Teacher-researchers in

acTion

Edited by Kenan Dikilitaş, Richard Smith and Wayne Trotman

IATEFL Research Special Interest Group

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
edited by Kenan Dikilitaş, richard smith and Wayne Trotman
Teacher-researchers in acTion
PART I
Renewing classroom practices through collaborative action research .................... 9
Anne Burns
Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research .......................................... 19
Dick Allwright
Published by IATEFL, No 2 – 3 The Foundry Business Park, Seager Road, Faversham, Kent ME13 7F Exploratory action research as workplan: why, what and where from? ................ 37
Authors of the individual chapters retain copyright over their work.
Richard Smith
ISBN 978-1-901095-71-5
Professional development through teacher-research ........................................... 47
First published as a collected volume in 2015 Kenan Dikilitaş
Edited by Kenan Dikilitaş, Richard Smith and Wayne Trotman
Cover artwork (‘Communion’) reproduced by kind permission of the artist,
Guillermina Victoria
PART II
([email protected]; http://wilhelmina18.wix.com/arte-victoria)
Cover design and book layout by Şerikan Kara [email protected] Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives ............................ 59
Rukiye Eryılmaz
The International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language was founded in 1967. Registered as a
charity (1090853) and registered as a company in England (2531041).
Peer observation: a systematic investigation for continuous professional
For further information about IATEFL, please see the IATEFL website http://iatel.org development ....................................................................................................... 71
For further information about the Research Special Interest Group, please see the ReSIG website
http://resig.iatel.org
Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu
Enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation ....................... 87
Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen
Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English through
consultation with students .................................................................................. 97
Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir
Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom ..................................... 109
Şehnaz Yusufoviç

iii
Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills ................................... 133 Developing language learning strategies and learner autonomy
Sedef Fenik through video games ......................................................................................... 333
Alexandros Palaiogiannis
Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing ........................... 147
Salim Razı Is using the mother tongue in ElT classrooms a sin?
A study of learners’ perceptions ........................................................................ 347
Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? ................................ 163
Sevil Gülbahar
Vildan Sakarkaya
PART III
Team-teaching for teacher training ................................................................... 175
Nicholas Velde Attribution retraining in l2 classes: prospects for
exploratory classroom practice.......................................................................... 357
Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors
İsmail Hakkı Erten
about learner autonomy .................................................................................... 189
Merve Güzel Integrated teacher-research ............................................................................... 369
Jerome C. Bush
Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a
teacher-centered one ......................................................................................... 207 A collaborative action research teacher development programme ..................... 387
Kevser Özdemir Yasemin Kırkgöz
Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase students’ use of learning strategies What happens when pre-service English language teachers are in action
and academic success in the classroom? ............................................................ 225 and researchers are recording? ........................................................................... 399
Huriye Jale Güneș Coșardemir H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan
From TEFl to ElF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an action-research Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections
project in Greece ............................................................................................... 235 of teacher-researchers in a higher education context in Turkey ......................... 419
Stefania Kordia Wayne Trotman
Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation ................................... 263 INDEX ............................................................................................................. 433
Ezgi Çetin
How can teachers find a happy medium between what students
want and their own practices? ........................................................................... 277
Esin Yüksel
Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice .............. 285
Duygu Ișık
Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and
open your minds” ............................................................................................. 297
İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal
Creating a learner-centred classroom environment ........................................... 315
Çiler İnan
iv v
 Contributors

Alexandros Palaiogiannis Hellenic Open University, Greece

Ali Galip Zorba Akdeniz University, Turkey
Anne Burns University of New South Wales, Australia
Arda Arıkan Akdeniz University, Turkey
Canan Önal Gediz University, Turkey
Çiler İnan İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey
Dick Allwright Lancaster, UK
Duygu Işık Ege University, Turkey
Elif Günbay Gediz University, Turkey
Esin Yüksel Gediz University, Turkey
Ezgi Çetin İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey
Gülizar Aydemir Gediz University, Turkey
İlknur Kurtulmuş Gediz University, Turkey
İsmail Hakkı Erten Hacettepe University, Turkey
Jale G.Coşardemir Yaşar University, Turkey
Jerome Bush University of Economics, Turkey
Kenan Dikilitaş Hasan Kalyoncu University, Turkey
Kevser Özdemir İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey
Koray Akyazı Gediz University, Turkey
Merve Güzel İzmir Institute of Technology Turkey
Nichaolas Velde Melikşah University, Turkey
Pelin Özmen Gediz University, Turkey

vii
Richard Smith University of Warwick, UK Introduction
Rukiye Eryılmaz Gediz University, Turkey
Salim Razı Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Turkey
Savaş Geylanioğlu Gediz University, Turkey
Sedef Fenik Gediz University, Turkey
Şehnaz Yusufoviç Yaşar University, Turkey
Sevil Gülbahar İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey
Sezgi Saraç Akdeniz University, Turkey his book contains chapters written by teacher-researchers working at uni-
Stefania Kordia Hellenic Open University, Greece versities across Turkey. he book aims to provide opportunities for teachers to
Vildan Sakarkaya İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey share their research relating to classroom practice with the wider ELT com-
munity across Turkey and internationally and provides a platform for general
Wayne Trotman İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Turkey
relection on the basis of a wide selection of teacher-research studies.
Yasemin Kırkgöz Çukurova University, Turkey
he conference which gave rise to this teacher-research book was sup-
Zeynep Aksel Gediz University, Turkey ported by the IATEFL Research Special Interest Group, and it thereby took
on a pan-Turkey and wider international dimension. However, the conference
already had a history of over three years, rooted in the activities of the Profes-
sional and Academic Development Division of Gediz University since 2010.
Every year from 2011 onwards, teachers working at Gediz had presented on
their research at an annual conference, as follows:
June and July 2011: First conference (in-house only), held at Gediz Uni-
versity Çankaya Campus with the participation of about 40 instructors.
June 2012: Second conference, held at Gediz University Seyrek Campus.
Plenary speakers from overseas were invited for the irst time   — Martin
Lamb (University of Leeds, UK) and Richard Smith (University of Warwick,
UK) — and instructors from Gediz University had the opportunity to receive
feedback on their presentations from these ELT specialists.
June 2013: hird conference, held at Gediz University Çankaya Campus.
he plenary speakers were Simon Borg (University of Leeds) and, for the sec-
ond time,  Richard Smith (University of Warwick). here were presenters as
well as audience participants from universities across Turkey.
Papers presented at these irst three Gediz conferences have been edited
and incorporated into three books (Dikilitaş 2012, 2013, 2014), which provide
a record of the research engagement of Gediz teachers over this time.
he June 2014 conference was held once more at the Gediz University
Çankaya Campus. his time there were three plenary speakers – Anne Burns
viii 1
2 Introduction Introduction 3

(Aston University, UK), Dick Allwright (Lancaster, UK) and Richard Smith of perspectives from leaders, teacher educators and teacher-researchers consti-
(University of Warwick, UK), and – due to the publicity IATEFL Research tutes coherent content, which together exempliies an emerging strategy for
SIG gave to the conference – some speakers from outside Turkey as well as professional development: teacher-research.
from other institutions in Turkey. . he main aim of this book is not so much to disseminate the knowledge
he TR programmes at Gediz University since 2010 have aimed to: generated by teachers as to showcase a range of teacher-research studies in
• encourage instructors to relect critically on current teaching practices order to inspire other teachers across the world. We hope that similar projects
•
with teachers can be conducted in diferent contexts such as primary, second-
raise their awareness of new practices
•
ary and high school as well as with the teachers from higher education who
encourage them to examine and review their beliefs
•
are mainly focused on here.
help them gain further insight into their teaching Part One opens with a chapter from Anne Burns and her suggestion that
• improve their motivation action research is a much more rewarding experience when carried out in a
• heighten their awareness of learners. collaborative manner on an area of mutual interest. After listing eight charac-
teristics of what she believes collaboration involves, such as equality and reci-
hese objectives appear largely to have been achieved, as teachers have con- procity, Burns outlines the value of and lists several practical ideas for working
sistently reported how they have beneitted from the process of researching collaboratively. It is noticeable in the present book that four out of eighteen
and from the indings that they obtained from their studies. studies were carried out in collaboration in the sense that at least two research-
he Gediz programme has had the following characteristics: ers were working on individual projects, although most others were carried out
• led by an internal trainer in collaboration with professional development leaders. Perhaps in the light of
• classroom as research setting Burns’ insights we can look forward to reading about more collaborative stud-
•
ies in both senses in the near future.
external perspectives involved
•
Following this, Dick Allwright pleads for ‘understanding’ from all involved
on-going support
•
in research. After addressing the tough question of what ‘understanding’ en-
writing-up and publishing
•
tails, Allwright seeks to persuade us that if understanding is so important, then
supported by following conferences it is something researchers, teachers and learners need to be working towards.
• sustained for 5 years He concludes that by using a form of practitioner research called Exploratory
Practice, both learners and teachers are able to develop at the same time.
here has, then, been a CPD strategy based on teachers developing their
Richard Smith next describes the rationale, nature and origins of a work-
own teaching via involvement in doing research over a relatively long period of
plan involving what he terms ‘exploratory action research’, utilised as a means
time each year (at least 8 months). his is in stark contrast to many other CPD
for inducting secondary school teachers in Chile into teacher-research. his
programmes in preparatory programmes in Turkish universities, which tend to
approach seems to combine elements of both action research and Exploratory
be shorter-term (involving workshops, seminars, or talks) and which may not
Practice but Richard also explains how it had origins in experience and how
require teachers to be so active.
exploratory action research emerged as a practical initiative, not primarily as
his book is a unique collection that brings together leaders in the area of
an attempt to inluence theory.
teacher-research (part I) and language teachers who have been doing teacher-
Completing Part One Kenan Dikilitaş explains how professional develop-
research for professional development (part II). here are also studies carried
ment has undergone immense changes in recent years, with a movement away
out by professional researchers in Turkey regarding how to facilitate teacher
from top-down models emphasizing received knowledge, and more towards
action research with in-service and pre-service teachers (part III). his blend
4 Introduction Introduction 5

teachers becoming researchers of their own classrooms and thereby creating error correction in teaching pronunciation in preparatory classes in order to
their own knowledge. gain insight into the views of novice English language instructors. Esin Yüksel
Part Two consists of eighteen chapters presenting teacher-research studies. explores Turkish students’ preferences about vocabulary instruction through
he irst, by Rukiye Eryılmaz, looks at what students think about corrective reading, and attempts to ind a happy medium between what they want and
feedback and asks which correction method they prefer. Following this, Koray teachers’ actual practices.
Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu, relect on their teaching practice and what they Duygu Işık looks into whether integrating target language cultural ele-
learnt by observing and discussing each other’s lessons in a deliberate attempt ments into language teaching makes learning more efective or not. In a
to improve their teaching. Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Özmen share indings of collaborative study, Canan Önal and İlknur Kurtulmuş created awareness
action research carried out to mirror the motivation of students, and address amongst their students about being independent readers and helped them
this issue by enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation. realize that new vocabulary could be learned more efectively and retained
Following this Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir focus on diiculties longer if they discovered the meaning in context. Çiler Inan explores how
beginner level students face with speaking in English. On the same topic, to create a learner-centred classroom environment and how to get learners
Şehnaz Yusufoviç then focuses on language anxiety, one of the most basic involved in the classroom work and more responsible for their own learning.
reasons for students not being able to talk in the classroom. Alexandros Palaiogiannis presents research that deals with the integration of
Sedef Fenik’s study concerns improving learners’ presentation skills commercial video games in a Greek senior secondary school context aiming at
through an oral presentation evaluation rubric that promoted peer assessment. investigating whether such games have the potential to foster the development
Next, Salim Razı investigates diiculties his students encountered in academic of language learning strategies and learner autonomy. Finally, Sevil Gülbahar
writing, and strategies they used to overcome these problems in an Advanced reports on the use of L1 in the classroom from students’ perspectives, with a
Reading and Writing Skills Course. he study by Vildan Sakarkaya focuses particular focus on teachers who prefer not to use the L1.
on reasons for and solutions to her students’ reluctance to participate in pair he inal part of this book contains ive chapters which relate to how teach-
and group work activities, while Nicholas Velde outlines an action research er-research can be well-supported. In the irst of these İsmail Hakkı Erten
project which investigated critical incidents in the classroom and the efect of points out that there is a paucity of studies into the attributions language
team-teaching on learning to mitigate such incidents during an ESL practi- learners generate concerning their performance and proposes this as a suitable
cum course assignment. topic for future teacher-research studies. In the second chapter here Jerome
Merve Güzel explores via questionnaires and interviews the views of Uni- Bush writes on ‘Integrated Teacher-research’ in a High School in Istanbul,
versity Prep School students and instructors regarding the concept of learn- which was the result of adapting teacher-research to the primary and sec-
er autonomy. Following this, Kevser Özdemir measures the impact of using ondary environment. All studies were conducted on the theme of motivation
learning-centered techniques on students and investigates the idea that suc- and the goal became not the production of an individual study to develop an
cessful learners assume a certain degree of responsibility for their own learn- individual teacher, but a series of studies along a single theme that could be
ing. Huriye Jale Günes Coşardemir investigates the efect of using learning compared and contrasted.
strategies on academic success with regard to two classes of students who had he third study here, by Yasemin Kırkgöz, describes a collaborative action
failed the previous track. research teacher development programme established between six primary
Stefania Kordia provides an insight into the ways that English language school teachers of English and a university teacher educator. he six newly-
teaching and learning practices in expanding circle countries such as Tur- qualiied English language teachers critically examined their instructional
key and Greece can be redirected so as to incorporate recent developments practices in the teaching and learning of English among young learners. he
in the ield of English as a lingua franca. Ezgi Çetin evaluates methods of penultimate study in this part is by Sezgi Saraç, Galip Zorba and Arda Arıkan,
6 Introduction

who present data on the beneits and limitations of participant-centred ac-

tion research relating to a pre-service English teacher training intervention.
Completing Part hree is a chapter by Wayne Trotman, whose study examines
reasons for choice of projects carried out by Turkish university level teachers
of English and looks at issues faced throughout the research period and how
they were dealt with.
As we look towards the 2015 conference, the ifth in the series, but the
irst to be wholly organized by the IATEFL Research SIG (in collaboration
with Gediz University), we feel the comprehensive picture presented by this
collection belies the criticisms that are sometimes heard that teacher-research
is only rarely undertaken when not part of a degree programme. Part II, in par-
ticular, showcases teacher-research studies carried out by teachers in a higher
education context who were strongly encouraged but not forced to participate
in action research. Most teacher-researchers who wrote chapters in this book
were for one year provided with sustained support for planning, doing, pre-
senting, and writing up their own research. his book therefore contributes
overall to the emerging literature on how teacher-research can be supported
and sustained in the ield of English language teaching. he idea of editing PART I
and publishing the book emerged from the editors’ collaboration, which start-
ed in 2012 and has continued to today, and our desire to promote the idea of
teacher-research more broadly. We hope we have succeeded in achieving our
underlying aim — to showcase these studies with a view to dissemination of
the idea of teacher-research as a professional development strategy around the
world for the community of English language teachers and teacher educators
Kenan Dikilitaş, Richard Smith and Wayne Trotman

References
Dikilitaş, K. (ed.). (2012). Teacher-research Studies at Foreign Language School: Inquiri-
es from Teacher Perspectives, Vol. 1. Ankara: Nobel.
Dikilitaş, K. (ed.). (2013). Teacher-research Studies at Foreign Language School: Inquiri-
es from Teacher Perspectives, Vol. 2. Ankara: Nobel.
Dikilitaş, K. (ed.). (2014). Professional Development through Teacher-research. İzmir:
Gediz University Press.

7
 Renewing classroom practices through
1 collaborative action research
Anne Burns

For me [AR] is really a quest for life, to understand life and to

create what I call living knowledge – knowledge which is valid
for the people with whom I work and for myself. (Marja Liisa
Swantz, in Reason & Bradbury, 2001: 1)

Introduction
Action research has become an important professional avenue for language
teachers wanting to deepen their understanding of their classrooms, their
teaching and their students (Edge, 2001; Johnson & Golombek, 2011).
hrough this understanding and their investigations and experimentation in
the classroom, teachers can make important changes in practice for themselves
and for their students. However, action research becomes all the richer when
teachers have the opportunity to work collaboratively rather than in isolation,
as sometimes seems to be suggested in some of the literature on action research
(e.g Nunan, 1989; Wallace, 1998). In this chapter, I explore what collaboration
in action research might involve and elaborate on diferent opportunities that
teachers could take to work together on professional issues of mutual interest.

Shifting views of the nature of teacher professional development

For many teachers around the world classrooms are isolated and isolating
places. he traditional (and still highly current) mode of teaching involves one
teacher in one classroom with his or her students, with little time or oppor-
tunity available for the sharing of professional ideas. After completing their
training, teachers often enter educational contexts where they are given little
support to address the immediate teaching challenges they face. While they

9
10 Renewing classroom practices through collaborative action research Anne Burns 11

might have completed courses on language learning, teaching methodology, laboration and collaborative action research are frequently referred to in the
or testing and assessing students, the content of these courses may be heav- language teaching professional development literature (for recent examples see
ily theoretical or focus on idealised recommendations for teaching that bear Shen & Huang, 2007; Lin, 2012; Banegas et al, 2013), it is more diicult to
little or no relationship to teachers’ own teaching contexts (Farrell, 2009). As ind actual descriptions or deinitions of what is meant by collaboration in
Sagor (1992, pp. 3-4) points out: “he topics, problems or issues pursued action research and teacher development. One useful summary related to col-
[in academic research] are signiicant but not necessarily helpful to teach- laborative teacher development is provided by Johnston (2009, p. 242) who
ers on the front line”. Similarly, when more experienced teachers are ofered describes it as:
professional development that consists of workshops based on “handed-down
requirements” (Leung, 2009, p. 53), they are likely to ind little of relevance to ...any sustained and systematic investigation into teaching and
their daily work and may even actively resist what is being advocated. learning in which the teacher voluntarily collaborates with oth-
In contrast, where teachers are part of an active “community of practice” ers involved in the teaching process, and in which professional
that draws on their personal ideas and experience and assists them to take these development is a prime purpose.
ideas further through collaboration, they gain a collective opportunity to change
He goes on to argue that collaborative professional development is not some-
those practices (Richards & Pennington, 1998). A growing trend in the litera-
thing that can be “done” to teachers, but that they “must have, or share, control
ture (e.g. see Burns & Richards, 2009; Johnson, 2009) advocates that teachers’
over the process”.
professional development should be located in localised school-based practices
In a further attempt to capture salient meanings, from the literature as well
where teachers can investigate and problematise their teaching and relect on
as from my own experiences of working with concepts of collaborative action
their “living knowledge” (see the introductory quote from Swantz, in Reason &
research, below I attempt to tease out some of the key characteristics of a col-
Bradbury, 2001) and lived experiences. One signiicant way in which this can be
laborative approach.
• Mutuality: shared sense of ownership and investment in the research
done is through collaborative action research.
and its outcomes
he value of collaborative action research • Equality: democratic participation combining diferent roles in the re-
search (teachers/students/facilitators)
• Collectivism: joint researching and sharing of ideas-in-progress
Action research democratises the process of knowledge production by building
on the actions, beliefs and understandings of those working within a particular
social context. It places emphasis on ‘insider’ experiences, rather than the more • Reciprocity: equal access to information and data by participants
generalised observations of teaching and learning that may be advanced by • Sustainability: support from other team members to keep focused and
external researchers. Collaboration with others in the same or similar social on-task
situation (managers, colleagues, learners, parents) means that collective knowl- • Airmation: joint evaluation and validation of each other’s research
• Sociality: awareness of broader social and educational context
edge can be more widely shared, expanding beyond the individual teacher’s
• (Re)generation: dialogue as a source of creative reconstruction of prac-
classroom and potentially inluencing other teachers’ practices more broadly.
tice
Delineating collaboration
Collaboration is a notoriously elusive concept to capture and can be perceived Central to the advantages ofered by collaborative, rather than individual,
diferently within the diverse professional contexts of education, business, action research is dialogic interaction between participants, which from a so-
medicine, and technology, thus giving rise to multiple deinitions. While col- cio-constructivist perspective ofers opportunities for teachers to externalise
12 Renewing classroom practices through collaborative action research Anne Burns 13

existing tacitly held knowledge and to mediate each other’s thinking (Lantolf At a time when I was searching for solutions, the invitation to join
& horne, 2006). Developments in thinking are thus scafolded by peers so an action research project seemed to open a door to a new way of
that new knowledge that might not be accessible individually can be articu- problem-solving. I was not unfamiliar with action research, but
lated and relected upon ( Johnson, 2009). his form of professional collabora- the attraction of this particular project for me was its collabora-
tive learning: tive nature. I saw it as an opportunity to explore my diiculties
and to discuss strategies for dealing with these issues with peers
regards learning as an active, constructive process, in which who were experiencing similar concerns. (Pam McPherson, 1997,
knowledge is not just transmitted but is jointly created in an in- p. 26)
herently social context where [people] work in groups...within
an authentic situation using high-order thinking and problem- A second approach to collaboration is that teachers can work with their stu-
solving skills. (Woo et al., 2011, p. 44) dents, a dimension that is particularly central to exploratory practice (All-
wright & Hanks, 2009), and that responds to other calls for greater empower-
ment of learners (e.g. Norton & Toohey, 2004). In the comment below, the
Ways of working collaboratively teacher describes her students as ‘co-participants’ as they worked directly with
her to observe and comment (often very critically) on the impact of the actions
Various options for collaboration in action research can be considered. Each she put in place.
example that I describe is illustrated by comments from teacher-researchers
I’ve worked with in the Australian context (all quotations are from Burns & his classroom-based action research was carried out with the in-
Hood, 1997). volvement of students in my...course. My...class also participated
First, teachers can collaborate with other teachers within their own work- in the research. I shall refer to my students as co-participants in
places or across similar workplaces. Here I discuss three options for this kind the research because they have actively provided me with data....
of collaboration:
here was a lot to learn from the reversal of roles as I became
1) Research pairs: Two teachers work together on an area of mutual in- a teacher-learner... As I was not contributing much to my team,
terest Bruce and Robert started to coach me by showing me some strat-
egies (Lenn de Leon, 1999, p. 108 and p. 112)
2) Research groups: Teachers, in pairs or individually, come together to
work on their selected topic and collaborate with the group to share Although rather uncommon in the language teaching literature, in a third
their insights approach to collaboration, other participants in the educational community
can be involved, such as school principals, administrators, professional devel-
3) Research teams: Based on an existing team (e.g. discipline, depart- opment leaders, supervisors and parents (an example of participatory research
ment, faculty) teachers work together on a selected area of curriculum involving parents from multilingual backgrounds is Mawjee & Grieshop,
development 2002). Such combinations mean that teachers and their partners get to see
‘the other side of the picture’, or more speciically, to see ‘each other’s picture’
One teacher, who was already familiar with individual research in her class-
as they share their diferent perspectives and understandings. Interaction be-
room, comments on how she saw the opportunity to do action research with
tween these participants means that issues that may be standing in the way
other teachers as a productive way to “open a door” on the challenges she
of students’ efective learning can be broken down as new ways of support-
faced:
ing student learning are sought. he comment below is from a staf training
14 Renewing classroom practices through collaborative action research Anne Burns 15

consultant who participated in action research with six teachers from various Practical ideas for working collaboratively
teaching centres in her region:
Drawing on my experience of working with teacher action researchers, I ofer
From the outset of the project it was obvious that as a group we some practical tips for strengthening a collaborative approach to conducting
all had varying ideas and interest areas in relation to teaching action research within a school or organisation. hey have been found to be
[mixed ability] groups. he notion of ‘disparity’ meant diferent efective in promoting the characteristics of collaboration outlined above and
things to each of us and each teacher wanted to embark on an in enabling teachers to work constructively and productively together.
investigation of an area of relevance to themselves.... • Organise the research so that there are opportunities to work in pairs or
teams
• Identify a common theme/themes that everyone is interested in re-
Participation in this project has been an enriching and profes-
sionally rewarding activity. he collaborative nature of this type
searching
• Set yourselves agreed starting and end-points for your inquiries
of action research has linked teachers from diferent centre to
work together on a common theme. Knowledge, experience and
expertise have been brought together and shared openly for the • Work out a series of meeting/discussion times to suit participants
development of us all...our learners have remained central to the • Give everyone equal ‘air’ time during the discussions
process. (Eady, 1997) • Share ideas/comment on each other’s research
Finally, a perhaps better known form of collaboration is through facili- • Be frank, open and respectful in sharing ideas
tator-teacher partnerships. he most frequent examples are of collaboration • Plan a variety of diferent ways to report the research (written/oral/
between a university-based researcher and teacher groups, where the research visual) and set realistic deadlines
expertise of the researcher is combined with the practical expertise of teachers. • Aim to publish the research in a teacher-friendly form if possible (news-
One possible threat to this kind of collaboration is the power-diferential, in letter, journal) and support each other to do this
that the researcher and the teachers’ approach may difer in terms of what is • Invite other teachers to a session where you can present your research
seen as research, or in who considers themselves to be the more dominant/ex- collectively
pert partner in the relationship. On the other hand, the facilitator may be able
to defuse teachers’ anxiety about doing research and support the development
of the kind of research skills and knowledge that underpin action research. Final thoughts
Facilitators could also be lead-teachers or professional development coordi-
Collaborative action research contributes to teachers’ professional develop-
nators working within the school and, in this case, will have more extensive
ment in at least three ways: knowledge construction becomes both personal
insider knowledge of the context than an external facilitator. In the following
and collective; new teaching and learning practices are scafolded and sup-
comment, an insider-facilitator comment on the value of the kind of support
ported by others; professional conidence in one’s own eicacy as a teacher is
facilitation can ofer:
enhanced through airmation from colleagues. hese three dimensions are
On-going support is critical so that those involved have access relected in the comments of Marie, with which I conclude this paper.
to work-in-progress discussions on a regular and frequent basis,
he action research group members not only listened attentively
as well as coordination support where necessary. While teachers
to my ‘discourses’ but were also most constructive in their advice.
may be individually in the classroom, action research is a col-
I found our discussions very extending—they gave me a broader
laborative venture and other people are important for bouncing
ideas of. ( Jane Hamilton, 1997, p. 148)
16 Renewing classroom practices through collaborative action research Anne Burns 17

perspective on my teaching role with this type of group [of learn- Johnston, B. (2009). Collaborative teacher development. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards
ers]. Being in a ‘neutral’ environment away from my teaching cen- (Eds.). (2009). he Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 241-
tre helped me to relect on my classroom practice in a much more 249). New York: Cambridge University Press.
objective way and I found it stimulating to work with teachers Lantolf, J. & horne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language
from other centres. he project gave me a better understanding development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
of [ X] as an organisation endeavouring to adjust to changing Leung, C. (2009). Second language teacher professionalism. In A. Burns & J.C. Rich-
educational demands. (Marie Muldoon, 1997, p. 23) ards (Eds.), he Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 49-58).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, Z. (2012). Collaborative action research: An efective way to promote EFL teach-
Acknowledgement er development. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(14), 22-28.
Mawjee & Grieshop (2002). Testing the waters: Facilitating parents’ participation
I’d like to express my thanks to Kenan Dikilitaş for inviting me to the confer- in their children’s education. he School Community Journal, 12 (1), 117-132. Re-
ence and to Richard Smith for suggesting this plenary topic – and to Dick trieved from http://www.adi.org/journal/ss02/Mawjee%20&%20Grieshop.pdf 28
Allwright for many conversations over the years. August, 2014.
Muldoon, M. (1997). A proile of group diversity. In A. Burns & S. Hood (Eds.),
References Teachers voices 2: Teaching disparate learner groups (pp. 18-23). Sydney: National
Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
Allwright, D. & Hanks, J. (2009). he developing langauge learner: An introduction to Norton, B. & Toohey, K. (Eds.). (2004). Critical pedagogies and language learning. New
exploratory practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. York: Cambridge University Press
Banegas, D., Pavese, A., Velazquez, A. & Velez, S. M. (2013) Teacher professional Nunan, D. C. (1989). Understanding language classrooms: A guide for teacher-intitiated
development through collaborative action research: Impact on foreign English- action. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall
language teaching and learning. Educational Action Research, 21/2: 185-201. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and
Bushan, R (2013). Continuous professional development through interaction and col- practice. London: Sage Publications.
laborative action research. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 70, 131-136. Richards, J. C. & Pennington, M. (1998). he irst years of teaching. In J.C. Richards
Burns, A. & Richards, J.C. (Eds.). (2009). he Cambridge guide to second language teach- (Ed.), Beyond training, (pp. 173-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
er education. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sagor, R. (1992). How to conduct collaborative research. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Denos, C., Toohey, K., Neilson, K., & Waterstone B. (2009). Collaborative research in Supervision and Curriculum Development.
multilingual classrooms. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Shen, M-Y. & Huang, Y-K. Collaborative action research for reading strategy instruc-
Edge, J. (2001). Action research. Alexandria: TESOL International Inc. tion. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 4 (1), 108-121. Retrieved
Farrell, T.S.C. (2009). he novice teacher experience. In A. Burns & J.C. Richards from http://e-lt.nus.edu.sg/v4n12007/shen.pdf 28 August, 2014.
(Eds.), he Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 182-189). New Wallace. M. (1998). Action research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge
York: Cambridge University Press. University Press.
Johnson, K. (2009). Second language teacher education: A socio-cultural perspective. New Woo, M., Chu, S., Ho, A., & Li, X. (2011). Using a wiki to scafold primary-school
York: Routlege. students’ collaborative writing. Educational Technology & Society, 14(1), 43-54. Re-
Johnson. K. E. & Golombek, P. R. (Eds.). (2011). Research on second language teacher trieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_1/5.pdf 28 August, 2014.
education: A sociocultural perspective on professional development. New York: Rout-
ledge.
 Putting ‘understanding’ first in
2 practitioner research
Dick Allwright

Introduction

First of all I want to explain why I think it is so important to put ‘understand-

ing’ irst, as the essence of all research worthy of the name. And I will need to
address the diicult question of what I mean by the term ‘understanding’ for
our ield.
Secondly I want to persuade you that if ‘understanding’ is so important,
then it is something everybody needs to be working for, not just researchers
(even if they also happen to be teachers), but teachers and learners as well.
hirdly, I shall acknowledge two major threats to putting understanding
not only irst, but also ‘for all’. Both these threats are related to the eternal
issue of inding time for everything people need to do in the classroom. One
is the pressure to focus on ‘action for change’, rather than for ‘understand-
ing’. he other is just the overcrowding of the typical curriculum, and school
timetable.
hroughout I will illustrate from published research and personal experi-
ence how some people have managed to ind productive ways of addressing
these concerns.
A word of caution before I go further.
I have been retired now for more than ten years, and so I could be talking
today about concerns that are already being adequately addressed in the ield
of teacher-research in the language classroom. If so I can only apologise in
advance and hope that my words will nevertheless serve to encourage people
to ‘keep up the good work’, and reinforce anyone who is still inding it diicult
to ‘put understanding irst’, to get everyone working for ‘understanding’, and
to ind time for everything.

19
20 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 21

Finally, I will propose three questions that I would invite you to ask of any But what do I mean by ‘understanding’?
teacher-research you may be personally involved in:
First of all, I see ‘understanding’ and ‘knowledge’ as two very diferent things.
I. Does this research pay suicient attention to understanding? Gathering relevant ‘knowledge’ about something may be very helpful in devel-
II. Whose understanding can this research develop? oping an ‘understanding’ of it, but having a lot of relevant knowledge in itself
III. Is this research a good use of class time? in no way guarantees that understanding will follow. Something else is neces-
sary if ‘knowledge’ is to lead to ‘understanding’, to something like ‘wisdom’. In
To get started I need to address the question: What is ‘research’? our ield there are a lot of people who know a lot about communication, but
their attempts to write about it, or talk about it, do not necessarily encourage
Essentially research, for me, is a process of working for us to believe they really understand how to communicate. hey clearly know
understanding what they are talking about, but do not seem to know how to communicate
their knowledge.
his is what basic science is about: doing research so that our understanding is his brings us to another way of looking at what we mean by the word ‘un-
developed. Research may have other functions in practice (e.g. product testing derstanding’. here are two very diferent conceptions of what understanding
rather than hypothesis testing), but I believe it is universally acknowledged involves: ‘intellectual’ understanding and ‘empathetic’ understanding, which
that its essential function is that of working for understanding. here will could be very crudely paraphrased as ‘understanding things’ and ‘understand-
always be arguments about how research should be conducted to be worthy of ing people’. he poor communicators about communication appear to have an
the name, but not, I think, about what research is fundamentally for. intellectual understanding of their subject, but at the same time seem to lack
It is also universally accepted, I think, that understanding is a necessary the ‘empathetic understanding’ that would help them meet the needs of their
pre-requisite for any intelligent decision-making. Not all decisions can be readers or listeners.
taken on the basis of a thorough understanding of the situation, but taking a Intellectual understanding appears often to be enough for the ‘hard’ scienc-
decision without irst even trying to understand the situation at stake makes es, looking for clearly and precisely articulated, evidence-based claims about
no sense at all. ‘Putting understanding irst’ is clearly what is required, and not the way that the physical world works – claims that can be challenged and
just in science, or in education, but throughout life. perhaps disproved by subsequent research and new evidence. So, for example,
Note the conference theme puts a focus on teacher ‘development’. For me early research on malaria suggested water itself was the carrier, but later re-
there is a direct link to be made between the notions of ‘development’ and search revealed the crucial role of the female anopheles mosquito.
‘understanding’. In our ield we distinguish between ‘training’, ‘education’, and But language teaching is not a ‘hard’ science. It is a social one, in which
‘development’ for language teachers. For me ‘teacher training’ is about acquir- the role of people, and the relationship between them, is crucial, and ininitely
ing and mastering the necessary practical skills involved in being a classroom more complex than the behaviour of mosquitoes. For that we need the sort of
language teacher, starting with such basic things as knowing how to speak to understanding that takes people properly into account, understanding based
the class so that everybody can hear what you are saying. ‘Teacher education’ on empathy (on being able to see things from another person’s point of view)
is essentially about acquiring the relevant language and educational knowl- rather than purely on intellect. his is the sort of understanding exhibited by
edge. hat leaves ‘teacher development’ to be equated with going well beyond experienced teachers who are acknowledged to be excellent at their job. One
both skills and knowledge to work for ‘understanding’, a direct parallel with of the curiosities of such people, however, is that in our ield there is practi-
‘research’ itself. cally a tradition that the best teachers have little or nothing to say about what
makes them so good. On one memorable occasion I remember a very highly
regarded language teacher in New York, when asked in public (at an inter-
22 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 23

national event at Teachers College, Columbia University bringing American, his double way of looking at ‘understanding’ can help us make what I be-
British and Canadian researchers together) what she did that made her so lieve is the crucial move from asking ‘how’ questions to asking ‘why’ ones. Un-
successful, could only say that all she knew was that she kept on getting her derstanding material things is often a matter of trying to discover the mecha-
contract renewed, so she had to be doing something right. nisms that make things work the way they do. We don’t have to try to take
What we are dealing with here, I believe, is best seen as a sort of under- into account what motivation water might have for boiling at 100C. We can
standing that cannot necessarily be put into precisely articulated statements understand water without resort to such notions as motivation, because such
like the scientiic claims in the non-social sciences, but as the sort of under- notions are speciic to living things. When we are trying to understand people,
standing that nevertheless informs everyday classroom decision-making. In however, it is natural to ask such ‘why’ questions. Sadly, in our ield, we have
short, it is the sort of understanding that is perhaps ‘beyond words’, but that allowed the search for a purely intellectual understanding to dominate.
can nevertheless be ‘lived’, even if it cannot be usefully described so that others For decades now, however, we have all too often, I believe, tried to deal with
have something concrete to try to emulate. understanding language teaching and learning as if it was an essentially tech-
I want to cover both sorts of understanding here, but my focus will be on nical matter of knowing precisely ‘how to teach’, a matter of inding the right
the liveable kind, because it is probably much less familiar a concept in educa- classroom teaching techniques for maximum measurable achievement, rather
tional research circles, even though it is the stuf of everyday life. It is the sort than an essentially human matter – of getting the best relationship between
of understanding that I ind crucial to my notion of practitioner research. A teachers and learners for a broadly productive learning environment.
telling example, for me, is the story told to me by a Brazilian teacher of her dis-
tress, and frustration, at her children listening to music during class. Instead
of just trying to ban it, however, she got them to talk about why they seemed
From asking ‘how?’ to asking ‘why?’
to need to listen to music all the time. hey reasoned very well with her, she Ruwen Zhang’s work on an extended reading class will illustrate this move
said, that they always worked to music in their ears at home, and that for from ‘technical’ to ‘human’ considerations. Zhang was very concerned that
them it wasn’t the distraction it might be for her – in fact it served to insulate she could not ind a successful way of teaching extensive reading at a Chinese
them from whatever else was going on at home. But they did acknowledge University. She writes (Zhang, 2004: 331):
that they should not keep the music going while she was talking, because that
was discourteous and unproductive. hey reached a ‘liveable understanding’, “As a responsible teacher”, “I have always acted in the problem-
in other words, one the teacher would not have reached by reading up about solving tradition, trying to get rid of problems one by one as soon
young people’s need for distraction, or whatever other intellectual understand- as I come across them in my teaching activities. I have hoped
ing might have looked worth investigating. that in this way I will improve my teaching method and help my
Something else I ind interesting about this sort of understanding is that students to develop their English language proiciency.”
the understanding reached cannot simply be passed on to other teachers and However, this approach had not worked for her (op cit: 334):
simply adopted by them. What could be passed on, if the teacher wrote up
the whole experience in suicient detail, is the steps the teacher took to better “Frequent modiications to my teaching methods did not pro-
understand her situation. Other teachers could try these steps out for them- duce positive results.”
selves, modifying them as they see it for their own speciic situations. So this
Relecting on the situation she realised (op cit: 334):
is the sort of work for understanding that may not produce straightforwardly
communicable and replicable indings, but it can produce procedural descrip- “I had been so worried about the teaching outcomes, in other
tions that other teachers (and learners) may ind helpful. words, about the examination results, that I never cared about
24 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 25

whether my students enjoyed the class or not. It suddenly oc- I think it was this idea that informed the whole development of action
curred to me that that the only way out was to emphasise the ‘the research, which switched the focus from academics doing the experiments to
quality of life in the classroom’.” teachers doing them for themselves, in a direct efort to improve the eicien-
cy of their teaching. hat was fundamentally a ‘political’ move to ‘empower’
She did so, successfully, and concluded (op cit: 345): teachers, to make it possible for them to be their own intellectuals, not eternal-
“Only by continuous exploration, only by successful co-operation ly dependent on academics. So it represented a major break with educational
between teachers and students, can we navigate the complexities tradition, and as such was a very exciting development for many (including
of the language classroom efectively.” me at the beginning, as an ’academic’ having second thoughts about my role in
relation to teachers).
his work by Zhang represents a radical change from the traditional ‘prob- But it did not represent such a fundamental a break with ideas about what
lem-solving’ approach she had used up to then. It was informed by develop- sort of research was worth doing. Action researchers retained the basic aca-
ments in ‘Exploratory Practice’, which I shall return to later in this paper. demic model of small-scale experimental research (minus the ‘control group’),
his problem-solving approach was itself informed by the long tradition of and the ‘problem-solving’ attitude of hoping to change things for the better
believing that salvation lay in the discovery of increasingly eicient teaching by inding more eicient classroom techniques. It was (and still mostly is?)
techniques. Back in the 1960s the search was on for the ‘best’ language teach- essentially about ‘action for change’, rather than ‘action for understanding’.
ing method, as if there would be just one ‘best’ method, which, once discov- So this was also basically a continuation of the faith in ‘technicism’ (for a full
ered, could, and should be adopted universally – by everyone, everywhere (see discussion of this position, and its implications for practitioner research, (see
Smith, 1970). It did not take very long (less than a complete decade) for the Allwright, 2005a). here was little sign of a serious concern for intellectual
ield to give up on ‘method’ as the key concept, because our experiments had understanding, let alone the empathetic sort of understanding.
failed to demonstrate convincingly that method mattered so very much. One
critic wrote (Grittner, 1968, in Allwright, 1988: 10):
But, who needs to ask ‘why?’? Who needs to understand?
“...perhaps we should ask for a cease-ire while we search for a Traditionally, and very crudely, it has been the researchers’ job to develop un-
more productive means of investigation.” derstanding - to ‘make sense of what’s going on’. It is then the teachers’ job to
hat soon arrived. We realised we could break methods down into their put into practice whatever understandings the researchers develop – to ‘make
component teaching techniques, and look at them one by one. he ‘method’ what goes on sensible’, and the learners’ job is simply to do whatever the teach-
experiments had largely failed for technical reasons (the impossibility of con- er wants them to do.
trolling them well enough, for example, when they needed to involve thou- Following this crude representation, it clearly is the researcher’s responsi-
sands of learners over several years) (see again Allwright, 1988, Chapter 1). bility to try to ‘make sense of what’s going on’, but the researcher has no re-
Experimenting with teaching techniques looked much more promising to sponsibility for ‘making what goes on sensible’. hat is surely the teacher’s job.
many people), including myself at the time (see, for example, Lindblad, 1969 But you cannot expect a teacher to be able to ‘make what’s goes on sensible’
and Allwright, 1975). Techniques could surely be observed, and their success unless the teacher can already ‘make sense of what’s going on’. Which begs the
or failure measured, in small-scale, relatively easily controlled experiments. question: ‘Can teachers trust researchers to supply the sort of research indings
his was the advent of the idea that language teaching and learning could best that will help teachers understand what’s going on in their own classrooms?’
[Lots of additional questions leap up: ‘even if researchers get the relevant ind-
be improved by introducing new and more eicient teaching techniques.
ings, can they communicate them successfully to teachers’; ‘even if researchers
get the indings, can they truly help teachers understand what’s going on in
26 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 27

their own classrooms, or will their indings be things that are generally true, interviews Cherchalli conducted and recorded. he numbers in the brackets
but not necessarily true for any particular class at any particular time’.] after each quote below refer to the page number in Cherchalli’s thesis where
If the teacher is also the researcher, as in practitioner research, then the teach- each quote can be found. It’s worth noting that half of the comments below
ers is clearly responsible for both, and the teacher/researcher can hope to get an were from the more successful students in the class. hese are marked by an
understanding that is directly appropriate for his or her particular learners. But (S) after the page number. Where they were from relatively weak students,
not unless ‘understanding’ is what the research aimed at developing. Not if it’s I have put a (W) after the page number. It is quite clear from Cherchalli’s
only trying to ind a ‘better’ way of practising vocabulary, for example. thesis that the relatively weak students in the class do not have a monopoly of
But what about the learners? concern about their need to understand what’s going on in their lessons.
Wouldn’t it be good if they understood (both intellectually and empatheti-
“It’s all confusing, there is no structure in the lesson.” (315W)
cally), and if they knew how they could help make what’s going on sensible,
for them? hat may seem hopelessly optimistic, to expect learners to be able to “Nobody has ever explained the techniques of these exercises!”
contribute to their own learning in this way, but experience with ‘Exploratory (295S)
Practice’, the sort of inclusive practitioner research I have been involved in “I have no idea why we’re doing this kind of exercise! I know that
developing over the last twenty-ive or so years, suggests very strongly, that if teachers have some idea in mind but I don’t know which one!”
you trust them to try, they will respond very well. (Recall the Brazilian teacher (295S)
and her successful way of dealing with learners listening to music in class.)
It took us a very long time to realise that we could actually ask learners “If one day a student happens to miss a word, another day he
about their learning lives. It wasn’t until 1980 that I formulated the proposi- won’t understand a whole sentence, and then it will be whole
tion that I think has pleased me most in all my writing (Allwright, 1980: 165; paragraph. OK you can tell us that the students must ask the
also in Allwright and Hanks, 2009: 1): teacher for whatever explanation. But OK once, twice, often, and
the teacher will get very fed up.” (275W)
“Learners are interesting, at least as interesting as teachers.”
“If there is suicient time we try to understand, use logic...if not,
And even then I had not got far beyond thinking of learners as sources of we draw heads or tails!” (298S)
data for me, the researcher, to interpret. We had got used to treating learners Finally, and most despairingly:
as objects of careful classroom observation, like ornithologists study bird mi-
gration, and we would try to interpret what they did in class, as if, as with birds, “Sometimes I only understand a lesson after having exhausted
there was no point in trying to get them to talk to us about their experiences. the teacher and my classmates.” (185W)
Nowadays teachers are routinely asked to be their own researchers, with
their own experiments and their own interpretations, but it is still much rarer Other research has demonstrated just how what learners do in class deter-
to see learners being treated as if they too might have anything of interest to mines to a large extent what learning opportunities are like in class (see All-
say about their classroom lives, and even rarer to see them invited to ask their wright, 1984; see also, much more recently, Woods, 2006). Notice how, from
own questions about their own classroom language learning experiences. another of Cherchalli’s learners, we can imagine that, had this student felt able
But, many years ago now, in the mid-1980s, Safya Cherchalli asked ifteen- to put the question in his or her mind, then that might have created a valuable
year-old Algerian learners about their learning lives. What they said to her learning opportunity for the rest of the class.
made it very clear that they wanted to understand what’s was going on in their “Sometimes I feel like asking the teacher a question but just re-
lessons (Cherchalli, 1988). hese comments were translated into English from alising that perhaps the rest of the class understand I hesitate.”
(185W)
28 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 29

In Slimani’s doctoral research (Slimani, 1987) we see how contributions dividually capable of. It is, or should be, a central part of all education,
from learners create learning opportunities that seem to be more successful in surely.
achieving learning than contributions directly from the teacher (see also All-
Additionally, developing understandings (of what it means to be a class-
wright, 2005b for a more recent discussion of the move from ‘teaching points’
room language teacher, of what it means to be a classroom language learner)
to ‘learning opportunities’).
is not something that can be done once and won’t ever need to be done again.
Since classroom life is a continuous, but continuously changing, process, so
So, what does all this tell us about the role of the learners? working for understanding it also needs to be a continuous process, fully inte-
grated into everybody’s everyday classroom learning and teaching lives.
hey are key practitioners, in an essentially social setting. hey want to under-
stand, to make sense of what’s going in their learning lives, and they can play
a signiicant role in helping ‘make what goes on sensible’, too.
So, how can it be done?
For all these reasons I believe it makes sense to think about how we might What we need is an indeinitely sustainable way of helping all practitioners
treat learners as co-practitioners, alongside teachers, rather than as the passive themselves (both teacher/researchers and learners) develop their understand-
‘clients’ of professional services provided by teachers. his is the main idea ings of classroom teaching and learning.
throughout the book Judith Hanks and published about learner development hat’s quite a lot to ask for already, but two external factors in particular
through inclusive practitioner research (he Developing Language Learner, typically make it even more diicult:
2009). Because if learners are treated as practitioners, alongside teachers, and
we think of teachers as proiting from their own development, then surely we Time pressures – a universal problem?
should also be thinking about learner development in the same way, as some- Again we can learn from some of Cherchalli’s learners in Algeria in the 1980s.
thing to somehow build into the curriculum.
But isn’t it asking too much of learners to expect all of them to be capable “Teachers are generally in a hurry to get the lessons over and
of developing by reaching their own understandings of their classroom learn- to pass to the following unit. It’s exasperating! What kills me
ing lives? Why not just let the teachers develop their (the teachers’) under- even more is that I spend all my time learning songs, trying to
standings, and pass these on to their learners? Two main reasons: understand them, but I’m never given a chance to show what I
a) because of the inevitable communication problem (like the one be- know.” (174S)
tween academic researchers and teachers). Is it reasonable to expect “Sometimes we’re blocked by a word. While we’re thinking
teachers to be able to pass on their understandings directly to all their about it the teacher goes on talking about other things and we
learners? can’t follow any more so we switch of.” (186W)
And,
“We make mistakes because we’re not given enough time to think
b) because we cannot just ‘borrow’ other people’s understandings, anyway.
about the rules! (253S)
We have to make them our own. So why not start by trying to develop
our own? It’s what we all have to do all the time to get through life “We don’t see the words again! We do understand them in class
(making sense of everything), and all learners, absolutely all, however but we don’t see them anymore.” (189W)
little intelligence they may display, deserve to be given every opportu- Time to work through the language curriculum itself is never enough. So,
nity, with as much help as the essentially social setting of the classroom time for any sort of research is going to be diicult to ind, especially if we
can provide, to develop their understandings just as far as they are in- want it to be a continuous process, not a projectised one.
30 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 31

he pressure for measurable improvement via visible change he promise of exploratory practice
Typically this seems to take the form of looking for the latest teaching tech- Exploratory Practice has been developed with such challenges at the forefront.
niques to get the best possible examination results – the ‘problem-solving’ ap- One way we describe it is:
proach that did not serve Zhang well enough.
I wish I could be persuaded that this particular pressure for change is not Exploratory Practice is an indeinitely sustainable way for class-
very widespread, and in any case not very strong, but I fear that it is almost room language teachers and learners, while getting on with their
universal, and can be very stressful. I think it becomes stressful especially learning and teaching, to develop their own understandings of
when it seems to be promoting change for change’s sake, as if change in itself life in the language classroom.
were always desirable. (For more about ‘change’ see Allwright, in Allwright
Unlike the varying lists of principles we have produced over the years (see
and Hanks, 2009: 282-3.)
Allwright, 2005: 353-366); and Allwright and Hanks, 2009: 260), these three
It happens to be relatively easy to design a simple (if not entirely valid)
lines seem astonishingly robust and resistant to signiicant change over more
practitioner research project to try out a change in the classroom, a new teach-
than twenty years of use. But such a cryptic description does seem to demand
ing idea perhaps. And decades of action research projects have been based on
its own set of notes. So:
this basic intention. But, if working for understanding is the necessary pre-
requisite to intelligent decision-making, then we need to ind time to ask ‘why’ 1. ‘indeinitely sustainable’ means it is not forced into time-limited
before we try out a new ‘how’. hat way we can expect ‘development’ (ie better projects, instead it involves a continuous commitment to exploration,
understanding), for both teachers and learners, as we saw in Ruwen Zhang’s whenever puzzling issues arise;
report. But it must necessarily take time, and as we have seen there is typically 2. ‘teachers and learners’ means both need to be involved as
no time to spare. ‘understanders’, as we have seen;
here is one way in which the time taken working for understanding can 3. ‘while getting on’ means strenuously avoiding all parasitic research
actually save time in the long run, however, as we have frequently found with activities;
people using Exploratory Practice as the research model, rather than action 4. ‘understandings’ means accepting the plurality of understanding. It
research. Sometimes, more often than not in practice, the work for under- also means putting understandings irst, and inding ‘solutions to
standing itself resolves issues in a way that means new teaching techniques problems’ second, if anywhere at all;
are just not needed. We saw this in the case of the Brazilian teacher upset by 5. ‘understandings’ does not necessarily mean anything expressible in
her learners listening to music in class. Teaching techniques become largely words, indeed, the most valuable understandings may be those that
irrelevant because what is at issue is the quality of life in the classroom, not the can only be ‘lived’, rather than expressed in words;
up-to-dateness, or apparent technical eiciency, of the pedagogic techniques 6. ‘understandings of life’ means life is the central concern, not
the teacher is using. ‘improvement’.
Both of the practical pressures I introduced above risk inducing burnout
Another way of describing EP, in one single convoluted sentence (based on
already (in learners as well as teachers), but this can only get worse if practitio-
Allwright, 2003: 127-8), is:
ners are also expected to somehow add a research dimension to their everyday
classroom lives.
What we now need, then, is a way of helping Ts and Ls to understand, a Exploratory Practice involves
way that challenges the pressure for visible change, that also somehow mini- A. practitioners (teachers and learners together) working to understand:
mises the inevitable time demands, and so helps minimise the overall risk of a) what they want to understand, following their own agendas;
burnout (again in both teachers and learners).
32 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 33

b) not necessarily in order to bring about change; After this relection on our classroom reality and on some social
c) not primarily by changing; problems, I decided to investigate Why do my students drop out of
d) but by using normal pedagogic practices as investigative tools, so that school?
working for understanding is part of the teaching and learning, not extra It was great to see all the students preparing their investigation
to it; and the dedication to overcome their diiculty with the language
e) in a way that does not lead to ‘burn-out’, but that is indeinitely in order to help their friends.
sustainable;
he investigation was carried out in a group of 35 students of ages
B. in order to contribute to:
ranging from 18 to 50. he class was divided into ive groups,
f ) teaching and learning themselves; each group was responsible for one activity, and the activities
were distributed according to their levels of knowledge of the
g) their own individual, collective, and mutual practitioner development. language. he students grouped themselves, after they divided
the activities. he students devised the activities according to
What may not be immediately apparent in such statements is the idea their familiarity with the language. I helped the students with
that the whole conception of Exploratory Practice relies on it being integrated some problems with the language, when they asked for help. All
into the curriculum, not seen as separate from it. his essentially means that the groups worked in close collaboration and with my orientation
development, for all practitioners, is itself built in to the curriculum. he main they started their research:
mechanism for this is integration by using normal pedagogic practices as the
investigative tools. Ana Rosario de Andrade’s story will illustrate what may be 1st group: they prepared a questionnaire, with some personal
involved, though all teachers will ind their own preferred ways of working for questions in order to collect information about students’ diferent
understanding, naturally. (For Andrade’s story in context see Allwright and problems and needs.
Hanks, 2009: 208-209.)
2nd group: they interviewed the drop-out students (they are all
“he story of my puzzle began when I entered one of the class- friends and live in the same neighbourhood) and tried to ne-
rooms in the school where I teach night courses and I realised that gotiate a special meeting with all the teachers involved in their
some of my students had dropped out. I felt very disappointed classroom life.
because it was the end of the second semester and it would be a
3rd group: they made up sentences to motivate their friends to
pity if they lost almost a year of studies. hen I proposed a class
keep studying and some advice for the students to be aware of
discussion in which their opinion and conclusions were raised.
their responsibilities and try to accomplish the tasks.
he students realised that dropping out of school and not inishing the sec-
4th group: they analysed each student’s needs, trying to under-
ond grade would bring bad consequences in their life. hey understood that
stand their friends’ problem and also considering if it was possible
the time they spend studying and the efort made would certainly guarantee a
to help them in some way. hey also organised a meeting with
better job, it’s an investment to achieve a positive result in the future. More-
the other teachers involved in their classroom life, where they
over, they became aware that it’s important to balance if giving up studying
showed the importance of their help in the process of bringing
was really worthwhile. As I expected, they wanted to do something to help
these students back. To my relief and surprise, the teachers de-
their friends.
cided to help us.
34 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research Dick Allwright 35

5th group: this last group made up a report on the students’ ex- 1. hat ‘research’ and ‘development’ are both essentially about getting
periences in handling working and studying, how they balanced understanding, so teacher-research for teacher development needs
working, family and studying, if the efort made in keeping up to be centred on working to understand, rather than on inding
their studies was really worthwhile for their future.” immediate solutions to practical classroom problems.
2. hat learners need (and want) to understand at least as much as
Ana Rosaria comments: teachers do. hat they do not think they get much help from teachers
“his type of activity has proven to be very valuable in all as- in this. And that our learners deserve all the help we can provide for
pects, since it provided a lot of growth for everyone involved. he them to develop their understandings.
students shared their experiences and relected on the quality of
I hoped also to persuade you that we can, by using a form of practitioner
life inside the classroom, introducing teachers and learners to the
research called Exploratory Practice, both help learners develop their own un-
principles of classroom research, through Exploratory Practice.
derstandings, and develop our own at the same time. In this way we can serve
Besides all that, the students had to put into practice some gram- the important aim of bringing together both teacher and learner development.
mar points like interrogative words, the use of why and because, As one of the founders of Exploratory Practice, I am obviously an advocate
and in order to write down some advice, the learners had to use for doing research that way. But my greater aim here has been to address con-
some modals.” cerns I have about practitioner research in general:

It would be foolish, and wrong of me, to try to persuade you that all of this I. he risk that ‘developing understanding’ will be sacriiced to ‘getting
is easy. It requires considerable thought to develop ways of working that suit a practical improvement’.
II. he risk that, even if teacher-researchers’ understandings are
particular group of learners, and it may also call upon a teacher to demonstrate
developed, the learners will not be encouraged to develop theirs.
a level of trust in the learners that is initially more a a matter of hope than ex- III. he risk that precious class time will be wasted.
pectation. Trust, we have found, is a key element in classroom life. In practice
we have found that demonstrating trust is an excellent way of gaining trust, so So, whatever research model you ind most appropriate for your purposes
that trust in the classroom becomes mutual. I urge you to ask the following three questions of any practitioner research
One way to approach the complex issues involved, and to share the inevi- project you are concerned with:
table burdens, is to seek out like-minded people and form a cooperative group. I. Does this research pay suicient attention to understanding?
In Brazil the Rio de Janeiro Exploratory Practice group has been meeting II. Whose understanding can this research develop?
regularly for many years now to work out collectively (teachers and learners III. Is this research a good use of class time?
together) how best to meet the challenges involved in incorporating EP into
their teaching and learning. he work of the Rio EP Group is inspiringly But, if you do try Exploratory Practice then please get in touch with us at the
described in Chapter 14 in Allwright and Hanks, 2009, a chapter entirely Exploratory Practice Network (via [email protected], or r.allwright@
written by the members of the group themselves (for contact, write to epcen- lancaster.ac.uk) to let us know how you get on.
[email protected]).
References
In conclusion
Allwright, D. 1975 Problems in the Study of the Teacher’s Treatment of Learner
In my abstract for this paper I wrote that I hoped to persuade you to agree Error. In Burt and Dulay (eds): 96-109.
with me on two sets of ideas that I believe have big implications for teacher- Allwright, D. 1988 Observation in the Language Classroom. London, Longman.
research:
36 Putting ‘understanding’ irst in practitioner research

Allwright, D. 1984 Why don’t learners learn what teachers teach? – he Interaction
Exploratory action research as
Hypothesis. In Singleton, D.M. and D.G. Little (eds) Language Learning in
Formal and Informal Contexts. Dublin, IRAAL, pp. 3-18.
Allwright, D. 2003 Exploratory Practice: rethinking practitioner research in language
teaching. Language Teaching Research, 7/2: 113-41.
3 workplan: why, what and where from?
Richard Smith
Allwright, D. 2005a Developing Principles for Practitioner Research: he Case of
Exploratory Practice. he Modern Language Journal, 89/3: 353-366.
Allwright, D. 2005b From Teaching Points to Learning Opportunities and Beyond.
TESOL Quarterly, 39/1, pp9-31.
Burt, M. K. and Dulay, H. C. 1975 On TESOL ’75: New Directions in Second Introduction
Language Learning, Teaching and Bilingual Education. TESOL, Washington
DC. In 2012 I was invited to advise on a project originally conceived by Tom Con-
Cherchalli, S. 1988 Learners’ Reactions to their Textbook (with special reference to the nelly of the British Council Chile. Disappointed by the results of previous,
Relation between Diferential Perceptions and Diferential Achievement): A case relatively top-down in-service teacher training initiatives, he had gained the
study of Algerian Secondary School Learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, approval of the Ministry of Education in Chile to sponsor up to 80 secondary
Department of Linguistics, Lancaster University. school teachers to engage in a year-long action research experience. He had
Grittner, F.M. 1968 Letter to the Editor. Newsletter of the National Association of
also appointed four mentors and arranged for all the participants and men-
Language Laboratory Directors (NALLD), 3/2: 7.
Lindblad, T. 1969 Explicit and Implicit – An Experiment in Applied Psycholinguistics.
tors to come together for a two-day workshop in Santiago in January 2013.
GUME Project 1 Report 11, Gothenburg. My role was to plan the workshop and to provide a suggested outline for the
Ortega, L. (ed) 2005 Special Issue: Methodology, Epistemology, and Ethics in year-long scheme of work. What actually happened overall has already been
Instructed SLA Research. he Modern Language Journal, 89/3. described (in Smith, Connelly and Rebolledo 2014). Innovative features in-
Slimani, A. 1987 he Teaching/Learning Relationship: Learning opportunities cluded the fact that this was a programme for secondary school not university
and the problems of uptake – an Algerian case study. Unpublished doctoral teachers, the fact that participation was voluntary, and attention was being
dissertation, Lancaster University. paid to embedding the innovation rather than it being just a one-of. We also
Smith, P.D. 1970 A Comparison of the Cognitive and Audiolingual Approaches to managed to achieve a lexible, process-oriented design, allowing for learning
Foreign Language Instruction; the Pennsylvania Project. Philadelphia, Center for and modiication along the way, and we feel, too, that we managed to de-
Curriculum Development.
velop fresh ideas about inal sharing of indings in a teacher-friendly fashion.
Woods, D. 2006 Who Does What in the ‘Management of Language Learning’?
Planning and the Social Construction of the ‘Motivation to Notice’. In Gieve,
Rather than focusing again on these aspects, in the present short contribution
S. and I.K. Miller (eds) Understanding the Language Classroom. Basingstoke, I wish simply to provide some supplementary information about the rationale,
Palgrave: 88-114. characteristics and origins of the central notion of ‘exploratory action research’
Zhang, R. 2004 Using the Principles of Exploratory Practice to guide group work in (henceforth, ‘exploratory AR’) which I introduced at the workshop and which
an extensive reading class in China. Language Teaching Research, 8/3: 331-345. was reined as the project went on.1 his notion emerged in response to speciic
local requirements, and my primary intention here is to show, for the possible
beneit of others engaged in supporting teacher-research, how it has served a
practical function in this particular context rather than to claim any kind of
1 At the time of writing (April 2015), the project is due to enter its third year of
implementation, with continuing British Council Chile and Ministry of Education Chile
(PIAP programme) support.

