Dossier module IV

Module IV

December 2017

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 5

READING 1

Process-Based CLT Approaches – Content-Based Instruction and Task-Based

Instruction ..................................................................................................................................... 6

READING 2

Strengths and weaknesses in Content Based instruction (CBI) in EFL settings at

beginning language development stages ..............................................................................15

READING 3

Teaching and Learning to Write: Using a Task-Based Approach in an EFL Class ..............24

READING 4

Alternative Assessment in EFL Classrooms: Why and How to Implement It! ....................35

READING 5

Project Work: A Means to Promote Language and Content ...............................................47

READING 6

Assessing general language proficiency .................................................................................58

The Common European Framework in its political and educational context ....................62

Common Reference Levels .......................................................................................................66

General Preface to the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012 .................................................72

NCSSFL-ACTFL Global Can-Do Benchmarks ..........................................................................73

REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................75

5

Welcome to Module 4: “Content-Based Learning and Task-Based Learning”! This

module is the 4th part of our Specialists in English Language Teaching. This training

will allow you to master four key competences related to Language Learning:

Didactics, Communication, Training and Self-Training as well as the Use of New

Information Technologies and Assessment Strategies via cross referential techniques

and methodologies.

The contents in the module tie the theory studied in module 3, as we explore English

teaching approaches that are variations of the Communicative Approach. Module 4

incorporates areas such as the development of linguistic competences, understanding

of modern language learning approaches and methodologies, session planning using

the Task based framework and the Content-based approach, as well as, alternative

assessment procedures. Areas such as ICT integration and Action Research will also

be developed alongside the aforementioned components. Therefore, it is strongly

encouraged that specialists commit to apply their newfound knowledge and skills into

their daily practice and provide much needed insights to the real applications of the

theory to a Salvadoran context.

This dossier will aid participants during their training and provide essential

information in different areas. The first reading comprises the main characteristics and

most relevant information regarding two process-based CLT approaches: Content-

based instruction (CBI) and Task-based instruction (TBI). The second reading provides

insight on the challenge that teaching writing represents and presents examples of

tasks and strategies for increasing students’ competence in writing skills. Readings

three and four present detailed information on the value of alternative assessment

and the features of two of its most comprehensive forms: portfolios and projects.

Finally, the fifth reading presents an overview of the language proficiency levels

according to the CEFR and the ACTFL, whose criteria must be considered for

assessment purposes.

6

Process-Based CLT Approaches – Content-

Based Instruction and Task-Based Instruction

In this reading, we will examine two current methodologies that can be described as extensions of

the CLT movement but which take different routes to achieve the goal of communicative language

teaching – to develop learners’ communicative competence. We refer to them as process-based

methodologies since they share as a common starting point a focus on creating classroom

processes that are believed to best facilitate language learning. These methodologies are content-

based instruction (CBI) and task-based instruction (TBI).

Content-Based Instruction

We noted above that contemporary views of language learning argue that communication is seen

as resulting from processes such as:

• Interaction between the learner and users of the language

• Collaborative creation of meaning

• Creating meaningful and purposeful interaction through language

• Negotiation of meaning as the learner and his or her interlocutor arrive at understanding

• Learning through attending to the feedback learners get when they use the language

• Paying attention to the language one hears (the input) and trying to incorporate new forms

into one’s developing communicative competence

• Trying out and experimenting with different ways of saying things

But how can these processes best be created in the classroom? Advocates of CBI believe that the

best way to do so is by using content as the driving force of classroom activities and to link all the

different dimensions of communicative competence, including grammatical competence, to

content. Krahnke (1987, 65) defines CBI as “the teaching of content or information in the language

being learned with little or no direct or explicit effort to teaching the language itself separately

from the content being taught.”

7

Task 1

How important is content in a language lesson? What kinds of

content do you think are of greatest interest to your learners?

Content refers to the information or subject matter that we learn or communicate through language

rather than the language used to convey it. Of course, any language lesson involves content, whether

it be a grammar lesson, a reading lesson, or any other kind of lesson. Content of some sort has to

be the vehicle which holds the lesson or the exercise together, but in traditional approaches to

language teaching, content is selected after other decisions have been made. In other words

grammar, texts, skills, functions, etc., are the starting point in planning the lesson or the course book

and after these decisions have been made, content is selected. For example, a lesson may be planned

around the present perfect tense. Once this decision has been made, decisions about the context or

content for practicing the form will be decided. Content- based teaching starts from a different

starting point. Decisions about content are made first, and other kinds of decisions concerning

grammar, skills, functions, etc., are made later.

Content-based instruction is based on the following assumptions about language learning:

• People learn a language more successfully when they use the language as a means of

acquiring information, rather than as an end in itself.

• CBI better reflects learners’ needs for learning a second language.

• Content provides a coherent framework that can be used to link and develop all of the

language skills.

Content-based instruction can be used as the framework for a unit of work, as the guiding principle

for an entire course, as a course that prepares students for mainstreaming, as the rationale for the

use of English as a medium for teaching some school subjects in an EFL setting, and as the

framework for commercial EFL/ESL materials.

As the framework for a unit of work: Content-based instruction need not be the framework for

an entire curriculum but can be used in conjunction with any type of curriculum. For example, in a

business communication course a teacher may prepare a unit of work on the theme of sales and

marketing. The teacher, in conjunction with a sales and marketing specialist, first identifies key

topics and issues in the area of sales and marketing to provide the framework for the course. A

variety of lessons are then developed focusing on reading, oral presentation skills, group

discussion, grammar, and report writing, all of which are developed out of the themes and topics

which form the basis of the course.

As the guiding principle for an entire course: Many university students in an EFL context are

required to take one or two semesters of English in their first year at a university. Typically, a

mainstream, multiskilled course book is chosen as the basis for such a course and the course covers

the topics that occur in the book. Any topics that occur are simply incidental to practicing the four

8

skills, etc., of the course book. Such courses, however, are sometimes organized around content. At

one European university, for example, the first-year English course consists of a sequence of modules

spread over the academic year. The topics covered are:

1. drugs 8. microchip technology

2. religious persuasion 9. ecology

3. advertising 10. alternative energy

4. AIDS 11. nuclear energy

5. immigration 12. Dracula in novels and films

6. Native Americans 13. professional ethics

7. modern architecture

The topics are chosen so that they provide a framework around which language skills, vocabulary,

and grammar can be developed in parallel.

As a course that prepares students for mainstreaming: Many courses for immigrant children in

English-speaking countries are organized around a CBI framework. For example, non-English-

background children in schools in Australia and New Zealand are usually offered an intensive

language course to prepare them to follow the regular school curriculum with other children. Such

a course might be organized around a CBI approach. An example of this approach is described by

Wu (1996) in a program prepared for ESL students in an Australian high school. Topics from a

range of mainstream subjects were chosen as the basis for the course and to provide a transition

to mainstream classes. Topics were chosen primarily to cater to the widest variety of students’

needs and interests. Linguistic appropriateness was another factor taken into account. Topics that

fulfilled these criteria include multiculturalism, the nuclear age, sports, the Green movement, street

kids, and teenage smoking.

As the rationale for the use of English as a medium for teaching some school subjects: A

logical extension of the CBI philosophy is to teach some school subjects entirely in English. For

example, in Malaysia, where the medium of instruction is Bahasa Malaysia (i.e., Malay), a decision

was recently taken to use English as the medium of instruction for math and science in primary

school and also for some courses at the university level. When the entire school curriculum is

taught through a foreign language, this is sometimes known as immersion education, an approach

that has been used for many years in part of English-speaking Canada. Parents from English-

speaking families in some parts of Canada can thus opt to send their children to schools where

French is the medium of instruction. This approach seeks to produce children who are bilingual in

French and English, since they acquire English both at home and in the community.

As the framework for commercial EFL/ESL materials: The series Cambridge English for Schools

(Littlejohn and Hicks 1996) is the first EFL series in which content from across the curriculum provides

the framework for the course. My own conversation course Springboard (Richards 1998) is also a

content-based course with themes and topics serving as the framework. The topical syllabus was

chosen through surveys of the interests of Asian college students.

9

Task 2

What problems does CBI pose for teachers? What are some

advantages and limitations of this approach in your opinion?

Issues in implementing a CBI approach

Content-based instruction raises a number of issues. A central issue is the extent to which focusing

on content provides a sufficient basis for the development of the language skills. It has been

pointed out, for example, that when English is used as the basis for teaching school subjects,

learners often bypass grammatical accuracy since their primary concern is mastery of content

rather than development of accurate language use. This has been a common complaint in places

like Hong Kong, where English has traditionally been the main medium for teaching school

subjects in many schools. Another issue concerns whether language teachers have the necessary

subject-matter expertise to teach specialized content areas such as marketing, medicine, ecology,

etc., and the inevitable “dumbing down” of content in such cases. Lastly, a key issue is that of

assessment. Will learners be assessed according to content knowledge, language use, or both?

Task-Based Instruction

Task-based instruction, or TBI (also known as task-based teaching), is another methodology that

can be regarded as developing from a focus on classroom processes. In the case of TBI, the claim

is that language learning will result from creating the right kinds of interactional processes in the

classroom, and the best way to create these is to use specially designed instructional tasks. Rather

than employ a conventional syllabus, particularly a grammar-based one, advocates of TBI argue

that grammar and other dimensions of communicative competence can be developed as a by-

product of engaging learners in interactive tasks. Of course, most teachers make use of different

kinds of tasks as part of their regular teaching. Task-based instruction, however, makes strong

claims for the use of tasks and sees them as the primary unit to be used, both in planning teaching

(i.e., in developing a syllabus) and also in classroom teaching. But what exactly is a task? And what

is not a task?

The notion of task is a somewhat fuzzy one, though various attempts have been made to define

it. Some of the key characteristics of a task are the following:

• It is something that learners do or carry out using their existing language resources.

• It has an outcome which is not simply linked to learning language, though language

acquisition may occur as the learner carries out the task.

• It involves a focus on meaning.

• In the case of tasks involving two or more learners, it calls upon the learners’ use of

communication strategies and interactional skills.

10

Task 3

Do you make use of classroom activities that can be described

as tasks in the sense described above? What do you think are

the characteristics of a good task?

Many of the activities proposed in the early days of CLT can be described as tasks according to

the definition above, i.e., information-gap and information-sharing activities that we find in many

course books and ELT materials. From the point of view of TBI, two kinds of tasks can usefully be

distinguished:

Pedagogical tasks are specially designed classroom tasks that are intended to require the use of

specific interactional strategies and may also require the use of specific types of language (skills,

grammar, vocabulary). A task in which two learners have to try to find the number of differences

between two similar pictures is an example of a pedagogical task. The task itself is not something

one would normally encounter in the real world. However, the interactional processes it requires

provides useful input to language development.

Real-world tasks are tasks that reflect real-world uses of language and which might be considered

a rehearsal for real-world tasks. A role play in which students practice a job interview would be a

task of this kind.

Willis (1996) proposes six types of tasks as the basis for TBI:

1. Listing tasks: For example, students might have to make up a list of things they would

pack if they were going on a beach vacation.

2. Sorting and ordering: Students work in pairs and make up a list of the most important

characteristics of an ideal vacation.

3. Comparing: Students compare ads for two different supermarkets.

4. Problem-solving: Students read a letter to an advice columnist and suggest a solution to

the writer’s problems.

5. Sharing personal experience: Students discuss their reactions to an ethical or moral

dilemma.

6. Creative tasks: Students prepare plans for redecorating a house.

Task 4

Can you give other examples of each of the six types of tasks

above?

There are many other taxonomies of tasks based on particular features of tasks, such as whether

they are one way, two way, simple, or complex. Many classroom activities do not share the

characteristics of tasks as illustrated above and are therefore not tasks and are not recommended

teaching activities in TBI. These include drills, cloze activities, controlled writing activities, etc., and

11

many of the traditional techniques that are familiar to many teachers. Despite the extensive recent

literature on tasks, however, there are virtually no published teacher resources containing tasks

that meet the criteria proposed in TBI.

How does TBI in practice differ from more traditional teaching approaches? Recall our earlier

discussion above of the principles of a P-P-P lesson or teaching format:

Presentation: The new grammar structure is presented, often by means of a conversation or

short text. The teacher explains the new structure and checks students’

comprehension of it.

Practice: Students practice using the new structure in a controlled context, through drills

or substitution exercises.

Production: Students practice using the new structure in different contexts often using their

own content or information, in order to develop fluency with the new pattern.

Advocates of TBI reject this model on the basis that (a) it doesn’t work; and (b) it doesn’t reflect

current understanding of second language acquisition. They claim that students do not develop

fluency or progress in their grammatical development through a P-P-P methodology. They also

argue that second language learning research has shown that language learning results from

meaningful interaction using the language and not from controlled practice. With TBI the focus

shifts to using tasks to create interaction and then building language awareness and language

development around task performance. How does this work in practice?

Willis proposes the following sequence of activities:

Pretask Activities

Introduction to Topic and Task

• T helps Ss’ to understand the theme and objectives of the task, for example, brainstorming

ideas with the class, using pictures, mime, or personal experience to introduce the topic.

• Ss’ may do a pre-task, for example, topic-based, odd-word-out games. Teacher may

highlight useful words and phrases, but would not pre-teach new structures.

• Ss’ can be given preparation time to think about how to do the task.

• Ss’ can hear a recording of a parallel task being done (so long as this does not give away

the solution to the problem).

• If the task is based on a text, Ss’ read a part of it.

Task Cycle

Task

• The task is done by Ss’ (in pairs or groups) and gives Ss’ a chance to use whatever language

they already have to express themselves and say whatever they want to say. This may be

in response to reading a text or hearing a recording.

12

• Teacher walks around and monitors, encouraging in a supportive way everyone’s attempt

at communication in the target language.

• Teacher helps Ss’ to formulate what they want to say, but will not intervene to correct errors

of form.

• The emphasis is on spontaneous, exploratory talk and confidence building, within the

privacy of the small group.

• Success in achieving the goals of the tasks helps Ss’ motivation.

Planning

• Planning prepares for the next stage where Ss’ are asked to report briefly to the whole class

how they did the task and what the outcome was.

• Ss’ draft and rehearse what they want to say or write.

• T goes around to advise students on language, suggesting phrases and helping Ss’ to

polish and correct their language.

• If the reports are in writing, Teacher can encourage peer-editing and use of dictionaries.

• The emphasis is on clarity, organization, and accuracy, as appropriate for a public

presentation.

• Individual students often take this chance to ask questions about specific language items.

Report

• Teacher asks some pairs to report briefly to the whole class so everyone can compare

findings, or begin a survey. (N.B: There must be a purpose for others to listen). Sometimes

only one or two groups report in full; others comment and add extra points. The class may

take notes.

• Teacher chairs, comments on the content of their reports, rephrases perhaps, but gives no

overt public correction.

Language Focus

Analysis

• Teacher sets some language-focused tasks, based on the texts students read or on the

transcripts of the recordings they hear. Examples include the following:

• Find words and phrases related to the topic or text.

• Read the transcript, find words ending in “s” and say what the “s” means.

• Find all the words in the simple past form. Say which refer to past time and which

do not.

• Underline and classify the questions in the transcript.

• Teacher starts Ss’ off, then students continue, often in pairs.

• Teacher goes around to help. Ss’ can ask individual questions.

• In plenary, Teacher then reviews the analysis, possibly writing relevant language up on the

board in list form; Ss’ may make notes.

13

Practice

• Teacher conducts practice activities as needed, based on the language analysis already on

the board, or using examples from the text or transcript.

• Practice activities can include:

• Choral repetition of the phrases identified and classified

• Memory challenge games based on partially erased examples or using lists

already on blackboard for progressive deletion

• Sentence completion (set by one team for another)

• Matching the past-tense verbs (jumbled) with the subject or objects they had in

the text

• Dictionary reference with words from text or transcript

Task 5

How practical do you think Willis’s proposal is? What issues does

it raise for teachers?

Task-based instruction can, in theory, be applied in a number of different ways in language

teaching:

As the sole framework for course planning and delivery: This appears to be the strategy

proposed by Willis. Such an approach was used in a program described by Prabhu (1987) in which

a grammar-based curriculum was replaced by a task- based one in a state school system, albeit

only for a short period.

As one component of a course: A task strand can also serve as one component of a course, where

it would seek to develop general communication skills. This is the approach described by Beglar

and Hunt (2002) in their study of a 12-week course for second-year Japanese university students.

The task strand was based on a survey. Students designed a survey form, then collected data,

analyzed it, and presented the results. In this case “task” is being used in ways others would use

the term “project.” At the same time, students were also involved in class- room work related to a

direct approach to teaching speaking skills, receiving explicit instruction in some of the specific

strategies and microskills required for conversation.

As a technique: Teachers who find the procedures outlined by Willis unrealistic and

unmanageable over a long period could still use task work from time to time as one technique

from their teaching repertoire.

14

Issues in Implementing a Task-Based Approach

Many issues arise in implementing a task-based approach. To begin with, there is little evidence

that it works any more effectively than the P-P-P approach it seeks to replace. Criteria for selecting

and sequencing tasks are also problematic, as is the problem of language accuracy. Task work may

well serve to develop fluency at the expense of accuracy, as with some of the other activities

suggested within a CLT framework. Content issues are also of secondary importance in TBI, making

it of little relevance to those concerned with CBI or mainstreaming. The fact that TBI addresses

classroom processes rather than learning outcomes is also an issue. In courses that have specific

instructional outcomes to attain (e.g., examination targets) and where specific language needs

have to be addressed rather than the general communication skills targeted in task work, TBI may

seem too vague as a methodology to be widely adopted.

