esl together
Theoretical Framework
Pedagogical Framework
This learning module draws on a number of pedagogical principles and theories. The unit uses a task-based approach to second language teaching, which is founded on the principles of social constructivism (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). A social constructivist approach to learning draws on theorists such as Vygotsky and Foucault, who argue that learners use language to create knowledge and to solve problems (Hirtle, 1996). Vygotsky’s notion of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) and scaffolding is also particularly relevant here. The ZPD is “the difference between the child's capacity to solve problems on his own, and his capacity to solve them with assistance” (Schütz, 2014, ‘The origins of thought’). That is, the zone of proximal development
encompasses those activities that learners can only do with the assistance of others in a process Vygotsky refers to as scaffolding (Schütz, 2014). Storch (2005) argues that scaffolding can also occur during collaborative work between peers: students work together to share and construct knowledge. As Mirzaei and Eslami (2015) have noted, there has been a recent growth in approaches which involve student collaboration in L2 classrooms with particular regard to student output. The authors argue that the ZPD provides an ideal space for learning to occur through collaborative dialogue.
A task-based approach to language teaching draws on many of these learning theories. Larsen-Freeman and Anderson (2011) note that in a task-based approach, students work together to complete tasks, meaningful activities which have a clear outcome that is not necessarily related to language. It is important that the “tasks are meaningful and relevant so that the students see the reason for doing the task and can see how the task relates to possible situations in their lives outside the classroom” (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011, p. 156). Students have to communicate as they work together to complete the task; they have to work to express their thoughts and ideas and to understand each other. In doing this, learners “have to check to see if they have comprehended correctly and, at times, they have to seek clarification”, a process which is argued to help facilitate language learning and acquisition (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011, p. 149).
Collaborative writing is an ideal medium through which scaffolding can occur in a task-based approach. Students can engage in collaborative dialogue about language as they produce output, therefore directing their attention to the language form so that they can notice gaps in their knowledge and improve their sense of language awareness (Svalberg, 2007). In addition, collaborative writing can “promote a sense of co-ownership and hence encourage students to contribute to the decision making on all aspects of writing: content, structure, and language” (Storch, 2005, p. 154). Mirzaei and Eslami (2015) found that students they worked with who engaged in ZPD-activated collaborative dialogue during L2 writing tasks “created the most facilitative learning space and mediated L2 learners’ knowledge building or cognitive activity” (p. 19). They support the notion that L2 learning is a socially mediated process.
Technological Framework
Larsen-Freeman and Anderson (2011) argue that technology should be integrated in a pedagogically thoughtful way. Technology “should not be cast as an alternative to classroom teaching, or as replacing the teacher, but as a tool that facilitates meaningful and challenging classroom work” (Van Lier, 2003, p. 2, as cited in Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011, p. 216). There are two major frameworks which look at the integration of technology and education which will be discussed here: the SAMR framework and the
TPACK framework.
The SAMR framework, which stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition, represents a way of classifying and evaluating the use of technology in learning (Romrell, Kidder & Wood, 2014). According to Puentedura (2013), where activities are classified as substitution or augmentation, learning is enhanced, whereas activities which are classified as modification or redefinition are argued to transform learning. The following learning module will be classified as modification. With regards to the jump from augmentation to modification, Puentedura (2013) asks whether the modification fundamentally depends on the new technology. Modification means that the learning task has been significantly redesigned (Romrell et al, 2014). In this learning module, the use of Google Slides in this learning task has significantly changed the nature of group interaction and collaboration. If, for example, groups were working with PowerPoint, they would likely be sharing the same computer and working face-to-face as they made changes to the presentation. In this case only one student would be able to use the computer at a time. By contrast, not only does Google Slides allow learners to interact without needing to be face to face, it also allows them, crucially, to be able to work on and modify the presentation simultaneously, while watching each other make changes and add comments. In this manner learning is transformed, because the collaborative process is significantly changed, facilitated by the use of this mobile technology. The technology also allow the whole learning task to be much more accessible. Students can use their smartphones or their personal computers to contribute to the assignment, making the learning far more situated and personalised (Romrell et al, 2014).
TPACK stands for Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge. It is a framework which “attempts to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge” (Koehler, n.d., ‘TPACK Explained’). TPACK is a model which represents the knowledge teachers use to inform their instructional planning and the integration of technology into their teaching (Harris & Hofer, 2011). Harris and Hofer (2011) define TPACK specifically as the knowledge which encompasses “How to teach specific content-based material, using technologies that best embody and support it, in ways that are appropriately matched to students’ needs and preferences” (p. 213).
Taking TPACK into account in this project meant understanding how my knowledge of the technology, the pedagogy and the relevant content interacted with my particular context and target learners. I wanted to create something which was adaptable to many different learning contexts but which would also be engaging, particularly for more advanced learners with access to technology outside of the classroom. I started with my pedagogical principles and framework: a task-based approach to language learning which incorporated collaborative writing. Collaborative writing activities are ideal for the presentation of all sorts of customised content. Since my learners are to be studying in the UK for a short time, and the aim of the program is not only to improve learners’ English but also introduce them to British culture, a collaborative writing project which had students writing, designing and finally giving presentations on aspects of British culture fulfilled the pedagogical and content-related aspects of the task. Finally, I had to think about how technology could best be used to facilitate and enhance such an activity. “Possibilities for technology use should be considered according to the types of learning activities that have been selected, which, in turn, have been chosen to match students’ learning needs and preferences” (Harris & Hofer, 2011, p. 214). I originally lingered on the use of PowerPoint for the project, however, as I have argued above, Google Slides presented many more opportunities for enhancing and even transforming the learning task and whole learning experience, giving students the opportunity to really engage with the task in its many aspects.