37
38 Exploratory action research as workplan: why, what and where from? Richard Smith 39

intrinsic superiority for it over other forms of work. his relective report be- Rebolledo (2013), who examined a previous initiative in the Chilean context.
gins, then, with considerations relating to practice, rather than with literature Paradoxically, indeed, teacher-research may have tended to become more as-
review or theoretical discussion. Nevertheless, from a desire to acknowledge sociated with academic programmes than with voluntary activity on the part
sources and avoid misunderstanding I do end the report with some informa- of teachers, as Borg (2013) has pointed out. Under the slogan ‘Research by
tion relating to the origins of the notion of exploratory AR as developed in teachers for teachers’, what I decided to try to come up with for the Chile proj-
this project and the way it in some ways is and in other ways is not derived ect was a workshop and year-long plan which would start of with a deliberate
from or comparable to other approaches, in particular Exploratory Practice attempt to demystify and, in a sense, de-academize or ‘democratize’ research
(see Allwright, this volume). (cf. Smith 2012). Also, rather than setting out an entire abstract ‘technology’
of action research in the initial workshop or associated materials, my plan was
to initiate a gradual development of teacher-research capacities via an experi-
A practical rationale ence-based (that is, grounded) approach, to be supported by means of dialogue
with mentors at points of need during the year.
Teacher-research in diicult circumstances
Doubts have previously been expressed – and continue to be expressed – about Exploratory action research as workplan
the feasibility of teacher-research forming part of ordinary teachers’ lives (cf. hose familiar with Exploratory Practice (cf. Allwright, this volume) may be
Borg 2013). At the same time, teacher-research has been viewed as a particu- wondering at this point why I did not recommend EP as a basis for teachers’
larly valid means for teachers to generate appropriate methodology in dii- work in the project. However, introducing teachers to action research had been
cult circumstances (Smith 2011), and its wider transformative potential has pre-set in the agreement with the Ministry of Education and I was relatively
long been recognized. My principal concern when responding to the challenge comfortable with this emphasis due to my own background experience (see
presented by the Chile project was, then, to recommend realistic procedures below). On the basis of the above considerations and this experience, I ac-
which would take full account of probable obstacles (cf. Smith, Connelly and cordingly proposed a year-long plan of work which would involve a relatively
Rebolledo 2014: 116), which would not add signiicantly to teachers’ existing long exploratory research lead-in period to be followed by one or, if time, two
burdens, and which would, indeed, need to be built into teaching schedules of periods of action research ‘proper’, i.e. implementation and evaluation of a new
up to 40 lessons a week in situations where class sizes of 40 or more were quite action or actions for change. he descriptive term ‘exploratory action research’
normal. I hoped – more positively – that the approach would be experienced came out of this, as I clariied and negotiated the overall workplan with those
by busy teachers not only as viable but as practical and useful. Indeed, it would involved.
need to be seen from the outset as something which ofered hope in diicult Exploratory AR, as this emerged within the project, can therefore be char-
circumstances, not as yet another imposition in a long line of inappropriate acterized as a gradualist approach, developed to be useful for induction into
in-service interventions. teacher-research in diicult circumstances, whereby teachers are encouraged
irst of all to engage in research-based exploration of issues arising in their
Need for a non-academic, gradualist and grounded approach classrooms via means which do not interfere with their everyday teaching,
One factor militating against the widespread adoption of teacher-research rather than immediately plunging into action and attempted measurement of
which has perhaps not been emphasized suiciently in the past may be the change. Only after a irst exploratory research phase has been completed are
way academic norms are so often emphasized (cf. Smith 2015). Action re- teachers guided to consider trying to resolve emerging issues by implementing
search can seem of-putting to teachers for this reason, as has been shown by and evaluating new actions, which themselves are grounded in and justiied by
indings from the irst, exploratory phase.
40 Exploratory action research as workplan: why, what and where from? Richard Smith 41

hus, the exploratory irst phase which justiied use of the adjective ‘ex- – if students have been asked for their ideas about how their motivation can be
ploratory’ before ‘action research’ can be seen to involve extensively clarifying improved in class, this can provide a bank of potentially appropriate ideas for
the existing situation – the nature of a given ‘problem’ or other issue – before trying out, while there is a possibility that just consulting students can in itself
any action for change is conceived and undertaken. In diagrammatic form, the help to solve a given problem, with no further action needed.
diference between ‘conventional’ action research (as this is often presented in In the report already referred to above (Smith, Connelly and Rebolledo
texts and training programmes) and exploratory AR can be conceived of as 2014), there is a full description of how the project turned out in practice in its
follows:2 irst year. here were some quite signiicant problems but also several successes.
As reported there (pp.126-127),
a dominant theme in inal relections was that participants had
learned to listen to their students more, and that doing explorato-
ry research had thereby fulilled a valuable pedagogical function
which plunging immediately into the ‘action’ part of action re-
search might not have fulilled to the same extent. Overall, then,
we feel we succeeded in developing innovative ways of making
teacher-research appear feasible as well as desirable in teachers’
eyes, in apparently very unpromising conditions. he successes
achieved despite the diiculties encountered are equally, we
should emphasise, a testament to the determination of the par-
ticipating teachers, and to the dedication of their mentors. Our
Figure 1: Action Research Figure 2: Exploratory AR experience suggests that the success or otherwise of initiatives
to engage teachers in teacher-research may depend largely on
One example given to teachers at the initial workshop in Santiago was that, what kind of teacher-research is introduced to teachers, how it
if lack of motivation seems to be an issue, students can be asked to write or is presented to them, how it is supported and what style of shar-
talk about their current motivation (answering questions like ‘What activities ing of the research is expected.  […] What we found ourselves
/ materials do I like in class and why?’; ‘What do I dislike in class and why?’, promoting, increasingly, was something innovative and teacher-
‘What would I like to do in class and why?’) and the teacher can identify friendly, whereby we approached teachers in a way that was not
common concerns by analysing their feedback. his can not only help teachers of-putting or overly academic.
decide on changes that are appropriate for their students, it also provides them
with ‘baseline data’ – a way to compare the situations ‘before’ and ‘after’ any
change they do try to implement. At the same time - as my own teacher-re- Origins in practice
search and pedagogy for autonomy experience has shown me (cf. Smith 2003) he origins of the exploratory action research workplan described above lie in
2 here is a danger here of mischaracterizing action research, a danger which is apparent also
my previous experiences as a teacher and teacher educator, experiences which
in the way Exploratory Practice sets itself up in opposition to a particular conception of themselves were informed by but not governed by the ideas of authorities
‘over-technical’ AR. My general impression remains, though, that when AR is referred to in including Dick Allwright and Anne Burns. hus, while exploratory AR can
ELT – including in the visual models that are typically shown to represent it – the need for be interpreted as a kind of compromise between or eclectic combination of
an initial, planned exploratory period is not generally mentioned.
42 Exploratory action research as workplan: why, what and where from? Richard Smith 43

Exploratory Practice and Action Research (cf. Wyatt and Pasamar Márquez I would not, anyway, have felt qualiied by my own prior experience (as de-
2015), the truth is that I did not think of it in a theory-driven or ‘mathemati- scribed above) to do so. On the one hand I wanted to recommend a relatively
cal’ (‘AR + EP => exploratory AR’) manner at the time. Instead, as I have been long initial ‘exploratory’ phase but on the other hand I wanted also to leave
describing, the phrase ‘exploratory action research’ emerged simply as a logical the door open to an experience of ‘action research proper’ – for reasons partly
description (for teachers and mentors) of a form of practice which I thought, related to the value I had previously found in this, as described above.
from my past experience, it would be appropriate to recommend according to he major change in approach which I introduced for the Chilean context
requirements in this context. was to continually stress the need to integrate research with teaching, in other
Taking these relections further, the recommended workplan was certainly words for the former not to burden the latter but to enhance it. My aware-
inluenced by my understanding of Exploratory Practice as this understanding ness of this need came from prior interest in and engagement with issues of
had built up over the years, but I feel was governed to a still greater degree by teaching in diicult circumstances (cf. Smith 2011) and the ideas I brought to
my prior practical experience – or perhaps I should say by my understandings bear were largely derived from my own autonomy-related experiences of ‘re-
of Exploratory Practice and Action Research only as these had been medi- searching-as-teaching-for-learning’ or ‘autonomy-oriented teacher-research’
ated by previous practical experience. When I irst came across (and admired) as I was putting it in conference talks at the time, including at the 2nd annual
the ideas of Dick Allwright and Anne Burns in the 1990s I was already ex- conference on action research at Gediz in July 2012 (see also Mercer, Smith
perimenting with ideas around developing autonomy in my own practice and, and Ushioda 2012). Of course this desire to integrate research and practice
increasingly, conceiving of my own inquiries into this practice as ‘action research’ is another aspect which is immediately recognizable as akin to Exploratory
(cf. Smith 2003). When I moved into a role in teacher education in the UK in Practice but it was not directly derived from the latter.
2000, I transferred some of my previous autonomy-oriented practices into my All of this is perhaps an over-long justiication for what I really want to
work with pre-experience MA students and engaged them in an action research say in this brief contribution, which is that the exploratory AR workplan was
experience which mirrored the way I had myself been learning as a teacher. In not, in the way it was developed for the Chilean context nor in its existing
parallel, I documented the development of their autonomy as learners of teach- manifestation in my UK teacher education practice, just a combination of two
ing (‘teacher-learner autonomy’) via a series of action research studies connected theoretical positions – EP and AR – nor has it ever been intended as a ‘rival’ to
with the development of the course in question (cf. Smith 2005; Brown, Smith them. he use of ‘exploratory’ in the phrase ‘Exploratory AR’ came primarily
and Ushioda 2007; also, Smith, Barkhuizen and Vieira 2013). out of my prior experience and was a pragmatic response to a particular con-
I had previously seen, then, how empowering action research can be as a text (much as Exploratory Practice was born in particular conditions in Rio de
means of professional and academic development, in my own experience as a Janeiro), not an ‘academic’ attempt to capture territory or attention.
teacher (educator) and in work with student-teachers in a particular ‘Profes- To make a general point in conclusion, teacher-researchers and teacher
sional Practice’ module. he workplan for the latter UK course has remained educator-researchers are not dependent on background theory – we construct
largely unchanged during the ifteen years since its inception in 2000, and our own knowledge on the basis of experience, and this might include de-
is basically the same as that portrayed in Figure 2 above (‘Exploratory AR’), veloping eclectic-seeming approaches which are contextually appropriate and
though within a shorter timeframe. In this conception, as in the model pre- congruent with our own experience and values, and which we should then feel
sented and named for the irst time in Chile, deep exploration of a particular at liberty to describe on their own terms and share for the possible beneit
area of concern precedes coming up with a plan for change and evaluating a of others similarly engaged, but without denying the validity of others’ ap-
new intervention. proaches in their own contexts. his – I have been hoping to demonstrate – is
In Chile I had been asked to introduce participants to ‘Action Research’ diferent from an ‘academic’ strategy which involves denigrating or ignoring
and could not in fact have recommended ‘full-blown’ Exploratory Practice but others’ positions to advance one’s own. Adopting an exploratory action re-
44 Exploratory action research as workplan: why, what and where from? Richard Smith 45

search workplan has shown its practical worth for us, in our experience in a Smith, R., Connelly, T. and Rebolledo, P. 2014. ‘Teacher-research as continuing
particular context. In describing its rationale, nature and origins here I hope professional development: A project with Chilean secondary school teachers’. In
others might feel encouraged to use exploratory action research and/or de- Hayes, D. (ed.) Innovations in the continuing professional development of English
velop/strengthen their own approach. language teachers. London: he British Council, pp. 111–128. Retrieved 25 April
2015 from http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/ec/iles/E168%20
Innovations%20in%20CPD_FINAL%20V2%20web.pdf
References Brown, P., Smith, R. and Ushioda, E. 2007. ‘Responding to resistance’. In Barield,
A. and Brown, S. (eds), Reconstructing autonomy in language education: Inquiry and
Borg, S. 2013. Teacher-research in language teaching: A critical analysis. Cambridge: innovation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cambridge University Press. Wyatt, M. and Pasamar Márquez, C. 2015. ‘Helping irst-year undergraduates engage
Mercer, S., Smith, R. and Ushioda, E. 2012. ‘How to combine teaching and in language research’. Language Teaching Research. Advance access: irst published
researching? Focus on Learners and Classroom Language Learning’. IATEFL on January 7, 2015 as doi:10.1177/1362168814562013
Research SIG Pre-Conference One-day Workshop, 46th Annual International
IATEFL Conference, Glasgow, March. Video online: https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=f3fR9OKNAMY&feature=edu&list=PL63CA3887ECD6FA91
Rebolledo, P. (2013). ‘Exploring action research on a professional development course
in Chile’. University of Leeds. Unpublished PhD thesis.
Smith, R. 2003. ‘Pedagogy for autonomy as (becoming-)appropriate methodology’. In
Palfreyman, D. and R.C. Smith (eds) Learner autonomy across cultures: Language
education perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 129–46.
Smith, R. 2005. Developing professional autonomy: An action research based MA
module and its ongoing evaluation’. Interactions 9/2 (issue 26). Retrieved 25
April 2015 from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/ldc/resource/interactions/
archive/issue26/smith
Smith, R. 2011. ‘Teaching English in diicult circumstances: A new research agenda’.
In Pattison, T. (ed.) IATEFL 2010 conference selections. Canterbury: IATEFL. Pre-
publication version retrieved 25 April 2015 from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/
soc/al/staf/teaching/smith/smith_r/tidc_-_a_new_research_agenda.pdf
Smith, R. 2012. ‘ELT research: what it is, why we need it, and how to do it!’. Guest
lecture in British Council Symposium series, Bristol, November 2012. Online -
retrieved 25 April 2015 from http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/seminars/
elt-research-what-it-why-we-need-it-and-how-do-it-0
Smith, R. 2015. Review of Teacher-research in language teaching: A critical analysis by S.
Borg, Cambridge University Press 2013. ELT Journal 69/2: 205-208.
Smith, R., Barkhuizen, G. and Vieira, F. 2013. ‘Teacher education and autonomy:
Where’s the real story?’ In A. Barield & N.Delgado Alvarado (eds),  Autonomy
in language learning: Stories of practices. Canterbury, England: IATEFL Learner
Autonomy SIG. Pre-publication retrieved 25 April 2015 from http://www2.
warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/al/staf/teaching/smith/smith_r/smith_barkhuizen_and_
vieira_2013_-_pre-publication_version.pdf
 Professional development through
4 teacher-research
Kenan Dikilitaş

his chapter discusses the relation between diferent forms of teacher-research

including exploratory practice, relective practice and action research. It also
discusses the changing approaches to professional development in English
language teacher education with references to the basic principles of these
three forms of research.
Professional development (PD) has undergone major changes in its form
and content recently due to simultaneous developments in education as well as
technology and pedagogy. PD sessions have moved away from trainer-based
to a trainee-based format, one in which trainees actively learn and develop
using their own resources as well as constructive feedback and scafolding pro-
vided by trainers (Mann, 2005).
Trainees are no longer seen as recipients of knowledge, but constructors of
it through active engagement in the process of learning. In addition, they are
given more opportunities to take control of their learning as is implied and
encouraged by principles of autonomous learning. here are two basic reasons
why teachers should maintain sustained participation in professional develop-
ment. he irst, as suggested by Bailey, Curtis and Nunan (2001), is that the
professional ield of English language teaching is changing and developing,
which could be diicult to follow without integration into professional devel-
opment. Similarly, another reason is that the basic knowledge about how to
teach has for a long time also been undergoing dramatic changes (Richards &
Farrell, 2005).
Pedagogical and practical changes in language teaching can be monitored
and understood through several professional activities ranging from top-down
models, where teachers are provided with received knowledge, to bottom-up
models where teachers are encouraged and guided explicitly to discover and
understand the changing nature of knowledge and practice of language teach-

47
48 Professional development through teacher-research Kenan Dikilitaş 49

ing. From such a perspective, active research engagement is worth mentioning hese never-ending issues in the lives of teachers make teacher-research
and highlighting as it prioritizes issues discussed above. Inquiry-based profes- a continuous professional development tool, which focuses on teacher devel-
sional development encourages trainees to research their own practices, un- opment through researching own beliefs and practices. Although teacher-
derstand more about their own classroom context and come to a stage where research is known as research conducted by teachers in their classrooms, the
they make informed decisions for development or change in the existing prac- form that it takes can vary according to whether it is based on exploration
tices. he research they carry out with their learners and colleagues also gives of context (Allwright and Hanks, 2009), relection on teaching practices
them an opportunity to construct new knowledge through mutual develop- (Schön, 1983; Wallace, 1991) or taking action or making changes (Burns,
ment. Learners play a key role in the identiication of the changes. As they 2011).
are at the center of learning process, how they learn and promote linguistic While conducting teacher-research projects since 2011, I felt that there
knowledge will inevitably inluence the way learning and teaching theories are was a clear distinction and relation between these three forms of research. To
constructed and put into use. It is actually the intellectual change in younger my understanding, exploratory practice is the irst step to be taken before any
generations that force the theoretical issues to reconsider their underlying data-based classroom research is carried out. By exploring a speciic context,
concepts. he teacher-researchers will access such knowledge base irst hand personal beliefs, and practices with learners or colleagues, you prepare the
rather than through the eyes of academic researchers who write their articles input or idea to relect on, which is, I believe, the next stage. Once classroom
using academic language which teachers may not be able to understand and issues are understood from diferent perspectives, then one can relect on
publish them in hard-to-access journals. herefore, if teachers are equipped them systematically to gain deeper insight into issues initially highlighted
with researching skills and can be trained to put insightful critical thinking in mutual quest. he ideas are outlined and the issue is clariied for further
into what they are researching, the data they collect and the interpretations questioning. hough it seems that this is also a process of researching and
they draw from research could be most useful. analyzing, a more systematic research path should be planned and carried
out as in action research, which requires trying out new practices and taking
Engagement in research action accordingly, which may in turn promote instructional change. With-
out insightful data collection and analysis, it could be wrong to decide on
Teacher-research as a professional development strategy has started to become changes in pedagogy.
an established one recently. he term ‘teacher-research’ refers to a form of he data collected and the ideas highlighted could not form a necessary
research conducted by classroom teachers to investigate an issue they iden- basis for change. his shows clearly that diferent forms of research serve
tify and reach some conclusions for themselves that can be constantly revised, diferent purposes. If the aim is to understand the issues and enhance qual-
improved and changed. herefore, teacher-research is not a product in itself.
ity of life by raising awareness in diferent aspects of teaching, you can stay
Rather, it is a process through which teachers raise awareness in the issues
at the exploratory practice level. If the aim is to gain further insight into
in question and understand unexplored perspectives as a result of the exten-
the explored areas of your teaching, then you need to start to theorize your
sive focused knowledge acquired through reading and thinking critically. It is
ideas/personal experiences more systematically. When the theorized prac-
this process of asking questions and trying to understand the scope that helps
tices inform you that you need more concrete and objective data to ensure
teachers develop ways of critically relecting on the emerging issues. Learn-
instructional or pedagogical change, then you should start to identify the
ing how to identify issues and approach them critically is the key ability that
issue properly carry out researching cycle to take actions or test the indings
teachers should develop because there is no end to the problems, questions and
before you decide on any change. herefore, we are proposing a long path be-
thought-provoking points that could emerge in any classroom.
fore changing practices currently done. Exploring and relecting may be two
steps to take before any engagement in research for professional develop-
50 Professional development through teacher-research Kenan Dikilitaş 51

ment. he following igure shows how each form of research can support one further change. He suggests that striving to understand classroom life will
another and can function as the driving force of the process of researching. provide opportunities for teachers and learners to collaborate pleasantly
and productively. He also advocates that this interaction can also prepare
an insightful basis for smooth pedagogic change. It could be suggested here
that Allwright also implies that one cannot make changes at the exploration
stage but prepare in the cognition for changes to be made in the future. In
addition, to call a pedagogical issue a problem without adequately exploring
the dimension and relecting on it could be dangerous. he necessity of ex-
ploring and relecting before researching proves to be necessary at this stage
as well. Allwright highlights this issue by suggesting a softer word, ‘puzzle’,
instead of ‘problem’. It is critically implied here that the exploration stage is
where teachers unlock a puzzle and get to understand how and why they do
things. A project conducted in BirminghamUniversity, titled “Professional
Development for Academics Involved in Teaching” (ProDAIT) suggests
seven key principles of any EP, which adapted as follows:

• Prioritize quality of classroom life

• Strive mainly to understand classroom life
• Do it as a joint project with learners or other teachers
• Strive to create an atmosphere of collegiality
• Focus on creating mutual development
• Put explored issues into classroom practice
• Make EP a culture that is part of teaching

In addition to these seven principles adapted, the project which has been
Figure 1: Forms of Teacher-research for Professional Development carried out at Gediz University for the past 5 years showed that teachers go
through the exploration process before they engage in research. herefore,
he igure also symbolizes how the pedagogical issue is developed and one more principle can be added to this list, which is “to seek critical areas
deepened into a researchable and answerable focus. he size of each cog var- which need researching further”. his principle is important in that it can
ies according to the degree of speciicity. In exploratory practice, the issue in help teachers do action research in areas that are critical to their classroom
question is discussed and explored from a broader perspective, which is nar- instruction.
rowed down to a relatively more speciic focus in relective practice, which can Relective practice, similarly, provides more solid evidence and basis for
be a concrete experience. hen the relection experience becomes the speciic the problem to be investigated systematically before a teacher decides on
focus or the problem that could be solved in action research. a pedagogical change in classroom practices. RP supports the ideas that
Allwright (2004) highlights the function of EP as providing a basis for teacher can learn by closely relecting on classroom experiences (Schön,
52 Professional development through teacher-research Kenan Dikilitaş 53

1983; Wallace, 1991). RP provides teachers with opportunities to gain in- Table 1. A suggested teacher-research programme
sight into the experiences to better understand their practices. Teachers in Stages Activities
such a practice based on thinking are expected to collect information about
their teaching to promote them in the following stages. Such an activity Planning the research design
can promote teachers’ understanding of the issue in question from students’ 1st quarter  1. Identifying purpose and scope
2. Specifying research questions
perspective as well as from their own subjective perspectives. he explora-
3. Discussing data collection tool
tion through discussion in the EP as an initial stage is consolidated with
4. Deciding on analysis of the data
more focused and closer examination of a speciic practice. he emerging
5. Outlining the research plan
or identiied weakness or points to improve at this stage can better inform
the problem to be investigated in an action research, which can follow EP 2nd quarter Doing teacher-research
and RP activities. 1. Preparing tools for data collection
Action research (see Burns, 2011) is seen as a cycle of researching 2. Designing classroom activities or materials
and taking actions to solve pedagogical problems in a way that could be 3. Collecting data
research-based or data-collection and analysis-dependent. What I claim 4. Transcribing or sorting out the data
here is that one may not be able to start an action research without dealing 3rd quarter Analyzing the data
with exploratory and relective practice, which can contribute to the criti- 1. Answering RQs with evidence from the data
cal clariication of practical issues and problems in the classroom teaching. 2. Drawing out implications
To solve problems in teaching may require carefully followed exploring 3. Developing ideas for relection
and relecting process because after action research teachers may need to 4th quarter Writing-up
take action in the form of changing or seriously modifying their existing 1. Writing up the section of the research
practices. herefore, I believe that exploratory practice together with re- 2. Editing the paper
lective practice is the irst step to any research- or inquiry- based profes- 3. Preparing the presentation
sional development. 4. Submitting the research
Such a staged-account of engagement in research has been achieved in
Presentation at a Teacher-research Conference
this project carried out at Gediz University. Diferent researchers followed
diferent paths at diferent paces while proceeding with their research stud-
ies, but basically they invested a lot of time and energy on the clariication
of issues and narrowing down the focus of the study. he discussions and To help teacher-researchers evaluate their teacher-research at the end of
ideas developed in the last four years will inform the next year’s (2014-2015) their engagement in doing one is also important in that they can relect on the
teacher-research project. he following stages have been outlined and sched- overall teacher-research process. I designed a checklist for teacher-researchers
uled with 33 teachers who would participate. to consider and wanted to ensure teachers know the scope and purpose of
research they are going to engage in. his checklist can also provide them
with an opportunity to evaluate their teacher-research and think proactively
for the next research experience. It ofers critical and constructive guidance to
ultimately generate a work that is of value to their professional development.
54 Professional development through teacher-research Kenan Dikilitaş 55

Table 2. Self-check list for teacher-research Burns, A. (2011). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for prac-
tioners.   Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching And Research Press. 
Characteristics Tick
Mann, S. (2005). he language teacher’s development. Language teaching,38(03), 103-1
1. I have done this research with and for my own students Schön, D. A. (1983). he relective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol.
2. I have done this research for developing ideas for classroom teaching 5126). Basic books.
3. I am directly involved in the research as a teacher-researcher Richards, J. C., and Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teach-
ers: Strategies for teacher learning. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
4. I have implemented a new practice or explored others’ opinions Wallace, M.J. (1991). Training Foreign Language Teachers: A Relective Approach. Cam-
5. I did this research in my own classroom bridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. I integrated a new practice into my own classroom
7. I have sought my colleagues’ opinions during the process
8. I collected data from my own students
9. I analyzed data using diferent tools
10. I relected on and interpreted the research indings for development
11. It has helped me develop my classroom practices
12. I have shared new knowledge with my students
13. It has helped me understand the teaching and learning process
14. It has helped me understand the context in which I work.
15. I beneited from the research personally and professionally
16. I can describe changes or development in my instructional and pro-
fessional understanding

It should be noted that the items of characteristics listed here have been
created on the basis of the experiences in the project as well as from the rele-
vant literature for the speciic context in which I have been working. However,
hopefully it can be used in any similar projects.

References
Allwright, D. (2004). Weaving research and practice together: A principled framework
for practitioner research. Educating: Weaving Research into Practice: Volume 1, 1.
Allwright, D., & Hanks, J. (2009). he developing language learner: An introduction to
exploratory practice. Basingstoke,, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
Bailey, K. M., Curtis, A., Nunan, D., & Fan, D. (2001). Pursuing professional develop-
ment: he self as source . Boston eMA MA: Heinle & Heinle.
PART II
 Experiencing feedback from student and
5 teacher perspectives
Rukiye Eryılmaz

Context and problem

I do not know how many times I have felt anxious about whether or not to
correct a student who has made a mistake in class. he dilemma of letting mis-
takes happen or discouraging students has always confused and bothered me.
On the one hand, I did not want to spoil students’ motivation; on the other, I
did not want to ignore the incorrect use of language. herefore, I have usually
been hesitant while giving feedback in class. At the same time, I have always
tried to think of the correct way of doing it without ofending the students.
Being a non-native English teacher I also make several mistakes ranging
from unimportant to serious. When someone else corrects me, no matter how
useful it is to me, I feel a slight embarrassment and frustration. Hence, I can
imagine how annoying it is for a student to be corrected – interrupted – in
front of their peers. Still, as teachers, we are supposed to control mistakes to an
extent and make sure students do not fossilize them.
In this context, the main problem is how to correct students. So far, several
methods, which will be explained later on, have been used by teachers. It is
mostly us, teachers, who decide how and when to correct. Yet, what is happen-
ing on the students’ side is ambiguous. Which correction methods are well-
appreciated by students is a signiicant issue to be resolved. herefore, I raised
three questions:
• What do students think about corrective feedback?
• Which correction method makes them less annoyed?
• If students prefer a speciic method, what does this mean?

Literature review
It is inevitable that second language learners make lexical, grammatical and
phonological mistakes. Making mistakes is in the nature of learning. However,

59
60 Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives Rukiye Eryılmaz 61

not every incorrect utterance is a mistake; on the contrary, there are ‘mistakes’ and feel embarrassed and reluctant to use the target language.
and there are ‘errors’, which were deined by Norrish (1983) as systematic de- At the same time, however, language learners need correction in
viations that happen when a learner has not learnt something and consistently order to improve their proiciency in the target language.
‘gets it wrong’. In other words, “error” is a form or structure that a native speak-
er deems unacceptable because of its inappropriate use (Klassen, 1991). Ac- he opinions of learners, their preferences for error correction, and their
cording to the Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (1992), views about diferent error correction procedures are almost totally neglected
a learner makes a mistake when writing or speaking because of lack of atten- (Oladejo, 1993). It is true that we may not know which correction method
tion, fatigue, carelessness, or some other aspect of performance. Mistakes can is good for each learner. However, it is not impossible to learn what students
be self-corrected when attention is drawn to them. In other words, an error think of corrective feedback. Since our main goal is to improve learning, we
occurs because the learner does not know what is correct, and thus it cannot should consult with students as well and correct them in accordance with their
be self-corrected (Erdoğan, 2005). hat being the case, not every wrong utter- needs and if needed preferences. As Oladejo (1993) argues;
ance a student makes requires correction. he important thing is that teachers If error correction is to be efective as a major source of feed-
should be able to know when and how to intervene so as to not only help stu- back to the learner, and as a means of generating correct target
dents learn but also to keep them motivated. However, there is a discrepancy language performance, then teachers must be willing not only to
among teachers over whether to correct all mistakes or just those which need change their attitudes towards errors, but they must also be ready
immediate remedy. Besides, some teachers may not know how to give correc- to modify their old habits with regard to the practice of error cor-
tive feedback, which can be deined as; rection in the classroom.
Any indication to the learners that their use of the target language I chose the feedback methods from Brown’s Principles of Language Teach-
is incorrect. his includes various responses that the learners re- ing and Learning (2000). He categorized them as recast, clariication request,
ceive. When a language learner says, ‘He go to school every day’, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, explicit correction, and repetition. Of these
corrective feedback can be explicit, for example, ‘no, you should methods, recast and clariication request are implicit whereas the other four
say goes, not go’ or implicit ‘yes he goes to school every day’, and are explicit. Below, each term is explained with examples from my own class:
may or may not include metalinguistic information, for example,
‘Don’t forget to make the verb agree with the subject. (El Tatawy, 1. Recast: An implicit type of corrective feedback that reformulates or expands
2002, p.1, quoted in Lightbrown and Spada, 1999, pp. 171-172). an ill-formed or incomplete utterance in an obtrusive way.

At this point it is also crucial to know the diference between communica- S: I have got tall antique vase.
tive practice and accuracy practice. In communicative practice language teach- T: I see,J you have got a tall antique vase.
ers should correct only those errors that hinder communication, whereas in
activities involving a speciic grammatical structure, a function, or a skill, cor- 2. Clariication request: An elicitation of a reformulation or repetition from a
rection should focus on errors strictly related to the structure being addressed. student.
his issue is explained as follows by Carranza (2007);
S: Reynaldo doesn’t has any boxes of chocolate. (Grammatical mistake)
[…] if teachers constantly correct learners’ attempts to speak T: I’m sorry? (Clariication request)
during free communicative activities, the learners might become
frustrated, build negative attitudes towards language learning,
62 Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives Rukiye Eryılmaz 63

3. Metalinguistic feedback: Provides “comments, information, or questions re- correction results in successful amendment. Clearly, there is no guarantee that
lated to the well-formedness of the student’s utterance” (Brown, 2000 cited in students will always ix these mistakes successfully. Still, it is our duty to relax
Lyster, 2004, p.405). students whenever necessary.
S: I’m tired of being tell...
T: We talked about passive voice, remember? Procedure
Initially, I asked students the following:
4. Elicitation: A corrective technique that prompts the learner to self-correct.
1. Which method do teachers usually use?
Elicitation and other prompts are more overt in their request for a response.
2. Which feedback method is better for students?
S: I’m going at home. 3. Which feedback is less suitable for students?
T: I’m going...? 4. Which feedback would you prefer?
S: Sorry, I’m going home. his was the beginning of many challenges I encountered. he students had
no idea of correction methods. Having learnt these methods, they answered
the questions. Yet, my theoretical explanation of the methods may still have
5. Explicit correction: A clear indication to the student that the form is incor-
been confusing for them.
rect and provision of a corrected form.
he second thing I did was to use one method more than the others each
S: What would you do if you see Michael Jackson? week. For example, for the irst week I paid attention to using the recast meth-
T: No, no “see.” What would you do if you saw Michael Jackson? od more than the others. Now and hen I took notes of the corrections I made
in the classroom. he following week the students wrote their opinions on
6. Repetition: he teacher repeats the ill-formed part of the student’s utterance, these two methods. hey described how they felt when I used each one, and
usually with a change in intonation. this continued for six weeks. Having completed this step, I prepared a more
general survey which included eleven questions and applied it six weeks later
S: Where did you put the forks and knifes (knaıfs)? (Pronunciation mistake) (see Appendix).
T: Where did you put the forks and knives (naıvz)? After collecting all the data I needed, I went through a meticulous analysis
and attempted to interpret them as much as I could.

When a teacher provides corrective feedback, he/she expects a reaction

from students. his reaction is called uptake, which is […] ‘a student’s utter- Findings and discussion
ance that immediately follows the teacher’s feedback and that constitutes a
Responses to questions
reaction in some way to the teacher’s intention to draw attention to some as-
pect of the student’s initial utterance” (Tedick and de Gortari, 1998 quoted in Students’ answers to the above questions are listed in full in the table below
Lyster and Ranta, 1997, p. 49). Additionally, learner uptake can be divided into (numbers in the table refer to the feedback methods discussed above, i.e. 1 =
two types: “(a) uptake that results in ‘repair’ of the error on which the feed- recast; 2 = clariication request; 3 = metalinguistic feedback; 4 = elicitation; 5 =
back focused and (b) uptake that results in an utterance that still needs repair explicit correction; 6 = repetition):
(coded as ‘needs-repair’)” (Fazilatfar and Jabbari, 2012, p.138 quoted by Lyster
and Ranta, 1997, p. 49). Uptake does not always occur, that is to say not every
64 Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives Rukiye Eryılmaz 65

S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
ing that students’ previous comments on this method stayed the same after its
Q
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 application in the classroom.
1 6 4 3 4 4 4 1 2 1 3 1 1 5 6 1 5 1 Recast vs. Clariication Request: Of these two, the students’ favorite was clar-
iication request. Two-thirds of the students supported it, claiming that it was
2 1 5 5 1 1 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 3 3 2 4 1
more polite and encouraging. his way, they were able to realize that they had
3 2 6 6 6 6 6 2 6 6 1 6 6 2 6 6 6 5
made a mistake easier.
4 1 5 5 3 3 3 6 3 5 5 5 5 6 3 5 4 1 Repetition: his was another method favored by students. Eight were in
Table: Students’ answers to four questions about feedback methods favour of it. Moreover, two noted it as the best method of all. However, those
who were not fond of this method alleged that it was not didactic and resulted
Answers to the irst question (row 1) indicated the students’ perceptions of in students’ not being able to realize their mistakes. One also suggested that it
the most common feedback method used by teachers. Answers showed that seemed rather rude.
teachers used recast the most (six students). he second most common was Clearly, students’ favorites were explicit correction and repetition, both of
said to be elicitation (four). For the second question (row 2), almost half of the which were explicitly performed by the teacher. As we see, students have two
students (eight) stated that they saw explicit correction as superior to other main concerns with regards to feedback. First, they want to learn what is cor-
methods, with recast coming second (four). In answer to question 3, twelve rect. Second, they expect the teacher to be polite while giving feedback. his
students suggested the sixth method, repetition, as their least favorite (row 3). attitude is a relection of students’ possibly low self-conidence in learning.
Seven students responded that they would most like to receive explicit correc- hey have a tendency to think that it is the teacher who knows what is wrong
tion, while ive preferred metalinguistic feedback (question 4, row 4). and what is not. Instead of discovering their mistake, they expect the teacher to
notice and correct it for them. As for the expectancy of politeness, we can say
During practice that it is probable that they are afraid of being embarrassed when their mis-
takes are pointed out. herefore, clariication request surpassed recast, which is
Metalinguistic feedback: Six students had a negative opinion of this method mostly an ambiguity for students. I observed that very few students had been
while seven found it efective. Two showed a neutral approach towards it. he aware of my unobtrusive corrections. While receiving their comments related
main reason why they found it inferior was that it was diicult for a student to to recast and clariication request I noticed that only a few students had made
recall the linguistic name of a certain grammar point. Moreover, one claimed remarks on recast. Clearly, it was not as evident as clariication request. As for
that it was indirect while another asserted that it spoiled luency. hose who metalinguistic feedback and elicitation, I can say that students do not strike a
thought positively about it suggested that it encouraged students to be active balance. hey do not seem to have a satisfying understanding of the two meth-
as well as being didactic. ods, which resulted in unclear and complicated thoughts.
Elicitation: Ten students evaluated this method as “not good.” he main he survey results surprised me. First of all, seven students argued that it
reasons were that it took time and made students nervous. One argued that was not right for a teacher to correct all mistakes while eleven claimed the
it could cause embarrassment if students were unable to repair their mistakes teacher should correct all mistakes. Except for two students who suggested
while the teacher was waiting for a correct answer. Five students thought this all mistakes should be immediately corrected, nine asserted that correction
method was efective since it enhanced their thinking ability. strongly helped to prevent mistakes, whereas the rest surmised that it helped
Explicit Correction: his method was deinitely the students’ favorite since only to an extent. Twelve replied that they were positively afected by being
all except three made positive comments on it. he main argument for this fa- corrected. Except for four, students mentioned that I gave them a chance to
voritism was that it made a positive impact on learning. Students claimed they correct themselves. Interestingly, they also stated that it was impossible for
could understand their mistakes better thanks to this method. It was surpris-
66 Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives Rukiye Eryılmaz 67

them to correct their own mistakes without the teacher’s help. According to the clariication method wouldn’t help since the student needs an explanation
the survey, most students (seven) thought that elicitation was the most ef- and guidance in such a case. During the application of my research I was extra
fective method and argued that the teacher used it more frequently than the careful and avoided correcting randomly. his is actually something teachers
others. should always consider. Interrupting students frequently and randomly doesn’t
he survey results proved that students were in favor of being corrected. mean helping students; on the contrary, it means undermining learners’ mo-
hey obviously beneited from corrective feedback which helped them to learn tivation.
from their mistakes. However, the survey showed me that students’ perspec- Students’ preference for a speciic method does not mean that it is the best,
tive could change. his change might have been a result of the overall efect of or else it does not show that it is the most efective one. However, it gives
the project. In the end, they preferred elicitation which prompts students to a teacher some valuable information on how students view language learn-
self-correct. Actually, in the survey I did not ask them their favorite method. ing. Speciically, it helps a teacher understand what students expect from the
Instead, I asked them which method was more efective. Still they preferred teacher while giving feedback. his project revealed that students had an in-
an explicit one. However, what makes it surprising is that elicitation is not as clination for explicit feedback methods. However, students in general should
overt as explicit correction and repetition. It provides students with informa- learn how to self-correct as well. If teachers always correct students, over time
tion to an extent and prompts them to self-correct. he survey showed that it can become a habit. I noticed my students were not aware of their mistakes
their dependence on the teacher changed slightly after the project. unless I made them realize. Maybe, by using implicit methods more often and
showing students the diferences between mistakes and errors, students can
form a habit of self- and peer-correcting.
Relections As for me, I do not know which method surpasses the others, and am not
Although carrying out this research project was not easy, it wouldn’t be wrong in search of it. Language is a multifaceted phenomenon. Teaching it involves
to say that it made a deep impact on me. At irst I didn’t believe that I could several variables, and so does correcting mistakes. Since errors/mistakes are
manage this project, the reason being I had had some hesitations related to the part of learning, I cannot restrict myself to certain rules. On the contrary, I
way I did the research. During the six weeks in which I used the six feedback am always open to changing and updating myself. However, what my students
methods I was not sure if I was on the right track. Whenever I asked students prefer in the process of learning can always be helpful to me.
to relect on our practice I had a slight fear of not being able to get their honest
opinions. Eventually, I realized that I had been wrong. My students’ relections
were not only honest but also very helpful. Moreover, they told me that they
References
had been really pleased when I asked them to share their opinions with me. Brown, H. D. (2000) Principles of Language Teaching and Learning. White Plains, NY:
hus, the irst thing I gained from this project was the reinforcement of teach- Longman. 277-278
er-student interaction. hey never refrained from contributing to the project. Carranza, L. M. V. (2007). Correction in the ESL classroom: What teachers do in the
In addition, I have become more aware of the diferences between errors, classroom and what they think they do. Pensamiento Actual, 7(8-9).
El Tatawy, M. (2006). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition. Teachers
mistakes and slips of the tongue. Reactions I got from students helped me
College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2(2).
notice the diferences among them. For instance, students could easily correct Retrieved May 17, 2014, from http://journals.tc-library.org/index.php/tesol/
their mistakes; however, in case of an error they had diiculty correcting. Basi- article/view/160
cally, if a student makes a mistake or slip, using methods like explicit correc- Erdoğan, V. (2005) Contribution of Error Analysis to Foreign Language Teaching.
tion or repetition is not very appropriate since it could cause students to feel Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 1(2), 261-270.
irritated. Similarly, trying to help a student who makes a serious error with Jabbari, A. A., & Fazilatfar, A. M. (2012). he role of error types and feedback in
Iranian EFL classrooms. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(1), p135.
68 Experiencing feedback from student and teacher perspectives Rukiye Eryılmaz 69

7. Does the teacher give you the opportunity to correct your mistakes/errors?
• Yes
Klassen, J. (1991) Using Student Errors for Teaching, FORUM, 29(1)
Norrish, J. (1987) Language Learning and their Errors. London, Macmillan Publisher
Ltd. • A little
• No
Oladejo, J. A., (1993) Error Correction in ESL: Learner’s Preferences. TESL Canada
Journal/Revue, 10(2).
8. Which method is more eicient?
• Explicit Correction
Tedick, D. J., & de Gortari, B. (1998). Research on error correction and implications
for classroom teaching. ACIE Newsletter, 1(3), 1-6.
• Elicitation
Appendix • Metalinguistic Feedback
• Recast
• Clariication Request
Survey on Error Correction (Immediate Feedback) in L2 Classrooms

• Repetition
1. Do you think that it is right for the teacher to correct all errors/mistakes?
• Yes
• No
9. Which method does the teacher use the most?
• Explicit Correction
• Elicitation
2. What types of mistakes should be corrected the most?
• Grammar
• Metalinguistic Feedback
• Pronunciation
• Recast
• Wrong Word Use
• Clariication Request
• Repetition
3. Which mistakes does the teacher correct the most?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------- 10. To what level can students correct their mistakes?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Should the teacher correct mistakes immediately or later?
• Immediately
---------------------------
• Later
5. To what level does correction prevent you from making these mistakes
again?
• Does no efect
• To an extent
• A lot
6. How is your motivation afected from being corrected?
• Positive
• Neutral
• Negative
 Peer observation: a systematic
6 investigation for continuous professional
development
Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu

Introduction
When one hears the term ‘peer observation’ many teachers may often feel a
sense of anxiety, recalling painful memories of their teacher training practice.
However, peer observation doesn’t necessarily have to be used as an evalua-
tive tool. he aim of this study is to relect on our teaching practice and we
thought the best way to improve our teaching was through observing each
other’s lessons. Peer observations not only help the observee but it also helps
the observer relect on his or her own teaching practice. his would give us
an objective view on what we’re doing in the class and also allow us to learn
though a modelling and experimenting with diferent methods. One teacher is
an experienced non-native teacher with an English Language and Literature
background, whilst the other is a less experienced native English teacher from
a non-ELT background. We both wanted to focus on teaching grammar as the
books used to teach the main course had changed. hrough the analysis of the
collected data, we have transformed peer observation into teacher-research.

Background of Koray
Krashen (1982) made the distinction between language learning and acqui-
sition, and as I was born and grew up in England, it can be said that I had
acquired English grammar as opposed to learning it. So, although I am a pro-
icient user English, I was unable to explain or describe this knowledge of the
language. Ellis (2008) highlighted the diference between implicit and explicit
knowledge ‘he acquisition of L1 grammar is implicit and is extracted from
experience of use rather than from explicit rules.’ I also learnt Turkish and a
little of several other languages by witnessing its use and through practice. My
French lessons at high school were also very fun and revolved around us doing
lots of production through communicative activities. his previous experience
of how I have acquired languages, along with the CELTA, seems to have an
71
72 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 73
professional development

impact on my teaching practice. In my irst year of teaching at Gediz, our the questions. With the help of the teacher trainer and our colleagues’ critical
teacher trainer observed my lack of use of the board when presenting gram- evaluation, the following questions were created as the basis of our study.
mar. his stayed with me, and now having been given a grammar focused main
Research Questions Data set
course book to teach, I felt the need to relect on my approach to teaching
grammar. he particular class I had just started teaching was a B2 level, and I What are the initial beliefs of the two teachers? 1st post observation transcript
was experiencing some diiculties with them. I thought that perhaps my ap- What are the current grammar teaching practices Analysis of the 1st lesson out-
proach to teaching doesn’t it in with the students’ ideas and expectations of of the two teachers? line
what a grammar lesson should look like. Are there any diferences that occur in the 2nd and Analysis of 2nd and 3rd lessons
3rd lessons? outlines
Background of Savaş
What are the developing beliefs in the 2nd and 3rd Analysis of 2nd and 3rd post
I have been an English teacher for 12 years and I have taught English language post observation discussions? observation brieings
in two diferent countries, irstly started in Turkey then, in the UK and then
What are the students’ perceptions of the diferent Analysis of the student focus
back to Turkey where I have been currently teaching to a preparatory program
lessons? group transcripts
for a University. As it is commonly accepted by all ELT teachers, teaching a
new language to teenage students who are preparing for their departments in
their universities is a highly big challenge once their English learner back- Literature review
ground is concerned. It takes a lot of energy and efort to give them the ideal
level of English in a year and prepare them for their departments where they Peer observation refers to a teacher or other observer closely watching or mon-
will study their majors in a new and a diferent language. he whole year in itoring a language lesson in order to gain an understanding or a concept of
the prep classes are mostly comprised of grammar teaching and here in the what that teachers applies in terms of teaching styles and techniques.
department we are a group of mixed teachers as foreign teachers (native speak- here is a wide range of perspectives regarding the deinition of peer obser-
ers) and Turkish teachers (non-native speakers of English). Considering the vation. Some of the descriptions for peer observation are as follows;
fact that grammar teaching is the main goal or wholly believed to be the big-
gest challenge amongst students as down to my observations, and believed to Table 1: Deining peer observation
be a quite boring class by its nature or how it is believed to be here in Turkey Bell (2002 ) A partnership in which colleagues observe each other’s practice,
we may say, I have always wondered how a grammar lesson is to be conducted provide feedback and engage in a discussion aimed to promote
by native teachers of English, their applications, activities or the presentation relection
of it and to what extend we, as non-native teachers could beneit from it or if Fletcher and Or- he identiication of strengths and developmental needs, and
we would apply any places of a native teachers’ lesson to our own. his project, smond (2005) the formulation of an action plan for further improvement
therefore, aims to see the diferent teaching methods, if any, between a native
Davys (2007) A general term that may encompass any form of mutual sup-
and a non-native teacher of English and the interaction in the classroom dur-
port between people who provide useful feedback to each other
ing a grammar lesson using the peer observation tool as a method.
Cliford-Brown Reviewing clinical reasoning skills and foster self-conidence
& Segal (2004) and self-directed learning
Research questions
Donnelly (2007) A critical relective device for teachers’ personal development
Finding research questions that were answerable and informative was a dif- Gosling (2005) Higher awareness of the student learning experience
icult task. Over a period of two months, we constantly reviewed and changed
74 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 75
professional development

As seen above, peer observation provides a feedback in order to track the Table 3: Limitations
teachers to become more aware of the issues for what they are really doing in Quirke (1996) A kind of a theatrical action as no one acts in their normal
the classrooms. It is an identiication of strengths which is a mutual support behavior.
amongst peers.
Richards and Farrell Some problems in implementing the procedures during the
Peer observation described from very diferent aspects might have several (2005) lesson.
strengths and weaknesses. Table 2 presents some of the strengths discussed in
Miscalculation in adapting the activities.
the literature.
Diiculty in describe accurately in real time such as the
Table 2: Advantages for doing peer observation actual language that was used during a teacher – student
exchange.
Bell (2005) Providing insight and supportive feedback A threatening experience because the teacher is now on
Bell (2010) Developing a sense of collegiality ‘show’
Bennett and Barp (2008) Improving student learning Richards (2011) Some degree of anxiety
Bandura (1977, 1997) Seeing what other peers do and improve themselves Badre (2010) Possible bias relating to the observer’s own beliefs about
Badre (2010) Gaining diferent feedback from diferent people teaching.
Donnelly (2007) Facilitating relection on the efectiveness of the par- he need for training on how to observe and be observed
ticipant’s own teaching Insensitivity during the feedback
Fostering discussion and dissemination of good practice
Increasing teachers awareness in student experience of As a clear note for the limitations of peer observation, it can be seen from
learning the above chart that it may cause some misunderstanding in between the peers.
Bandura (1997) Improving in conidence in teaching and their self-
Badre (2010) eicacy
Bell (2010)
Procedure
We decided to follow a reciprocal / developmental model of peer observation
As it is seen from the above chart, we, as teachers, gain good amount of where two teachers took turns in observing one another’s lessons; it also has
positive results in peer observation. To support this idea, Richards and Farrell themes from the developmental model as Kenan Dikilitaş, the Head of Profes-
(2005) expresses quite the same outcome from a classroom observation by say- sional Development, was also involved in the process. We have also grounded
ing ‘More experienced teachers can beneit from the novice teachers by peer observa- our research on Kolb’s Experiential Learning heory.
tion.’ his clearly shows us that peer observation can play a signiicant role in he data collection consisted of a cycle of three observations per teacher, in
classroom practices, can back novice teachers up when they feel stressed out which the two teachers observed and took notes on one another’s lessons. he
with the monotonous teaching methods and can open a new sight to a better observations were recorded with a combination of ield notes and narrative
teaching. As Richards and Lockhart note, “much of what happens in teach- summary format and were also recorded on video for later evaluation which
ing is unknown to the teacher” (1994:3). his also indicates that the unseen would assist teachers to analyse the activities and student engagement in the
areas in teaching could be noted down by the help of peer observation which lesson. After each observed lesson, the notes were then discussed in a post
in return would be assistance for future conducts in teaching for all teachers. observation meeting for evaluation in which the Head of Professional Devel-
While this is the case and it has some positive factors, there also may be opment was present in order to give guidance when necessary. he following
some limitations to be a disadvantage for some reasons according to some of themes emerged from the initial post observation meeting:
the researchers.
76 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 77
professional development

• inductive /deductive teaching approach Findings and discussion

• classroom management
• example rule / rule example Research question 1: Current teachers’ beliefs about teaching grammar
• learner / teacher centred We initially conducted our irst lessons without a pre observational focus in
• student / teacher talking time order to see where we required or needed to develop our teaching practice.
After the lessons, we had a post observation meeting together with Kenan
It was also decided that the students perceptions of the diferent lessons (the Mentor), here we relected on our views about teaching grammar and
should also be collated and analysed in order to triangulate our data collection. discussed what had happened during the lesson. Together with the mentors’
After the observed lessons, students were placed in groups to relect on the help we exposed the main focus of the research. he table below presents the
lesson based on the following questions: current beliefs of the two teachers when teaching grammar.

• What is the diference between the three lessons?

• Which lesson did you enjoy the most?
Table 4: Initial beliefs about grammar teaching from the 1st observed lesson

• Which lesson do you think you learnt the most? Deductive approach Inductive approach
• Which lesson would you prefer to have in future English lessons? ‘‘deductive teaching is boring and ‘‘grammar should be presented in an
teacher centred’’ integrated way as opposed to directly
After further discussion together with the mentor, we decided to narrow from the book’’
the observational focus down to grammar instruction, and then to inductive ‘‘it’s an out of date way of teaching’’ ‘‘learners should induce grammar
structure from exposure to contextual-
and deductive dichotomy, as this would also encapsulate the other themes.

Koray
‘‘probably better suited for exam ised input’’
teaching’’ ‘‘activities are a good tool for providing
grammar input’’

“he teacher should give the gram- “In inductive approach, teaching is not
mar structure” very involved”

Savaş
‘‘In Turkey, the teacher has to give “time consuming”
pre information before moving on “teacher is killing himself trying to
to giving the actual lesson” control the students”

It can be understood from the descriptive sentences that T1 has a prefer-

ence for an inductive approach. He believes that the teacher ought to allow
learners the chance to take responsibility for their own learning, as opposed
to being taught grammar structures explicitly in a teacher centred classroom
Figure 1: he cycle followed by the teacher-researchers whilst doing POT environment. On the other hand, T2 views a teacher’s role as being the dis-
seminator of knowledge in the classroom, and that inductive teaching is both
energy and time consuming, but also passive in the role as a teacher.
78 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 79
professional development

Research question 2: What are the current teaching practices of both teachers? Table 6 shows the sequence of activities based on natural deductive ap-
proach Savaş followed. Here he describes the grammar structure in detail be-
As this was a relective tool for PD, we wanted to see where we stood in terms
fore starting the activities. he lesson low is based on teacher’s performance
of teaching practice at the beginning of the study. his would give an objective
only with the majority of the lesson being spent in giving the grammar target
analysis of our teaching and give us the focus points we would later concen-
structure to the students.
trate on in future observations.
Research question 3: Were there any diferences seen in the 2nd and 3rd observed
Table 5: Koray’s 1st observed lesson outline (Parallel structure) lessons
Stage Description Interaction Duration
Table 7: Koray’s 2nd observed lesson (If clauses)
Warm-up Collaborative kinaesthetic activity GW 5 Stage Description Interaction Duration
Input Wall dictation with complicated texts T-S GW 10 Input Give students sample sentences and structure T-S 10
Sts try to simplify sentences S-M PW 8
Exploration St do multiple choice exercise from book T-M-S 5
Compare students’ sentences with S-T 5 Controlled
Noticing Sts rewrite sentences using it clause PW 8
teacher’s Practice
Peer check in groups GW 2
Controlled Students board their sentences for whole
Exercise from course book Feedback S-T-S 10
Practice T-S-M 10 class discussion
Sts create own sentences using paral- S-M 10 Freer Practice Exercises from course book T-S 10
Freer practice
lel structures
Summary of where and why we use It
Warm down T-S 2
clause
Koray’s attitude towards teaching seems to be relected in above lesson
outline. Creating integrated skills activities to give students the opportunity
From Table 7 it may be seen that Koray experimented in applying a deduc-
to notice the structure and then practise using it. With no explicit grammar
tive teaching approach, as he had observed in Savaş’ previous well executed
input from the teacher, students are directed towards the grammar tables in
deductive lesson. he grammar structures were given to the students at the
the reference section if and when needed.
beginning of the lesson. A big diference was noticed in seeing the students so
quiet and easy to manage, without any real efort from the teacher.
Table 6: Savaş’ Observed 1st lesson outline (2 and 3 conditionals)
Stage Description Interaction Duration Table 8: Savaş’ 2nd observed lesson (Parallel structures)

Warm-up Discussion leisure time T-S 5 Stage Description Interaction Duration

Input Presenting formula T-S 5 Warm-up Introducing the structure T-S 5
Structural diferences T-S 10 Presenting samples S-T 5
Practising the structure S-T 10 Input Applying Structural diferences T-S 10
Exercises Sentence completion T-S 15 Practicing the structure S-T 10
Activities Presenting songs and pictures S-T - Exercises Students Sentence completion S-T 15
Warm-down Summarizing what has been learnt T-S 5 Warm-down Summarizing what has been learnt T-S 5
80 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 81
professional development

Table 8 shows the group of activities that was also based on deductive ap- he table above shows a lesson plan based on an inductive approach. he
proach though the teacher’s intention was to do an inductive approach. his teacher starts the lesson with practicing the grammatical structure samples
time there were more practices on the grammar structure that were predomi- and moves on with a video presentation followed by sentence formations done
nantly performed by the students. It appears there may have been some resis- by the students as a conirmation of the knowledge elicited during the irst
tance to experiment with a change in practice at this stage of the study. part of the lesson.

Table 9: Koray’s 3rd observed lesson outline (Deinitive / Non-deinitive relative clauses) Research question 4: What are the developing beliefs of the teachers in the 2nd
Stage Description Interaction Duration and 3rd post observation discussions?

Lead in Family Guy video clip T-S 3

Table 11: Opinions taken from 2nd post observation meeting
Test/ Controlled Sts categorise and correct sentences T-S-M
5
practice (def/non-def ) PW Deductive approach Inductive approach
Setting Context Elicit story from pictures about Savaş ‘‘deductive approach has its place ‘‘students should induce grammar
T-S 3
Sts rearrange mixed sentences to create but shouldn’t be used all the time, structure from the exposure to contex-
GW 7
story especially with prep school stu- tual input’’
Freer practice Sts make the story more interesting dents’’ ‘‘activities in the class room are a good
GW 10
using target grammar structure ‘‘I felt more relaxed, classroom way to provide grammar input’’

Koray
Feedback Sts share stories Whole class 5 management was much easier’’ ‘‘the teacher should release control of
T-M-S the classroom, letting students prac-
Focus on form Elicit grammar structure and rules 8 tise’’
GW
“activities are a time consuming thing”
As the lesson outline demonstrates, Koray has integrated themes of “this is still a grammar lesson and “I wanted to give sample sentences

Savaş
deductıve teaching, in an inductıve lesson, with testing and controlled practice I still believe students should be irst rather than the structure which I
at the beginning but still inductıve in terms of eliciting gaps in structure from followed and you just can’t leave it believe was something I don’t normally
students. here was also much more learner interaction. all to the students ” do”

Table 10: Koray’s 3rd Observed lesson outline (Adverbials) Koray’s relection
Stage Description Interaction Duration After observing Savaş’ lesson, I experimented teaching with the deductive ap-
Warm-up Presenting video in context T-S 15 proach. I noticed that the class was much easier to manage as the lesson was
Practicing the struc- Eliciting Students ’sentences S-T 10 centred on me, as opposed to the learners. he class was very quiet and calm,
ture S-T 5 students seemed to be getting on well with the exercises from the book, how-
ever there were several students who didn’t appear to be doing anything. I
Exercises Eliciting Sentence samples S-T 10
remember it feeling more like a high school environment as opposed to a
Activities Presenting videos S-T - university preparatory school. Although it was easier to manage the class, I
Summarizing what has been don’t think students really had the opportunity to practise using the language
Warm-down T-S 5
learnt as much as they would have normally.
82 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 83
professional development

Savaş’ relection Savaş

As seen in the table, I have somewhat strict rules over deductive grammar In this inal post observation I believe that the inductive lessons are rather
teaching that is due to teaching deductively for a long term. Even though the attractive to students, however, he still believed a grammar lesson should be
lesson was planned and conducted to be more like a student based one, there conducted deductively. I also believe that teachers should be careful when per-
was still quite a little resistance executing one. I seemed to be in control with forming an inductive lesson and students should be kept in line with the struc-
the practices during the lesson. tures at the of the lessons.

Table 12: Opinions taken from the 3rd post observation meeting Research question 5: What are students’ perceptions of the diferent approaches
to teaching grammar?
Deductive approach Inductive approach
he following table attempts to compare the difering opinions on grammar
“students can get bored easily as ‘‘grammar structure should be rein-
they soon become disengaged’’ forced after giving suicient time for
instruction taken from both classes. It was decided that the students’ percep-
Koray

‘’structures should be highlighted students to induce the rules’’ tions of our teaching practice should also be taken into consideration, as they
allowing learners to notice, rather ‘’learning occurs through practice ‘’ are often able to give a diferent perspective about the lessons compared to
than being taught’’ the teacher’s opinion.
‘’although inductive is preferred “all about activities, no grammar teach-
approach, let’s not forget that ing” Table 13: Focus-group feedback on the approaches for both classes
deductive approach is there to be ‘’normally we have to see a grammar Inductive Approach Deductive Approach
applied’’ teaching lesson, rather than activities’’
Savaş

‘’deductive approach should be in “doing activities is something else, it’s engaging disengaging

Students’ perceptions
of the diferent approaches
a process of goals as most teachers not teaching, it’s another way of con- interactive limited interaction
say’’ ducting a lesson’’ informative passive students
“requires less efort” ‘’some of the activities may be a bit competitive learning-oriented
confusing’’ activity-based little practice
learning-based memory based
discovery-based explicit teaching
Comments about changes in beliefs after the inal lesson not grammar focused grammar focused
kinaesthetic orientation limited participation
more students talking less student talking time
Koray
Towards the end of the study we played the videos of the recorded lessons
After the third and inal observation, my views on a traditional deductive
back to the classes, followed by a focus group interview with the students. We
approach still remain unchanged. Our prep school students, who have six les-
wanted to triangulate our perceptions of teaching, to those of the observer and
sons of English lessons ive days a week need lessons that are both engaging
the students. As can be seen, students ind the inductive approach as ofering
and allow learners to use their cognitive thinking skills. We should allow stu-
more fun, being learning-based and increased levels of interaction as well as
dents the opportunity to become learners, actively seeking out rules and pat-
being more learner-centred. Although several students commented that there
terns in language, as opposed to being passive recipients of knowledge.
was more learning in the deductive lessons, they were considered as boring and
not providing enough opportunities for interaction and practice.
84 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous Koray Akyazı and Savaş Geylanioğlu 85
professional development

Relections ity of our students at Gediz University prep school appear to be students, so
surely the task for me is to ind the happy medium.
As a result of this teacher-research project, I have also deepened my knowl-
Koray’s relection edge on the diferent models of peer observation, with their difering advan-
After writing an exploratory practice research paper the previous year on tages and disadvantages in relective practice and teacher development. I know
teaching phrasal verbs, I wanted to do something where the focus of the re- feel more conident in my teaching practice as I feel more aware of students’
search was me and my teaching practice. I could never have realised the depth expectations and needs as second language learners.
at which doing peer observation could go to when used as a relective tool, nor
how diicult it would turn out to be. Savaş’ relection
As this model of peer observation included a cycle of three sessions fol- In my case, it all started with a curiosity for how a lesson was to be conducted
lowed by peer observations, we were given many useful opportunities to relect by a native teacher when teaching grammar and the degree of interaction be-
on our teaching practice. I used to thınk that my lessons were all inductive but tween the teacher and the students during that lesson.
after doing lots of reading, I learnt what an inductıve lesson should actually be. At the end of three grammar lesson observations we gave feedback to each
I soon realised that I was neglecting the grammar structure input my students other under the supervision of a school mentor who was present with us at
were so used to receiving, in favour of more time for practice. As a result of this every feedback session. After analyzing our irst lessons the outcomes indi-
project, I have revisited my beliefs on the importance of matching my teach- cated that we were completely diferent from each other in terms of teaching
ing style to that of the classroom, rather than always following an inductive form and technique which was something I had expected to happen. I must
approach. Now I am more aware of the need for including grammar structures admit that my expectations were higher as I had the belief that a grammar
after giving enough time for the learners to induce the rules for themselves. lesson would be held better with a native teacher and the students would learn
We were lucky enough to have an educational developer who or gain better insights tactics in grammar lessons. But this was not the case.
was also involved in the project. He helped deepen the study and he lessons were appreciated equally by the students as the inductive lessons
narrow our attention on the main issues discussed in this study. taught by the native teacher were equally regarded as good as the deductive
He was there to provide assistance in giving feedback throughout teaching method, moreover, some of the students commented that a deductive
the research, from developing the research questions through to lesson was more engaging at some point.
the analysis of the data and inally writing the paper. Without the My initial focus of working with a native teacher was to look at classroom
educational developer’s active role, the post observation meet- interaction patterns. After experimenting with diferent types of activities I
ings may have had a negative impact on teacher conidence, as at now feel more aware about the importance of student interaction within a
times, feedback was judgemental and subjective. classroom. It goes without saying that peer observation helped us to elaborate
new ideas to perform better grammar lessons and a clearer insight of what we
he focus of this project wasn’t to change our practice, but to relect on really were in teaching. With the help of peer observation teachers can also re
our beliefs about teaching grammar. We have both noticed good practice in think and establish new patterns of practices for themselves to improve and
the class, and tried to implement and combine new styles of teaching into our change in a positive way thus it helped us (teachers) see both gaps and posi-
own class to good efect. I have researched extensively on the advantages and tive aspects in our own grammar lessons and practices of which we were not
disadvantages of deductive and inductive teaching, including when, why, and previously aware. Finally, peer observation in general can help narrow the gap
with whom. In my opinion, deductive teaching may be more suited to teaching between one’s belief and the view of teaching and what actually happens in
students, whereas learners may appreciate the inductive approach. he major- the classroom.
86 Peer observation: A systematic investigation for continuous
professional development

References Enhancing student motivation through

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-eicacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change.
Psychological review, 84(2), 191.
Bell, M. (2002). Peer observation of teaching in Australia. Learning teaching and sup-
7 reflection on motivation
port network Generic Centre. Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen
Bell, M. (2005). Peer Observation Partnerships in Higher Education. Higher Education
Research and Development Society of Australia Inc., Milperra, NSW.
Bennett, S., & Barp, D. (2008). Peer observation–a case for doing it online. Teaching
in Higher Education, 13(5), 559-570.
Davys, D., & Jones, V. (2007). Peer observation: A tool for continuing professional Context and problem: why motivation?
development. International Journal of herapy and Rehabilitation, 14(11), 489-493. Learning a language is a complex process and there is a close relationship be-
Donnelly, R. (2007). Perceived impact of peer observation of teaching in higher edu-
tween motivation and language learning. Furthermore, motivation is central to
cation. International Journal of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 19(2),
117-129.
it and without this learning hardly occurs. So it’s not surprising to note there
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit are numerous studies on motivation. As a result of these studies we note a clear
language knowledge. Studies in second language acquisition, 27(02), 305-352. connection between motivation and success in language learning. herefore,
Gosling, D. (2005). Peer Observation of Teaching: Implementing a Peer Observa- motivation plainly results in success. Motivation among students makes all
tion of Teaching Scheme with Five Case Studies. Staf and Educational Develop- the diference and it is vital to any teacher. hus, students can be motivated by
ment Association. their teachers and achieve their goals. A teacher’s role in creating a classroom
Hammersley‐Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2005). Relecting on relective practices where students are motivated to learn is very important for the education pro-
within peer observation. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 213-224. cess. If students are motivated they look forward to coming to the language
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 65-78). classroom and want to engage in class. Every student’s motivation is diferent.
Oxford: Pergamon. Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (Eds.). (2005). Professional De-
herefore in motivation it is important to understand the motivational strate-
velopment for Language Teachers: Strategies for Teacher Learning. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
gies and implement them into the teaching-learning process. If, as teachers,
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. (2011). Practice Teaching: A Relective Approach. Cam- we are able to apply motivational strategies, we can thus enhance both student
bridge: Cambridge University Press. performance and classroom experience.

Teacher one
he aim of this research was to better understand student motivation towards
learning English. As an instructor I can clearly see that sometimes my stu-
dents are highly motivated or demotivated. he starting point of this research
was to understand what afects their motivation and what their attitudes were
towards learning English. Within this framework I researched the relation-
ship between motivation and language learning and analyzed the relevant data
in order to determine ways to motivate my students.

87
88 Enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen 89

Teacher two and explore their own motivational aspects. By discussing motivation in a sys-
tematic way with carefully designed interaction patterns we believed students
From my own experience, I can openly state that a teacher is signiicant to help
can have a chance to view motivational dimensions of their learning process
students to be motivated but sometimes s/he alone might not be suicient to
from a deliberate, conscious and willing perspective.
motivate each student. hat is the answer to the question of why some lan-
Since some language learners are more successful than others, it is neces-
guage learners are more successful than others. Personally, I can mentor some
sary to shed light on possible causes. In general, factors specifying diferences
to be motivated, however I want all to be motivated. To this efect, I explored
between the learners’ language acquisition are called individual diferences and
the connection between language learning and motivation as an action re-
attitudes. According to Gardner and Tremblay (1994) all individual difer-
search at Gediz University this year.
ences and attitudes afect learners directly. Considering these it makes sense to
question language learners in order to enhance motivation. his might lead us
Literature review to reveal the signiicance of communicating with the language learners during
In this teacher-research we aimed at increasing student’s motivation by en- the lessons in this way. At that point it is also necessary to explore students’
gaging them in discussing what motivates and demotivates them during the expectations through their own idiosyncrasies. Attitudes are considered as ba-
learning process. In the literature there are several references that support this sic issues in much research since they directly afect the language learning
view. For example, according to Gardner and Lambert (1985), there is a close process (Gardner and Lambert, 1959, 1972; Gardner, 1985; Deci and Ryan
relationship between language learning and motivation. Even though motiva- 1985; Dörnyei, 1990, 1994, 1998; Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991; Oxford
tion is a term used in academic and research settings there is little consensus and Shearin, 1994; Gardner and Tremblay, 1994; Ellis, 1994).
regarding its precise meaning (Dörnyei, 1998).
Motivation has a close relationship with language acquisition as students’ Procedure
motivation afects their learning process. Cook (2000) discovered that lan-
he study involved 25 A2 level EFL learners who each answered four difer-
guage acquisition is not the same among all learners. Furthermore, he main-
ent open ended questions to understand their motivation. Every week they
tains that there are three main factors which concern and inluence second
were given one such question which they answered individually, in pairs and
language acquisition (SLA): age, personality and motivation, and adds that
in groups, respectively. he irst three questions aimed to understand their ap-
among these motivation is the most signiicant. Ellis (1994: 715) approached
proaches towards learning English and factors that afect their motivation or
motivation as the attempt which learners make for learning a second language
demotivation. he irst was “Why do I learn English?” he purpose was to
because of ‘their need or desire to learn it’. Lightbown and Spada (2000: 33)
address and understand their self-awareness towards learning English. he
identiies motivation in SLA as ‘a complex phenomenon which can be deined
second “What is your approach towards learning English?” By asking this we
in terms of two factors: learners’ communicative needs and their attitudes to-
tried to learn the students’ attitude towards learning English. We wanted them
wards the second language community’.
to ill in branches of a tree and they thus wrote the ways in which they could
To base debates upon second language teaching it is crucial for teachers to
use the language they were learning. he purpose was to make them under-
ind innovative ways to enhance student motivation. Children acquire their
stand the areas where they use and need English in their lives. In response to
irst language involuntarily, unconsciously, and relexively but adults learn a
the third question, “What makes you feel motivated & demotivated?” they
second language by deliberately, consciously, knowingly and wilfully taking on
listed internal and external factors that afected them.
and assuming rules of language and learning strategies (Krashen, 1985, cited
At the end of the classroom motivational studies we wanted to explore how
in Cook, 2000). In the same way, in our classroom practices we surfaced adult
students’ motivation was inluenced by this oral and written engagement. To
learners’ motivational awareness through various tasks and got them to mirror
90 Enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen 91

this end we asked them the following inal question “How did you feel about Findings and discussion
these activities?” his was individually answered and afterwards, discussed as
After we collected these data we framed our research questions as follows;
a whole class to understand whether these questions had any impact on their
1. Does engaging in these activities help students become more moti-
motivation. During this process we did not interfere with any response that
vated?
they had written and, in order to provide anonymity, did not request they write
his question was the main purpose behind this study. To understand this
their names. Turkish students wrote their answers in Turkish as they felt they
we analyzed their answer to “How did you feel about these activities?” As the
could express themselves better this way. answers were clearly expressed, we could draw a conclusion and prepared a
chart accordingly.
Questions in data collection
2. Why do students think these activities are motivating?
Q1 Why do I learn English? To answer the second research question we translated every response that
Q2 What is your approach towards learning English? they had given. As some answers are similar to each other we counted how
many responses were the same and gathered those under eight key themes
Q3 What makes you feel motivated & demotivated? which will be discussed in the following section of this chapter.
Q4 How did you feel about these activities?
Research question 1: Does engaging in these activities help students become
more motivated?
Summary of the procedures
With this question we wanted to understand whether engagement in these
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 activities had created motivation for students. he data where students were
Purpose Understand- Learning the Finding the Exploring asked to decide and answer emerged as shown below.
ing approaches students’ at- internal and how students’
to learning titude towards external fac- motivation Table 1: Number of positive and negative responses by students
learning Eng- tors that af- was inluenced
Students (N) Yes No Neutral
lish. fected them. by oral and
written en- 25 23 2 -
gagement.
Procedure individually, Individually, in Individu- Individually,
Table 1 demonstrates the high number of students who believed that this
in pairs and in groups ally, in pairs, in classroom experience of discussing motivation with classmates had had a positive impact
groups groups on becoming more motivated.

Skills Discussing Discussing Discussing Discussing

and writing and writing and writing and writing Research questions 2: Why do students think these activities are motivating?