15

Strengths and weaknesses in Content Based

instruction (CBI) in EFL settings at beginning

language development stages

RESEARCH PROBLEM

Description

Content Based Instruction (CBI) as one of the most revolutionary methods in the language

teaching/ learning process, takes language and puts it into context considering that language

learning is more likely to be successful when facing conditions that are similar to the ones that are

experienced when learning the mother tongue. It also claims that language must not be seen as a

set of elements which are studied in isolation and through the use of unreal sentence s and

situations, it must be done in continuous action, this way students can witness lively the way it

works so the y will have a better understanding instead of memorization.

Regarding this idea, it becomes complicated to face authentic material at beginners' stages due

to the evident lack of vocabulary at that stage and if we consider an EFL setting, the lack of

authentic material arises as one of the main limitations for a content based class. Fortunately new

technologies allow teachers and students to have unlimited access to this authentic information;

unfortunately not everyone has that opportunity.

In order to face authentic material, it is imperative to have a look at the way English is taught

nowadays, for example, textbooks offer a way in which language is divided into pieces and taught

considering the level of difficulty of the structure in an isolated way so, students show acceptable

performance comprehending but, not producing. Books also give predesigned material that does

not consider students preferences, likes and dislikes so, their motivation may not be as high as

expected because not all students enjoy the same things and it can be reflected in the obtained

results.

16

Research question

Is it possible to have an adequate content based class at English beginners' courses?

Objectives

To highlight the main strengths and weaknesses which are found in CBI. To find out possible

strategies in order to overcome CBI weaknesses.

Purpose of the study

Originally Content Based Instruction first appeared in the mid-1980s with the publication of

Bernard Mohan's work, Language and Content. Mohan describes his work as an exploration into

the ways in which the "learning of language and subject matter can be accomplished" (Mohan

1986). Immersion programs applied this principle as a way of adapting foreign students to scholar

systems so they can attend regular academic classes in L2 this way students leaned target language

and the required content.

What is intended in this paper is to analyze the possibilities of using a content based class in EFL

settings at beginners' stage so students can have the opportunity of using the target language in

a more realistic way inside the classroom in order to have a more practical language learning

process beyond textbooks from the very beginning of students’ contact with L2.

Significance of the study

Content Based Instruction as a significant approach in language teaching does not work the same

for all settings. especially if we talk about an English course in EFL settings where content is not as

important as it could be. Regarding this context, English is normally taught through the use of

textbooks but the real use of English is missing due to the lack of more realistic material and

students end by learning in one specific context but when facing original performance they show

an evident deficiency of L2.

At beginners' stages of learning, the use of a content based class would be complicated because

of the evident absence of vocabulary and grammatical features thus; not only the comprehension

of the taught feature, but also language learning would be delayed and that is why it is important

to have a broad revision of Content Based Instruction (CBI) and how it could be adapted to the

setting and its needs.

Considering what qualifies as content in content based classes, it is very common for it to be some

kind of subject matter related to the students' academic curriculum. The second or foreign

language can be consequently used as the medium of instruction. Nevertheless, this is not the

only option available for, and regarding a setting such an English course, some authors suggest,

that content "… needs not be academic; it can include any topic, theme, or non­language issue of

17

interest or importance to the learners" (Genesee, 1994). This statement shows the flexibility of a

content based class and the possibility of teaching at beginners' stages developing students ' skills.

RESULTS, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Results

As it can be seen in its origins and in immersion programs where it has been commonly applied,

CBI has had as main setting that one where English is spoken as mother tongue but, how can it be

applied at early stages of the language learning process? Is it really necessary to wait until learners

master the language itself to set CBI as the approach to be taken into account? What happens in

EFL settings?

Nowadays books might be one of the main tools regarding language learning in universities,

academies or school courses, but when students are asked to open a book they might not

understand it at first (considering that all input found there is written in L2) so it would be shocking

at first and, if they are addressed in English. the way students face their first contact with the target

language would be upsetting and this might be nothing but lack of motivation. When learners

face their first language classes they are normally afraid because they do not know how to stand

before it especially beginners, because a beginner does not have enough knowledge and getting

a flood of information as first contact with L2 might cause panic.

In order to have an ad equate CBI environment students should be exposed to the target language

as soon as possible but in EFL settings it should be done at a different rate, taking into account

the level of the students, their necessities and also not making false assumptions based on a

common reaction to something unknown. When considering CBI as the way of teaching language

it is not necessary to become an expert in a content area, especially in EFL settings where language

teachers are prepared to teach languages rather that content and also people are more focused

in language learning instead of leami.ng any kind of content.

One way to avoid this situation is to remember what Genesee (1994) states: 'the content needs

not be academic; it can include any topic, theme, or non-language issue of interest or importance

to the learners" this way, learners might understand that the use of content in order to teach

languages is a successful strategy in which language is appreciated in real context through the use

of authentic material.

CBI Strengths and Weaknesses

There might be many points of view regarding strengths in CBI. and it is well known that depending

on the context where it is applied, these features might vary, because as it always happens inside

the very classroom, contexts are as different as we are.

Among its main strengths it is important to mention:

18

1. The real use of language. Language stopped being just a group of distant grammatical units

and became a whole with a purpose in this case, content teaching. Learners started to know and

understand L2 in action, within real life situations and through the use of authentic material which

allow learners not only to learn a language but also content. This situation led students to achieve

goals through the use of their own comprehension abilities by facing authentic situations taken

from a wide variety of authentic sources, giving language authenticity.

2. CBI can make learning a language more interesting and motivating. Students can use the

language to fulfill a real purpose, which can make students both more independent and confident.

When learners see that everything they do has an achievable purpose they have more possibilities

of assimilating content because they might understand in a dear way what they are doing instead

of solving isolated exercises which enclose students inside learning by repetition but sometimes

far from comprehension.

3. CBI is very popular among EAP (English for Academic Purposes) teachers as it helps students to

develop valuable study skills such as note taking summarizing and extracting key information from

texts. When students face authentic material they will have to interpret instead of translate as they

usually do, so real language comprehension skills will be required. If learners face isolated exercises

in which there is no context. they might find several problems to understand a text because a text

would be longer and more complete than a single completed sentence. It is hard to get to a full

comprehension from the very beginning because of the learners level but, content can be adapted

and, starting from the least complicated exercise might help students to start developing their

potential from early stages instead of waiting far higher levels to make students face authentic

English.

4. Taking information from different sources, re-evaluating and restructuring that information can

help students to develop very valuable thinking skills that can then be transferred to other subjects.

Considering that content does not mean academic content, the language classes output must be

carefully chosen, and never has to remain the same, even the most simple exercise in an adequate

way shows how useful language learning might be, and not only inside the classroom. Language

learning does not mean only learning an L2 for travelling, approving a test or fulfill a request, it

also opens the door to a wide range of information that can be applied not only in the academic

context but also in real life situations. Students can develop a much wider knowledge of the world

through CBI which can feed back into improving and supporting their general educational needs.

5. The inclusion of group work within the framework given can also help students to develop their

collaborative skills, which can have great social value. Language learning is a process in which

involves all participants inside the classroom as a unit which goes in the same direction, allowing

the creation of adequate environment for learning. Language learning is not a process in which a

participant learns a language once and then keeps it to himself / herself, language exists for

communicating. CBI allows teacher to use a considerable amount of activities in order to enhance

group work peer evaluation, and different ways of allowing exchanges among learners and

teacher.

19

Overcoming weaknesses

Along with these strengths, some weaknesses are also found, and as it was established before,

there are also many points of view considering these weaknesses, as well as strategies to overcome

them leaving out the context because weaknesses do not exist to stop but to overcome and to go

on. The following part shows some of the main weaknesses that can be found in CBI and some

personal ideas regarding their strengthening.

1. CBI might not be explicitly focused on language learning so; some students may feel confused

or may even feel that they aren't improving their language skills. This situation is very common in

EFL settings because it is not very common the use of content and every time students face that

kind of material they increase their anxiety levels and if they are not able to solve a task well, they

might be likely to lose motivation and interest because of the false assumption of failure regarding

language learning. In an EFL setting like ours we are used to measure language learning by taking

into account how much grammar is learned rather than the use of that grammar inside a more

realistic environment. Including some form of language focused, exercises to help draw attention

to linguistic features within the materials and consolidate any difficult vocabulary or grammar

points. If we work using authentic material, it does not mean that everything must be reading and

writing pointlessly, this material is the way to lead students inside the features we want to teach,

all exercises to be done or to explain must be taken from there, otherwise they will not be related

at all to the material and it will weaken the exercise.

2. The overuse of the students’ native language during the lesson might be a problem, because

the lesson isn't explicitly focused on language practice students find it much easier and quicker to

use their mother tongue. It is important to know that people in the classroom do not have the

same abilities understanding L2 that directly, and if this is forgotten, some learners might lose

interest in the class because at the moment of getting lost they will have to stop working and they

will not be able to understand neither the lesson nor the content. Also learners tend to be afraid

of asking the teacher when they do not understand increasing this way that fear situation which

might be seen in the learners' production skills.

Try sharing a rationale with students and explain the benefits of using the target language rather

than their mother tongue. The way to familiarize learners with language learning in a gentle way

is by inviting them to participate· solving activities, asking questions and sharing their ideas not

by forcing them. Students should have access to all information required in order to help them to

understand what is being taught, this information must be helpful and adapted to their level and

characteristics so they can feel more confident with L2 information. L2 must be a tool to join not

to divide.

3. It can be hard to find information sources and texts that lower levels can understand. Also the

sharing of information in the target language may cause great difficulties. Inside the classroom

not all students have the same level, the same abilities and the same necessities and of course

they will not be able to perform in the same way. Regarding sources of information the situation

is very similar, it is not so simple to get a " beginners text", or " intermediate text” in order to teach.

20

Students find it difficult to go on when the y try to read a text in L2 and do not understand it so;

they might end up by losing interest.

A possible way around this at lower levels is either to use texts in the students' native language

and then get them to use the target language for the sharing of information or to have texts in

the target language but allow the students to present the end product in their native language.

These options should reduce the level of challenge and might increase the level on self-confidence.

In this part it is important to take into account material selection, because this is the starting point

when facing CBI. It must be remembered that students can participate in this selection, but

teachers. must analyze this material in order to prepare it in an adequate way. At early stages of

learning not all students are going to be as confident as others, they must be given the opportunity

of sometimes performing in mother tongue but, it is good to be careful of not allowing this

situation being longer than required.

4. Some students may copy directly from the source texts they use to get their information and

fulfill the goal. This is a common feature because it is very simple to associate one word in the

question with one from the texts as it might happen in other subjects so, they simply copy the

information that is required expecting to have answered well. When students face problems

understanding they tend to associate elements this way some questions can be answered and

some tasks can be solved but the learner did not learn at all in fact, is gaining confusion.

Task design is vital. Teachers should not take a reading and prepare just specific questions as the

goal to be achieved. At early stages this may work in order to give learners some self-confidence

but, little by little learners must face more challenging tasks that demand students evaluate the

information in some way, to draw conclusions or actually to put it to some practical use. Having

information sources that have conflicting information can also be helpful as students have to

decide which information they agree with or most believe. All this information must lead to

language and content learning and the way of checking this is by the application of students’

abilities to produce language considering what they understand and think.

Discussion

CBI has shown from its very beginnings the way how real life and language learning can meet

inside the classroom. In the early days of language teaching, the use of authentic material did not

consider this so, although the use of authentic material is a good option, its lack of context

considering the environment where taught, became a barrier because learners learned something

that had a context for some people but not for them. It is important to underline that this material

was first used for translation rather that interpretation so the understanding of it could be

inadequate and far from its real meaning.

Although the real use of language, the main idea of CBI lies on teaching content and the possibility

of teaching great amount of content in L2 at early stages might be difficult. Fortunately academic

content is not the only content that can be taught in CBI so, depending on the level it is possible

21

to teach something which may increase learners’ interest and motivation, there is no perfect

material, it is the way it is used what makes the difference.

Not all material will be useful, but if it is carefully chosen and worked the results might be better.

Evaluation has been seen as a weak point in CBI because language learning does not always mean

content learning and vice versa. In a context where the content is strictly academic it is hard to

know what and how to evaluate because there is the possibility of evaluating content and language

separately but if they were taught together this evaluation should be carried out the same way. If

learners have the opportunity of helping to select material they would be able to understand and

discuss about it in a better way because of their proximity to the topic, situation which lead to

enhance interest and motivation. Authentic material offers a wide variety of possibilities in order

to create different ways of evaluating far from paper and pen evaluation. Problem solving, group

tasks, discussions, presentations, etc. are examples of activities which can be used to perform

assessment in CBI classes.

Evaluation, as it should be performed in any subject, must be progressive and constant. Learners

should be exposed to a considerable amount of language through stimulating content, CBI

supports contextualized learning; learners are taught useful language that is surrounded within

relevant discourse situation which is not seen in traditional language teaching which divided

English into small pieces of grammatical units. That way, students learned English the same way,

by pieces so, their results showed the same fragmentation at the moment of producing language

spontaneously.

There are different ways of applying CBI from early context. Teachers should take into account that

not all learners are able to understand the same at the same rate so, the use of different activities

starting with easy ones and going forward to more complex ones will lead to a better process

which may lead to an adequate language learning. CBI contexts might demand the use of target

language in order to perform inside the classroom but, it does not mean that teachers may use it

to create a distance with the people who evidence difficulties. Mother tongue is a tool as well to

help students to gain some self -confidence when the situation demands it. CBI is not an

unbreakable rule, is way of teaching so, it must be flexible and innovative.

Conclusions

Although CBI can be seen as an advanced level technique, there are some kinds of CBI that show

that contextualizing it to early stages could be possible through being flexible and having a high

level of motivation. Greater flexibility and adaptability in the curriculum can be set up regarding

students' interest. When learners see that the learning process takes them into account,

considering their interests, fee lings, likes, dislikes and also actual facts that surround them, they

will feel closer to it and this change can be clearly reflected in their motivation towards the class

and learner s' results as well.

22

With CBI all four skills gain more attention in class unlike previous ideas which emphasized on one

or two skills over the others. Language started to be seen as a whole and not as a set of isolated

parts, this way the understanding of the language itself will be eased so, learners will be able to

fully comprehend and produce in L2. Many learners showed ability to perform well in one skill but

evidencing as well a gasp regarding others and that happened because if language is seen as a

puzzle it will be difficult to be understood.

Performance abilities which were a synonym of advanced levels can be taken into account at early

levels of language learning. When language is divided, exercises divide learning too because if

single sentences are taken from nowhere, the lack of context is evident and this lack might lead

students to misunderstand the task. If students are asked to work from authentic material the way

they face it might be more complete because the material itself has a defined context which help

students to understand an idea.

Complex information is delivered through real life context from the students to understand in a

better way leading to intrinsic motivation. Every time a learner solves a task through the use of the

learned features really puts language into practice and once a goal is achieved the learner could

feel that the language was really useful for something else besides an unreal evaluative activity,

they learned something witnessing how English worked.

Students facing known vocabulary (numbers) have the opportunity of practicing it in L2 in an easier

way, so the teaching act can be focused on the practice as we learned mother tongue step by step,

language learning is not a high speed process and the hard the language is work, the better it will

be learned. Through the endless practice our learners have the possibility of internalizing what is

taught and if we also represent it using their environment objects they will establish a better

relationship with language. Although some exercising seems to be repetitive and non-challenging,

it does not mean that is not a good exercise. Only through practice we are able to master

something so, as teachers we must consider that our students do.

When giving importance to communication, the concept of error also changes. In the past, these

inaccuracies were punished in order to reduce their occurrence (conditioning), and now mistakes

are also punished through grades or concepts. In real communicative environments errors are part

of the everyday conversation as in the mother tongue so, the focus lies on meaning rather than

form. If the students are able to communicate there is an achieved goal, if a mistake appears it is

taken as a normal feature which is inevitable and helpful in order to understand and being

understood.

It is impossible to have a perfect way of teaching languages, every single idea has shown

effectiveness but never in an absolute way and CBI is not the exception. Strengths and weaknesses

are just relative ideas because they are part of a whole idea which exists the way it is and even

when correcting every aspect of it, there will be something missing. As teachers it is important to

recognize that teaching languages is not an already written truth, it will always be a never-ending

process in which all actors must have a part in order to get the goal of learning.

23

CBI stands for two main concepts, motivation and interest, learners have got more responsibility

in their own process and the teachers have lost the power which they were given in the past.

Teachers and students have the opportunity of being an active part when selecting material and

topics so, the class changes from a unidirectional one to a real interactive one. Although it looks

like a very demanding concept, the results of allowing students to participate in their own learning

process will definitely increase learners' motivation towards language learning because they are

now learning what they are really interested in, instead of studying a predesigned book that in

many situations does not take into account learners' interests.

24

Teaching and Learning to Write: Using a

Task-Based Approach in an EFL Class ABRAHAM PANAVELIL ABRAHAM

UNIVERSITY OF NIZWA, OMAN

ABSTRACT

Teaching writing is one of the most challenging tasks an EFL teacher has to face, and students find writing a

difficult skill to develop. This reading, however, focuses on Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) as a

successful tool for tackling this problem. It defines TBLT and examines its importance for enhancing the writing

skills of the EFL students, giving examples of tasks that have been successfully tried out in the classroom. The

reading also examines the use of various strategies for increasing EFL learners' involvement in reading-to-

writing activities.

