistic resources

matchingGerman, Year 8

beginnersbattleships

Learners work in pairs using a numbered grid to ‘hit’ points located by letters and numbers

on axes to destroy opponent’s forces

information gap, focus on meaning, outcome, real-

world game

problem-solving

French, Year 10

make up animal riddles (focus: comparative)

Learners construct animal riddles on model provided by teacher using comparative

structure, then guess each other’s riddlesreasoning gap, outcome,

real-world activity

creative project

Japanese, Year 10

story book competition

Learners write a story for younger pupils, books are scored for creativity and language

in a competition judged by older pupils

information gap, outcome, real-world

activity

Erlam 2013 L2 Task Description Task criteria

matchingGerman, Year 8

beginners

battle ships

Learners work in pairs using a

numbered grid to ‘hit’ points located

by letters and numbers on axes

to destroy opponent’s forces

information gap

focus on meaning, outcome, real-world

game

Implementation of innovation may be enhanced when

• innovations are easy to understand• the teacher is allowed time and space to try out the innovation • teachers are able to observe colleagues while trying out the innovation•[it] is perceived by teachers as practically doable and compatible with practical constraints

Van den Branden, 2009

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

“the instructors in this study had the desire to read and engage with research (Borg 2013),

but they did not have the necessary tools and support to be able to do so”

“implementing these research ideas regularly is not possible given the structure of the teaching context, their inexperience as

instructors and their graduate coursework”

Gurzynski-Weiss, 2015

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

2 theory-driven approach

“the use of tasks implies ‘design’: prospective and dynamic, with fluid boundaries between

workplan and process

“look at ‘design’ in terms of how teachers construe the pedagogic potential of different

tasks, and how they work with them in the classroom”

“richer understandings of ‘task’ as a pedagogic tool within a context of use, and richer

conceptualisations of the scope of ‘design’”

Samuda, 2007

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

3 implementation

present studysupport student teachers in design and implementation of teaching activities

encourage reflective practice for professional development

understand teacher attitudes to changing practice

present study25 first-year MA students

18h action research course to complement a 2-week classroom placement

6 groups of 3-5 participants design, implement and reflect on common teaching activity

group work on task design

pre-intervention presentation

group feedback on task criteria (questionnaire)

teaching and observation (data)

post-intervention presentation/reflective paper

final questionnaire task?

design brief

You now wish to give these learners a ‘communicative activity’ to practise this area further. You want the

students to interact as much as possible and involve as many different members of the class as possible. Although reading and writing may be involved, you are

most concerned to provide opportunities for speaking skills. You want the activity to last roughly between 15

and 30 minutes.

Samuda, 2005

task criteria

1. emphasise meaning versus form2. include an information gap 3. involve learners’ own resources 4. produce an outcome or result

Erlam, 2015

Level Description Task criteria

“Pass the bomb” debate

Upper secondary I

(15-16 years)

Learners take turns to present arguments in favour of or against teenage use of social media as quickly as

possible to avoid holding “bomb” when it goes offrely on own linguistic

resources, real-world activity

Who’s who guessing

game

Upper secondary I

(15-16 years)Learners take turns to give clues to words in 60 or 90

seconds: winner generates most correct guessesinformation gap, outcome,

rely on own linguistic resources, real-world activity

Do’s and don’ts/

Storytelling

Lower secondary III/IV (13-14-15 years)

One learner tells story to allow partner to put separate comic strip panels into correct order.

information gap, focus on meaning, outcome

What happened to

my bedroom?

Lower secondary III/IV (13-14-15 years)

Learners describe bedroom floorplans to identify three differences.

information gap, outcome, real-world activity

Class rulesLower

secondary I/II (11-12-13 years)

Learners match sentence strips to images and decide whether actions are permitted, forbidden or

compulsory at school? (real-world context)

Driving testLower

secondary I/II (11-12-13 years)

Learners roleplay driver and driving instructor to negotiate route

information gap, real-world activity

task design

Meaning versus form Are the pupils acting as users of English, rather than learners of English?