Duration 50 minutes 50 minutes 50 minutes 50 minutes

he second research question was asked in order to identify reasons that make
these activities motivating for them. We found eight impact areas from the
students open ended responses. hey reported that talking about motivation in
the classroom in pairs and in groups gave them a chance to revisit their moti-
vation. Some answers given by the students are illustrated in table 2.
92 Enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen 93

Table 2: reasons for positive motivational aspects Table 3: reasons for negative motivational aspects
Impact N Illustrative Students Responses Student Reasons
Motiva- 18 “Because of these activities, I saw that our teachers 1 “I think they are useless.”
tion in- are trying hard for us. I started to enjoy English even 2 “I like them because we did not have to do any lessons.”
crease though I hate it.”
“It increased our motivation positively.”
“I wanted to learn English more.”
“hese surveys give us a break during our lessons and To look at what makes these activities motivating, igure 1 visualizes the
thus, increase our motivation.” most reported reasons. he major aim of the activity was to help the students
feel more motivated by relecting on their motivation to learn and exchange
Awareness 17 “I realized the importance of English.”
“It helped me realize that I had to try harder to develop ideas with others. It seems that this has been achieved, on the basis of their
myself.” self-reported responses.
“I understood that learning a language is very useful.”
Learning 9 “I can diferentiate what is useful and what is not.”
“I learned efective learning methods.”
“I learned how to study English.”
“I learned time management; I stopped wasting my
time and started to learn how to study eiciently.”
hought- 7 “I questioned why I needed to learn English.”
stimulat- “hese activities broadened our way of thinking.”
ing “I think this is an opportunity for us to correct our mis-
takes and increase our motivation.”
Self-ex- 4 “hese kinds of surveys make us feel valued and we can
pression express our feelings via these activities.”
Social 3 “I had better and quicker connection with my class-
develop- mates.”
ment “I started to think about the efect of English in our
lives.”
“hese activities helped me realize that I can work in It was clear that we realized the role of student relection over issues that
groups.” are problematic for themselves. By sharing ideas they came to realize where
Sense of 1 “hese kinds of surveys make us feel valued and we can they were and how they could improve these weaknesses. he activities we
belonging express our feelings via these activities.” conducted in the classroom ofered them an opportunity to think about and
Problem 1 “It helps us to convey our problems.” see themselves, which also provided us with a detailed account of how they
Identiica- view motivation and how we can help them be more motivated. We discuss
tion more speciic inluence of the project in the relection section below.
94 Enhancing student motivation through relection on motivation Zeynep Aksel and Pelin Õzmen 95

Relections lesson. As they tend to feel demotivated during the lessons, we will sometimes
apply these questions to afect their motivation, realizing that a ‘recess’ during
Teachers a lesson could highly be motivating.
Experiencing this exploratory practice study was both inspiring and eye-open-
ing. By carrying out this research we started to know more about students’ References
views of motivation to learn. During this process we read various articles about
motivation theories but both felt that was insuicient as our argument on Cook, V. (2013). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing Motivation in Foreign‐Language Learning.
motivation could only be explored through practical rather than theoretical
Language Learning, 40(1), 45-78.
knowledge. Our irst signiicant point was to make students relect by asking Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. he
questions, thus raising their awareness towards learning a second language. At Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
that point we found that our own awareness towards integrating motivation Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language
into teaching was really surprising to us. Since we were planning to ask those Teaching, 31(03), 117-135.
motivational questions to raise awareness, we realized that it was important Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
for a teacher to do something to raise awareness. However, after engaging in Press.
them, we learned that it was really vital to show concern for their ideas on their Gardner, R.C. & Lambert, W.E. (1972) Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language
own motivation. In consequence, we have learned that we can deal with issues Learning. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House
on motivation by means of motivational practice techniques that we have ob- Gardner, R. C., & Tremblay, P. F. (1994). On Motivation: Measurement and Concep-
tual Considerations. he Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 524-527.
tained during fruitful action research sessions
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Factors afecting second language learning.
How languages are learned, 2.
Students Long, M. H., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisi-
tion research. Longman.
As noted earlier, students were less motivated before being involved in this ex-
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation
ploratory practice study. It is possible to say that by discussing learning a new of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist,
language students became more aware of the impact it would have on their 55(1), 68.
future. According to the feedback they had given we could easily observe that
asking those questions about motivation increased their motivational levels.
Furthermore, when they were asked to answer questions about demotivation
they could express themselves freely, and by writing and discussing all these
questions we can state that this exploratory practice study raised their aware-
ness, self-expression skills and sense of belonging in various ways.

For Future Practice

Considering the activities we applied in the classroom and after analysing
the results, we concluded that this exploratory practice was beneicial for the
engagement of students in the classroom in terms of motivation. We came to
a mutual agreement that we could and should ask such questions during the
 Tackling speaking challenges faced by
8 low-level learners of English through
consultation with students
Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir

Context and problem

When we irst had speaking classes in an A1 classroom, we had not expected
that we, the teachers, would be the only ones talking. he irst impression that
we had in the irst ive minutes of the lesson was that we would have a chal-
lenging quarter. However, we couldn’t ignore the fact that speaking is crucial
because it improves students' communicative skills and only then students can
express themselves. his study focuses on the diiculties students (beginners)
face with speaking in English. We tried to explore these challenges from the
students’ point of view, exploring why many second language learners, espe-
cially those who don’t have a strong background in English, like our students
in our preparatory school, feel that speaking in a foreign language is harder
than writing, listening or reading.We also wanted to ind out when and at
what point the students should be expected to speak in the target language. To
do this, we prepared questionnaires to ind out what impedes their speaking
skills. Analyzing the feedback from the questionnaire, we gave a second ques-
tionnaire to ask for solutions from the students. According to the reactions
and feedback, there are 2 main factors: linguistic and non-linguistic. his study
provides a student perspective on their own challenges and ofers solutions to
major problems in speaking. It also answers a question for us: what should be
expected of low level learners in terms of their speaking at the beginning of
their learning experience?

Research questions
his study focused on the reasons why students have diiculty in speaking and
some possible solutions ofered by them. Research questions were as follows:

97
98 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir 99
through consultation with students

1. What are the factors that cause students to have diiculty in speaking? grated from early on. Swain points out the importance of output. According
2. What can be done to overcome these diiculties? to Swain, students should be pushed to speak. Being pushed will prompt them
3. Is it right to expect students who have just started learning English to to recognize the linguistic problems that they have. Students’ dialogue with
speak? others will show whether learning takes place or not. hus, it is also right to
say giving feedback is necessary in the learning process since when learners are
in the process of language acquisition; they often make mistakes which help
Literature review
them understand the language better while speaking.
here are diferent theories about whether students who have just started
learning English should be expected to speak or not. Some theories support
the idea that compelling students to speak in the early process of learning Procedure and indings
may cause challenges while others ind it necessary to wait until students are
provided with suicient input. Research question 1: What are the factors that cause students to have diiculty
Krashen (1981) thinks that production should be delayed until learners in speaking?
are ready. Students should not be expected to speak unless suicient input is
A questionnaire was prepared to ind out English speaking problems of stu-
provided. Krashen points out the importance of comprehensible input in the
dents who have diiculties and problems due their level of English. he ques-
process of language learning. According to his comprehensible input theory
tionnaire was given to approximately one hundred students in ive diferent
students are to go through a process similar to children. He makes emphasis
A1 classes. he aim of the questionnaire was to detect the diiculties and
on exposure and input rather than practice and production. Students must be
problems that low level students had. As they were A1 students the questions
exposed to language via suicient input in order to generate spoken and writ-
of the questionnaire were in Turkish and the students were expected to answer
ten acquisition automatically. his is only possible when enough focus is on
them in Turkish. he questions translated into English were as follows;
listening and reading; therefore, before production learners should be allowed
to listen and read to be ready to speak. In addition, Krashen thinks that there 1. How important is “speaking” when learning a new language? Why?
are afective ilters that play an important role in language acquisition. High 2. What are some of the practices you do to improve your English?
motivation and self-conidence are some of them. In a classroom atmosphere 3. How do you feel when you speak English?
high motivation and self-conidence should be high and anxiety level of stu- 4. In your opinion, what’s the best way to improve one’s speaking?
dents should be low. hus, for a lower ilter to work learners need to be relaxed. 5. What are some diiculties/problems that you encounter when speaking
According to Krashen’s theory, there are three stages in the process of second English?
language learning: he data collected through the questionnaire was irstly analyzed by cat-
1. Pre – production: Learners do not response but participate. (eg. by egorizing and then counting the responses. Regarding the responses, two main
pointing) factors were categorized as linguistic and non-linguistic. he results of the irst
2. Early – production: Students answer ixed conversational patterns. (eg. questionnaire which was done to discover the problems of the students show
How are you? ) that the main factors that relate to their speaking problems are as shown in
3. Speech – emergent : eg. role plays, games, personal information, opin- Figure 1:
ions, group problem-solving.
On the other hand, Swain (1995) believes that production should be inte-
100 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir 101
through consultation with students

As the table demonstrates, linguistic problems outweigh the non-linguistic

problems. he result of the distribution was the opposite of what we were ex-
pecting to ind at the beginning. his tells us that asking for students’ point of
view helped us a great deal for inding the right aspect for this study.
According to the results, the linguistic factors are: lack of vocabulary, lack
of grammar, semantics and pronunciation, wheras non-linguistic factors are:
lack of conidence, anxiety, fear of making mistakes, panic, unfamiliarity to the
topic. hese are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 1: Distribution of the speciic factors afecting speaking

In Figure 1, lack of vocabulary seems to be the major obstacle emerged in

the study. Students feel the need to have a wide range of vocabulary in order to
express themselves. Anxiety is the second biggest obstacle after lack of vocabu-
lary. It is an afective factor meaning a emotional factor which inluence learn-
ing. Lack of grammar, pronunciation, fear, semantics, panic, topical familiarity
and lack of conidence are the other factors that follow.
he data collected through the questionnaire was irstly analyzed by cat-
egorizing and then counting the responses. Regarding the responses, two main
Figure 3: Speciic analysis of non-linguistic factors
factors were categorized as linguistic and non-linguistic. Figure 2 shows the
distribution of factors.
When we look at the afective non- linguistic factors (Figure 3), we can
see that anxiety plays an important role along with fear, panic and lack of
conidence and topical familiarity. Students insist that they even forget the
easiest word or structure because of anxiety. It seems to weaken their self-
esteem and conidence therefore making the way for the other factors; panic
and lack of conidence.
Vocabulary is essential to English language teaching because without suf-
icient vocabulary, students ind it hard to understand others or to express
their ideas. Lack of vocabulary followed by lack of grammar and pronuncia-
tion are the linguistic factors that impede their speaking. hese are shown
in Figure 4.
Figure 2: Distrubution of the factors afecting speaking
102 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir 103
through consultation with students

Research question 2: What can be done to overcome these diiculties?

As our students were in the centre of problems themselves, we shared the
results of the irst questionnaire with our students. We prepared another ques-
tionnaire with the purpose of having a deeper understanding of what our stu-
dents think about how to solve the problems they deal with. It can be said
that the second questionnaire directly relects the suggestions made by the
students. hey are tabulated in Table 1:

Table 1. Students’ suggestions for improving speaking skills

he elicited problem Students’ own suggested strategies
Figure 4: Speciic analysis of linguistic factors 1. I don’t think I have a. reading books
enough vocabulary b. reading graders
to express myself. c. more reading
he above mentioned linguistic and non-linguistic factors that afect d. using authentic caricature and magazines for vocab
speaking have been elicited from the students and categorized by the teacher- e. using dictionary more
researchers. However, we also thought that it would be logical to ask the same f. dictionary study from English to Turkish
students for any solutions to the problems categorized in order to understand g. spend more time on vocabulary study
their ideas and blend them with ours. herefore we decided to ask them about h. more time for vocab development
their own suggestions. Research Question 2 attempts to answer this question. i. thinking about the meaning of the meanings
After we identiied problems in each category, students were given another j. studying vocabulary
questionnaire which ofered solutions to the common diiculties and prob- k. writing sentences with target words
l. vocab learning through writing practices
lems pointed out in the previous questionnaire. hey were expected to suggest
m. memorizing and using the words in sentences
possible solutions from their own point of view. n. videos and games to memorize
he second questionnaire had only one question; o. memorizing systematically and testing
With the help of the questionnaire given you before it was seen that low p. systematic memorizing
level learners have some common diiculties and problems. What are your q. watching ilms and series with dictionary
solutions to them?
• I don’t think I have enough vocabulary to express myself.
r. listening to music
s. playing games
• I panic when I’m supposed to speak. I feel anxious, nervous etc. t. making foreign friends
• I ind it diicult to form a sentence.
u. it should be taught in a funny way that helps us focus

• I’m afraid of making mistakes.

on the word
v. learning vocabulary with Turkish meanings
• When I don’t have enough background knowledge about the topic, I w. forming a glossary
have poor performance. x. a separate vocabulary lesson
• I don’t think my pronunciation is good enough.
y. repetition of vocabulary

Data from the second questionnaire was analyzed to see the solutions
from student perspective.
104 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir 105
through consultation with students

2. I panic when I’m a. More practice 6. I don’t think my a. Reading loudly

supposed to speak. b. Trust pronunciation is b. More pronunciation practice
I feel anxious, ner- c. A more friendly environment/teachers good enough. c. More speaking practice
vous etc. d. Practice with foreigners d. Repetition of vocabulary and memorizing
e. More speaking lessons e. Listening to songs
f. No grading system f. Watching videos/ TV series/movies
g. Knowing more vocabulary g. Making foreign friends
h. Hints and little help from others h. Going abroad
i. Understanding that it is ok to make mistakes i. Studying vocabulary
3. I ind it diicult to a. Vocabulary j. Having a speaking class at school
form a sentence. b. Practice k. Reading
c. Exercises about sentence structure l. Having a class for pronunciation
d. Writing practices m. More emphasis on phonetics in Turkish
e. Talking to foreigners n. More listening
f. Time o. No grading
g. A more friendly environment
h. Better grammar
i. Reviewing what has been learned As seen above, students’ responses to the questions were carefully catego-
j. Reading rized to see the whole picture which could tell us explicitly where the problem
k. More study on form is and how the problem can be handled through students’ eyes. We thought
4. I’m afraid of mak- a. Studying vocabulary that looking at the speaking problem through their eyes could help us solve
ing mistakes. b. More experience the problem more practically. he following section discusses these issues.
c. Less students in the classroom
d. No grading
Research question 3: Is it right to expect students who have just started learning
e. More practice
f. Making mistakes and getting used to it
English to speak?
g. Environment Normally, in our school we do not have separate speaking class. However, stu-
h. Pronunciation dents are required to have speaking exams at the end of each module including
i. Better grammar
A1. his system compels students to produce orally even if they are not ready
5. When I don’t have a. Researching about the topic to do so and we often observe that students are challenged by this practice. It
enough back- b. Examples from everyday life
stems from the fact that students are not equipped with enough vocabulary,
ground knowledge c. Interesting exercises about the topic
about the topic, I d. Reviewing what has been learned grammar and semantics and they feel under pressure, anxious and unconident.
have poor perfor- e. More interesting topics But only this year we had separate speaking classes for A1 students. hus,
mance. f. Having background information we could focus on speaking just as much as other skills. he context of the les-
g. Knowing more vocabulary son was based on real life situations and expressions so they were exposed to
h. Better pronunciation more input and seemed to beneit from the lessons. Even if they were supposed
i. Listening to other people speaking about the topic to start producing language right away, they felt more conident and comfort-
j. Speaking lessons able as they had a better chance to get and use more knowledge. Swain’s output
106 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English Elif Başak Günbay and Gülizar Aydemir 107
through consultation with students

theory has an important role in our students’ second language acquisition. We • Establishing good rapports with students, accept them as individuals,
let our students make mistakes as this will prompt them to recognize con- tolerate their mistakes, and create a supportive and relaxed classroom
sciously some of their linguistic problems. environment.
• Promote cooperation instead of competition.
Discussion • he activities should be centered on students’ interests and be appropri-
ate for their proiciency levels.
• Helping learners to accept the fact that they will make mistakes as part
Although students want to improve their speaking skills at initial stages of
language learning, as outlined in the indings sections they encounter or come
up with a variety of challenges. herefore, the results were helpful and guiding of the learning process.
for understanding what speciically caused our students’ speaking diiculties.
3. Pronunciation
• Repetitive Review/Practice. 
Identifying them was the irst aim of our study. he second questionnaire for

• Grasping every opportunity you have to speak with people in English.

student suggestions and solutions gave us an insight and helped us look at the
problems from the students’ point of view. As teachers it seems we need to
learn how to deal with the challenges and help them promote speaking. In or- • Recording themselves.
der to achieve this, we think that it is important to keep these points in mind: • Practice
1. Lack of vocabulary: • Read and listen simultaneously.
• Picking up meanings of words from context. [Context has beneicial • Remembering that the spelling of words and their pronunciation are
long-term efects.] If you have the time, and even if you think you don't often diferent
have the time, try to add context. Writing a few example sentences using • Role playing and impersonating native English speakers.
• Helping them to be good listeners (giving them a listening task, creat-
new vocabulary will help you remember the words in context.
• Playing oral and written word games to enhance their vocabulary ing questions etc)
• Watch the movies in that language extensively and listen to songs in TL
knowledge
• Playing with words can be enjoyable for it creates an interest in know-
ing more about them 4. Topic familiarity
• Don't make random lists of new words. Try to group words in themes. • Researching about the topic
his will help memorize new words more quickly. • Examples from everyday life
• Learning Collocations • Reviewing what has been learned
• Pre-teach vocabulary • More interesting topics
• Preparation time • Having background information
• he better prepared students are before an activity, the easier it will be • Knowing more vocabulary
• Listening to other people speaking about the topic
for them.

2. Anxiety, panic, Fear, Lack of conidence

• If the teacher is too involved, they will be distracted.
108 Tackling speaking challenges faced by low-level learners of English
through consultation with students

Relection Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in

It is diicult to solve a problem if it is looked from only one side of it. We
believe that this study helped not only us but also the students to come to a
realization about their own speaking skills and take an action. Speaking in
9 my classroom
Şehnaz Yusufoviç
a foreign language may seem diicult at irst. However, it can be overcome.
hese suggestions give us an idea about what can be done to contribute more
to their development. Before we got feedback from the questionnaires, we
had thought that students had problems mainly with grammar and that was
the reason why they had diiculty in speaking. However, the results showed Context and problem
us that it was not the only thing that stopped them from speaking. here
Researchers and teachers of foreign languages have long been aware of the
seemed to be other problems both linguistic and non-linguistic. And the solu-
problem of ‘foreign language anxiety’. Any teacher of any language has real-
tions ofered by the students were indeed similar to what we saw as a solution.
ized and seen the efects and the results of students’ anxiety. Having tried
hrough this study, we became more conscientous about designing the speak-
to ind and develop speaking activities that encouraged my students to use
ing lessons in order to avoid any diiculties that may be caused from our side
the language they were learning, it occurred to me that many students were
as teachers. We are now considering those linguistic and non-linguistic factors
handicapped by anxiety while practising. I therefore decided to focus on the
that afect students’ speaking skills in English to help them move forward in
question of language anxiety since it is among the most basic reasons for stu-
their learning process. As for Swain and Krashen’s opinions on speaking, we
dents not being able to talk in the classroom. In order to conduct my research,
found that there are points both of us agree with. However, in the end we are
I decided to use the activity ‘Speaking Marathon’ as a tool to help me to ind
most likely to agree with Swain on this. We believe that students should be
some answers to the questions in my mind.
encouraged to speak from early on. Being pushed will help them to come to a
he problem was: students were reluctant to talk in English in the class-
realization about the diiculties they face, because from students’ performance
room. hey even avoided using very basic words or structures. Instead, they
and responses, we can understand if the learning is taking place or not.
preferred to be silent or whisper in their native language – Turkish - to show
somehow they knew the answers to questions asked by the teacher. It was clear
References that anxiety was a factor in this. When the theoretical background is searched,
it can be seen that there are several reasons for students to feel anxious. Bear-
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford:
ing all the ideas in my mind, I wanted to focus on my idea that advocated:
Oxford University Press.
“Basically and most importantly they were afraid to hear their own voice in a
Krashen, S D. (1985). he Input Hypothesis. Harlow: Longman.
new language which was an unknown or less-known area to them.
Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New
Language anxiety is a complex problem including issues of motivation,
York: Routledge.
learning style, learning strategies, beliefs about learning, and attitudes of
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they
teachers and so on. I tried to isolate and focus on the problem of students’
generate: A step towards second language learning.  Applied Linguistics,  16(3),
self-esteem with the intention of increasing it, by creating an assessment-free
371-391.
atmosphere during the activities.
he following questions are addressed in my study:
• Are students aware of their language anxiety? Do they think they can
speak in the classroom?
109
110 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 111

• What reasons do students give for not feeling able to use English in the in this area deine their indings as “inconsistent and contradictory” (Mah-
classroom? moodzadeh, 2012). he reasons for these inconsistent, contradictory indings
• How do students feel and regard themselves while speaking English? and the inconclusive nature of anxiety stems from it being dependent on a
• Do some speaking activities - without any assessment worry - help stu- lot of variables. Young (1991) exempliies these variables as “language setting,
dents reduce their anxiety? anxiety deinitions, anxiety measures, age of subjects, language skill, and re-
• Can I use these kinds of activities in any type of lesson to encourage
search design”. How to interpret the results of anxiety research is also prob-
students to use English in class? lematic. For instance, while Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) speak about
“state, trait and text anxiety”, Macintyre (1995) inds it beneicial “to place
language anxiety into the broader context of the psychology of social anxiet-
Literature review ies” and supports his study with “anxiety from a cognitive perspective” (p. 91).
This study categorises three general factors which impact on foreign language
Teachers and researchers recognize the subject of anxiety for language learners. anxiety:
Researchers get help from psychology and linguistics. hey depend on general 1. Cognitive Factors, which can be regarded as linguistic variables that
theorists of anxiety like Bandura and Pekrun; more situation-speciic theorists show students’ problems in grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc.
of language learning anxiety like MacIntyre and Gardner; and theorists who 2. Afective Factors, which can be seen as non-linguistic variables that in-
highlight contextual levels of anxiety within individuals like Pappamihiel. his clude psychological reasons, public speaking anxiety, social, socio-cul-
study supports Bandura’s theory of self-eicacy. Bandura explains self-eicacy tural anxiety, etc.
“refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of 3. Other Factors, which can include teacher oriented variables, things re-
action required to manage prospective situations” (Bandura, 1995, p.2). Pap- lated to classroom environment, learner beliefs, etc.
pamihiel’s (2002) explanations also helped my idea to create the practices:
“Bandura’s (1991) theory of self-eicacy posits that when a situation is per-
ceived as threatening, the resultant anxiety is dependent on an individual’s Procedure
perception of his/her ability to deal positively with that threat…. Self-esteem his research was conducted with 12 Yaşar University Prep School Pre-inter-
can act as a mitigating factor in anxiety-producing circumstances”. (Pappami- mediate level Reading lesson students for a track lasting two months. hree
hiel, 2002, p. 329) While stimulating students’ own beliefs about themselves, diferent speaking activities were used. he activities were used 8 times over
I would be able to help them develop their own self-esteem; and the practices a 5 week period in accordance with a program schedule. Two questionnaires
would be a kind of supplementary skill- based trials. MacIntyre’s study (1995) were prepared to be applied before starting and after inishing all activities.
and the conclusion part of it was supporting my idea of practising and so he activities were done only at the beginning of the lessons, starting with one
that creating a better self-esteem. It says: “…attempts to reduce anxiety may minute in the irst lesson and ending up with ten minutes in the last planned
require some skills training as a supplement to anxiety reduction strategies lesson.
in order to compensate for deiciencies created by anxiety arousal,…” (Ma-
cIntyre, 1995, p. 97).
he reasons for and consequences of language anxiety in foreign language Phase I
learning are myriad and complex. Mahmoodzadeh (2012) states that ‘in case To start collecting data for the research, the irst questionnaire was given to the
of conducted studies on foreign language anxiety (eg., Aida, 1994; Macintyre, learners. he questionnaire was translated into the students’ native language
et. al.,1997), a review of the literature has shown that foreign language anxiety Turkish to make it more comprehensible and to be able to collect reliable data.
is negatively related to foreign language learning’. Nevertheless, researchers he statements and questions can be seen in Appendix A.
112 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 113

Phase II tivity, which lasted six minutes, included the same topics plus technology and
As a second step the three speaking activities – Speaking Marathon, Conver- animals (again covered in Reading lessons).
sation, and Interview - were commenced. he third speaking activity held in class was ‘Interview’. his was con-
he irst activity, used for three lessons, was ‘Speaking Marathon’, in which ducted by students in pairs twice. However, this time the pairs were arranged
all students were arranged sitting in rows facing each other. On the face of it, diferently to increase the diiculty of the activities gradually since the same
the activity appeared to be pair work but in fact each student worked alone. partners would create familiarity and higher self-esteem. But students do not
Students were talking to themselves in the target language without stopping. always have the same people around them to talk. hey should be able to, be
hey could say anything in English: words, phrases, expressions, sentences. In brave enough to talk to everybody. he task was the same for both of the inter-
the irst lesson, the students tried to talk for one minute, in the second lesson view activities. he students thought of a list of famous people including ilm
for two minutes, and in the last one for three minutes. he aim of the activ- stars, politicians, athletes and artists. Each of them chose a famous person to
ity was irst, to help students get accustomed to their own voice in the target become. hey were then put in pairs to interview each other. he duration for
language; second, to make them feel more comfortable since everybody in the the irst interview was eight minutes and the second, ten minutes.
class was doing the same thing; and inally to make them realize they know During all the activities all responses, comments, and complaints by the
some words, phrases, expressions in the target language and that they can say students were noted down for subsequent analysis.
them. he second questionnaire was applied after all the activities had been
No assessment or performance was made in order to create a low-anxiety, completed. Two more questions were added to the same questionnaire. hese
natural atmosphere. he students were informed of this and that only their open-ended questions were:
names as pairs were noted down to be monitored easily. No interference and Question 11. Do you think the activities we have done so far have been
correction was made by the teacher to encourage a positive classroom environ- helpful to you? If yes, how?
ment. he teacher had purely a facilitating role. Question 12. After all the activities we have done, do you think that you
he topics of the speaking marathon activity were also given to direct the will be speaking in English more comfortably? (See Appendix B for the sec-
students. For the irst activity they were free to talk about anything to get them ond Questionnaire)
used to the activity itself. For the second activity the topic was ‘jobs and people’
since the preceding and following reading lessons were about these subjects.
For the last speaking marathon activity the topics were ‘jobs, people, places Findings and discussion
and food’ to give them a broader range of material as the duration of the activ-
ity increased. hese were also topics of reading texts covered in class. Part I
he second speaking activity conducted for a further three more lessons
was ‘Conversation’ in which students were again sitting in a row facing each he results of the questionnaires are shown in pie charts relecting students’
other. Students were be arranged in diferent pairs, though they were free to ideas generally in three categories as positive, negative and no strong opinion.
choose partners. hey were told to ask questions to one another, to be inter- 12 students answered the irst questionnaire. he results and answers of the
ested in their partner’s answers and try to ask follow-up questions. he topic irst questionnaire are as follows:
of the irst conversation activity was free with the focus on students getting to
know each other. Students spoke for four minutes. he topics for the second Question 1: ‘I can speak in English easily in the classroom’.
conversation, which lasted for ive minutes, were: people, jobs, places, food, the
internet, communication and education. he third and inal conversation ac-
114 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 115

Question 3:

Students Description of how was 'finding words while

speaking English'

SS speak SS cannot speak

positive negative no strong opinion

It was found that out of 12 students only 3 of them agreed with the idea
that they could speak in English easily in the classroom, while 9 of them 11 out of 12 students expressed that they could not ind the right words
thought they could not speak. hat is, a clear majority of the students thought while speaking. (91.6%). For the statement of ‘ Finding words while speaking
that they could not speak in English easily in the classroom. in English is _________ for me.’: More than half of them used negative adjec-
tives meaning they found it diicult; a quarter of them used mild adjectives
Question 2: ‘I cannot
Question pronounce
2: ‘I cannot pronouncethe
thewords
words easily.’
easily.’ meaning a little diicult; and only a small minority used positive adjectives
meaning it was easy.
Students' pronunciation QuestionQuestion
4: 4:
How SS found their own pronunciation

Positive ideas about pronunciation Negative ideas about pronunciation

11 of 12 students thought that they could not pronounce the words easily.
positive negative no strong opinion
hey gave negative feedback about their feelings. Only one of them thought
that he/she could pronounce the words in English easily, and the feeling ex- A great majority of the students gave negative adjectives for how they
plained was positive. found their pronunciation. Students expressing positive and no strong opinion
Question 3: answers were equal with the numbers of 1 student each.
116 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 117

Question 5: 5:
Question Question 7:7:
Question

Speaking fluently Not being able to talk in front of classmates

positive negative
Positive (SS that can talk) Negative (SS that cannot talk)

11 out of 12 students stated that they could not speak luently. Only one of
these students thought that he/she could speak luently. Less than half of the students thought that they could not talk in front of
their friends in the classroom, while more than half believed that they could
Question 6: 6:
Question
talk in front of their classmates.

SS that avoid speaking English Question 8:

Self comparison with classmates about communication

Positive (SS do not avoid) Negative (SS avoid)

he majority of the students agreed the idea that they avoided speaking in My classmates are worse than me My classmates are better than me

English. Only 3 of them stated that they did not avoid from speaking English. My classmates are not different from me Not applicable answers

In this question it was searched that if the students thought their friends were better than
118 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 119

In this question it was searched that if the students thought their friends Part II
were better than themselves or not.
Some items of the questionnaire (items 5, 6, 7 and 10) were concealing some
A clear majority of the students thought that their friends were better at
underlying anxiety factors. he students tried to explain the reasons behind
communication than themselves; and that this afected many of them in a bad
their problems, and these were analysed using the three categories of factors
way while a small minority of them expressed that he or she was not inlu-
referred to above. he problems or factors are categorized into three headings:
enced by it. Few of the students thought that their friends were worse than
themselves; and that this made them feel good. 1. Cognitive Factors, which can be regarded as linguistic variables that
show students’ problems in grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc.
Question 9: 2. Afective Factors, which can be seen as non-linguistic variables that
include psychological reasons, public speaking anxiety, social, socio-
SS' Feelings when the teacher and the classmates do not
understand what they mean cultural anxiety, etc.
3. Other Factors, which can include teacher oriented variables, things re-
lated to classroom environment, learner beliefs, etc.

Question 5:
Factors why SS cannot speak fluently

Positive Negative No strong opinion Not applicable answers

Most of the students stated that they felt bad when the teacher and their
friends did not understand what they meant. A small minority of them ex-
pressed that they did not feel negatively since they believed that their friends Cognitive Factors Affective Factors Other Factors Not applicable Answers

were not better than themselves. here were three N/A answers.

Question 10: More than half of the students responded the questionnaire explained that
All the students thought that they could not speak English the way they they could not speak luently because of linguistic factors. More than half ex-
wanted. he reasons given by the students for this will be analysed in the sec- pressed that it was because of non- linguistic factors particularly anxiety. here
ond part of this section. was only one student answer in other factors category. Finally, there was also
another student that answered ‘I do not know’, which became a N/A answer.
120 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 121

Question 6: his question was analysing public speaking anxiety. Half of the students
stated that they felt good when they were speaking in front of their classmates.
he other half explained that they felt bad. As a result half of the students
expressed Afective Factors as reasons.

Question 10:
Reasons why SS cannot speak English well

Half of the students answered the questionnaire showed Afective Fac-

tors (related to social, psychological, and public speaking anxiety) as reasons
for avoidance while speaking. Students stated cognitive factors and students
expressed themselves as self-conident were equal. Cognitive Factors Affective Factors Other Factors Not applicable

Question
Question 7:
7:
Most students focused on Cognitive and Other Factors categories. For the
Speaking in front of classmates Afective Factors the number of students was less.

Part III
After all the activities were completed, the second questionnaire was given to
the students. Nine students answered the questionnaire since others were not
in the classroom. he results of the second questionnaire and the comparisons
of it with the results of the irst questionnaire are as follows:

Cognitive Factors Affective Factors

This question was analysing public speaking anxiety. Half of the students stated that they felt
122 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 123

Question 1: ‘I can speak in English easily in the classroom’. More than half of the students thought that they could pronounce the
words easily. hey gave positive feedback about their feelings. Less than a
Students quarter thought that they could not pronounce the words in English easily,
and the feeling explained was not much negative. Only one of the students
showed no strong opinion.
It is clear in this item again the practices changed student beliefs positively.
Question 3:

SS speak SS cannot speak

It was found that a great majority of the students agreed with the idea that
they could speak in English easily in the classroom, while less than a quarter
thought they could not speak. It can be seen that after the practices done in the
classroom, a great change occurred in students’ own beliefs and self-conidence For the statement of ‘Finding words while speaking in English is _________
when compared to the irst questionnaire. for me.’: More than half of them used positive adjectives meaning they found
it easy. Less than a quarter of them used negative adjectives meaning a little
Question 2: ‘I cannot pronounce the words easily.’ diicult; and only a small minority used weak adjectives meaning it was about
diicult.
Students' pronunciation
Question 4:Question 4:
How SS found their own pronunciation

Positive ideas about pronunciation Negative ideas about pronunciation No strong opinion

positive negative no strong opinion Not applicable answer

In this chart, it is seen that students’ self-esteem went up. Only one of the students gave a
negative answer. And one of the students did not answer the question; so it is shown in N/A
124 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 125

In this chart, it is seen that students’ self-esteem went up. Only one of the According to the irst questionnaire, three quarters of the students agreed
students gave a negative answer. And one of the students did not answer the the idea that they avoided speaking in English. Only 3 of them stated that
question; so it is shown in N/A category. Whereas positive answer was only they did not avoid from speaking English. But in this chart it is seen that the
one in the irst questionnaire, the number of students was three for the second rate of avoidance decreased after the practices.
one.
Question 7: 7:
Question
Question 5: 5:
Question
Not being able to talk in front of classmates
Speaking fluently

positive negative

Although still a great majority of the students stated that they could not Positive (SS that can talk) Negative (SS that cannot talk)

speak luently, the pie chart shows the increase in the number of students that
thought they could speak luently. his shows the development of students’
perception after the applied practices. After the studies done, the students who believed they could talk in front of
their classmates increased in number. here were less students showing public
Question 6: 6:
Question speaking anxiety.

SS that avoid speaking English Question 8:

Self comparison with classmates about communication

Positive (SS do not avoid) Negative (SS avoid)

My classmates are worse than me My classmates are better than me

According to the first questionnaire, three quarters of the students agreed the idea that they My classmates are not different from me Not applicable answers
126 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 127

In this question it was searched that if the students thought their friends Question 11: 11:
Question
were better than themselves or not.
Students that thought their friends were better at communication than Answers for whether the activities studied in class
helpful
themselves and that gave N/A answers were equal. Less than a quarter thought
that they were equal. Very few of them expressed that they thought their
friends were worse than themselves. But only one of the students expressed
that he or she was inluenced badly by it. his shows that after the practices
students developed conidence.

Question 9: 9:
Question

SS' Feelings when the teacher and the classmates

do not understand what they mean Yes No

More than three quarters of the participants agreed that the activities they
completed were helpful to them. heir comments about how it was helpful will
be considered in part IV.
Less than a quarter of them disagreed with the idea that the practised ac-
tivities were helpful.

Positive Negative No strong opinion Not applicable answers Question 12:

Answers for whether the SS would be more comfortable

Most of the students stated that they felt bad when the teacher and their
friends did not understand what they meant. Students who felt relaxed, who
had no strong opinion, and who gave N/A answers were all equal. his shows
decrease in the number of students who felt bad.

Question 10:
One of the respondents answered that he/ she could speak in English; so
that this student stated no reasons for not being able to speak English. he rest
tried to explain the reasons as shown in Part II.
Yes No No strong Opinion
128 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 129

For the question of ‘After all the activities we have done, do you think that throughout practice. Different variations of these kinds of activities can
you will be speaking in English more comfortably?’, there were no negative be used by teachers in the warm-up sections or at the last minutes of
answers. More than a quarter of the respondents expressed positive answers. language classes for any skills.
Nearly three quarters of the respondents indicated no strong opinion by ex-
pressing they would be speaking English a bit more comfortably.
Relections
Part IV In the light of the research that I have done, I am glad that I did the
survey. I have learned that if I have a question in my mind, I should go
his part includes the factors of item 11 of the second questionnaire since it
was not asked and answered in the irst one. on the trials of inding the answers. I have realized that doing research
brings a teacher better awareness. Practising this study helped me think
Question 11: 11:
Question from the point of my students, and to remember my own problems as a
student. I noticed that doing action research helped me to gain a detailed
How were the activities done helpful for SS
perspective on our students through a process of inding and solving
problems, improving strategies and knowledge. I also learnt that there
were many other teachers like me with questions in their minds. I could
ind and get help from their studies. All of these were learning steps for
me and they are helpful for my professional development in my career.

Acknowledgements
I am thankful to my supervisor Kenan Dikilitaş for his help, to Yasar
University Professional Development Assistant Songül Tomek, and to
Cognitive Factors Affective Factors my dearest friend Kudret Öztürk for her full support.

When the answers were analysed to the question of ‘how?’, it was seen that
more than half of the students who thought that the activities were helpful
References
for them expressed Afective Factors; namely words which showed self-coni- Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective eiciency in changing societ-
dence, realization of self-potential, development, relaxation, etc. ies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-eicacy in changing societies (pp. 1-45). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign Language Classroom
Comment on results Anxiety. Wiley, 70(2), 125-132. May 2014
İlkyaz, M. (2014). he Efect of Anxiety on Students' Speaking. In K. Dikilitaş (ed.),
On the whole, the study showed progress in students. Their attitudes, Teacher-Research Studies: Inquiries from Teacher's Perspectives (s. 27-32). İzmir:
perceptions, and point of views changed. As a teacher, I also saw the Gediz University.
changes in their conidence. According to this research, foreign lan- MacIntyre, P. D. (1995). How Does Anxiety Afect Second Language Learning? A
guage anxiety in the classroom is something that can be overcome Reply to Sparks and Ganschow. he Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 90-99. May
2014
130 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom Şehnaz Yusufoviç 131

Mahmoodzadeh, M. (2012, May). Investigating Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety 6. I avoid speaking in English.
within the EFL Learner's Interlanguage System: he Case of Iranian Learn- Yes O No O
ers. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(3), 466-476. doi:10.4304/ (If your answer is ‘yes’): I am afraid of ________________ while I am speak-
jltr.3.3.466-476 ing.
Pappamihiel, N. E. (2002, February). English as a Second Language Students and
English Language Anxiety: Issues in the Mainstream Classroom. Research in the 7. I cannot talk in front of my friends and the teacher in the classroom.
Teaching of English, 327-355. May 2014 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40171530 Because it makes me feel_________________.
Pollard, A. (2005). Relective Teaching. New York: Continuum.
Tunçay , N. (2014). How to Motivate the Students to Speak. In K. Dikilitaş (Ed.), 8. Some of my friends in the classroom are _____________ than me in com-
Teacher-Research Studies: Inquiries from Teachers' Perspectives (s. 33-37). İzmir: munication. his makes me feel ________________.
Gediz University.
Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and Speaking English as a Second Language. RELC, 9. When the teacher and my friends do not understand what I mean, I feel
37(3), 308-328. doi:10.1177/0033688206071315 ________________.
Young, D. J. (1991). Creating a Low-Anxiety Classroom Environment: What Does
Language Anxiety Research Suggest? he Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 426- 10. I cannot speak in English the way I want.
439. 05 07, 2014 http://www.jstor.org/stable/329492 Yes O No O
(If your answer is ‘yes’): what could the reasons be?
___________________________________________________________
Appendix A: the irst Questionnaire used in the study ___________________________________________________________ .
1. I can speak in English easily in the classroom.
Yes O No O (Questions adapted from the works of M. Mahmoodzadeh and M. Ilkyaz)

2. I cannot pronounce the words easily.

Yes O No O
(If your answer is ‘yes’): I feel ___________ when I pronounce an English
Appendix B: the second Questionnaire used in the study
word. 1. I can speak in English easily in the classroom.
Yes O No O
3. I cannot ind the right words while speaking.
Yes O No O 2. I cannot pronounce the words easily.
(If your answer is ‘yes’): Finding words while speaking in English is Yes O No O
_________ for me. (If your answer is ‘yes’): I feel ___________ when I pronounce an English
word.
4. I ind my pronunciation ___________.
3. I cannot ind the right words while speaking.
5. I cannot speak luently. Yes O No O
Yes O No O (If your answer is ‘yes’): Finding words while speaking in English is _________
(If your answer is ‘yes’): Because I focus on _________________while speak- for me.
ing.
4. I ind my pronunciation ___________.
132 Exploring students’ speaking anxiety in my classroom

5. I cannot speak luently.

Peer assessment as a way of developing
Yes O No O
(If your answer is ‘yes’): Because I focus on _________________while speak-
ing.
10 presenting skills
Sedef Fenik
6. I avoid speaking in English.
Yes O No O
(If your answer is ‘yes’): I am afraid of ________________ while I am speak-
ing.
"If we always do what we've always done,
7. I cannot talk in front of my friends and the teacher in the classroom.
we will get what we've always got."
Because it makes me feel_________________.
-Adam Urbanski
8. Some of my friends in the classroom are _____________ than me in com-
munication. his makes me feel ________________.

9. When the teacher and my friends do not understand what I mean, I feel
________________.
Introduction
With the idea of activating higher order thinking skills, the focus of educa-
10. I cannot speak in English the way I want. tion has shifted to learner-centered discourses and practices. he movement of
Yes O No O traditional methodologies and assessment levels to the involvement of learners
(If your answer is ‘yes’): what could the reasons be?
in the learning process lies in the belief of developing learners’ awareness and
____________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________ . critical thinking skills. his perspective has generated the culture of learning
11. Do you think the activities we have done so far have been helpful to you? If rather than the testing of the knowledge. hus learners have an active role
yes, how? both in learning and assessment processes. If language educators use the same
methodologies and assessments they will always get the same results in terms
12. After all the activities we have done, do you think that you will be speaking of learning. As long as you dive deep into the sea you can see the real beauty
in English more comfortably? and beneit of it. In the light of this learners should be diving to think deeply
in the assessment performance and consequently deepen their learning ac-
tively and autonomously.
In this paper I present the view of peer assessment method and additionally
share indings of research in which 13 students were involved in assessing each
other’s oral presentation as part of their oral portfolios. he aim of the study
was to ind out whether constant peer assessment develops learners’ presenta-
tion skills, whilst focusing on these questions:
(1) What kind of impact does peer assessment have on students’ presenta-
tion skills?

133
134 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 135

(2) Is peer and teacher assessment the same? Table 1: Strengths of peer assessment
(3) What do learners like or dislike about the evaluation process? Authors Quotes on Peer assessment
(4) How does relecting on the results of peers afect their improvement? Özogul & Sul- • Leads to a more active involvement of students in their
livan (2007) own learning process.
(5) What are the weaknesses and strengths of learners according to their Falchikov ( 2005) • Is beneicial to involve learners in the assessment of
self-relection? presentations to develop their self-regulating skills.
Topping (1998) • Allows for higher learning performance, higher presen-
Literature review tation conidence (self-eicacy) and the development
of appraisal skills.
he current assessment form in higher education is predominantly considered Topping (2003) • Highlights the economic beneits of adopting self- and
as summative and formative and done mostly by teachers and institutions. On

STRENGTHS
peer assessment which leads to the reduction of the
the other hand, with the idea of learner centered teaching the need to change teaching workload.
the assessment form is recognized both to enhance learners’ ability and coni- Schunk (2001) • Is a learning monitoring process
dence in assessing each other’s work and to raise learners’ involvement in the • Helps learners to bring their behavior in line with their
assessing process. Involvement of students in the assessment process can be performance and goals.
classiied into two: self- and peer- assessment. Falchikov (2005) deines peer Hughes & Large • Improves students’ academic performance and provides
assessment as students’ use of criteria and application of standards to the work (1993) them with experience in making assessments which
of their peers to judge that work. In the light of this, self-assessment is the use will be useful to them in their future careers.
of criteria and standards to evaluate their own work for future improvement. Mangelsdorf • Develops learner autonomy by transferring responsibil-
Peer assessment requires learners both to decide, in a class or group, who de- (1992) ity from teachers
serves what marks and why and to relect on what learning has taken place and • Improves student higher order thinking through the
how (Cheng & Warren, 1999). critical reading of peers’ writing.
Hattie (2009) • Is formative in nature and has a clear potential of fos-
tering the subsequent learning process.
Kwan & Leung • Promotes critical student relection of their learning
(1996)

Table 1 demonstrates the strengths of peer assessment which are compiled

from various articles in the literature. As they have highlighted, peer assess-
ment improves learners’ thinking skills while creating a more independent
learning atmosphere. During peer assessment learners’ critically doing self-
relection is also supported by Kwan and Leung (1996). It is critical to develop
learners’ self-observation skills as well as their self-relection skills in order to
help them gain a better understanding of their own development through the
comparison of their performances.
136 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 137

Table 2: Weaknesses of peer assessment In Table 3 what is assessment by peers and a teacher is depicted clearly
Authors Quotes on Peer assessment focusing on its features to highlight the diferences between them. he idea of
peer assessment is compiled from an article called ‘Self and peer assessment’
Nelson & Mur- • ESL learners mistrust peer responses as English is not
(2008) reported by RMIT University. In contrast to assessment by peers, the
phy (1993) their peers’ irst language and view the teacher as ‘the one
who knows’. features of assessment by a teacher are constructed as dichotomies to peer as-
sessment through my own analysis of ideas. According to my perception of as-
WEAKNESSES

Sadler & Good • Peer grading does not result in increased student learning
(2006)
sessment by teachers it seems that when assessment is under the control of an
authority it is more teacher- centered and limited in terms of perspective and
Wilding (2006) • Consideration needs to be taken with regards to the va-
knowledge improvement as peer assessment provides deep thinking including
lidity and reliability of assessment
the participation of learners.
Elliot & Hig- • here can be a tendency for students to initially under-
gins (2005) mark
Rowland • Student-grading is to be closely related to tutor grading Procedure
(2000) but generally lower As a part of a main course lesson the students were required to give an oral
Boud & • here was a slight bias on the behalf of learners to over- presentation on diferent topics every week to extend the students’ period of
Holmes (1995) mark active listening and speaking. he students did not receive training on how to
present. Considering this fact, it was decided to implement peer assessment
Compared to its strengths, peer assessment has also been perceived as an through a speciic rubric for 4 weeks for students to understand key points of
assessment with some discrepancies in terms of validity and reliability. In table delivering a presentation. he rubric comprises 4 aspects on oral presentation
2 it can be observed that all the weaknesses raised by diferent authors are all which are presentation content, visual aids, performance and general items.
about marking issue which moots the validity of peer assessment. It is clear here were 13 participants who regularly gave presentations for 4 weeks. Not
that this major concern on over- and under-marking is still under discussion. only the students but also I as a teacher illed the rubric to evaluate each stu-
dent weekly.
Table 3: Features of peer and teacher assessment After the irst 2 weeks’ presentations the evaluation forms about each stu-
Assessment by peers Assessment by a teacher dent were given to them to write a self- relection about their performance and
an action plan for later presentations. hen the last presentations of each stu-
Involving assessing peers Involving evaluation
dent were videoed for the students to evaluate their inal situation while giving
Focusing on improvement Focusing on judgement a presentation. Following this they were asked to write a self-relection once
Enhancing autonomous learning Maximizing teacher dependency more. As a last step of gathering data I asked them to discuss their likes and
Providing multiple perspectives Providing a narrow perspective dislikes about the evaluation process and the impacts of this process during
Learning from and with peers One way learning (from T to S) one class hour. All the data gathered from diferent mediums, were analyzed
Providing mutual feedback Providing authority feedback and interpreted in detail with tables and comments.
It is necessary to highlight the position of this process and the participants
Leading to open-mindedness Creating dependency and anxiety
as it is of immense importance in terms of Exploratory Practice suggested by
Promoting critical thinking Providing transmitted knowledge Allwright (2004). In this process an oral presentation task is a requirement in
Functioning formative Serving as summative and formative B2 level. his means that I, as a teacher, did not arrange extra time which led to
138 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 139

a practice done during working time. he study was not designed to ind a pos- he results of teacher assessment also demonstrate a rise in each section; how-
sible solution to a classroom problem; it aimed to improve both learners and ever, they luctuate slightly in four weeks. In spite of the luctuation in teacher
the teacher’s own understanding and deepen the thinking. When learners are grades it is clear that the learners developed their skills.
in the participant position rather than the object or the subject of the research It is important to highlight the higher grades in teacher assessment com-
they are motivated to discover their learning and understand what is going on. pared to peers. In the literature there are two contradictory ideas about peers’
he teacher is not the only one doing the research to understand and ind a over-marking and under-marking during assessment. As opposed to what
solution to problems. Allwright underlines this, ‘Learners need (and want) to Boud and Holmes (1995) suggest in terms of over-marking, indings depict
understand at least as much as teachers do.’ that learners have the tendency not to give high grades to their peers. hese
indings are supported by Elliot and Higgins (2005) study in terms of under-
marking and accuracy in peer assessment.
Findings and discussion
he data Figure 1 demonstrates total results given by their peers weekly
for each performance indicator, while Figure 2 is the evidence given by the
teacher. he results are based on the total average of the students’ grades from
each performance indicator. 3,4
3,2
25 3
25
2,8 Seri 1
20
20 2,6
Presentation Presentation
content content Presentation
15 15 Visual aids
Visual aids Visual aids content Performance
General
10 10
Performance Performance

5
General 5 General
0
0
Figure 3: Increase rateFigure 3: Increase rate per content
per content
week week week week
1 2 3 4
Figure 3 indicates how much improvement the students gained in their oral
Figure
Figure 1: 1: peer assessment
peer assessment Figure 2: Figure
teacher2: teacher assessment
assessment performance per content. As may be seen in the table their oral performance
was assessed in four diferent aspects. It is clear that the highest increases were
Figures above reveal how much the students developed on a weekly ba- in their performance and presentation content. his result also coincides with
sis. In Figure 1, it is clear that there was a gradual increase in four aspects of the students’ self-relections which demonstrate their focus points were mostly
students’ presentation performance. Although the success rate was good to on body gestures, eye contact, luency and memorizing. Contrary to what the
start with, it seems that the slight rise was evidence of the success of the peer graph depicts regarding visual aids’ rate, it has been observed that this was the
assessment process. he blue column representing presentation content shows result of their higher success rate at the beginning of their oral portfolio.
the highest increase every week compared to the other presentation indicators.
140 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 141

Table 4: Students’ areas of weakness after 1st and 4th self-relection Table 5: Students’ areas of strengths after 1st and 4th relection
Students’ weak In 1st self-relection In 4th self-relection Students’ strength Areas In 1st relection In 4th relection
Areas Organization of information 25% -
Eye contact 66% 27% Eye contact 0,8% 22%
Gestures 58% 38% Clarity in speaking 0,8% 33%
Excitement 50% 50% Body gestures 0,8% 11%
Memorizing 25% 11% Asking and answering 0,8% 22%

Timing 25% 0% Visual aids - 11%

Fluency - 22%
Voice and pacing 25% 22%
Voice - 22%
Visual aids 16% 11%
Organization of information 16% 0% When compared with weakness areas, it can be inferred from Table 5 that
Asking and answering Qs 16% 22% students do not have the tendency to spot their strengths at irst sight since
they are more focused on their weaknesses for improvement. Although some
Fluency 0,8% 33%
areas like eye contact and body gestures mentioned as weaknesses show a con-
siderable decrease between the 1st and 4th relection in Table 4, they are not
considered as strengths, which is strongly related to their focus on evaluation
Table 4 demonstrates participants’ areas of weakness in their relections af- rather than appraisal.
ter the irst two presentations and the last presentation. As may be seen in the
table, the highest percentages are on eye contact and body gestures according
Table 6: Impacts of video recalling for self-evaluation
to the learners’ observations at the beginning. It is clear that there is decline
in the rate which is the efective result of analyzing peers’ assessments and ob- Impact Areas Quotes from students
serving their own performances from the videos. It is interesting to highlight do self-relection I am still not doing the body gestures; I should moti-
that their excitement level remained the same which indicates that a normal vate myself to do so
level of anxiety is unavoidable during presentation. It can also be inferred that do self-assessment In my belief my presentation is better than my previ-
learners feel excited when they are being assessed by their peers. his means ous presentations
although they perceive excitement as a weakness, they take their duty seriously. do retrospective assess- I thought if I didn’t read from the paper, I would make
Another striking result is the increase in luency. Compared to other decreas- ment better
ing weaknesses, learners luency seems to worsen. his is the result of the re- give proactive decisions I will also try to increase my voice
lection done by watching their videos. Here it is essential to state the indings
evaluate possible changes I have to make eye contact
gathered while evaluating the results by peers difers from the indings while
watching their own performance. While watching they observe their luency see strengths and weak- I should manage my behavior carefully, but my voice
nesses was good.
easily as it is more obvious visually.
match previous feedback Friends could understand clearly what I want to say
with behaviors
142 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 143

In Table 6 the real data from students’ relections on their last performance Table 8: Categorization of likes and dislikes about assessment process by students
can be seen. he data were analyzed according to the impact by students’ own Likes Dislikes
self-reports. As seen in the table, the data shows the cognitive process the stu-
Awareness realized our skills Unreliability not objective in evalu-
dents were passing through while self-relecting, as the process requires critical ations
thinking skills.
realized our mistakes giving more to close
recognized ourselves bet- friends
Table 7: Impacts of peer assessment by students ter results may not be
realistic
Self-awareness Social Skills

recognized mistakes more self conidence Cooperation writing comments for Anxiety feeling stressed during
recognized positive behaviors become more social friends evaluation
overcome our weaknesses giving feedback to others misunderstanding of
liked the way to correct feedback
Personal development Skill development my friends showed others
their weaknesses
learnt to speak in front of spectator grammar improved
overcome excitement luency in speaking
Gains gained presentation ex-
improved eye contact improved presentation skills
perience
gained criticizing experi-
Table 7 depicts the impact of peer assessment by students which can be ence
considered predominantly as beneits. his data is the learners’ relection on
peer assessment process at the end of the process. hus, it is not a measurable Motivation attention during presen-
one as they are the learners’ perceptions and self-reports rather than assump- tations
tions. he gains they made were categorized in four diferent development ar- feeling like a teacher
eas: self-awareness, personal development, social skills and skill development. fun
It seems that all participants developed their awareness and social skills with-
out any explicit teaching of how to address a presentation.
hese developmental areas are not the same as the rubric. It is apparent As indicated in table 8, learners’ likes and dislikes about peer assessment
that coming up with valuable gains is apparent evidence of how this peer as- process are categorized and analyzed in terms of their content. his data also
sessment process is successful in promoting learner’s deep thinking skills and relects self-reports of learners at the end. It is discernable that their likes
awareness in terms of their development in learning. his strength of peer as- outnumber their dislikes. hrough peer assessment learners seem to like being
sessment is also supported by Kwan and Leung (1996). made aware of themselves, cooperating with peers, gaining assessment experi-
ence and being motivated. One of the most striking issues among the dislikes
is the reliability of peer assessment.
As stated in Table 2, reliability is still a concern which has been question-
ing by researchers. According to the data about dislikes, it reveals that over-
144 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills Sedef Fenik 145

marking is a problem leading to unreliability and unreality. Another issue to yourself. Each time, I recognized that I am diving into deeper waters more,
be underlined here is anxiety. Even if the assessment is carried out by peers, and consequently thinking more deeply. his critical thinking process results
learners feel anxious, which can be interpreted as taking their learning process in efective analysis and better self-relection on the area. Along with doing
seriously. Even though learners pointed out anxiety as a dislike, anxiety is an research I have gained knowledge about exploratory practice. Now I am more
inevitable result of the assessment process. aware that for exploratory practice teachers do not need extra time apart from
the classroom.
I have a better understanding of exploratory practice in which learners act
Relections as the participants. In terms of peer assessment I became more aware of what
it actually is. As this was my irst trial, along with the participants I expe-
Discovering new ways
in organization of ideas
Better self-reflection rienced deep insight. I and my learners have both gained open-mindedness
through relective learning, self-relection and critical thinking. hese all result
in promoting autonomy in class. his exploratory practice has put both the
doing Effective analysis
research teacher and the learners in a deep, long way where the learners have to do more
Critical thinking Improve learners’
understanding of
than the teacher during the assessment procedure ending up with priceless
No extra time themselves and peers gains in terms of learning.
Self- confidence
Finally, all the gains resulted from this research actually contribute to my
Learners as
participants professional development. After this research I am more aware of my strengths
professional Self- exploratory and I feel more conident. While considering all these, I pass through a critical
development reflection practice
Aware of my thinking phase which promotes exploration for improvement.
strenghts Colloborative with
students
All the four gain areas have one common essential point worth high-
Exploration for better Critical thinking Improve my
lighting, which is critical thinking. Becoming aware of my weaknesses and
Promotes autonomy
improvement understanding of strengths through understanding, applying, analyzing, assessing and creating
peer
myself and my
has improved my quality of thinking and that of the learners as well. Doing
learners
assessment
self-relection in itself requires thinking critically. hus when you start think-
Experiential learning Reflective learning ing deeply, you become more aware of what you are doing, what the research
can provide. Doing teacher-research is an ocean of experiences, the deeper you
Open-mindedness Self reflection dive, the more you discover, experiment and learn.
Chart 1- Analysis of relection
References
As a consequence of this study I have gained a much better understand- Boud, D. & H. Holmes. (1995). Self and peer marking in a large technical subject. In
ing of doing research, implementing exploratory practice, peer assessment and D. Boud (ed.) Enhancing learning through self-assessment, 63–78. London: Kogan
professional development. As chart one shows, I categorized my gains under page.
four headings. To begin with, doing systematic research every year leads to Cheng, W. & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and Teacher Assessment of the Oral and
diferent improvements on oneself each time. Coming up with a new area to Written Tasks of a Group Project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
research requires the discovery and trial of new ways in organization of ideas. 24/3
In this way only you can contribute new perspectives to the ELT world and
146 Peer assessment as a way of developing presenting skills

Elliott, N. & A. Higgins. (2005).Self and peer assessment: Does it make a diference
Cross-checked problems in
to student group work? Nurse Education in Practice 5(1) 40-48
Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving Assessment hrough Student Involvement: Practical So-
lutions for Aiding Learning in Higher and Further Education. New York: Routledge
11 undergraduate academic writing
Falmer. Salim Razı
Grieves, J., J. McMillan & P. Wilding. (2006). Barriers to learning: Conlicts that oc-
cur between and within organisational systems. International Journal of Learning
and Intellectual Capital 3(1) 86-103.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to
Introduction
Achievement. Abingdon: Routledge.
Hughes, I. & Large, B. (1993). Staf and Peer-group assessment of oral communica- Almost every language teacher would agree that developing the skill of writ-
tion skills. Studies in Higher Education,18(3) 379-385 ing is the most diicult one both for teachers and learners. My students and
Kwan, K.P. & Leung, R. (1996). Tutor versus peer group assessment of student per- I are no exception to this. When we remember the natural order of language
formance in a simulation exercise. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, development we see that writing appears at the very end after listening, speak-
21(3) 205-214. ing and reading. hus, schools are full of language learners who consistently
Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: what do the complain about their writing tasks in addition to teachers who backbite their
students think?” ELT Journal,46(3) 274-84 students due to their unwillingness in writing. When it comes to the develop-
Nelson, G. & Murphy, J. (1993). Peer response groups: do L2 writers use peer com- ment of academic writing skills in a foreign language then such complaints
ments in revising their drafts? TESOL Quarterly 27(1) 135-42 unsurprisingly double. his is why developing academic writing skills has been
Özoğul, G., Olina, Z., & Sullivan. H. (2007). Teacher, self and peer evaluation of investigated by several researchers (e.g. Marlink, 2009); yet it is impossible
lesson plans written by preservice teachers. Educational Technology Research and to ofer a single syllabus with reference to the relevant literature that its all
Development, Reiser, RA. classes. his is simply related to the nature of teaching. As each class has its
Rowland, S. (2000). he enquiring university teacher. Buckinghamshire: Open University own dynamics the problems vary.
Press
Sadler, P. M. & Good, E. (2006). he Impact of Self- and Peer Grading on Student
Context and problem
Learning. Educational Assessment , 11(1), 1-3.
To provide a basis for this research study I would like to familiarize the readers
with my students. As the lecturer of the Advanced Reading and Writing Skills
Course, I should acknowledge that spending the last decade teaching academic
writing skills to hundreds of students at the Department of English Language
Teaching (ELT) has contributed a lot to my understanding of the concept.
I can easily indicate that my students have been aware of the importance of
developing (academic) reading skills related to their roles as teachers of Eng-
lish. However, they experience diiculty in understanding why they need to
develop academic writing skills. hus my duty as the lecturer starts with jus-
tifying the reasons for the practice of academic writing skills. To do this I

147
148 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 149

give examples from action research studies that they are expected to conduct Methodology
as efective teachers in their teaching career. However, developing awareness My main aim in conducting this study was to identify problems my students
on this does not necessarily mean that I solve all my problems. Indeed, as the encountered in writing their academic papers and which strategies they re-
nature of teaching requires, I need to confront several subsequent problems ported to be employing to ind solutions to their problems. Related to the
such as preventing plagiarism and providing efective feedback throughout the indings I had an expectation of revising my course content in accordance with
semester. Under those circumstances the most appropriate treatment in the the needs of my students. In the light of these I aimed at answering the follow-
course seems to be incorporating digital technology. his is why I have been ing research questions (RQs):
creating virtual Turnitin classes for my students and enabling online assign-
RQ1: What are the self-reported diiculties that freshmen encounter in
ment submission. In this way I make use of the essential features of Turnitin,
academic writing?
namely Originality, GradeMark, and PeerMark.
RQ2: What are the lecturer-reported diiculties that freshmen encounter
in academic writing?
Feedback in writing RQ3: What are the most commonly employed self-reported strategies to
overcome academic writing problems?
In this study, in addition to digital technology I also focus on assessment for RQ4: Are the self-reported diiculties, self-reported strategies and scores
learning since relevant literature indicated the positive impact of this (Davison diferent with regard to academic years?
& Leung, 2009; Fyfe & Vella, 2012). In this way I aim to provide a basis for
using assessment rubrics as a teaching tool. he by-product of such an imple- Setting
mentation is receiving a variety of feedback. It is clear that diferent types of
feedback provided either by tutor or peer are beneicial (e.g. Comer, 2009; I conducted the study in the ELT department of Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart
Topping, 1996). Fyfe and Vella’s study could be one of the examples in which University (COMU), Turkey in the spring semesters of two consecutive aca-
an assessment rubric was used as a teaching tool. he basic assumption of such demic years, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. he COMU ELT department was
an implementation is better development of written language skills (Davison appropriate to conduct the study as the syllabuses suggested by Razı (2011)
& Leung, 2009) by integrating peer evaluation in process writing. his is be- were followed in the Advanced Reading and Writing Skills Course.
lieved to encourage the development of metacognitive skills that would result
in becoming independent learners (Docherty, 2013). Participants
Classroom-based assessment requires beneiting from self, peer and tutor Although a total number of 515 students registered on the Advanced Reading
review (Lam, 2013). With the help of feedback coming from several sources, and Writing Course in two consecutive years either as day or evening students,
learner autonomy develops much better (Hu & Lam, 2010). Actually these are I did not include all of them in the study. In the irst year I included repeating
the metacognitive writing strategies to relect, criticize, and redraft their own students, yet to avoid reporting the same students’ responses for the second
papers as identiied by Lam. hey support learner autonomy that is known as time I excluded repeating students for the second year. In addition I also ex-
an essential prerequisite of university students (Humphreys & Wyatt, 2013). cluded students who did not submit their assignments. Finally I identiied a
On the other hand peer feedback is another complementary aspect since a threshold level of 20% as suggested by Walker (2010) and excluded students
peer makes the other one aware of the problems in the paper. hus such inter- who plagiarised extensively. In conclusion 272 students were included. As the
action and collaboration could be related to Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proxi- ELT department is female-dominant, the number of female learners (n = 187)
mal Development. outperformed the number of male learners (n = 85). he participants’ ages
were 17 – 35, with an average of 21 at the time the data were collected. Table
1 provides detailed information about the participants.
150 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 151

Table 1. Detailed Information about the Participants On the other hand, in the beginning of the spring semester I asked them to
Day / Evening Gender 2011-2012 2012-2013 Total choose an ELT related topic and write a review paper of 3.000 words during
the semester. hroughout the semester, for ive times, I allocated ive-minute
Day Female 29 40 69
individual tutorial sessions for each student to provide feedback about the
Male 11 17 28 development of their papers. In addition, through lectures in the classroom,
Evening Female 33 24 57 I dealt with the requisites of academic writing to enable the development of
Male 16 6 22 positive identity in writing (Lavelle & Zuercher, 2001). Figure 1 illustrates
Repeating Female 61 - 61 the process writing that I followed in the 2011-2012 academic year spring
Male 35 - 35 semester.
Total 185 87 272

Brainstorming Outline First draft

Instruments (Week 4) (Week 6) (Week 9)
Tutor feedback Tutor feedback Tutor feedback
I developed two instruments to collect data. Firstly I used Academic Writing
Diiculty and Strategy Inventory (AWDSI) that constituted of 42 items in
two groups. he irst group of 33 items aimed at revealing diiculties students
experience, whereas the second group of 9 items identiied my students self- Proofreading Revision Second draft
reported strategy employment. Cronbach alpha test indicated a reliability of (Week 14) (Week 12) (Week 11)
Peer & tutor feedback Tutor feedback Tutor feedback
.90 for the 42-item AWDSI.
Secondly I used Transparent Academic Writing Rubric (TAWR) to score
my students’ academic papers. It included 50 items in 5 categories of introduc-
tion (8 items), citation (16 items), academic writing (8 items), idea presentation Turnitin Self & anonymous
Tutor score
(11 items), and mechanics (7 items). In a previous study (Razı, 2013), I had submission peer score
Tutor feedback
Digital feedback Self & peer feedback
already provided inter-rater reliability (Pearson’s r(55) = .97, p < .001), intra-
rater reliability (Pearson’s r(55) = .99, p < .001), and Cronbach alpha score of
.89 for the 50-item TAWR. Figure 1. he process writing and types of feedback in 2011-2012 academic
Figure 1. The process writing and types of feedback in 2011-2012 academic year spring
year spring semester
Procedures of data collection
Advanced Reading and Writing Skills is a course over two semesters. For each After submitting their assignments I asked my students to ill in AWDSI.
semester of the 2011-2012 academic year, I followed the course content sug- hus, after inalizing their process writing they identiied both the problems they
gested in Razı, (2011). In the fall semester I provided academic reading mate- had experienced and strategies they had employed to overcome them. Moreover
rials to my students to enable the development of academic genre. In addition I evaluated and scored each of my students’ papers by using TAWR. his allowed
they also learned APA in-text citation rules and practised their skills in ive me to see the problematic parts in their papers. I would like to indicate however
individual assignments. For these ive teacher assigned topics I asked them to that before evaluating their papers I irst pre-screened them by considering their
peer review each other’s papers by using the detailed checklists that I provide length, the quotation ratios and similarity reports with the help of Turnitin. De-
for each assignment. tails of the pre-screening process can be found in Razı (2013).
152 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 153

With reference to my students’ answers in 2011-2012 academic year to the Procedures of data analysis
irst three research questions I restructured the course content for the spring I used SPSS 20.0 to analyse the data. I analysed students’ demographic informa-
semester. My basic assumption in doing this revision was enabling better tion and the items in TAWR by means of descriptive statistics. I administered
awareness of diiculties they experience. I believed that would result in the independent samples t-tests to compare the results in two consecutive years.
development of better academic writing skills. hus at the end of the spring
semester of 2012-2013 academic year I delivered a copy of TAWR to my stu- Limitations of the study
dents. With the help of previous years’ assignments I modelled how to score
papers in the classroom. hen I asked my students to evaluate their own pa- I would like to remind the readers about the limited number of participants
pers by using TAWR. I hoped they would realize their weaknesses and correct since I speciically focused on my own classes. hus the indings may not be
generalizable due to the inclusion of a single university in the Turkish tertiary
them before submission. Next I asked them to ask a peer for proofreading by
context. I do believe, though, that the results shed light on our understanding
means of TAWR. his time I expected them to help each other in order to ind
of developing academic writing skills in a foreign language.
the weaknesses in their papers. As in the 2011-2012 academic year I inally
collected data by means of AWDSI and TAWR. Figure 2 illustrates the pro-
cess I followed in 2012-2013 academic year spring semester. Please note that Findings and discussion
red boxes in the igure indicate additions to Figure 1. Research question 1: What are the self-reported diiculties that freshmen
encounter in academic writing?