INTRODUCTION

Writing is an important skill that can open up a world of possibilities for any student. Even in these

days of the Internet and other technologies, written communication in English is still an asset for

the aspiring student. But for a majority of our students writing is a skill they find hard to acquire.

The major problems they face in writing are (1) finding an apt word suitable for the topics, (2)

using appropriate tenses based on the situation, (3) using correct spelling and punctuation, (4)

organizing ideas neatly and coherently in paragraphs.

Such difficulties place a heavy burden on students, often causing them to lose interest in

writing. They find it difficult to write a composition based on their own ideas and they are afraid

of making mistakes in grammar, usage, vocabulary etc. However, one way to resolve this problem

is to use a TBLT approach in an EFL class as it creates a free instructional environment in which

students and teacher work together and collaborate in a relaxed atmosphere.

TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING: AN APPROACH

Task-based language teaching is an approach rather than a method which creates a natural

context for using the target language in the classroom. It allows students to explore their ideas

25

and choose their own words, and thus become active learners. It also gives teachers an opportunity

to develop activities in the form of interesting tasks on familiar subjects. The lesson is based on

the completion of a task and the language studied is determined by what happens as the students

proceed with the work. It is an approach that offers students material that they have to actively

engage with in the process of their learning, enabling them to explore their ideas freely and use

their own words without worrying about mistakes in grammar, vocabulary or other mechanical

aspects of writing. When they practice to write continually and complete their tasks, they can build

their vocabulary and improve their handling of grammar, spelling, punctuation, and useful

expressions. The familiarity of the topic and the enjoyment of the task are a solution to students'

writing difficulties.

Different Views

TBLT is an outcome of the communicative approach and plays an important role in developing

communicative language competence. The goal of language teaching is to develop what Hymes

(1972) called "communicative competence" (p. 272) and according to Johnson K. (1984) the

acquisition of communicative ability in a language is an example of skill development (p. 193).

Richards (1986)) says that the two types of materials used for communicative approaches to

language teaching are text-based and task-based (p. 73).

This communicative approach later evolved into a task-based language teaching method. Since

the publication of Jane Willis' A Framework for Task-Based Learning in 1996, the word 'task' has

been popular in ELT circles. Willis defines 'task' as "a goal-oriented activity in which learners use

language to achieve a real outcome" (p. 53). Hence, tasks are activities that require learners to

arrive at an outcome from given information through a process of thought, and which allows

teachers to control and regulate that process. In TBLT, assessment is primarily based on task

outcomes rather than on the correctness of language. According to Foster (1999), TBLT

methodologies "share a common idea, giving learners tasks to transact, rather than items to learn

and provides an environment which best promotes the natural language learning process". (p. 69).

Skehan (2003) defines 'task' as an activity in which meaning is primary (p. 3), while according

to Nunan (2004), 'task' is a "piece of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending,

producing or interacting in the target language while their attention is principally focused on

meaning rather than form" (p. 10). Prabhu (1987) saw a task as" an activity which required learners

to arrive at an outcome from given information through some process of thought and which

allowed teachers to control and regulate that process" (p. 24). Prabhu further stated that there are

essentially three types of tasks: filling an information gap, where students use language to share,

give or gain a piece of information; filling a reasoning gap, where students use language to share

opinions; and problem-solving, where language is used to salve a problem (p. 34). Whatever the

focus of a particular task, students are asked to perform it in response to topics that have been

assigned. This means a task can be anything that motivates students to learn the target language.

Hence, in developing writing skills, teachers should select tasks that will motivate learners, engage

their attention and promote their writing skills as efficiently as possible.

Dave and Jane Willis (2007), in their book Doing Task-based Teaching, listed seven kinds of task

that can be used in an EFL class to enhance student writing skills:

26

• Listing: Brainstorming and/or fact finding (qualities, priorities, things, features, things to do,

reasons)

• Ordering and Sorting: Sequencing, ranking, classifying (sequencing story pictures, ranking

items according to cost, popularity, negative or positive)

• Matching: Listening and writing, listening and doing, matching phrases/description to

pictures, matching directions to maps

• Comparing: Finding similarities or differences (comparing ways of greetings or local customs,

contrasting two countries)

• Problem-Solving: Real-life situations, case studies, incomplete texts (logic problems, giving

advice, proposing and evaluating solutions, predicting a story ending)

• Projects and Creative Tasks: Doing and reporting a survey, producing a class news­paper,

planning a radio show, designing a brochure, etc.

• Sharing Personal Experiences: Storytelling, anecdotes, memories, opinions, reactions (early

schooldays, unforgettable moments, terrible journeys, etc.) (p. 58).

[A Task-Based Lesson plan prepared by Dave Willis and Jane Willis is given in the Appendix with

some modifications that might be of use to teachers who use TBLT in the EFL writing class]

Advantages

The main advantage of the task-based approach is that it gives students much freedom and natural

context in which they can use the target language in class. Hence, they have a more varied

exposure to language and are exposed to a good range of lexical phrases, collocations and

language forms. However, the focus is essentially on writing per se rather than correctness of

grammar, syntax etc. Students can explore their ideas and choose their own words with the result

that they become active learners. They are free to explore ideas without worrying about mistakes

in using tenses and appropriate words. The last part of the TBLT process can be devoted to

corrections and improvement. TBLT is learner-centered and is a strong communicative approach

where students spend their time fruitfully and creatively.

A FRAMEWORK FOR TBLT: THREE STAGE PROCESS

In a framework for TBLT, Jane Willis (1996) suggests a three stage process - pre-task, task cycle,

and language focus (p. 54) - and this comprises effective steps for improving students' writing

skills. The result is that students tend to become better at formulating their ideas in a coherent

way, using correct syntax/grammar, vocabulary, and so on.

The Pre-Task Phase

The pre-task phase introduces the topic and task for the students and activates topic- related

words and phrases. It is like a warm-up activity. Students get a chance to recall things that they

know and the teacher then tells them what will be expected of them at this stage. The teacher may

highlight new language structures to draw attention to certain phrases or expressions and perhaps

27

present a model of the task by showing a picture, audio or video that demonstrates it, at the same

time trying to elicit appropriate vocabulary or phrasing which students might find useful. For

example, the teacher may talk about the village/city where the students live, what they like and

what they don't like about it, and write their responses on the board, thus providing useful

vocabulary for the main task.

During this time, students are expected to get involved in the task, individually or in pairs,

depending on the type of activity selected. After choosing the task and explaining it, they begin

drafting. And as they begin writing the first draft, the teacher should urge them to let their ideas

flow onto the paper without concern for perfection in form or mechanics. At every stage, it is the

teacher's duty to encourage and motivate the students to use what they are comfortable with in

order to complete the task.

The Task Cycle Planning and Report Stage

This cycle can be divided into three parts: the task itself, its planning, and the report stage. The

following points have to be taken care of at this stage:

1. The task should not be repetitive: e.g. Yesterday I went to Muscat. Yesterday I went to my

college. Yesterday, I met my friend etc.

2. The task has a communicative goal for the students to achieve- for example, making an

important decision about choosing a course, writing a list of items that may be needed for

a picnic or preparing for a football match etc. The teacher should make it clear to the

students that their important goal is complete the main task.

3. The main task allows students to use their own ideas without worrying about the grammar,

spellings and other mechanics of writing. The task must not restrict the language that

students wish to use. Indeed they are free to use any language structures they want in order

to achieve the end goal, which provides them with motivation and purpose and ensures that

students focus their attention on communicating meaning rather than on grammatical

structures.

4. During the task, the teacher's involvement should always be encouraging and supportive.

However, s/he is not supposed to tell students which grammatical structure to use while they

are engaged in their tasks although the teacher may, if necessary, mention useful words or

phrases. Nor should the teacher correct the students' work during the task but quietly

monitor student progress and note down their mistakes for eventual correction.

Planning and Report Stage

At the planning stage, students work with the teacher to improve their writing skills. Here, there is

a heavy emphasis on form-focused instruction as students attempt to improve the overall

correctness of their writing. The teacher at this point plays a very important role in shaping the

written work of the students. At the report stage, students present their findings and here the

teacher's role is to act as a chairperson and to summarize each student's work and make

comments. The report stage is crucial as it gives students added motivation to complete the task.

28

Language Focus

This is the final stage and it allows a closer study of some of the specific features naturally occurring

in the language used during the task cycle. By this time, students will have already worked with

the language and processed it for meaning, so they are ready to concentrate more on the language

forms that carry meaning. This stage focuses on two parts: analysis and practice. The analysis

involves the teacher focusing on certain language structures or grammatical issues related to the

tasks that students are addressing. This may be based on some of the errors the teacher has noted

down while monitoring the students' work. Students here can also do practice exercises with

special focus on language issues.

Why is the language focus last instead of first? The most important point about task-based

learning is that students communicate what they want to say using the words and phrases they

wish to use. This approach works on the notion that students are basically intelligent, that is, they

often know what they want to say, and this approach gives them some control and freedom to

express their ideas in the paper. It is the drive to communicate their ideas which becomes an

impetus to learn the language. The teacher is merely a facilitator in the writing process and helps

students in their effort to be good writers. Once the teacher knows that students have developed

an interest in writing, they can provide them with opportunities to write for different audiences

and for different purposes, and to write in other genres, including stories, biographical pieces, and

other types of essays.

Of course, there are numerous ways in which this framework may be adapted to situations and

contexts. The task cycle might be replaced with an activity in which students study a text and

attempt to work out the meaning of a new structure, before presenting their findings to other

students and receiving feedback and comments from the teacher.

TASK- BASED TEACHING AND LEARNING: SOME ISSUES

Since TBLT is very student-centered, and since students are encouraged to use their own language

and vocabulary, it becomes necessary for the teacher to give continuous support during the whole

process. Otherwise, students will not learn new expressions, phrases or words themselves. Even

after the task cycle is completed, the learning process goes on. The valuation part is crucial for the

students to become aware of the tasks that they have completed and their results. If the teacher

does not do the follow- up, half of the effort is wasted. Thompson and Millington (2012) point out

that "large class sizes, inadequate financial support and teacher time constraint at many

institutions can make the introduction of task-based teaching problematic" (p. 159).

Tasks for Developing Writing Skills: Some Examples

1. On the first day of my EFL class in writing, I invite my students to write something about

themselves so that I come to know about their background and especially about their

knowledge of English language and their writing skills. I show them a few examples of student

writing from the previous years as models. I realize that my students are happy to express

themselves freely. Thus, as a teacher, I get an opportunity to listen to their stories and I give

due credit to their accomplishments, letting them know that they learn to write by writing.

29

2. A task based on a personal memory that works well with any age is an "I remember" one

(Peregoy, Suzanne and Boyle, 2013). This also can be given as an introductory task for students

who have just started their course in writing. Here the teacher gives a number of prompts to

elicit answers from the students:

Teacher: I want you to think of five things that have happened to you. Write down each of

the five things, beginning with the phrase / remember. When you have finished,

share your ideas with a partner. [Give students time to share]

Teacher: Now, write down one name associated with each of the five things you selected.

[Waits a few minutes]

Teacher: Can you name our five senses? [Students mention the Five senses: touch, sight,

smell, hearing, and tasting.] Write down the most important sense that goes with

each of your "I remember" reflections. [Waits a few minutes]

Teacher: Now, select the "I remember" you would most like to write about. Share the

memory with your group. [Waits about 15 minutes]

Teacher: Next, write the part of the memory that makes it memorable or important to you

and share it with your group.

Teacher: Now, writing as fast as you can for 10 minutes, see how much of the memory you

can get down on paper. Don't worry about punctuation or spelling; you can think

about that later, if you like what you've written.

Teacher: [Ten minutes later] Share your writing with your group members and ask them to

make suggestions that will make it clearer (p. 260).

We can notice that in this type of task, all the three phases - pre-task, task cycle and language

focus can easily be applied.

Any topic or theme can give rise to different types of tasks (Dave Willis, 2007) which can be

generated with the help of a typology in Table 1. Each type involves a different cognitive process.

The top two types increase in cognitive complexity from left to right, but are generally cognitively

less challenging than the two at the bottom. These may involve more complex cognitive operations

or combinations of simpler task types. For example, let us take the topic "Cats". In this case a

'Listing Task' might be: List three reasons why people think cats make good pets. A 'Comparing

Task' might be to compare cats and dogs as pets. A 'Problem Solving Task' might be: How and by

whom will the cats be taken care of when the family is away or absent? An anecdote telling task

can involve sharing stories or personal experiences about cats.

TURNING TEXT READING INTO A TASK

We can use TBLT far working with texts and turn text reading into a task for the students. Here,

instead of the three stages mentioned above, we can divide the tasks into pre-reading, during-

reading and after-reading activities.

Pre-reading aims to activate schema by helping students relate what they already know to a

reading passage and this helps in building background knowledge. At this stage, students may be

introduced to vocabulary and ideas found in the text. The teacher can ask them to make

predictions about what they are going to read. Such activities encourage students to anticipate a

reading and stimulate their interest and motivation to read (Jacobs, 1999). A video clip/pictures

30

related to the text can be shown to the students before reading the text. A brain storm activity and

matching exercise with new and difficult vocabulary from the text can also be arranged as pre-

tasks. As stated before, a pre-task should always make students feel ready and comfortable before

working with the main task, and when working with texts it is always required to include the main

theme of the text and new vocabulary items from it.

During-reading activities help students integrate their background knowledge into the new

information they receive from the text. While they are reading, they can gather, organize, and

analyze the text and see if their predictions during the pre-reading session were similar or different.

Students can also be encouraged to formulate new questions and predictions (Jacobs, 1999).

Table 1. Types of tasks

LISTING TASK COMPARING TASK

YOUR TOPIC

Example: Cats

PROBLEM SOLVING TASK ANECDOTE TELLING TASK

After-reading activities provide students with an opportunity to articulate their understanding

of the text they have read (Barnett, 1988, Jacobs, 1999). During this stage, students can be given

different writing exercises where they get a lot of practice in using vocabulary and sentence

patterns they find in the reading.

The following is a passage on "Mark Twain's Boyhood Home."

On the west bank of the Mississippi there is a quaint house with a white picket fence, preserved

as a museum dedicated to its former owner- a famous writer. It is said that many characters

and stories from his novels are based on real-life experiences that he had there as a boy. This

house was the childhood home of Samuel Clemens, although most of you may know him by

his pen name: Mark Twain.

Sam Clemens was born in November 1835, as the infamous Halley's Carnet shot through the

skies. His family moved to this house in Hannibal, Missouri when he was 8 years old. The family

was so impoverished that they had to move out of the house for a while, living above a local

drug-store in exchange for his mother's services as a cook. They couldn't afford to move back

until after his father died, in 1847.

Ten years later, at age 22, Sam Clemens started to work on a riverboat. Also a journalist, he

adopted the pen name "Mark Twain" after a river term that means two fathoms (12 feet) in

depth, meaning "safe water" far riverboats to pass through. Under this new name, he published

many famous books including The Adventurous of Huckleberry Finn, an anti-racist story that

is often misinterpreted and criticized for using racial terms and stereotypes.

Pre-Reading

Before handing over the passage to the students, the teacher can involve them in some pre-

reading activities that will create the right attitude for receptivity. During these activities, students

will be asked to make use of their experience of life and their imagination and intelligence which

31

will enable them to guess what may happen in certain situations. The title of the passage, the

illustrations, key words, warmers etc. are some of the tools that may be used by the teacher. In the

case of the above passage, the teacher can write the title on the board, followed by certain

questions which the students may be asked to answer in their notebooks:

1. What do you understand by boyhood?

2. What is the difference between boyhood and childhood?

3. Have you heard about Mark Twain?

4. Have you travelled on a riverboat?

5. What do you understand by the word "racism"?

6. What is the difference between "pen name" and "real name?"

At this juncture, students can be asked to work either in groups or individually. The teacher may

collect the answers and share them with the class. The teacher can also show an illustration of a

house on the banks of a river. The picture of the Mississippi river or a video clipping related to the

Mississippi can also be shown to stir interest in the minds of the students.

During-Reading Activities

Now, as students are ready to read the text, the teacher can distribute copies of it to the students.

The following during-reading activities can be tried out:

1. Listening to a good reading of the text

2. A reading of the text

3. Language exercises

4. Checking against the inferences made about the text in the pre-reading activities

Students often enjoy listening to a text either on a tape or when it is being read aloud by the

teacher in the classroom. It is, of course, very advantageous if the teacher has a good voice and a

dramatic sense while reading the text. This will help students to "feel" the language, its rhythm,

intonation, sounds etc. If the text is long, the teacher can read some of the interesting sections

which will encourage them to read the whole piece.

Now, it is the turn of the students to read, at first silently, and then aloud and individually, in

pairs or in groups. The teacher can ask them to mark some of the difficult words or expressions in

the text and then help them to find out their meanings.

From the reading, students will be happy to note that they have formed some clear ideas about

the text before actually going through it.

Post-Reading Activities

Post-reading activities are meant to create a suitable situation in which the students can express

their reactions to reading the text. These will not only deepen their understanding of the text but

also generate interest in the creative use of the language. Some of the post-reading activities are:

32

Comprehension Questions

These questions are meant to assess how far the students have understood the text. The teacher

may ask the following questions regarding the present text:

• Why do you think Mark Twain wanted to use a pen name rather than his real name?

• Come up with a pen name for yourself. Explain what it means to you and why you chose it?

• Imagine growing up with very little money, just like Mark Twain. How would you handle the

situation?

• Can you guess the meaning of the word "stereotypes" from the context of the text?

