Loop Input
Loop Input
Loop input
Tessa Woodward
Taking the term content to represent what a person is trying to learn, and
process to represent how a person is trying to learn it, we can track these
two concepts from learning in everyday life to learning in the teacher
training classroom thus:
Content/What
Process/How
Everyday life
Language learning
classroom
Listening to others,
studying verb tables,
talking about own past
events, mimicry
Teacher training
classroom
Experiential learning/ Trying out is a form of experiential learning. For example, the teachers in
training
the training classroom above, wishing to expand their repertoire of
dictation types, can pretend to be language students and experience, say,
a picture dictation given by the trainer. Provided the experience is
followed by discussion of what has been learnt (about the dictation type
and how it works in the language learning classroom), experiential
learning is regarded as a very useful tool in EL teacher training.
Loop input
301
302
Tessa Woodward
For example:
a A complete session on continuous assessment run along loop input
lines could thus have integrated within it a continuous assessment of
the participants understanding of the material presented in the
session, using the methods advocated by the presenter in the session.
This would be followed by a round-up discussion of the assessment
materials, methods, advantages, and disadvantages, from the point of
view of a student as well as a teacher.
b A course module on, say, the Presentation, Practice, Production, or
Three Ps method of introducing new language to foreign language
students could, if run along loop input lines, have three main phases.
The rst is where the methods and materials associated with the Three
Ps are elicited or taught to participants via texts or talks. The second is
where the participants have a chance to try out the methods and
materials in very controlled settings, such as micro- and peer-teaching
practice. The third would be where they are encouraged to transfer
them to situations which would be of use to them in their own
classrooms. Towards the end of the module, if participants had not
noticed already, the congruity between the content and the process of
the module would need to be pointed out by discussion.
c At the level of a whole course, if the organizer wished to explore with
participants the overall idea of a little and often teaching and learning
philosophy, then using loop input would enable the facilitator to
introduce this, or indeed all of the component(s) of the course, using a
little and often scheme of work. This would mean that each session
would not contain long blocks of work, but rather short sections on a
number of topics. Each of these threads of work would contain the
kind of review and extension of material that is implied in this way of
working (see Woodward 2001). Thus, in one session, the criteria for
good and bad threads could be discussed. In another session this work
could be reviewed, and the advantages and disadvantages of thread
planning could be dealt with, and so on.
The advantages of loop input are that it is multi-sensory, in just the same
way as experiential learning, but with the added advantage of involving
self-descriptivity and recursion, both of which can have the eect of
fascinating certain people. Some participants thus learn more deeply as a
result of this reverberation between process and content.
Allowing time for the decompression phase also involves participants in
a detailed and very useful discussion of the steps, materials, content, and
participant experience of the activity from the inside out.
303
References
Ellis, R. 1986. Activities and procedures for
teacher training. ELT Journal 40/2: 919.
Kolb, D. A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience
as the Source of Learning and Development. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Woodward, T. 1986. Loop input-a process idea.
The Teacher Trainer 1: 67.
Woodward, T. 1988a. Loop-input: A new strategy
for trainers. System 16/1: 238.
Woodward, T. 1988b. Loop Input. Canterbury:
Pilgrims.
Woodward, T. 1991. Models and Metaphors in
Language Teacher Training. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
304
Tessa Woodward