Brainstorming Outline First draft

My students in the 2011-2012 academic year indicated the greatest diiculties
(Week 4) (Week 6) (Week 9) in ‘cause of plagiarism’, ‘deciding whether citation is needed or not’, and ‘para-
Tutor feedback Tutor feedback Tutor feedback phrasing that results in over quoting’. Yet they explained the least diiculty in
‘using block quotations’. he other least diicult three items were paraphrasing
because of insuiciency in ‘grammar’, ‘vocabulary’, and ‘in-text citation rules’.
Familiarization of
rubric
Revision Second draft From these preliminary results a contradiction appears at this point as they re-
(Week 12) (Week 11)
(Week 13)
Tutor feedback Tutor feedback
garded ‘paraphrasing’ both as a problematic and a less problematic skill. Figure
Self feedback
3 illustrates my students’ mean values on each item of AWDSI Part 1.

Proofreading 4,5
Turnitin Self & anonymous
(Week 14) peer score 4
submission
Peer & tutor Self & peer feedback
Digital feedback
feedback 3,5

2,5

Tutor score 2

Citation needed

Paraphrasing: comprehension

Comprehending sources
Cause of plagiarism

Paraphrasing: directly quote

Reliability of sources

Academic writing rules

Summarizing

Overall unity

Writing references
Paragraph coherence
Paragraph unity
What to integrate in paper

Paragraph length
Figures

Linking devices

Identifying main idea

Headings
Stopping reading to write

Why refer to others

Paraphrasing: vocabulary
Topic selection
Writing complex sentences

Tables

Block quotations
Narrowing down

Vocabulary selection

Overall coherence

Outline

Quotations

Paraphrasing: in-text citation

Supporting main idea

Paraphrasing: grammar
Tutor feedback

Figure2. 2.
Figure Thehe processwriting
process writingand and
typestypes of feedback
of feedback in 2012-2013
in 2012-2013 academic
academic year spring
year spring semester

Figure 3. Self-reported diiculties in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 185)

Figure 3. Self-reported difficulties in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 185)
 154
performed worse. Figure 5 illustrates their diiculties in 2011-2012 academic
received high scores were less problematic as opposed to those on which they
in each of 50 TAWR item. I had the assumption that the items on which they
To identify my students’ problems in academic writing I examined their scores
encounter in academic writing?
Research question 2: What are the lecturer-reported diiculties that freshmen

I reveal.
next RQ I compare their self-reported diiculties to their real diiculties that
caution since they may not report their actual diiculties. hat is why in the
my students understanding of their problems they need to be approached with
the previous year’s results. Although these results gave some impression about
‘in-text citation rules’ appeared among the least problematic ones similar to
whereas paraphrasing because of insuiciency in ‘vocabulary’, ‘grammar’, and
phrasing that results in over quoting’ as one of the most problematic skills
diiculty appeared in ‘cause of plagiarism’. For once more they regarded ‘para-
similar to the responses in the previous year. For example, again the greatest
ure 4, in 2012-2013 academic year reveals that their reported diiculties are
Figure 4. Self-reported difficulties in 2012-2013 academic year (n = 87)

2,5

3,5

4,5

On the other hand investigating my students’ answers, as illustrated in Fig-

2

Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing

Cause of plagiarism

Figure 4. Self-reported diiculties in 2012-2013 academic year (n = 87)

Paraphrasing: directly quote
Reliability of sources
Paraphrasing: comprehension
Academic writing rules
Writing complex sentences
Paragraph length
What to integrate in paper
Citation needed
Comprehending sources
Topic selection
Overall coherence
Overall unity
Vocabulary selection
Stopping reading to write
Writing references
Paragraph coherence
Paragraph unity
Narrowing down
Supporting main idea
Identifying main idea
Linking devices
Outline
Why refer to others
Summarizing
Quotations
Paraphrasing: vocabulary
Headings
Figures
Paraphrasing: grammar
Block quotations
Paraphrasing: in-text citation
Tables

TAWR item carries 2 points to make 100 points in total.

lowed by Figure 6 related to the diiculties in 2012-2013 academic year. Each
year by considering their performance according to TAWR items that is fol-
Figure

Figure 5. Lecturer-reported difficulties in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 161)

0,2
0,4
0,2
0,6
0,4
0,8
0,6
0,8
1,2
1,4
1,2
1,6
1,4
1,8
1,6
1,8

0,2
0,4
0,2
0,6
0,4
0,8
0,6
0,8
1,2
1,4
1,2
1,6
1,4
1,8
1,6
1,8
0
0

1
1

2
2

0
0

1
1

2
2
Figure 5. Lecturer-reported diiculties in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 161)
Figure

In-text In-text
citationcitation In-text In-text
citationcitation
6. Lecturer-reported

Citing in Citing
needin need Citing in Citing
needin need
Restructuring
Restructuring
paraphrases
paraphrases Quote ratio
Quote ratio
Rewording
Rewording
paraphrases
paraphrases ParagraphParagraph
length length
WritingWriting
references
references Key words Key words
6. Lecturer-reported

Quote ratio
Quote ratio Paragraph Paragraph
unity unity
Introduction:
Introduction:
Aims Aims Introduction:
Introduction:
aims aims
Citing quotes
Citing quotes QuotationQuotation
use use
QuotationQuotation
use use ParagraphParagraph
coherence coherence
Introducing
Introducing
quotesquotes Markers Markers
Grammar Grammar WritingWriting
references
references
EffectiveEffective
conclusions
conclusions Restructuring
Restructuring
paraphrases
paraphrases
ParagraphParagraph
length length Grammar Grammar
Paragraph Paragraph
unity unity RewordingRewording
paraphrases
paraphrases
Secondary
Secondary
sourcesource
ratio ratio Abstract Abstract
difficulties

AbstractAbstract Citing quotes

Citing quotes
Paragraph
Paragraph
coherencecoherence Paper length
Paper length
Punctuation
Punctuation LinkingLinking
devicesdevices
diiculties

Introducing
Introducing
paraphrases
paraphrases Introducing
Introducing
paraphrases
paraphrases
SecondarySecondary
sourcesource
use use Effective Effective
conclusions
conclusions
Markers Markers Introducing
Introducing
quotesquotes
LinkingLinking
devicesdevices VocabularyVocabulary
selection selection
in 2012-2013

Relevance
Relevance
of conclusions
of conclusions Introduction:
Introduction:
topic topic
Introduction:
Introduction:
Topic Topic Sentence Sentence
complexitycomplexity
Key words Key words Secondary Secondary
sourcesource
use use
in 2012-2013

Flow ofFlowideasof ideas Objectiveness

Objectiveness
LengthLength
of paper of paper Extremeness
Extremeness
OverallOverall
unity unity FocussingFocussing
on issue on issue
OverallOverall
coherencecoherence SecondarySecondary
sourcesource
ratio ratio
PassivePassive
forms forms Title Title
Paper format
Paper format Number Number
of sourcesof sources
academic

Ordering Ordering
references
references PassivePassive
forms forms
Number Number
of sources
of sources Relevance Relevance
of conclusions
of conclusions
Spelling Spelling Punctuation
Punctuation
academic

FocussingFocussing
on issue on issue Flow ofFlowideasof ideas
Headings
Headings
and subheadings
and subheadings PrecisePrecise
words words
Sentence Sentence
complexity
complexity Abbreviations
Abbreviations
Vocabulary
Vocabulary
selectionselection Spelling Spelling
yearyear

Title Title HeadingsHeadings

and subheadings
and subheadings
SourceSource
reliability
reliability SourceSource
reliability
reliability
Extremeness
Extremeness OverallOverall
unity unity
(n =(n

Salim Razı

Tables Tables
and figures
and figures OverallOverall
coherence coherence
CitationCitation
match match Slang, jargon,
Slang, jargon,
clichésclichés
NarrowingNarrowing
down down Ordering Ordering
references
references
87)

Contractions
Contractions NarrowingNarrowing
down down
= 87)

Objectiveness
Objectiveness Paper format
Paper format
PrecisePrecise
words words Contractions
Contractions
Slang, jargon,
Slang, jargon,
clichésclichés Tables Tables
and figures
and figures
Abbreviations
Abbreviations CitationCitation
match match
Topic selection
Topic selection Topic selection
Topic selection
155
156 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 157

5
he descriptive statistics revealed ‘use of in-text citation rules’ and ‘citing 4,5
when necessary’ as the most problematic two items in each year. Similarly, in 4
the previous RQ the students acknowledged both items as problematic ones. 3,5
Although these two items hold their own places in the second year, the mean 3
values of scores indicated better performances. Such progresses could also be 2,5
2
observed in the other TAWR items. he results also indicated that their weak-
1,5
nesses in paraphrasing led them to over quote. In case of paraphrasing, they 1
experienced diiculties both related to restructuring and rewording the ex- 0,5
pressions. 0

Research question 3: What are the most commonly employed self-reported

strategies to overcome academic writing problems?
Comparing students’ answers in two consecutive years indicated that the strat-
egy of ‘checking vocabulary choice’ appeared in the middle of the list each time.
he remaining eight strategies can be grouped in two categories, namely the Figure 8. Self-reported academic writing strategies in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 87)
four most and least popular strategies. hese remained in their original groups Figure 8. Self-reported academic writing strategies in 2011-2012 academic year (
in the 2012-2013 academic year, yet there are slight changes in their order. he
overall indication with regards to self-reported strategy employment is that
my students beneit from academic writing strategies at a high level. Research question 4: Are the self-reported diiculties, self-reported strategies
and scores diferent with regards to academic years?
5
4,5 Before comparing the results in the two consecutive years I uncovered the
4 time my students had spent on their assignment throughout the semester. To
3,5
do this I used their responses in AWDSI related to each step of process writ-
3
2,5 ing. he students in 2012-2013 academic year (M = 44.05 hours) spent more
2 time on their assignments in comparison to those in the 2011-2012 academic
1,5
year (M = 38.88 hours). In the second year they indicated spending more time
1
0,5 on their drafts. It is interesting to note that they reported spending less time
0 on proofreading. his might be due to the facilitating role of using TAWR
at the proofreading stage. It should be remembered that the numbers that I
introduce relect my students’ own reports and I did not have any control over
this. Figure 9 shows the time they spent on each step of their assignment in
two years.

Figure 7. Self-reported academic writing strategies in 2011-2012 academic year (n = 185)

Figure 7. Self-reported academic writing strategies in 2011-2012 academic year (
158 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 159

Conclusion and relections

12
Notwithstanding the limitations the following conclusions could be drawn
10
with reference to the results. Firstly it can be concluded that identifying the
8 diiculties in academic writing is a challenging task for freshmen. he prob-
lems that they report may not indicate their real problems. hus they should
6 be assisted in identifying their real problems. Secondly, to overcome academic
4 2011-2012 writing diiculties freshmen report their employment of academic writing
2012-2013 strategies at a high level. Yet, relying on such self-report might be naive of
2 a teacher since students may not be aware of their actual use of strategies.
0 hirdly, familiarization with the rubric seems to be beneicial for the develop-
ment of better academic writing skills for novice authors. I would thus make
more use of rubric in my course for the following years.
In terms of educational implications it could be inferred that students are
not aware of their real problems in academic writing. herefore they need to
develop learner autonomy related to the metacognitive skills of monitoring and
Figure 9. Comparison of time spent at each step of process writing
Figure 9. Comparison of time spent at each step of process writing evaluating. Developing such skills will provide awareness on the control of
their own writing processes so that they will identify their diiculties better.
To compare the two groups I irstly administered independent samples t- hus for the following academic year I would model appropriate strategies in
test and checked self-reported diiculties. he results indicated signiicant dif- the classroom and provide declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge
ferences between 2011-2012 (M = 2.99, SD = .60) and 2012-2013 (M = 2.78, about them to my students. To enable maximum beneits of these strategies
SD = .57), t(270) = 2.741, p = .007 with small efect size (d = .36). hus, with I will encourage my students to employ them after school while working on
reference to this inding it could be inferred that they experienced less diicul- their assignments. In this way I have the assumption that they will be able
ty in 2012-2013 academic year in comparison with 2011-2012 academic year. to transform the strategies into skills. With reference to Cumming (1997),
Secondly, I administered independent samples t-test on their self-reported TAWR could be identiied as an analytic type of assessment rubric since it
strategies. he results this time did not indicate signiicant diferences between enables in-depth analysis by dealing with essential components of writing.
2011-2012 (M = 4.12, SD = .67) and 2012-2013 (M = 4.25, SD = .59), t(270) Moreover, analytic rubrics are known to aid students to become better writers
= -1.50, p = .14. Since they reported high employment of academic writing (Dappen, Isernhagen, & Anderson, 2008). Encouraging my students to make
strategies, it would not be wise to expect a signiicant diference in relation to use of TAWR will contribute to the development of metacognitive skills since
strategy employment. analytic rubrics trigger critical thinking sub-skills (Saxton, Belanger, & Becker
Finally, I administered independent samples t-test on assignment scores. 2012).
he results indicated signiicant diferences between 2011-2012 (M = 71.96, In terms of methodological implications the present study reports the ind-
SD = 13.81) and 2012-2013 (M = 84.02, SD = 12.01), t(248) = 6.92, p < .001 ings of an on-going research project. Interested readers might refer to Razı
with large efect size (d = .93). As they experienced less problems in academic (2013) for the development of TAWR, Razı (2014a) for perceptions of plagia-
writing I expected better performance in 2012-2013 academic year and the rism detectors and the impact of Turnitin on plagiarism incidents, and Razı
results conirmed my expectancy. hus, it seems to be clear that they beneited (2014b) for the impact of anonymous peer review on developing academic
from both self and peer review with the help of TAWR. writing skills.
160 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing Salim Razı 161

Finally, in this study I present self-reports of academic writing strategies

As for further research, I intend to conduct interview sessions with my stu- that my students employ. I believe that investigation of the employment of
dents to learn both the contribution of familiarization with the rubric and the strategies more carefully such as conducting think aloud sessions would be
contribution of several types of feedback such as self, peer, lecturer, and digital, beneicial. hus, I would like to beneit from research in the ield of metacog-
with speciic focus on digital feedback that is a relatively new term that (Razı, nition with speciic interest into collecting data by considering the suggestions
2014b) introduces. In addition, I strongly believe that enabling peer review for of Veenman (2011). Learning more about their actual strategy employment
every step of process writing on Turnitin would result in the development of will assist me to revise my course content for the following years.
much better academic writing skills. his will also assist my students to discard All in all, considering the last decade of my academic writing teaching
the negative impression of Turnitin as they simply regard it as a plagiarism experience with speciic emphasis on the last two years, I clearly see how I
detector rather than a device that facilitates writing. hus, next year I will en- have changed my way of teaching over time. I realize the contribution of re-
able my students to beneit from this by integrating such feedback into process cent technological advances in foreign language classes and such advances do
writing as illustrated in Figure 10. Red boxes in the igure indicate additions not seem to have an end. his means that language teachers are in a vicious
to Figure 1 whereas red typing shows additions to Figure 2. circle and should welcome changes in accordance with cutting edge technol-
ogy. However, this does not necessarily mean we should incorporate any in-
structional technologies into our classes. What we are expected to do is ind
Brainstorming Outline First draft the most beneicial way of using recent instructional technologies that it our
(Week 4) (Week 6) (Week 9)
Peer & tutor Peer & tutor Peer & tutor
teaching aims. he only way of succeeding in this aim seems to be conducting
feedback feedback feedback more action research studies.

Familiarization of Revision Second draft

rubric References
(Week 12) (Week 11)
(Week 13) Peer & tutor Peer & tutor Comer, K. (2009). Developing valid and reliable rubrics for writing assessment: Re-
Self feedback feedback feedback
search and practice. In K. Weir & P. Coolbear (Eds.), Ako Aotearoa good practice
publication grants. Wellington, New Zealand: Ako Aotearoa. http://akoaotearoa.
Proofreading Self & anonymous ac.nz/ako-hub/good-practice-publication-grants-e-book/resources/pages/writ-
Turnitin
(Week 14)
submission
peer score ing-assessment-research. Accessed 22 December 2012.
Peer & tutor Self & peer Cumming, A. (1997). he testing of writing in a second language. In C. Clapham &
Digital feedback feedback
feedback
D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Language testing and as-
sessment (Vol. 7, pp. 131-139). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Dappen, L., Isernhagen, J., & Anderson, S. (2008). A statewide writing assessment
model: Student proiciency and future implications. Assessing Writing, 13, 45–60.
Tutor score
Tutor feedback
Davison, C., & Leung, C. (2009) Current issues in English language teacher-based
assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 393–415.
Docherty, C. (2013). Learning-oriented assessment (LOA): Strengthening the link be-
tween learning, teaching and assessment. Plenary speech presented at the 4th CBLA
Figure 10. he
Theprocess
processwriting
writingand
andtypes
typesofof
feedback to be
feedback to followed in 2014-2015
be followed academic
in 2014-2015 academic
SIG Symposium, Nicosia. Retrieved July 22, 2014 from http://www.ealta.eu.org/
year spring semester
events/CBLA-cyprus2013/Lectures_workshops/C_Docherty%20-%20plena-
ry%20-%20LOA.pdf
162 Cross-checked problems in undergraduate academic writing

Fyfe, B., & Vella, C. (2012). Assessment rubric as teaching tool: Learning how to ‘tick
Pair and group work activities: Keep
all the boxes’. Cambridge ESOL: Research Notes, 48, 30-36. Retrieved July 23, 2014
from http://www.cambridgeesol.org/rs_notes/rs_nts48.pdf
Hu, G., & Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical
eicacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional
12 them or leave them?
Vildan Sakarkaya
Science, 38(4), 371-394.
Humphreys, G., & Wyatt, M. (2013). Helping Vietnamese university learners to be-
come more autonomous. ELT Journal, 68(1), 52-63.
Lam, R. (2013). he relationship between assessment types and text revision. ELT
Journal, 67(4), 446-458.
Lavelle, E., & Zuercher, N. (2001). he writing approaches of university students.
Introduction
Higher Education, 42, 373-391. It is widely agreed by most language teachers that pair and group work activi-
Marlink, J. (2009). Improving students’ academic writing. California English, 15(2), ties (hereon PGWA) enable students to involve in learning actively and pro-
6-9. vide the students with the opportunity to communicate with each other. Most
Razı, S. (2011). Advanced reading and writing skills in ELT: APA style handbook. Ankara: teachers believe that there aren’t any more convenient forms to have students
Nobel.
work on and experiment with the language than such tasks. Most of them
Razı, S. (2013, February). Assessing academic writing: Development of a rubric and relat-
ing Turnitin reports. Paper resented at International Conference on Interdisciplin- share the idea expressed by Scrivener (2012:224) that “Language learning is
ary Research in Education, Kyrenia, Cyprus. a process that involves lots of attempts and errors along the way, and so it is
Razı, S. (2014a, April). Undergraduates' perceptions of plagiarism detectors and the impact very important to give learners opportunities to try out the language to feel it
of Turnitin on plagiarism incidents. Paper presented at 2nd international congress on their tongue, to experiment with putting words together, to make attempts
of research in education: Innovative research in education: Implications for future that turn out to be unsuccessful or only partially successful and not to aim all
(25-27 April 2014), İzmir. the time, unrealistically, only for supposedly perfect exam-ready sentences.”
Razı, S. (2014b, June). Turnitin anonymous peer review process in the assessment of un- Most teachers agree that whole class teaching is less appropriate for com-
dergraduate academic writing. Paper presented at the 6th International Integrity & municative speaking activities and many students don’t like speaking in front
plagiarism conference 'Promoting authentic assessment’, 16-18 June 2014, New- of their peers. herefore, by many practitioners and researchers, PGWA are
castle upon Tyne, UK.
suggested as perfect solutions for getting students involved in speaking activi-
Saxton, E., Belanger, S., & Becker, W. (2012). he critical thinking analytic rubric
(CTAR): Investigating intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of a scoring mecha- ties in class because they reduce the anxiety level of students when compared
nism for critical thinking performance assessments. Assessing Writing, 17, 251-270. with whole-class activities. (Harmer, 2000:116; Woodrow, 2006: 323; Tunçay,
Topping, K. J. (1996). he efectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher educa- 2013:36).
tion: A typology and review of the literature. Higher Education, 32, 321-345.
Veenman, M. V. J. (2011). Alternative assessment of strategy use with self-report in-
struments: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 205-211. Context and problem
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: he development of higher psychological processes. Nobody can ignore the value of using PGWA to foster students’ communica-
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. tive skills in language classrooms. Having the same idea in mind, many course-
Walker, J. (2010). Measuring plagiarism: Researching what student do, not what they books today contain suggestions for these activities. Being a strict follower of
say they do. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 41-59.
the idea that classroom interaction is an indispensable part of a good language
classroom, I tried to include as many PGWA in my classroom practices as

163
164 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? Vildan Sakarkaya 165

possible, but having a class so unwilling to take part in them was a very big ter learner responsibility and independence, and can improve motivation and
disappointment for me. he unwillingness of my students to take part in such contribute to a feeling of cooperation and warmth in the class. According to
activities urged me to investigate the efectiveness of PGWA in my classes. Long and Porter (1985:207-212), pair and group work activities:
I started to think about the causes of the problem and decided that a study • increase language practice opportunities
• improve the quality of student talk by shortening teacher talk(lockstep
would help me ind out my students’ perceptions and attitudes towards pair
work and group work activities and causes of their reluctance to engage in
teaching) time
• help individualize instruction
them more. With the help of my indings I thought I would be able to work

• promote a positive afective climate

on ways of developing more efective PGWA.
he present study focused on the reasons of my students’ reluctance to par-
ticipate in PGWA and aimed at inding out some solutions for the problem. • motivate learners
My research questions were as follows:
However, besides these potential advantages, there are also diiculties or
1. What were the perceptions and attitudes of my students towards pair problems that teachers may have to deal with while applying these activities.
work and group work activities? Ur (1996:232-233) summarizes these potential problems as follows: “Teach-
2. What were the causes of their reluctance to take part in these activities? ers fear they may lose control, that there may be too much noise, that their
3. How could I motivate them to get involved in pair work and group students may over-use their mother tongue, and do the task badly or not at
work activities? all. Some people – both learners and teachers – dislike a situation where the
4. How could I design more efective pair work and group work activities? teacher cannot constantly monitor learner language.” Harmer (2001:116-117)
adds some more disadvantages to the list. According to him, the chances of
Literature review misbehavior are greater with pair work than in a whole-class setting. He states
that pair and group work activities are not always popular with students be-
In recent years, with the advent of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), cause they sometimes prefer to interact with their teachers rather than with
teaching and learning practices in the language classroom have gone through another learner who may be a linguistically weak student. He airms that,
a transformation period. As a result of the efect of CLT practitioners have especially in pair work, the actual choice of paired partner can be problematic
started to place more emphasis on interaction in the classroom as a means of if students frequently have to work with someone they don’t have a good re-
language learning and use. Fluency activities, where the focus of learners is lationship with.
primarily on the communicative message rather than on displaying control
Bearing these potential problems in mind, researchers have come up with
over a speciic target structure (Ellis,1988) have become the main focus of
some practical solutions and suggested some ideas to produce more efective
language classrooms.
PGWA in class. According to Ur (1996:233), the success of group work relies
he fact that luency building activities and interaction are at the core of
on the surrounding social climate, how habituated the class is to using it, the
the communicative classroom has led to the widespread use of PGWA in lan-
selection of an interesting and stimulating task and careful organization.” Ac-
guage classrooms. he advantages of these activities have been discussed by
cording to Scrivener (2012:223), “Nowadays, most teachers can see a real value
many practitioners and researchers. Ur (1996:232) deines such activities as
in pair and group work. But even when teachers are convinced of the reasons
“a form of learner activation that is of particular value in the practice of oral
for pair and group work, students may not always see the point.” According
luency”, and explains the rationale behind using them as follows: “Learners
to Scrivener (2012:223), the reason for this may simply be that they have not
in a class that is divided into ive groups get ive times as many opportunities
thought through or understood the value of it.
to talk as in full-class organization”. She also states that these activities fos-
166 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? Vildan Sakarkaya 167

Harmer (2001:119) suggests investing time in discussion of pair and he research was conducted in an A1-level prep-class at İzmir Katip Çelebi
group work activities in class to persuade reluctant students that PGWA University. A questionnaire including 5 open-ended questions was adminis-
are worth doing because they may have mixed feelings about working with tered to 23 students from my main course class to ind out the attitudes of
a partner or about not having the teacher’s attention at all times. He asserts my students. Considering their level of English proiciency and hoping to get
that in this way, we, as teachers, can create “a joint code of conduct” and can more data, the questions were in Turkish. he data was analyzed by being put
come to agreement about when and how to use diferent student groupings. into categories depending on their frequencies in order to be able to identify
He adds that “when we know how our students feel about pairwork and the most prevailing ones. After the data analysis I developed some ideas which
groupwork we can then decide, as with all action research, what changes of helped me improve my classroom practices related to PGWA and motivate
method, if any, we need to make.” Similar ideas are shared by many other my students to engage in such activities.
practitioners like Raja& Saeed (2012:160), who state that students need to
be trained to work in group settings and recognize the importance of com-
munication in class.
Findings and discussion
It is most of the time the teacher’s responsibility to show the value of an
activity for language learning. As Dörnyei (2007:727) states, enhancing the Learners’ background
learner’s language-related values and attitudes does contribute to the moti-
vation of the learner. Nobody can deny that the more motivated the learn- Of the 23 students in this study, eighteen were from Anatolian High Schools
ers are, the more eager they are to involve themselves in productive tasks. Ur where English was an important part of the curriculum, especially in the 9th
(1996:274) states that learner motivation makes teaching and learning im- and 10th grades, during which they had English lessons for 10 hours a week.
measurably easier and more pleasant, as well as more productive, and agrees his number decreases in the 11th and 12th grades, during which they had only
with Girard’s idea (cited in Ur, 1996:276) that it is an important part of the four hours of English a week. Two of the students under this category had
teacher’s job to motivate learners. According to Dörnyei (Dörnyei 2001), the experience of private tutoring and private language schools. he other ive
“long-term, sustained learning- such as the acquisition of L2 – cannot take were from normal high schools or vocational high schools where they had
place unless the educational context provides, in addition to cognitively ad- three or four hours of English during their irst year and no English through-
equate instructional practices, suicient inspiration and enjoyment to build up out the rest of their high school education.
continuing motivation in the learners.” He claims that if we are not fortunate
with the composition of our class group, student motivation will not be au- Opportunity for pair and group work activities
tomatically there, and as teachers we need to try to actively generate positive
attitudes toward L2 learning. According to the results of the study, during the language training they had
before their university education, ifteen students almost never had a chance
to practise English in pairs or small groups. Seven students had these activities
Procedure in their language classes some of the time during their previous education. All
he main concern of this study was to investigate the attitudes of my students the students in this category came from Anatolian High schools. Only one
towards PGWA and identify the reasons of their reluctance to engage in such student had these activities most of the time in his language classes and this
activities. In the light of the indings, the study aimed to ind solutions to the student mentioned attending a private language school.
most common problems, with the intention to exploit them during my pro-
spective practices.
168 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? Vildan Sakarkaya 169

Table 1: previous frequency of pair and group work experience Reasons for not enjoying pair and small group work activities
Number of students Four students wrote that they didn’t enjoy these activities at all. hese students
Most of the time 1 thought that these activities were not are not taken seriously by students and
Some of the time 7 they turn into a chat.
he students who expressed their dislike about pair and group work activi-
Almost never 15
ties were all from Anatolian High schools. One of them had never tried these
activities during his previous education. Two of them had these activities in
he results showed that despite the fact that they didn’t have much experi-
their classes some of the time and one of them had these activities most of the
ence in PGWA, 19 students answered the question whether they enjoyed such
time in his language classes.
tasks with YES. 4 students expressed that they didn’t enjoy the activities at all.
Table 3: Reasons for not enjoying pair and group work activities
Reasons for enjoying pair and small group work activities
Number of
Ten students believed that these activities were a good opportunity for speak- students
ing practice. One student commented, ‘Since we are learning English as a for- Little value to learning English 4
eign language, we don’t have much chance for speaking practice except for our Noisy and chaotic classroom environment 2
classes. Having pair work and group work activities in class gives us a chance
he gap between the levels of students 1
to practice the language in speaking.’
Eight students stated that they felt more conident and comfortable while Speaking anxiety 1
working in pairs and small groups. Not having enough knowledge about the topics 1
Five students believed that these activities were good for their luency be-
cause they spoke freely without caring about their mistakes, which is also con- Reasons for engaging in pair and group work activities in my lessons
nected with speaking anxiety.
Six students mentioned that these activities were good for peer learning, Table 4: Frequency of participation in pair and small group work activities in my lessons
peer correction and better learning. One of the students stated that when she
Frequency of participation Number of students
was corrected by a friend she learnt better.
Every time 2
Table 2: Reasons for enjoying pair and group work activities Most of the time 11
Some of the time 10
Number of
students
Table 5: Reasons for engaging in pair and group work activities most of the time
A good opportunity for speaking practice 10
Feeling more conident and comfortable 8 Reasons Number of students
A good chance for peer learning, peer correction and better 6 A good opportunity to practice and improve 10
learning their luency
Improve their luency 5 Feeling more comfortable in small groups 5
CPG 2
170 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? Vildan Sakarkaya 171

hose students who stated that they always participated in these activities ticipation in the activities depends on my friends. If my partner is not willing
expressed that they really wanted to be able to speak English, and not only to to participate into the activity and doesn’t take the activity seriously, I most of
learn grammar. hey wanted to be able to improve their speaking and these the time join him/ her and I lose my interest in the lesson.’
activities were a good opportunity to practise speaking and they felt more Another student commented, ‘When I do these activities with a friend that
relaxed with a small group. I have a good relationship with, I can easily speak to him/ her comfortably and
he very same reasons were given by the students in the second category, self-conidently despite the fact that my English is not so good and this makes
who stated that they took part in these activities most of the time. Eight stu- me feel good. However, if I have to do the activity with someone I don’t know
dents stated that they wanted to be able to speak English and these activities well, I can’t feel comfortable and can’t speak easily.’ For those students who were
were a good opportunity for speaking practice and improving their luency. not conident enough, I used two techniques taken from Scrievener (2012,
Five students stated that they felt more comfortable in small groups and pairs, p.210). One was to start the activity in whole class format and then hand over
but they expressed their preference to work with a partner with whom they to groups and the other one was to give them time to think about the topic. his
had a good relationship. silent rehearsal time helped students feel a bit more conident in speaking.
One of the students who expressed her dislike towards these activities stat- Another student mentioned that everyone had a diferent level of proi-
ed that she involved herself in these activities just for a good CPG (Classroom ciency. When, for example, he was paired with someone whose level was lower
Participation Grade). his was also shared by another student with the same or higher than his, these kinds of activities didn’t work. He wrote that the
dislike, who answered the question with “some of the time”. partner with the lower proiciency level felt bad. He commented, ‘If the levels
of everyone were similar to one another, everyone would take these activities
seriously, and they might work.’ In order to solve the problem related to pairs,
Reasons for not engaging in pair and group work activities in my lessons
I got an idea from Wilson (cited in Scrievener, 2012, p.201), who suggests us-
ing threesomes rather than pairs and I observed that it worked well in class.
Table 6: Reasons for not engaging in pair and group work activities
Number of students
Implications
Personal characteristics 1 he indings of this study showed that if those students had been given the op-
General negative attitude towards learning English 2 portunity to practice speaking in pairs and small groups during their previous
language studies, more students might have engaged in those activities. One of
Speaking anxiety 2
the students stated “before university, I didn’t have a chance to do this because
Peer efect 4 my teacher didn’t give importance to it, but I wish I had.” herefore, teachers
Boring activities 6 at high schools should include PGWA in their lessons more. his also may be
Distracting and noisy classroom environment 4 one of the reasons why some of my students were reluctant to engage in these
activities. Such activities were not something that they were accustomed to. In
the light of my indings, and bearing in mind that students might not be used
hose students who mentioned having speaking anxiety also expressed that to pair and group work activities, I realized that I should follow a step by step
they wanted to be able to speak English and they felt better in small groups, procedure to get my students to become accustomed to and internalize these
but they insisted on the importance of knowing their partners well. activities. his means long and careful planning before the lessons. It was also
While answering the question here four students wrote about the impor- surprising to ind out that the students were highly aware of the rationale be-
tance of the efect of their partners, which was also a reason for the distracting hind such activities in spite of the fact that they were not used to such activities
and noisy classroom environment. One of the students commented, ‘My par- because 19 students responded that they enjoyed these activities.
172 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them? Vildan Sakarkaya 173

he results also indicated that including PGWA in lessons is also an efective dents because of having lessons lack of enjoyment. I realized that my pair and
way to help students cope with their speaking anxiety. One student commented, group work activities had turned into a routine and were predictable, maybe
“I like these activities, and they are better than speaking in front of whole class sometimes because of strictly following the course book. his urged me to
because I feel a bit anxious while speaking in front of the whole class. I forget add an extra element to help encourage students to participate willingly and
about everything when I have to speak in front of a large group.” herefore, actively. Especially adding a competitive element to work increased the moti-
as teachers, we should try to include as many PGWA as possible in our class- vation of my students.
room practices and should never give up on them as it is stated by Scrivener Additionally, those students with a negative attitude towards such activities
(2012:206), “Even if half of the students are not working as directed, that still complained about the noisy and distracting classroom environment. For teach-
leaves many who are. As a result, instead of one or two students doing something ers, these activities are a major challenge in terms of classroom management
useful while the others sit back, 10 or 20 students are working constructively. skills. hese are the times that we must be really alert about what is going on
Teachers must not drop pair work just because it is not successful for all students in our classrooms because the chances of misbehavior are greater with PGWA
all the time.” It shouldn’t be ignored that PGWA help students build luency by than in a whole-class setting. I had to revise my classroom management skills
decreasing the anxiety level that they would have in front of a large group. and monitoring techniques. Also, I realized the importance of convincing our
Contrary to my conclusions based on my observations in class, only a lim- students that having a considerable amount of noise in class during pair and
ited number of students had negative attitudes towards such activities. his group work activities is in the nature of such activities.
negative attitude of those students might be owing to the fact that they could Also, when giving reasons for not engaging in such activities, students
not see the merit in pair and small group work activities. hey felt that these mentioned the efect of their partners. I realized that I should be really careful
activities were not worth doing because they believed that they were not taken while pairing and grouping our students. As teachers we should be very careful
seriously by students. At this point, I realized that it was the teachers’ responsi- about the composition of the pairs and groups, by giving them a chance to ex-
bility to convince the students to take part in these activities and help them see perience the activities with a variety of group settings and not forcing them to
their value. As Harmer (2001, p.119) suggests, investing some time in discus- work in a setting that they don’t feel comfortable with. Teachers should form a
sion of pair and group work activities in class to persuade reluctant students clear proile of the relationships in their classes from the very irst day, maybe
that pair and group work are worth doing may help teachers a lot. by keeping notes about things happening in class.
When it comes to my own lessons, although the vast majority of the stu- It was interesting to see that one of the students who expressed her dislike
dents (18 out of 23) expressed positive attitudes towards such activities, the towards pair work activities stated that she got involved in these activities just for
percentage of students engaging in them most of the time (13 students) de- CPG (Classroom Participation Grade). his was also shared by another student
creased. his indicated that there were some problems related to my classroom with the same dislike, who answered the question related to engaging in these
practices besides some reasons related to other factors. It is a bit hard for a activities with “some of the time”. his indicated that including in-class perfor-
teacher to face and admit, but the results showed that the activities I applied in mance evaluation criteria in our end of term assessment criteria was efective to
class were boring for my students and so they didn’t want to take part in them. push some reluctant learners to engage in such activities in class. Also, having a
Dörnyei (2007, p.719) emphasizes the importance of providing suicient in- checklist related to the performance of students throughout PGWA may push
spiration and enjoyment to build up continuing motivation in learners in every some reluctant learners to get them engaged in such activities.
educational context by stating, “If the educational context cannot provide suf-
icient inspiration and enjoyment to build up continuing motivation in learner
Relections
and unless we are singularly fortunate with the composition of our class group,
student motivation will not be automatically there.” I had lost some of my stu- hrough this study I learnt that without a systematic look at the things going on
in our classes we miss points and may have false beliefs and prejudices towards
174 Pair and group work activities: Keep them or leave them?

our students. Prior to my study I had thought that my students had negative Team-teaching for teacher training
attitudes to PGWA and didn’t want to participate in them. I realized that I had
misinterpreted what was going on in my class. I came to the realization that
they actually see the merit in such activities and they really want to take part in
13 Nicholas Velde
them. With the help of my research project, I had the chance to learn what they
thought and how they felt, and identiied the real source of the problem so as to
be able to move towards excellence in my teaching practices. I had the chance
to revise what I had already known and applied in my classes and added new
techniques to my repertoire related to the application of pair and group work
Context and Problem
activities. I also realized that an enjoyable and stimulating learning environment
is as important as providing students with cognitively adequate instructional New teachers often struggle with numerous aspects of such a demanding ca-
practices. It would have been a huge fallacy if I had given up on pair and group reer. Frequently, these teachers rely on their recent training in order to make
work activities just depending on some false beliefs and prejudices. sense of the issues they face in and out of the classroom. As an attempt at
better preparing teachers for such diicult instructional decisions, training
programs often include a practicum component in which teachers engage in
References actual teaching either by themselves or under the supervision of an experi-
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge enced teacher. his method of teacher training has been strongly supported as
University Press. a means for enabling pre-service teachers in handling real demands of teach-
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a motivating classroom environment. In International ing in the classroom in both English as a foreign (EFL) and second language
handbook of English language teaching 719-731. Springer US. (ESL) settings (Farrell, 2001; Slagoski, 2007). Although the practicum is pur-
Ellis, R. (1988). he role of practice in classroom learning. AILA review, 5, 20-39.
ported as an efective method in teacher training, little research investigates
Girard, D. (1977). Motivation: he Responsibility of the Teacher. ELT Journal, 31,
its efects on pre-service teachers, and even less research has been devoted to
97-102.
Harmer, J. (2000). How to Teach English, Longman. examining particular aspects of team-teaching and handling critical incidents
Harmer, J. (2001). he Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman. (CIs) (e.g., student misunderstanding, teacher mistakes, problematic activities)
Long, M. and Porter, P. (1985). Group work, Interlanguage Talk, and Second Lan- during a practicum course.
guage Acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 19(2), 207-228. During my time in an American MA TESOL program, I was able to con-
Pellowe, W. R. (1996). Modifying Pairwork Activities to Encourage the Use of Eng- duct a course for adult learners of English with a colleague from the same
lish and Communication Strategies: An Action Research Project. ELTED .2(1). degree program. he practicum requirement presented a unique opportunity
Raja, N. & Saeed A. (2012). he Efectiveness of Group Work & Pair Work for Stu- to work closely with another pre-service teacher to plan and conduct lessons
dents of English at
for the course in a deeply collaborative fashion. hough my practice teaching
Undergraduate Level in Public & Private Sector Colleges”; Interdisciplinary Journal of
at the time had beneited from my training in the degree program, I was quite
Contemporary Research in Business. 4(5).
Scrivener, J. (2012). Classroom Management Techniques. Cambridge University Press. interested in the ways in which a team-teaching scenario might present learn-
Ur, Penny (1996). A Course in Language Teaching (Practice and heory). Cambridge ing opportunities absent from an individual teaching experience. In particu-
University Press. lar, I had been struggling with how to handle the CIs occurring in class and
Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC jour- thought I might beneit more from teaching with and relecting with someone
nal, 37(3), 308-328. else to see how we both observe and react to CIs in the classroom.

175
176 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 177

his article aims to provide information concerning an action-research investigated the efects of collaboration between pre-service teachers during a
project in which I investigated the issue of CIs in the classroom and the efect practicum course and found that teachers much preferred working with peers
of team-teaching on learning to mitigate such incidents during an ESL practi- to apply the theories and principles learned in their teacher training program
cum course assignment. he issue at hand was that of learning to handle CIs as opposed to tackling such a diicult challenge alone. Practicum research
in the classroom through a practicum experience. More speciically, the action lends credibility to a TESOL training program and also supports cooperative
research was aimed at answering the following questions: learning amongst pre-service teachers.
1. In what ways does team-teaching contribute to a pre-service teacher’s Outside a practicum situation, team-teaching has also been directly inves-
learning to mitigate critical incidents in the classroom? tigated in the TESOL ield, but minimally. Matsuda and Matsuda (2001) in-
2. How does team-teaching inluence the teaching of a lesson generally? vestigated journal sharing amongst language teachers and found they provided
context for sharing teaching ideas, problems with L2 writing, and relection on
development as a teacher. However, no study to date has actually investigated
Literature review the experiences of teachers collaborating inside a language classroom as well
During training, pre-service English language teachers are encouraged to en- as outside.
gage in relective practice during teaching. his type of practice can either be CIs are another area of language teaching that have received emphasis in
adopted in weak or strong forms. In a weak form, a teacher simply ponders teacher training programs. CIs are deined as unplanned incidents occurring
teaching issues upon completion of lessons with no written document cre- during teaching that serve to trigger insights about teaching (Farrell, 2008).
ated for later relection. However a strong form is more often encouraged as Analysis of CIs can lead to solutions for problems, build collegiality amongst
a more focused approach, wherein teachers systematically relect on the issues teacher peers, encourage questioning norms and routines, help teachers pose
they face in and outside the classroom using self-created tools to document critical questions about teaching, and help bring teaching beliefs to a higher
such relection (Farrell, 2008). One training experience that has been repeat- level of awareness (Richards & Farrell, 2005). New teachers certainly encoun-
edly suggested as grounds for such relection is that of a practicum course in ter a multitude of CIs during lessons, and CIs should be strongly focused on
English language teaching certiicate and master’s programs. during pre-service training.
Practicum experiences have been investigated to some degree in the ield In the realm of K-12 mainstream education, some research has been con-
of TESOL. Farrell (2001) examined the role of a teacher trainee in order to ducted to highlight the usefulness of relection on CIs amongst pre-service
determine the ways in which pre-service teachers are socialized into the ield teachers. Griin (2003) found that the pre-service teachers’ documentation
of language teaching through a practicum experience. he study utilized a of CIs indicated an increased orientation by participants towards growth and
practicum model in which the trainee worked under a supervising teacher and inquiry as professionals. he participants also moved away from thinking con-
assisted with instruction. hrough the case study, Farrell suggested that clear cretely and began to show evidence of thinking more pedagogically in their
roles should be determined concerning who is in charge of the trainee’s growth relections. Work has also been done in the English language teaching (ELT)
as a professional, and supervising teachers must also be trained to handle the ield. In her case study involving relection on CIs by Malaysian secondary
challenges of working with pre-service teachers. Another study revealed the teachers of English as a second language (ESL), hiel (1999) found that
efects of a collaborative action research project during a practicum course for teachers professionally beneited from documenting case studies of critical in-
pre-service teachers. Ho (2013) found that teachers gained critical experience cidents. However, the research was not thorough in exactly how the teachers
handling student learning issues and teaching decisions when they worked beneited and instead ofered a surface-level perspective on relective practice
together to identify problems and choose speciic actions to take as teachers in and the role of CIs in such relection during teacher training. Current research
order to observe efects among students and teachers alike. Canh (2013) also highlights CIs as important learning opportunities for new and experienced
178 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 179

teachers, but it fails to reveal the learning utility of CIs during practicum ex- used (see Appendix A). Half-way through the data collection period, it was
periences for pre-service English language teachers in a team-teaching envi- determined by both participants that the form was not addressing the research
ronment. questions appropriately and was subsequently adapted to better answer the re-
Research gives credence to utilizing a practicum during teacher training, search questions (see Appendix B). Essentially, the forms required both teach-
and also supports collaboration as it is preferred amongst pre-service teachers. ers to relect on personal emotions, thoughts, and actions, and it also involved
However no research has documented the practicum experience of teachers relection on the partner teacher’s actions. Finally, the second form included a
collaborating together inside the classroom and the efect of such a practi- question devoted to how the team-teaching aspect of the course was inluenc-
cum design on teachers’ ability to relect on and learn from CIs. herefore, ing instructional decisions in general as opposed to only during a CI.
the following study aims to ill this gap in research while answering the posed
research questions in order to beneit teacher training programs simultane- Methods
ously.
he teaching situation for this research project was unique because it involved
two teachers collaborating in and out of the classroom in order to provide
Procedure lessons to adult learners of English. During any given lesson, one teacher had
prepared the lesson plan with assistance from the other teacher, and was teach-
ing that lesson as the primary instructor (PI) with occasional assistance from
Participants
the other teacher, the secondary instructor (SI). he responsibility for writing
he two pre-service teacher participants involved in the research included the the lesson plan and giving the lesson was traded between the two teachers
author of this article and one other teacher. Both participants were enrolled every week. Every lesson featured these circumstances, and it was these cir-
in a Master’s degree program for teaching English as a second language in cumstances that drove the research questions in the irst place.
an American university. Both teachers were in their mid-twenties, one male In order to answer the research questions, the participating teachers com-
and one female. he data collected concerned actions taken in an ESL course pleted the teaching relection form on a weekly basis soon after completing a
ofered through a partnership between the university and a local non-proit lesson together. A total of 20 relection forms were collected over an academic
organization ofering English tutoring to residents in need. 12 to 15 students semester. Each teacher contributed 10 forms individually. he teachers agreed
attended each lesson, and the course was designed to assist the students in to complete the relection forms as soon as possible after a post-lesson discus-
speaking with the teachers of their children about school-related issues, but sion taking place immediately after each lesson. During the post-lesson dis-
also included English helpful for communication in general. Students’ names cussion, the teachers both agreed on a particular CI to relect on for research
and information were not included in the collection of data in order to exclude purposes. his process was followed every week during the semester of action
them from any formal participation in the action research. research.
Following the collection of data, responses were grouped by the question
Materials they addressed and were analyzed for emerging patterns. According to Burns
It has been suggested that action research remain practical and organized in (2010), this method of inductive coding can help to bring out the connections
a way to be most helpful for solving the inherent problems at hand (Grabe & between collected data and the ‘big picture’ or research area being investigated.
Stoller, 2011). In this spirit, the primary tool utilized for collecting data was Essentially, the action researcher attempts to become deeply acquainted with
designed to be used with ease and to be adaptable should issues arise during the data in order to identify the patterns in which answers to research ques-
the research project. Initially, a relection form consisting of ive questions was tions exist. Following an extended period of becoming acquainted with the
180 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 181

responses provided by the participants concerning CIs, some clear patterns Teacher-Oriented Student-Oriented Language-Oriented
emerged. One portion in particular During tonight’s infor- he critical incident oc-
was sample sentences to mation gap activity, the curred when we realized
Findings and discussion elicit Ss asking for clari- several of the students (I realized?) that the
ication. he point came slipped into Spanish even past progressive is much
Upon examining the relection responses, two major trends emerged. he re- where I needed to intro- though we had asked harder to teach than
sponses were grouped by the types of CIs they discussed. hese types fell into duce words Ss didn’t know them to stick to English. previously thought.
particular categories: teacher, student, and language-oriented CIs. Additional- in a sentence to elicit their While walking group to
ly, the responses were re-grouped according the teacher roles occurring during use of asking what a word group, we had to remind
CIs uncovered. hese role categories included assistive, symmetrical, request- means. I was stumped. them to speak English.
ing, and consultative. See Tables 1 and 2 for examples of relection responses While giving directions for he past two weeks, we
for each category. he following section discusses both the CI types and the the irst activity (greetings), have had students whose
I accidentally got ahead of L1 was Spanish, but
roles that the teachers adopted during those CIs in order to address each re-
myself and told students to this week, we also had a
search question posed prior to data collection. pair up, but the activity was student whose L1 was
he three types of CIs encountered over the semester help to highlight designed to be solo. Chinese.
how the teacher participants learned to handle CIs. A large number of the CIs
encountered during the research were teacher-oriented. Teachers were often
Table 2. Teacher Role Category Examples
focused on their own actions as opposed to the students or the language be-
ing taught. he responses included mention of methods for giving directions, Assistive Symmetrical Requesting Consultative
planning for lessons, execution of activities, use of visuals or a whiteboard, and My reaction was to [PI] explained it in Actively, I asked I decided to take
relective practice prior to a lesson. Responses to our irst question on the re- help [SI] come up another way, which [SI] if we should charge a bit and to
lection form concerning what occurred during the CI helped to highlight the with words. I end- seemed to work go ahead and do establish with her
type of CI that occurred. In addition to teacher-oriented CIs, some student- ed up not walking for most students, writing instead, what I would do
around to help stu- but a few were still and he suggested in order to prepare
oriented CIs also occurred. Responses regarding these CIs included mention
dents during one asking questions staying with the Ss for the task
of students’ use of their irst language (L1), and the discrepancy of proiciency activity so I could … pairs. (language in and
among the students of the class. his type of CI was much less frequent in make that list. for it).
our data, and even overlapped with the teacher-oriented CIs because some When I realized [SI] seemed to be [PI] clearly had [SI] was ask-
CIs were too diicult to classify as only one type. However, this type of CI is which sentence doing much the issues with not ing questions
important because students are an integral part of the lesson. Finally, there was [Student] needed, same as I was. She being able to see about what I had
one CI in which language was the primary focus. In particular, teaching the I told [PI] to go walked around and the students ... She planned and we
present continuous grammatical feature presented itself as a more challeng- ahead and erase did not seem angry voiced this and just went from
ing topic for our students. Overall, these three major types of CIs emerged the rest and move or nervous, but just consistently asked there.
and helped to narrow the focus of our attempt at answering our irst research on because I (luck- really calm. for assistance in
question. ily) had that one knowing when to
memorized. move on.
Note: PI, SI, and Student were used for maintaining anonymity.
Table 1.CI Category Examples he most frequent type of CI involved teachers’ actions before or during
182 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 183

a lesson and the relections yielded important information about how team- highlight that a PI also compensated for gaps in his/her own teaching, and the
teaching inluenced handling this type of CI. Teacher-oriented CIs seemed SI observed and imitated the actions taken by the PI to mitigate the CI. In-
helpful for teachers to examine their own actions and also aforded interesting terestingly, the beneit seemed to switch direction during these particular CIs.
relections on emotional and active responses during a lesson. he PI often he PI demonstrated proper handling of a CI while the SI was able to observe
responded in an emotional way. Answers including words like “surprise” and how to handle a CI and actually assist in handling the CI by simulating the
“dang-it moment” indicate that it was quite normal for the PI to initially re- action demonstrated by the primary teacher.
act with emotion rather than action. However, the SI’s responses during CIs Another way in which teachers took action was to actually request assis-
helped to highlight the assistive role a co-teacher played during our lessons. tance from the other teacher during a CI. his happened when a teacher was at
he actions often included illing gaps in teaching left by the primary teacher. a loss for examples, or simply needed help in giving clear instructions. hough
hese actions included giving more direction, explaining language more thor- this type of reaction to CIs seemed helpful during the lesson, it did not pro-
oughly or with visual aids, providing examples for the other teacher, giving vide a means for learning how to mitigate CIs as an individual teacher. With
some direction to the other teacher to help improve instruction immediately, another teacher in class it was easier for the participants to request help rather
assisting individual students with completing activities, and making important than to deal with the CI themselves. Unfortunately, this option is never pres-
decisions before a lesson to improve the likelihood of a successful activity or ent during a normal lesson in which no SI is present. Still, this type of reaction
lesson. It is important to note that our data suggest a pattern of one teacher re- to a CI was much less frequent. Furthermore, that these incidents occurred
acting with surprise or embarrassment while the other teacher reacted with ac- and were relected on helped to highlight the gaps in a teacher’s repertoire.
tion. Additionally, the responses from PIs concerning the SI’s reactions often In relecting on these CIs, one teacher indicated the efect of little planning
uncovered feelings of gratefulness and ‘noticing the gap’ that was left by their inluencing the activity, but also provided insight by mentioning that the rest
own teaching. his particular feature of our data indicated that both the pre- of the lesson was consequently changed. his relection in particular indicated
service teachers observed an actual model of taking action to solve problems a deeper relection on how one CI inluenced a lesson, and in many ways, this
in teaching demonstrated by their co-teacher. his type of observation seems type of relection was likely helpful in both teachers seeing the true efect of
quite apt for learning how to handle CIs as the emotions connected with each CIs with a broader perspective.
incident provide for a more vivid memory of a teacher’s own reactions during he last role that participant teachers found themselves in was that of a
teaching juxtaposed with the more actions of their co-teachers. In conjunction, consultant to the other teacher. his happened solely for the SI, who had not
these results indicate that a real-life model of handling CIs occurred during prepared the lesson and was simply there to assist and observe during the
the lessons in question and teachers left the experience with tangible exemplar lesson. In particular, this reaction occurred just before one lesson when both
teaching moments which they may rely on in future handling of CIs in the teachers realized that a portion of an activity was not quite planned out and
classroom. directions were not clear enough as they were in the lesson plan. his was the
Less often, the responses indicated that the PI took action to mitigate a only instance in which one teacher ofered the other teacher assistance in how
CI and the other teacher imitated that action. For example, one CI involved a to teach a particular portion of their lesson. hough this consultative aspect
PI seeing that directions were simply unclear for students. he PI proceeded of handling a CI was infrequently observed during the semester, the CI and
to move throughout the classroom to ofer more speciic or clearer directions, reactions by the teachers helped to show that some cooperative learning was
and the SI followed this action by doing the exact same thing. Furthermore, occurring concerning a preemptive approach to handling CIs by both teachers.
during a diferent CI, a PI felt it was necessary to use the students’ L1 to help In many ways, the responses indicated a trend towards learning from prior CIs
clarify a teaching point, and the SI proceeded by using the L1 with a smaller and attempting to prevent the repetition of those CIs through careful plan-
group of students in the class. his type of symmetrical teaching helped to ning. With more data, we might see evidence of this type of learning from past
184 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 185

mistakes recurring in the teacher relections. Relections

Regarding our second research question, the inal question added to the
In hindsight, the action research was quite successful in answering the research
relection form half-way through the semester helped to more directly answer
questions and highlighting the learning that occurs in a team-teaching envi-
how team-teaching contributed to giving the lessons in general. Patterns con-
ronment for pre-service teachers. Clearly, the types of CIs and the roles ad-
cerning emotions, enhancing the activities in the lesson, and illing gaps left
opted during them by the PI and SI helped the teachers to see gaps in teaching
from the PI all emerged from our responses to the relection question.
and the ways in which those gaps could be illed. Interestingly, the learning
hrough team teaching, both teachers’ training experience was enriched
curve for the participant teachers was observed all within one semester. he
in some way. It was noted that the PI often felt worse emotionally about the
teachers began to address the incidents they had experienced earlier in the
lesson than the SI. Additionally, one teacher had a bit less experience teaching
semester by working together to prevent them later in the semester. he col-
language learners prior to the research and felt much more useful as a teacher
laboration certainly helped in this process and it is unknown whether a single
as a result of being the SI for a lesson. Finally, one teacher commented that
teacher would so quickly be able to address such CIs by merely relecting alone
rapport seemed to be much stronger between the other teacher and students
on their experience.
later in the semester when compared to the irst lesson. Overall, team-teaching
Aside from the answering of research questions, it is clear that a team-
seemed to provide some emotional support for teachers during an important
teaching practicum experience can deeply afect the learning of teaching. he
time in their training.
two teachers were able to directly inluence their perspectives on their own
In addition to emotional beneits, the teachers both commented on the use
teaching due to the team-teaching they conducted while providing free classes
of team-teaching to enhance activities. In one lesson, a teacher felt an activity
for community members in need. By working to connect pre-service teach-
was much more communicative and contextualized as a result of team-teach-
ers with such community members, practicum team-teaching becomes much
ing. In another lesson, a PI mentioned the beneit of having the SI teach one
more feasible while providing all parties with a means for learning in a positive
activity. Finally, a response included information about the low of the lesson
and educational atmosphere. It is highly recommended for teacher-training
being improved as a result of team-teaching. It seems that the delivery and
programs to adopt such a method for meeting needs of many with little to no
addressing of goals during lessons were deeply impacted by team-teaching.
time and inancial cost. In this way, pre-service teachers can engage in team-
As mentioned, we often struggled with lessons and this resulted in gaps
teaching without the burden of payment obstructing their chance to work
left by our teaching. Both teachers commented on the ability to compensate
towards mastering the complex craft of language teaching.
for the problems of the other teacher due to the team-teaching nature of the
lessons. hese gaps included illing in a late-arriving student on the things
she missed while the PI taught new language, giving more explanation and References
scafolding before activities, and providing more needed practice to students Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for
when the PI might have moved on. he responses provided in both the initial practitioners. New York, NY: Routledge.
questions about CIs and the inal question on our relection form helped to Canh, L. V. (2013). Great expectations: he TESOL practicum as a professional
show that both teachers beneited greatly from identifying gaps in teaching learning experience. TESOL Journal.
and taking action to ill them. Farrell, T. S. C. (2001). English language teacher socialisation during the practicum.
Prospect, 16(1), 49-62.
Farrell, T. S. C. (2008). Relective practice in the professional development of teachers
of adult English language learners. CAELA Network Brief. Found at: http://
www.cal.org/caelanetwork/pdfs/RelectivePracticeFinalWeb.pdf
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2011). Teaching and researching reading (2nd ed.). New
186 Team-teaching for teacher training Nicholas Velde 187

York, NY: Longman. Appendix A

Griin, M. L. (2003). Using critical incidents to promote and assess relective think- Relection Form 1
ing in preservice teachers, Relective Practice: International and Multidisci- Briely explain the critical
plinary Perspectives, 4(2), 207-220. incident, what led up to it, and
Ho, B. (2013). Carrying out collaborative action research in a practicum. TESOL Jour- what followed.
nal, 4(2), 295-311.
Matsuda, A., & Matsuda, P. K. (2001). Autonomy and collaboration in teacher educa-
tion: Journal sharing among native and nonnative English-speaking teachers.
he CATESOL Journal, 13(1), 109-121.
Richards, J.C. & Farrell T.S.C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. What was your reaction? (Af-
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. fect, Action, or Both)
Slagoski, J. D. (2007). Practicum: Microteaching for non-native speaking teacher
trainees. English Teaching Forum, 4, 32-37.
hiel, T. (1999). Relections on critical incidents. Prospect, 14(1), 44-52.

What was your team-teacher’s

reaction? (Afect, Action, or
Both)

How did you and your team-

teacher react together?

Did team-teaching contribute

to or mitigate the incident?
188 Team-teaching for teacher training

Appendix B
Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!
Briely explain what led up to
the incident and the incident
itself.
Relection Form 2
14 Beliefs of students and instructors about
learner autonomy
Merve Güzel

What was your reaction?

(Afect, Action, or Both)
Context and Problem
Learner Autonomy has been the main concern of EFL teaching environments
in recent years. his is because it is believed to result in permanent, life-long
learning. However, it is a well-known fact that the Turkish education system is
based on traditional teaching methods which control students too much and
hinder autonomous language learning. Even so, there are so many professional
What was your team-teach-
er’s reaction? (Afect, Action, development conferences and workshops all over the country and the tenden-
or Both) cy towards autonomous learning directs the EFL teachers to learner-centred,
communicative activities both inside and outside the classroom.
he concept of learner autonomy was introduced by Holec (1981) and has
been deined in many ways since then. Holec deined it as the “ability to take
Did team-teaching contrib-
charge of one’s own learning”, and referring to this ability “is not inborn but
ute to or mitigate the inci-
dent? Briely explain.
must be acquired either by ‘natural’ means or (as most often happens) by for-
mal learning, i.e. in a systematic, deliberate way” (1981). In accordance with
the same perspective, Boud (1988) deined the term as “an approach to learn-
ing … that students take some signiicant responsibility for their own learning
over and above responding to instruction”. Another important deinition was
Did team teaching support provided by Little (1991) who viewed autonomy as “a capacity – for detach-
the teaching of the lesson ment, critical relection, decision-making, and independent action.”
in any other way(s)? Briely he deinitions above show us that the main focus of learner autonomy is
explain. taking responsibility for one’s own learning along with being relective, inde-
pendent and able to make decisions. Even though these key points imply that
learner autonomy is a self-generated quality, it is an undeniable fact that teach-
ers have a great role in fostering this quality. According to Little learner auton-
omy depends on teacher autonomy and teachers cannot be expected to foster
the growth of autonomy in their learners if they do not themselves know what
it is to be an autonomous learner (1995). Moreover, in all their pedagogical

189
190 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 191
about learner autonomy

actions teachers must be able to exploit their professional skills autonomously, Holden and Usuki (1999) carried out another study to explore the views of
applying to their teaching those same relective and self- managing processes Japanese students. hey utilized 10 open-ended interview questions to get stu-
that they apply to their learning. (1995). As understood from these remarks, dents’ perceptions about learner autonomy and their teachers’ attitudes. At the
teachers themselves should have autonomous skills so that they can guide their end of the study, they pointed out that students simply do not have adequate
students and foster learner autonomy both inside and outside the classroom. opportunities to develop their autonomy because they usually learn English in
As mentioned before, applications of the Turkish education system impose teacher-centered classes.(1999) Moreover, results revealed that students prefer
autonomy-hindering beliefs upon both teachers and students. With this prob- teachers who play non-traditional roles rather than teachers who simply lec-
lem in mind I wanted to see to what extent learner autonomy inds its place ture or transmit their knowledge.(1999)
in the Turkish EFL context and decided to get both EFL instructors’ and Chan (2003) examined teacher’s perspectives of learner autonomy at Hong
students’ perspectives about the issue. Kong Polytechnic University who noted that “teachers felt mainly responsible
he main aim of this study was to explore via questionnaires and interviews for the methodological decisions within the classroom” (in Barillaro, 2011).
the views of Gediz University Prep School students and instructors regarding Furthermore, “respondents reported a clear awareness of autonomy as a goal
the concept of learner autonomy. he participants were 52 A2 students and 10 of teaching and felt fairly positive about students’ decision-making abilities in
EFL instructors. Research questions were as follows: aspects of the language learning process. Teachers did feel, however, restricted
by curriculum constraints and consequently did not provide decision-making
1. What does learner autonomy mean to EFL instructors? opportunities for learners in areas of autonomous learning (e.g. learning objec-
2. To what extent do the EFL instructors ind their students autonomous? tives, activities)” (Barillaro, 2011).
3. What activities are used most by teachers to foster autonomy? Durmuş (2006) investigated EFL teachers’ perceptions on promoting
4. What are the constraints that prevent the teachers from fostering learner autonomy at Anadolu University. Participants of the study were 116
autonomy suiciently? EFL teachers at the School of Foreign Languages Basic Languages Depart-
5. What are the beliefs of students on learner autonomy? ment. Diferent forms of questionnaires were used as data collection tools.
6. What type of activities are done by the students claiming to be Results showed that the majority of the participants supported learner in-
autonomous? volvement in realistic and achievable objectives.(2006)

Literature review Procedure

Since learner autonomy is a highly popular concept, thus far many studies have
been conducted by scholars and researchers, some of which have focused on he present study sheds light on the perceptions of Gediz University Prep
beliefs and attitudes of EFL learners and instructors. For instance, Cotterall School students and instructors on learner autonomy. Both qualitative and
(1995) carried out a study to investigate learner conceptions and efects of quantitative data collection techniques were used as research methods. Data
them on readiness for autonomy. In order to collect data students were given were collected through a ive-point Likert questionnaire developed by Egel
a questionnaire on learner beliefs about language learning. he results of the (2009) and open-ended questions. he overall tendency of students towards
study showed that learner beliefs regarding such factors as role of the teacher, autonomy was researched and also the views of the students and teachers were
role of feedback, learner independence, learner conidence in study ability, ex- analyzed in detail. Participants were ifty-two B2 students from three diferent
perience of language learning, and approach to studying have an important classes and ten EFL instructors at Gediz University. In order to collect data,
role in promoting learner autonomy. Results also indicated that learners and students were asked to complete a frequency-scale questionnaire to get their
teachers can hope to construct a sharing understanding of the language learn- views on diferent autonomous behaviors and other related variables. More-
ing process, and of their roles in it. (Cotteral, 1995) over, both students and instructors were asked ive open-ended questions each.
192 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 193
about learner autonomy

Findings posed to like analyzing, questioning and discussing. Moreover, they are re-
ported to retain the meaning from the context through critical thinking and
his study was shaped by both qualitative and quantitative data which helped
association of ideas. Namely, they try to explore things themselves.
me answer six research questions. he data gathered bore fruitful outcome and
I came up with valuable indings about the general tendency of students to-
wards learner autonomy, common aspects of autonomous students, most often Independency
used autonomy-friendly activities (by both teachers and students), constraints Independency is another common quality of autonomous learners according
hindering the promotion of autonomy. to the teacher-participants. he item got a frequency score of 8 out of 63,
which shows that relying less on the teacher is an important sign of being au-
Research question 1: What does learner autonomy mean to el instructors? tonomous according to the participant instructors. In this sense, autonomous
learners are less dependent on their teachers as they prefer to discover things
he irst research question was aimed at inding how EFL instructors take
irst rather than be spoon-fed. hey don’t necessarily need a teacher to learn
learner autonomy. Instructors were asked what learner autonomy means to
every single thing but they need the guidance of a teacher.
them and what the common aspects of autonomous learners are. hrough their
answers, the common aspects of autonomous learners were categorized under
nine broad items including control over learning, independency, awareness, Table 1: Common Aspects of Autonomous Learners
motivation, collaboration, cognition, metacognition, socio-afectiveness, and Frequency
Categories Illustrative Responses
responsibility. he table below shows the frequency of these items among the (63)
teachers’ answers. However, I will discuss top three with regard to their fre-
quency scores. Control over
Taking the ownership of learning
6 Playing an active role in the process.
learning
Being in the center of language learning.
Metacognition
Relying less on the teacher.
Metacognition was the top quality of autonomous learners by EFL instructors
Learning things without the need for a teacher.
at Gediz University. As shown in both Table 1 and Figure 1, metacognition Independency 8 Not needing to ask many questions and try to
got a frequency score of 15 out of 63.his reveals that the instructors con- discover irst. 
sider students utilizing metacognitive skills as autonomous. According to the
answers of teachers, metacognitive skills such as knowing how and where to Aware of what they are doing in the classroom
learn and what tools to use, evaluating their own progress and language learn- Aware of their skills and learning styles
Awareness 6
Aware of their strengths and weaknesses
ing process, setting language learning goals, choosing language learning meth-
ods, techniques, materials and content to be learned are signs of autonomy. Desire to learn
Self-motivated
Motivation 4 Intrinsically motivated
Cognition
Cognition was the second most common quality of autonomous learners by Liking to collaborate with their friends to use the
the teacher-participants with a frequency score of 8 out of 63. his outcome language.
Collaboration 3
shows that cognition is also a clear sign of autonomy for EFL instructors at Asking the teacher for guidance.
Gediz University. In the light of the indings, autonomous learners are sup- Working cooperatively with others
194 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 195
about learner autonomy

Knowing how to learn and what tools to use Research question 2: To what extent do EFL instructors ind their students
Metacognitive 15 Evaluating his language learning process autonomous?
Setting language learning goals
he second research question was a very direct one aimed at inding out to
Liking analyzing, questioning, discussing. what extent the EFL instructors think their students are autonomous. As can
Retaining meaning from context, be seen in igure 2, seven out of ten participant teachers have responded that
Cognitive 8 Trying to explore things themselves
they don’t think their students are autonomous at all, and the other three have
Learning in formal and informal environments. said only few of their students sometimes show autonomous behavior.
Socio-afective Questioning the purpose of deeds.
6
Not hesitating in asking questions to the teacher
Not expecting the teacher to assign something to
study
Responsibility 7 Being responsible for their own learning.
Taking responsibility for their own learning

Figure 1 shows the emerging themes from the data and their frequency lev-
els among the participant instructors’ answers. As can be seen, utilizing meta-
cognitive and cognitive skills, and independence from the teacher are the top
three qualities of autonomous learners.