An Alternative Approach

As an alternative, the teacher can also split the text into different sections and provide section

numbers. The sections must be divided as per the content of the text. The text with the marked

sections and numbers should be handed over to the students. Another sheet of paper with a

specific format also should be given to the students, like the one below:

You must read the text and fill in the format. Look at the sections in the text and write down

the most important information from each section in the first column.

Write down your experience, opinion, knowledge about the information you find in the text

in the second section.

Students may be asked to work together or individually when they read and fill in the format.

When they have all finished with the text and the format, they may be allowed to discuss their

choices. The motivating factor is that students are free to put into the format the information that

they find correct and that they must make a case for their choice while talking about the text in

class. They are also given time to work with difficult vocabulary items and expressions. Here they

have an opportunity to consult each other and also the teacher about the text's words and phrases

that they find difficult to understand.

The teacher can move around in the class and monitor how students are doing the task. This

gives the teacher an opportunity to understand specific problems faced by the students in their

use of language and in the writing process. And also the teacher, at this juncture, has the full

attention of the students, who will be motivated to learn the language well and in turn write well.

Dealing with Fiction or Short Stories

Here also, the pre-reading, during-reading and after-reading activities can be incorporated. If the

story has a straightforward plot, it is easy for the teacher to clip up the text and turn the text

reading process itself into a common task for a group of students. So, the teacher should select

the story prudently and see that it suits the purpose.

But, while doing the main task, the format may be slightly different.

33

First, the teacher should divide the text into small sections (it may be cut up into 3-4 sections)

- logical in relation to the plot of the story. Then, he/she can divide the story into different sections

and mark each section with letters or numbers. The class should be divided into groups that match

the number of sections. The teacher then keeps the different sections separate on the table and

asks each student in a group to pick up one of the pieces. When all the students in a group have

read their own piece of text, they must tell the rest of the group what the text is about. After this,

each group must try to write the story in the right sequence. The format may be as follows:

Short story Adjectives/descriptive language

• Main Character

• Minor Characters

• Setting 1

• Setting 2

• Setting 3

• Problems/Themes

Reconstructing the Story

As a variation, students can also be asked to recall and retell the story that they have dealt with.

This task helps students clarify their understanding of the story and gives them more practice in

using the language. For this task:

• It is better to have a short story as students can recall stories better.

• Select key words from the reading that students can use while reconstructing the story.

Alternatively, the teacher can write the words on the board or on a piece of chart paper.

Procedure

• The teacher may first read the story and ask the students to spend a few minutes in silent

reading, focusing on the main idea of the story and the key words.

• See that the students understand the meaning of the key words.

• Ask students to put aside the story and take turns with another student in the class to tell

each other the story in their own words. Encourage the students to make use of the key

words.

• Ask students to write down what they remember from the reading, using key words from

the story.

• The teacher may collect the written work of the students for comments and improvement.

CONCLUSION

There are innumerable ways and methods to improve the writing skills of our EFL students. TBLT

is just one approach that can help. This approach is based on the assumption that students may

study more efficiently when their minds are focused on the task, rather than on the language that

34

they are using. Students begin with the task and, when they have finished it, the teacher draws

attention to the language used, making corrections and adjustments. With the introduction of

different tasks, the class environment becomes more alive, with the result that student involvement

and participation becomes observable. However, the implementation of TBLT needs a good deal

of preparation on the part of the teacher, especially in designing tasks that are interesting and

suitable. Teachers can also design tasks based on different texts that the students can read and

then write on. The important point is that teachers must select the tasks prudently and implement

them properly. They must create situations in which students can think independently and also

suggest tasks that kindle their interest and sharpen their intuitive faculty and sensibilities. In turn,

students will develop an interest in writing and will be able to enhance their writing skills.

REFERENCES

Barnett, M. (1988). Teaching reading in a foreign language. ERIC, ED 305829.

Dave, W., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing Task-based Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Foster, P. (1999). Key Concepts in ELT: Task-based learning and pedagogy. ELT Journal, 1(53), 69-

70. doi:10.1093/elt/53.1.69

Hymnes, D. L. (1971). On communicative competence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania

Press.

Jacobs, V. (1999, August). What secondary teachers can do to teach reading? Harvard Education

Letter: Research Online.

Johnson, K. (1982). Communicative syllabus design and methodology. Oxford, UK: OUP.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

doi:10.1O17 /CBO9780511667336

Peregoy, F. S., & Owen, F. B. (2013). Reading, writing and learning in ESL: A resource book for

teaching K-12 English learners. New York: Pearson.

Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy.

Oxford, UK: OUP.

Richard, J. C. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1-14. doi:10.1017/

S026144480200188X

Thompson, C., & Neil, J. M. (2012). Task-based learning for communication and grammar use.

Language Education in Asia, 2(3), 159-167. doi:10.5746/LEiA/12/V3/12/A04/Thompson_

Millington

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for Task-based learning. London: Longman.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Active Learning: A process whereby students are engaged in active learning.

After Reading: Active reading strategies implemented after reading a text.

Anecdote Telling Tasks: Tasks using anecdotes, narrative or stories.

Communicative Competence: The ability to communicate well in a language.

Comparing Tasks: Finding similarities and differences in two or more tasks.

35

Alternative Assessment in EFL Classrooms:

Why and How to Implement It! MARWAN SAEED SAIF MOQBEL IBB UNIVERSITY – YEMEN

I. Introduction

Assessment is an essential component of the teaching and learning process. Its importance emerges

from the fact that assessment can improve teaching and can affect students’ learning negatively or

positively. Its importance also emerges from the purposes it can serve: helping educators to set up

standards, assessing students’ progress and motivating their performance, providing diagnostic

feedback, etc. (Herman, Aschbacher, & Winters, 1992, p. 2).

In EFL classrooms, assessment should be diagnostic, helping teachers to monitor students’

progress and learning and to identify the difficulties that their students encounter or have. It should

provide the necessary information and feedback to adapt and redirect instruction to ensure that

students can meet outcomes (North Carolina State Department, 1999, p. 14). It should also involve

identifying what students know and what they can do in the language (i.e., their real ability to use the

language), which the forms of traditional assessment fail to provide (Richards & Renandya, 2002, p.

336). In addition, assessment should focus on students’ performance rather than on their ability to

manipulate the English language in discrete items taken out of context. Moreover, it should provide a

total picture of the students’ ability in the English language rather than the isolated snap shot provided

by the tests (North Carolina State Department, 1999, p. 11).

In recent years, the shift from teacher-centered to communicative student- centered EFL

teaching approaches and methods has called for shifting from traditional assessment methods to

alternative assessment methods which are more student-centered (Grabin, 2007, p. 2). Another

factor behind the shift towards alternative assessment might be the limitations of traditional

assessment which have led to a growing dissatisfaction with traditional assessment methods and

which has made teachers, educators, and researchers start thinking about a more effective and

friendly means of assessment, namely alternative assessment. It was hoped that such a shift towards

alternative assessment would result in improvement in assessment, which, in turn, could result in

improvement in learning (Black & William, 1998, p. 7).

36

Reviewing the literature, the researcher found that traditional assessment has several

limitations. In EFL classrooms, traditional assessment often fails to meet the interest of teachers in

identifying what their students can do in the language (Richards & Renandya, 2002, p. 336). It usually

measures students’ ability to recognize or recall (Grabin, 2007, p. 11) but not their ability to use

English holistically in real-life situations. It often masks what students really know or can do in English

(Huerta-Macías, 2002, p. 338) and its results are often not true indicators of students’ performance,

ability, or progress (Gottlieb, 2006, p. 100). In addition, most of its techniques, such as multiple-

choice items and Yes/No items cannot represent real-life language (Brown & Hudson, 1998, p. 659)

and may facilitate cheating (Hughes, 2003, p. 78). They also focus mainly on the discrete skills or

elements of language (Stoynoff, 2012, p. 527) rather than the overall language proficiency.

Moreover, traditional assessment is restricted to the end of a course or a semester (Hughes,

2003, p. 5; North Carolina State Department, 1999, p. 14) and there is no feedback provided to students

in this type of assessment as Bailey (1998) stated. This means that assessment is seen as an end in itself

rather than as an integral part to instruction. Besides, traditional assessment gives rise to stress and

anxiety in students (Huerta-Macías, 2002, p. 338), which can affect their performance and

achievement negatively.

II. Alternative Assessment

Alternative assessment refers to strategies that are utilized to ask students to show what they can do

(Grabin, 2007, p. 11). According to Huerta-Macías (2002), alternative assessment refers to situations

in which “students are evaluated on what they integrate and produce rather than on what they are able

to recall and reproduce” (p. 339). In EFL contexts, alternative assessment directly evaluates students’

English skills and shows their ability to use it (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 105). Although

alternatives to traditional assessment are referred to by different terms, such as alternative

assessment, authentic assessment, performance-based assessment, and direct assessment; most

alternatives share some common characteristics. They ask students to perform, produce, or do

something; use tasks that represent meaningful instructional activities; invoke real-world

applications; and focus on processes as well as products of learning (Herman et al., 1992, p. 6).

According to Opp-Beckman and Klinghammer (2006), alternative assessment has some

characteristics, including being based on course objectives, evaluating actual student performance,

involving students in the evaluation process, and having a set of criteria that describe the desired

achievement and that students should be aware of (p. 107). In fact, setting criteria in alternative

assessment is essential to guide judgments and to help students to complete the activities on which they

are to be judged as Hamayan (1995) stated.

1. Reasons for using alternative assessment methods in EFL classrooms

Although there are some issues, including reliability and validity, raised against alternative

assessment, the use of alternative assessment in EFL classrooms is increasing. This may be due to

the benefits and advantages that this type of assessment has for students and teachers as well.

Reviewing the literature, the researcher came out with some reasons that may stand behind that.

Actually, traditional assessment failed to provide teachers with what students can do in the English

language. Because of this, alternative assessment methods have been proposed. As the alternative

37

assessment methods replicate real-world communication contexts and situations outside the

classroom, they measure students’ ability to use English holistically in real-life situations. Besides,

alternative assessment is a diagnostic tool that is carried out continuously over a period of time

rather than restricted to the end of a course or a year. In this, it can offer a comprehensive and

accurate picture of students’ overall competence in English. In addition, alternative assessment is

student-centered. This helps students to be more involved in their learning and gives them a sense

of control for their own learning (Richards & Renandya, 2002, pp. 335- 336).

Moreover, alternative assessment methods, such as self-assessment and peer assessment

train students to assess their performance and monitor their own learning progress, which enables

them to take some responsibility of their own learning as Opp-Beckman and Klinghammer (2006)

stated. In contrast with traditional assessment, which shows students' knowledge about the language

rather than what students can do in the language, different types of alternative assessment such as

presentations show students ability to use English for an actual purpose. With alternative assessment,

students can demonstrate what they have actually learnt and how well they can use what they have

learnt (Opp- Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 105). Further, alternative assessment offers a wide

range of assessment possibilities to address students’ different learning styles. For example, some

students might choose to demonstrate their understanding by writing about something while

others might prefer to perform or to display visually. In contrast with traditional assessment, which

focuses mainly on products by evaluating results and outcomes of learning, alternative assessment

focuses on processes as well as products (North Carolina State Department, 1999, pp. 26-27).

According to Huerta-Macías (2002), alternative assessment provides information on the strengths

and weaknesses of each individual student (p. 339). This can direct teachers and students to the areas

that need improvement.

2. Principles of effective alternative assessment

Apart from the common principles of validity, reliability, etc. which are fundamental cornerstones of

traditional assessment, Grabin (2007) referred to eight other principles which can contribute to the

effectiveness of alternative assessment. The first principle is related to the purpose of assessment.

Alternative assessment should aim at improving learning. Therefore, teachers should provide

students with opportunities to practice tasks and activities of various areas of performance, which can

help them to acquire a variety of important skills and to improve their learning. The second three

principles are related to the nature of alternative assessment tasks and activities and the instructions

given. Alternative assessment should be based on authentic and real-world tasks and activities in

terms of getting students to deal with meaningful situations similar to those of the real life. This can

enable students to apply what they learn to real-life situations. In order to help students to achieve

assessment tasks and activities successfully, teachers should provide students with clear instructions,

criteria, and guidelines. Besides, alternative assessment should be feasible. This requires teachers to

consider students’ knowledge, level, ability, and the available time and resources when creating tasks

and activities. Assessment methods should be practical and its cost should be acceptable as well.

Two other principles are related to the nature of assessment. Alternative assessment should

be a continuous process. This requires teachers to assess students and monitor their progress and

learning over time rather than at the end of courses or semesters. Alternative assessment should

also be connected with the curriculum, the learning outcomes, and daily instruction and the

38

assessment methods should be related to what teachers are teaching in the classroom. The last two

principles are related to students. As alternative assessment was a result of the shift from teacher-

centered to student-centered teaching approaches and methods, it is student-centered. Thus,

alternative assessment methods should work to facilitate and evaluate students' learning and

assessment tasks and activities should be built around topics and issues of interest to students.

Further, alternative assessment should be fair. Fairness in assessment involves considering

students’ individual differences in terms of familiarity, level, interest, and motivation. It also involves

having all students equal access to resources. Taking these principles into account, EFL teachers can

make assessment more effective and successful, achieving the real purpose of assessment in EFL

classrooms, i.e., measuring students’ skills and knowledge and what they can do with English.

3. Common forms of alternative assessment

Alternative assessment is not limited to one single method, strategy, or form. In EFL context, the

term alternative assessment is used to refer to a variety of different forms of assessment

procedures (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 105) that share some common characteristics

as stated earlier and that most of them aim at obtaining a holistic integrated representation of a

student's language (Hamayan, 1995, p. 218). This article sheds light on the most common forms,

namely performance assessment, self-assessment, and peer assessment.

3.1. Performance assessment

Performance assessment is an assessment in which the teacher observes and makes a judgment

about a student’s ability to create a product or perform a task (North Carolina State Department,

1999, p. 265). It requires two things, namely a task to perform or a product to create and some

criteria for rating performances and products (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 107).

According to Gottlieb (2006), the criteria of assessment should be well-articulated and shared with

students through rubrics or scoring guides. Gottlieb thought that the criteria can allow teachers

and students to monitor and profile students’ language learning (p. 86). Besides, performance

assessment should be connected to the desired learning outcomes and directed towards achieving

them (Herman et al., 1992, p. 24). What is special about performance assessment is that it is integral

to the classroom instruction and the learning process. It is authentic and can provide students with

opportunity to express their learning in direct ways that reflect real-life situations (Gottlieb, 2006,

p. 111).

Performance assessment has several forms, such as performance-based tasks, portfolios,

journals, diaries, projects (Grabin, 2007, p. 56). In this article, the focus will be on the two main

forms, namely performance-based tasks and portfolios. Performance-based tasks are “tasks that

require students to employ the knowledge and skills they have acquired by creating a product or

delivering a performance” (Grabin, 2007, p. 56). Using performance-based tasks to assess EFL

students, teachers should consider some principles. According to Grabin (2007), tasks or activities

given to students should be authentic and directed with specific objectives. Grabin also

emphasized the importance of specifying some criteria (whether in the form of a rubric, a rating

scale, or a checklist) to guide students in the development of their products or performances. In

addition, when assigning tasks to students, teachers should consider students’ interest and

39

individual differences to ensure fair assessment, selecting tasks that are appropriate to students’

level and age as Yildirim and Orsdemir (2013) stated. Yildirim and Orsdemir argued that in

performance-based tasks, teachers should consider not only the product but also the process itself

and that tasks should develop not only grammatical and vocabulary knowledge of a language but

also its skills (p. 565).

The process of creating and implementing a performance-based assessment task in EFL

classrooms has to pass some steps as North Carolina State Department (1999) indicated. In the

light of these steps, the following example shows how to carry out a performance-based

assessment task for English speaking skill in elementary EFL classroom. The teacher, first, specifies

what language skill to evaluate (speaking skill) and decides what to assess (i.e., the assessment

objectives which include assessing a student's ability to introduce him/herself in English to the

class; stating name, age, family, where one lives, subjects, and hobbies; and closing). Then, the

teacher chooses the task (providing oral self-introduction) to get students show the target skill.

Here, the teacher should think about the administration of the task, i.e., whether the task is done

individually or in small groups, the time required for doing the task, and how to collect responses.

To be specific about what to observe, the teacher defines the assessment criteria, namely

pronunciation, fluency, information, vocabulary, and grammar. In the light of the criteria, the

teacher constructs a rubric (i.e., the assessment instrument) which indicates what constitutes

excellent, good, or poor performance for each criterion. For example, regarding the criterion

pronunciation, if a student consistently pronounces words correctly, his performance is considered

excellent; if a student generally pronounces words correctly and makes some inconsistencies in

pronunciation that do not impede understanding of the words, his performance is considered

good; but if a student frequently pronounces words incorrectly and his pronunciation impedes

understanding of the words, his performance is considered poor. The teacher should share the

rubric with students to make them aware of the assessment criteria. While the students do the task

(i.e., they introduce themselves), the teacher listens to them to assess their performance in the

light of the rubric, giving them feedback on their performance.

Using performance-based tasks to assess EFL students is beneficial and advantageous.

Performance-based assessment tasks require students to be engaged in tasks that mirror real-life

situations, which create opportunities for them to produce authentic language (Grabin, 2007, p.

141). This means that performance-based assessment tasks can indicate clearly what students

know and can do in English. Besides, they involve sharing rubrics with students and communicating

standards of assessment to them, which may increase students’ confidence due to their familiarity

with the standards of assessment. In addition, it makes students more engaged in learning (Griffith

& Lim, 2012, p. 3).