Are the pupils mainly concerned with expressing and comprehending meaning, not focusing on linguistic form?

Information gap (= écart d’information) Do pupils close an information gap as a result of the communication that takes place?

As a result of the communication do pupils find out something that they didn’t know?

Learner resources Is it true that the language needed to complete the task has not all been specially pre-taught?

Does the task allow learners to use language they have learned on other, unrelated occasions?

Outcome or result Do the pupils use English to achieve an outcome, and not as an end in itself?

Do they have to achieve a result to show that the task is completed?

feedback on task design

Proposed activitiesAverage rating

/ 8 points(N = 23)

Standard deviation Max Min

Who's who guessing game 6.86 1.0 8 5

Bedroom design 6.39 1.5 8 3

Rules/storytelling 5.98 1.1 8 4

Pass the bomb debate 5.76 1.2 8 4

Class rules 5.65 1.5 8 3

Driving test role-play 4.77 1.4 7 2

participant ratings

Ivy Nora

Anna

Astrid

Izzy

Jason

Celine

Carrie

Cindy

Sharon

Abby

Suky

Chris

Dom

Jack

Larry

Aline

Todd

Amy

Melissa

Seb

Kristen

Rob

6.8 6.7 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.9 5.7 5.7 5.6 5.5 4.9 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.3

7.5 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 8 7 8 7 7 6.5 8 8 8 5 6

7 7 7 7 8 7 7 8 8 8 7 6.5 7.5 7 6 7 6.5 6 5.5 6 6 5 5

7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6 6 6 6 3 5 5 5 4

7 6 6 6.5 7 6 6 6 6 6 6.5 6 5.5 6 5 6 6 6 3 5 4 4 4

6.5 6 6 6 5 6 6 5.5 4.5 5 5.5 6 5 5 5 4 6 5.5 * 4 3 4 4

6 6 6 4.5 4 6 5 4.5 4 3 4 4.5 3.5 4 4 4 2 3 * * 2 * 3

Ivy

Nor

a

Ann

a

Ast

rid

Izz

y

Jas

on

Cél

ine

Car

rie

Cin

dy S

haro

n

Abb

y

Suk

y

Chr

is

Dom

Jac

k

Lar

ry

Alin

e

Tod

d

Am

y

Mel

issa

Seb

Kris

ten

Rob

Who’s who guessing game Driving test role-play

Ivy Celine Suky Nora Jack Rob

6.8 6.3 6.1 6.7 5.7 4.37.5 8 7 8 8 67 7 6.5 7 6 57 6 6.5 7 6 47 6 6 6 5 4

6.5 6 6 6 5 46 5 4.5 6 4 3

Feedback on task design

MEAN(N=23) Who's who Bedroom Do’s and

don’tsBomb debate

Class rules

Driving test

Is the focus on meaning? 79% 90% 67% 81% 96% 65% 76%

Is information exchanged? 55% 84% 87% 51% 45% 48% 14%

Is language use (not) pre-planned?

77% 85% 72% 87% 76% 77% 63%

Is there an outcome? 83% 72% 93% 80% 72% 92% 86%

implementation

What happened in the classroom?

What role did technology play?

Parti

cipan

t rat

ing (5

poi

nt L

Ikert)

HarryCeline

IvyCarrie

FredMelissa

SebKristen

AlineAbbyAnnaJack

1 2 3 4 5

Participation (self) Participation (peer)

How well did learners participate?

Parti

cipan

t rat

ing (5

poi

nt L

Ikert)

HarryCeline

IvyCarrie

FredMelissa

SebKristen

AlineAbbyAnnaJack

1 2 3 4 5

Speaking (self) Speaking (peer)How much did learners speak?