Figure 2: Beliefs of Teachers about Students’ being Autonomous

Research question 3: What activities are used most by teachers to foster

autonomy?
he third research question explored common activities used by teachers with
the aim of fostering autonomy. Instructors were asked how they promote au-
tonomy and what activities they utilized most to make their students more
autonomous. hrough their answers, the mostly-used activities were classiied
into six strategies including guidance, giving responsibility, promotion of self-
study, metacognitive training, promotion of interaction pattern, promotion of
discovery learning. he table below shows the frequency of these six items
among the teachers’ answers. However, I will discuss the top three with regard
Figure 1: Summary of Common Aspects of Autonomous Learners
to their frequency scores.
196 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 197
about learner autonomy

Table 2: Most Used Strategies Fostering Autonomy tive training, giving responsibility and promoting self-study are the top three
Mostly Used Strategies Frequency strategies used by our instructors.
Responses
Fostering Autonomy (24)

Acting like a facilitator rather than a

Guidance 3 controller
Guiding them how to do certain tasks

Giving students more responsibility.

Giving students more responsibilit.
Letting the students choose their own
Giving Responsibility 5 materials, activities and topics.
Promoting creativity by letting them decide
on what topics to choose for projects.
Giving them tasks to complete independently.
Encouraging them to go to libraries for
outside class research.
Promoting Self-Study 4 Suggesting websites,blogs,podcasts. Figure 3: Summary of Most Used Strategies
Metacognitive Training
Suggesting students ilms and TV series

Promote critical thinking and relection on

learning
Raising and awareness in learners’ thinking Metacognitive training
Metacognitive processes. Metacognitive training was the most common strategy used by EFL instruc-
6 Raising awareness about learning styles and
Training
strategies tors at Gediz University. As can be seen in both Table 2 and Figure 3, the item
Teaching them how to learn. got a frequency score of 6 out of 24, which shows that most teachers try to
improve their students’ metacognitive skills by raising awareness about learn-
Promoting peer correction. ing styles, strategies and thinking processes. Moreover, they claim to promote
Promoting group works and projects in and
Promoting outside the classroom. critical thinking and relection on learning so as to be able to teach them how
4 to learn.
Interdependence Giving the the sts more interdependent duties
and tasks to work collaboratively.
Getting the sts to answer their own questions Giving responsibility
through eliciting.
Promoting Discovery Getting them to use reference books or
Giving students more responsibility is another important way used by teacher-
2 participants to foster autonomy. he item got a frequency score of 5 out of
Learning dictionaries so that they can answer their own
questions themselves. 24, showing that the teachers consider responsibility as one of the key points
in promoting autonomy. Accordingly, they let the students choose their own
materials, activities and topics and they also give them tasks to complete inde-
Figure 3 shows strategies the participant instructors utilize most to foster pendently so that they help their students become more autonomous.
learner autonomy in and outside the classroom. As can be seen, metacogni-
198 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 199
about learner autonomy

Interdependence nection between Turkish students’ learning habits and teachers’ teaching hab-
its. In this sense, teacher-participants claim that the education system prevents
Promoting interdependence, which means students’ being mutually dependent
them from giving control to the students, incorporating more practice into the
on each other, is one of the top three strategies utilized by Gediz University
lessons and using more communicative activities. Moreover, some teachers even
instructors to foster learner autonomy. he term got a frequency score of 4 out
claim their colleagues enjoy and ind it easy to spoon-feed students.
of 24, making us understand that teacher-participants know the importance of
interdependent tasks which help students learn from each other. Suitably, they
encourage their students to work collaboratively through pair works, group Time Constraints
works and projects in and outside the classroom. Another important constraint for Gediz University instructors is time-related
problems. he teacher-participants claim that they don’t have enough time to
Research question 4: What are the constraints that prevent the teachers from spare for autonomy-friendly activities due to their busy schedule and the rush-
fostering autonomy suiciently? ing pace of the syllabus.
he fourth research question aimed to ind out the drawbacks that hinder the
teachers from promoting autonomy suiciently. In order to answer this ques- Table 3: Constraints Hindering Teachers from Fostering Autonomy Suiciently
tion, participants were asked to count the constraints they experience, and
Categories of Frequency
their responds were categorized into seven broad items including previous ex- Illustrative Responses
constraints (23)
perience, Turkish education system, materials, teaching and teacher- related students’ educational background
problems, motivation, syllabus and time. he table below shows the frequency previous learning style
of these seven items among the teachers’ answers. However, I will discuss the their beliefs about how to learn
top three with regard to their frequency scores. Previous experience 8 learner strategies to learn
learning styles of my students
Previous Experience understanding language learning
According to the responds of the teacher-participants, students’ previous learn- Turkish education
3 education system
ing experience was the most common constraint on fostering learner autono- system
my with a frequency score of 8 out of 23(Figure/Table). In order to clarify this Materials 1
material- course books
point, the Turkish education system and the Turkish students’ learning habits teachers’ not wanting to give the control to learners
should be briely mentioned. It is well known by everyone in Turkey that the teachers’ not incorporating more practice
Turkish education system is based on memorization. Moreover, students are Teaching and
teachers’ not using more communicative activities
used to being spoon-fed rather than discovering for themselves. herefore they Teacher- Related 5
not giving more freedom to students
lack such skills as thinking critically, learning independently, and working in- problems
teachers love and use spoon-feeding
terdependently. As a consequence, most students resist learning autonomously
lack of intrinsic motivation
since it is diicult for them to give up their previous learning habits.
Motivation 2 student motivation/desire
Teaching and Teacher-Related Problems hectic schedule
Syllabus 2 rushing pace of the syllabus
he second most common constraint hindering teacher-participants from fos-
tering autonomy is teaching and teacher-related problems. his constraint may Time 4 time constraints
easily be associated with the irst one. hat is to say, there seems to be a clear con-
200 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 201
about learner autonomy

Figure 4 shows the categories of constraints hindering participant instruc- students think they are dependent on their teachers to a large extent. he irst
tors fostering autonomy suiciently. As can be seen, students’ previous expe- item in the survey was exam-orientedness which got the highest mean score
rience, teacher and teaching related problems and time constraints were the in the survey. he high score of this item reveals that though some students
main ones.
Figure 4: Summary of Constraints claim they apply to self- study as a way of learning, they cannot give up their
exam-based study habits. hat’s to say, most of the students study English only
when they have forthcoming exams and quizzes.

Table 4: General Tendency of Students towards Autonomy

Dimension of Learner Autonomy Average
(Out of 5)
Taking the responsibility of their own 2.1
learning
Enthusiasm for group work- projects 2.2
Self-Study 2.3
Dependence on Teacher 3.7
Figure 4: Summary of Constraints
Exam Orientedness 3.8

Research question 5: What are the beliefs of students on learner autonomy? Figure 5 shows the general tendency of students towards autonomy. As can
he ifth research question was aimed at inding EFL students’ general ten- be seen, most of our students are exam-oriented and their level of dependence
dency towards autonomy. In order to answer this question, a frequency-scale on teacher
Figure 5:is relatively
Summary high. Beliefs on Autonomy
of Students’
questionnaire on learner autonomy was given to 52 A2 students in three dif-
ferent classes so as to get their views on diferent autonomous behaviors and
other related variables. For ease of data analysis the (number) questions in the
survey were categorized under ive titles including taking the responsibility
of their own learning, enthusiasm for group-work projects, self-study, depen-
dence on teacher and exam orientedness. As can be seen in both table 4 and
igure 5, the item related to responsibility got a mean score of 2.1 out of 5,
which shows that most of the participant students think they don’t take re-
sponsibility for their own learning. Accordingly, the third and fourth items got
similar mean scores of 2.2 and 2.3, revealing that only some students assume
themselves to be enthusiastic for group work and they apply to self-study as a
way of learning. he second item got a mean score of 3.7, showing that most Figure 5: Summary of Students’ Beliefs on Autonomy
202 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 203
about learner autonomy

Research question 6: What type of activities are done by the students claiming to Discussion
be autonomous?
hrough this teacher-research I aimed to get both EFL teachers’ and learners’
he last research question of the study was aimed at inding out and categoriz- views on autonomy. he six research questions which gave shape to my study
ing the activities utilized by students who claim to be autonomous. Participant provided me with valuable data which are open to discussion and commentary.
students were asked open-ended questions and according to their answers, Accordingly, in this part of my study, I aim to relect and comment on the re-
the activity types were classiied into three: media enhanced learning, self-lin- sults, make references to the literature and give suggestions for further studies.
guistic study and social-interaction based activities. As can be seen in table 5, he indings of the irst research question revealed that for the participant
students mostly apply to media-enhanced learning which involves such activi- EFL instructors, the top qualities of autonomous learners are cognition, meta-
ties as watching ilms and series, listening to talks and utilizing the internet for cognition and independency. his result is important in that participant instruc-
various purposes. Self-linguistic study on vocabulary and grammar is another tors see a direct relation between autonomy and using cognitive/metacognitive
way utilized by students claiming to be autonomous. As for the third category, strategies and being independent. When the literature is scanned, it can be
participant students reported that they apply to social-interaction based activi- easily recognized that there is a certain parallel between the opinions of partic-
ties such as practicing speaking with their foreign friends and teachers. ipant instructors and many scholars. According to the literature the uppermost
quality of autonomous learners is taking responsibility for one’s own learning,
Table 5: Most-Utilized Activities By Autonomous Learners and in my opinion, one needs to utilize his/her cognitive and metacognitive
Categories of Frequency of skills independently in order to take charge of his/her learning.
responses responses As for the second research question which was aimed at inding out wheth-
Media Enhanced Learning 11 er participant instructors think their students are autonomous or not, most
Self-Linguistic Study 4 of them responded that they don’t ind their students autonomous at all. his
Interactive Activities 3
result shows a parallel between the results of the student survey used to an-
swer the ifth research question exploring students’ general tendency towards
learner autonomy. According to the results of this survey, while some students
Figure six shows the categories of activities used by students claiming to be au- claim they apply to self-study as a way of learning, most see themselves as
tonomous. AsCategories
Figure 6: can be seen,
ofthe most
most utilized
utilized activities
activities by are technology-based
autonomous learners ones. exam-oriented and teacher dependent students.
he indings of the third research question exploring the common activities
used by teachers to promote autonomy showed that participant teachers apply
activities which stimulate metacognition, responsibility and interdependence.
his result is signiicant in that participant instructors know the importance
of activating learners’ metacognitive skills, giving them responsibility and uti-
lizing interdependent activities which are considered by many scholars as key
points in fostering autonomy. In particular, interdependence which lets learn-
ing occur via collaboration and interaction between learners is seen by Boud
(1988) as a more developed stage of autonomy than independence.
As for the results of the fourth research question, the constraints revealed
bear importance in terms of many aspects. First of all the students’ previous ex-
perience which is seen as the top constraint by the participant teachers shows
Figure 6: Categories of most utilized activities by autonomous learners
204 Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone! Beliefs of students and instructors Merve Güzel 205
about learner autonomy

us that Turkish EFL learners have been educated in an atmosphere where they 2. We shouldn’t always give students what they want. hough they
have been seen as passive recipients of the knowledge. For this reason, they generally expect us to spoon feed them, we should guide them about
are used to being spoon-fed and lack skills helping them to be autonomous. learning how to learn.
Consequently, most students resist learning things autonomously since it is 3. We should help our students understand that what they learn has a
diicult for them to give up their previous learning habits. Second constraint meaning and function rather than passing the exams.
is about teaching practices. According to the participant teachers, the edu- 4. We shouldn’t be disappointed with students’ resistance to autonomy-
cation system, rushing syllabus and time constraints prevent them fostering friendly activities such as self-evaluation, peer evaluation, pair-works,
autonomy suiciently in the classroom. Here comes up the general problem
group-works, projects and tasks. hey will get used to those activities
of EFL classrooms in Turkey: exam-oriented classes, spoon-feeding teachers
in time.
and passive students. At this point, it can be understood that the syllabi for
5. As data showed, students mostly utilize technology-based activities
EFL classrooms should be designed in such a way that there is enough time
for communicative, autonomy-friendly activities. outside the classroom, so we should suggest blogs, log-books, online
As for the indings of the last research question (the ifth one has already journals, web-sites, games, videos, ilms and series so that they can
been discussed), the results provided me with valuable information on activity integrate English into their daily lives
types utilized by autonomous learners. he indings show us the importance of
technology and internet. It is clear that most of the students tend to use inter- References
net so as to improve their language skills. In accord with this result, I suggest
Barillaro, F. (2011). Teacher Perspectives of Learner Autonomy in Language Learning.
that we EFL teachers should assign more online tasks and utilize blogs, log
MA dissertation, Sheield Hallam University.
books, social networking sites etc. to promote learner autonomy.
Boud, D. (1988). Developing Student Autonomy in Learning. New York: Kogan Press.
All in all, my study showed that though Gediz University instructors try Cotterall, S. M. (1995). Developing a Course Strategy for Learner Autonomy. ELT
their best to promote learner autonomy, there are some constraints that hinder Journal. 49(3).
them from doing so. As for the students, they are well aware of their non- Durmuş, A. (2006). EFL Instructors’ Perceptions on Learner Autonomy at Anadolu
autonomy and exam orientedness. However, there are some who try to rely University. MA thesis. Anadolu University.
less on their teachers, utilize their meta-cognitive skills and take charge of Egel, İ. P. (2003). he Impact of the European Language Portfolio on the Learner Autonomy
their own learning, which is a big step towards autonomy. As a last word, EFL of Turkish Primary School Students. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation. Anadolu
teachers should never forget that if we are not autonomous themselves, we University, Eskişehir.
cannot expect our students to be so. If we avoid being over-controlling, pre- Holden, B. & Usuki, M. (1999). Learner autonomy in language learning: A preliminary
investigation. Bulletin of Hokuriku University, 23, 191-203.
scriptive teachers, we can give more freedom to our students so that they can
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
become active learners rather than passive recipients.
Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy. 1: Deinitions, Issues and Problems. Dublin:
Authentik.
Further Suggestions Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: the dependence of learner autonomy on teacher
autonomy. System 23(2) 175-81.
1. EFL teachers should be lexible about classroom practices. hough
all of us try to comply with the syllabus, we may create some time for
task-based activities which help students improve their metacognitive
and cognitive skills.
 Enhancing a learning-centered
15 classroom rather than a
teacher-centered one
Kevser Özdemir

“I forget what I was taught. I only remember what I’ve learnt.” Patrick White
“ You are given the experiences you need to understand the world.” Paulo Coelho

Context and problem

he aim of this study was to measure the impact of using learning-centered
techniques on students. his study also intended to investigate the idea that
successful learners assume a certain degree of responsibility for their own learn-
ing and refute prejudgments that teachers make before considering all of the
facts about what learners want and need. To begin with, I’d like to mention the
initial motivation which inluenced me to carry out this research. I was taught
by traditional teachers at school, most of whom sat at their desks throughout
the whole lesson and just taught English grammar rules deductively without
giving us any chance to practise them. Sadly, it didn’t change when I was at
university. I recall an incident where one of our instructors left the classroom
crying as I told her that I could have done the same thing as she did. While I
was doing the CELTA (Certiicate in English Language Teaching to Adults) I
realized that I was nowhere near being student or learning-centered in the irst
years of my career. I hadn’t been aware of the enormous amount of talking time
which was done by me but not my students. I had never looked for proof of
whether the target language was acquired by the students or the aim of the les-
son was achieved. I must admit, hardly ever did I have an aim for each lesson.
Given the conversations I have with my colleagues, teachers always ind it
easier to blame students when learning does not take place efectively. I per-
sonally believe that rather than considering teaching from the perspective of
our students, we tend to act in a more controlling way. We claim that creation
of a positive pedagogical environment which facilitates learning seems to be

207
208 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 209
teacher-centered one

far-fetched due to several reasons such as failing to prepare students for the involved in their learning processes. he extent to which it is possible or desir-
end of term tests, the risk of losing control over the learners, the hard work able for learners to be involved in their own learning will obviously vary from
that we would have to take on while preparing our lessons. We assume that context to context and from learner to learner. If learners are to learn anything
learning would be a product of teaching but unfortunately that’s not neces- at all, they have to do the learning for themselves so they should be involved
sarily the case. We put much of our energy into catching up with the syllabus, in their own learning. In an ideal learning-centered context, not only will de-
asking and answering our own questions, putting ourselves in the centre of cisions about what to learn and how to learn be made with reference to the
our lessons, and so we neglect to focus and concentrate more on all the factors learners, but the learners themselves will be involved in the decision making
related to learning, what is learned and how it is learned. he exams we give process. Each element in the curriculum process will involve the learner, as
become the major means of measurement of what is learned. Table 1 shows.
Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a teacher or a learn-
er-centered one has recently become quite a popular aim among language Table 1 - Learner roles in a learner-centered curriculum (Nunan & Lamb (1996). he
teachers worldwide. Does a learning-based attitude help learners communi- self-directed teacher. Managing the learning process, 9.)
cate better in English? It is an unfortunate fact that teaching grammar consti-
Curriculum Role of learner
tutes a great part our curriculums and we are supposed to teach many diferent
structures by the time the course has ended. But the question is “Do they stage
really learn what we teach?” Is it possible to claim that being able to do well Planning Learners are consulted on what they want to learn and how they
in an exam means that students have achieved their goals and that they are want to learn and how they want to go about learning. An exten-
capable of using the language efectively for diferent purposes? he answers sive process of needs analysis facilitates this process. Learners are
to these questions were sought in this research by observing two prep’ classes at involved in setting, monitoring and modifying the goals and objec-
Izmir Katip Çelebi University School of Foreign Languages on a regular basis.
tives of the programs being designed for them.
Students were initially asked to ill in a survey about their previous learning
context. hey were next given another survey to compare their experiences Implementa- Learners’ language skills develop through the learners actively using
of a teacher-centered classroom compared with a learning-centered one and tion and relecting on the language inside and outside the classroom.
to share their feelings about the current learning environment where stimu- hey are also involved in modifying and creating their own learn-
lating activities and techniques were implemented to encourage them to get ing tasks and language data.
actively involved in the learning process. he extent to which they had found Assessment Learners monitor and assess their own progress. hey are also ac-
learning-centered lessons more useful or not was investigated in this second
and evalua- tively involved in the evaluation and modiication of teaching and
survey. Another survey was given to the instructors who work at Izmir Katip
Çelebi University School of Foreign Languages to see what they think of a tion learning during the course and after it has been completed.
learning-centered classroom and if they are able to run a learning-centered
environment in their classes. Cross, (2000), writing about the learning process, makes the point that “We
cannot transfer our knowledge ready-made into our students’ minds” (Cross,
2000, p. 10). Gardner (1999) captures the concern for diferences in learners
Literature review when he writes, “Human minds do not all work in the same way, and human
he concept of learner-centeredness has been invoked with increasing fre- beings do not have the same cognitive strengths and weaknesses” (p. 166). his
quency in recent years. What does the term mean? Nunan & Brindley (1986) focus on the learner and the learning process is at the heart of the learning
state that, Learner centered classrooms are those in which learners are actively versus teaching debate.
210 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 211
teacher-centered one

he debate in higher education is further described by Barr and Tagg learning outcomes” (p. 32). he teaching model seems to place much of its
(1995) as a need to shift from an instructional (focus on teaching) model to energy on the process or ways of teaching and less concern on what is learned
one where learning is the major concern (focus on learning). his debate in or how it is learned.
higher education is further described by Barr and Tagg (1995) as a need to According to Reynolds, (1998), one might assume that learning would be
shift from an instructional (focus on teaching) model to one where learning is a product of teaching and that the purpose of teaching would be for learn-
the major concern (focus on learning). At college level, Boggs (1996) supports ing to occur. If one looks at the process, learning and teaching can each be
this shift by suggesting that “We need a new paradigm for community col- deined in its own way. Learning can occur without teaching and that teach-
leges, one which deines the colleges as learning rather than teaching institu- ing doesn’t ensure learning. hat is not to say that learning cannot occur
tions” (p. 25). from teaching activities. he debate is not over the need or value of teaching
Barr and Tagg (1995) believe that the chief agent in the process is the activities, but over the need to focus and concentrate more on all the factors
learner. hus, students must be active discoverers and constructors of their related to learning.
own knowledge” (p. 21) Rogers (1969), further supports the need for learn- Bunce et al. (2010) measured the average length of the students’ reported
ers to take control over the learning. Rogers points out that learners must be attention lapses, and also examined the relationship among attention lapses
trusted to develop their own potential and encouraged to choose both the and various pedagogical methods used by two diferent instructors. he most
way and direction of their learning. According to Reynolds, J. (1998), learners intriguing inding of this study was a relationship between the timing of ac-
should have meaningful control over what and how things are learned, plus tive-learning, or “student-centered,” pedagogies and the pattern of reported
how the learning outcome is measured. his concern for the learner acquiring lapses in attention. If we could design our classes according to our students’
meaningful control of the learning process has been called “student centered” needs and interests and if we established positive, constructive rapport with
or “learner centered” but more appropriately should be called learning-centered them, they would be more engaged and involved.
learning.
he learning-centered concept is also supported by a study begun in the
Procedure
early 1990s by the American Psychological Association (APA). he nature
of the learning process is dealt with in the APA (1997) report and it is stated he irst step of the study was to give students a survey to get their ideas about
that “successful learners are active, goal-directed, self-regulating, and assume the usefulness of their MC lessons in Semester one. Instead of interviewing
personal responsibility for contributing to their own learning (APA, 1997, the students, I preferred to give them a survey so that they could have more
p.7).  time to think about the questions. he students were asked to give their sur-
Barr and Tagg (1995) see the teaching model as one where the purpose is veys back in three days. he questions in the survey were in Turkish because
to provide and deliver instruction through courses and programs. A typical the aim of the survey was not to assess the students’ proiciency, but to get
example could be where the teaching is structured around classes (50 minutes them to share their ideas more comfortably without stumbling upon the lan-
lectures and 3 unit courses), covering course content and the use of an end-of- guage barrier. Except for a few, most of the students handed their surveys in
course assessment. In this type of model, little concern may be given to learn- on time. Since the word ‘dominate’ was misinterpreted by the students, the
ing outcomes or how that learning is produced. he teaching model is further third question could be called a problematic one. Almost all of the students
described by Wagner and McCombs (1995) when they write, “Teachers de- associated domination with teacher’s discipline and classroom management
cide for the learner what is required from outside by deining characteristics and most of them said their instructor was dominant in the classes.
of instruction, curriculum, assessment, and management to achieve desired
212 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 213
teacher-centered one

Survey 1 Survey 2
1. Did you ind Main Course lessons in Semester one useful? Why/Why not? In 1. Learners have a right to be involved in curriculum totally disagree (1)
what ways could MC lessons be made more useful? decision making (e.g., selecting content, selecting learn- disagree slightly (6)
2. Do you think MC lessons helped you to improve your English? If yes, in what ing activities and tasks). neutral (13)
ways? agree slightly (3)
3. To what extent were the lessons dominated by the teacher and how did you totally agree (1)
feel about this? How could this be changed? 2. Learners learn best if the content relates to their own totally disagree (0)
4. What did you most enjoy about the Main Course lessons in Semester one? experience and knowledge. disagree slightly (0)
Why? And (if applicable) what did you least enjoy? neutral (2)
5. How much opportunity in Main Course lessons in Semester one did you have agree slightly (3)
to practise your own spoken English? How could this be improved? totally agree (19)
6. Would you rather be more actively involved in the lessons? If yes, in what ways 3. Learners have ixed ideas about language learning totally disagree (0)
do you think you could be more involved? that need to be taken into account in developing lan- disagree slightly (2)
7. How useful do you think pair-work activities are in your current Main Course guage programs. neutral (6)
teacher’s lessons? agree slightly (8)
8. Do you ind pair-work activities boring or fun? totally agree (8)
9. Do you think there are not enough/enough/more than enough pair-work activities?
4. Learners who have developed skills in ‘learning how totally disagree (0)
10. What are your thoughts about my never using Turkish with you?
to learn’ are the most efective students. disagree slightly (0)
neutral (0)
he second step of the study was to prepare lesson plans enriched with agree slightly (7)
learning-centered activities. For the next two weeks, games chosen according totally agree (17)
to diferent learning styles, pair-work and group activities, songs, role-plays, 5. Learners are less interested in learning for learning’s totally disagree (0)
pronunciation and drilling activities were all implemented in my MC lessons. sake than in learning in order to achieve immediate or disagree slightly (0)
Grammar was taught by using inductive method, thereby giving the students not too far distant life goals. neutral (4)
the chance to generate structures by themselves. Tips about how to improve agree slightly (7)
their English were given with examples. I tried to minimize teacher talking totally agree (13)
time by keeping students busy with pair and group-work activities. Instead 6. Learners have diferent learning styles and strategies totally disagree (0)
of answering my own questions, I asked provoking questions to stimulate the that need to be taken into consideration in developing disagree slightly (0)
students’ thinking process. I used concept checking questions to teach gram- learning programs. neutral (0)
mar and vocabulary and brought various kind of games which suit diferent agree slightly (5)
learning styles to revise particular subjects. totally agree (19)
Another survey was given to the instructors who work at Izmir Katip 7. Learners who have developed skills in self-assessment totally disagree (0)
Çelebi University School of Foreign Languages. he aim of this survey was and self-evaluation are the most efective students. disagree slightly (0)
to evaluate the instructors’ own attitude toward the concept of learner-cen- neutral (6)
teredness. hey were asked to indicate their attitude to the concept of learner- agree slightly (6)
centeredness by rating the following statements from 1 (totally disagree) 2 totally agree (12)
(disagree slightly) 3 (neutral) 4 (agree slightly) to 5 (totally agree). 24 instruc-
tors answered the questions as shown in the table. he numbers in parenthesis
indicate the number of the instructors.
214 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 215
teacher-centered one

In the second part of the survey, they were asked to indicate their attitude 6. Learners’ diferent learning styles and strategies are taken never (1)
to the concept of learner-centeredness by rating the following statements from
into consideration in developing learning programs. rarely (5)
1 (never) 2 (rarely) 3 (sometimes) 4 (usually) to 5 (always) with a reference to
sometimes (9)
a teaching context they were familiar with.
usually (7)
Considering my teaching experince… always (2)

1. Learners are involved in curriculum decision making never (9) 7. Learners are encouraged to develop skills in self-assess- never (1)
(e.g., selecting content, selecting learning activities and rarely (10) ment and self-evaluation. rarely (6)
tasks). sometimes (5) sometimes (11)
usually (0) usually (5)
always (0) always (1)

2. Learners are given the chance to relate to their own ex- never (1)
he inal step was to give students another survey to see how useful they
perience and knowledge. rarely (2) found the irst two-week period of MC lessons in which learning-centered
sometimes (10) classroom activities were prevalent. Some typical student comments were pro-
usually (8) vided in the analysis of the survey. he questions in the survey were:
always (3)
3. Learners’ ixed ideas about language learning are taken never (3) Survey 3
into account in developing language programs. rarely (4) 1. Did the activities and games carried out in the irst two weeks raise your inter-
sometimes (11) est and motivation?
usually (5) 2. Was it you or your teacher who was doing most of the speaking? Who do you
always (1) think was more active during the lessons?
4. Learners are encouraged to develop skills in ‘learning never (3) 3. Do you think you were encouraged to be more active?
how to learn’ rarely (4) 4. Are you conscious of the learning style that best suits you? (visual, audio-lin-
sometimes (5) gual…)
usually (10) 5. Do you think your learning style was taken into consideration by your teacher?
always (2) 6. Indicate your positive and negative thoughts about the lessons which took
place in the irst two weeks.
5. Learners are encouraged to be more interested in learn- never (2)
7. Do you think you were counselled by your teacher on how to learn better?
ing for learning’s sake than in learning in order to achieve rarely (2)
8. Do you learn English in order to achieve immediate or not too far distant life
immediate or not too far distant life goals. sometimes (9)
goals?
usually (9)
always (2)
216 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 217
teacher-centered one

Findings and discussion Question 7. Six ind pair-work activities useless as they only speak English
when the teacher is around. Otherwise, they do not speak English. Besides,
Analysis of student survey 1 they believe it is more useful to speak with the teacher.
“We start speaking English only when we see the teacher is coming over
To the questions in the irst survey, twenty-ive students in total gave the an- to us.”
swers below: Questions 8/9. Only one inds pair-work activities boring and more than
Question 1. Five said they didn’t ind the Main Course lessons in Semes- enough.
ter one useful. 20 students said they were useful but boring. Almost half of the Question 10. Only two believe that my not using L1 is an obstacle for
students said they lost their attention when the teacher just relied on the book. them.
“he lessons could have been more active and interesting. Relying on the book Taking their answers into consideration, it could be inferred that students
all the time distracts me.” complain about the pace of the lessons which they ind boring and tiresome.
Question 2. Only one believes the lessons helped him to improve his Eng- Unfortunately, they don’t believe that they were encouraged to use the lan-
lish in every skill. he others think the lessons contributed little if none in guage in a creative, meaningful and communicative manner.
listening and speaking. hey say they can understand when the teacher speaks he answers that students gave in the survey reveal that they learn better
English but they can’t understand a native speaker nor are they able to com- when they are actively involved in the learning process and that they want the
municate using English. lessons to be more student-friendly. hey want to be given the chance to put
“I still have diiculty in understanding and speaking.” what they’ve learned into practice. hey are not opposed to learning grammar
Question 3. Twelve stated that the domination was equally shared by them but they believe learning would take place more efectively if it was taught
and the teacher. 13 students think the teacher was more dominant and except in a more fun way rather than traditional inductive ways. hey also state that
for the pair-work activities they didn’t have the chance to be active. pair-work activities help them speak more freely as they are afraid of making
Question 4. he students enjoyed the videos in Practical English parts, mistakes in front of their peers. Almost all of the students’ desire to be actively
song activities, speaking activities and games. hey think that the lessons were involved in the learning process requires a lot of thinking while planning our
slow-moving, and not appealing. Teacher’s depending on the book, listening lessons.
activities and grammar lessons led them to lose their interest.
“Having conversations with our teacher in English was very useful. Games
Analysis of instructor survey
and activities were quite fun and they engaged my interest.”
Question 5. Only four believed they had to practice their own spoken Question 1. More than half of the instructors are not sure about giving the
English. Some believed they have to be at upper-intermediate level to be able right to learners to be involved in curriculum decision and none of them do so.
to speak English. Some students complained about their friends’ speaking Question 2. Nineteen said learners learn best if the content relates to stu-
Turkish all the time whereas others expressed their not feeling at ease when dents’ own experience and knowledge but only three give that chance in their
speaking English. teaching experience.
Question 6. Eighteen want to be actively involved in the lessons. While Question 3. Although eight strongly agree and eight slightly agree that
three didn’t answer this question, twenty-three want to be active in pair-work learners’ ixed ideas about language learning need to be taken into account in
activities and games. 1said she doesn’t want to be active due to her fear of mak- developing language programs, only one always does so.
ing mistakes in front of other students. Question 4. Despite the fact that all instructors believe that learners who
“I don’t how to be more active but if being active means communicating have developed skills in ‘learning how to learn’ are the most efective students,
better in English, I would love to play a more active role in lessons.” half the instructors do not usually or always encourage them to do so.
218 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 219
teacher-centered one

Question 5. Twenty agree that learners are less interested in learning for communication and harmony among the teachers which caused adaptation
learning’s sake than in learning in order to achieve immediate or not too far problems among the learners.
distant life goals. However, thirteen said they do not encourage their learners “All students learn better when they have fun.”
to be more interested in learning for learning’s sake. Question 7. Twenty-six said yes while nine said no.
Question 6. Twelve strongly and six slightly agree that learners who have “What she says is just cliché.”
developed skills in self-assessment and self-evaluation are the most efec- “She always tells us how to learn more efectively especially how to improve
tive students. Nevertheless, ifteen do not usually take their learners’ diferent our listening skill.”
learning styles into consideration in developing programs. “She gives us individual support during the lessons which I ind very use-
4.3 Analysis of student survey 2 ful.”
To the questions in the second survey which was given to the students, Question 8. Twenty-four said they were learning English with long-term
thirty-ive in total gave the answers below: purposes, nine learn a language for the sake of learning a language and two
Question 1. hirty-two said they were more motivated whereas three said said both.
they weren’t. Even though there was no guidance for question number 4, it was very
Question 2. Eighteen said the instructor was more active, fourteen said interesting to ind almost all students giving the same answer. hey all said
they were more active and three said both the teacher and students were equal- they learn better when they are active and when they listen to the teacher.
ly active in the lessons. Note taking is also found very helpful to learn better. Apparently, all students
Question 3. hirty-three believe they were encouraged to be more actively enjoyed being at the center of the learning process and getting individual help
involved whereas two do not think so. and support about how to learn better.
“I normally either spend time on social network or sleep during the lessons,
but in that two-week period I didn’t ind it diicult to remain engaged in three
lessons in a row. I learned a lot while having fun.”
Relection
Question 4. hirty-four said by listening, taking notes and being actively
involved, one said he got distracted when he lost interest. Relection on the literature review
Question 5. Twenty-eight said their learning style was taken into consid- While I was going through the literature, one of the most interesting things
eration in the lessons while two said no importance was given to their learning that I learned was that learners should have meaningful control over what
style. Two said occasionally and 1 said none of the teachers take our learn- and how things are learned, plus how the learning outcome is measured. I had
ing styles into consideration. One said Teachers could have been more aware never thought about giving students a chance to be involved in the assessment
of our diferent learning styles. One said the instructor merely used her own process and now I’d like to learn more about this issue. he literature provided
techniques regardless of our diferent learning styles. me with more information about learners’ language skills which seem to im-
“As long as I am not bored, I feel like it is taken into consideration.” prove when they use the language actively and when they are encouraged to
“None of the teachers take our learning styles into consideration because relect on the language inside and outside the classroom. he answers that
the only thing that matters is just preparing us for the exams.” were given by the students also support the idea that students feel the neces-
Question 6. Students generally found the lessons useful, efective and fun. sity to practise the language inside and outside the classroom but they neither
hey particularly liked role-play activities and having been given the chance to know how to, nor do they have a chance to do it. herefore, I would like to
practise. One student said the teacher could have spoken Turkish upon seeing know more about how I can help students to relect on what they have learned
one subject had not completely been comprehended. One said there was no inside and outside the classroom.
220 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 221
teacher-centered one

When we look at the literature on learning-centered classrooms, it shows classmates. hese students clearly stated that they prefer to practise with their
that if learners are to learn anything at all, they have to do the learning for partners, listen to songs and watch videos. hey believe talking to a partner in a
themselves so they should be involved in their own learning. However, 26 pair-work activity helps them to correct one another’s mistakes and to talk more
students out of thirty-ive said they want to learn English for long-term goals freely. Considering the fact that most students ind pair-work activities useful
such as academic purposes or to have a successful career. his inding made and fun, I will deinitely allocate more time for pair and group-work activities.
me think that if students were more engaged and involved in learning, they I can see the connections between the typical student’s attention span which
might be learning English for the sake of learning a language not for speciic is about 10 to 15 minutes long and loss of interest and motivation. Bearing
purposes. this in mind, I personally believe that eliminating the distractors would not
necessarily engage our students in the lessons. Instead of collecting their cell
Relection on the instructor survey phones, raising our voice or waking up the sleepers, we need to come up with
various strategies to prevent them from losing their interest.
he answers given by the instructors to both surveys were really intriguing he most intriguing inding of this study was 21 students said that I was
as they reveal a huge conlict between what has to be done and what is re- more active in the lessons. Although I tried to minimize the talking time by
ally done. More than half of the instructors believe that learners need to be using games and activities through which the students could be more active, it
consulted on what they want to learn and how they want to learn and how turned out that it was still me who was more dominant. I need to work really
they want to go about learning, but in reality very few can put these ideas hard on this issue and restrain myself from doing most of the talking. I need to
into practice in their lessons. Although most of them admit the necessity of focus on the experience for learners, rather than what I want to say.
designing lessons according to learners’ diferent learning styles and strategies, On the other hand, after carrying out this research I’ve become more con-
almost half of them do not usually put it into practice. Whatever the reasons ident about using solely English in the lessons because except for three stu-
are, there seems to be an active disagreement between theory and practice. dents, all of them stated their positive feelings about my using English all the
herefore, what students said in the survey about instructors’ being indiferent time. Regardless of the question, they mentioned how useful it was to engage
to their learning styles might be true. them in the lessons. Since every single student’s opinion matters, I need to im-
prove myself in diagnosing students who have diiculty in understanding and
Relection on the student surveys equip myself with diferent strategies to be able to reach those students as well.
his study clearly showed me that I need to refocus my attention from teacher Both the surveys answered by the students have revealed the fact that they
to learner. I realized that I hardly give any chance to the students to express do not appreciate lessons which are led by the teacher depending solely on the
their needs and interests about what they want to learn and how to learn. In course book. hey ind it diicult to follow the lesson once they get bored and
my following teaching practice, I’d like to give my students more opportunity they turn of. Hence, it’s not hard to draw the conclusion that if we could de-
to lead the low of lessons. I had a misconception that most students are not sign our classes according to our students’ needs and interests and if we estab-
aware of the learning style that best suits them, but the survey revealed that lished positive, constructive rapport with them, they would be more engaged
almost all of the students are conscious of how they learn better. Except for and involved. herefore, I strongly believe that we need to have long sessions
the timid students, they all want to be actively involved in the learning process. while preparing our curriculums to enrich our lessons according to the learn-
hey want to improve their speaking skill by talking to either their instructor ers’ needs since almost all of the students mentioned in the second survey that
or their peers. I’ll have to do more thinking about how to give them opportu- not being dependent on the book was a real asset for them.
nity to be more active. It was very surprising to learn that shy students do not While carrying out this research my biggest challenge was to design lessons
want to be actively involved in order not to get embarrassed in front of their which would appeal to diferent learning styles and strategies. Taking into ac-
222 Enhancing a learning-centered classroom rather than a Kevser Özdemir 223
teacher-centered one

count what students wrote in the irst survey, I tried to improve the ambience Gardner, H. (1999).  Intelligence reframed:  Multiple intelligences for the 21st century.  New
of the classroom so that none of the students would turn of, but it turned out York:  Basic Books.
that it wasn’t very easy as I had to devote a lot of time and thinking to come Nunan & Lamb (1996). he self-directed teacher. Managing the learning process,
up with ideas which would appeal to all learners including the timid ones. 9-11.
he activities had to appeal to diferent learning styles but also they had to be Reynolds, J. (1998) Learning Choices (STD 195) Course.  Alexandria, VA:  Northern
meaningful and help students to connect new learning with the old. Seeing Virginia Community College.    [On-line] Available:    http://www.nv.cc.va.us/
how diicult it is to prepare such language programs in which learners are en- home/nvreynj/
couraged to be more active and engaged, a professional resource centre should Rogers, C. R. (1969).  Freedom to learn.  Columbus, OH:  C. E. Merrill.
be in service in our school. Apart from activities to implement in classes, every Wagner, E. B., & McCombs, B. L. (1995).  Learner centered psychological principles
teacher whether novice or experienced needs consultation and support and in practice:  Designs for distance education.  Educational Technology, 35(2), 32-35
needs to be provided with ideas about how to create a learning-centered con-
text in his/her classroom.
Based on what students said in both surveys, I came to the conclusion that
we shouldn’t act like leaders. On the contrary, we should never forget that we
are only there for guidance. Instead of appointing ourselves as assessors, we
have got to let our students monitor and assess their own progress. Unless they
are actively involved in the evaluation, we cannot claim to have students who
are responsible for their own learning. herefore, I would like to learn more
about how to involve my students in the assessment and evaluation process.
All in all, it’s obvious from the indings that being lexible according to
their needs or tendencies doesn’t mean that they’re taking over our classes. Our
mission shouldn’t be viewed as simply to ofer instruction and evaluation but
instead to produce learning as an outcome. It is a must for teachers to come up
with ways to raise their learners’ interest and motivation, to provide enjoyment
and relaxation and make the lessons not only efective but also fun.

References
Barr, R. B., & Tagg. J. (1995).  From teaching to learning.  Change, 27(6), 13-25.
Boggs, G. R. (1996).  he learning paradigm.  Community College Journal, 66(3), 29-
27.
Bunce, D. M., Flens, E A., & Neiles, K. Y. (2010). How long can students pay at-
tention in class? A study of student attention decline using clickers. Journal of
Chemical Education, 87, 1438-1443.
Cross, K. P. (2000).    Cross paper #4:    Collaborative learning 101.    Mission Viejo,
CA:  League for Innovation in the Community College.
 Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase
16 students’ use of learning strategies
and academic success in the classroom?
Huriye Jale Güneș Coșardemir

Context and problem

Learning strategies have increasingly become the centre of attention and
gained great importance in the teaching-learning process. Oxford (1990, p.8)
deines learning strategies as “the speciic actions taken by the learner to make
learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more efective and
more transferrable to new situations”.
When scientists analyse the behaviour of successful language learners,
they see that they apply diferent types of learning strategies. “he language
learners,who are able to use a wide variety of language learning strategies ap-
propriately, are better equipped to improve their language skills” (Federholt,
1997, p. 1). “However, being able to use the best strategies out of a carefully
cultivated range does not always come by itself ” (ibid.). Students need guid-
ance in learning how to learn. “As language teachers, we should be able to
help students recognize the various components which make up the learning
process” (ibid).
In my action research, I focused on the efect of using learning strategies
on academic success. I had two classes of students who had failed the previ-
ous track. None of the students lacked motivation. On the contrary, they were
serious students who spent a lot of time trying to learn English but neverthe-
less had failed for some reason. herefore, I wondered whether these students
were aware of learning strategies and if using these strategies could be a solu-
tion to their problem. I wanted to research whether helping students to apply
these strategies in their learning process would increase their autonomy and
success in English. One way of developing these skills is through the use of
diaries, in which students keep a record of their language learning strategy
development. herefore I designed and implemented a small-scale research
project that intended to introduce students to the concepts of adopting learn-

225
226 Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase students’ use of learning Huriye Jale Güneş Coşardemir 227
strategies and academic success in the classroom?

ing strategies through the use of diaries and then analysed the efects on their to learning and those which contribute indirectly to learning” (pp.124-126).
success and learner autonomy. She divided the direct learning strategies into six types as: clariication/ verii-
cation, monitoring, memorization, guessing/ inductive inferencing, deductive
reasoning and practice. he indirect learning strategies were divided into two
Literature review types as creating opportunities for practice and production tricks.
Afterwards, several scientists such as Brown (1980), J. Michael O’Malley,
Language learning strategies Anna Uhl Chamot, Gloria Stewner-Manzanares, Lisa Kupper and Rocco P.
Russo (1985),
Research on language learning strategies started in the 1970s. Various deini- Ellis (1986) and Oxford (1990) made some additions and amendments
tions of language learning strategies (LLS) have been used by key igures in the to Rubin’s deinition and classiication of learning strategies. Among these
ield within foreign language education. Tarone (1981, cited in Algan, 2006, p. deinitions and classiications, the most comprehensible one for the students
67) deined a language learning strategy as "an attempt to develop linguistic in this research belonged to Oxford, so in this paper her deinition is followed.
and sociolinguistic competence in the target language … to incorporate these Oxford (1990) deined language learning strategies as “operations em-
into one's interlanguage competence". Rubin (1987, p. 22) later stated that ployed by the learner to aid the acquisition, storage, retrieval, and use of in-
LLS "are strategies that contribute to the development of the language system formation” (p.8). She classiied learning strategies into six groups, attempting
which the learner constructs and afect learning directly". Finally, in her book a remedy for the perceived problem that many strategy inventories appeared
for language teachers, Oxford (1990, p.8) provides speciic examples of LLS to emphasise cognitive and metacognitive strategies and to ascribe much less
(i.e., "In learning ESL, Trang (a foreign learner of English) watches American importance to afective and social strategies (p. 16):
TV soap operas, guessing the meaning of new expressions and predicting what
will come next") and a comprehensive deinition: 1. Memory strategies, which relate to how students remember language.
2. Cognitive strategies, which relate to how students think about their
learning.
...language learning strategies are … speciic actions, behaviours, 3. Compensation strategies, which enable students to make up for limited
steps, or techniques that students (often intentionally) use to im- knowledge.
prove their progress in developing L2 skills. hese strategies can 4. Metacognitive strategies, relating to how students manage their own
facilitate the internalization, storage, retrieval, or use of the new learning.
language. Strategies are tools for the self-directed involvement 5. Afective strategies, relating to students’ feelings of anxiety.
necessary for developing communicative ability (p.8). 6. Social strategies, which involve learning by interaction with others.

Despite there being various deinitions of LLS, there appears to be a shared

Learner autonomy
view that they are conscious or semi-conscious thoughts, actions and behav-
iours that are employed by the learners to facilitate the obtaining, storage, Learner autonomy is described as a capacity for active, independent learning
retrieval and use of information (Algan, 2006, p. 26). but, like language learning strategies, it has been deined diferently by many
Rubin (1975) was one of the earliest researchers in this ield who pro- researchers. Among these scientists, Little (1991), for example, sees autonomy
vided a very broad deinition of learning strategies as “the techniques or de- as a “capacity—for detachment, critical relection, decision making and inde-
vices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge” (p.43). Later, in 1981 she pendent action” (p. 4). he key factor of learner autonomy is that the learner
identiied two kinds of learning strategies: “those which contribute directly is responsible for his/her own learning. “his acceptance of responsibility has
228 Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase students’ use of learning Huriye Jale Güneş Coşardemir 229
strategies and academic success in the classroom?

both socio-afective and cognitive implications: it entails at once a positive imperfectly developed. Apart from switching on the radio or putting a cassette
attitude to learning and the development of a capacity to relect on the con- in a tape deck, it was apparent that students had no clear idea as to how to
tent and process of learning with a view to bringing them as far as possible listen eiciently and efectively.
under conscious control” (Little, 1991, p. 4). When students have the chance In general, students had limited understanding of the components of lan-
to control what, how and when they learn, they are more eager to set their guage learning, and very little awareness of their roles as language learners. To
goals, plan their work, develop strategies to cope with new situations and un- help them, I gave a short, simpliied orientation to the three main groups of
foreseen problems, evaluate and assess their own work and be more aware of LLS set out by Oxford (1990, p. 16):
their process. hey are able to learn how to learn from their own successes and
1. Metacognitive strategies, which deal with self-management: setting
mistakes in ways which will help them to be more eicient learners in the
goals, monitoring, and self-evaluation.
future (Crabbe, 1993).
2. Cognitive strategies, which deal with actual information: how to ob-
In this study, learning diaries are used to encourage students to take more
tain it (by asking for clariication, repetition, etc.); inferencing mean-
initiative and control of learning, to ind relevant language learning strategies
ing from context; using dictionaries and grammar books; retaining it
to cope with diiculties and to relect on their learning. hanks to these ad-
through memorization, repetition, mnemotechnic tricks, and writing
vantages, keeping a learning diary a useful tool for fostering learner autonomy.
things down; and retrieving it.
3. Socio-efective strategies, which include co-operating with classmates,
Procedure friends, teachers, or speaking English with other speakers of English.
he present study was conducted with 40 pre-intermediate level students who After the orientation, the students started keeping their learning diaries by
study at Yaşar University Prep Class and it lasted for one track of 8 weeks. At deining the last problem they had in the learning process and which strate-
the beginning of the track, I talked briely about what language learning strat- gies they planned to use to overcome the problem. his procedure continued
egies were and their advantages and asked the students to keep a Language every day in the last 10 minutes of the lesson and when the lesson inished I
Learning Strategy diary. Before starting on the diaries, students were encour- collected their dairies daily. Every two weeks, the students also included their
aged to speak in English about what language learning meant to them, how comments about the efectiveness of the strategies they applied.
they learned language, and what their perceptions of themselves as language When I collected the students’ diaries I did not pay attention to the lan-
learners were. In the discussion part it was obvious that the students did not guage mistakes but I gave comments on what students had written. Also, every
plan when they would study English or how they should study. hey did not Friday for 30 minutes, I mentioned some contents of the journals in class and
monitor their own progress, and evaluation was expected to be carried out only provided feedback on them, or solutions if necessary.
by the teacher.
Furthermore, they used very ixed, limited strategies which they had not
Findings and discussion
evaluated for efectiveness. For example, most students said that in order to
memorize words, they wrote them down many times, but when asked why In this part, representative examples of diary entries will be given to show how
they used this method and not another, they had no concept of alternative some students negotiated the various steps involved in developing their LLS
ways of doing it. here was a noticeable discrepancy between what students and learner autonomy. As with all things, some students were quicker at be-
said would be helpful, such as speaking with speakers of English and listen- ing able to utilize various strategies efectively. Others needed more guidance
ing to tapes, and what they actually did. Furthermore, some strategies, which for a longer period, either through my comments in connection to their diary
seemed to be supericially good techniques, such as listening to tapes, were entries or by talking with me outside of class.
230 Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase students’ use of learning Huriye Jale Güneş Coşardemir 231
strategies and academic success in the classroom?

When parts of the journals are quoted in this paper, the language mistakes Student C:
are not corrected if they do not afect comprehension in order for the material Identiied Problem: I couldn’t understand much the listening parts.
to be authentic for readers. Strategies: I will listen to English songs and I will try to write the words in it. I
will watch English ilms with and without subtitles.
Student A:
Two weeks later she wrote;
Identiied Problem: To overcome my shyness and being ashamed of my English. I liked practicing songs. I learned words and saying them. Also, I started Gossip
Strategies: Ask questions in English, Talk English with people, Attend Girl. First, in English, after in Turkish. I still don’t understand all but I can follow
speaking classes more it in English now.
After deining his problem and ways of overcoming it, there were diary By keeping a learning diary, she practiced her self-evaluation and self-
entries from the same student describing what he did: monitoring skills. his practice helped her to be more aware of her own learn-
…I talked to one of the International students in our class in English. ing process so next time she can be better at making decisions regarding the
I was active in Speaking Class. planning, efectuation and appraisal of their eforts.
I was late to the 1. Lesson and I told my problem in English…. Student D:
he same student wrote a few days later: Identiied Problem: I ind vocabulary diicult, especially word formation.
… still I am shy. I am not comfortable speaking… Strategies: I will revise school at home and do some practice. hen I will come to
he student applied a socio-afective strategy but the diary entry does not the oice hour to ask the teacher.
seem very optimistic. Yet, I made a note in his diary that things take time, and 2 weeks later the same student wrote:
it is not possible to change his character over a night. I also praised him for …I didn’t need see the teacher. I practiced adjectives and adverbs. I looked a, an,
thinking about this problem, and working to solve it. During the process I the and nouns. I did the word formation exercises from internet. It is easy now…
tried to be as constructive as possible. he student chose a memory strategy to remember the words he learned
Other diary entries included relections such as the following: at school. He revised what he did at school and searched relevant resources
Student B: to compensate his weakness. As a result, he could ind a way to deal with his
Identiied Problem: I can’t understand the reading passages in the exam. problem and his case shows that being able to use the learning strategies leads
Strategies: I will read funny things, I will look the dictionary less, I will scanning learners to be more autonomous. Even though he had intended to see the
and skimming, I will play strategy games in English. teacher about the problem, he was less dependent on her after he applied the
his student applied cognitive strategies to sort out his problem. He started strategies.
reading comics and playing a computer game called he Bonte Room (http:// Student E:
bartbonte.com/bonteroom/). his game requires a lot of reading because to get Identiied Problem: learning words is really hard.
out of this room, the student needs to read and understand the clues well. A Strategies: I will have a vocabulary notebook. I will write new words and ex-
few weeks later he wrote in his diary; ample sentences.
….the reading lesson is more fun now. Reading is more easy now. I learned a lot 2 weeks later;
of words, I will ind others strategies for other lessons… … vocabulary notebook is boring and not pratic but good. For new words I wrote
Seeing there were more enjoyable ways to overcome his diiculties moti- sentences about my boyfriend and make pictures. It is easy to remember. Is there easy
vated the student to apply the learning strategies more. In addition, the fact way?..
that he is trying to identify his weaknesses shows he is on the right path to his student applied memory strategies to learn and remember the new
increasing his autonomy. words. By using the words in sentences from her personal life, she will be able
232 Does keeping ‘learning diaries’ increase students’ use of learning Huriye Jale Güneş Coşardemir 233
strategies and academic success in the classroom?

to internalize the new input and send it to her long term memory. By creating more autonomous learners who had clearer ideas on how to be better language
sentences, she was trying to contextualize the target words, and by making learners by using very simple strategies.
sentences about her boyfriend, she was trying to create a mental linkage. From this teacher- research project I learned that even the weakest student
Student F: in the class can be better aware of his learning process and he can improve
Identiied Problem: I didn’t understood Relative Clauses in class. his language skills by using learning strategies. Now, I strongly believe that
Strategies: I will revise at home and do practice in a grammar book. I can ask good language learning strategies are essential, and I will continue to work on
friends. reinements that will help students become better learners.
2 weeks later;
…my friend İ… studied me about who, which and that. After, we solved ques-
tions about it. I did all questions correct.
References
his student applied social strategies to overcome her problem. In this case, Algan, N. (2006). he language learning strategies used by the university preparatory stu-
learning took place by working together. dents and the instructors’ awareness of their students’ use of these strategies. Unpublished
Student G: master thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Crabbe D. (1993). Fostering autonomy from within the classroom: the teacher’s re-
Identiied Problem: My English bad.
sponsibility. System, 21(4) 443-452.
Strategies: I will listen.
Fedderholdt, K. (1997). "Using Diaries to Develop Language Learning Strategies"
As for this student, there were some who needed guidance to become more Retrieved from “jalt-publications.org/old_tlt/.../fedderholdt.html”
speciic about what they were doing. For example, did she listen for general Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy 1: Deinitions, Issues and Problems. Dublin: Au-
understanding or speciic points, to improve vocabulary or check grammar in thentik.
practice? As for learning strategies, I asked her to think about what she was Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies. USA: Heinle and Heinle Publish-
doing while listening. Was she listening to the tape in its entirety, or was she ers.
stopping it after a few sentences, making notes, and repeating what she heard? Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: heoretical assumptions, research history and ty-
pology. Learner Strategies in Language Learning, 15-30.
Tarone, E. (1981). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. TESOL
Relections quarterly, 15(3), 285-295.
In my action research, I focused on the efect of using learning strategies on
academic success. I had two classes full of failed students from the previous
track and I felt a great desire to teach something useful to them. I wanted to
teach them how to ish, instead of feeding them with a ish. I wanted to teach
them strategies to help them better ind their own ways throughout their edu-
cational life, instead of teaching just words or grammar rules for their exams.
After the students became convinced that what they were doing was for their
own good, they were more eager to take part in the study and seeing their
enthusiasm made me feel like a real teacher.
In my action research, I was curious about the development of language
learning strategies and I saw how easy it was to implement even in one track.
At the end of the experience, I saw my students make higher level progress as
 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy:
17 lessons learned from an action-research
project in Greece
Stefania Kordia

Introduction
Over the last years, a lot of emphasis has been placed on the signiicance of
action research in terms of improving teaching and learning practices based
on the particular needs of one’s learners and the requirements of the teach-
ing context. In this regard, following a cyclical process involving planning,
acting, observing and relecting is absolutely necessary in order to construct
a personal theory of efective teaching in one’s own classroom (Koshy, 2005;
Pine, 2009).
Along these lines, the purpose of this paper is to describe an action re-
search study which I have carried out in one of my classes at a primary school
in Crete, Greece. Twenty-two twelve-year-old learners attending the sixth-
grade were involved in the study, which focused on the way that my practices
could be modiied so as to meet the needs of my learners who wished to be
eventually able to communicate successfully with other non-native speakers
(NNSs) using English as a lingua franca (ELF). his research was undertaken
within the framework of the ‘ELF-TEd Project’, a pioneer teacher education
programme organized by Bogaziçi University (Istanbul, Turkey) and Hellenic
Open University (Patras, Greece) aiming at raising in-service teachers’ aware-
ness of the pedagogical implications of ELF.
After discussing what motivated me to carry out this research and pre-
senting a brief review of the literature that has informed my decisions while
conducting it, the steps I followed are described with reference to the meth-
odology and the material that I used in order to address the needs of the par-
ticular learners. he paper concludes with the lessons I have learned out of this
experience, hoping that they might inspire other teachers to conduct a similar
action research project in their own contexts.

235
236 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 237
action-research project in Greece

Motivation for the research After clarifying what this kind of re-orientation of teaching and learning
means to me from a theoretical perspective, a description of the steps I fol-
Broadly deined as the preferred language of communication among people
lowed throughout this study is provided.
who do not share a common linguistic and cultural background, English as a
lingua franca (ELF) is nowadays used internationally, especially in expanding-
circle countries such as Turkey and Greece where most English-medium com- ELF and ELF-aware pedagogy
munication people participate in involves other non-native users. In Greece,
As previously mentioned, ELF primarily refers to the language that non-na-
in particular, where this research has been carried out, ELF is being used for
tive speakers of English use when they need to communicate with each other.
several communicative purposes by increasingly more people, including Eng-
In fact, even though a comprehensive linguistic description of ELF has not
lish language learners of all ages and grade levels.
been provided yet, research carried out in this ield has already highlighted
his situation is also true as far as my own students are concerned; despite
that communication in lingua franca contexts displays several distinctive char-
their young age and their relatively low level of proiciency, they often use
acteristics which illustrate that successful interactions between NNSs are typi-
English outside the classroom environment while, for instance, playing inter-
cally determined by criteria other than those associated with the language as
active games on the internet or chatting with friends from abroad. he fact,
it used by native speakers (NSs; for more information on ELF see e.g. Cogo,
however, that they sometimes complain that their conversations with other
2012; Cogo and Dewey, 2006; Jenkins, 2007; Seidlhofer, 2009, 2011).
NNSs have resulted in a ‘communication breakdown’ has urged me to think
Presenting a thorough analysis of the indings of ELF research lies beyond
that modiications in my teaching practice were necessary in order for my
the scope of this paper, but, nonetheless, discussing those which, from a peda-
learners to be eventually able to establish efective communication in lingua
gogical point of view, are most signiicant is essential in terms of the action
franca contexts.
research I carried out. In this respect, it has been established that successful in-
To that end, studying about ELF and trying to realize how developments
telligibility among NNSs is the most important criterion determining the ef-
in this ield can be integrated in teaching and learning was more than neces-
fectiveness of ELF communication; typically referring to “the extent to which
sary; in this respect, deep relection on my teaching practices in relation to
a speaker’s message is understood by a listener” (Rajadurai, 2007, p.88), intel-
the pedagogical implications of ELF in which I was engaged throughout the
ligibility in lingua franca contexts actually entails a collaborative interactional
‘ELF-TEd Project’ (Bayyurt and Sifakis, in print) has made me realize that
process where both interlocutors share responsibility in achieving mutual un-
my teaching needed to be re-directed from adopting the traditional Teaching
derstanding. In fact, while they jointly negotiate the meaning, they sometimes
English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) paradigm towards adopting ELF-
use several linguistic forms which do not conform to NS norms, regarding, for
aware pedagogy.
instance, pronunciation and grammar; when not impeding intelligible com-
herefore, I decided to carry out an action research study in my classroom
munication, such ‘deviations’ are, however, not viewed as ‘errors’ but, rather, as
so as to see how such a shift could actually be brought about. Taking into con-
manifestations of the creativity and variation inherent in ELF discourse, illus-
sideration that what matters most is addressing my learners’ particular needs,
trating the interlocutors’ ability to de-construct and re-construct the English
this study aimed at providing answers to the following questions:
language according to their communicative purposes (Cogo and Dewey, 2006;
a) Is the implementation of ELF-aware pedagogy an appropriate choice Seidlhofer, 2009).
in this context based on the learners’ learning purposes and attitudes? Furthermore, research has shown that efective communication in lingua
b) If so, what kind of adaptations need to be made as far as teaching meth- franca contexts involves the use of strategies and skills which “are diferent
odology and syllabus design are concerned? from those of native speakers” (Graddol, 2000, p.13) and are crucial in terms
c) What lessons can be learned from the implementation of ELF-aware of maintaining the low of conversation. In this regard, the process of accom-
teaching in this context?
238 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 239
action-research project in Greece

modation, referring to the various ways in which ELF speakers use the lan- to address the challenges associated with communication with other NNSs in
guage in response to the ways that it is being used by their interlocutors (Cogo lingua franca contexts; in other words, it involves adopting a “modiied peda-
and Dewey, 2006; Jenkins, 2006), has been highlighted; according to research gogic stance” (Sifakis and Fay, 2011, p.291) by enriching the teaching process
indings, typical ELF-based communication strategies and accommodation with insights gained from ELF research rather than trying to teach ELF as a
skills include asking for clariication, repeating a problematic utterance, mak- variety in its own right or even as an alternative to TEFL.
ing repairs, rephrasing and paraphrasing, adding contextual information, code- he issue of the ownership of language (cf. Widdowson, 1994) and the cor-
switching and language mixing, backchannelling and so forth (see e.g. Matsu- responding determination of the target model of language use are, therefore,
moto, 2011; Seidlhofer, 2004). given great emphasis within this perspective. By recognizing that English does
Taking into account that most communication nowadays takes place in not ‘belong’ only to its native speakers but rather to everyone who uses it and
lingua franca contexts, the pedagogical implications of these indings are in- by setting the successful ELF speaker, rather than the native speaker, as the
deed crucial and, in my view, they indicate that there is a striking discrepancy target model for the learners, ELF-aware pedagogy actually aims at helping
between the way the language is taught and learnt –in Greece at least– and the the learners raise their self-conidence as non-native speakers and make the
way it is actually spoken around the world. his, in turn, highlights the urgent language their own.
need for re-orientation of teaching and learning in response to the status of In this regard, after determining whether implementing an ELF-aware
English as the global lingua franca of our times. pedagogy is indeed appropriate in a speciic context, the irst step towards
To this end, challenging, and perhaps abandoning, various traditional as- achieving this goal necessarily entails raising the learners’ awareness of the
sumptions underlying the TEFL paradigm is necessary. As several scholars variety and richness of English language use around the world; this essentially
have argued, TEFL has been dominated by a pervasive ideology –described by means that learners need not only to be exposed to “as many diferent authen-
Holliday (2006) as ‘native-speakerism’– according to which, on the one hand, tic NNS ways of communicating as possible” but also to be engaged in actively
native speakers are considered the “ultimate authority” (McKay, 2002, p.42) participating in, and relecting on, real-life communicative situations (Sifakis,
and the most legitimate reference point regarding language use, while non-na- 2004, p.245).
tive ones, on the other, are regarded as “permanent learners” (Hülmbauer, 2007,
p.6) who can never claim they own this language. Aiming, therefore, at helping
the learners achieve native-like competence by emulating the linguistic behav-
he action research
ior of NSs, great emphasis is placed on elements such as ‘proper’ pronunciation Having briely discussed the motivation for this research and its theoretical
and grammatical accuracy, while any deviation from the ‘proper’ NS norms is underpinnings, the way that I have tried to incorporate an ELF-aware per-
treated as an ‘error’ which should eventually be ‘corrected’ (Seidlhofer, 2009). spective in my own teaching practice through this action research is described
Accordingly, ELF-based skills and competences which are essential in estab- in this section.
lishing intelligible communication with other NNSs get typically ignored.
In the light of the above, moving towards ELF-aware pedagogy may indeed he research context and the participants
be more appropriate in contexts like Greece where ELF is used as a medium
of international communication. Based on the premise that the most signii- As mentioned in the introduction of this paper, the action research study was
cant question is how developments in the ield of ELF can be integrated in carried out with the sixth-grade class of a primary school in the island of Crete
the teaching and learning process, ELF-aware pedagogy essentially entails a which consisted of twenty-two twelve-year-old learners.
“change in mindset” ( Jenkins, 2007, p.238) as far as language teaching is con- More speciically, the learners’ level of competence varied from A1+ to A2+
cerned, prioritizing the promotion of skills and competences that enable one according to CEFR, and, ifteen of them shared Greek as their mother tongue,
while seven were bilingual in Greek and Albanian or Serbian; apart from
240 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 241
action-research project in Greece

state school, where English instruction begins at the 3rd grade, they had also with friends from other countries face-to-face or over the internet was found
been learning English at private language institutions for four years, as well to be a key motivational factor for them, highlighting the need for helping
as French or German which are compulsory subjects at Greek state primary them address the challenges of ELF communication.
schools. Besides being a multilingual and multicultural class, what is highly Concerning their attitude towards ELF-related matters, special emphasis
signiicant is that the learners did already have some experience in ELF com- was placed on the issue of the ownership of the English language. Due to their
munication, since, as previously noted, they used English with other NNSs background knowledge perhaps, not only did they seem to comprehend what
outside the classroom environment to a great extent. Furthermore, the fact this fairly abstract concept means, but also they displayed a surprisingly open-
that I had been their English teacher –and even their personal friend– for four minded attitude towards it; some of them actually argued that claiming that
years was more than important in terms of gaining their trust and support and a language belongs only to its native speakers is not “fair”, since non-native
increasing their engagement in this study. speakers who “use the language well enough so as to be able to express themselves”
As far as courseware is concerned, state-provided textbooks are used in also have “the right to say that they own the language”.
every state primary school in Greece relecting the traditional NS-oriented Furthermore, while discussing the aspects of teaching and learning that, in
TEFL paradigm; in the one addressed to sixth-grade learners in particular, their opinion, should be modiied, most of the learners stated that the empha-
grammatical accuracy is overemphasized while really few opportunities are sis being placed on grammatical accuracy and ‘proper’ pronunciation usually
provided for developing ELF-based skills and competences. Furthermore, made them feel “stressed”; most signiicantly, however, they argued that they
even though non-native speakers are sometimes included in the listening in- would like to be exposed to NNS discourse more often, further justifying the
put the learners are exposed to, their discourse is, more often than not, script- need for the implementation of ELF-aware pedagogy in this context.
ed, and hence the variation inherent in ELF talk is not illustrated. As a result, he indings of this exploratory research were actually more than useful not
modifying the activities my own learners would be engaged in was necessary, only in terms of realizing that my past teaching practices were rather unsuc-
which is actually encouraged in Greek state schools as long as the learners’ cessful but also regarding the way I could try to raise their awareness of ELF
needs are addressed. communication through this action research. he second phase of the case
study, therefore, involved designing and implementing two appropriate ELF-
he research phases aware lesson plans tailored to the learners’ learning purposes and views.
Based on the knowledge I had gained while studying ELF literature, as
Based on the research questions, this research was undertaken in three main well as on the outcomes of the focus-group interviews, I decided that, at the
phases, the irst one of which aimed at determining whether the learners’ irst lesson, the learners should be exposed to real-life NNS-NNS interactions
learning purposes and attitudes towards ELF-related issues indeed justiied and be engaged in identifying key features of ELF communication (Appen-
the implementation of ELF-aware pedagogy in this context. To that end, us- dices II-III). To this end, a pre-/while-/post-listening sequence was followed.
ing semi-structured focus-group interviews (Appendix I), exploratory research More speciically, the pre-listening stage aimed at activating the learners’ back-
was carried out and content analysis of the obtained qualitative data was then ground knowledge by inviting them to think about their own experience in
conducted, creating categories relecting the learners’ responses. ELF communication; key features of ELF discourse, like the use of gram-
he indings of this research were highly interesting. In fact, apart from matical ‘errors’ and of pronunciations relecting L1 norms, were thus elicited
listening to music, watching ilms, using technological devices such as mobile through whole-class discussion. In fact, this stage took slightly more time to
phones and eventually having a successful academic and professional career, be completed than initially expected, since the learners got really excited while
the learners stated that they learned the language in order to be able to com- remembering communicative situations they had participated in relecting
municate with native and especially with non-native users while, for instance, such ELF-based elements.
travelling abroad or carrying out business transactions; in addition, talking
242 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 243
action-research project in Greece