The second main form of performance assessment is portfolios. A portfolio is a practical

way for assessing a student work throughout the entire year or semester (Lotfi, 2012, p. 95). It is

“a collection of student work over a period of time” (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 106).

According to Paulson, Paulson, and Meyer (1991), a portfolio is “a purposeful collection of student

work that exhibits the student's efforts, progress, and achievements in one or more areas” (p. 60).

This purposeful collection can usually give the teacher a clear idea about students’ achievements,

skills, efforts, abilities, and contributions to a particular class (Brown & Hudson, 1998, p. 664) over

a period of time and in one or more learning areas.

40

To use portfolios for assessment three things should be considered: the purpose of

assessment should be defined, the criteria for determining what to put into the portfolio should

be explained, and the criteria for assessing students’ work should be identified (Herman et al.,

1992, p. 72). The criteria can even be discussed with students (Zhang, 2009, p. 100) to make them

more aware of them and more involved in the process of assessment. To ensure an effective use

of portfolios, portfolios should be built from class assignments and matched with the curriculum

and its objectives as Zhang (2009) stated.

In portfolios, students can include whatever they believe to be important for their learning

process. They can include information, samples work, and evaluations that serve as indicators for

their performance. They can also include samples of written work (written stories, essays, etc.),

tapes of oral work (role-playing, presentations, sketches, etc.), and checklists of tasks and

performance (Lotfi, 2012, p. 95). Moreover, students can include criteria of selection and reflections

(learning logs, journals, etc.) on their works (Paulson et al., 1991, p. 60).

Portfolios can be in a paper form or in an electronic one. In the electronic portfolios,

students use web 2.0 tools, such as wikis and blogs to upload their works on the four skills of

English or their reflections on their performance. Three main types of portfolios can be considered

for classroom use: assessment portfolios, showcase portfolios, and collections portfolios. Based on

Fiktorius (2013), Lotfi (2012) and Zhang (2009), an assessment portfolio consists of items that a

student chooses to include according to certain assessment criteria. The items included in this type

of portfolio are scored or evaluated. While a showcase portfolio contains students’ best pieces of

work for each objective, a collection portfolio, which is also called a working folder, is a collection

of all the pieces of a student’s work during a certain period of time.

According to Rao (2006), there is no single way for developing or implementing portfolios.

Rao proposed three portfolio categories which represent a scheme for developing portfolios,

namely collections, reflections, and assessment; stating that each category represents a distinctive

stage of the portfolio development and has its own criteria that reflect its function. Regarding

collections, decision about what to put in the portfolio is usually determined by the purpose of the

portfolio (Burnaz, 2011, p. 15). According to Rao (2006), it is better to confine collections to one area,

such as oral language development, reading competence, listening comprehension, etc. Reflections

- which can take the form of a journal or diary, learning logs, self-assessment checklists, etc. - can be

on strategies of learning, students’ reactions (Rao, 2006, p. 116), problem areas and difficulties, what

has been learnt and what has still to be learnt, and plans for improvement (Burnaz, 2011, p. 39). The

third category, i.e. assessment, is usually determined by the purpose of the portfolio which should be

defined clearly. If the purpose is to demonstrate growth or progress, the teacher can make

judgments about the evidence of progress and provide those judgments as feedback to students or

make note of them for her/his own records. Similarly, students can use the portfolio to self-assess and

monitor their progress (Mueller, 2014). If the portfolio is to be used for assessment purposes, the

teacher should determine when and how it should be evaluated (Mueller, 2014) and set up clear

assessment criteria (Rao, 2006, p. 118; Zhang, 2009, p. 100). The reliability and validity of the contents

should also be established and maintained. In addition, data collection should be systematic and in

alignment with curriculum goals and objectives. Moreover, each piece of evidence should be coupled

with specified criteria in the form of a rubric or a descriptive scale (Rao, 2006, pp. 117-118).

The following example, which is adapted from Charvade, Jahandar, and Khodabandehlou

(2012), shows how to use portfolio assessment in intermediate or upper-intermediate EFL

41

classrooms to improve and monitor students’ reading ability. After presenting the idea of portfolio

assessment and its purpose and components to students, the teacher identifies the purpose of the

portfolio assessment (which is monitoring students’ progress in reading ability over one semester)

and defines the portfolios assessment objectives. The list of objectives, which should be given to

students, represents the reading skills and sub-skills that the portfolio should provide evidence

that the students have mastered. For example, one of the objectives of the portfolio is I can scan

a text for specific information. Regarding the portfolio collections, the teacher asks each student to

complete 10 reading passages of various genres, giving them some guidelines for selection. For

each passage, the teacher tells students to use a self-assessment checklist (See Table 1) to refer to

the reading strategies that they use to comprehend and understand the passage and a reading

log (See Table 2) to monitor their progress, to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses or

challenges in reading, and to set their plans for improving their reading skill.

As the portfolio is used for assessment purposes, the teacher should set some criteria for

evaluating the portfolios and should make sure that the students understand them. The

assessment criteria may include variety (the passages are of various genres), completeness

(students collected the ten passages and complete a self-assessment checklist and a reading log

for each passage), growth (the work represents student’s growth and progress in reading ability),

organization (the contents are organized systematically), following directions (students followed

the teacher’s directions for selecting the portfolio pieces), and neatness (student work is neat)

(North Carolina State Department, 1999, pp. 196-197). The teacher should keep on monitoring

students’ progress from time to time (e.g. at the end of every month). He may even need to hold

conferences to discuss students’ progress. At the end of the semester, the teacher collects

students’ portfolios and evaluates them in the light of the stated criteria.

Table 1. Student’s Self-assessment Checklist

Please, tick each item to indicate the reading strategy you used to understand the passage:

No The Reading Strategy Yes No

1 I use my background knowledge.

2 I use context as well as parts of words to work out the meaning of

unknown words.

3 I scan the text for specific information.

4 I skim the text to get its main idea.

5 I identify links between sentences.

6 I identify parts of speech in sentences.

Table 2. Student’s Reading Log

Date:

My progress in reading comprehension

I am good at

I need to work on

I can improve my reading ability by

Excellent – good – acceptable

42

Using portfolios in EFL classrooms to assess students is useful and effective. According to

Lotfi (2012), portfolio assessment promotes students’ autonomy and creates opportunities for

them to take responsibility of their own learning, to make choices and decisions about their

learning, and to plan their learning activities. It can also offer authentic information about students’

progress, helping them monitor and reflect on their own learning progress (Lotfi, 2012). In

addition, portfolio assessment enables students to be involved in their learning and assessment,

promoting their motivation, and helping them to see their weaknesses, strengths, and

development in different skills and areas (Burnaz, 2011, pp. 15-16). What is special about portfolios

is that they can be used in classes of any age or proficiency level (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer,

2006, p. 106) and applicable to all language skills and systems (Charvade et al., 2012, p. 137).

3.2. Peer assessment

Peer assessment is an arrangement for students to “evaluate each other’s work, using pre-set

guidelines” (Opp-Beckman & Klinghammer, 2006, p. 104). According to Miller (2002), the basic

idea behind peer assessment is to provide opportunities for students to evaluate themselves and

their work more critically (p. 10). To ensure effective peer assessment, students should use clearly

defined guidelines to assess each other’s work (Azarnoosh, 2013, p. 3). Thus, teachers usually find

it useful to provide students with checklists, rating scales, or rubrics when implementing peer

assessment. Besides, students should be trained on how to give and use feedback and have a clear

idea about peer assessment.

The process of creating and implementing peer assessment in EFL classroom has to pass

some stages. Peng (2009) proposed an implementation process scheme for peer assessment. The

scheme involves three main phases: Pre-implementation phase, implementation phase, and post-

implementation phase. Each phase has its own purpose and procedures. Based on the said scheme,

the following example, which is adapted from Peng (2009), shows how to create and implement

peer assessment for oral presentation of intermediate or upper-intermediate EFL students. In the

pre-implementation phase, the teacher, defining the task and its purpose, asks students, in groups

of five, to choose their own topics for presentation. The teacher should give students enough time

for preparation. After discussing and setting with students the assessment criteria, the teacher

prepares the assessment tool (See Table 4). For better understanding of the requirements, the

teacher can provide students with a rubric (See Table 3) which should be prepared in the light of

the criteria of assessment and the level of students. The teacher should provide students with

copies of the assessment tool and the rubric, giving them some time to work on.

In the implementation phase, the teacher, first demonstrates how to conduct the peer

assessment method to strengthen students’ confidence and lower their anxiety. Then, he can ask

the students to give their presentations. While a group of students is giving their presentation,

both the teacher and the rest of the class assess the performance of the individual members of

the group by completing the peer assessment form in the light of the rubric. The teacher should

also monitor the peer assessment process and the quality of peer feedback. After carrying out the

peer assessment, the teacher collects peer assessment forms and reviews them, giving students

constructive feedback on their performance.

43

Table 3. Oral Presentation Rubric

Criteria 1 (Poor) 2 (Average) 3 (Good) 4 (Excellent)

Organization There is no sequence

of information that

audience cannot

follow presentation.

Presenter jumps

around that audience

has difficulty to

follow presentation.

Presenter presents

information in quite

logical sequence that

audience can follow.

Presenter presents

information in logical

and interesting

sequence that

audience can follow.

Fluency There is lack of

fluency with bad

intonation, constant

hesitation, and

pauses.

Fluency is inadequate

with intonation

problems and

frequent hesitation

and pauses.

There are some

pauses and hesitation

but complete

thoughts and

relatively accurate

intonation.

Speech is continuous

with very few pauses,

natural intonation,

and little or no

hesitation.

Pronunciation Most words are

pronounced

incorrectly.

Some words are

pronounced

incorrectly.

Most words are

pronounced

correctly.

All words are

pronounced

correctly.

Non-verbal

communication

Presenter never

makes eye contact

with the audience.

No movement or

descriptive gestures.

Presenter sometimes

makes eye contact

with the audience.

Very few movements

or descriptive

gestures.

Presenter usually

makes eye contact

with the audience. He

makes movements or

gestures that

enhance articulation.

Presenter always

makes eye contact

with the audience.

Movements seem

fluid and help the

audience visualize.

Verbal

communication

Presenter does not

speak clearly. It is

difficult for the

audience to

understand.

Presenter sometimes

speaks clearly and at

a good pace. Most of

the time, audience

find it difficult to

understand.

Most of the time,

presenter speaks

clearly and at a good

pace. It is easy for the

audience to

understand.

Presenter speaks very

clearly and at a good

pace. It is very easy

for the audience to

understand.

Confidence Presenter is not

confident at all. He

reads from notes.

Presenter is quite

confident. He

sometimes reads

from notes.

Presenter is almost

confident. He rarely

returns to notes.

Presenter is very

confident. He never

looks at notes.

* The rubric is developed in the light of some rubrics from different sources, namely NCTE/IRA

(2004), STUDYLIB (2015), TextLab (2015), and Toth (2015).

Table 4. Oral Presentation Form

Presenter’s Name: Date:

Please, use (√) to rate the oral presentation of your fellow student:

Criteria Poor Average Good Excellent

Organization

Fluency

Pronunciation

Non-verbal communication

Verbal communication

Confidence

Integrating peer assessment into EFL classrooms can result in a lot of benefits for EFL students.

Peer assessment can promote students’ autonomy and independence, increase their motivation,

enhance their personal responsibility, and improve their self-confidence as Peng (2009) indicated.

44

It can also improve interaction among students, help them to develop collaborative skills and

create opportunities for them to learn from each other, to talk in English, and to get more feedback

on their performance or products (Peng, 2009). Besides, peer assessment can play an important

role in making students more aware of the course objectives. According to Gottlieb (2006), peer

assessment promotes students’ involvement in their own learning and helps them to monitor their

own progress (p. 94). Gottlieb added that peer assessment is an effective means for having

students to practice language with each other (p. 145). Similarly, Azarnoosh (2013) stated that peer

assessment gives students opportunities for interaction which is important in the development of

a language.

3.3. Self-assessment

Self-assessment is a process in which students actively evaluate themselves, which may help them

to develop self-awareness and better understanding of learning outcomes (Miller, 2002, p. 8). It

does not mean that students assess themselves in the form of grades (Moheidat &

Baniabdelrahman, 2011, p. 51). It is just a reflection made by students on their performance, ability,

or progress. In EFL contexts, self-assessment can refer to procedures by which the students

themselves evaluate their English language skills and knowledge (Bailey, 1998, p. 227). To ensure

successful self-assessment, it is essential to establish clear criteria for students to use when they

assess their own performance or product.

Like peer assessment, the process of creating and implementing self- assessment in

classroom has to pass three main phases which represent a scheme for implementing self-

assessment in EFL classrooms: Pre-implementation phase, implementation phase, and post-

implementation phase. Each phase has its own purpose and procedures. In the light of this scheme,

the following example shows how to use self-assessment in EFL writing pre-intermediate

classroom. The teacher, after teaching some aspects of writing, namely punctuation marks and

sentence structures wanted to assess students' ability to apply the points and tips taught using

self-assessment method. In the pre-implementation phase of self-assessment, the teacher,

defining the task and its purpose, asks students to write a paragraph and apply the points and tips

taught. He provides students with an assessment tool (See Table 5) to use it to assess their pieces

of writing. Here, the teacher should encourage impartial self- evaluation of the performance or

product as Meihami and Varmaghani (2013) stated.

In the implementation phase, the teacher provides students with a piece of writing

containing the aspects taught, demonstrating how to assess it in the light of the self-assessment

checklist. Then, he asks students to write a piece of writing and apply the points and tips taught.

Students do the task and then assess their pieces of writing using the self-assessment checklist.

The teacher should monitor and help students (if they do the task in the classroom). In the post-

implementation, there should be a systematic follow-up in the form of either a written feedback

from the teacher on students’ work, a journal reflection, a conference, or any other technique as

Meihami and Varmaghani (2013) stated.

Therefore, after conducting self-assessment, the teacher collects the self-assessment

checklists and pieces of writing and gives students feedback on their work.

45

Table 5. Self-assessment Checklist for the Piece of Writing

Please, tick each item to reflect on your piece of writing:

No Items Yes No

1 Are commas used where necessary?

2 Is there a full stop at the end of every sentence?

3 Are all sentences and names capitalized?

4 Do all the sentences contain at least one subject and one verb and express a

complete thought?

5 Does your piece of writing contain a variety of sentence types (i.e., simple,

compound, and complex)?

* The self-assessment checklist is adapted mainly from Honsa (2013).

Many advantages can be gained from implementing self-assessment in EFL classrooms. Self-

assessment can help students to improve their English language skills: writing (Meihami &

Varmaghani, 2013), reading (Moheidat & Baniabdelrahman, 2011), and listening and speaking

(Shahrakipour, 2014). It also encourages active participation of students in their learning and

evaluation (Shahrakipour, 2014, p. 1), which can increase students’ motivation and promote their

autonomy, independence, and life-long learning skills (Honsa, 2013, p. 50; Shahrakipour, 2014, p.

1). In addition, it gives students more control over their learning and increases their responsibility

towards it (Gottlieb, 2006, p. 141; Honsa, 2013, p. 49; Shahrakipour, 2014, p. 1), making them more

involved in their own learning (Gottlieb, 2006, p. 94) and more aware of the assessment criteria

and directing them to identify their weaknesses and strengths (Honsa, 2013, p. 50; Shahrakipour,

2014, p. 1) and to monitor their improvement in areas of weaknesses. What is special about self-

assessment is that it may lead to more confidence as Shahrakipour (2014) indicated.

III. Conclusion

Assessment can be an integral part of instruction through the use of alternative assessment

methods. The current article tried to provide a simple and practical guide for EFL teachers to use

alternative assessment in EFL classrooms. It presented examples of various proficiency levels and

of different language skills with a view to indicating that alternative assessment is appropriate for

students of any proficiency level and that alternative assessment in not restricted to one particular

language skill; it is rather applicable to all language skills and systems. The article also highlighted

the advantages and benefits of alternative assessment and how integrating it into instruction can

be beneficial and advantageous for EFL students and teachers.

Yet, the literature indicated that alternative assessment has some disadvantages and

obstacles, including the need for training teachers and students on this type of assessment, the

large amount of time and effort it takes to create and administer assessment tasks and activities,

the size of classes which may not always help to implement it, students' resistance to participate

in self- and peer assessment due to their belief that they have not the right to assess themselves

or their peers or due to their belief that assessment is the job of teachers only. Besides, there are

some other issues, such as objectivity, accuracy, and consistency that are raised against alternative

assessment.

However, it is not fair to deal with alternative assessment only in the light of these terms.

Apart from grading purposes, which the researcher does not recommend using some of alternative

46

assessment methods for, alternative assessment has major functions and advantages in EFL

classroom. Further, teachers can maximize objectivity, accuracy, and consistency of this type of

assessment through more practice, training, setting clear assessment criteria, providing feedback

for students on their work, and considering students' level, interest, and ability when creating tasks

and activities.

As an advocate of using alternative assessment in EFL classroom, the researcher has started

to use some of its methods, namely peer assessment and self-assessment, in his EFL classroom. It

is true that the researcher did that on a small scale and not for grading purposes, yet he found it

useful for his students. Thus, the researcher recommends EFL teachers to think seriously about

using alternative assessment in their EFL classrooms and report its effect on their students and

their learning. The researcher believes that once an EFL teacher becomes willing to use alternative

assessment in his/her classroom and familiar with the procedures and requirements of

implementing it, has the necessary skills and knowledge to use alternative assessment, and trains

his students on its methods; he/she will find it interesting and useful. Starting to use alternative

assessment in EFL classroom, teachers should be cautious about using its methods for grading

purposes, especially self-assessment, peer assessment, and portfolios as this may not accurately

reflect students' ability or knowledge in English and may fix students’ attention on getting good

marks only, which is not the purpose of these alternative methods.