1

2

3

4

5

Participants (N=12)Harry Celine Ivy Carrie Fred Melissa Seb Kristen Aline Abby Anna Jack

Integral IncidentalMotivational Pedagogical

use of technology

1

2

3

4

5

Mean participant rating (5 point Likert; N=12)users meaning close gap find out sthg not pre-taught other language outcome completion

Self Peerdesign versus implementation

peer observation

A critical incident is an important incident or occurrence that could be related more broadly to your teaching or to pupils’ learning. Examples of types of

incidents include: ‘an incident where your action really made a difference in the learner's outcome, either directly or indirectly;’ ‘an incident where things did

not go as planned,’ or ‘an incident that was typical and rewarding.’ Adapted from Breen et al., 2001

language accuracyinstructions

time managementoff-task behaviour

participation/motivationinitiative

success/failure of communicationdesign problem

detasking by teachertask avoidance by learner

Number of participant comments (N=32, 25 participants)

0 2 4 6 8 10

classroom management

task design/ implementation

language

2

7

16

7

7/32

strong versus problematic task

design

Were pre and post evaluations different according to task-orientation?

Were there differences in critical reflection?

Strong task design Group Céline Ivy Suky

Who’s who guessing game before before after before after before after

users 0.95 1 1 1 1 1 1

meaning 0.84 1 1 0 1 0.5 1

close gap 0.93 1 1 1 1 1 1

find out sthg 0.75 1 0.5 1 1 1

not pre-taught 0.84 1 1 1 1 0.5 1

other language 0.86 0 1 1 1 1 1

outcome 0.82 1 1 1 1 1 1

completion 0.61 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 1

6.86 7 7 7 7.5 7 7

Who’s who guessing game Céline Harry Ivy SukyLanguage accuracyClassroom managementinstructions 1 1 1time management 1 1off-task behaviourIndividual learnersparticipation/motivationinitiative 1 1Task design/implementationsuccess/failure of communicationdesign problemdetasking by teachertask avoidance by learner

Problematic task design Group Jack Nora Rob

Driving test before before after before after before after

users 0.68 1 1 1 0 1

meaning 0.84 1 1 1 1 1 1

close gap 0.09 0 1 0 1 0 1

find out sthg 0.18 0 1 0

not pre-taught 0.48 0 1 1 1 0 0

other language 0.77 1 1 1 1 1

outcome 0.86 1 1 1 1

completion 0.86 1 0 1 1 1

4.77 5 6 6 5 4 4

Problematic task design (driving) Jack Nora RobLanguage accuracyClassroom managementinstructionstime managementoff-task behaviourIndividual learnersparticipation/motivation 1initiativeTask design/implementationsuccess/failure of communicationdesign problem 1detasking by teacher 1task avoidance by learner 1

"I dropped should/shouldn't from my second lesson because I realised it was a huge mistake to try and force this notion into an activity that

was designed just with another goal.

My unique goal was to make them able to guide another person and not to use should/shouldn’t.

I think it was unnecessary and a mistake from us and not from the students.

Their reaction was highly expectable (= predictable); they did what they were supposed

to do"

Rob

What had troubled me during the lesson is that without really having thought about it, I started writing out on the board the different

instructions that were being given by the instructor, such as “fasten your seat-belt, turn left, turn right, go straight, etc.”

The problem after having done that is that the following students kept looking at the board and basically reading “the answers.” At this point my activity was

not going so well anymore, but in the heat of the moment I did not realize

what had caused it to dysfunction. This transformed the activity, which had

been quite authentic so far, into a “reading exercise.”

Now that I think about it, I realize that this might have

been the cause, but at the same time I understand why I did it. I did that because I was afraid that they would not be able to do the activity and would be

stuck.

Jack

some conclusionsstudent teachers able to design, implement and evaluate teaching tasks to varying degrees

role of technology not central if not specified in design brief

“garden path” approach may be more beneficial: learn more from less successful tasks

interactive Teaching in Language with Technology (Erasmus+)

Social Networks in Teacher Education (LLP)

Telecollaboration for Intercultural Language Acquisition

online collaboration with classroom teachers

MOOC: use of video in the language classroom

pre-service teacher collaboration on teaching tasks

TAKING TO TASK(S) Exploring task design by novice teachers in technologically mediated and non-technological activities

http://wp.me/p28EmH-6N

Shona Whyte @whyshona

http://efl.unice.fr whyte@unice.fr