At the while-listening stage, the learners were exposed to two authentic Concerning methodology, Task-Based Language Teaching was adopted in
extracts of interviews with NNSs displaying French and Turkish ELF respec- this case, modifying its typical pre-task/task-cycle/language-focus sequence to
tively which I found on the internet. Two activities were included therein, incorporate, at the end, a speciic component where instruction about ELF-
the irst one of which was a simple multiple-matching one, where they had to related issues could take place. In view of that, both during the game and after
match each speaker to information mentioned at their interviews; the purpose it, special emphasis was given on the extent to which intelligible communica-
of this activity was, actually, to help them realize that, despite ‘mistakes’ or tion among the learners was established; to this end, a member of each group
‘strange’ accents, they could indeed comprehend the message that these ELF playing the game acted as an ‘observer’, focusing on the way the players tried
users conveyed. hat being said, the learners seemed to ind French ELF easier to achieve mutual understanding and complete the task successfully. It should
to comprehend than Turkish ELF, possibly due to the fact that they were more also be mentioned that, at the language-focus stage, in order to direct the
familiar with French pronunciation. After listening the extracts, though, for learners’ attention to ‘form’ regarding Present Perfect, sentences they them-
the third time, they got accustomed to Turkish ELF as well and managed to selves had employed during the game were used, thus highlighting how their
answer the question correctly. use of the language facilitated or impeded efective communication.
he second while-listening activity, which was more demanding, included As a matter of fact, while monitoring the way they interacted with each
six multiple-choice questions that engaged the learners in noticing speciic other, I was really happy to realize that they managed to negotiate the meaning
ELF features displayed in the listening extracts. heir attention was drawn, quite successfully by employing a range of strategies, such as asking for clarii-
among others, to the role of intelligibility in efective communication and to cation or repeating problematic utterances. Furthermore, they seemed to enjoy
the communicative strategies the speakers used while talking; in this respect, this game and their motivation was not afected by any diiculties they faced
they were asked, for instance, to deduce the reasons why the speakers repeated during the task, indicating that challenging and meaningful activities need to
a particular utterance or how they used paraphrase to express their message be used when implementing an ELF-aware pedagogy.
more appropriately. Not surprisingly, the only question they found rather dif-
icult was the fourth one illustrating that unfamiliar pronunciation may indeed
cause intelligibility problems. Lessons learned
Such issues were further elaborated on at the post-listening stage, where, Based on the research questions, the third phase of the study involved re-
in order for them to link background knowledge to new information, they lecting on the outcomes of the implementation of ELF-aware pedagogy and
were asked to think of situations in which the wrong answers in the multiple- drawing relevant conclusions. First of all, I should highlight that the learners’
choice questions could have been acceptable. Fruitful discussion took place in positive response throughout the two ELF-aware lessons has actually demon-
this stage as well; in order to show how they would use these strategies, for strated, in my view at least, that not only developing ELF-aware pedagogy is
example, some learners performed the roles of ELF speakers in a spontaneous appropriate in this context but also that this action research should perhaps
role-playing activity, which actually made me realize how I should design the have been carried out a lot earlier. In this regard, helping the learners further
second ELF-aware lesson. develop their ELF-based skills and competences so as to be even more efec-
On the grounds of the irst lesson plan, therefore, the second one (Ap- tive in the future is highly important and, therefore, it is essential that I carry
pendices IV-V-VI) aimed at engaging the learners in practicing the strategies out more action research focusing on this issue.
they were previously exposed by adapting speciic coursebook activities. More To this end, the knowledge I have gained out of this experience could in-
speciically, focusing on developing their speaking skills, as well as on helping deed prove quite useful. In fact, it has been shown that using motivating and
them practice the Present Perfect tense through game-like activities as the meaningful activities that build on the learners’ background knowledge and
syllabus speciied, a role-playing game was designed inviting the learners to focus on real ELF communication is essential; starting, perhaps, with listening
participate in ELF communication within the safe classroom environment. activities that depict ELF accents the learners are more familiar with and, pro-
244 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 245
action-research project in Greece

gressively, engaging them in more demanding communicative situations where Cogo, A. and Dewey, M. (2006). ‘Eiciency in ELF communication: from pragmatic
the use of more complex strategies is necessary, the bases can be set for helping motives to lexico-grammatical innovation.’ Nordic Journal of English Studies, 5(2)
the learners establish intelligible communication with other NNSs. hat said, 59-93.
this action research has made me realize that the sooner one starts incorporat- Graddol, D. (2000). he future of English? A guide to forecasting the popularity of the
ing an ELF-aware component in their teaching, the better outcomes will be English language in the 21st century (2nd ed.). London: he British Council.
achieved in terms of the learners’ ELF-based performance. Holliday, A. (2006). ‘Native-speakerism’. ELT Journal, 60(4) 385-387.
he ELF-aware teacher has thus a quite diicult, yet crucial, task to per- Hülmbauer, C. (2007). ‘You moved, aren’t?’–he relationship between lexico-gram-
form. Indeed, based on my own limited experience in developing and imple- matical correctness and communicative efectiveness in English as a lingua franca’.
menting ELF-aware pedagogy, helping the learners become successful ELF Vienna English Working Papers, 16(2) 3-35.
speakers requires a lot of time and efort, as well as systematic planning; it en- Jenkins, J. (2006). ‘he spread of EIL: a testing time for testers.’ ELT Journal 60/1:
tails translating the indings of ELF research into teaching goals according to 42-50.
the particular needs of one’s learners and, then, designing appropriate teaching Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
material that aim at raising the learners’ self-conidence as non-native speak- versity Press.
ers. Most importantly, though, it entails recognizing the reasons why one’s Koshy, V. (2005). Action research for improving practice: a practical guide. London: Paul
teaching practices need to change in view of the status of English as a global Chapman Publishing.
lingua franca; the signiicance of ELF teacher education programmes –such as Matsumoto, Y. (2011). ‘Successful ELF communications and implications for ELT:
the ‘ELF-TEd Project’ in the framework of which this study was undertaken– sequential analysis of ELF pronunciation negotiation strategies’. Modern Language
needs to be highlighted. Journal, 95(1) 97-114.
McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language: rethinking goals and
approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Conclusion Pine, G. J. (2009). Teacher action research: building knowledge democracies. housand
he purpose of this paper has been to describe an action-research study con- Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
ducted in a primary school classroom in Greece, and to illustrate the way that Rajadurai, J. (2007). ‘Intelligibility studies: a consideration of empirical and ideological
issues’. World Englishes, 26(1): 87-98.
ELF-aware pedagogy was developed and implemented in this context. In this
Seidlhofer, B. (2004). ‘Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca’.
regard, it has been argued that taking into consideration the learners’ back-
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24 209-239.
ground knowledge and engaging them in real ELF communication are crucial
Seidlhofer, B. (2009). ‘Common ground and diferent realities: world Englishes and
in terms of helping them establish efective communication with other non-
English as a lingua franca.’ World Englishes, 28(2) 236-245.
native speakers.
Sifakis, N. (2004). ‘Teaching EIL – Teaching International or Intercultural English?
What teachers should know’. System, 32(2) 237-250.
References Sifakis, N. and Fay, R. (2011). ‘Integrating an ELF pedagogy in a changing world: the
case of Greek state schooling.’ In A. Archibald, A. Cogo and J. Jenkins (Eds.), Lat-
Bayyurt, Y. and Sifakis, N. (in print). ‘Transforming into an ELF-aware teacher.’ In P. est Trends in ELF Research. 285-297. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Vettorel (Ed.), New Frontiers in Teaching and Learning English. Cambridge: Cam- Publishing.
bridge Scholars Publishing.
Cogo, A. (2012). ‘English as a lingua franca: concepts, use, and implications.’ ELT Widdowson, H. (1994). ‘he ownership of English’. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2) 377-389.
Journal, 66(1) 97-105.
246 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 247
action-research project in Greece

Appendix I – Focus group interviews Appendix II – ELF-aware Lesson 1

248 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 249
action-research project in Greece
250 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 251
action-research project in Greece

Appendix III – ELF-aware Lesson 1: material

252 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 253
action-research project in Greece
254 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 255
action-research project in Greece

Appendix IV – ELF-aware Lesson 2

256 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 257
action-research project in Greece

Appendix V – ELF-aware Lesson 2: material

258 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 259
action-research project in Greece
260 From TEFL to ELF-aware pedagogy: lessons learned from an Stefania Kordia 261
action-research project in Greece

Appendix VI – ELF-aware Lesson 2: coursebook activities

 Developing error-correction in teaching
18 pronunciation
Ezgi Çetin

Context and problem

Considering a language cannot be completely taught without any emphasis
on the sound system making up the language, teaching pronunciation con-
stitutes a crucial part of ELT. It is a key component in facilitating learners
to become more skilled and luent users of English, and it is surely as essen-
tial as any other skill in the acquisition of the language. Studying individual
sounds, connected speech, stress and intonation are the areas an EFL learner
should be aware of and use efectively to utter phonologically correct speech.
Pronunciation was at the center of language teaching when the Audiolingual
Approach was popular, with several techniques (such as drills, use of minimal
pairs, role-plays, and memorization) developed for getting learners to perceive
and identify diferences between single sounds at the time (Lightbown and
Spada, 2013, pp. 68-71). However, with the introduction and popularity of the
Suggestopedia and, afterwards, the Communicative Approach, focusing more
on communication and interaction than form, teaching pronunciation seems
to have started to fall behind other skills of language teaching, though not fully
disregarded. Personally, as a researcher, pronunciation has always been a key
aspect of my English language learning and teaching philosophy. his point
leads me to carry out research in this area.
he age at which I began to learn English was eleven, fortunately the criti-
cal age of puberty helping me to grasp the language in a more natural way.
Having become aware that the pronunciation of words was variable thanks to
our English teacher at high school, the Phonetics and Phonology course I took
at university turned out to be a milestone in my interest in pronunciation. Our
teacher’s teaching styles and techniques were very eicient in supporting us on
the path to become more proicient learners and speakers of English as well as
my peculiar enthusiasm about eliciting individual sounds composing a word.

263
264 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 265

Since that time I have been putting emphasis on pronunciation of English Types of feedback
not only as a learner but also as an English teacher and I believe it is an indis-
Recast: An implicit type of corrective feedback that formulates or expands
pensable part of communicating in English more clearly and freely. As Setter
an ill-formed or incomplete utterance without directly pointing out that the
and Jenkins (2005) state, “Pronunciation is the major contributor to successful
student's utterance was incorrect.
spoken communication, and how anyone learning a language can expect to be
L: I lost my road.
understood with poor communication skills is outside of our comprehension.”
T: Oh, yeah, I see, you lost your way. And then what happened?
his research study aimed to evaluate error correction in pronunciation in
Clariication request: An elicitation indicating that the message has not
preparatory classes and to gain insight into the views of novice English lan-
been understood or that the student's utterance included some kind of mis-
guage instructors teaching Main Course at preparatory classes at Izmir Katip
Çelebi University on the use of pronunciation in their classes. he research take. A repetition or reformulation is necessary by using phrases like ‘I’m sor-
questions are as follows: ry?’, ‘Excuse me?’ etc.
(1) What are the error correction strategies used by novice teachers for L: I want practice today, today. (Grammatical error)
teaching pronunciation in the classroom? T: I’m sorry? (Clariication request)
(2) What are the novice teachers’ perceptions of using pronunciation and Metalinguistic feedback: Provides “comments, information, or questions re-
treating pronunciation errors in the classroom? lated to the well-formedness of the students’ utterance” (Lyster, 2004, p. 405).
(3) What are the ways to improve teaching pronunciation in the class- L: I am here since January.
room in terms of the emphasis put on its practice and error correction? T: Well, okay, but remember we talked about the present perfect tense?
Elicitation: A corrective technique that prompts the learner to self-correct.
Elicitation and other prompts are more overt in their request for a response.
Literature review L: [to another student] what means this word?
T: Uh, Luis, how do we say that in English? What does …?
Pronunciation and error treatment L: Ah, what does this word mean?
Explicit correction: Clearly showing that the utterance was incorrect, the
Teaching pronunciation has been an area of interest for research for a long teacher provides the correct form.
time. Exposing learners to the target language is one of the highlighted fo- L: When I have 12 years old …
cus points of several studies (Genesee, 1991; Bradlow et al, 1997; Wang and T: No, not have. You mean, “When I was 12 years old …”
Munro, 2004; Harada, 2006, 2007a, 2007b). Other studies highlight the efect Repetition: he teacher repeats the incorrect part of the student’s utterance,
of learners’ aptitude, attitude, and motivation on the acquisition of pronun- usually with a change in intonation.
ciation (Carroll, 1981; Guiora, 1972; Stevick, 1976; Snow and Shapira, 1985; L: When I have 12 years old …
Schumann, 1986; Skehan, 1989; Bongaerts et al., 1997; Moyer, 1999).
T: When I have 12 years old …
Errors play a fundamental role in learning English since they indicate that
he error treatment techniques stated above will be used later in the data
learners are dealing with the language. Keeping the importance of errors in
collection part.
mind, the strategies for error treatment need to be speciied clearly so as to
make use of the correct one at the right time in the classroom context. Ellis
Although there are six diferent strategies for error treatment speciied in
(2001), Jessica Williams (2005), Lyster (2004), and Panova and Lyster (2002)
the literature, I located another strategy one of the teachers was using efec-
present the terms divided into what Panova and Lyster (2002) call feedback
tively during my class observation: Peer-correction. In this case, the students
types. (L) stands for learner, and (T) stands for teacher utterances.
266 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 267

making the ill-formed utterance are corrected by their classmates or peers and Table 1: he qualities of teachers participating in the study
interaction takes place between the students. Teacher Experience Institution Pedagogi- A course on
Other strategies to deal with error treatment were avoidance, in which the (years) cal forma- pronunciation/
teacher pretends not to notice the student’s error and does not correct it and tion teaching pronun-
delayed correction which means the teacher postpones error correction in order ciation
not to discourage the student from communicating. In delayed correction, the Hacettepe Uni./Eng-
Teaching pronun-
teacher may take notes about the errors during the lesson and handle them at T1 2 lish Language and Yes
ciation
the end of the activity or lesson. Literature-Ankara
Considering the literature, even though there are many studies on teach- Celal Bayar Uni./
ing pronunciation, there is a dearth of research conducted on error correction/ T2 2 English Language and Yes No
treatment in teaching pronunciation. Mourad (2010) speciies the reasons for Literature-Manisa
pronunciation as lack of oral practice and priority in terms of pronunciation. METU/English Lan-
Phonetics
Umera-Okeke (2011) identiies pronunciation errors and suggests treatment T3 2 Yes Teaching pronun-
guage Teaching-Ankara
methods to improve learners’ pronunciation in his study. Likewise, Jerotijevic ciation
(2013) investigates Serbian teachers’ preferences for corrective feedback in Yaşar Uni./Eng-
pronunciation and indicates that the most frequently employed strategy is ‘re- T4 1 lish Language and Yes No
cast’ in Serbian EFL classes. Literature-İzmir
Ege Uni./American
T5 2 Culture and Literature- Yes No
Procedure İzmir
he data collection process began with identifying which teachers to observe.
In the irst phase the criteria for the choice of teachers was convenience since Since I wanted to see them teaching in their own classes, at irst I did not
both the teachers and I had busy teaching schedules at university, requiring me notify in advance the teachers of my main focus of observation so as not to
to focus on the teachers teaching at the time I was available for observation. manipulate their teaching and the amount of time they allocated for pronunci-
I included not only novice but also experienced teachers in the data collec- ation activities in Main Course lessons. Having observed four teachers in two
tion in order to make comparisons and contrasts between them. However, I weeks and acquiring very little data on the use of pronunciation, most of which
had to make a change in the sample of the study that it would not be possible were on correcting the errors of students, I decided to resolve this matter by
to observe all the teachers I had chosen due to lack of time and it might not informing teachers concerned about my research focus so that they could get
prove to be efective. herefore, I speciied the novice teachers with an experi- prepared before the observation and place emphasis on the error correction
ence of teaching English for 0-3 years to limit the number of teachers and to strategies of teachers regarding pronunciation. his change in the direction of
save time. my research seemed to be critical as it helped me to get richer data.
I developed a checklist for the observations to see which error correction
strategies were exploited for teaching pronunciation in the classroom as well
as recording the lessons I observed to gain insight into the details for the data
analysis phase. I allocated one lesson per teacher to observe their classes.
268 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 269

Table 2: Checklist for error correction of pronunciation As well as taking notes of the important aspects mentioned by the teachers
Strategies / Techniques Use during the interviews, I recorded all the interviews to further analyze after-
wards.
√ Recast
√ Clariication request
√ Metalinguistic feedback Findings and discussion
√ Elicitation
Classroom observation
√ Explicit correction
√ Repetition/Drills By using the checklist for error correction strategies and recordings, I began
to analyze the data for class observations, which turned out to take nearly 10
√ Peer- correction
hours for me to transcribe as I had to focus on every detail so as not to miss
√ Avoidance anything related to error correction in teaching pronunciation. However long
√ Delayed correction it might have taken, I inally came up with a igure in which I categorized
√ Any others: the error treatment strategies used in the observed classes when focusing on
pronunciation.
Another means of collecting data was through conducting individual in-
terviews following class observations. To achieve this, I designed a semi-struc-
tured interview to identify the novice teachers’ perceptions and views on the
use and correction of pronunciation. he questions included in the interview
were as follows:
1. How many years have you been teaching?
2. Which department did you graduate from?
3. What kind of courses did you take?
a. What areas were emphasized in your training course?
→ Teaching grammar, reading, listening, speaking, writing, and
pronunciation? What did you learn?
4. Do you think it is important for teachers to focus on pronunciation? If yes,
please explain how much.
5. Do you think that Turkish (or other) learners have challenges in learning Figure 1. Error treatment strategies used by teachers in teaching pronunciation
pronunciation? If yes,
a. Please, elaborate on the reasons: what/how. As Figure 1 illustrates, ‘repetition/drills’ and ‘recast’ were the most com-
b. How do you deal with these problems? monly exploited strategies by the teachers concerned. Repetitions and drills
6. Do you think it is vital to correct pronunciation errors? If yes, when and are strategies that require repeating after what the teacher or the recording
how should these errors be corrected? utters, while recast refers to correction of the ill-formed pronunciation pattern
7. What can we (as teachers) do to improve our pronunciation and teaching with the demonstration by the teacher. With all these three strategies handled,
pronunciation? it is obvious that most of the pronunciation errors in the observed classes were
270 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 271

treated under the control of the teachers, leading to more teacher-centered to her background in studying ELT and taking the Phonetics plus teaching
classrooms than student-centered ones. his inding overlaps with Behavior- pronunciation courses as part of her education as she was aware of the ways to
istic heory since learning the correct pronunciation patterns was made up cope with errors in pronunciation. he other four, who did not take any courses
of habit formation through repetitions, drills and taking the teacher as the on teaching pronunciation during their studies, did not combine their error
example for correct pronunciation. correction strategies with communication or interaction.
Another prominent inding seen in Figure 1 is that ‘elicitation’, ‘peer- As another point arising from the interviews was that all teachers believed
correction’, ‘delay’, and ‘clariication request’ were the student-centered error that Turkish learners face challenges in English pronunciation arising from
treatment strategies falling behind the teacher-centered ones, suggesting that somewhat similar reasons: the diferent language structures of Turkish and
there was less time devoted to students’ self-discovery and self-correction of English, not being native speakers of English, not having an authentic envi-
their own errors or peer-correction of each other’s errors. his demonstrates ronment where they can produce English in a natural way and lack of impor-
that the observed classes did not include as many cognitive (via elicitation, tance put on English pronunciation in students’ earlier education. he sound
delay, and clariication request strategies) or communicative (peer-correction) /θ/ and the words beginning or ending with the letters ‘th’ were found to be the
strategies as behavioristic ones (repetitions, drills, and recast) in terms of error most challenging for Turkish students as this sound does not exist in Turkish
treatment in pronunciation. and it has a diferent pronunciation. To overcome challenges with pronuncia-
Also of interest in Figure 1 is that ‘metalinguistic feedback’ was not used at tion, most of the teachers informed me that they used repetitions and drills by
all to correct pronunciation errors, meaning that the teachers never made any trying to be a model as well as trying to expose students to authentic environ-
comments to let students correct themselves through reminding them of prior ments by watching movies and creating artiicial environments.
knowledge on a speciic sound (e.g. / ə /) or a rule (e.g. the silent consonant he recommendations for improving our pronunciation as teachers and
in ‘bomb’). teaching pronunciation were made up of the points below:

Interviews 1. Putting more emphasis on the phonetic alphabet and repetition,

2. Trying to refresh our knowledge by correcting our pronunciation errors,
According to the data analysis of the interviews, all the teachers were of the
opinion that communication had great importance in teaching pronunciation 3. Being involved in authentic environments,
and that classes should be student-centered in order to achieve high level of 4. Audio-lingual activities, i.e. watching movies or series, listening to songs in
accuracy and luency. Interestingly, though, there was a mismatch between English.
their beliefs and practices of error treatment in pronunciation in the observed
classes. Despite favoring the Communicative Approach in practice, they tend-
Relection
ed towards a Behavioristic Approach with the use of teacher-centered error
correction strategies in pronunciation. As regards the research study, I was glad to have invested my time on a topic
Among the teachers observed and interviewed, one shone out as the only I have had a professional interest in for a long time and doing this research
teacher adopting the ‘peer-correction’ strategy for pronunciation errors. She helped me to develop myself both as an English teacher and a researcher.
preferred to encourage students to ind and correct each other’s pronunciation herefore, I could handle the whole process in terms of pedagogical learning
errors many times during the lesson I observed, and expressed her belief in and methodological learning.
using this strategy as a tool for reinforcing interaction in English by making
sure that students build conidence through cooperation and collaboration.
Using this strategy consciously to reinforce communication may be related
272 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 273

Pedagogical learning ciation.

Considering my understanding and classroom practices of teaching pronun- d) Analyzing data: As a researcher, whose prior plans had to change
ciation, through the error correction strategies I have focused on so far, I have direction, I understood that there is always the likelihood of change;
become more conscious of myself as a teacher treating my students’ pronuncia- therefore, a researcher should be ready for shifting sands and adapting
tion errors in the class. Prior to this research study, I was not much aware of the the process according to new contexts. Making use of two data col-
techniques I could use for error-correction in pronunciation in my teaching lection tools for the research proved to be helpful to cross-check the
and my strategies for correction were mostly getting students to locate their results, so I came to see that one data collection might be misleading in
own errors through ‘elicitation’ and ‘clariication request’, plus habit formation some cases.
strategies: ‘repetition’ and ‘drills’. However, I did not allocate enough time to he analyzed data demonstrated that there was a mismatch between teach-
let them work together interactively. ers’ perceptions and practices regarding the correction of pronunciation er-
hroughout this research study, I realized that there was a lot more I could rors. While they believed in the beneits of communication, interaction and
do in teaching pronunciation in my classes and that I could give more op- student-centered classes, they still used teacher-centered error treatment strat-
portunity to students to interact with each other via peer-correction. Hence, egies in pronunciation. his may necessitate a training course to be held for
peer-correction is a strategy I will be using in my classes from now on. I am novice teachers at İzmir Katip Çelebi University on how to use error correc-
also of the opinion that employing a variety of strategies for error correction in tion strategies in pronunciation in more interactive and student-centered ways.
pronunciation might be fruitful in order not to disturb students, which means Besides, taking the teachers’ background into account, it might be fruitful if
that even avoidance might help in some communication-based contexts. the pedagogical training courses at universities included a course on teaching
pronunciation as the teacher who took the Phonetics and teaching pronuncia-
Methodological learning tion courses during her education was more aware of her strategies of teaching
pronunciation than the other three having graduated from the department of
I can categorize the stages of my development as a researcher as follows:
English/American literature.
a) Reading relevant studies: In the beginning, I surely had some back-
ground knowledge on teaching pronunciation, but it was a signiicant What contributed me most as a researcher during this process
step to read relevant studies to broaden my horizon and to foresee what is that I now know that conducting research certainly requires
I could do based on pronunciation. devotion; researchers should be able to move on despite ups and
b) Doing observations: Upon my decision to observe teachers’ lessons, downs.
I had to make a choice between the teachers to observe on account
of lack of time and ended up with the novice teachers. Gathering in- References
suicient data through observations, I had to change the direction of
Bongaerts, T., van Summeren, C., Planken, B., & Schills, E. (1997). Age and ultimate
my research towards error correction in pronunciation. Observing all
attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language. Studies in Second Language
teachers concerned took me several weeks as I had the chance to ob- Acquisition, 19, 447-465.
serve at most two teachers in one week, which was rather time-con- Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training
suming. Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some efects of perceptual
c) Running interviews: Following the observations, interviews with the learning on speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(4),
observed teachers aided me in collecting more efective data as well as 2299-2310.
comparing teachers’ views and practices on error correction in pronun- Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-ive years of research on foreign language aptitude. In
274 Developing error-correction in teaching pronunciation Ezgi Çetin 275

K. C. Diller (Ed.), Training, research, and education (pp. 87-136). Pittsburgh, PA: TESOL (pp. 3-15). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
University of Pittsburgh Press. Stevick, E. (1976). Memory, meaning and method: Some psychological perspectives on lan-
Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. In H. D. Brown (Ed.), Princi- guage learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
ples of language learning and teaching (pp. 277-278). New York, NY: Pearson Long- Umera-Okeke, N. P. (2011). Identiication of the sources and treatment of ESL pro-
man.Genesee, F. (1991). Learning through two languages. New York: HarperCol- nunciation errors: A case study of Igbo speakers of English. African Journals Online
lins. (Special edition), 3-12.
Guiora, A. Z. (1972). Construct validity and transpositional research: Toward an em- Wang, X., & Munro, M. (2004). Computer-based training for learning English vowel
pirical study of psychoanalytic concepts. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 13(2), 139-150. contrasts. System, 32, 539-552.
Harada, T. (2006). he acquisition of single and geminate stops by English-speaking Williams, J. (2005). Form-focused instruction. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of re-
children in a Japanese immersion program. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, search in second language teaching and learning (pp. 671-691). Mahwah, NJ: Law-
28(4), 601-632. rance Erlbaum Associates.
Harada, T. (2007a). Long-term phonological beneits of childhood L2 experience in a
Japanese immersion program. Paper presented at the 16th International Congress
of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Saarbrücken, Germany.
Harada, T. (2007b). he production of voice onset time (VOT) by English-speaking
children in a Japanese immersion program. International Review of Applied Lin-
guistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 45(4), 353-378.
Jerotijevic, D. (2013). Teachers’ response to Serbian EFL learners’ pronunciation er-
rors. Versita, 99-112.
Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned. Oxford: OUP.
Lyster, R. (2004). Diferential efects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruc-
tion. In H. D. Brown (Ed.), Principles of language learning and teaching (pp. 277-
278). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Mourad, S. (2010). Pronunciation Practice and Students’ Oral Performances. A case study
of second year English students at the University of Constantine. A dissertation
submitted in partial fulillment of the requirements for the Magister degree in Ap-
plied Linguistics and Language Teaching Option: Language Teaching and Meth-
odology. Constantine, Algeria.
Moyer, A. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology: he critical factors of age,
motivation, and instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 81-108.
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult
ESL classroom. In H. D. Brown (Ed.), Principles of language learning and teaching
(pp. 277-278). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Schumann, J. H. (1986). Research on the acculturation model for second language
acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 7(5), 379-392.
Setter, J., & Jenkins, J. (2005). Pronunciation. Language Teach., 38, 1-17.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual diferences in second-language learning. London: Edward
Arnold.
Snow, M. A., & Shapira, R. (1985). he role of social-psychological factors in second
language learning. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Beyond basics: Issues and research in
 How can teachers find a happy medium
19 between what students want and their
own practices?
Esin Yüksel

Introduction
here has been a surge of interest in vocabulary teaching in recent years
(hornbury, 2002; Grabe, 2009). his is partly because vocabulary learning
can be considered to be a crucial step in learning a second language (L2) since
‘..without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary nothing
can be conveyed’ (Wilkins cited in hornbury 2012, p.13). his implies that
a considerable amount of meaning is carried lexically. herefore it is impor-
tant for L2 users to build a suicient repertoire of words in order to express
themselves. Achieving this would also get them over the threshold level of L2
since vocabulary learning is essential for developing L2 proiciency (Oxford
& Crookall, 1990). Besides, vocabulary growth could facilitate their language
learning process as unknown words would be no more an impediment to com-
municate or understand a text.
Given the importance of vocabulary learning, it is necessary to discuss how
vocabulary instruction should take place as it plays a central role in vocabulary
learning efectively. It is a central issue because a particular way of instruction
determines the type of output or learning by students. However, the type of
vocabulary instruction, whether to teach explicitly or implicitly, has been a
contentious issue in the history of English Language Teaching (ELT) as there
are diferent approaches to teaching vocabulary. hornbury (2002) discusses
them and shows some techniques a teacher might choose to aid learners to
acquire new vocabulary items. his study aims to explore them to teach vo-
cabulary through reading, and tries to ind a happy-medium between learners’
preferences and teachers’ actual practices.

277
278 How can teachers ind a happy medium between what students Esin Yüksel 279
want and their own practices?

Context and problem If you spend most of your time studying grammar, your English
will not improve very much. You will see most improvement if
According to Kachru’s (1985) model of World Englishes, Turkey belongs to
you learn more words and expressions. You can say very little with
the expanding circle where English is learnt as a foreign language (EFL). hat
grammar, but you can say almost everything with words!
implies Turkish students do not have immediate communication needs and
therefore have little opportunity to practice it outside the classroom. hus, they he following quotations, on the other hand, highlight the contributory
need exposure to the language as much as possible in the classroom. Based on role of vocabulary in fostering grammatical knowledge.
my teaching experience, however, these students mostly focus on exams and
mechanical exercises and prefer explicit instruction rather than communica- Vocabulary knowledge can also help and facilitate grammar ac-
tive activities. As Turkish students are exam-oriented, they tend to memorize quisition since “knowing the words in a text and conversation
vocabulary and expect reading lessons to be full of explanations of unknown permits learners to understand the meaning of the discourse,
items. which in turn allows the grammatical patterning to become more
he main problem with vocabulary teaching is that there is a tension be- transparent” (Ellis, 1997 cited in Schmitt 2000, p.143). herefore,
tween second language (L2) vocabulary learning strategies expected by stu- in the twentieth century there was the shift of focus “from gram-
dents and vocabulary instruction adopted by instructors. Most Turkish stu- mar as the central anchor of language teaching to the lexicon”
dents expect explicit vocabulary instruction whereas teachers tend to teach (Hasbun, 2005, p.2) which I now move to.
implicitly. his tendency of learners may raise the question as to whether vo-
It is also worth noting that vocabulary is also closely related to reading as
cabulary teaching is just presenting the meaning of a word or using translation.
a skill. he mutual relationship between reading and vocabulary is inevitable
Obviously, it is not; it is more than just introducing new words. Vocabulary
as lexical knowledge is the driving force behind reading ability. As Schmitt
teaching can take diferent forms that will be further discussed in detail. (2000, p.150) points out, “reading is an important part of all but the most
Having considered issues regarding the vocabulary instruction, I could say elementary part of vocabulary programs”. he strong relationship between
that these conlicting ideas have to survive together in the same classroom in vocabulary and reading is also shown in a various research studies (Schmitt,
order to make both the students and teachers happier with a mixture of explicit 2000; Grabe, 2009). One last word related to the perfect correlation between
and implicit teaching. As Schmitt (2008) suggests, there needs to be a combina- reading and vocabulary is that just as a bird cannot ly without wings, reading
tion of explicit teaching and activities from which incidental learning can occur. comprehension is not possible without a proper grasp of related vocabulary.
herefore, this study aims at inding a happy medium between what students
want and actual teacher practices by applying a proper mix of methods.
Incidental and explicit learning of vocabulary
Literature review As Schmitt (2000) suggests, explicit and incidental learning are the two ap-
proaches to vocabulary acquisition. In the former words are learned through
direct instruction, whereas in the latter knowledge of words is acquired inci-
How important is vocabulary?
dentally. From my point of view there needs to be a combination of approaches
Mastering the L2’s vocabulary plays an important role in learning a foreign in the classroom since explicit instruction is necessary with beginner level stu-
language. Wilkins summed up the importance of vocabulary when he com- dents. It is required to form a basis of knowledge, especially with low level stu-
pared the grammatical knowledge that students might possess. In the follow- dents whose interlanguage system (a transitional system relecting the learn-
ing quotation by Wilkins, cited in hornbury (2002, p.13), this emphasis is ers’ second language knowledge) is being constructed. Nation (1995) proposes
made clearly. that “the most frequent 2,000 words are essential for any language use, and so
280 How can teachers ind a happy medium between what students Esin Yüksel 281
want and their own practices?

are worth the efort required to teach and learn them explicitly”. his is also tion (2006). he purpose of the pre-test was to check whether students were
supported by Schmitt (2000, p. 144) who notes that “the 2.000 level is only a ready for the combination of approaches or not. he participant’s total score
beginning and teaching words explicitly beyond this level can still supply suf- was multiplied by 100 to get their total vocabulary size. Having analyzed it,
icient beneits that warrant the time expended”. However, I do not want to be the instructor taught four units following the textbook and special attention
misunderstood. his does not imply teachers should teach explicitly entirely, as was paid to the reading section. Additional exercises of the types suggested by
an explicit approach includes traditional ways such as dictionary use, transla- hornbury (2002) were designed for every unit. hese included inferencing
tion and mechanical exercises, and so students may get used to spoon feeding from context, matching exercises and dictionary use. he vocabulary was irst
and become lazier. As hornbury (2002, p. 77) exempliies, when there is over- presented in the context or taught implicitly, so that students could work out
reliance on translation, learners do not work very hard to access the meaning. the meaning for themselves, and then it was reinforced by explicit activities.
his implies that it is less memorable. It is a case of “no pain, no gain”. here- Data for this study was gathered through an open-ended questionnaire after
fore teachers should irst try to make students discover the meanings of words each unit was taught. he questionnaires were administered to 16 participants
by eliciting them, teaching them in context or any other discovery work, and studying English as a foreign language at A2 level. here were ive statements
encourage learners to work out the meanings themselves. his implicit manner in the questionnaire where students were expected to respond with ‘Yes’, ‘No’,
of teaching makes the words more meaningful and serviceable. In the long- or ‘Not sure’. Responses were then calculated on the basis of percentage. he
term incidental learning is also important for at least two reasons: data coming from open-ended questions were applied to content analysis and
• Meeting a word in diferent contexts expands what is known about it emergent themes were listed (shown in Figure 2). his study adopted both a
(improving quality of knowledge). qualitative and quantitative approach in terms of the method used as interpre-
• he additional exposures help consolidate it in memory. (Schmitt 2000,
tations and percentages were employed during data analysis.
p.146)
Findings and discussion
As Schmitt (2000, p.121) points out, “For second language learners at least,
both explicit and incidental learning are necessary, and should be seen as com- Vocabulary size test designed by Nation (2007) was conducted to ensure the
plementary”. Explicit instruction is necessary to reach a threshold level. How- readiness of students for a combination of methods applied in the classroom.
ever, we cannot underestimate the value of implicit teaching and incidental
learning since they make words more memorable. hus, we need to be aware
of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.

Procedure
Data collection
his study aimed to address the following:
• What do students think about the combination of methods applied in
the classroom?
he irst step was to identify the vocabulary size of the participants with
a pre-test. he test form examined in this study consisted of 10 items from
each 1000-word level for a total of 20 items which were developed by Na- Figure 1. Vocabulary Size Test
282 How can teachers ind a happy medium between what students Esin Yüksel 283
want and their own practices?

he collected data shown in Figure 1 demonstrates the vocabulary level of Figure 2 illustrates the frequency of positive answers to the six statements
the participants before conducting the study. he column provides an estimate evaluated in four groups: facility with vocabulary learning, facility with recall
vocabulary size that each participant has out of 2000 word family level. he of the content, improvement in vocabulary learning and increase in motiva-
data illustrates that the vocabulary level of the participants is beyond 2000. tion. As is clear from the data, there is a general positive trend towards the use
his level is only a beginning, and “teaching words explicitly beyond this level of both explicit and implicit approaches in reading whilst teaching vocabulary.
can still supply suicient beneits that warrant time expended” (Schmitt 2000, Results indicate students are satisied with the combination of methods - im-
p.144). However, Nation (1990) notes that “there comes a point where words plicit and explicit instruction – one that facilitates their vocabulary learning.
occur so infrequently that it is better to use teaching time to help students ac-
quire the strategies necessary to learn the words on their own”. herefore, this
study aimed at using both explicit and implicit approaches. Having considered
Relection
my classroom practices with the participants, I felt that although they were hrough this teacher-research, observing learners’ attitudes towards diferent
beyond 2,000 word level, they were likely to have the lexical resources neces- approaches made me gain self-awareness of my practices by relecting upon
sary to cope with the combination of approaches in reading. them. I realized how important is to tailor the lesson regarding the needs and
According to Figure 1 the research question examining the students’ expectations of my students. I am now more capable of being able to make
thoughts about the combination of methods applied in reading represents the sense of what is going on in my classroom, which implies understanding stu-
learners’ positive attitudes towards mixed methods I employed in the class- dents’ needs and expectations and being able to respond to them. When the
room. expectations of both students and teachers are met, they are more likely to be
Figure 2 shows the responses to statements about vocabulary teaching in motivated.
reading and the number of students corresponding to each category. I have also started thinking critically about my classroom practices which
helped me to develop my own learning and teacher framework. he critical
approach towards the manner of vocabulary instruction afected my beliefs
about teaching vocabulary. Before conducting this study I had always thought
implicit instruction was the best style of teaching. However, this study made
me realize diferent ways of teaching vocabulary. I am now aware that it is
sometimes not enough to employ a single approach in language teaching, es-
pecially with lower level students. I have learnt that teachers should listen to
their inner voices regarding the unique atmosphere of their classrooms and
decide whether to teach explicitly, implicitly or maybe a combination of both.

References
Ellis, N. C. (1997). Vocabulary acquisition: Word structure, collocation, word-class,
and meaning. Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 122-139.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a Second Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Figure 2 Responses to statements about vocabulary teaching in reading Press.
Hasbun, L. (2005). he efect of explicit vocabulary teaching on vocabulary acquisition
and attitude towards reading. Actualidades Investigatives en Educacion. 5(2) 1-21.
284 How can teachers ind a happy medium between what students
want and their own practices?

Kachru, B. B (1985). Standards, Codiication and Sociolinguistic Realism: he Eng-

Exploring how to integrate English
lish Language in the outer circle. English in the World, 11-30.
Nation, P., & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. Vocabu-
lary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 14, 6-19.
20 culture into my teaching practice
Nation, I. S. P. (1995). he word on words: An interview with Paul Nation. he Lan- Duygu Ișık
guage Teacher. 19(2): pp. 5-7.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990) Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1990). Vocabulary Learning: A Critical Analysis of Tech-
niques. TESL Canada Journal. 7(2) 9-30.
Schmitt, N. (2008). Teaching Vocabulary. USA: Pearson. Introduction
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press. Having been an English language teacher for ive years, I have always felt
hornbury, S. (2002). How to Teach Vocabulary. Harlow: Pearson. something missing in my language classes. Although they have had an inten-
Wilkins, D. (1972) Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold. sive English language learning programme, students have always had problems
about internalizing the language and its components. hey have known almost
all the grammar rules theoretically or memorized a large amount of vocabulary
or some useful expressions, phrasal verbs and so on. However, when it comes
to practice they have generally had diiculty. he problem is either incorrect
or inappropriate usage of grammar rules or words or not even relect their
knowledge and disuse them. One of the most disturbing things that I have
experienced is having upper-intermediate level students who still disuse or
overuse the third person singular “-s”. Another one is trying to teach students
useful expressions they can use in daily life and when the perfect time to use
the expressions comes, seeing no students using them. hat is why it was really
very pleasing and surprising when I see students using the rules or expressions
although it was what it normally had to be. he frequency of the reverse situ-
ations was high and it made me think about the reason behind the problem.
After examining my classes I deduced that my students’ lack of efective
language learning was the result of their not being integrated or familiar with
the target culture. I often observed students who tried to ind a way to escape
reading and comprehending a text, avoid using diferent structures and expres-
sions in their writing or speaking. hey also had problems when they listened
to a text related to target culture and daily routines. It was clear that when they
felt like a stranger to the topics covered they were unable to comprehend it
completely and unwilling to use it in further productive activities. his fact led
me to ind a way to break my students’ chains and make them more interested,
related and integrated with the target culture. he aim of this study is to ind

285
286 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice Duygu Ișık 287

whether integrating target cultural elements into language teaching makes edge that is learnt socially. When these two kinds of knowledge progress at
language learning more efective or not. the same time, as is the case in native language learning, systemic knowledge
here are two research questions in this study; is supported by schematic knowledge and as a result, meaningful language
1. Does integration of target cultural elements into language teaching learning occurs. When a person tries to learn a language with its systemic but
make language learning more efective or not? without schematic knowledge, they meet their need of schematic knowledge
2. What are students’ opinions about the efect of target cultural elements from their already established one which belongs to their native language. he
in language learning? reason why students cannot internalize a language is the inconsistency of these
two types of knowledge. When schematic knowledge does not it systemic
knowledge, the syntactic and semantic rules do not have a complementary en-
Literature review vironment that helps a learner to visualize it and these rules remain incapable
Culture in language teaching has always been a controversial topic in ELT. of helping the learner to understand and use the language. As a result efective
Although it is accepted that culture and language cannot be separated, some learning does not occur and learners cannot or do not remember to use the
people ind it unnecessary to teach culture. he conlict is not only about the rules they learn although they have enough theoretical knowledge.
use of culture but about which culture to use in language teaching. While When we look at the literature about target culture teaching we can see
some group of people are in favour of using home culture, others believe it is many studies dealing with culture issue. To start with, Jingxia (2010) was one
important to teach target culture and some others support teaching both. of the people who supported the importance of incorporating target cultural
Before we discuss whether it is important to teach or integrate cultural ele- elements into language teaching. She states that a learner without cultural
ments in language teaching we should know what culture means. It is really knowledge would falter in case of a direct interaction with a native speaker
not possible to put culture in only one deinition or under one title because this of English. To prove her idea and to see the current situation of Chinese uni-
concept is related to many disciplines and means somehow diferent things for versities on culture teaching, she investigates the place of culture teaching in
each discipline. Two American anthropologists, Kroeber & Kluckhon, have Chinese universities. he points she wants to ind out are the state of Chinese
identiied 164 diferent deinitions of the term culture (Özkalp, 1989; Sabuncu students’ cultural awareness & competence, culture teaching in EFL classes
& Emre, 1995; Gao, 2006, cited in Damar, 2013). It shows the complexity of and the best methods of culture teaching. he results reveal that students ind
the concept which is not possible to explain in relation to one discipline or their culture learning and so competence inadequate although they are willing
one aspect. to learn about target culture. When it comes to the teachers, they state that
Culture is dealt with from diferent perspectives in language teaching. he culture teaching is important in language teaching for successful communica-
irst is the concepts as big “C” and small “c”. Big “C” means the visible part of tion. hey, however, reveal that they do not often introduce cultural elements
a culture such as food, sports, popular culture, art, literature and so on while in class. All the participant teachers also agree that linguistic knowledge is
small “c” refers to the invisible part of a culture such as cultural norms, com- more important than culture teaching. Finally, they show dissatisfaction with
munication styles, verbal and non-verbal symbols. While teaching a language the amount of cultural elements in textbooks.
both are used to enhance language learning and teaching. In this study, also, Another piece of research was conducted by Yılmaz (2006) who examined
culture is accepted as both big and small “c”. the opinions of students on the role of culture in EFL. He developed and ap-
Another explanation about culture comes from Alptekin (1992) as he says plied a questionnaire to senior Anatolian high school students from three dif-
there are two types of knowledge that make people understand a language. he ferent cities. Participants stated that they gave importance to learning English
irst is systemic knowledge that includes syntactic and semantic or so-called for instrumental purposes, practicing features and skills of this language and
“formal” aspects of language. he second one is schematic knowledge, knowl- including international topics. In addition most participants supported the
288 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice Duygu Ișık 289

notion of teaching target language culture integrated with English language

teaching although a signiicant number disagreed or partially agreed. 1. Do you know anything about British/American culture?
Önalan (2005) studied EFL teachers’ perceptions of the place of culture
YES NO
in ELT. He used a written survey questionnaire and an interview to collect
data from Preparatory School teachers. Participants stated that they generally 2. Does (not) knowing British/American culture afect your language
taught the diferences between target and native culture in their classes. In ad- learning? Why and How?
dition the responses of the teachers revealed that they had positive attitudes
towards using culture in their teaching but some stated that there should not
be too much target cultural information so as not to cause boredom or sym-
pathy towards it. Although participants had positive attitudes results showed he aim of the test was to see students’ existing knowledge about target
that teaching the target culture was not among their prior objectives. When it culture and their opinion about the efect of knowing or not knowing it. After
comes to their students’ point of view they thought their students had a posi- adminstering the pre-test I started to teach the students target cultural ele-
tive attitude towards target culture learning. ments. hat is why an extensive search was done before starting the culture
To check teachers’ perceptions of culture Bayyurt (2006) also made a semi- teaching process. Some materials were found that could help students to have
structured interview with non-native (Turkish) teachers on issues such as the an idea about target culture.
concept, content and context of culture, and advantages & disadvantages of NEF Practical English Part: In the students’ course book “New English
being non-native English speakers. he results show that culture and language File hird Edition” there were parts after each two units named “Practical
were connected for most of the participants but they preferred using diferent English”. In these students were taught about British/American cultures by
cultures (international culture) in their classes. Participants also stated that means of an American girl and a British boy’s love and life stories. hese parts
target culture was indispensably involved in their lessons and was important to were both culturally educatory and engrossing so students learnt about them
make students aware of diferences between native, target and other cultures. in a funny way. In practical English parts students learnt not only the cultures
However, there was not agreement among the participants on whether to use but some diferences between these two cultures.
cultural content in foreign language education or not. When it comes to their Sit-coms: Another method that was used for target culture teaching was
being non-native English speakers, participants agreed that their success in sitcoms. As students generally like visually-attracting materials and sitcoms
learning English afects students positively. are short and humorous, students learnt about target culture
All these studies were important for me to shape my idea as to how to Online quizzes about target culture: Students were given quizzes that were
conduct my research. about target culture. he source for the quizzes was a website called “esolcours-
es.com”. he quiz parts were applied in a competitive way so that students
were more enthusiastic to answer the questions and the answers were more
Procedure permanently learnt compared to classic teaching methods.
In the research the participants were 20 students at preparatory school of Proverb and Idiom Teaching: In these activities, students were given a
İzmir Katip Çelebi University. heir level of English was pre-intermediate. proverb or idiom and asked about the occurrence of them. Students worked as
As a irst step, a pre-test was applied to the participants. In the pre-test, pairs and groups.
there were two questions; Videos, Listening &Reading texts: Students watched listened or read au-
thentic materials about target culture. hese materials were about geography,
currency, leisure activities, English language, new words, and manners of peo-
290 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice Duygu Ișık 291

ple and so on. After each material, activities were done to support and rein- • We do not forget what we have learnt and it is more permanent because
force culture teaching. we learn through experience not memorization
Students were given a target culture education with the materials above for • Culture is the most important factor to learn a language
• We cannot understand the jokes and we can misunderstand people be-
ten weeks. Despite their busy pacing, each week they did three or four culture
activities. he activities usually ended up with a related writing task. After each
there was an evaluation part for about 5 to 10 minutes when students evalu- cause of this we cannot realize whether they have good or ill will
ated their learning and summarized what they had learnt in an oral way. • Apart from idioms and proverbs, we can have extensive vocabulary
At the end of week ten students were given a post-test (See Appendix) knowledge by learning target culture
• When we do not about culture, we cannot understand what a mimic,
in which they were asked about the efect of their culture learning on their
language learning. body language or intonation mean
• If you have the full command of the target culture, you will have the full
Post-practice interview command of the target language, too.
Have these activities that teach cultural elements of English inluenced your • Culture and language are like hand in glove. You cannot understand one
English learning? without the other
Students’ answers were collected and put into categories as the conclusion Not all the answers were positive. here were some that were opposed to
illustrates. the culture learning such as:
• Culture and language are totally diferent. I saw nobody starting to learn
Findings a language by learning its culture
In the pre-test students were asked two questions as to whether they knew • I do not think that knowing the cuisine or education system of a coun-
about British/American culture and what their opinion was about the efect of try would help learn its language
culture knowledge on their language learning. Here are the results: • Culture does not afect spoken language and a foreigner can understand
a native or vice versa
• At school we learn grammar not culture and we can speak English, so
Do you know anything about British/American culture? culture is not important
YES NO • Language learning is not about knowing target culture; it is about being
6 14 willing, motivated and inclined to learn it.

70% (14 out of 20) stated that they did not have knowledge on British or After the pre-test and following culture teaching activities a post-test was
American culture while 30% (6) of them claimed to have knowledge about applied to see whether culture teaching resulted in any changes in their lan-
target culture. When they were asked their opinion about the efect of culture guage learning and opinions about the efects of culture learning. he results
knowledge on their language learning, their answers were various. Some sup- are presented in the table below:
ported culture learning as a facilitator of language learning by stating that:
• Culture is important in terms of understanding native speakers’ behav-
iours, attitudes or using and idioms and proverbs appropriately
292 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice Duygu Ișık 293

Table 2: Post-test results he ifth one which was related to the culture efect on listening skills, 50%
Not (10 out of 20) students agreed while the rest was divided as 25% (5 out of 20)
Disagree Agree were unsure and the other 25% (5 out of 20) disagreed. he seventh statement
sure
asking the culture efect on writing skills got 80% (16 out of 20) agreement,
1. Familiarising with English culture made 10% (2 out of 20) indecision and 10% (2 out of 20) disagreement from stu-
2 4 14
reading comprehension easier for me dents.
2. Familiarising with English culture When it comes to the last statement that asked the culture efect on stu-
helped me remember the content of 2 3 15 dents’ motivation, (16 out of 20) agreed that learning target cultural elements
authentic texts increased their motivation to learn English, 10% (2 out of 20) stated they were
3. Familiarising with English culture unsure and the rest 10% (2 out of 20) stated that learning target cultural ele-
2 2 16
helped me improve my vocabulary ments did not increase their motivation.
4. Familiarising with English culture After the post-test they were also asked whether the activities that taught
2 3 15 cultural elements of English inluenced their learning English. he answers
helped me improve my speaking
were generally on behalf of the efectiveness of target culture learning. he
5. Familiarising with English culture students stated that:
5 5 10
• hey were much better at understanding the native speakers of English
helped me improve my listening

• As they knew that there were some cultural diferences, they did not
6. Familiarising with English culture
increased my motivation to learn 2 2 16
judge or stigmatize native speakers of English with their own cultural
English
norms or misunderstand them
• hey were better at using idioms or proverbs or making jokes appropri-
7. Familiarising with English culture made
2 2 16
writing easier
ately
For the irst statement, 70% (14 out of 20) agreed that their reading com- • As they learnt them in context, students had a permanent vocabulary
prehension improved thanks to culture learning while 20 % (4 out of 20) were knowledge
not sure about it. 10% (2 out of 20), however, disagreed that culture learning • hey had fun while learning through culture as they did not only learnt
had positive efects on their reading skills. In the second statement, the stu- grammar rules or a list of words to memorize
dents were asked about the efect of culture learning on their remembering the • hey were more enthusiastic and volunteer to participate in the activi-
content of authentic texts. 75% (15 out of 20) agreed, and 15% (3 out of 20) ties, so they had a higher level of motivation.
were unsure while 10% (2 out of 20) disagreed the positive efect of culture
learning on their authentic knowledge remembering. For the third statement In contrast with the majority, there were some students who stated that:
• hey did not want to learn about the target culture
which was about the efect of culture learning on vocabulary improvement,

• hey did not ind it useful or efective to learn about the target culture
80 % (16 out of 20) agreed, 10% (2 out of 20) were unsure while the other 10
% (2 out of 20) disagreed. he next statement was about the efect of culture
learning on speaking skills. 75% (15 out of 20) agreed that culture learning • Instead of wasting time with the target cultural stuf, they could learn
improved their speaking skills, 15 % (3 out of 20) were not sure about such an more grammar rules or do some more exercises about them.
efect while only 10 % (2 out of 20) disagreed.
294 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice Duygu Ișık 295

Discussion students are like a cook who has a lot of the ingredients and gets more day
by day but knows nothing about cooking. What we should do is not to give
It can be seen through the answers that learning target cultural elements more ingredients but the recipe. If not, they either do not cook anything so
helped students learn English better and easier although just a few students the ingredients decay or use wrong the ingredient for the wrong meal such as
did not ind it useful. When we check the post-test we can see that 80% stu- an eggplant for cheesecake. In my opinion, what we lack of in our language
dents agreed that learning target cultural elements improved their speaking teaching is this “the recipe”.
and writing skills and motivation. 75% also stated that they got better at re- In my teaching profession, for ive years, I have always supported using
membering the context of authentic texts and speaking skills. 70% students cultural elements in our classes and claimed to know the importance of target
said to get better at reading comprehension. he only skill that had 50% agree- culture teaching on students’ learning. With this research, however, I realized
ment about the improvement was listening. Only half of the students agreed that my ideas on target culture teaching only remained in theory. When I was
that target culture learning improved their listening skills. asked I was totally in favour of teaching it, however, it was not the case in
By looking at the statistics I can claim that learning target cultural ele- practice. I was like the teachers I criticized; I was one of the teachers who did
ments had a positive impact on speaking, writing, remembering the context, not teach how to cook, who did not give students the recipe but just gave the
reading skills and motivation. Students showed a marked improvement on this ingredients and asked for a good meal. What is more, I was unfair towards my
skills when they started to learn about target culture. hey were good at using students because I really got angry when they did not understand or use what
the right expressions and a good range of words in their writing, expressing I taught. All in all, I had a chance to have a deep insight of my teaching and
the right mimics or attitudes in their speaking activities or role plays, and were myself, as a teacher. It was important to see my weaknesses and ind a solution
able to understand even complex texts faster than before. hey were also will- for them.
ing to do some tasks about target culture and had fun from these activities.
Although only half of the students stated that their listening skills improved
thanks to target culture learning, I observed improvement in all of them in- References
cluding the ones who claimed to have no improvement after target culture Alptekin, C. (1993). ‘Target-language Culture in EFL Materials’. ELT Journal, 47/2,
learning. he reason may be that they became familiar with the target culture 136-143.
and it helped them to have permanent and meaningful learning. Bayyurt, Y. (2006). Non-native English language teachers’ perspective on culture in
Apart from language skills, learning target cultural elements made them English as a foreign language classrooms. Teacher Development, 10(2), pp. 233-247.
more motivated to learn. Unlike most of the time when students did not want Damar, E. (2010) “Culture: Is it an avoidable or adorable concept in EFL settings?”
to do anything related to lesson at all, I saw students who really wanted to Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 (2013) 752 – 755
learn. Instead of having to memorize formulas of grammar structures, they Önalan, O. (2005). EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of the Place of Culture in ET: A Survey
liked learning English with real-like activities. Study at Four Universities in Ankara/Turkey. Journal of Language and Linguistic
Studies Vol. 1, No. 2
Jingxia, L. (2010). Teachers code switching to L1 in EFL Classroom. he Open Applied
What I gained Linguistics Journal, 2010,3, 10-23.
Yılmaz, D. (2006). Students’ opinions of the role of culture in learning English as a foreign
Although we as language teachers are all in agreement that culture and lan- language. Unpublished master’s thesis. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey.
guage are inseparable, we do not give enough importance to it and culture is
not integrated enough in our lessons. he result is generally a huge deal of
grammar and vocabulary knowledge, full of theoretical knowledge without
practical skills and thus confused, bored and unmotivated students, because
296 Exploring how to integrate English culture into my teaching practice

Vocabulary teaching through readers:

21
Appendix
POST-TEST
“close your dictionaries and open your
Not
Disagree
sure
Agree minds”
1. Familiarising with English culture made
reading comprehension easier for me. İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal
2. Familiarising with English culture helped me
remember the content of authentic texts
Introduction
3. Familiarising with English culture helped me
improve my vocabulary Whenever we ask our students to read a text, they grab their smart phones to
4. Familiarising with English culture helped me check the meaning of the unknown words rather than trying to guess it from
improve my speaking the context. With this ‘dictionary interruption’ reading a text can sometimes
5. Familiarising with English culture helped me be a torture both for students and teachers. We can observe that our students
improve my listening sometimes lose concentration and drift away from the real purpose of reading.
he reading lesson becomes a translation class because they feel the need to
6. Familiarising with English culture increased
my motivation to learn English
look up each unknown word in the dictionary. herefore, we usually feel disap-
pointed to see our students struggling. We might even think that this stems
7. Familiarising with English culture made
writing easier from laziness because students believe it is the easiest way. However, are we
able to show our students this is actually a short-term solution rather than an
efective way to learn unknown words in reading texts?
As we observed, the general expectation of our students from a reading
class is to learn the target vocabulary in an isolated way and then start reading.
hat is, they always demand the Turkish deinitions of target words before
reading rather than trying to infer meaning from context. Having this as our
starting point, we decided to create awareness amongst our students about
being independent readers and help them realize that new vocabulary can be
learned more efectively and retained longer if they discover the meaning in
context. To achieve our goal we used a variety of diferent vocabulary teach-
ing techniques by combining implicit and explicit activities in our extensive
reading classes. As our students are accustomed to learning vocabulary in an
isolated way, it would be too radical to solely use implicit activities in the
classroom. herefore, we took the student needs and preferences for vocabu-
lary learning into consideration and decided to include contextualized implicit
and explicit vocabulary activities. We found that contextualized implicit and
explicit vocabulary teaching we integrated into the lesson has a positive impact
both on vocabulary learning and overall comprehension of extensive reading.

297
298 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 299

Literature review Table 1. A comparison of explicit and implicit vocabulary instruction

Language ability is divided into four skill areas of listening, reading, speaking EXPLICIT vs. IMPLICIT VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
and writing; vocabulary is one of the key elements which connect the four Explicit Implicit
skills in foreign language learning. As Wilkins (1974) states: √ Focuses attention directly on the √ Using language for communicative pur-
information to be learned poses (Schmitt, 1988)
“Without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabu-
lary nothing can be conveyed” √ Focuses on making the learner √ he meaning of a word is acquired
notice new vocabulary by doing totally unconsciously as a result of ab-
Wilkins argues that learners should have a good deal of vocabulary knowl- exercises such as learning vocabu- straction from repeated exposures in a
edge and learn new words constantly in order to communicate efectively. lary lists, word building games and range of activated contexts. (Ellis, 1994,
using various strategies (Nation, p.219)
herefore, we chose our extensive reading classes to conduct this study be-
1990).
cause we believe extensive reading is one of the important ways of learning
√ Applying metacognitive strategies √ More contextualized, thus enables
and developing vocabulary knowledge. Extensive reading is seen as a powerful
to remember new vocabulary, to learners to learn more words and can
strategy by Bell (2001), who states: consolidate a new understanding boost their vocabulary retention (Hunt
by repetition…’ (Ellis, 1994, p.219). and Beglar, 2002).
“Extensive reading is a type of reading instruction program that
has been used in ESL or EFL settings, as an efective means of √ Can take place both intentionally √ Can only be incidental, which is de-
developing reading luency, comprehension, and vocabulary de- and incidentally Laufer and Hul- ined as "without learners' awareness of
stijn (2001, p.11) an upcoming retention test, or without
velopment.”
learners' deliberate decision to commit
Learners are also exposed to new words repeatedly while they are doing ex- information to memory Laufer and
Hulstijn (2001, p.11)
tensive reading, which enables them learn vocabulary by guessing the meaning
in a context rich text. Learning occurs more efectively as a result of frequent √ A variety of techniques used such √ Incidental learning and context skills
encounters with the same word in diferent contexts throughout the book. as, pre-teaching vocabulary words, are used in the exercises.
repeated exposure to words, key-
Similarly, Gatbonton & Segalowitz, (2005) state: word method, word maps, root
“Learners encounter the same words over and over again in con- analysis, restructuring reading ma-
terials, etc.
text, which result in vocabulary learning”
In the extensive reading class we aim to guide students to do extensive he diferent aspects of implicit and explicit vocabulary instruction in Table
reading rather than assign them to read at home. Students are expected to read 1 gave us an opportunity to identify the speciic characteristics of the activities
certain chapters extensively and discuss the content and engage in vocabulary we were going to design. We paid attention to these diferences while prepar-
activities during the lesson. Activities are carefully designed by the teachers as ing materials for each lesson.
a combination of implicit and explicit vocabulary teaching in order to foster
vocabulary learning within the context and to minimize the use of dictionary Research Questions
as a source of vocabulary translation. In Table 1 we present the diferences
between implicit and explicit vocabulary instruction to elaborate on the prin- As we wanted to see the degree of efectiveness of the blended implicit and
ciples and prepare ourselves for such classroom practices with reference to explicit activities in students’ vocabulary learning, we asked the following three
several studies. questions:
300 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 301

1. What is the students’ target vocabulary knowledge before they read the
reader?
2. What is the students’ target vocabulary knowledge after they read the read-
er?
3. What are the students’ views on contextualized activities before and after
the reader lesson?
We aimed to ind answers to question 1 and 2 by analyzing the target vo-
cabulary lists for which we asked students to produce a sentence for all words
they knew. We found answers for question 3 by analyzing student feedback.

Procedure
he research was carried out in Gediz University Preparatory School in
İzmir, Turkey. Our preparatory school system was based on a modular sys-
tem and the students were required to complete four levels (A1, A2, B1, and
B2) successfully in order to be able to start their faculties. here were four
quarters in each level, each consisting of eight weeks. his study was con- Figure 1. Integration of extensive reading with speaking, listening, and writing tasks
ducted in two separate A2 classes by two instructors. Students were required
to read two readers, each of which were completed in four weeks. At the end
of four weeks students were tested from the assigned book. Every week they Before starting the project, we aimed to create a sense of awareness amongst
had two hours of reading classes in which they were expected to read the students about the learning process. We informed students that they were go-
assigned pages extensively. he two hours of instruction each week consisted ing to be participants of a study and explained to them the general structure
of a combination of contextualized implicit and explicit vocabulary activi- of our instruction. We told them that this would not be a vocabulary-centered
ties. According to Elley and Mangubhai (1991), successful extensive reading lesson alone and that they would be involved in many skill-based activities. We
programs should integrate reading with the respective four skills such as also emphasized that they should not look up any deinitions or translations of
speaking, listening, and writing tasks. hey should also encourage students unknown vocabulary during both the reading process and lessons.
to read more over a course of time. herefore, we aimed to design our classes In the lesson, as part of reading syllabus, students read Dracula, a graded
to include all four skills in order to help students master their target within reader for their level. Before we started the lesson, as a irst step, we checked
all aspects as illustrated in the igure below: the students’ background knowledge of the headwords in the reader. We gave
students a list of headwords before they started reading. his list included 38
target words to be taught during the instruction. Students were asked to num-
ber each word using the scale in Table 2.1 (‘Vocabulary Knowledge Scale’ (VKS
– Paribakht & Wesche, 1993, 1997; Wesche & Paribakht, 1996)
302 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 303

Table 2. Vocabulary Knowledge Scale but he looked younger and his hair was no longer white. here was HORDT on his
1 I have never seen this word before. mouth, which ran down across his neck. My hands were shaking, but I had to touch
him, to look for the keys. I felt all over his body, but they weren’t there. Suddenly, I
2 I have seen this word before, but I am not sure of its meaning.
wanted to kill Count Dracula. I took a workman’s MLAMB and began to bring it
3 I know the meaning of this word, but I am not sure if my sentence is correct down hard on to that TROBLE, smiling face. But just then the head turned and the
or not. XONT’s burning eyes looked at me. His HORDTY mouth smiled more TROBLY
4 I know the meaning of this word and I can use it in a sentence. than ever. I dropped the MLAMB and stood there, shaking. What could I do now?’
After handing out this paragraph we drew students’ attention to certain
Students were asked to produce a sentence for the words they had marked structures such as NOUN + TO BE and POSSESIVE PRONOUN + NOUN.
as ‘3’ or ‘4’. We also asked them to look for similar patterns with their partners. In addi-
tion, we told them there were some other structures which indicate the part of
Table 3. Pre-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale (Dikilitaş & Bush speech of a word. Students were asked to detect the parts of speech of the giv-
(2014) en words and replace them with appropriate words (i.e., target words), paying
attention to the meaning that they are supposed to convey, such as a positive
Target 1 2 3 4 Produce a sentence if you mark 3 or 4.
or a negative adjective, or an adverb. Students exchanged their papers with an-
Word other group and looked for alternative answers. After eliciting the answers we
1. become showed the original paragraph below and asked them to check their answers:
2. believe ‘he Count (n) was there, in his coin (n), but he looked younger and his hair was
3. carriage no longer white. here was blood (n) on his mouth, which ran down across his neck.
My hands were shaking, but I had to touch him, to look for the keys. I felt all over
After doing this exercise in the classroom students were assigned to read his body, but they weren’t there. Suddenly, I wanted to kill Count Dracula. I took a
the irst three chapters at home. hey were asked to read the assigned part workman’s hammer (n) and began to bring it down hard on to that horrible (adj),
without using a dictionary. smiling face. But just then the head turned and the Count (n)’s burning eyes looked
he next stage was to teach the target vocabulary. To do this we prepared at me. His bloody (n) mouth smiled more horribly (adv) than ever. I dropped the
various types of vocabulary activities. For the irst week we assigned the irst hammer (n) and stood there, shaking. What could I do now?’
two chapters and asked students to scan the text and underline the unknown We observed that students were mostly able to detect the part of speech of
vocabulary and then start reading. We told them to try to infer meaning of the words, and had ample alternatives, such as:
underlined words rather than look up their deinitions. “I took a workman’s hammer, and began to bring it down hard on to that fright-
ening, smiling face.” (Original word = horrible)
“His ugly mouth smiled more strongly than ever.” (Original words = bloody,
Week 1 horribly)
For the irst 2 hours in the classroom students were asked to pair up and detect he teacher elicited synonyms or antonyms and, if there were not any, they
the part of speech of the unknown vocabulary item. Teachers elicited some were supplied by the teacher.
answers. hey showed the paragraph below in which some target words were Exercise 2 (Contextualized/implicit). As a follow up exercise we gave stu-
changed with completely nonsense words: dents ten comprehension questions for which answers were carefully designed
Exercise 1 (Contextualized/explicit). ‘he XONT was there, in his PLURT, to address the target vocabulary in the chapters. Having encountered the tar-
304 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 305

get vocabulary many times students were able to answer the questions using T: Is her face red or white?
those words successfully. S: White.
T: Is a ‘pale face’ red or white?
S: White.
Week 2 T: Who has a pale face in the class?
Exercise 1 (Semi-contextualized / explicit). Students read chapters three and S: Eren.
four extensively. In the classroom they were given a worksheet which asked In groups students were asked to write a descriptive paragraph for some of
them to choose the most appropriate collocations for the given words. he the characters using these words. Groups exchanged their paragraphs to see
collocations were extracted directly from the reader and they were asked to diferent character descriptions.
collocate the words as they were in the book. Some examples from the work- Exercise 2 (Implicit). As a follow up activity students were asked to iden-
sheet are given below: tify some adjectives which describe the main characters. As a group they were
asked to write a descriptive paragraph for a character they had chosen.
ice frightened
a kiss wound
as cold as hate Lucy looks…….. lovely
Week 4
fear horrible Exercise 1 (Implicit). As students inished reading the book in the last week,
hammer pale group discussion was held in the classroom. Teachers observed how students
were able to use the target vocabulary successfully during the discussion.
Students compared their answers with their partners. While checking the Exercise 2 (Explicit/contextualized). Next, the teachers handed out a work-
answers they were able to realize there might be multiple collocations in some sheet which included original sentences from the book with missing target
exercises. hey stated that they were able to detect alternative collocations by vocabulary to ill in. he aim was to make them guess the target vocabulary
the part of speech that they belong to. based on the words which they collocate with.
Exercise 2 (Implicit/contextualized). As a follow up activity students were As the last step we handed out the same list which we had given out at the
given some discussion questions to answer within their group. hese were de- beginning (Post-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation) to observe
signed to encourage them to use the related vocabulary of the week. progress in sentence production. Finally, we got written feedback from stu-
dents to see if there was a change in their views.
Week 3
Exercise 1 (Explicit). Students were assigned to read the last two chapters ex-
Results
tensively. Target vocabulary of the related chapters was shown to the students he irst two research questions were as follows:
and they were asked to categorize words under the titles positive, negative, or 1. What is the students’ target vocabulary knowledge before they read the
neutral. For unknown words we asked concept-checking questions to elicit reader?
meaning, such as; 2. What is the students’ target vocabulary knowledge after they read the
‘Lucy’s face was pale.’ reader?
T: Is Lucy healthy? To answer these questions we used the vocabulary lists which were named
S: No. Pre-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale and Post-Exercise
306 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 307

Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale. In each vocabulary list, there were Figure 2 shows the teacher evaluation results of 836 total items in the Pre-
38 headwords which students were expected to use in self-produced sentences. Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale.