47

Project Work: A Means to

Promote Language and Content FREDRICKA L. STOLLER

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, increasing numbers of language educators have turned to content-based

instruction and project work to promote meaningful student engagement with language and

content learning. Through content-based instruction, learners develop language skills while

becoming more knowledgeable citizens of the world. By integrating project work into content-

based classrooms, educators create vibrant learning environments that require active student

involvement, stimulate higher-level thinking skills, and give students responsibility for their own

learning. When incorporating project work into content-based classrooms, instructors distance

themselves from teacher-dominated instruction and move toward creating a student community

of inquiry involving authentic communication, cooperative learning, collaboration, and problem

solving.

In this article, I shall provide a rationale for content-based instruction and demonstrate how

project work can be integrated into content-based classrooms. I will then outline the primary

characteristics of project work, introduce project work in its various configurations, and present

practical guidelines for sequencing and developing a project. It is my hope that language teachers

and teacher educators will be able to adapt the ideas presented here to enhance their classroom

instruction.

A RATIONALE FOR CONTENT-BASED INSTRUCTION

Content-based instruction (CBI) has been used in a variety of language learning contexts, though

its popularity and wider applicability have increased dramatically since the early 1990s. Numerous

practical features of CBI make it an appealing approach to language instruction: In a content-

based approach, the activities of the language class are specific to the subject matter being taught,

and are geared to stimulate students to think and learn through the use of the target language.

Such an approach lends itself quite naturally to the integrated teaching of the four traditional

language skills. For example, it employs authentic reading materials which require students not

only to understand information but to interpret and evaluate it as well. It provides a forum in which

students can respond orally to reading and lecture materials. It recognizes that academic writing

48

follows from listening and reading, and thus requires students to synthesize facts and ideas from

multiple sources as preparation for writing. In this approach, students are exposed to study skills

and learn a variety of language skills which prepare them for the range of academic tasks they will

encounter. (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989, p. 2)

This quotation reflects a consistent set of descriptions by CBI practitioners who have come to

appreciate the many ways that CBI offers ideal conditions for language learning. Research in

second language acquisition offers additional support for CBI; yet some of the most persuasive

evidence stems from research in educational and cognitive psychology, even though it is

somewhat removed from language learning contexts. Four findings from research in educational

and cognitive psychology that emphasize the benefits of content-based instruction are worth

noting:

1. Thematically organized materials, typical of content-based classrooms, are easier to

remember and learn (Singer, 1990).

2. The presentation of coherent and meaningful information, characteristic of well organized

content-based curricula, leads to deeper processing and better learning (Anderson, 1990).

3. There is a relationship between student motivation and student interest – common

outcomes of content-based classes – and a student’s ability to process challenging

materials, recall information, and elaborate (Alexander, Kulikowich, & Jetton, 1994).

4. Expertise in a topic develops when learners reinvest their knowledge in a sequence of

progressively more complex tasks (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993), feasible in content-based

classrooms and usually absent from more traditional language classrooms because of the

narrow focus on language rules or limited time on superficially developed and disparate

topics (e.g., a curriculum based on a short reading passage on the skyscrapers of New York,

followed by a passage on the history of bubble gum, later followed by an essay on the

volcanos of the American Northwest).

These empirical research findings, when combined with the practical advantages of integrating

content and language learning, provide persuasive arguments in favor of content-based

instruction. Language educators who adopt a content-based orientation will find that CBI also

allows for the incorporation of explicit language instruction (covering, for example, grammar,

conversational gambits, functions, notions, and skills), thereby satisfying students’ language and

content learning needs in context (see Grabe & Stoller, 1997 for a more developed rationale for

CBI).

PROJECT WORK AS A NATURAL EXTENSION OF CONTENT-BASED INSTRUCTION

Content-based instruction allows for the natural integration of sound language-teaching practices

such as alternative means of assessment, apprenticeship learning, cooperative learning,

integrated-skills instruction, project work, scaffolding, strategy training, and the use of graphic

organizers. Although each of these teaching practices is worthy of extended discussion, this article

will focus solely on project work and its role in content-based instructional formats.

Some language professionals equate project work with in-class group work, cooperative

learning, or more elaborate task-based activities. It is the purpose of this article, however, to

49

illustrate how project work represents much more than group work per se. Project-based learning

should be viewed as a versatile vehicle for fully integrated language and content learning, making

it a viable option for language educators working in a variety of instructional settings, including

general English, English for academic purposes (EAP), English for specific purposes (ESP), and

English for occupational/vocational/professional purposes, in addition to preservice and in-service

teacher training. Project work is viewed by most of its advocates “not as a replacement for other

teaching methods,” but rather as “an approach to learning which complements mainstream

methods and which can be used with almost all levels, ages and abilities of students” (Haines,

1989, p. 1).

In classrooms where a commitment has been made to content learning as well as language

learning (i.e., content-based classrooms), project work is particularly effective because it represents

a natural extension of what is already taking place in class. So, for example, in an EAP class

structured around environmental topics, a project which involves the development of poster

displays suggesting ways in which the students’ school might engage in more environmentally

sound practices would be a natural outcome of the content and language learning activities taking

place in class. In a vocational English course focusing on tourism, the development of a

promotional brochure highlighting points of interest in the students’ hometown would be a

natural outgrowth of the curriculum. In a general English course focusing on cities in English-

speaking countries, students could create public bulletin board displays with pictorial and written

information on targeted cities. In an ESP course on international law, a written report comparing

and contrasting the American legal system and the students’ home-country legal system

represents a meaningful project that allows for the synthesis, analysis, and evaluation of course

content. Project work is equally effective in teacher-training courses. Thus, in a course on materials

development, a student- generated handbook comprising generic exercises for language-skills

practice at different levels of English proficiency represents a useful and practical project that can

be used later as a teacher-reference tool. The hands-on experience that the teachers-in-training

have with project-based learning could, in turn, transfer to their own lesson planning in the future

(J. Mohanraj, personal communication, June 5, 1997). These examples represent only some of the

possibilities available to teachers and students when incorporating project work into content-

based curricula.

THE PRIMARY CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT WORK

Project work has been described by a number of language educators, including Carter and Thomas

(1986), Ferragatti and Carminati (1984), Fried-Booth (1982, 1986), Haines (1989), Legutke (1984,

1985), Legutke and Thiel (1983), Papandreou (1994), Sheppard and Stoller (1995), and Ward (1988).

Although each of these educators has approached project work from a different perspective,

project work, in its various configurations, shares the following features:

1. Project work focuses on content learning rather than on specific language targets. Real-

world subject matter and topics of interest to students can become central to projects.

2. Project work is student centered, though the teacher plays a major role in offering support

and guidance throughout the process.

3. Project work is cooperative rather than competitive. Students can work on their own, in

50

small groups, or as a class to complete a project, sharing resources, ideas, and expertise

along the way.

4. Project work leads to the authentic integration of skills and processing of information from

varied sources, mirroring real-life tasks.

5. Project work culminates in an end product (e.g., an oral presentation, a poster session, a

bulletin board display, a report, or a stage performance) that can be shared with others,

giving the project a real purpose. The value of the project, however, lies not just in the final

product but in the process of working toward the end point. Thus, project work has both a

process and product orientation, and provides students with opportunities to focus on

fluency and accuracy at different project-work stages.

6. Project work is potentially motivating, stimulating, empowering, and challenging. It usually

results in building student confidence, self-esteem, and autonomy as well as improving

students’ language skills, content learning, and cognitive abilities.

PROJECT WORK AND ITS VARIOUS CONFIGURATIONS

Though similar in many ways, project work can take on diverse configurations. The most suitable

format for a given context depends on a variety of factors, including curricular objectives, course

expectations, students’ proficiency levels, student interests, time constraints, and availability of

materials. A review of different types of projects will demonstrate the scope, versatility, and

adaptability of project work.

Projects differ in the degree to which the teacher and students decide on the nature and

sequencing of project-related activities, as demonstrated by three types of projects proposed by

Henry (1994): Structured projects are determined, specified, and organized by the teacher in terms

of topic, materials, methodology, and presentation; unstructured projects are defined largely by

students themselves; and semistructured projects are defined and organized in part by the teacher

and in part by students.

Projects can be linked to real-world concerns (e.g., when Italian ESP students designed a leaflet

for foreign travel agencies outside of Europe describing the advantages of the European

Community’s standardization of electrical systems as a step toward European unity, or when

general English students at an international school created a public bulletin board display –with

photos and text based on extensive interviews with EFL faculty– introducing new students to their

EFL teachers). Projects can also be linked to simulated real-world issues (e.g., when EAP students

staged a debate on the pros and cons of censorship as part of a content-based unit on censorship).

Projects can also be tied to student interests, with or without real-world significance (e.g., when

general English students planned an elaborate field trip to an international airport where they

conducted extensive interviews and videotaping of international travelers; see Ferragatti &

Carminati, 1984; Legutke, 1984, 1985; Legutke & Thiel, 1983).

Projects can also differ in data collection techniques and sources of information as

demonstrated by these project types: Research projects necessitate the gathering of information

through library research. Similarly, text projects involve encounters with “texts” (e.g., literature,

reports, news media, video and audio material, or computer-based information) rather than

people. Correspondence projects require communication with individuals (or businesses,

governmental agencies, schools, or chambers of commerce) to solicit information by means of

51

letters, faxes, phone calls, or electronic mail. Survey projects entail creating a survey instrument and

then collecting and analyzing data from “informants.” Encounter projects result in face-to-face

contact with guest speakers or individuals outside the classroom. (See Haines, 1989 and Legutke

& Thomas, 1991 for a more detailed description of these project types.)

Projects may also differ in the ways that information is “reported” as part of a culminating

activity (see Haines, 1989). Production projects involve the creation of bulletin-board displays,

videos, radio programs, poster sessions, written reports, photo essays, letters, handbooks,

brochures, banquet menus, travel itineraries, and so forth. Performance projects can take shape as

staged debates, oral presentations, theatrical performances, food fairs, or fashion shows.

Organizational projects entail the planning and formation of a club, conversation table, or

conversation-partner program.

Whatever the configuration, projects can be carried out intensively over a short period of time

or extended over a few weeks, or a full semester; they can be completed by students individually,

in small groups, or as a class; and they can take place entirely within the confines of the classroom

or can extend beyond the walls of the classroom into the community or with others via different

forms of correspondence.

INCORPORATING PROJECT WORK INTO THE CLASSROOM

Project work, whether it is integrated into a content-based thematic unit or introduced as a special

sequence of activities in a more traditional classroom, requires multiple stages of development to

succeed. Fried-Booth (1986) proposes an easy-to-follow multiple-step process that can guide

teachers in developing and sequencing project work for their classrooms. Similarly, Haines (1989)

presents a straightforward and useful description of project work and the steps needed for

successful implementation. Both the Fried-Booth and Haines volumes include detailed

descriptions of projects that can be adapted for many language classroom settings. They also offer

suggestions for introducing students to the idea of student-centered activity through bridging

strategies (Fried-Booth, 1986) and lead-in activities (Haines, 1989), particularly useful if students

are unfamiliar with project work and its emphasis on student initiative and autonomy.

Sheppard and Stoller (1995) proposed an 8-step sequence of activities for orchestrating project

work in an ESP classroom. That model has been fine-tuned, after testing it in a variety of language

classrooms and teacher-training courses. The new 10-step sequence (see Figure 1) is described

here in detail. The revised model gives easy-to-manage structure to project work and guides

teachers and students in developing meaningful projects that facilitate content learning and

provide opportunities for explicit language instruction at critical moments in the project. These

language “intervention” lessons will help students complete their projects successfully and will be

appreciated by students because of their immediate applicability and relevance. The language

intervention steps (4, 6, and 8) are optional in teacher-education courses, depending on the

language proficiency and needs of the teachers-in-training.

52

Figure 1. Developing a Project in a Language Classroom

DEVELOPING A PROJECT IN A LANGUAGE CLASSROOM

To understand the function of each proposed step, imagine a content-based EAP classroom

focusing on American elections.4 (A parallel discussion could be developed for classrooms – general

English, EAP, ESP, vocational English, and so forth – focusing on American institutions, demography,

energy alternatives, farming safety, fashion design, health, the ideal automobile, insects, Native

Americans, pollution, rain forests, the solar system, etc.). The thematic unit is structured so that the

instructor and students can explore various topics: the branches of the U.S. government, the

election process, political parties with their corresponding ideologies and platforms, and voting

behaviors. Information on these topics is introduced by means of readings from books,

newspapers, and news magazines; graphs and charts; videos; dictocomps; teacher-generated

lectures and note-taking activities; formal and informal class discussions and group work; guest

speakers; and U.S. political party promotional materials. While exploring these topics and

developing some level of expertise about American elections, students improve their listening and

53

note- taking skills, reading proficiency, accuracy and fluency in speaking, writing abilities, study

skills, and critical thinking skills. To frame this discussion, it should be noted that the thematic unit

is embedded in an integrated-skills, content-based course with the following objectives:

1. to encourage students to use language to learn something new about topics of interest

2. to prepare students to learn subject matter through English

3. to expose students to content from a variety of informational sources to help them

improve their academic language and study skills

4. to provide students with contextualized resources for understanding language and

content

5. to simulate the rigors of academic courses in a sheltered environment

6. to promote students’ self-reliance and engagement with learning

After being introduced to the theme unit and its most fundamental vocabulary and concepts, the

instructor introduces a semistructured project that will be woven into class lessons and that will

span the length of the thematic unit. The teacher has already made some decisions about the

project: Students will stage a simulated political debate that addresses contemporary political and

social issues. To stimulate interest and a sense of ownership in the process, the instructor will work

with the students to decide on the issues to be debated, the number and types of political parties

represented in the debate, the format of the debate, and a means for judging the debate. To move

from the initial conception of the project to the actual debate, the instructor and students follow

ten steps.

STEP 1: STUDENTS AND INSTRUCTOR AGREE ON A THEME FOR THE PROJECT

To set the stage, the instructor gives students an opportunity to shape the project and develop

some sense of shared perspective and commitment. Even if the teacher has decided to pursue a

structured project, for which he or she will make most decisions, students can be encouraged to fine-

tune the project theme. While shaping the project together, students often find it useful to make

reference to previous readings, videos, discussions, and classroom activities.

During the initial stage of the American elections project, students brainstormed issues that

might be featured in an American political debate. Through discussion and negotiation, they

identified the following issues for consideration: taxes, crime, welfare, gun control, abortion, family

leave, foreign policy, affirmative action, election reform, immigration, censorship, the environment,

and environmental legislation. By pooling resources, information, ideas, and relevant experiences,

students narrowed the scope of the debate by choosing select issues from within the larger set of

brainstormed issues that were of special interest to the class and that were “researchable,” meaning

that resources were available or accessible for student research.

STEP 2: STUDENTS AND INSTRUCTOR DETERMINE THE FINAL OUTCOME

Whereas the first stage of project work involves establishing a starting point, the second step

entails defining an end point, or the final outcome. Students and the instructor consider the nature

of the project, its objectives, and the most appropriate means to culminate the project. They can

54

choose from a variety of options, including a written report, letter, poster or bulletin-board display,

debate, oral presentation, information packet, handbook, scrapbook, brochure, newspaper, or

video.

In the case of the American elections project, the teacher had already decided that the final

outcome would be a public debate between two fictitious political parties. In this second stage of the

project, students took part in defining the nature and format of the debate and designating the

intended audience. With the help of the instructor, it was decided that the class would divide itself

into five topical teams, each one responsible for debating one of the issues previously identified;

topical teams would generate debatable propositions on their designated issue and then divide

into two subgroups so that each side of the issue could be represented in the debate. Students

would also be grouped into two political parties, which they would name themselves, with one side

of each issue represented in the political party; the issues and corresponding perspectives would

form the party platform. The 40-minute debate was structured as follows:

Opening remarks

Representative from first party 1 minute

Representative from second party 1 minute

Issue 1

Party representative who supports proposition 2 minutes

Party representative who opposes proposition 2 minutes

Issue 1 rebuttals

Another party representative who supports proposition 1 minute

Another party representative who opposes proposition 1 minute

Issues 2–5

(Same pattern as Issue 1) 24 minutes

Questions and answers from audience to other party representatives 6 minutes

Closing remarks

Speaker from second party 1 minute

Speaker from first party 1 minute

The class decided to invite English-speaking friends and graduate students enrolled in a TESL/TEFL

program to serve as their audience and judges. It was decided that the audience would vote on

which team presented the most persuasive arguments during the debate.

STEP 3: STUDENTS AND INSTRUCTOR STRUCTURE THE PROJECT

After students have determined the starting and end points of the project, they need to structure

the “body” of the project. Questions that students should consider are as follows: What information

is needed to complete the project? How can that information be obtained (e.g., a library search,

interviews, letters, faxes, E-mail, the World Wide Web, field trips, viewing of videos)? How will the

information, once gathered, be compiled and analyzed? What role does each student play in the

evolution of the project (i.e., who does what?)? What time line will students follow to get from the

starting point to the end point? The answers to many of these questions depend on the location of

the language program and the types of information that are within easy reach (perhaps collected

55

beforehand by the instructor) and those that must be solicited by “snail” mail, electronic mail, fax,

or phone call.