Table 4. Pre-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale, Dikilitaş & Bush (201
4)
Pre-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale
Target 1 2 3 4 Produce a sentence if you mark 3 or 4.
Word
1. become
2. believe
3. carriage
4…
38…. Figure 2. he teacher evaluation of 836 total items in the Pre-Exercise Self-Reported
Vocabulary Evaluation Scale
Teachers analyzed these sentences using a rubric shown in Table 5 designed
by Dikilitaş & Bush (2014) and answered research questions one and two. he
he table indicates that most of items in the pre-word lists were marked ‘0’
researchers marked each of the 38 items on a scale of 0-4 according to the
(492 items) by the teachers, which means the student didn’t write any sentence
rubric in Table 4.
or answer, or had the word confused with another word. A score of 1 in the
rubric indicates ‘completely incorrect usage of a word, which does not show
Table 5. Productive Vocabulary Evaluation Rubric, Dikilitaş & Bush (2014) understanding of the meaning or semantics’. he number of the items which
Productive Vocabulary Evaluation Rubric were scored as 1 is only 24 in the pre-test. Similarly, the number of items
0 Student didn’t write any sentence or answer, or had the word confused with marked as 2 is only 19. A score of 2 means that the item response shows low
another word. understanding of the meaning of the word, and the student may understand
1 Completely incorrect usage; doesn’t show understanding of the meaning or grammatical function or part of speech. When we look at a score of 3, the
semantics. number of the items increases to 68. his score refers to the item responses
which show understanding of the meaning of a target word, but the word use
2 Shows low understanding of the meaning of the word; may understand gram-
matical function or part of speech is incorrect (there may be incorrect collocations or awkward usage). A mark-
ing of 4 in the rubric indicates that the item response shows an understanding
3 Shows understanding of the meaning, but uses the word incorrectly. May use
incorrect collocations or awkward usage (Ex: “the road became tight.” Instead
of the meaning and use of the word. Teachers marked 233 items as 4. Results
of “he road became narrow.” of the pre-test were in line with the expectations of the teachers. he teach-
ers aimed to teach the target vocabulary with a combination of implicit and
4 Shows an understanding of the meaning and usage of the word. Ideally, stu-
dents are using the word in a complicated way such as changing the part of
explicit activities, and expected a decrease in the number of item responses
speech, idiomatic usage, using correct collocations, or adding inlectional or which were scored as 0. here was a considerable decrease in the number of
derivational morphemes. the post-test items which were scored as 0 when compared to pre-test items.
308 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 309

Figure 3 shows the teacher evaluation of 836 total items in the Post-Exercise Figure 4 clearly shows that there was a dramatic decrease (31%) in the
Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale. number of item responses receiving a score of 0 and an upward trend in the
number of item responses receiving a score of 3 (8%) and 4 (23%). he num-
ber of item responses receiving a score of 1 decreased slightly and there was a
slight increase in the number of item responses receiving a score of 2.
he results of pre-test show parallelism with results of post-test. Items
marked as ‘0’ and ‘1’ show a decrease in both pre-test and post test results;
however, there is an upward trend in items marked as ‘2’, ‘3’ and ‘4’. he upward
trend in ‘3’ and ‘4’ indicates how students were able to understand the target
word and used it correctly or almost correctly. he increase in items marked as
‘3’ and ‘4’ shows that the students achieved signiicant success in producing sen-
tences which show the meaning of related vocabulary. he substantial decrease
in the number of the items marked as ‘0’ shows that the students were successful
in learning the target vocabulary. he decrease here is dramatic; however, items
marked as ‘1’ and ‘2’ hardly changes. his may be because the combination of
implicit and explicit activities led students to be accomplished in production.
Figure 3. Post-Exercise Self-Reported Vocabulary Evaluation Scale In short, the high percentage of the items marked as ‘0’ in pre-test shifted to
‘3’ or ‘4’ in post-test. To conclude, igures in the tables above show that there is
Figure 3 shows 236 items were marked as 0 in the post test. he number substantial achievement in sentence production of the students thanks to the
of items marked as 1 is 17 and 2 is 23. 140 items were marked as 3 and 420 combination of explicit and implicit vocabulary teaching activities.
items were marked as 4. Figure 4 compares pre-test and post-test results and
shows the percentages. Feedback results
By analyzing student feedback, the teachers tried to answer the third research
question:
3. What are the students’ views on contextualized vocabulary teaching
activities before and after the instruction?
Table 3 displays 32 students’ feedback on the four-week instruction of con-
textualized vocabulary learning through the reader ‘Dracula’.

Table 6. Reported changing and unchanging ideas

Reported changing and unchanging ideas N
Shifting to contextualized learning 20
No change in favor of explicit learning 8
Favoring contextualized learning before and after 4
Figure 4. Comparison of pre-test and post-test results Total number 32
310 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 311

According to Table 6, there are great reported changes in the type of in- 2. Having no interruption while reading has many beneits.
struction that students preferred in vocabulary learning. Table 7, on the other Four students said that reading was more fun and lawless since there was
hand, shows how these changes are reported with their own words. he re- not any interruption caused because of dictionary usage. his made them
sponses of the students were categorized as themes in order to provide clarity. concentrate better on the reading material, which in turn fostered com-
prehension. Two students stated how when they looked up the unknown
Table 7. Student feedback on the 4-week instruction of vocabulary learning practices words while reading they felt discouraged and lost their desire to read.
Now that they knew there wouldn’t be an interruption they felt more mo-
Contextualized vocabulary Explicit vocabulary learning
N N tivated. Another issue concerning dictionary interruption may concern its
learning
psychological efect. As one student stated, trying to guess the meaning of
Retention 18 3 Retention a word from the context made him feel relieved about the dictionary use
Less time consuming without a Too much time spent on because he generally felt distressed about using a dictionary each time he
12 3
dictionary guessing encountered a new word.
Feeling discouraged and unmo- Lowers motivation when 3. here is an improvement on the overall comprehension of the reading
2 3
tivated with dictionary couldn’t be guessed material through contextualized vocabulary learning.
Better focus on comprehension 3 4 Comprehension problems As three students stated, reading without dictionary interruption and try-
Provides a holistic view for Possible to guess incorrectly ing to guess the words from context provided better focus on comprehen-
3 3
comprehension sion. hey suggested that there was an improvement in their ability to
Lessen the concern of diction- Incompetence guess, and in this way they can make better connections. hree students
2 said that having to look at the general context to understand the meaning
ary use
Improvement in the ability of Diicult to bother to guess of a word provided a holistic view, and in this way they were able to have
guessing and making connec- 3 2 better overall comprehension.
tions 4. Reading is less time consuming when done without using a dictionary:
More fun and lawless reading 4 L2 students stated they used their time more eiciently since they didn’t
have to look up each new word. herefore, student feedback showed that
trying to guess the meaning of the words from the context while reading
Interpretation was time-saving.
Positive feedback from students who are in favor of contextualized vocabu- Eight students did not alter their views on contextualized vocabulary learning.
lary learning through readers can be grouped under four implications: Feedback from those students who favored isolated vocabulary learning while
1. Contextualized vocabulary learning through readers has a positive ef- reading can be grouped under four similar implications:
fect on retention: 1. Seeing the deinition / translation of a word has a better efect on re-
he feedback shows that 20 students who formerly believed they could tention: hree students believed they had to see the exact deinition or
only learn a new vocabulary item in an isolated way, generally through a the translation of an unknown word in order to remember it. herefore,
dictionary, changed their ideas after this instruction. 18 of these students they didn’t favor any implicit or contextualized vocabulary activities dur-
stated that, when they tried to guess the meaning of a word from the ing reading.
context, it became permanent in their memory. his implied that learning 2. Contextualized vocabulary learning may lead to comprehension prob-
vocabulary in a contextualized manner increases retention. lems: Four students stated that having too many unknown vocabulary
312 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds” İlknur Kurtulmuş-Canan Önal 313

items created comprehension problems. hree of these students also be- Relection
lieved that it might be possible to guess the meaning of a word incorrectly,
As teachers, we have always wanted to integrate extensive reading materials
and this could mislead them about comprehension.
into our classes and encourage our students to read outside of the classroom
3. Guessing is time consuming: hree students stated that they spent too
as well. Observing similar problems during our reading instruction in various
much time on guessing the meanings, so they wanted to learn the words
classes led us to handle this issue as a research topic, and we observed many
before they started reading, and preferred isolated vocabulary teaching.
students struggling with a reading passage, trying to concentrate on every bit
4. Incompetence creates motivational problems: One student stated that
of it, thus forgetting to take pleasure in reading itself. herefore, we wanted to
he didn’t have enough vocabulary knowledge in order to guess meanings
help them improve their reading skills with the help of this research.
from context, and felt discouraged when he couldn’t infer the meaning. As
his research was a rewarding experience for us in many ways. he irst ef-
another student said, it was too diicult for her to try to guess a meaning,
fect is that we had a chance to deepen our knowledge on vocabulary teaching
so she didn’t bother to do so. She felt she didn’t have enough competence
techniques, learning strategies, and extensive reading. Another efect is that
in vocabulary.
we were able to monitor the change in students’ views. It was fulilling to see
Apart from the students who changed their former ideas on vocabulary that there had been some considerable change in many of the learners’ beliefs
learning, and those who still favored the isolated way of vocabulary learn- and practices regarding vocabulary learning and readers. hey felt that they
ing, there were four who favored contextualized vocabulary learning both be- became more autonomous in reading and did not need to use dictionaries fre-
fore and after our instruction. It was interesting to see their answers because quently anymore while reading, which was one of our main objectives before
they suggested that even before this practice, they applied similar techniques we started the research. Both qualitative and the quantitative data implied
and avoided dictionary use. hey believed inferring the meaning has a posi- that teaching vocabulary through reading is very efective if it is taught with
tive efect on comprehension. It was exciting for us to see more autonomous a combination of explicit and implicit activities. We were very contented to
students like them. Another surprising result observed were students ques- see that the results of this research were in line with our expectations. he last
tioning their beliefs on their traditional vocabulary learning techniques. hese efect was on our teaching. Having seen that our students overcame their bias
included those who favored the isolated way of vocabulary learning because of regarding contextualized techniques and tended to use inference-based tech-
their prejudice against contextualized ways of learning. Even if they seemed niques rather than frequent use of dictionaries, we are planning to use similar
to support strict dictionary use and isolated teaching, they confessed that the strategies in our future reading classes to help our students be less dependent
exercises conducted during the instruction helped them use a dictionary less on dictionaries and teachers and more autonomous in vocabulary leaning. We
while reading. One stated: are now more aware of the positive efect of teaching vocabulary in context.
Although we carried out this research in a reading class environment, we re-
“I still prefer reading the book using a dictionary. Nevertheless, alized that we can transfer results of this research. Actually, we have already
these activities encouraged me to use the dictionary less than I started to use it in grammar and listening classes.
usually do because they helped me how to have an idea on a word
I have never seen”
References
Even if the student seemed not to have changed her ideas about vocabulary
learning, she will probably realize the change in her practice as she gains more Bell, T. (2001). Extensive reading: Speed and comprehension. he Reading Ma-
conidence on guessing. trix, 1(1).
Dikilitaş, K. & Bush, J. (2014). Writing as a vocabulary learning tool. Writing as a
learning tool. Vol.17. Brill Academic Publishers. Netherlands.
314 Vocabulary teaching through readers: “close your dictionaries and open your minds”

Elley, W. B. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: he efect of book‐based

Creating a learner-centred classroom
programs. Language Learning, 41(3), 375-411.
Ellis, N. (1994). Vocabulary acquisition: he implicit ins and outs of explicit cogni-
tive mediation. Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, 211-282. Academic
22 environment
Press. London Çiler İnan
Hunt, A. & Beglar, D. (2005). A framework for developing EFL reading vocabulary.
Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 23-59.
Laufer, B. & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second lan-
guage: he construct of task-induced involvement. Applied linguistics, 22(1),
Introduction
1-26.
Nation, I. S. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Ernst Klett Sprachen. he matter of creating a learner-centred classroom environment has long been
Wesche, M. & Paribakht, T. S. (1999). Introduction. Studies in Second Language Ac- a critical issue for teachers. In my opinion, the more we get the learners in-
quisition, 21(02), 175-180. volved in the classroom work, the more they will be successful and responsible
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold. for their own learning. How to accomplish this also is the question that has
inspired many researchers, such as me, to search for ways to foster learner-
centredness. Key questions include; what does being ‘learner-centred’ actually
mean? And how can we create a classroom environment in which learners do
the work, and not the teacher?
Teachers should always look for ways to develop their classroom practices
and give more importance to the learners rather than the input. I am also one
of these teachers who struggle to get students to be more responsible for their
own development. his is a research study that arose from a point to develop
in an area identiied during a post-observation feedback session with a teacher
trainer. Following this, I decided to talk less in the classroom, give my students
more opportunity to direct their own learning, get them into work and have
them create their own learning environment as much as possible. In relation
to this I realized that the things I decided to implement were actually some of
the principles of a learner-centred approach. he next step was to learn more
about this approach and take action accordingly.
As mentioned earlier in this study, the irst step is to ask what does ‘learner-
centred learning’ actually mean? What are the diferences between learner-
centredness and teacher-centredness? he section below introduces, according
to the literature ‘learner-centred learning’ and ‘teacher-centred learning’ and
their diferences.

315
316 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 317

Literature review In summary, we can say that students take the responsibility of their own
learning by making decisions on how to learn and what is important to learn
but of course in partnership with the teacher, because in learner-centred class-
Characteristics of learner-centred learning rooms the teacher has many diferent roles. hese roles imply a set of second-
he constructivist approach to learning describes a learning process where stu- ary roles for the teacher: irst, as an organizer of resources and as a resource
dents work individually or in groups to explore, search and solve problems and himself; second, as a guide within classroom procedures and activities. In this
become actively engaged in seeking knowledge and information rather than role the teacher endeavors to make clear to the learners what they need to
being passive recipients of information. Constructivism states that students do in order to achieve some speciic activity or task if they indicate that such
learn more by experiences and active involvement than by observing (Brooks guidance is necessary. (B.Kumaravadivelu, 2006, p.99).
& Brooks,1993). In this learner-centred classroom learners are the construc-
tors of knowledge through gathering and synthesizing information and in- he traditional mode: teacher-centred learning
tegrating it with the skills of inquiry, communication, critical thinking and
ln contrast to the learner-centred approach, the traditional mode shows the
problem-solving. he learners have to adopt an active role. Instead of merely
teacher as the sole authority of learning as in the behaviorist perspective. In
repeating after the teacher or mindlessly memorizing dialogues, they have to
this traditional perspective the teacher controls the instructional process and
learn to navigate the self, the learning process, and the learning objectives.
delivers the content to the entire class. hus, the learning mode is passive and
(B.Kumaravaduvelu,2006).
learners play little part in their learning process (Mayer, 1998, p. 353-377).
ln learner-centred learning the focus is on the ‘learning process’ rather than
In teacher-centred classrooms students mostly work alone and do not learn
the ‘content’, and this learning environment encourages learners to develop
to communicate with other students; there is no peer correction at all. Teacher-
their ability to use language and communicate knowledge efectively. ln this
centred instruction does not allow students to express themselves or ask questions
way, learners will become active participants of their own learning process, and
and direct their own learning; they are just passive recipients of knowledge so
will be able to make use of the knowledge presented by the teacher. In learner-
they can get bored easily. In this learning environment the focus is on the instruc-
centred classrooms there is such a learning environment that students do the
tor not on the learners; instructors generally tend to correct students’ errors them-
work, talk and ask and answer questions either by pair or group work. ln this
selves. Students are generally just waiting for the teacher to tell them what to do
classroom the leading idea is that if a learner is actively taking part, he or she
or what is next. hey are also just assessed with exam papers to monitor learning
will take in more than if he or she is simply getting messages from a teacher.
-as an example of summative assessment- at the end of a learning session.
Harmer (2007) also says ‘he ideal situation is for students to take over their
In summary, during teacher-centred instruction teachers just create pas-
own learning’. In learner-centred classrooms, learners are directly involved in
sive recipients of knowledge. However, with learner-centred instruction, our
the production of their own knowledge. hey produce their own work, like
learners can produce their own knowledge and become active participants of
writing papers, essays, reports and tests, and this production process is just an
learning. hrough learner-centred instruction, learners can achieve indepen-
element of formative assessment. Because in learner-centred learning learn-
dent minds and the capacity to make educational decisions and value judg-
ers are not just assessed with exam papers, they are also assessed in progress
ments (Brown, 2008, p.5).
with their own products. hrough collaboration and cooperation with others,
learners engage in their learning and at the same time learn from each other’s
mistakes by peer correction. Asking questions and leading learners to solutions Data collection
nurtures students’ natural curiosity and is recommended over simply giving
In this research study l utilized both qualitative and quantitative data collec-
answers (Brown, 2008).
tion techniques. Firstly, as a quantitative data collection tool, a questionnaire
318 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 319

including seven questions about student-centred and teacher-centred teaching Table 2: Questions in the second survey
was administered to a group of 130 students.
Originally, there were ive questions in this survey; two of them leading

l dısagree
because

because
I agree
students to learner-centred teaching and three of them to teacher-centred
teaching. After the questionnaire was applied to a group of students as a pilot
study, it was identiied that the last question in the survey did not lead students
to a speciic choice. Accordingly, some alterations were made and the ques-
65 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that
tionnaire was extended to seven questions. he questionnaire was conducted they prefer working in groups, in pairs or individually to having
in the students’ native language to make it easier for students to comprehend a teacher-dominated lesson.
and answer.
Survey one (below) aimed at revealing students’ viewpoints about the lead- 87 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that
they like it when the teacher asks their opinion about what to
ing power of the class. In other words, this questionnaire was used to under-
do or how to do it.
stand where students place themselves concerning classroom work.
60 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that
they like getting all answers from teacher directly.
Table 1: Questions in the irst survey
79 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that
partially agree they believe the teacher is responsible for giving necessary in-
totally agree

formation for them.

undecided

partially
disagree

disagree
65 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that

totally
they want their teacher to correct their errors immediately.

1. I prefer working in groups, in pairs or individu- After getting the results from the irst survey a follow-up survey (Table 2)
ally to having a teacher-dominated lesson. including open-ended questions was designed. his follow-up survey aimed
2. I like it when the teacher asks my opinion at getting more qualitative information about learners’ ideas. It consisted of
about what to do or how to do it. ive statements which provided me with more relevant information for the
research study.
3. A good teacher should be the authority in the
class.
4. I don’t want to be active and productive in the Some problems of data collection
class; reading, writing, speaking and doing a In the data collection process it was sometimes diicult to get students to-
task all the time. gether to do the questionnaire beyond lesson time. However, I didn’t experi-
5. I like getting all answers from teacher. ence any problems with getting students’ permission to conduct the question-
6. he teacher is responsible for giving necessary naire as they were really eager to respond to my questions. In some classes I
information for me. conducted it in the last few minutes of the lesson if we had time to do so, but
7. I want my teacher to correct my errors imme- in others I conducted it during the break time.
diately.
320 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 321

Data analysis he other four questions above were prepared to see to what extent students
have a tendency towards a teacher-centred learning environment. According
Survey One to the results, 70 % of the students actually want to be active and productive in
100 the class with reading, writing, speaking and other types of activities. On the
80 other hand, 60 % like getting all answers from their teachers and 65 % want
60
their teachers to correct their mistakes immediately which shows us that they
40
20
Seri 1
feel dependent on the teacher to some extent. Additionally, a large majority of
0
the students (79 %) think that the teacher is responsible for giving necessary
Preference for group Teacher asking for information to them. hey believe that it is the teachers’ duty to provide them
work opinion
with necessary information. his again shows us that they have a misconcep-
Figure 1. Results of the irst two questions of the irst survey
Figure 1. Results of the first two questions of the first survey tion about language learning and also they do not really know the importance
of learner autonomy, learning outside the class by themselves.
he two questions above were prepared to see to what extent students have a he second survey was applied to a speciic group including seventeen stu-
tendency towards a learning-centred classroom environment. According to the dents. It provides us with more detailed information about students’ views, so
percentages we can clearly see that 65 % of the students like pair and group work each question was analyzed in a more detailed way with key words and schemas.
activities and they mostly prefer working in pairs or groups. In addition, a great
majority of students (87 %) like being asked what to do in the lessons and how to Survey two: question 1
do it by their teachers. As McCombs & Miller state ‘he students are encouraged
65 % of the students who participated in the irst survey stated that they prefer
to relect on their own learning, share their insights with their peers, and apply
working in groups, in pairs or individually to having a teacher-dominated les-
new learning to real-life, authentic experiences.’ (McCombs & Miller, 2007). son. his was conirmed in the second survey. Ten students out of seventeen
When learners are the focus, they become fully engaged in the process. Learn- were positive about pair work or group work activities. Below in an illustration
er-centred learning is much more eicient for students’ language learning in con- we can see the subcategories presenting reasons why they are positive about
trast to traditional learning. Apart from being more eicient, most of the learners pair/group work activities.
– according to the survey results – prefer it, too. Here are the other results:
Learning from
90 partners
(4 Ss)
80
Understand Enjoyable to
70 better learn
(1 St) (2 Ss)
60

50 POSITIVE
40 (10 Ss)
Being active
30 With teacher
and adapted
direction
to learn
20 (1 St)
(1 St)
10 Learning new
words
0 (1 St)
Willingness to be Teacher as the source Teacher-controlled Teacher as a corrector
productive of knowledge answers

Figure
Figure1:
1:Reasons whystudents
Reasons why students are positive
are positive about pair/group
about pair/group work work
The other four questions above were prepared to see to what extent students have a tendency
322 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 323

In this irst question four students state that with the help of pair and
group work activities they can learn from their partners. hey state that they Less systematic
can ask partners questions they cannot ask their teachers easily. Two students and productive
(2 Ss)
state that it is enjoyable to learn with pair work and group work activities. One Teacher is
Teacher's
of them states that they can understand better if they work in pairs/groups. better than
students
knowledge is
the best and
One of the students states that they have more chance to be active with pair/ (1 St)
deductive
(1 St)
group work activities and they can easily be adapted to learn. Another student NEGATIVE
comments that with every pair/group work activity they can learn new words (7 Ss)
from their partners. On the other hand, one states that they should work in Complexity
pairs/ groups but with proper teacher management. he most prominent re- Teacher
guidance
about true/false
Leaving work
sult derived from the survey is that students have a belief that they learn from (1 St)
(1 St)
their partners while they are working in groups or pairs. As Jensen (1998) says, Problems and
‘New meaning comes through social interaction, so the connection between confusion
(1 St)
students is important. Cooperative learning and collaboration should be en-
couraged. he learner-centered teacher recognizes this principle of learning
and actively infuses collaborative opportunities into each lesson. Collabora- Figure Figure 2: Reasons
2: Reasons whyare
why students students
negativeare negative
about about
pair/group pair/group work
work
tion provides students with opportunities to learn from their peers and to gain
skills that will be beneicial throughout their lives ( Jensen, 1998). Students In the irst question, two students feel that the lesson would be more sys-
feel free to ask their partners questions they are afraid to ask their teachers. tematic and productive if there were no pair work activities. hey strongly
hey also ind their lesson more enjoyable if they do pair/group work activi- believe that they can get the most accurate knowledge from the teacher and
ties, and they learn better. In addition, it is seen that students feel more active do not think that they can learn from their partners. One of the students even
and motivated to learn with these activities. Although we can clearly see that has a misconception that there can be problems and confusion in the class if
students prefer these kind of activities, they still want to feel secure and guided there are pair/group work activities. Another claims that she does not under-
at the same time. hat is why they need suicient guidance and support from stand what is right or wrong and, as a result, abandons the work during pair/
their teachers. group work activities. hese answers show us that some of the students have
On the other hand, seven students out of seventeen are negative about pair/ a very deep dependence on the teacher. From their answers we can clearly see
group work activities. Below we can see subcategories showing reasons why that they have a misconception about a productive and systematic class. hey
they feel this way. wrongly believe that if the teacher is the authority and controller of the class,
it can be systematic and productive, otherwise there will be problems and con-
fusion in the class and a lot of n noise will result. However, they do not know
that to learn a language eiciently students must have ‘learner autonomy’. As
Nunan (1988, p.3) suggests, not everything can be taught in class, but even if
it could, a teacher will not always be around if and when students wish to use
the language in real life (Cotterall 1995, p. 220).
324 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 325

Survey two: question 2 hey think that they are the ones who learn, so they should decide what to do
and how to do it. In this way, they can control their own learning. Here we can
87 % of the students who participated in the irst survey stated that they like
infer that they actually want to have ‘the responsibility of their own learning’
it when the teacher asks their opinion about what to do or how to do it. In
-one of the important features of learner- centredness- if they are given the
response to this, in the second survey 3 out of 17 students appeared to misun-
chance to do it. It is also true that students will feel valued and they will be
derstand the question or gave incomprehensible answers, but the remaining 14
more productive if they are asked by the teacher, as two of them state. In fact,
students agreed, with diferent reasons as follows:
students want to feel important in the class and want to see that they have
the right to criticize things or give opinions about the procedure of the lesson.
Feeling valued
(2 Ss) If the students have all these values then they will take control of their own
learning environment.
Partnership We are the
with the ones who
teacher (1 St) learn
ALL (5 Ss) Survey two: question 3
STUDENTS 60 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that they like get-
POSITIVE ting all answers from the teacher directly. In the second survey, nine students
A more (14 Ss) More out of sixteen concurred. Here are the subcategories showing the reasons.
productive motivated and
lesson interested
(1 St) (4 Ss)
More
attracts the
attention accurate and
(1 St)
realible
knowledge
(5 Ss)
Students are
Figure 3: Reasons why students like
11 being asked by the teacher accustomed
to it
(1 St)
In the second question ive students say, ‘I think we are the ones who learn,
so we should decide what to do’ and ‘everyone has diferent learning styles, so AGREE
we should give our opinions.’ Four students think that the lessons would be (9 Ss)
more motivating and interesting if the students decided what to do and how Learning is
to do it in the class. One of the students states that asking their opinion would Saves time dependent on
the teacher
attract their attention. Another one states that they would have a partnership (1 St)
(1 St)
with the teacher during the lesson in this way. One important result is that two
Otherwise l get
students state they feel valued if their opinion is asked by the teacher. Also, confused
one believes that it can be a more productive lesson if the teacher asks their (1 St)
opinion about the lesson.
hese answers show us that even if they have diferent reasons, students all
Figure 4: Reasons why students like getting all the answers from the teacher
like being asked what to do in lessons. From one commonly given answer I
can understand that they are aware of their place in the learning environment.
 326 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 327

As a response to the third question ive students state that they can get there will be no collaboration in the class.’ Another says, ‘he teacher is not
more accurate and reliable knowledge from the teacher. One of the students a machine giving the answers all the time and he/she should not be, either.’
states that if everyone says something at the same time there will be confu- Another one thinks that it is useless for students to just sit and wait for the
sion, so getting the knowledge from the teacher saves time. One states that answers instead of searching for them. One states that sitting and waiting for
they prefer this way because this is the way they are accustomed to because of the answers can cause laziness among students and another believes that the
their previous teaching contexts. One of the students believes that learning a information will be more long-lasting if we search for it and then ind it.
new language totally depends on the teacher. Another one says if he/she hears By looking at these answers we can clearly see that some of the students
something wrong from others, he/she will get confused. are aware of the importance of collaboration during classwork. It is nice to see
hese answers indicate how some students have a dependence on their that some know that the information will be longer-lasting if they search for
teacher. One of the students even says that language learning occurs with the it. In addition, one of them is afraid of laziness because of teacher-centredness,
eforts of the teacher. hey mostly believe that only the teacher can provide so we can say that in contrast to our common belief about students’ laziness,
them with accurate knowledge. Also, it is seen that they wrongly believe they some may actually want to be active. herefore, I think we should not make
waste time if they search for the answers, and are afraid of getting confused. generalizations about our students and irstly we should check their existing
However, the remaining seven (one more student gave an unclear answer) beliefs about their own learning.
state that they do not prefer getting all the answers from the teacher, and the
reasons vary: Survey two: question 4
79 % of the students who participated in the irst survey stated that they be-
Searching is
better to lieve the teacher is responsible for giving necessary information to them. Eight
learn students out of twelve answering the second survey (ive either misunderstood
(2 Ss) the question or gave incorrect answers) agree that it is the teacher who should
There should Teacher is not a
be machine giving provide them with necessary information. Here are the subcategories showing
collaboration the answers
the reasons why they agree:
(1 St) (1 St)

DISAGREE Teacher's
duty
(7 Ss) (5 Ss)
If we search,
Useless for it is long-
students lasting
(1 St) (1 St)
Laziness can
occur AGREE
(1 St) (8 Ss)
We have
little or no To memorize
knowledge of we need the
Figure 5: Reasons why students do not like getting all the answers from the teacher the new
language
teacher
Figure 5: Reasons why students do not like getting all the answers from the teacher (1 St)
(2 St)

Two students prefer searching for knowledge, and believe that searching is Figure 6: Reasons why students think that teacher is responsible for giving
a better way to learn. One student states, ‘If we just sit waiting for the answers, necessary information
328 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 329

Five students state that it is the teacher’s duty to give them necessary in- izing, making it real for themselves. To make them realize this, we, as teachers,
formation. hey strongly believe that they cannot learn in any other ways. Two irstly should believe it and integrate this belief in our own teaching practice, and
students say ‘we have little knowledge of new language, so we need someone to try to make the language use real for our students in every situation.
learn this new language.’ One of the students states that to learn a new language However, the other four students state that the teacher is not always re-
they should memorize the language and to memorize it they need a teacher. sponsible for giving necessary information to them. hey should arrive at the
answers themselves when it is possible.
There should Two of these students hold the viewpoint that teacher and students should
be
collaboration collaborate. he two others say that students should try to learn, should search
(2 Ss) for knowledge, and that it is not good for them to expect everything of the
teacher all the time. By looking at these answers we can say that some students
are aware of the importance of taking part in learning. hey attach importance
to searching for knowledge. Furthermore, they know how important collabo-
ration is in the learning environment and they value collaboration. However,
DISAGREE only a few of them are aware of this.

(4 Ss) Survey two: question 5

It is not
Students good to
should try expect from 65 % of the students who participated in the survey stated that they want their
(1 St)
the teacher teacher to correct their errors immediately. In answers to the second survey,
(1 St) fourteen out of seventeen students agree with this Here are their reasons:
Clear and
Figure 7: Reasons why students think the teacher is not responsible giving constent
necessary information learning
(6 Ss)
Loss of
From the answers to this question we can say again that students have a concentration
great misconception about who a teacher actually is. Is s/he someone who (1 St)
should have all accurate knowledge about the language and transfer it to stu-
dents, or someone who should guide students to succeed in their learning
AGREE
practice, to get the idea of how to acquire the language eiciently? In addi- (14 Ss)
tion, they wrongly believe that to learn a language they have to memorize it in Not to learn It is difficult to
all aspects. Here we can understand that from the beginning of our teaching wrongly self-correct
practice we should make our students aware of the teacher’s place in the class. (2 Ss) Otherwise (1 St)
We should train them to take the responsibility for their own learning. hey mistakes
should know that a teacher is someone who assists them and guides them with will be
consistent
their learning practice but the actual responsibility of getting the knowledge is
(4 Ss)
their own duty. In addition, from the beginning they need to realize that they
cannot learn a language by memorizing it; actually they can learn it by internal- Figure 8: Reasons why students want their teachers to correct their errors
330 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment Çiler İnan 331

Six students state that learning will be clear and consistent by this means. Here I can see that only a minority of the students believe they should cor-
Four are afraid that if the mistakes are not corrected, they will persist and later rect their mistakes themselves. Only one student is aware of the importance
it will be harder to correct them. Two students say ‘If the mistakes are not of self-correction. his means that our students mostly depend on the teacher
corrected, we will have the wrong information.’ One of them emphasizes the in the class, which is not the right attitude to learn a language. As we already
importance of concentration and he claims that he will lose his concentration know, language learning should be consistent in and out of class, so our stu-
if the mistake is not corrected immediately. Another one says ‘It is diicult for dents at irst need to learn how to correct their mistakes themselves and how
us to self-correct, so the teacher should correct our mistakes.’ to learn from their mistakes by self-correction and peer-correction.
Here we can clearly see that most of the students are really afraid of learn-
ing something wrong. However, their misconception is that they always expect
the teacher to correct their mistakes, but they do not try to self-correct. hey
Relections in general
are not aware of the importance of self-correction or peer-correction. In this research study I researched students’ existing perceptions of learner-
I believe that the irst thing we should do is get students to realize the centred instruction in a detailed way and came up with really interesting re-
importance of self-correction and peer-correction. hen we should allocate sults. he most unexpected one for me was students’ preference for pair and
more time to these. With the help of pair or group work activities we can eas- group work activities because, in contrast to the common belief, they deined
ily achieve this. their preference for pair and group work activities with really logical reasons.
In answer to the same question, only two students stated that they can self- his made me realize that the irst thing we should do in our classes is to try to
correct (one further student gave an unclear answer). Here are their reasons: be aware of our students’ preferences without prejudgments. Another interest-
ing result was seeing student’s desires (87 %) for their opinions to be valued in
class. I learnt that being asked by the teacher is more important for students
than we think. If we do this, they will feel valued and will probably be more
Learners can
correct active during lessons.
(1 St) In addition, however, I see that most of our students are not really aware
DISAGREE of ‘learner autonomy’. hey do almost nothing on their own apart from the
things they do in the class.
(2 Ss) Another thing I learnt, then, is that I should encourage my students to
To learn better keep learning outside the class as much as possible. I should also teach them
learners should to navigate for themselves but not to wait for the teacher to give the neces-
correct
sary information all the time. I also realized that most students do not know
(1 St)
the importance of self or peer-correction. I should create contexts for them
in which they have the chance to correct each other. Last but not least, our
Figure 9: Reasons why students do not want their teachers to correct their mistakes students, due to their learning backgrounds, are really dependent on us. hey,
in fact, want to exceed their limits, but are still afraid to make mistakes and
need our guidance.
Here we can see that only two of the students think they should correct
I should, therefore, always try to be a guide or an assistant for them, but not
their mistakes themselves, but they have diferent viewpoints. One of them
the leader in the class. I should try to create their learning environment not my
says ‘to learn better we should correct our mistakes’, whereas the other one
own teaching environment.
says ‘we can correct our own mistakes, it is not really important who corrects.’
332 Creating a learner-centred classroom environment

Relections on my own teaching practice Developing language learning strategies

hanks to this research study I gained a critical look at my own lessons, and
started to question my own teaching practice. Additionally, I learnt to look at
the class environment from students’ perspectives, and I realized that there is
23 and learner autonomy through video
games
always something else to do to improve my teaching practice, and I also got
an immediate impact on one of my current practices. In one of my lessons, Alexandros Palaiogiannis
with regard to the results of my survey, I tried to ask my students their opinion
about how to practice the topic of the day. hey really appreciated being asked
and immediately found ways to practise the topic. I realized that in this les- Introduction
son students participated more than the other lessons where I chose how to
Nowadays, most teachers are increasingly inding themselves in situations
practise the topic. his experience gave me the chance to see the validity of the
where the majority of their students are video game players, either novice or
results of my research study.
experienced ones, within a primary or secondary school context alike. We are
going through an “age of digital culture” (Buckingham, 2007), with the young-
References sters being the “Digital Natives” (Prensky, 2001a; 2001b), since they are “all
‘native speakers’ of the digital language of computers, video games and the
Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). he case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Internet” (Prensky, 2001a, p. 1).
Brown, J. (2008). Student-centred instruction: Involving students in their own educa-
tion. Music Educators Journal, 94 (5), 30-35. Context and research questions
Harmer, J. (2007). he practice of English language teaching (4th Edition) Harlow: Pear-
son Education. Along these lines, the fact that my students, in a Senior High School, have
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006).  Understanding language teaching: From method to post- repeatedly expressed a keen interest in knowing the meaning of English words
method. Routledge. they have come across in the virtual worlds of their favourite video games, cou-
Mayer, R.E. (1998). ‘Cognitive heory for Education: What Teachers need To Know. pled with my own wish to explore whether this popular entertaining means
In Lambert, Nadine M. McCombs, Barbara L. (eds). How Students Learn: Re- could be turned into a powerful learning tool as well, has become the incentive
forming Schools hrough Learner-Centred Education, American Psychological As-
for the present research.
sociation, Washington, DC, 353-377.
To this end, this study mainly explored the various language learning strat-
egies that students employ when playing video games at home and not in a
formal schooling context, at their own pace, alone or with peers. hese learning
strategies were examined in connection to coping with new vocabulary en-
countered in a video game and the development of students’ writing skills in a
“situated learning” (Gee, 2004) mode. he study also focused on issues closely
linked to learning strategies such as learner autonomy and life-long learning
skills development. In particular, it investigated the following research ques-
tions:
• Does students’ engagement in video game play facilitate their under-
standing of new vocabulary?
333
334 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 335
through Video Games

• Do video games provide students with a context that will help them cative competence”, render them particularly important for language learning
develop their writing skills in a meaningful, motivating way? purposes. Such strategies can ultimately lead to learner autonomy, “learning
• Do video games urge students to develop learning strategies en route to how to learn”, and life-long learning skills development, which are the ul-
reaching speciic goals set during video game play? timate goals of any educational system designed for the 21st century global
• Do video games facilitate learner autonomy and independence, thus citizen.
promoting life-long learning? Although there are numerous strategy classiications and distinctions in
the relevant literature, the present study draws mainly from Oxford and her
But irst, let us have a look at some signiicant theoretical considerations
well-known classiication system (1990), since it is considered the most in-
underlying the present research.
luential to date. Oxford’s taxonomy consists of two broad categories, namely
direct and indirect strategies, which are further subdivided into a total of six
Literature review groups – memory, cognitive and compensation under the direct category, and
he theory of learning which informs the design and use of video games for metacognitive, afective and social under the indirect category.
educational purposes is constructivism, whose main tenet is that learners con- Closely linked to learning strategies is the concept of learner autonomy,
struct meaning and knowledge by actively interacting with their environment which can be broadly deined as “the capacity to take control over one’s own
and reorganizing their mental structures (Phillips, 1995), building upon pre- learning” (Benson, 2011, p. 2), while, with regard to strategies, autonomy could
vious knowledge and experience, which they match against newly-acquired also be described as “the capacity to make use of strategies that are clearly as-
information (hanasoulas, 2001). sociated with the idea of control of learning” (ibid., p. 97).
Csikszentmihalyi’s low theory (1990) is also considered central to video According to Benson (2011, p. 2), one necessary condition for the develop-
games (Squire, 2011), since it describes the state of completely focused moti- ment of autonomy is providing learners with opportunities to exercise control
vation, absorption and immersion in the task at hand, which “becomes intrin- over their learning. In the present research, learners were given the opportu-
sically rewarding, done for its own sake” (Stevison and Kaplan, 2010, p. 155), nity to “take responsibility for their own learning and to apply active, person-
a state that video games are believed to foster and favour. Game designers ally relevant strategies” (Littlewood, 1997, p. 81). To this end, they were asked
manage to keep players in such “low” states, in which educators would like to play a video game out of the formal schooling context, at home, either alone
to see learners in formal instruction settings, as well, but, in fact, “few current or in pairs/groups, without the physical presence of the teacher.
curricular practices are designed to foster” (ibid.).
Along these lines, various arguments in favour of the integration of video Research design and procedures followed
games in educational contexts have been put forward, although research into
this newly emerging ield is quite recent and still in progress. With regard to he research was conducted with a group of twenty 16-year-old students, at-
the present study, through video games students “experience a sense of autono- tending the irst grade of a Senior High School in hiva, a Greek provincial
my” (Stevison and Kaplan, 2010, p. 152), since players are continuously asked town. he sample consisted of twelve female and eight male students compris-
to “make active choices in simulated settings”, simultaneously developing their ing a mixed-ability class, as is usually the case with Greek state schools, whose
critical thinking skills on “a multilayered platform of insights and discoveries” English language proiciency level mainly ranged from waystage (A2) to van-
(ibid.). tage (B2), according to the Common European Framework of Reference for
Following Oxford (1990, p. 1), learning strategies can be deined as “steps Languages (Council of Europe, 2001).
taken by students to enhance their own learning”, and their being “tools for Within this context, I had to select a video game that would potentially
active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing communi- engage the majority of the participants and serve the purposes of the study
336 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 337
through Video Games

well. My inal choice was Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express (he Nevertheless, despite drawing from both QUAL and QUAN research,
Adventure Company, 2006), a commercial game, designed and created for en- mixed methods designs usually “display a dominant method” (Dörnyei, 2007,
tertainment rather than educational purposes, for a variety of reasons. p. 63). Within this mixed methods research paradigm, the main method em-
Firstly, mysteries, detective stories and thrillers appeal especially to teenag- ployed was the case study, which lies within the QUAL research paradigm, en-
ers, who ind them interesting and engaging, as my students conirmed as well. hanced by QUAN research practices. he sample described above constitutes
Second, the whole game is based on dialogue, written notes and letters, and the ‘case’ the present research focused on.
whether players proceed in the game or not depends on their understanding Coming to the research instruments, a number of diaries, in which students
of the target language. his served the purposes of the research since players had to make entries at various points during the research, following certain
are forced to employ strategies in order to deal with vocabulary diiculties and prompts, and a inal questionnaire, administered at the end, were used, the for-
move on. mer coming from the QUAL and the latter from the QUAN ield. he use of
Another important criterion is that the train passengers in the game come more than one instruments served the purpose of triangulation, which allows
from diferent countries and players are, thus, exposed to various accents of the researcher to “conirm or challenge the indings of one method with those
English, coming from both inner-circle countries, such as Great Britain and of another” (Laws et al., 2003, p. 281), thus contributing to the improvement
the USA, as well as expanding-circle ones, such as Italy, France and Turkey, in of research validity and maximizing reliability at the same time.
line with Kachru’s well-established scheme (1985), describing the main con- he main research instrument constructed was diaries while the question-
texts of English language use around the world. At the same time, they have naire aimed at complementing and enhancing the data collected through the
the opportunity to become acquainted with slangy terms or expressions some diaries. To this end, a great number of items focused on behavioural issues,
characters in the game often utter, and the fact that learners are not usually namely the particular actions student gamers took to deal with vocabulary and
exposed to such terms within formal education settings makes it even more writing diiculties as well as problems encountered regarding gameplay per
imperative that they resort to strategies in order to cope. se. Other items addressed the respondents’ beliefs about and attitudes towards
Last but not least, the game is based on a famous novel by the same title, the whole video gaming experience and the efects the latter had on them as
written by Agatha Christie, and some students might have heard about the foreign language learners, in terms of vocabulary learning, writing skill devel-
story or seen a movie based on the book, too. his information could activate opment and learner autonomy (for the research instruments see Palaiogiannis,
their background schemata and help them overcome or anticipate certain dif- 2012).
iculties as far as the storyline is concerned. In particular, players have to ‘don’ he research lasted from November 2011 to March 2012. According to
the main character of the game, wander in a virtual world, seek clues that student preference, one group of three and three pairs were formed while the
might reveal the identity of a murderer, solve a number of simple and more remaining eleven students played alone.
complex puzzles as they proceed in the game, collect ingerprints and foot- he video game consists of three distinct parts, but the research focused on
prints, and interrogate suspects until the true identity of the killer is revealed the irst two parts, during which students had to carry out speciic vocabulary
in the end; in other words, they have to act the same way the police would in and writing game-related tasks (see Palaiogiannis, 2012). he tasks aimed at
real life. making gameplay meaningful and purposeful for their learning and not just
he so-called “mixed methods research” (Creswell et al., 2003) was selected a purely entertaining activity, and keeping them focused on certain aspects of
as the most appropriate and efective means to collect data within the speciic the game. Several brieing and debrieing sessions, “critical” conditions for the
context. his means that both qualitative (QUAL) and quantitative (QUAN) integration of video games into educational settings (Betrus and Botturi, 2010,
research were employed in an attempt to combine the case-speciicity and p. 49), preceded and followed video game playing respectively, taking place in
subjectivity of the former with the objectivity and generalizability of the latter. the regular EFL classroom. During these sessions, language as well as game-
338 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 339
through Video Games

play problems were brought to the fore, solutions were suggested, and opinions Findings and discussion
were exchanged and commented upon both by the teacher and students alike.
Following Oxford (1990), the questions on vocabulary and writing strategies
Since the greatest part of the research was conducted outside the school
were placed into speciic categories. In particular, in the vocabulary section of
context, a group was set up on the Facebook called he Murder On he Orient
the questionnaire, the questions were categorized as cognitive, compensation,
Express Game Group, which all research participants could join, establishing an
social or metacognitive strategies. In the same vein, in the writing section, they
online learning community. Within this community, information low could
were categorized as metacognitive, cognitive, social or compensation strate-
take place and members could provide feedback to each other and seek solu-
gies. With regard to vocabulary, 90% employed compensation strategies, 80%
tions to problems encountered in the virtual world of the video game.
employed cognitive and social strategies while 65% resorted to metacognitive
At the end of each part, students had to carry out a writing task in the
strategies (Chart 1). As regards writing, all (100%) used both metacognitive
school’s computer lab. To this end, the process writing approach (White and
and cognitive strategies, 85% resorted to social strategies while 80% employed
Arndt, 1991) was adopted as the most compatible with the application of
compensation strategies (Chart 2).
writing strategies. he participants had to write letters as the main character
to their employer, informing him about the progress of the murder investiga-
tion, any potential suspects and so on. In this way, situated learning took place
through role-play, game-based activities that facilitated students’ active par-
ticipation in a powerful context for learning.
he inal questionnaire was irstly piloted on a sample similar, in terms
of sex, age and interests, to the target sample with the view to ensuring that
respondents in the actual study would experience no diiculties in completing
the instrument, regarding the “clarity of wording” (Cohen et al., 2007) either
in the items per se or the instructions, the time taken to complete it, or its dif-
iculty level.
As regards the diaries, qualitative content analysis (Dörnyei, 2007) was em-
ployed, in that speciic patterns and themes were identiied in the data (ibid.), Chart 1
on the basis of which relevant categories were established. To protect the par-
ticipants’ anonymity, during the diary entries as well as the questionnaire data
analysis, identiication numbers were assigned to them ranging from S1 to
S20 (where S=Student). Besides, some aspects of the data were ‘quantitised’,
in other words converted into numerical codes (Dörnyei, 2007), in an efort to
integrate it with its quantitative counterpart used in this research, in line with
a most common practice within the mixed methods data analysis ield, namely
‘data transformation’ (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998).
Both the ‘quantitised’ qualitative data coming from the diaries and the
quantitative data that the questionnaire yielded were subjected to statistical
analysis through the use of a statistical package widely employed in applied
linguistic research, SPSS.
Chart 2
340 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 341
through Video Games

With regard to participant beliefs and attitudes about the whole video lary. he vast majority (90%) of the speciic sample believe that understanding
gaming experience, 90% agree that playing the video game helped them un- new vocabulary and video gaming are linked to each other (Chart 3), since the
derstand new vocabulary, 90% agree that understanding the meaning of new former enhances the latter and vice versa. In this vein, video gaming promotes
words helped them solve problems and move on in the game, 75% believe that purposeful, meaningful vocabulary learning in a way that formal education
writing letters as the main character of the game gave them a real life purpose cannot, since only by understanding new words encountered in the digital
for writing, while 50% believe that writing letters as the main character of worlds of video gaming can gamers come up with solutions to problems and
the game made video gaming an interesting experience to them. Finally, 60% move on in the game. he evidence provided by the statistical analysis indicates
agree that writing in collaboration with their classmates made them feel more that almost all participants felt that gameplay and vocabulary learning were
conident and 55% believe that playing the video game at home, making their positively interrelated at some point during the game (Palaiogiannis, 2012).
own decisions about their own learning, made them feel more independent he second research question refers to situated learning and speciically
and autonomous as learners (Chart 3). whether video games provide students with a context that will help them de-
velop their writing skills in a meaningful, motivating way. 75% of the partici-
pants expressed their enthusiasm for this situated writing in their diary entries
since “it was just like [they] had lived this event in real life and [they were] a
real detective [themselves]” (S20, diary 1). In terms of gender, 30% were male
and 45% were female, comprising 75% of both the total male (6 out of 8) and
female (9 out of 12) sample population. his means that the vast majority of
the male and female participants were in favour of having their writing skills
developed, while acting as the main character of a video game.
Coming to the third research question, this study also explored whether
video games foster the development of learning strategies while gamers try to
reach speciic goals during gameplay. All learners employed strategies in order
to deal with vocabulary and writing diiculties, otherwise they wouldn’t be
able to solve problems and advance the storyline. In particular, regarding the
former, most recruited compensation strategies (90%, Chart 1), which is un-
derstandable due to the great word load they admittedly encountered during
gameplay, while with regard to writing, all learners (100%) used metacogni-
Chart 3 tive and cognitive strategies, followed by social (85%) and then compensation
strategies (80%, Chart 2). he evidence also indicates that video gaming and
the various technical or storyline diiculties, encountered during gameplay,
he data was statistically analysed through the performance of certain tests,
favour especially collaboration and the use of social strategies among gam-
namely Chi-Square tests and especially Fisher’s Exact Test, to check whether
ers (Palaiogiannis, 2012). he evidence provided by statistics indicates that
a statistically signiicant correlation between variables existed (for more on the
all female participants showed a preference for social strategies to deal with
statistical analysis and the relevant indings see Palaiogiannis, 2012).
vocabulary, which might be suggesting that girls are more in need for support
he indings can now be discussed in regard to the research questions that
and encouragement when it comes to a genre stereotypically associated with
have informed the present study. To start with, the irst question refers to
boys, while social strategies were also evidenced to be associated with those
whether video gaming can facilitate students’ understanding of new vocabu-
342 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 343
through Video Games

who felt more autonomous during gameplay since all of them (100%) em- vein, by engaging students in video gaming tasks that involve and presuppose
ployed such strategies. collaboration, the teacher can facilitate the development of autonomy and
With regard to the last research question, the present study attempted to life-long learning skills among learners. he engagement in such projects also
investigate whether video games facilitate learner autonomy and indepen- seems to contribute, as the present research showed, to the establishment of
dence. he majority of the participants believe that the video gaming experi- a friendly rapport between the teacher and the learners in a non-threatening,
ence made them feel more autonomous and independent and collaborative supportive environment for everyone involved.
writing boosted their conidence (55% and 60% respectively), a feeling often
associated with autonomy (Chart 3). Collaborative writing and autonomy are
associated with social strategies and the majority of the sample population
Conclusion
(100% female, 50% male) used such strategies. Besides, the statistical tests he ultimate goal of this study is to provide teachers with insights into the
indicated that those who found the vocabulary tasks in the pre-gaming stages countless possibilities they have at their disposal, especially due to the advent
helpful were the ones who expressed feelings of autonomy, meaning that they of new technologies and the students being enchanted by them. Although
considered teacher support conducive to the development of their autonomy some teachers might be negatively predisposed towards video gaming or feel a
and independence. bit intimidated at irst, due to their lack of familiarity and knowledge regard-
ing the speciic genre, it might be worthwhile to give it a try, especially if they
consider the potential gains that the whole experience might have to ofer, and
Teaching implications – who knows – they could even become ardent gamers themselves in the long
Although the generalizability and transferability of the results to similar situ- run, even more so than their own students.
ations cannot be ensured, due to the contextualized nature of the study and
the limited number of the participants, fruitful conclusions can be drawn for
relection.
References
First of all, games are one of the best methods to motivate learners intrin- Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
sically since they can be fun and highly engaging, thus turning the learning Betrus, A. K. & Botturi, L. (2010). ‘Principles of playing games for learning’. In A.
process into a meaningful and memorable experience. Besides, video games Hirumi (Ed.), 33-55.
foster skills “immediately generalizable” to real-life situations (Prensky, 2006,
Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: children’s learning in the age of digital culture.
p. 8), such as reasoning, problem-solving and decision-making. he fact that a
great number of diferent learning strategies were evidenced to be at play dur- Cambridge: Polity Press.
ing gaming renders the virtual environments of video games suitable contexts Cohen, L., Manion L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.).
for learners to develop strategies in a natural, meaningful way if they are to London: Routledge.
reach their goals and inish the game successfully. Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages:
hrough video games collaborative learning is promoted and students de- learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
velop cooperative learning skills as they work in partnerships or small groups Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L. & Hanson, W. E. (2003).
having synchronized goals and objectives (Stevison and Kaplan, 2010, p. 152).
‘Advanced mixed methods research designs’. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds),
his is a very important point since collaborative learning and social strategies
Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. housand Oaks, CA:
employed during gameplay were evidenced to be closely associated with par-
ticipant feelings of autonomy and independence in the present study. In this Sage, 209-240.
344 Developing Language Learning Strategies and Learner Autonomy Alexandros Palaiogiannis 345
through Video Games

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and
Harper Perennial. quantitative approaches. housand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University hanasoulas, D. (2001). ‘Constructivist learning’. ELT Newsletter, Article 54, at http://
Press. www.eltnewsletter.com/back/April2001/art542001.htm, accessed 5 December
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: a critique of traditional schooling. 2011.
London: Routledge. he Adventure Company (2006). ‘Agatha Christie: murder on the Orient Express’
Hirumi, A. (Ed.) (2010). Playing games in school: video games and simulations for [PC game-software]. PC Master Gold, 29.
primary and secondary education. New York: International Society for Technology White, R. & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. London: Longman.
in Education.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). ‘Standards, codiication and sociolinguistic realism: the English
language in the outer circle’. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds), English in
the world: teaching and learning the language and literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 11-30.
Laws, S., Harper, C. & Marcus, R. (2003). Research for development. London: Sage.
Littlewood, W. T. (1997). ‘Self-access: why do we want it and what can it do?’. In
P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds), Autonomy and independence in language learning.
London: Longman, 79-92.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know.
Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Palaiogiannis, A. (2012). ‘Using video games to foster strategy development and learner
autonomy within a secondary school context’. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation,
Hellenic Open University.
Phillips, D. C. (1995). ‘he good, the bad, and the ugly: the many faces of constructivism’.
Educational Researcher, 24 5-12.
Prensky, M. (2001a). ‘Digital natives, digital immigrants’. On the Horizon, 9(5) 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2001b). ‘Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II: Do they really think
diferently?’. On the Horizon, 9(6) 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2006). Don’t bother me Mom – I’m learning. St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.
Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning: teaching and participatory culture in the
digital age. New York: Teachers College Press.
Stevison, M. & Kaplan, J. (2010). ‘Games for language arts education’. In A. Hirumi
(Ed.), 147-172.
 Is using the mother tongue in ELT
24 classrooms a sin?A study of learners’
perceptions
Sevil Gülbahar

Context and problem

Using the students’ irst language in a foreign language classroom has long
been a concern among language teachers all around the world. Some believe
that the L2 should be the only medium of instruction in the classroom, while
others support the idea that there should be some L1 use in a foreign language
classroom in order to foster the learning process of students. However, it is
agreed on by the latter group that the use of the L1 should be limited, and so
this raises the question “when and how much L1 should be used?”
I had been teaching English to Turkish university students for 16 years and
always believed that there should be some L1 in the classroom, especially in
a classroom full of students with a low-level of proiciency in English. In my
opinion, for example, while making a contrast between the grammatical struc-
ture of Turkish and English, or to provide the meaning of a word that is not
a key to understand a text, a teacher can use the students’ irst language. his
might both save time and facilitate students’ learning. However, at my present
university (IKCU, SFL), there are some teachers who do not prefer using L1
in their classrooms. According to them, English is the only language that can
be used in the classroom whatever the situation or the students’ level is. hey
support their idea by saying it is the only chance for students to be exposed
to and to produce English. hat is why I wanted to conduct this study. I was
teaching A1 level students and wanted to discover if what I was doing in the
classroom was supported by my students’ perceptions of L1 use or not.

Literature review
here is perhaps no common ground between foreign language teachers about
the use of the mother tongue in the classroom. Some believe that there should

347
348 Is using the mother tongue in ELT classrooms a sin? Sevil Gülbahar 349
A study of learners’ perceptions

be zero L1 in the classroom and see it as a harmful sin that teachers must Data collection tools
avoid. Others support the use of L1 and consider that banning it is not a good he data for the study was collected thorough interviews since the data would
idea and that using the L1 has its own advantages. In Using the Mother Tongue be more detailed in that way in comparison to a questionnaire in which stu-
(2003:10), Deller and Rinvolucri explain one of the beneits as making stu- dents generally prefer writing very little. he interviews took place over four
dents ‘feel safe and grounded’ in the classroom. days since there were four groups and each interview lasted for about ten min-
While teachers of English seem indecisive about the use of the mother utes. he participants were interviewed in groups of four, ive or six because
tongue in a foreign language classroom, students seem more decisive about it. some of them didn’t appear on their interview day, so they were interviewed
Several studies have been conducted among students to ind out their attitudes with other groups. he groups were formed by me taking into consideration
towards the use of L1 in their foreign language classrooms. Interestingly, they the characters of the participants: talkative students were grouped together in
are generally against its use. Findings of a study carried out among Iranian order not to give them the opportunity to dominate an interview with silent
university students to discover their attitudes towards L1 use show that “they ones. All interviews were recorded using both a mobile phone and a digital
are reluctant to use their mother tongue in English language situations and recorder as a precaution against the risk of losing the data. In the interview
reject it strongly for the sake of better exposure to L2.” (Nazary, 2008:147) In participants were asked three questions about the L1 use in their classroom.
another study, the researcher concluded that “students revealed negative at- he questions were, in the order they were asked:
titudes toward L1 use and disapproved its use by their teachers.” (Qadri, 2006)
In contrast to the above, there is research that proves L1 use to be beneicial Question 1: How do you feel when I use your L1 in the lesson? Why?
according to students. Schweers (1999:6) indicates that her research results
show “a high percentage (88.7%) of the student participants felt that Spanish” Question 2: How do you feel when I use only English in the lesson? Why?
-in this case the mother tongue of the students- “should be used in their Eng- Question 3: In which part of the lesson would you prefer me to use your L1? Why?
lish classes”. In another study, the researchers concluded that “the idea that
L1 can help the student psychologically is approved by the fact that learners To decrease the level of anxiety before the interview and to gather richer
actually learn more when they feel more secure, and when they are more com- data, participants were given the questions two days before the interviews, and
fortable in a learning environment.” (Raeiszadeh, et al., 2012:437) were told about being recorded. After collecting all the data the interviews
were transcribed.
Procedure
Data analysis

Participants To analyse interviews I used tables and categorization. he overall view of the
students was important for the research; therefore, the data in the transcrip-
his study was conducted at Izmir Katip Celebi University, School of For- tions were grouped under categories according to the major common points of
eign Languages. he participants were A1 level prep. students. Twenty-one answers given by the students to each question and analysed in that way.
participants who attended the study were from the same classroom -my own
class- with diferent English learning backgrounds. Before conducting the in-
terviews participants illed in a permission form which let me use the data Findings and discussion
collected from the interviews. he answers of the participants were analyzed and grouped for each question.
he responses to the irst question given by all groups are presented in Table 1.
350 Is using the mother tongue in ELT classrooms a sin? Sevil Gülbahar 351
A study of learners’ perceptions

Research question 1: How do you feel when I use your L1 in the lesson? Why? Research question 2: How do you feel when I use only the L2 in the lesson?
Why?
his research question concerns students’ reasons for and responses about L1
use in the classroom.
Table 2. Students’ feelings for L1 use in the classroom
Table 1. Students’ reasons for L1 use Feeling n Reasons Representative responses

Feeling N Reasons Representative responses - Subconscious learning “It helps me be more adapted to the
lesson.”
- Better adaptation /
“If we don’t understand, speaking in Turk- “We try harder to understand and
Better comprehension
ish is better.” Positive 13 - motivation learn English.”
“When our mother tongue is used, it’s
Positive 16 Good for clarifying - Good to hear
better in terms of understanding.”
“When we’re stuck, I think support in
Provides support - Makes one study harder
Turkish is better.”
“Hearing English all the time was
- Problems in compre- problematic for me; it caused me to
“After some time, when the language we
Loss of concentration hension get lost in the lesson.”
Nega- know is used, we get bored easily.”
4 Nega- “When you talk in English, I don’t
tive “When Turkish is used, the pace of the 7
Slows down the pace tive understand you.”
lesson may slow down.” - Loss of motivation / “Always hearing English and not un-
Note. n= number of students demotivating derstanding makes me feel bored af-
ter some time.”
According to the data, most of my students have positive feelings towards Note. n= number of students
the use of their L1 by the teacher. he main reason presented by the students
is to have better comprehension of the lesson. It is necessary to point out that According to the data presented in Table 2, most of the participants have
the students require the L1 only when they don’t understand the topic being positive feelings towards the teacher’s use of the L2 in the lesson. he most
taught in the lesson. Only a few of the students expressed negative feelings common reason given by the students was that it causes subconscious learning
about the use of L1 due to the fact that it causes a loss of concentration. Here of English in time. hey stated that they did not understand most of the things
I believe it is essential to point out that none of the participants said that the I said at the beginning of the irst term, but later they understood me better.
teacher should use only the L1 in the classroom. However, there were also some students who had negative feelings towards the
The second question in the research asked the students about their feel- L2 use all the time, and their biggest concern was the lack of comprehension it
ings towards the use of only the L2 in the classroom. The answers are caused. here were also two students who mentioned that the proiciency level
presented in Table 2. of students was an important factor. hey added that with lower level students
the teacher’s use of the L2 all the time might hinder comprehension.
The last question in the study focused on areas of the lesson in which
students preferred their teacher to use the L1. The data for the question
is presented in Table 3.
352 Is using the mother tongue in ELT classrooms a sin? Sevil Gülbahar 353
A study of learners’ perceptions

Research question 3: In which part of the lesson would you prefer me to use your the following year. hus, it is possible for them to believe that grammar is the
L1? Why? most important thing to learn, and that’s why they may want it to be taught in
Turkish. Again, two students mentioned that they did not want any Turkish in
the classroom because of the problems it may cause such as misunderstanding
Table 3: Students preference for L1 use according to the lessons
of a topic.
Areas of n Reasons Representative responses
the lesson
- Better understanding “Especially in grammar, us-
Relections
ing Turkish is better for us By conducting the above study I had the chance to conirm that using the L1
- Requires a high level of lan- to understand it.” in a foreign language classroom is not a sin at all and, in fact, it is required
Grammar 13 guage proiciency “In grammar because it’s to an extent by students. I had always believed that students had positive at-
diicult for us to under- titudes towards their teachers’ using the L1, especially in grammar teaching,
- Inability to ask questions
stand.”
when stuck and through this research it proved to be true. Apart from its relections as a
“Turkish explanation of teacher the study helped me to improve as a researcher. To exemplify, I discov-
Vocabu- - Provides better understand- ered while carrying out research that my study is actually not action research,
3 the word makes it clear in
lary ing
mind.” in which the primary aim is an action for change, but exploratory practice, in
“he teacher may revise which the researcher aims to understand what is going on in the classroom
the points students didn’t and why. To conclude, this research helped me understand that, in order to
Revision 1 - Better comprehension
understand at the end of comprehend the rules of English use better, my learners need some Turkish in
the lesson.” the classroom, especially while I am teaching grammar.
“When we don’t under-
No spe- stand something, I want
1 - Clarifying References
ciic part you to use my mother
tongue.” Deller, S., & Rinvolucri, M. (2002). Using the Mother Tongue: Making the most of the
- Causes misunderstandings “…they are diferent learner's language. Delta.
languages with diferent Nazary, M. (2008). he role of L1 in L2 acquisition: Attitudes of Iranian university
No use of students. Novitas-Royal, 2(2), 138-153.
2 - Students get used to it rules…”
the L1 Qadri, T. A. R. (2006). Teachers’and students’practices and attitudes Toward arabic (L1)
“We think in Turkish all
- A barrier to think in the L2 the time.” use in ELT. Doctoral dissertation, American University of Sharjah.
Note. n= number of students Raeiszadeh, A., Alibakhshi, G., Veisi, E., & Gorjian, B. (2012). Iranian EFL learners'
Perception of the Use of L1 to L2 Translation Task in General English Class-
es. Advances in Asian Social Science, 2(2), 436-440.
he data in Table 3 shows that the majority of students stated that they
Schweers, C. W. (1999). Using L1 in the L2 Classroom.Available: http://dosfan.lib.
wanted the teacher to use the L1 while explaining the grammar points. he uic.edu/usia/E-USIA/forum/acrobat/P6.pdf
most common reason they gave was that when grammar is in the L1 they
understand the rule better. In my opinion, the reason for grammar being at
the top of the list might be because the students have to take a proiciency
test at the end of the year and they have to pass it to study at their faculties
PART III

355
 Attribution retraining in L2 classes:
25 prospects for exploratory classroom
practice
İsmail Hakkı Erten

“I am just hopeless. I just can’t learn English.”