In this American elections project, it was decided that topical team members would work

together to gather information that could be used by supporters and opponents of their proposition

before actually taking sides. In this way, topical team members would share all their resources,

later using it to take a stand and plan a rebuttal. Rather than keeping information secret, as might

be done in a real debate setting, the idea was to establish a cooperative and collaborative working

atmosphere. Topical team members would work as a group to compile gathered information (in the

form of facts, opinions, and statistics) and then analyze it to determine what was most suitable to

the sides supporting and opposing their proposition. At this point, students would subdivide into

groups of supporters and opponents and then work separately (and with other party members) to

prepare for the debate. At that time, students would decide on different roles: the spokespersons,

the “artists” who would create visuals (charts and graphs) to be used during the debate, and so

forth.

STEP 4: INSTRUCTOR PREPARES STUDENTS FOR THE LANGUAGE DEMANDS OF

INFORMATION GATHERING

It is at this point that the instructor determines, perhaps in consultation with the students, the

language demands of the information-gathering stage (Step 5). The instructor can then plan

language instruction activities to prepare students for information-gathering tasks. If, for example,

students are going to collect information by means of interviews, the instructor might plan

exercises on question formation, introduce conversational gambits, and set aside time for role-

plays to provide feedback on pronunciation and to allow students to practice listening and note

taking or audiotaping. If, on the other hand, students are going to use a library to gather materials,

the instructor might review steps for finding resources and practice skimming and note taking with

sample texts. The teacher may also help students devise a grid for organized data collection. If

students will be writing letters to solicit information for their project, the teacher can introduce or

review letter formatting conventions and audience considerations, including levels of formality and

word choice. If students will be using the World Wide Web for information gathering, the instructor

can review the efficient use of this technology.

STEP 5: STUDENTS GATHER INFORMATION

Having practiced the language, skills, and strategies needed to gather information, students are now

ready to collect information and organize it so that others on their team can make sense of it. In

the project highlighted here, students reread course readings in search of relevant materials,

used the library to look for new support, wrote letters to political parties to determine their stand

on the issue under consideration, looked into finding organizations supporting or opposing some

aspect of their proposition (e.g., gun-control groups), and solicited information that could possibly

be used in the debate. During this data-gathering stage, the instructor, knowing the issues and

propositions being researched, also brought in information that was potentially relevant for student

consideration, such as readings, videos, dictocomps, and teacher-generated lectures.

56

STEP 6: INSTRUCTOR PREPARES STUDENTS FOR THE LANGUAGE DEMANDS OF COMPILING

AND ANALYZING DATA

After successfully gathering information, students are confronted with the challenges of organizing

and synthesizing information that may have been collected from different sources and by different

individuals. The instructor can prepare students for the demands of the compilation and analysis

stage by setting up sessions in which students organize sets of materials, and then evaluate,

analyze, and interpret them with an eye toward determining which are most appropriate for the

supporters and opponents of a given proposition. Introducing students to graphic representations

(e.g., grids and charts) that might highlight relationships among ideas is particularly useful at this

point.

STEP 7: STUDENTS COMPILE AND ANALYZE INFORMATION

With the assistance of a variety of organizational techniques (including graphic organizers), students

compile and analyze information to identify data that are particularly relevant to the project. Student

teams weigh the value of the collected data, discarding some because of their inappropriateness for

the project and keeping the rest. Students determine which information represents primary

“evidence” for the supporters and opponents of their proposition. It is at this point that topical

teams divide themselves into two groups and begin to work separately to build the strongest case

for the debate.

STEP 8: INSTRUCTOR PREPARES STUDENTS FOR THE LANGUAGE DEMANDS OF

PRESENTATION OF THE FINAL PRODUCT

At this point in the development of the project, instructors can bring in language improvement

activities to help students succeed with the presentation of their final products. This might entail

practicing oral presentation skills and receiving feedback on voice projection, pronunciation,

organization of ideas, and eye contact. It may involve editing and revising written reports, letters,

or bulletin-board display text. In the case of the American elections debate project, the instructor

focused on conversational gambits to be used during the debate to indicate polite disagreement

and to offer divergent perspectives (see Mach, Stoller, & Tardy, 1997). Students practiced their oral

presentations and tried to hypothesize the questions they would be asked by opponents. They

timed each other and gave each other feedback on content, word choice, persuasiveness, and

intonation. Students also worked with the “artists” in their groups to finalize visual displays, to make

sure they were grammatically correct and easily interpretable by the audience. Students also

created a flyer announcing the debate (see Appendix), which served as an invitation to and

reminder for audience members.

STEP 9: STUDENTS PRESENT FINAL PRODUCT

Students are now ready to present the final outcome of their projects. In the American elections

project, students staged their debate in front of an audience, following the format previously

agreed upon. The audience voted on the persuasiveness of each political party, and a winner was

57

declared. In the case described here, the debate was videotaped so that students could later review

their debate performances and receive feedback from the instructor and their peers.

STEP 10: STUDENTS EVALUATE THE PROJECT

Although students and instructors alike often view the presentation of the final product as the last

stage in the project work process, it is worthwhile to ask students to reflect on the experience as

the last and final step. Students can reflect on the language they mastered to complete the project,

the content they learned about the targeted theme (in the case highlighted here, that would be

American elections, party platforms, and the role of debate in the election process), the steps they

followed to complete the project, and the effectiveness of their final product. Students can be

asked how they might proceed differently the next time or what suggestions they have for future

project work endeavors. Through these reflective activities, students realize how much they have

learned and the teacher benefits from students’ insights for future classroom projects.

CONCLUSION

Content-based instruction and project work provide two means for making English-language

classrooms more vibrant environments for learning and collaboration. Project work, however, need

not be limited to content-based language classes. Language teachers in more traditional

classrooms can diversify instruction with an occasional project. Similarly, teacher educators can

integrate projects into their courses to reinforce important pedagogical issues and provide trainees

with hands-on experience, a process that may be integrated into future classrooms of their own.

Whether a project centers on American elections, demography, peace education, syllabus design,

or methodology, students of varying levels and needs can benefit from the empowering experience

that results from participation and collaboration in a project. Although project work may be easier

to implement in second language settings because of more readily accessible content resources,

teachers in foreign language settings have already proven that with adaptation and creativity, the

project approach can be successful and rewarding for teachers and students alike.

58

Assessing general language proficiency

[Assessing General Language Proficiency: 5' 22"]

There are differences in how the term general language proficiency (GLP) is understood, and

different interpretations of GLP will affect how language tests are made. There are at least three

possible approaches to understanding and defining general language proficiency, with their

corresponding implications for the tests and assessments they inform.

A. BEFORE YOU WATCH

1. What features do you think are part of General Language Proficiency (GLP)? Continue the list

with at least four additional features...

Listening ability

Grammar

…………………………………………………

…………………………………………………

…………………………………………………

…………………………………………………

2. Do you think that the interpretation of GLP affects the way a test is developed? How?

3. Can you name a test which illustrates what, in your opinion, is a good reflection of general

language proficiency? Why do you think this is so?

59

B. WHILE YOU WATCH

4. Before you start making a test,

What do you need to do?

Why?

General Language Proficiency (GLP): three different approaches

C. THE "ABILITIES IN REAL LIFE" (ARL) APPROACH

5. Complete:

The ARL approach sees GLP as the ability to ......................., ......................., .......................,

and ..................................... in real ..........................................

6. Which sections are normally included in a test illustrating this GLP approach? Tick as

appropriate

⃝ Listening

⃝ Grammar

⃝ Speaking

⃝ Reading

⃝ Translation

⃝ Vocabulary

⃝ Writing

7. True (T) or False (F)?

In tests illustrating the "Abilities in Real Life" (ARL) approach, the questions...

a. ...are designed to find out what students know. ______

b. ...assess how performances reflect real life. ______

8. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the "ARL" approach?

Advantages Disadvantages

60

D. THE "INTERACTIVE " APPROACH

9. Complete:

The "Interactive" approach considers that no skill can be .............................to any other.

For example, in a conversation, there may be three skills involved:

………………………………………………….

………………………………………………….

………………………………………………….

10. What test task is given as an example of this approach?

………………………………………………….

11. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the "Interactive" approach?

Advantages Disadvantages

E. THE "COMMON CORE" APPROACH

12. The "Common Core" approach includes everything that goes into ..................................... and

using a language. The video mentions six main aspects:

1. ................................................. 4. .................................................

2. ................................................. 5. .................................................

3. .................................................. 6. .................................................

13. Which are considered the best predictors of language ability?

................................................. .................................................

14. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the "Common core" approach?

Advantages Disadvantages

61

F. AFTER YOU WATCH

15. Match the GLP approaches described in the video to their definition

GLP approach Definition

A. Abilities in real life 1. Includes everything that goes into knowing and using a

language.

B. Interactive 2. Takes into consideration the ability to speak, write, read and listen

in real life situations.

C. Core 3. Considers that no skill can be independent of any other.

16. Complete the following summary of the video about GLP and language testing and

assessment with the words provided.

information, limited, ability, detailed, approximation

If you want a test to give you a ................................ understanding of someone's language

proficiency. you need a lot of .......................... A short and ........................ test will only give you

an ............................... of a test taker's ..................................

To learn more about GLP, you can access Section 2.1 in Chapter 2 in The Common European

Framework of Reference: Learning, Teaching Assessment, where the different elements of an

"action oriented approach" to GLP are described and discussed (pp. 9-16):

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework EN.pdf

62

The Common European Framework in its

political and educational context

1. What is the Common European Framework?

The Common European Framework provides a common basis for the elaboration of language

syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, examinations, textbooks, etc. across Europe. It describes in a

comprehensive way what language learners have to learn to do in order to use a language for

communication and what knowledge and skills they have to develop so as to be able to act

effectively. The description also covers the cultural context in which language is set. The Framework

also defines levels of proficiency which allow learners' progress to be measured at each stage of

learning and on a life-long basis.

The Common European Framework is intended to overcome the barriers to communication

among professionals working in the field of modern languages arising from the different

educational systems in Europe. It provides the means for educational administrators, course

designers, teachers, teacher trainers, examining bodies, etc., to reflect on their current practice,

with a view to situating and coordinating their efforts and to ensuring that they meet the real

needs of the learners for whom they are responsible.

By providing a common basis for the explicit description of objectives, content and methods,

the Framework will enhance the transparency of courses, syllabuses and qualifications, thus

promoting international cooperation in the field of modern languages. The provision of objective

criteria for describing language proficiency will facilitate the mutual recognition of qualifications

gained in different learning contexts, and accordingly will aid European mobility.

The taxonomic nature of the Framework inevitably means trying to handle the great

complexity of human language by breaking language competence down into separate

components. This confronts us with psychological and pedagogical problems of some depth.

Communication calls upon the whole human being. The competences separated and classified

below interact in complex ways in the development of each unique human personality. As a social

agent, each individual forms relationships with a widening cluster of overlapping social groups,

which together define identity. In an intercultural approach, it is a central objective of language

education to promote the favorable development of the learner's whole personality and sense of

identity in response to the enriching experience of otherness in language and culture. It must be

left to teachers and the learners themselves to reintegrate the many parts into a healthily

developing whole.

The Framework includes the description of 'partial' qualifications, appropriate when only a

more restricted knowledge of a language is required (e.g. for understanding rather than speaking),

or when a limited amount of time is available for the learning of a third or fourth language and

more useful results can perhaps be attained by aiming at, say, recognition rather than recall skills.

63

Giving formal recognition to such abilities will help to promote plurilingualism through the

learning of a wider variety of European languages.

2. For what uses is CEF intended?

The uses of the Framework include:

The planning of language learning programmes in terms of:

• their assumptions regarding prior knowledge, and their articulation with earlier learning,

particularly at interfaces between primary, lower secondary, upper secondary and

higher/further education;

• their objectives;

• their content.

The planning of language certification in terms of:

• the content syllabus of examinations;

• assessment criteria, in terms of positive achievement rather than negative deficiencies.

The planning of self-directed learning, including:

• raising the learner's awareness of his or her present state of knowledge;

• self-setting of feasible and worthwhile objectives;

• selection of materials;

• self-assessment.

Learning programmes and certification can be:

• global, bringing a learner forward in all dimensions of language proficiency and

communicative competence;

• modular, improving the learner's proficiency in a restricted area for a particular purpose;

• weighted, emphasizing learning in certain directions and producing a 'profile' in which a

higher level is attained in some areas of knowledge and skill than others;

• partial, taking responsibility only for certain activities and skills (e.g. reception) and leaving

others aside.

The Common European Framework is constructed so as to accommodate these various forms.

In considering the role of a common framework at more advanced stages of language

learning it is necessary to take into account changes in the nature of needs of learners and the

context in which they live, study and work. There is a need for general qualifications at a level

beyond threshold, which may be situated with reference to the CEF. They have, of course, to be

well defined, properly adapted to national situations and embrace new areas, particularly in the

cultural field and more specialized domains. In addition, a considerable role may be played by

64

modules or clusters of modules geared to the specific needs, characteristics and resources of

learners.

3. What criteria must CEF meet?

In order to fulfil its functions, such a Common European Framework must be comprehensive,

transparent and coherent.

'Comprehensive' means that the Common European Framework should attempt to specify

as full a range of language knowledge, skills and use as possible (without of course attempting to

forecast a priori all possible uses of language in all situations - an impossible task), and that all

users should be able to describe their objectives, etc., by reference to it. CEF should differentiate

the various dimensions in which language proficiency is described, and provide a series of

reference points (levels or steps) by which progress in learning can be calibrated. It should be

borne in mind that the development of communicative proficiency involves other dimensions than

the strictly linguistic (e.g. sociocultural awareness, imaginative experience, affective relations,

learning to learn, etc.).

'Transparent' means that information must be clearly formulated and explicit, available and

readily comprehensible to users.

'Coherent' means that the description is free from internal contradictions. With regard to

educational systems, coherence requires that there is a harmonious relation among their

components:

• the identification of needs;

• the determination of objectives;

• the definition of content;

• the selection or creation of material;

• the establishment of teaching/learning programmes;

• the teaching and learning methods employed;

• evaluation, testing and assessment.

The construction of a comprehensive, transparent and coherent framework for language learning

and teaching does not imply the imposition of one single uniform system. On the contrary, the

framework should be open and flexible, so that it can be applied, with such adaptations as prove

necessary, to particular situations. CEF should be:

• multi-purpose: usable for the full variety of purposes involved in the planning and provision

of facilities for language learning

• flexible: adaptable for use in different circumstances

• open: capable of further extension and refinement

• dynamic: in continuous evolution in response to experience in its use

• user-friendly: presented in a form readily understandable and usable by those to whom it

is addressed

• non-dogmatic: not irrevocably and exclusively attached to any one of a number of

competing linguistic or educational theories or practices.

65

4. Language assessment

The CEF is 'A common European framework for language learning, teaching and assessment'. Up

to this point, the focus has been upon the nature of language use and the language user and the

implications for learning and teaching.

In relation to the assessment of language proficiency, there are three main ways in which

the Framework can be used:

1. for the specification of the content of tests and examinations.

2. for stating the criteria for the attainment of a learning objective, both in relation to the

assessment o fa particular spoken or written performance, and in relation to continuous

teacher-, peer- or self-assessment.

3. for describing the levels of proficiency in existing tests and examinations thus enabling

comparisons to be made across different systems of qualifications.

66

Common Reference Levels

a. Criteria for descriptors for Common Reference Levels

One of the aims of the Framework is to help partners to describe the levels of proficiency required

by existing standards, tests and examinations in order to facilitate comparisons between different

systems of qualifications. For this purpose, the Descriptive Scheme and the Common Reference

Levels have been developed. Between them they provide a conceptual grid which users can exploit

to describe their system. Ideally a scale of reference levels in a common framework should meet

the following four criteria. Two relate to description issues, and two relate to measurement issues:

Description Issues

• A common framework scale should be context-free in order to accommodate generalizable

results from different specific contexts. That is to say that a common scale should not be

produced specifically for, let us say, the school context and then applied to adults, or vice-

versa. Yet at the same time the descriptors in a common Framework scale need to be

context-relevant, relatable to or translatable into each and every relevant context - and

appropriate for the function they are used for in that context. This means that the

categories used to describe what learners can do in different contexts of use must be

relatable to the target contexts of use of the different groups of learners within the overall

target population.

• The description also needs to be based on theories of language competence. This is difficult

to achieve because the available theory and research is inadequate to provide a basis for

such a description. Nevertheless, the categorization and description needs to be

theoretically grounded. In addition, whilst relating to theory, the description must also

remain user-friendly - accessible to practitioners. It should encourage them to think further

about what competence means in their context.

Measurement Issues

• The points on the scale at which particular activities and competences are situated in a

common framework scale should be objectively determined in that they are based on a

theory of measurement. This is in order to avoid systematizing error through adopting

unfounded conventions and 'rules of thumb' from the authors, particular groups of

practitioners or existing scales that are consulted.

• The number of levels adopted should be adequate to show progression in different sectors,

but, in any particular context, should not exceed the number of levels between which

people are capable of making reasonably consistent distinctions. This may mean adopting

different sizes of scale step for different dimensions, or a two-tier approach between

67

broader (common, conventional) and narrower (local, pedagogic) levels.

b. The Common Reference Levels

There does appear in practice to be a wide, though by no means universal, consensus on the

number and nature of levels appropriate to the organization of language learning and the public

recognition of achievement. It seems that an outline framework of six broad levels gives an

adequate coverage of the learning space relevant to European language learners for these

purposes.

• Breakthrough, corresponding to what Wilkins in his 1978 proposal labelled 'Formulaic

Proficiency', and Trim in the same publication1 'Introductory'.

• Waystage, reflecting the Council of Europe content specification.

• Threshold, reflecting the Council of Europe content specification.

• Vantage, reflecting the third Council of Europe content specification, a level described as

'Limited Operational Proficiency' by Wilkins, and 'adequate response to situations normally

encountered' by Trim.

• Effective OperationaI Proficiency which was called 'Effective Proficiency' by Trim,

'Adequate Operational Proficiency' by Wilkins, and represents an advanced level of

competence suitable for more complex work and study tasks.

• Mastery (Trim: 'comprehensive mastery'; Wilkins: 'Comprehensive Operational Proficiency'),

corresponds to the top examination objective in the scheme adopted by ALTE (Association

of Language Testers in Europe). It could be extended to include the more developed

intercultural competence above that level which is achieved by many language

professionals.

When one looks at these six levels, however, one sees that they are respectively higher and lower

interpretations of the classic division into basic, intermediate and advanced. Also, some of the

names given to Council of Europe specifications for levels have proved resistant to translation (e.g.

Waystage, Vantage). Toe scheme therefore proposed adopts a 'hyper­ text' branching principle,

starting from an initial division into three broad levels - A, B and C:

Figure 1

1 Trim, J. L. M. 1978 Some Possible Lines of Development of an Overall Structure for a European Unit Credit Scheme for

Foreign Language Learning by Adults, Council of Europe.

68

c. Presentation of Common Reference Levels

The establishment of a set of common reference points in no way limits how different sectors in

different pedagogic cultures may choose to organize or describe their system of levels and

modules. It is also to be expected that the precise formulation of the set of common reference

points, the wording of the descriptors, will develop over time as the experience of member states

and of institutions with related expertise is incorporated into the description.

It is also desirable that the common reference points are presented in different ways for

different purposes. For some purposes it will be appropriate to summarize the set of proposed

Common Reference Levels in single holistic paragraphs, as shown in Table 1. Such a simple 'global'

representation will make it easier to communicate the system to non-specialist users and will also

provide teachers and curriculum planners with orientation points:

Table 1. Common Reference Levels: global scale

Proficient User

C2

Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarise

information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing

arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself

spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of

meaning even in more complex situations.

C1

Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognise

implicit meaning. Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without

much obvious searching for expressions. Can use language flexibly and

effectively for social, academic and professional purposes. Can produce clear,

well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of

organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices.

Independent

User

B2

Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract

topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialisation. Can

interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular

interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party.

Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a

viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of

various options.

B1

Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters

regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. Can deal with most

situations likely to arise whilst travelling in an area where the language is

spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of

personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes and

ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans.

Basic User

A2

Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of

most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information,

shopping, local geography, employment). Can communicate in simple and

routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar

and routine matters. Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her

background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.

A1

Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases

aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type. Can introduce

him/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal

69

details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she

has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and

clearly and is prepared to help.

In order to orient learners, teachers and other users within the educational system for some

practical purpose, however, a more detailed overview is likely to be necessary. Such an overview

can be presented in the form of a grid showing major categories of language use at each of the

six levels. The example in Table 2 (on the next two pages) is a draft for a self-assessment orientation

tool based on the six levels. It is intended to help learners to profile their main language skills, and

decide at which level they might look at a checklist of more detailed descriptors in order to self-

assess their level of proficiency.

For other purposes, it may be desirable to focus on a particular spectrum of levels, and a

particular set of categories. By restricting the range of levels and categories covered to those

relevant to a particular purpose, it will be possible to add more detail: finer levels and categories.

Such detail would enable a set of modules to be 'mapped' relative to one another - and also to be

situated in relation to the Common Framework.

Alternatively, rather than profiling categories of communicative activities, one may wish to

assess a performance on the basis of the aspects of communicative language competence one

can deduce from it.

d. Illustrative descriptors

The tables used to introduce the Common Reference Levels (Tables 1 and 2) are summarized from

a bank of ‘illustrative descriptors' developed and validated for the CEF. These formulations have

been mathematically scaled to these levels by analyzing the way in which they have been

interpreted in the assessment of large numbers of learners.

Communicative activities

'Can Do' descriptors are provided for reception, interaction and production. There may not be

descriptors for all sub-categories for every level, since some activities cannot be undertaken until

a certain level of competence has been reached, whilst others may cease to be an objective at

higher levels.

Strategies

'Can Do' descriptors are provided for some of the strategies employed in performing

communicative activities. Strategies are seen as a hinge between the learner's resources

(competences) and what he/she can do with them (communicative activities).

70

Table 2. Common Reference Levels: self-assessment grid

A1 A2 B1 U

ND

ER

ST

AN

DI

NG

Listening I can recognise familiar

words and very basic

phrases concerning myself,

my family and immediate

concrete surroundings

when people speak slowly

and clearly.

I can understand phrases

and the highest frequency

vocabulary related to areas

Of most immediate personal

relevance (e.g. very basic

personal and family

information, shopping, local

area, employment).

I can catch the main point in

short, clear, simple

messages

and announcements.

I can understand the main

points of clear standard

speech on familiar matters

regularly encountered in

work, school, leisure, etc. I

can understand the main

point of many radio or TV

programmes on current

affairs or topics of personal

or professional interest

when the delivery is

relatively slow and clear.

Reading I can understand familiar

names, words and very

simple sentences, for

example on notices and

posters or in catalogues.

I can read very short, simple

texts. I can find specific,

predictable information in

simple everyday material

such as advertisements,

prospectuses, menus and

timetables and I can

understand short simple

personal letters.

I can understand texts that

consist mainly of high

frequency every day or job-

related language. I can

understand the description

of events, feelings and

wishes in personal letters.

SP

EA

KI

NG

Spoken

Interaction

I can interact in a simple

way provided the other

person is prepared to

repeat or rephrase things

at a slower rate of speech

and help me formulate

what I'm trying to say. I

can ask and answer simple

questions in areas of

immediate need or on very

familiar topics.

I can communicate in

simple and routine tasks

requiring a simple and

direct exchange of

information on familiar

topics and activities. I can

handle very short social

exchanges, even though I

can't usually understand

enough to keep the

conversation going myself.

I can deal with most

situations likely to arise

whilst travelling in an area

where the language is

spoken. I can enter

unprepared into

conversation on topics

that are familiar, of

personal interest or

pertinent to everyday life

(e.g. family, hobbies, work,

travel and current events).

Spoken

Production

I can use simple phrases

and sentences to describe

where I live and people I

know.

I can use a series of phrases

and sentences to describe

in simple terms my family

and other people, living

conditions, my educational

background and my

present or most recent job.

I can connect phrases in a

simple way in order to

describe experiences and

events, my dreams, hopes

and ambitions. I can briefly

give reasons and

explanations for opinions

and plans. I can narrate a

story or relate the plot of a

book or film and describe

my reactions.

WR

IT

IN

G Writing I can write a short, simple

postcard, for example

sending holiday greetings.

I can fill in forms with

personal details, for

example entering my

name, nationality and

address on a hotel

registration form.

I can write short, simple

notes and messages

relating to matters in areas

of immediate need. I can

write a very simple personal

letter, for example thanking

someone for something.

I can write simple

connected text on topics

which are familiar or of

personal interest. I can

write personal letters

describing experiences and

impressions.

71

B2 C1 C2

UN

DE

RS

TA

ND

IN

G

Listening I can understand extended

speech and lectures and

follow even complex lines of

argument provided the

topic is reasonably familiar. I

can understand most TV

news and current affairs

programmes. I can

understand the majority of

films in standard dialect.

I can understand extended

speech even when it is not

clearly structured and when

relationships are only

implied and not signaled

explicitly. I can understand

television programmes and

films without too much

effort.

I have no difficulty in

understanding any kind of

spoken language, whether

live or broadcast, even when

delivered at fast native

speed, provided I have some

time to get familiar with the

accent.

Reading I can read articles and

reports concerned with

contemporary problems in

which the writers adopt

particular attitudes or

viewpoints. I can understand

contemporary literary prose.

I can understand long and

complex factual and literary

texts, appreciating

distinctions of style. I can

understand specialized

articles and longer technical

instructions, even when they

do not relate to my field.

I can read with ease virtually

all forms of the written

language, including

abstract, structurally or

linguistically complex texts

such as manuals, specialized

articles and literary works.

SP

EA

KI

NG

Spoken

Interaction

I can interact with a degree

of fluency and spontaneity

that makes regular

interaction with native

speakers quite possible. I

can take an active part in

discussion in familiar

contexts, accounting for and

sustaining my views.

I can express myself fluently

and spontaneously without

much obvious searching for

expressions. I can use

language flexibly and

effectively for social and

professional purposes. I can

formulate ideas and

opinions with precision and

relate my contribution

skillfully to those of other

speakers.

I can take part effortlessly in

any conversation or

discussion and have a good

familiarity with idiomatic

expressions and

colloquialisms. I can express

myself fluently and convey

finer shades of meaning

precisely. If I do have a

problem I can backtrack and

restructure around the

difficulty so smoothly that

other people are hardly

aware of it.

Spoken

Production

I can present clear, detailed

descriptions on a wide

range of subjects related to

my field of interest. I can

explain a viewpoint on a

topical issue giving the

advantages and

disadvantages of various

options.

I can present clear, detailed

descriptions of complex

subjects integrating sub-

themes, developing

particular points and

rounding off with an

appropriate conclusion.

I can present a clear,

smoothly flowing

description or argument in a

style appropriate to the

context and with an

effective logical structure

which helps the recipient to

notice and remember

significant points.

WR

IT

IN

G

Writing I can write clear, detailed

text on a wide range of

subjects related to my

interests. I can write an

essay or report, passing on

information or giving

reasons in support of or

against a particular point of

view. I can write letters

highlighting the personal

significance of events and

experiences.

I can express myself in clear,

well-structured text,

expressing points of view at

some length. I can write

about complex subjects in a

letter, an essay or a report,

underlining what I consider

to be the salient issues. I can

select style appropriate to

the reader in mind.

I can write clear, smoothly

flowing text in an

appropriate style. I can write

complex letters, reports or

articles which present a case

with an effective logical

structure which helps the

recipient to notice and

remember significant points.

I can write summaries and

reviews of professional or

literary works.

72

General Preface to the ACTFL

Proficiency Guidelines 2012

The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines are descriptions of what individuals can do with language in

terms of speaking, writing, listening, and reading in real-world situations in a spontaneous and

non-rehearsed context. For each skill, these guidelines identify five major levels of proficiency:

Distinguished, Superior, Advanced, Intermediate, and Novice. The major levels Advanced,

Intermediate, and Novice are subdivided into High, Mid, and Low sublevels. The levels of the ACTFL

Guidelines describe the continuum of proficiency from that of the highly articulate, well-educated

language user to a level of little or no functional ability.

These Guidelines present the levels of proficiency as ranges, and describe what an individual

can and cannot do with language at each level, regardless of where, when, or how the language

was acquired. Together these levels form a hierarchy in which each level subsumes all lower levels.

The Guidelines are not based on any particular theory, pedagogical method, or educational

curriculum. They neither describe how an individual learns a language nor prescribe how an

individual should learn a language, and they should not be used for such purposes. They are an

instrument for the evaluation of functional language ability.

The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines were first published in 1986 as an adaptation for the

academic community of the U.S. Government's Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) Skill Level

Descriptions. This third edition of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines includes the first revisions of

Listening and Reading since their original publication in 1986, and a second revision of the ACTFL

Speaking and Writing Guidelines, which were revised to reflect real-world assessment needs in

1999 and 2001 respectively. New for the 2012 edition are the addition of the major level of

Distinguished to the Speaking and Writing Guidelines, the division of the Advanced level into the

three sublevels of High, Mid, and Low for the Listening and Reading Guidelines, and the addition

of a general level description at the Advanced, Intermediate, and Novice levels for all skills.

Another new feature of the 2012 Guidelines is their publication online, supported with

glossed terminology and annotated, multimedia samples of performance at each level for

Speaking and Writing, and examples of oral and written texts and tasks associated with each level

for Reading and Listening.

The direct application of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines is for the evaluation of functional

language ability. The Guidelines are intended to be used for global assessment in academic and

workplace settings. However, the Guidelines do have instructional implications. The ACTFL

Proficiency Guidelines underlie the development of the ACTFL Performance Guidelines for K-12

Learners (1998) and are used in conjunction with the National Standards for Foreign Language

Learning (1996, 1998, 2006) to describe how well students meet content standards. For the past

25 years, the ACTFL Guidelines have had an increasingly profound impact on language teaching

and learning in the United States.

73

NCSSFL-ACTFL Global Can-Do Benchmarks

74

75

Reading: The Alternatives in Language Assessment

Link: https://goo.gl/4eagXQ

Summary: This paper explores the advantages and disadvantages of different kinds of language

assessment, from traditional testing to more modern ways to assess learning.

Reading: Task-Based Teaching and Testing

Link: https://goo.gl/54kge6

Summary: From the teacher´s perspective, the author presents key underpinnings of task-based

instruction, its emergence within language education, and its component parts. Furthermore, he

highlights the fundamental processes of teaching and testing, outlining a task-based approach to

each and posing questions in need of inquiry, such as the challenges of TLBT in language education.

Reading: Language testing does more harm than good

Link: https://goo.gl/Rzm1Nd

Summary: University staff members hold a debate, based on teacher´s concerns, about the

importance of testing to assess students´ learning.

Reading: Assessment Portfolios and English Language Learners: Frequently Asked Questions and a

Case Study of the Brooklyn International High School

Link: https://goo.gl/E6U18g

Summary: This paper presents answers to frequently asked questions about assessment portfolios

for English language learners and to describe the lessons that portfolio users have learned. Also

included is a case study of the use of assessment portfolios at The Brooklyn International High

School in Brooklyn, New York. The advantages and challenges of using assessment portfolios are

applicable not only to English language learners, but also to a number of other student populations.

Therefore, this publication is helpful for a variety of audiences. It is particularly relevant for school

principals and English-as-a-second-language and bilingual program directors who are considering

assessment portfolios for use in their schools.

76

Reading. The Effects of Self- and Peer-assessment on Iranian EFL Learners' Argumentative Writing

Performance

Link: https://goo.gl/YD6qjn

Summary: In this article, the researchers find the effect of self- and peer-assessments on the

argumentative writing performance of intermediate Iranian EFL learners. Among their findings, it is

indicated that the use of self- and peer-assessments significantly affected the writing ability of the

learners, which leads to the conclusion that using alternative assessments for Iranian EFL students

could be helpful in overcoming some of their argumentative writing difficulties. The results of this

study have clear implications for both learners and teachers and other stakeholders of ELT. They can

use these alternative assessments as a learning opportunity to lower the anxiety and improve the

argumentative writing skill of students.

Reading: Alternative assessment: Portfolio assessment for young learners

Link: https://goo.gl/DBx2jg

Summary: This paper discusses the significance of this type of alternative assessment and explores

different researchers’ views on portfolio assessment and its implications to young learners’

assessment. Moreover, it illustrates some important aspects teachers should take into consideration

about using portfolios with children.

Reading: CONTENT-BASED SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING

Link: https://goo.gl/fzMjsG

Summary: This article discusses the features and nature of content-based instruction from its roots

in the communicative approach to the connection with the ESP (English for Special Purposes)

movement.

Reading: Content-based projects in the EFL classroom

Link: https://goo.gl/Lsm3BT

Summary: This article introduces content-based projects as a method that can be used to enhance

EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teaching in an academic context. Students engage in individual

projects related to different disciplines; they conduct an internet search, collect data, interview

people, analyze their findings and eventually give a 5-minute presentation to their colleagues. The

paper presents the steps of implementing this method over a semester, showing how it has

improved students' writing skills, especially in the area of content.

Reading: A Content-Rich Maker Project

Link: https://goo.gl/YtDeY6

Summary: A teacher shares his experience with a project that supports a lot of high-level group work.

By developing the research and planning, the teacher was able to capitalize on the students’

engagement. The main areas of learning were informational reading and writing, measurement and

unit conversion, group work communication, and character education.

77

Reading: Assigning CEFR Ratings to ACTFL Assessments

Link: https://goo.gl/869sr8

Summary: An empirically-based alignment of proficiency guidelines between the two major

frameworks for learning, teaching, and assessing foreign language skills: the U.S. defined scales of

proficiency, i.e., the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines/ILR Skill Level Descriptions, and the Common

European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR).

Reading: Readers Theatre: Improving Oral Proficiency in a Japanese University EFL Course

Link: https://goo.gl/3kY7eW

Summary: One effective approach in teaching oral skills is the use of drama called Readers Theatre

(RT). It is a presentational performance based on principles and techniques of oral interpretation

which seeks to entertain, instruct and persuade (Adams, 2003). The objective of this paper is to

examine students’ observations of their own language learning experiences through RT. We first

provide a literature review on the pedagogical values of drama in developing oral competence. The

authors’ observations suggest that using RT in the language classroom is generally a rewarding

learning experience for EFL students and teachers. Therefore, the authors recommend RT as an

effective technique in helping students in the process of improving their oral proficiency.

Reading: Do Language Proficiency Levels Correspond to Language Learning Strategy Adoption?

Link: https://goo.gl/6ygrD2

Summary: This paper explores the relationship between language learning strategies and language

proficiency levels and the pedagogical implications of such relationship.