Merve (a prep year student at a state university)

"I scored very low because

I do not like the way my teacher teaches."
Arda (a prep year student at a state university)

Introduction
he above quotes from two prep year university students who had been study-
ing English for about two months and seemed to have fallen behind their
classmates appear to echo voices of a considerable proportion of students in
language classes. Such students appear to believe that their poor language
learning achievement is simply due to their language learning ability and they
can do little about it (cf. Merve). here are also others who consider their
teachers as the main source of their poor performance in the exams (cf. Arda).
Still ]others claim that either questions were diicult in the exam or they were
not lucky. In brief, students do seem to have personal explanations for their
exam performance in English classes.
Students’ subjective explanations are often argued to be linked to several
psychological constructs in the process of language learning and thus con-
stitute a set of signiicant factors. In the irst section of this chapter, I will
attempt to summarize signiicant research into language learners’ attributions
for their achievement in language learning. In the second section of the chap-
ter, I will review the concept of attribution retraining and endeavour to show
how classroom teachers can go about understanding and changing their stu-
dents’ attributions.

357
358 Attribution retraining in L2 classes: prospects for exploratory classroom practice İsmail Hakkı Erten 359

Attribution theory and research in second language learning Personal explanations generated by individuals for language learning per-
formance can be either alterable or unchangeable. Such a feature is highlight-
Personal explanations given by language learners for their achievement in a
ed by the stability dimension which informs us of whether one’s attribution
particular task or a test are called attributions (Weiner, 2010). Attributions re-
is likely to change over time or remain unchanged. In that sense, efort can
veal one's self-evaluation and thus can be informative in terms of human moti-
be seen as an unstable internal factor as its amount and nature can be altered
vation and/or motivated behaviour. Weiner (2010: 29) explains this very neatly
in time. Ability, on the other hand, is internal but is usually considered to be
when he states “…the interpretation of the past, that is, the perceived causes of
stable.
prior events, determines what will be done in the future.” his is to maintain that
he third dimension is controllability which reveals how much control one
relecting on the relationship between outcome, task nature, and attributions,
feels one has over what happens in the process of language learning. Individu-
learners will develop possible future behaviours and make decisions regarding
als, for example, may see themselves as having more control over the amount
what to do next. Attributions as evaluations of the past but also as forecasts of
of efort they are prepared to invest than over diiculty of learning a foreign
the future are profoundly consistent with process-based theories of motivation
language or their luck in exams and tasks. Figure 1 illustrates diferent dimen-
wherein motivation is pictured as a process consisting of several phases (Wil-
sions of attributions.
liams & Burden, 1997). Dörnyei (2003), for example, describes motivation as
involving three stages (a) choice motivation where goals are set, intentions are Internal External
formed and action is launched, (b) executive motivation whereby eforts on Uncontrol-
Controllable Uncontrollable (UN)Controllable1
the task are maintained by persistence with it, and (c) motivational retrospec- lable
tion whereby an evaluation of what happened is made. In Weiner`s (1992) Long-term Task dif-
Stable Ability Teacher input/bias
efort iculty
attribution-related motivation theory, the relationship between the sense that
a person makes of their past learning experience and how they relate it to their
Situational Parental support &
current performance is evaluated and the conclusions they draw obviously play Health, Mood
Unstable efort/strategy Classroom environ- Luck /Fate
a pivotal role in whether they decide to act or to abstain from doing so. If, for & Interest
use ment
example, a student keeps failing in an easy task and attributes this outcome to
a lack of ability, she may ind it diicult to motivate herself and may simply Based on Weiner (2010)
Figure 1: Dimensions of attributions
withdraw from taking any further part or may stop making any efort, thus
negatively adjusting her motivation with a possible feeling of learned helpless-
ness. Alternatively, another student who fails in a task and explains the failure Although interest into personal attributions to one’s performance is not
by not having made enough efort may have a totally diferent motivational new, the topic has only recently started to attract some attention in the ield of
orientation for the next trial with relatively increased eforts. second language learning and teaching (e.g. Williams & Burden, 1999: Wil-
Attributions can be of diferent dimensions. hese are locus of causality, sta- liams, Burden, & Al-Baharna, 2001; Ushioda, 2001; Williams, Burden, Poulet,
bility, and control. he locus of causality explains whether people explain their & Maun, 2004; Gobel & Mori, 2007; Hsieh & Schallert, 2008; Peacock,
performance by referring to internal or external causes. Examples of internal 2009; Gobel & Mori, hang, Kan, & Lee, 2011; Erler & Macaro, 2011, Erten
causes include whether someone sees herself as having the required ability and/ & Burden, 2014).
or endeavouring to achieve the task. External causes, on the other hand, signi- Conventionally, a set of four main attributions (i.e. ability, efort, task dif-
ies the role attributed in good or poor performance in language learning to iculty, and luck) have been documented as being used by language learners to
external forces such as how diicult the task is thought to be and/or how lucky explain the main causes for their performance in language learning. However,
one perceives herself. other possible attributions such as interest, health, mood, materials, means,
360 Attribution retraining in L2 classes: prospects for exploratory classroom practice İsmail Hakkı Erten 361

strategies used by learners, and signiicant others (teacher, parents, peers, etc.) (Hashemi & Zabihi, 2011; Pishghadam & Zabihi, 2011). With reference to
are also possible (see Williams & Burden, 1999; Peacock, 2009). continuing with foreign language study, Erler and Macaro (2011) found that
Attributions generated by language learners both for success and failure if students think learning a foreign language is diicult (task diiculty), they are
appear to vary. Descriptive studies report that learners generally tend to attri- likelier to discontinue their studies, highlighting the link between attributions
bute internal attributions for success and external attributions for failure. In- and one`s motivation to carry out a speciic task.
ternal attributions for success often include efort while failure is attributed to Attribution can also be seen as a relection of one’s mindset regarding the
lack of efort, distraction from others, or diiculty of the language (Williams process of language learning. Mercer (2012) makes a distinction between
& Burden, 1999; Williams et al., 2001; Erler & Macaro, 2011). However, such growth and ixed mindsets to describe two competing implicit theories of in-
a tendency does not seem to be universal. In some cases the opposite order dividuals about how alterable their language learning ability can be. To Mer-
holds true. For example, participants in studies from eastern countries appear cer, language learning mindset “relects the extent to which a person believes that
to credit their teacher as an external attribution for their success and blame language learning ability is dependent on some immutable, innate talent or is the
themselves for their failure. his was the case among Chinese students (Pea- result of controllable factors such as efort and conscious hard work” (2012: 22).
cock, 2009), Japanese and hai students (Gobel & Mori, 2007; Mori, Gobel, Uncontrollable ability attribution reported as predictor of achievement can
hepsiri & Pojanapunya, 2010) and Malaysian students (hang, Gobel, Norl be a sign of ixed mind set while efort attribution can relect a growth mind
& Suppiah, 2011). set (Erten & Burden, 2014). his suggests that much can be learned from
Teachers and language learners may have diferent opinions on what causes investigating students’ opinions on sources of success and failure in language
success and failure. Such a diference was highlighted by Peacock’s (2009) study learning.
into teacher attributions vs. learner attributions. He reports that students and
teachers gave contrasting views on a considerable number of attribution items.
Commenting on such diferences, he asserts that contrasting teacher-student
Attribution retraining
attributions for failure or success may result in problematic situations. If, for Remember Merve that I quoted at the beginning of this chapter. She believes
example, a teacher attributes students’ failure to the lack of efort while her she is hopeless and she cannot learn English. Her attitude relects an ability
students attribute their failure mainly to task diiculty, the teacher is likely to attribution, whereby she seems to believe she has little ability. Weiner (2010)
fail to notice the extra future help students may need to succeed in a particular asserts that such students may develop a sense of learned helplessness and give
task. up trying. Also remember Arda who complained about his teacher’s method of
More recently, studies adopting inferential research methodologies ap- teaching and attributed his failure to his teacher. Weiner (ibid) goes on to ar-
pear to have established a link between attributions and language learning gue that the least desirable (maladaptive) attributions are external, uncontrol-
achievement (Cochran, McCallum, Bell, 2010; Pishghadam & Zabihi, 2011; lable, and stable attributions (e.g. luck, materials, teachers etc.) while the most
Hashemi & Zabihi, 2011; Erten and Burden, 2014) as well as learners’ will- desirable (adaptive) ones are internal, controllable, and unstable attributions
ingness to continue learning a foreign language (Erler and Macaro, 2011). In (e.g. efort, using strategies etc.). Weiner recommends that it would be best if
such studies, the controllability dimension often appears to be closely linked students could convert their attributions to their performance from maladap-
to achievement as those factors that seemed to predict achievement were more tive ones to more adaptive ones, as these will have more positive efects on
than often uncontrollable attributes such as ability (Hsieh & Schallert, 2008; learners’ future learning behaviours.
Erten & Burden, 2014), luck, mood, and task diiculty (Hashemi & Zabihi, he question arises then “what can teachers do to help their students?” An-
2011; Pishghadam & Zabihi, 2011; Erten & Burden, 2014), although ef- swers to this question lie within studies where apparently achievement attribu-
fort as a controllable attribution was also reported to be a predictor of success tions were found to be malleable (see Weiner, 2010). Weiner refers to some
362 Attribution retraining in L2 classes: prospects for exploratory classroom practice İsmail Hakkı Erten 363

attribution retraining studies where steps were successfully taken to alter stu- sponses can inform us about vulnerable students. Attribution retraining stud-
dents’ external, stable, uncontrollable attributions into more internal, control- ies (e.g. Perry et al., 2010) propose that the most vulnerable group of students
lable and unstable attributions, helping them to take a more conident attitude are usually those with low locus of control. In other words, those students who
to their studies. Such work can be classiied as attribution retraining studies. attribute their failure to ability, luck, task diiculty, teacher bias, etc rather
Attribution retraining involves convincing students that their so-called ex- than efort and lack of efective strategies are likelier to beneit more from any
planations of their poor performance may not always relect the actual truth attribution retraining attempts.. herefore it will be sensible to hypothetically
behind the scene and that they can do better if they believe they can. Such expect that any attribution retraining intervention can yield better results with
work often tries to promote the locus of control and show students that what such students.
happens to them is often within their control (Perry, Stupnisky, Hall, Chip- Causal Search Activation: Once the vulnerable students are identiied, these
perield, & Weiner, 2010; Ruthig, Perry, Hall, & Hladkyj, 2004). his is in line students can be ofered a session in which they are invited to think seriously
with current indings from SLA research that the controllability dimension in about possible causes of their performance in a language test. his can be done
learner attributions appeared to predict language learning achievement (Erten through a brainstorming activity in a focus interview group or through an
& Burden, 2014). herefore, helping learners to realize the control they might interactive pair-work activity where students may be asked to write down pos-
have over the learning process may improve their attitudes towards their stud- sible causes for their performance.
ies as well as their autonomy and achievement in the learning process. Attribution Retraining (AR) Induction: Haynes et al. (2009) suggest that a
Attribution retraining (AR) may involve a multicomponent approach. session that lasts 30-90 minutes may need to be allocated for such an induc-
Haynes, Perry, Stupnisky, and Daniels (2009), for example, discuss a ive-step tion. hey describe two methods that can be used. he irst is based on a video
attribution retraining protocol employed in a number of diferent attribu- session while the second one employs a handout. hey can be used together
tion retraining studies with irst year college students. hese are given and or separately.
described below: he video session involves videotaping two senior students talking about
their experience in the irst year. hey emphasize how they believed they did
1. Pre-AR Diagnostic Assessment
not have the ability but things started changing when they made more eforts
2. Causal Search Activation
or changed their study strategies. Following their conversation a lecturer com-
3. AR Induction
ments on their talk to promote locus of control over the process of learning.
4. AR Consolidation
his can be easily adopted for a language learning context in which a group of
5. Post-AR Assessment
students can talk about (or perform a scripted conversation about) their initial
Pre-AR Diagnostic Assessment: he irst step to alter students' attributions language learning experience and emphasize the fact that things can change
for their performance in language learning requires an initial assessment of when they started taking more control over the process of language learning.
their attributions. Haynes et al. (2009) propose that this needs to be done his can be coupled with a commentary from a language instructor who high-
within the irst month after the term begins. his may be of vital importance lights the signiicance of attributing performance to more internal/unstable/
for some students as the assistance they may need is likely to be more urgent controllable causes.
than is often thought. For a language programme, then, it may well be suitable he second method is about employing a handout. A handout can be pre-
to wait until learners are irst assessed through either formative or summative pared with a nice layout to present maladaptive attributions on one side and
assessment tools. adaptive alternatives on the other side, again promoting locus of control over
To do this, once students receive results from their irst assessment, an at- the process of learning. Students can be asked to read a printed or online ver-
tributions questionnaire can be administered. An assessment of students' re- sion of the handout and participate in a discussion session.
364 Attribution retraining in L2 classes: prospects for exploratory classroom practice İsmail Hakkı Erten 365

AR Consolidation: An attribution retraining session is typically followed by Summary and conclusion

a consolidation session. Haynes et al. (2009) describe four diferent methods
In this chapter, I tried to show the links between the factors to which stu-
of consolidating students' adaptive attributions: group discussion, a diicult
dents refer to explain and attribute their achievement and/or failure in learn-
aptitude/language test, a writing assignment, and a handout.
ing a foreign language. I have several times emphasized the need for language
Group discussion: Target students can be organized into small groups and
learners to adopt more adaptive attributions for what happens to them in the
discuss their attributions regarding their poor academic experiences. hey are
process of language learning. Controllability was also emphasized as it has
asked to give three most important causes of their performance then report
been shown to be closely linked to achievement. Finally, I tried to exhibit how
their reasons to the discussion coordinator. he whole group then discusses
a typical attribution retraining programme can be applied in language classes.
whether reasons produced by diferent groups are controllable or uncontrol-
I feel the need to note that attribution retraining studies are scarce in the
lable. Later the group suggests more controllable alternative attributions for
ield of SLA and any attempts to understand, let alone change, how students
their unsatisfactory performances.
explain their performance is truly congruent with the spirit of exploratory
An aptitude/language test: a second AR consolidation procedure that
classroom practice. At the same time, if we can help our students adopt more
Haynes et al. describe is administering a diicult aptitude test where students
adaptive attributions to their performance, be it poor or good, this is likely to
are most likely to fail. According to Haynes and his colleagues such a failure
lead to genuine improvement in our classroom environments.
following an attribution retraining session can help students practice endors-
ing more controllable attributions. IIn a language classroom, however, it may
not be practical to administer a general aptitude test. Instead, such an experi- Acknowledgement
ence can be provided through a diicult language test that is above students'
I owe thanks to my colleagues Olcay Sert and Kadriye Aksoy of Hacettepe
proiciency level. Students can then experience generating genuinely more
University for taking pains to provide me with valuable feedback on this paper.
adaptive attributions for their low performance.
My special thanks go to my wife Nesrin Bayraktar Erten for creating the time
A writing assignment: In this assignment, students are asked to remember
slot for me to write and taking care of children by herself.
a test that they failed or performed considerably lower than that they usually
do, then describe their emotions and what they learned from this experience.
Students are advised that their responses will be kept conidential. References
Handout: he handout prepared for the attribution retraining session pro- Cochran, J. L., McCallum, R. S., & Bell, S. M. (2010). hree A’s: how do attributions,
vides a salient resource for students to study. Further, a printed handout can be attitudes, and aptitude contribute to foreign language learning? Foreign Language
complementary to a video session and function as a reminder of the session. Annals, 43(4), 566–582.
Post-AR Assessment: Once the attribution retraining and consolidation steps Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: ad-
are complete, students' attributions can be reassessed some time later. Haynes vances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53, 3–32.
et al. recommend several months after the completion of previous components Erler, L., & Macaro, E. (2011). Decoding ability in French as a foreign language learn-
of the retraining. To do this, the same attribution instrument can be adminis- ing motivation. Modern Language Journal, 95(4), 496–518.
tered again, coupled with a close observation of students' improvement in due Erten, İ. H., & Burden, R. L. (2014). he relationship between academic self-concept,
course of time. Such reassessment will make it possible to compare students' attributions, and L2 achievement. System, 42, 391-401.
Gobel, P., & Mori, S. (2007). Success and failure in the EFL classroom: exploring stu-
attributions and performance before and after attribution retraining.
dents’ attributional beliefs in language learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 7, 149–169.
Gobel, P., Mori, S., hang, S. M., Kan, N. G., & Lee, K. W. (2011). he impact of cul-
ture on student attributions for performance: a comparative study of three groups
366 Attribution retraining in L2 classes: prospects for exploratory classroom practice İsmail Hakkı Erten 367

of EFL/ESL learners. Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia ( JIRSEA), Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: exploring the role of motivational
9(1), 27–43. thinking. In Z. Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language
Hashemi, M. R., & Zahibi, R. (2011). Learners’ attributional beliefs in success or fail- acquisition (pp. 93–126). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i.
ure and their performance on the interchange objective placement test. heory and Vispoel, W. P., & Austin, J. R. (1995). Success and failure in junior high school: a criti-
Practice in Language Studies, 8, 954–960. cal incident approach to understanding students’ attributional beliefs. American
Haynes, T. L., Perry, R. P., Stupnisky, R. H., & Daniels, L. M. (2009). A review of Educational Research Journal, 32, 377–412.
attributional retraining treatments: Fostering engagement and persistence in vul- Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park:
nerable college students. In Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. Sage.
227-272). Springer Netherlands. Weiner, B. (2010). he development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: a
Hsieh, P. P., & Kang, H. (2010). Attribution and self-eicacy and their interrelation- history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28–36.
ship in the Korean EFL context. Language Learning, 60(3), 606–627. Williams, M. D., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social con-
Hsieh, P. P., & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Implications from self-eicacy and attribution structivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
theories for an understanding of undergraduates’ motivation in a foreign language Williams, M. D., & Burden, R. L. (1999). Students’ developing conceptions of them-
course. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 513–532. selves as language learners. Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 193–201.
Mercer, S. (2012). Dispelling the myth of the natural-born linguist. ELT Journal, Williams, M. D., Burden, R., & Al-Baharna, S. (2001). Making sense of success
62(1), 22–29. and failure: the role of the individual in motivation theory. In Z. Dörnyei, & R.
Mori, S., Gobel, P., hepsiri, K., & Pojanapunya, P. (2010). Attributions for perfor- Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 171–184). Hono-
mance: a comparative study of Japanese and hai university students. JALT Journal, lulu: University of Hawai’i.
32(1), 5–28. Williams, M. D., Burden, R., Poulet, G., & Maun, I. (2004). Learners’ perceptions
Peacock, M. (2009). Attribution and learning English as a foreign language. ELT Jour- of their successes and failures in foreign language learning. Language Learning
nal, 64(2), 184–193. Journal, 30, 19–29.
Perry, R. P., Stupnisky, R. H., Hall, N. C., Chipperield, J. G., & Weiner, B. (2010).
Bad starts and better inishes: Attributional retraining and initial performance in
(Footnotes)
competitive achievement settings. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 29(6),
668-700. 1
Pishghadam, R., & Zabihi, R. (2011). Foreign language attributions and achievement he addition of the prefix UN- indicates that these factors can be controllable but often only by others
(e.g. school administration) rather than the learner themselves, making these factors uncontrollable for
in foreign language classes. International Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 1–11. language learners
Ruthig, J. C., Perry, R. P., Hall, N. C., and Hladkyj, S. (2004). Optimism and attribu-
tional retraining: Longitudinal efects on academic achievement, test anxiety, and
voluntary course withdrawal in college students. Journal of Applied Social Psychol-
ogy, 34: 709–730.
Ruthig, J. C., Perry, R. P., Hladkyj, S., Hall, N. C., Pekrun, R., and Chipperield, J.
G. (2008). Perceived control and emotions: Interactive efects on performance in
achievement settings. Social Psychology of Education, 11: 161–180.
hang, S. M., Gobel, P., Nor, N. F. M., & Suppiah, V. L. (2011). Students’ attributions
for success and failure in the learning of English as a second language: a compari-
son of undergraduates from six public universities in Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of
Social Sciences and Humanities, 19(2), 459–474.
Tse, L. (2000). Student perceptions of foreign language study: a qualitative analysis of
foreign language autobiographies. Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 69–84.
 Integrated teacher-research
26 Jerome C. Bush

Context and problem

In this chapter I would like to describe the professional development practices
we used at Ahmet Şimşek Koleji during the 2013-2014 academic year. he
school is a private K-12 school in Istanbul with about 1500 students and I am
the foreign language coordinator. I manage 32 teachers, (25 English teachers
and 7 German teachers) who teach foreign languages to children from 3 to 18
years old. he school is well-established, having been founded in 1986. It is
located in the Kartal district of Istanbul, which is on the Asian side.
he reason I want to describe our project is that I think what we did is
diferent from, and perhaps an improvement on, other professional develop-
ment programs. It is my hope that other schools and institutions will adopt
this model, which is based on teacher-research. I am now calling the program
“Integrated Teacher-research” or ITR for short. he basic idea is that all the
teacher-research projects are simpliied and have a common theme. he use of
a common theme is why the term “integrated” is being used. In this case, all
the teacher-research projects were related to motivation in some way. I believe
that this program is an interesting innovation and that other institutions can
beneit from understanding and using this process.
Before I describe the program in detail, I would like to give you some
background on our school and our professional development eforts. Since the
school was established in 1986, it has always been focused on the teaching of
English. I was recruited in 2010 and came to Turkey in August of that year. I
spent the irst year getting adjusted to the new system and started training the
teachers in the 2011-2012 year. I was doing mostly workshops and seminars.
hese seminars were on general topics of teaching and learning such as read-
ing comprehension, teacher knowledge, professionalism, the cognitive aspects
of writing, and motivation. However, the seminars were not efective in that
they seemed to have little impact on classroom behavior.
369
370 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 371

Although I continued seminars during the 2012-2013 academic year, it Integrated Teacher-research is the result of adapting teacher-research to
was becoming apparent that it was a fruitless endeavor. his was upsetting to the primary and secondary environment. he research process was simpliied
me because I put a lot of time and energy into developing the workshops and to make it feasible for teachers to complete. All of the studies were to be
creating my PowerPoints. he teachers responded positively and said they en- conducted on the theme of motivation. he goal became not the production
joyed the seminars. However, they said that they couldn’t put the theories and of an individual study to develop an individual teacher, but a series of stud-
concepts from the seminars into action due to curriculum constraints and poor ies along a single theme that could be compared and contrasted. In ITR, the
student behavior. I wanted to provide a valuable training experience for the aggregate of the studies are as important as the individual studies. here is as
teachers, but the training sessions were only mildly interesting to the teachers. much value in the conversations about the studies and all the teachers being
he puzzle I needed to solve was inding a way to make professional develop- focused on the resolution of a common problem as there is in the individual
ment meaningful without overburdening the teachers. studies themselves.
At the end of the year, I was still thinking about how I could improve my I did not so much design ITR as it just sort of grew. In other words, I did
seminars. I gave the teachers a survey and had them tick of seminar topics not set out to develop a new professional development technique. I was just
in which they might be interested. he overwhelming top response was “mo- trying to do something that would be efective in-service training. While we
tivation”. It seemed that the teachers were assuming an inverse relationship were conducting the project we referred to it as “the motivation project” and
between motivation and classroom behavior. hat is to say, that if we could not ITR. However, when I look back on it, I am pleased with the results and
increase the motivation, the instances of classroom disruption would decrease. feel that it was appropriate in this context. I would like to do a similar project
Of course, motivation has other positive beneits and it seemed like a good next year another around theme. Before describing the concept of ITR further,
topic to consider. perhaps it is best to take a look at some of the pertinent literature and related
Over the summer something very interesting happened. I was invited to studies to see how ITR difers from other forms of research.
a lovely conference in the city of Izmir, Turkey. he conference was titled
“Teacher-researchers in Action” and it was organized by Dr. Kenan Dikilitaş at
Gediz University. Dr. Simon Borg was the main speaker at this conference. He
Literature review
gave compelling reasons to try teacher-research as a professional development ITR is not the process of integrating teaching and research, which has a devel-
activity. Additionally, the teachers at Gediz University who had conducted oped body of literature (e.g. Colbeck, 1998). ITR is also distinct from Collab-
studies presented their research, and that was very interesting. he teacher- orative Teacher-research, which is where a group of teachers do a single study
researchers spoke about the process and what they gained from the process of by working together. It should also not be confused with educational research,
conducting research. which is a general term for research about teaching and education, but not
I felt very positive about teacher-research and thought I would like to try necessarily conducted, by teachers.
this method at Ahmet Şimşek Koleji. However, the teachers at Ahmet Şimşek ITR has some features in common with Exploratory Practice (see All-
Koleji did not have the skills or support of the teachers at Gediz University. A wright, 2003). One common feature is that the focus is on understanding a
high school simply does not have the same culture of research as a university. phenomenon. he research activities in in an ITR project, when considered to-
Also, high school teachers have an incredible complicated job that includes gether, should give some perspective on a larger issue. Additionally, similar to
communication with parents and adherence with a host of regulations from exploratory practice, ITR does not adhere to the strict principles of academic
the M.E.B. (Turkish ministry of education). Teacher-research as it was pre- research. However, ITR difers from exploratory practice in that it uses an
sented at Gediz University would not be appropriate in this context. I decided intervention. Exploratory practice examines normal classroom procedures to
to modify teacher-research for our context. he end result is ITR. develop understanding. In the words of Allwright (2001), “…one of the chief
372 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 373

distinguishing features of Exploratory Practice, [is] the deliberate exploitation • Teachers become more critical, relective, and analytical
of standard classroom language learning and teaching activities as the means for • Teacher rely less on external sources to supply answers to problems
collecting data on what happens in the classroom …” (p.4). ITR, in contrast, is • Fosters connections between teachers and researchers
•
modeled on intervention studies, but it is the compilation and comparison of
Improves teachers’ sense of self-worth and status
•
the individual studies that leads to greater understanding of a phenomenon.
Reduces the gap between research indings and classroom practice
•
he individual studies in an ITR project may seem completely unprofessional
to academicians. However, the aggregate of the studies can shed light on a Develops a problem-solving mindset for teachers
phenomenon. Also in contrast to exploratory practice, ITR does not just seek • Increases the professional status of teachers
to understand a phenomenon, but it may address a problem or seek to make a • Empowers the teacher to inluence the teaching profession
• Has the potential for improving the entire educational process
speciic improvement in a school.
he practice of teaching can be improved by looking at solid evidence of
what successfully develops students (Hammersley, 2007). his is known as ev- It seems that teacher-research is efective in developing teachers’ coni-
idence-based practice. he purpose of educational research, then, is to compile dence as well as abilities. It also has been shown to have a positive impact on
evidence which can be used in educational decision making. It is important student behavior and learning. Additionally, teacher-research can drive school
that teacher base their decisions on evidence of what works. However, much of improvements. Teacher-research not only identiies problems, it suggests so-
this research is done in universities and is conducted by professors or profes- lutions and tests them. his creates evidence of efective procedures that can
sional researchers. Substantial contributions to the ield of Second Language then be adopted by the whole school.
Acquisition have been made in this way. Much of the teaching practices of According to Stenhouse (1975), an important characteristic of research is
today have come from these empirical studies. However, sometimes these re- that it must be made public. Teacher-research is certainly relective, but if it
search studies, which are somewhat clinical in nature, miss the realities of the stops at the development of a personal understanding, it would not be consid-
classroom. Teachers have a unique insight into what works for classroom prac- ered research according many academicians. hese academicians assert that re-
tice. Sometimes teachers are more aware of what works in a classroom than an search must be communicated and that such communication is integral to the
academician. hus, teachers have the potential to make substantial contribu- deinition of research. It is only after the research has been disseminated that
tions to the ield of education. it can become part of the public debates which shape educational policy. Free-
his is the position that Dr. Borg was supporting at the conference in man (1996) stated that teacher-research which is not made public runs the
Izmir during June of 2013. In fact, much of the information regarding teach- risk of being lost. Although private inquiry can be beneicial, a wider distribu-
er-research reported here comes from the book “Teacher-research in Language tion increases the chance that teacher-researchers will have an impact both on
Teaching” by Simon Borg (Borg, 2013). In the book, Borg asserts, “…teacher- the ield of education and on educational policy. hat is why we compiled and
research has the potential to be a powerful transformative force in the pro- printed our studies.
fessional development of language teaching” (pg.6). herefore, exploring the Some academicians argue that the responsibility to publish research in a
relationship between teachers and research is vitally important. he potential way that approximates academic research is too heavy a burden for teach-
beneits of teacher-research are many, and have been widely reported on in the ers. Indeed, that is the perspective that I took for the project. I designed it to
literature as summarized in Borg (2013). hey are: be feasible for busy teachers to complete. It did not have a strong academic
• Improved teacher decisions and judgments requirement. Imposing strict requirements for academic-like research would
• Reduced feelings of frustration and isolation for teachers
be too much for teachers in this context. Unfortunately, our teachers are also
• Allows teachers to be innovators
not highly paid. Economic instability, generally speaking, does not facilitate
374 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 375

embarking on a path of systematic inquiry. Teachers also have personal reasons slides. he reduced research process was described in detail for the teachers
for not conducting research such as lack of skills, knowledge, belief, or motiva- and efort was taken to see that the overall project was explained clearly. he
tion (Borg, 2013). process for the teachers consisted of four steps. he teachers were to ind and
In addition to the problems teachers face in conducting research, several read one article related to motivation. hen the teachers were to develop a re-
researchers question the validity of teacher-research. Much of the teacher- search question. he third step was to do something to test the question, such
research produced is done so as a teacher development scheme (this project as a classroom activity. After that the teachers had to observe the results and
included). his means that teachers are rarely voluntarily involved in research write a report. Although the research process was simpliied for the teachers,
projects. herefore, much of the research is of low quality and the indings are it was not an activity they were used to and they had a lot of questions. At an
not reliable. his critique is made according to a traditional view of scientiic early stage it became clear that this was not a research culture and there would
research and disregards the value of the process of conducting research to the be some problems.
teacher. In spite of the confusion, the teachers all found articles related to motiva-
Integrated Teacher-research addresses these issues by reducing the aca- tion by the required due date. Presumably, all of the teachers read these articles.
demic requirements of the individual studies and focusing on the process and Many of these articles were from academic journals, but some of them were
the aggregate results. he individual studies may not be reliable, but the pro- just simple one-page articles from the internet. Regardless of the quality of
cess of doing the research and comparing it with similar research done by the article, it is almost certainly true that this project prompted the teachers
peers has many beneits. I really think it is a new idea. Although a wealth of to read. In addition to understanding the contents of the articles, the process
research exists on teacher-research, I couldn’t ind a situation where the re- of searching for such publications can be beneicial. One can see the scope of
search was integrated around a single theme. I make the claim of developing current research and discover what types of studies are popular. It is possible
a new system with no small degree of trepidation. Such a wealth of research that just by searching for and reading an article the teachers had internalized
exists that it is possible this concept has been tried before and I wasn’t able more information about teaching than they had the year before when they
to ind the study. Even if this project turns out to be unoriginal, it still adds were passively sitting through seminars.
to the growing body of practitioner research. Perhaps it is signiicant in that In addition to the reading, all teachers developed a research question that
it focuses on the primary and secondary EFL teaching environment, which I approved. he project was to be a systematic way of answering this question.
tends to be underrepresented in the literature. hen more problems started to develop. Some teachers became confused as to
what to do to proceed, but didn’t want to ask for guidance. Other teachers were
afraid that their classroom activity, which was often referred to as an interven-
Procedure tion, would not be efective. Time constraints, particularly the testing schedule,
he rationale for the program was set out in the department strategic plan were reported to be a problem. Many of the teachers said that they were not
which was given to teachers on Monday, August 19, 2013. he strategic plan used to this kind of project and were unclear on how to proceed. To make the
clearly stated a position that teacher behavior stems from teacher beliefs. It project less confusing I made another handout that listed the expected out-
also reported that seminars may be pleasant experiences, but not efective. comes along with section headings for the reports.
herefore, to impact teacher behavior, teachers should actively work on a proj- In addition to this, I made myself available to assist with the various proj-
ect themselves. his project will have the teacher trying some new behavior, ects. I also checked in with teachers at our weekly meetings. Teachers were
observing the efect and recording the result. hesitant to ask me for help, but they were discussing their projects with each
I gave a presentation to the teachers on Wednesday August 21st, 2013. he other. I was very happy to see these discussions going on. However, it should
presentation was about 45 minutes long. I prepared a handout and PowerPoint be noted that some teachers strongly resisted the project. In fact one teacher
376 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 377

just handed in some material copied from the Internet with a letter of apology. did her study on that topic. Some of the articles were directly related to the
Although this was a great disappointment at irst, I eventually came to realize project, others were related in an indirect way. hese indirectly related articles
that this was also a type of data. hese kinds of projects will not work for every were general in nature. Although they provided useful background informa-
teacher and having inlated expectations could be dangerous. I decided that it tion and theoretical perspective, they did not relate directly to the study done
would be best to take the long view and consider the research in the aggregate by the teacher.
and the efects it was having on the teachers and the school.
“In fact the article was about studies and developments on moti-
Eventually, I had all the reports. I realized that it would make a nice book.
vation in education up to date. So in that point of view my project
As part of the process I had always meant to publish the compilation of re-
seems as if unrelated. But when all details are read in the article
ports. However, I hadn’t really planned on creating a book. I thought it would
the main point of the project suits well I think.” –T1
be more like a magazine. I ended up with almost a hundred pages of material.
To determine the efectiveness of the project I had the teachers complete a Several teachers mentioned that the articles were partially useful. Some of
survey with eight open-ended questions. I analyzed the responses, wrote a few the teachers adapted the articles to their particular circumstances and used
sections describing the process and results, added a few pictures and ended up some, but not all of the information in the articles.
with 135 pages of material. I designed a cover and had it printed as a book.
As of the writing of this article the book is being printed. After the book “Yes, most of the parts are related to what I did in the classroom.”
arrives, I will have the teachers read the book and respond to at least three of –T16
the authors. his will further create discussion, analysis and comparisons. At “…I was aware of the fact that I would not be able to use every
our school we have a primary school group and a high school group. hese two single idea recommended in the article, but I chose some parts
groups of teachers don’t often interact. However, they will interact through of the article and tried to adopt them in my classroom studies.”
this book. he process took place over an entire school year. It was not really –T11
easy, but it also wasn’t so diicult it couldn’t be done. It was appropriate for
Most of the teachers based their studies on the articles that they chose.
a context where research is generally not valued, and the teachers are over-
his turns out to be the reason they chose the articles. In these cases the article
worked and under-paid.
was directly related to the study. In some cases the teacher-research study was
essentially a replication of a previous study. he teachers are using procedures
Findings and discussion described in the articles and verifying if the results will be similar in the Turk-
I will give a summary of the responses of the eight-question survey in this sec- ish EFL environment.
tion. he survey was completed by 21 teachers. hree teachers did not respond “I chose an article which was useful and could be done easily in
to the survey. he responses of the teachers will be reported anonymously. my classroom. So it worked well in the classroom I chose. When
Each teacher has been assigned a number, from “T1” to “T21”, and these num- I saw the positive impact on the students, I also did some of the
bers will be used instead of names. same activities in my other classes.” –T10
he irst question of the survey had to do with whether or not the article
that was read related to the research project. Twenty of the teachers (95%) he responses to this question seem to indicate that initial reading is an im-
indicated that the article related to their study in some way. Only one teacher portant ingredient in ITR. In most cases, the article provided structure for the
said that her project was not connected to the article that she read. In this research study which was conducted by the teacher. Of course more reading
case, she was inspired by another project that was going on in the school and would have been better. However, requiring the teachers to search out and read
ive or ten studies would be a heavy burden for already overworked teachers.
378 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 379

It should be noted that the article selection done by the teachers was not “We have to teach them grammar, vocabulary etc. Our pro-
random. For the most part, the teachers had an idea of a topic they wanted to gramme is so much illed with these kinds of grammar and vo-
research before they went looking for an article. he articles provided theoreti- cabulary exercises. We do not have extra time for doing any other
cal frameworks and methodologies for the studies of the teachers. It is hard to activities. It was stressful for me.” – T10
imagine that the teachers would have produced much of anything at all if they
had skipped the article reading step. he fear of failure was mentioned by four people. his fear was mostly
he next question asked the teachers what part of the project was the most about whether or not the intervention would be successful, rather than a fear
stressful. Several teachers mentioned during staf meetings that they were of reprisal or public humiliation.
stressed by the project and that they did not have adequate preparation to “…so all these could be wasting lots of time on something that
conduct a study. he teachers’ responses to the written survey indicated a vari- wouldn’t work probably.” – T1
ety of factors contributed to the stress of the project. he stress factors and the “It’s very easy to get excited about a project or a new way of teach-
frequencies are reported in the table below. ing but actually putting it into practice is quite diicult…” –T18

Table 1 – Frequencies of stress factors (N=21) Only one teacher mentioned a fear of something like a reprimand.
Freq. % Stress Factor Freq. % Stress Factor “…I felt extremely discouraged and was worried that I wouldn’t
10 48% students 2 10% nothing prepare a satisfactory report.” –T19
5 24% time 2 10% materials he other stress factors mentioned are more or less self-explanatory. In the
4 19% failure apprehension 2 10% evaluating the results category of noise, three of the teachers were stressed by the noise the students
4 19% noise 1 5% technology made and one was stressed by noise that came from outside. What is made
inding the article and writ- clear by the responses to this question is that the project was indeed stressful
3 14% 1 5% inding a place for the teachers. his is the irst time the teachers had been asked to do such
ing the report
a project. Additionally, the all wanted to do a good project. At the beginning
In this current project, the item that was most mentioned as stressful was it was told that the reports would all be shared with the group. Although this
the students. he adverse behaviors of students that were most mentioned was not indicated as a stress factor, it may have had an efect on the quality of
were lack of participation, noise and failure to study. work that the teachers desired to produce. Teachers, like other professionals,
want to be seen as competent by their peers.
“It was the students’ part which made me stressful. Despite hav- he next question asked if the project changed the way the teacher will
ing planned the activities beforehand, I felt stressful and a bit teach in the future. hirteen of the teachers (62%) responded positively or di-
frustrated when there was not enough student participation.” – rectly said “yes”, six teachers (29%) responded negatively or said “no”, and two
T11 teachers (9%) made replies that did not give a clear indication.
Another major stressor was time. Some teachers reported that the project “Yes, absolutely changed the way I teach. It happened as soon as I
took class time away from other planned activities. Others reported that work- inished the project, It didn’t take a long time. By the help of this
ing under deadline caused them stress. One teacher reported that the search- report, I improved my methods in reading.” –T21
ing a reporting phase of the project took up a lot of time in the evening.
380 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 381

“Actually this Project taught me new techniques that I never Not all the comments were as positive as the examples above, but overall
used. I realised the importance of authentic materials on students the projects seemed to give a beneit to students. Even the comments that
because they helped them to increase their motivation.” – T14 were less glowing indicated that the majority of students beneitted from the
project.
he teachers who responded negatively or said “no” directly indicated that he ifth question asked if the teachers felt supported. he teachers were
they were already using the techniques they were investigating. In these cases, told about teacher-research and were given documents outlining the project.
the teachers were expanding on what they were doing or verifying the efec- hey were also told where they could get additional information on teacher-
tiveness of their methods. research. he foreign language coordinator also ofered to help the teachers. A
“I feel this project won't change the way I teach because I always few teachers accepted this ofer, but most of the teachers did not. Although
use this kind of things in my classroom activity. But I learnt some many of the teachers did not ask for help it seems they were able to draw on a
new activities from this article.” –T3 number of sources that assisted them in their projects.

Comments that were unclear indicated a need to deine what one means “We searched and we asked each other how we could success this
by teaching. project as teachers.” –T9
“I was supported in doing this project. At the beginning of this
“I still teach in the same way but I have learned new methods; so term in seminars, I learned lots of things methods and tech-
I have added new techniques. I believe every teacher has a teach- niques. I looked into methods books and I asked some English
ing style and it does not change; but they can add more fresh teachers.” – T8
techniques in their way of teaching styles.” –T10
A teacher-research project, as we have seen, is a stressful activity. Although
he teachers were very astute in pointing out that learning a few new tech- support was often ofered, it seems the teachers felt more comfortable getting
niques may not entail a substantial change in the way a teacher teaches. While help from each other. In this way, an ITR project can help to develop a com-
they may not represent a fundamental shift in teaching, new techniques en- munity of teachers. It also creates a culture of inquiry within this community.
hance the quality of classroom practice. herefore, it seems that even those However, some people, especially those outside the community of teachers, are
who did not claim to have a change in their teaching were able to improve as not so understanding and supportive.
a result of the ITR program.
“Nobody supported me while I was doing my Project. And also
All of the teachers commented that students received beneits from the
when I got permission from principle, he said you should be care-
program. ITR, as well as other teacher-research programs, have an advantage
ful, if our students see you maybe they want to go out and if
over other forms of professional development in that working with students
it happens, you will be responsible for it. his speech made me
is integral to the process. his can provide a direct positive result for students.
stress.” –T12
“he projects impact on students was astonishing. hey were all
he previous comment, regarding the way the principal threatened the
like racers waking up to the big day.” - T1
teacher, should receive special attention. Not all of the management at ev-
ery school will be supportive of ITR projects. In fact, many managers do not
“I saw that students like this kind of things. hey eagerly partici- want to step outside of traditional boundaries and try something diferent in
pate in the lesson. And also their success becomes more than an teaching. Some of the teachers mentioned a fear of failure, and that possibility
average.” –T3 always exists. A failure on the part of a teacher can be seen as a failure of the
382 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 383

principal. School principals have often worked very hard for a long time to confusion was experienced regarding whether “similar” meant a diferent proj-
become principals and do not want to do things that would jeopardize their ect about motivation or an ITR project on another topic.
careers. However, as indicated here and in other research, the real and poten-
tial beneits are substantial. It is not clear how traditional-minded educational “No, I really don't like to do motivation project. However, if the
leaders can be convinced to allow ITR and other teacher-research projects. subject will be diferent, yes I would like to do any Project next
he sixth question was a general question about the value of the project. year.” –T15
Nineteen of the teachers (90%) responded positively. he two (10%) com- Most of the teachers said they would like to do a similar project next year
ments that were less than positive were not strongly negative. In these cases, (n=16, 76%). here were a number of positive comments on the project. his is
the teachers made suggestions for other activities that could be more valuable. interesting in light of the fact that the teachers generally reported stress doing
“To me, next year or any appropriate period we will have to come the project. It seems as if the beneits of the project outweigh the diiculties
together and set up brain storms on how to improve the standard of doing the project.
of the school and professional activities. And we may also use “Yes, we should. Because it helps to improve ourselves and it
other schools’ activities after considering and adapting the difer- enables us to learn the importance of methods that we are us-
ences to our conditions.” –T19 ing while teaching English. For example, I learned that reading
hose who responded positively cited a number of beneits. Most of the is more important in learning foreign language than I thought.
beneits were related to the process of doing research. Some of the teachers Now I’m giving more importance to my reading lessons.” –T21
became excited by research. Some of the teachers were much more moderate in their support and sug-
“It was a professional activity which made me think beyond the gested changes, sometimes substantial changes. Although the project was de-
teaching routine. Searching for the article, deciding about the ac- signed to be easy and simple, several of the teachers voiced opinions that it was
tivity plan and learnıng new things were “valuable”. –T11 too diicult. From another perspective, the project itself may not have been so
diicult, but teachers have a great deal of responsibility and a wide range of
“he article and the data were the valuable materials for me. First
duties already. It seems the objection is to putting another duty on top of an
of all, by reading the article I learned to use new techniques. Sec-
already heavy load.
ondly, I learnt the results with the data. While I was doing the
questionnaire I wondered the results of it and I got excited.” –T14 “Yes, but we should do it orally. Because we wrote this project and
“Motivation is very important for all skills and has an important it took much time, and there was too much stuf to do…” –T3
role in learning a new language. So, this project is valuable for me “Perhaps a group of teachers or a pairwork project might be eas-
in learning how to motivate and also I have done like this kind of ier and spread the load a bit.” – T7
project for the irst time.” –T16
he teachers who said they did not want to do a similar project next year
he next question was about whether or not a similar project should be (n=3, 14%) also reported on the diiculties of doing to projects in addition to
conducted next year. he word “similar” was deliberately used to allow teach- other duties. It is absolutely true that teachers received no additional pay or
ers to consider ways in which the program might be adapted or changed to even release time to conduct their research. Even though the requirements of
be more efective. In the school the project was referred to as “the motivation the research were low, it is an extra duty.
project” and not the “ITR project” or “the research project”. herefore, some
384 Integrated teacher-research Jerome C. Bush 385

“If I have to be an honest, I don’t want to do. Because this is my It also means that subsequent classes taught by these teachers may beneit.
irst year in teaching English, I am trying to learn many things he school also proited because the problem of students motivation was ad-
about the job. Also, the stressful things in question 2 made me dressed. Another positive outcome was that the teachers formed a community
tired, both physically and mentally.” –T17 of relective practice. In my opinion, this is the best outcome and it was un-
foreseen at the outset. he project started as a way to help individual teachers
For some of the negative responses, it was not clear if the teacher didn’t develop and as an alternative to professional development seminars that were
want to do teacher-research or work on the topic of motivation. not efective. he development of a community of inquiry was not planned. It
“For my professional development, it was an extraordinary expe- was not designed to be a collaborative teacher-research project, where teachers
rience. I prefer to do something diferent for the next time.” –T11 work together on the same study. However, teachers reported that they often
got support from other teachers. his mutual support fundamentally shifts the
he inal question was an open question asking about additional feelings quality of the conversations in the teachers’ room. he last comment in section
or thoughts about the project. Some of the feelings that were expressed were 10, which comments on the setting up of a new mentality (T19), relects this
happiness and pride. Teachers were proud of themselves and their students. community of inquiry. Perhaps having the projects all related to a single theme
Teachers again mentioned that the project was useful. Some of the teachers increased this feeling of camaraderie. Integrating the projects made it more of
expressed feelings of anxiety. Many of the teachers reported that they gained a school project and less of a collection of individual projects. his seems to
insights into their students through the project. have had an impact on the teachers as a group.
Regardless of the theme or purpose of the studies, ITR helps to develop an
“What I felt about the project was also a great excitement and of
inquisitive mindset among the teachers at a school. It can bring a department
course I was proud of my students. I was anxious at the begin-
together and discussions of classroom practices are more likely to occur. he
ning but when I saw how hard they tried, I did not mind about
project involves all the English teachers at a school and ideally, those teachers
any other thing. he mission was accomplished for me since they
should suggest the theme of the project. Generally, teachers are interested in
learned and remembered the vocabulary for a long time (still in-
better and more efective ways to teach. hey are practitioners, not theoreti-
deed). On the other hand I’ve been teaching almost about 14
cians. his often leads to a problem-solving approach to developing a theme.
years and that happened to be the best time that I understood the
herefore, ITR can be a tool to solve the problem that is the theme of the proj-
importance of high motivation.” –T1
ect, in this case unmotivated students, while developing the individual teachers
“Personally, the project was beneicial because, both we research and the school.
something, we developed ourselves and encouraged students. …
we learned new techniques thanks to this project.” –T17
References
“In fact, this kind of project was useful for us to set up a new
mentality but we need time and experience to go further.” –T19 Allwright, D. (2001). hree major processes of teacher development and the appropriate
design criteria for developing and using them. Research and Practice: Voices from
the Field Conference (pp. 115-133). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Relections Allwright, D. (2003). Exploratory Practice: Rethinking practitioner research in lan-
guage teaching. Language Teaching Research, 7/2: 113-141.
In my opinion, the project was a success on many levels. he students received
a beneit from the teachers trying new techniques. hese techniques are now Borg, S. (2013). Teacher-research in Language Teaching: A critical analysis. Cambridge:
in the repertoire of the teachers, which means that the teachers developed. Cambridge University Press.
386 Integrated teacher-research

Colbeck, C. L. (1998). Merging a seamless blend: How faculty integrate teaching and
A collaborative action research teacher
research. he Journal of Higher Education, 69/6: 647-671.
Freeman, D. (1996). Redeining the relationship between research and what teachers
know. In K. M. Bailey, & D. Nunan, Voices from the Language Classroom (pp.
27 development programme
88-115). New York: Cambridge University Press. Yasemin Kırkgöz
Hammersley, M. (. (2007). Educational research and evidence-based practice. London:
Sage.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London:
Heinenmann . Introduction
his study describes a collaborative action research (CAR) teacher develop-
ment programme established between six primary school teachers of English
and a university teacher educator, the author of this paper. Six newly-qualiied
English language teachers critically examined their instructional practices in
teaching and learning English to young learners (TEYLs). From this relec-
tive process, they proceeded to implement a problem that they identiied in
their own classroom settings and relect upon their new practices. he irst
part of this paper describes a review of the relevant literature. he second part
documents the procedures outlining the methodology of conducting a CAR.
A qualitative case study approach was adopted to describe the development
of the teachers. his section also provides an analysis of the major points
emerging from the qualitative data. he analysis of the interviews, collabora-
tive meetings, lesson observation data, and the researcher’s ield notes suggests
that teachers have developed professionally besides experiencing challenges.
In order to provide a picture of how one of the teachers carried out action re-
search in his classroom, lesson extracts is presented. he article concludes with
the author’s relections of the outcomes of utilizing CAR to promote teacher
development.

Context and problem

In Turkey, the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MNE) ofers in-
service training for practicing teachers at primary and secondary education.
Although there has been a signiicant increase in the number of participants in
such programs, the kind of one-of training remains insuicient for on-going
teacher developmental processes (Bayrakçı, 2009). hus, innovative in-service

387
388 A collaborative action research teacher development programme Yasemin Kırkgöz 389

teacher development programs are needed to address the actual needs of par- down an area of interest into a research question and inding time to write in
ticularly novice teachers in their early years of teaching. their action research journals” (p. 309) as causing diiculties for teachers.
his study describes my engagement, as the university teacher educator, In this study, I worked with six practicing primary school teachers in one
with six novice teachers of English on a school-university collaborative action of the provinces in Turkey. A framework, proposed by Mitchell et al. (2009)
research teacher development programme in order to address the following guided the theoretical orientations to action research that is practical, or eman-
research questions: cipatory, it focuses upon professional development and it supports teachers in
1. What is the impact of a collaborative action research process on the planning and implementing their action research projects based upon their in-
teachers’ professional development? dividual needs and problems emerging from their classroom context through
2. What challenges, if any, do teachers face during their participation in self-relective spirals of planning, acting, observing, and relecting.  hus, the
this process? uniqueness of the participants and the fact that each teacher was engaged
in diferent ‘ecologies of practice’ (Kemmis, Wilkinson, and Edwards-Groves,
2009) contributes to the signiicance of the study.
Literature review
Collaborative Action Research (CAR) employs a recursive spiral cycles fo-
cusing on planning, acting, observing, relecting, re-planning, and re-enacting Procedure and methods
(Kemmis, 1998). Mitchell Reilly and Logue (2009) state that CAR is relevant I used a case study method to examine the nature of each teacher’s professional
particularly for novice teachers in their irst ive years of practice as they may development (Yin, 2003). Data were collected from interviews, collaborative
need support for engaging in the real teaching problems they may encounter. meetings, lesson observations and my ield notes from the teachers who vol-
hey also note that via CAR, a zone of proximal development is established, untarily participated in the study. Participants were six Turkish native speaker
during which the novice teacher solidiies her/his own teaching style, the teachers of English with an average age of 25.6 years and an average 3.5 years
university partner scafolding the process of using theory to guide decision- of teaching experience, teaching English in primary classes to young learners
making, and by doing so, bufers the novice teacher as she/he tackles with the (TEYLs). hree teachers had previously attended short one-shot seminars.
realities of teaching with tools to solve other problems. Within the supportive he research took place over a four-month period during the spring semester
framework of CAR, teaching concerns can be addressed by the development of the school year.
of meaningful solutions “at a quicker pace than toiling in social and intellec- Prior to initiating CAR, I held a meeting with the teachers for planning the
tual isolation” (Mitchell et al., 2009, p.346). CAR partnership. I made it clear that my role was to act as a supporter, orga-
Studies reporting the use of CAR have documented several beneits. Capo- nizer, a facilitator and a co-researcher with the teacher participants. We agreed
bianco and Joyal, (2008) found that teachers involving in CAR demonstrated on the aims of the programme, and planned a sequence of weekly meetings.
observable professional development. Johnson and Johnson (2002) and Burns As the next stage, I held a semi-structured interview with each teacher (pre-
(1999) indicated that when novice teachers work with experienced mentors, professional development interviews) to gain information on background teach-
CAR helped participants gain better understanding and develop collabora- ing and the issues for investigation in their own classroom settings. At the end
tive relationship. Studies also highlight some challenges faced by teacher- of CAR, inal interviews (post-professional development interviews) were held
researchers. Cole and Knowles (1993) categorize some of these challenges as with the teachers that aimed to provide data concerning any changes in teach-
technical/logistical issues (e.g. time and place to do the research), personnel ers’ views of their participation in this CAR project.
issues related to the group dynamics of working collaboratively, and procedural A schedule of fourteen meetings equivalent to 42 hours were set up that
issues in conducting robust research. Zeichner (2002) identiies “narrowing took place regularly on a weekly basis during the teachers’ release time from
390 A collaborative action research teacher development programme Yasemin Kırkgöz 391

teaching. Meetings were used to help how to design and implement action re- Findings and discussion
search project; to inform on data collection tools and date analysis techniques.
In this section, I present the data to answer my research questions, and discuss
Such meetings also created an opportunity to share ideas, ofer feedback, and
it in light of the research indings. Additionally, I present lesson observation
for the teachers to relect upon their experiences. All discussions from the
data of one teacher to illustrate the impact of a facilitated CAR on the devel-
meetings were audio-recorded and later transcribed for analyses.
opment of participants’ professional learning.
Each teacher identiied a problem or a research focus that they wished to
examine. Teachers examined their problems from various aspects, setting up
an inquiry in light of the literature; collecting data via interviews and ques- he impact of car on the teachers’ professional development
tionnaires, and analyzing. hey inally documented action research projects, he analysis of qualitative data revealed two main categories of teachers’ pro-
followed by relection on their action. I facilitated the action research process fessional development: knowledge and practice.
by providing Knowledge development involved teachers’ learning about new ideas gener-
• support and resources as teachers conceptualized and implemented ated from collaborative meetings and readings of the literature. All teachers
their action research plans, had a deeper understanding of TEYLs, and implementing this newly-acquired
• research guidance on conducting literature reviews and on how to ana- knowledge within their school context. hey also expressed enhanced coni-
lyze qualitative and quantitative data. dence, feeling more capable to deal with emerging problems/puzzles.
he preliminary interview with teachers revealed answers that were incon-
I also visited each teacher’s classroom to evaluate their action and docu- sistent with contemporary views of TEYLs. Post-programme interview data
ment speciic examples of action research pedagogy as evidenced from the suggest that the teachers’ knowledge changed as they engaged in understand-
observation that may be attributable to their participation in CAR. Six rounds ing details of TEYLs while concurrently attempting to integrate it into their
of lesson observations were allocated to each teacher, thus totaling 12 audio- practices. For instance, Cem described himself as possessing a better concep-
taped observations per teacher in teachers’ own primary grade 4-5 classes. tual understanding of TEYLs:
I deinitely have a better understanding of how to tackle learn-
Data analysis ers’ short concentration by setting up engaging and experiential
Data from the interview, weekly meetings and lesson observation were tran- learning activities based on my readings of the literature and my
scribed. Transcriptions and the researcher ield notes were read and coded by action research project.
the author. Data were unitized into textual units and coded using descriptor he opportunity to learn about multiple intelligences helped Hamdi to em-
phrases (Patton, 2002). Another researcher familiar with qualitative data analy- ploy it efectively in addressing the varied learning styles of his students:
sis coded data independently. Collaboratively, the author and the researcher
then constructed general coding categories to correspond to the research ques- As part of this process, I learned about the principles of mul-
tions. Observation notes were read several times to have a holistic nature of the tiple intelligence theory. I’m now able to apply diferent kinds of
data. Based on the qualitative analysis of the completed lesson observation form, activities for diferent intelligence types: games, songs, drawing,
data reduction was achieved through an interpretive summary of classroom ob- colouring, and information gap activities, which students enjoy.
servation for each teacher. Triangulation was achieved through the use of mul- CAR also had the beneit of introducing teachers to research, as
tiple data sources to enhance the validity of data analysis. he length of the study explained by Seval:
and the involvement of member checks ensured data trustworthiness.
392 A collaborative action research teacher development programme Yasemin Kırkgöz 393

Doing action research helped me to identify speciic problems Line No.

and improve my teaching English to this age group. I can now 1 T: Do you like CARS? (showing lashcards of cars)
see the value of using pair and group work in managing my les- L1: Yes, I like cars very much.
sons. T: What about HORSES? (pointing to lashcards of horses)
L2: Yes, I like horses. Hocam bizim atımız var zaten. (with code-switching,
In terms of practice development, each teacher was able to make connec- 5 We already have horses)
tions between theory and practice as evidenced from lesson observation data T: Okay. Very good. hen, Kaan, please tell me…. What do you use your
and my ield notes. he following observation notes from diferent teachers horse for?
L2: uuuuh. Teacher teacher…
illustrate this clearly.
T: Ne için kullanıyorsunuz atı? (He explains the question in Turkish)
Cem identiied lack of motivation as a major problem in his classroom. As 10 L: teacher…..biniyoruz. (..we ride on it).
a way to solving this problem, he introduced surprise activities, e.g. ice breakers T: Ohhhhh. You are riding on it? good (He responds to students in English).
during the lesson (colouring, matching, games) to help the teacher manage the T: What about cars?
class more efectively. He also took account of the diferences in pupils’ learn- L: Hocam bir yere gitmek için kullanırız. (we use it to go somewhere) Pupils
ing style by varying the activities, and often set up information gap activities comprehend the question and answer it with code-switching between English
in which learners were encouraged to be both actively involved and mentally 15 and Turkish.
engaged in the learning process. T: Ne diyoruz buna? (what do we call this?)
Documentation compiled in the form of interviews, lesson observation, the L: Ulaşım mı hocam? (is it transportation?)
researcher’s ield notes, and the participants’ insightful relection and evalua- T: Yes, very good. TRANSPORTATION. Repeat after me.
TRANSPORTATION (He invites the whole class to repeat the new word
tion of their experiences, four months after initiation of CAR, brought to the
20 many times)
forefront several issues promoted in the present project: CAR provided a vi- LLL: Transportation. Transportation (in chorus)…
able method of professional development for all these teachers in idiosyncratic T: Now, please tell me. What other things can we use for
ways. he high degree of commitment for the investigation, diferent strengths TRANSPORTATION? (To support the meaning, he uses gestures).
and talents from individual teachers, and the fact that teachers had common T: Yani, başka neleri ulaşım için kullanırız? I mean… what else do we use
needs contributed to the ultimate efectiveness of CAR. 25 for transportation?. (he target content is not being told by the teacher directly,
In order to provide a picture of how one of the teachers carried out action learners are being directed by the teacher)
research in his classroom, the following lesson transcripts (Table 1-2) ofer ex- L: Otobüs, kamyon (Bus, truck)
cerpts on ‘Vehicles and Transportation’. he lesson extracts show that around T: Yes, very good…. Bus… and truck….(pointing to the pictures)
the main theme ‘transportation’, through many activities the teacher tried to hen, he puts some objects on the table and introduces them to the learners one by
one. hese are toys of rocks, plane, school bus, sailor, pilot. He asks them what the
maximizes the use of L2, addressing diferent learning styles and (pseudonym).
means of transportation, carrying these objects are).
he problem Cem (pseudonym). identiies in his action research project with T- Okay. You were very good. hank you… you know the vehicles we use
primary grade four class is to promote students’ communicative proiciency, for transportation. Okay. You got it? Now, please tell me….What is this?
lack of which he identiied as a problem. (showing a rock) It is a ROCK… What CARRIES it?
L: Truck…. Yes truck
T-TRUCK…good…. Please repeat after me…TRUCK…TRUCK
(showing a toy truck)
394 A collaborative action research teacher development programme Yasemin Kırkgöz 395

LLL: truck... truck… (He continues till he has introduced all types of vehicles Transcription conventions: T= teacher; L1, L2= identiied learner;
used for transportation. he use of objects in the classroom helps them create links LLL=whole class choral; (in italics) = commentary; …= pause; CAPITALI-
between the words and the images of them). SATION= emphasis.
Further practice: Listen and number. After repetition, the teacher shows them
some pictures of the vehicles used for transportation. He wants pupils to listen
As illustrated above, Cem’s persistent attitude to use L2 is relected in his
and then match the number with the correct vehicle).
T: hese are the pictures of the vehicles.... Okay... We use them for
teaching. Many of the key features associated with the communicative use of
transportation. his is a picture.... Picture of a vehicle. I will say the names language are manifested in the instructional practices of Cem. Pupils are be-
of these vehicles with numbers. You will put the correct number next to ing exposed to comprehensible input through the use of techniques such as
the picture. Okay. (He then gives the same instruction in Turkish to make sure repetition (Line 10), short simple sentences, and visual support (the use of
pupils have understood). lashcards, pictures, toys, real objects) to facilitate their understanding, feeling
T: Number 1 is the truck…. Number 2 is the car…. Number 3 is a school that utilizing a variety of techniques can help increase student motivation.
bus. Number 4 is a plane (He moves around to check students’ answers). Cem gives priority to meaning over the form on the belief that young learn-
Below is another excerpt recorded from the next lesson observed. ers need to be taught indirectly through games, songs and activities as the
most favourable way to promote their acquisition of English. In other words,
Activity 2: Production (Speaking)
he has a clear rationale for exposing the pupils to L2. In this lesson, with the
(He gives pupils toys or pictures of vehicles with diferent colors. He gets them
to talk about the vehicles according to their types and color. To do that, he directs
help of the teacher’s use of intonation and stress, pupils know that they are
some questions just for the irst time, and then wants the learners to ask and learning about transportation. Besides, they are directed by the teacher’s ques-
answer these questions). tions (Lines 1, 3, 21) to consider the subject from diferent perspectives. he
T: I have very good toys and pictures for you. Look. Helin! Which one pupils are actively involved in using L2 by carrying out various activities.
do you want? A car? A truck? A plane? Please take one... hey are all here are many key features associated with the TEYLs which are mani-
beautiful. fested in the instructional practices of Cem. He introduces new language items
L: Teacher…. please give me this picture… using enjoyable activities to make the learning of English a pleasant and an
T: Özge! Stand up please. (uses gestures) I have got a car. It is grey. What enjoyable experience for the pupils. he way in which he presents vocabu-
have you got? lary and the structure help pupils acquire language unconsciously, and practice
S: I have got a truck.
the language more efectively. Cem introduces useful phrases and words in the
T: What colour is it?
L: It is green.
context of games and activities within familiar topics to facilitate pupils’ un-
T: Good Helin . please ask Özge what she has got.. derstanding of the new structure rather than teaching or explaining it directly.
Now, take your toys and pictures.. please everyone.. and you can walk Despite pupils’ tendency to use L1 in some communication, and is able to
around and look at your friends. Ask and answer these questions ‘What maintain luent use of English with very little mixed-code when he wants to
have you got?’ and then you can answer okay..and then …’What coulor ensure that the pupils have understood instructions. He tried to speak in L2
is it?’. while giving instructions or communicating with the students, and responded
T: Okay good..come here Fikret. Come here.. to students in L2, which he justiies as follows:
(After the initial prompting and encouragement by the teacher to ask and here is a good balance between the use of mother tongue and the target
answer questions, students get out of their seats, move around and ind a pair language. Yet, we can also see that the learners get the basic knowledge. hey
toask and answer the questions. In this way, they have the chance to interact are accustomed to the teacher’s speaking in L2. However, there is a problem
with each other). here which is that the teacher speaks more. he learners should be directed to
speak more frequently. I am trying to manage this.
396 A collaborative action research teacher development programme Yasemin Kırkgöz 397

As suggested by Slattery & Willis (2001), young children will only acquire Personnel issues
the language when they hear around them, need to hear a lot of English since
Being in diferent ecologies meant that any additional meetings had to be
teacher is the main source of input. He encouraged pupils to use the L2 dur-
scheduled outside of school time. Besides the regular weekly collab-
ing interactions.
orative meetings, four teachers were able to create opportunities to meet face
Interview data indicated that Cem has become aware of the teaching style
to face on a regular basis. However, two teachers experienced personnel issues
to young learners, as indicated by the following interview extract:
related to the additional meeting times as they perceived it as an additional
I believe that the structures should be presented in an inductive workload. his was because the schools were geographically isolated, which
way rather than deductive way. Learners should be helped to prevented them to create opportunities to participate in such meetings for
guess what the structure and the target content are. In this tran- collaboration and discussion of action research projects.
scribed lesson, with the help of the riddles, and the teacher’s use
of intonation and stress, the learners know that they are going to Procedural issues
learn about transportation. In addition, they are directed by the Teachers in their irst action research project experienced research-related
teacher’s questions. problems in narrowing down an area of interest into a research question. As
hroughout his lessons, Cem used gestures and body language and his voice the teachers were unfamiliar with conducting a research they found it a chal-
appropriate to support what the students’ were learning. Cem displayed many lenge to transform the interview and questionnaire data collected into an un-
of the features that accorded good instructional practices expected in TEYLs. derstandable form. his is in line with some other action research studies (see
here was a higher incidence of contextualized activities like games, songs, in Zeichner, 2002).
his lessons, as speciied by the COC.
Relections
Challenges teachers face during their participation in this process
hrough this research I have learned that professional development can be
While the present CAR was viewed by participants as successful, it resulted in improved, and many of the day-to-day problems experienced by novice teach-
a number of challenges, corresponding to three factors in the categorization of ers can be addressed by creating opportunities that support teachers to be-
Cole and Knowles (1993). come self-relective through adopting a school-university collaborative action
research model, conducted in the company of an experienced teacher, a re-
Technical/logistical issues searcher and/or a teacher educator.
he action research projects focused on improvement of classroom practice
and teacher actions were therefore very similar to the processes that teach- References
ers engaged daily in their classrooms. However, participants perceived that Bayrakci, M. (2009). In-Service Teacher Training in Japan and Turkey: A Comparative
the amount of work required in designing questionnaire, holding interviews Analysis of Institutions and Practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,
caused them workload beside their teaching workloads, as expressed by Cem 34(1), 10-22.
below: Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge:
It was initially hard for me to investigate students’ learning styles. I strug- Cambridge University Press.
gled with issues related to how I should best deliver this to the students. Cole, A.L., & Knowles, J.G. (1993). Teacher development partnership research: A
focus on methods and issues. American Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 473–95.
398 A collaborative action research teacher development programme

Goodnough, K. (2003). Facilitating action research in the context of science education:

What happens when pre-service English
relections of a university researcher. Educational Action Research, 11(1), 41-64.
Johnson, B., & Johnson, K. (2002). Learning from warthogs and oxpeckers: promoting
mutualism in school and university partnerships. Educational Action Research,
10(1), 67–82.
28 language teachers are in action and
researchers are recording?
Kemmis, S. (1998). Action research. In J. Keeves (Ed.), Educational Research,
Methodology, and Measurement: An International Handbook (pp. 42–49). New York:
H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan
Pergamon.
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson. J., Hardy, I. & Edwards-Groves, C. (2009). ‘Leading and
Learning: Developing ecologies of educational practice’. Australian Association Introduction
for Research in Education, Canberra, November 29 to December 2, 2009. Research that teachers do in their classrooms has been variously named such
Mitchell, S.N., Reilly, R.C.,& Logue, M.E. (2009). Beneits of collaborative action as teacher-research or practitioner research (Anderson & Herr & Nihlen,
research for the beginning teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 344-49. 1994; Hopkins, 1985). Similarly, action research is a broad term for all kinds
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. housand Oaks, CA: of school-based or practitioner-based research all of which are based on com-
Sage. mon principles such as systematic inquiry and scientiic data gathering process
Slattery, M., & Willis, J. (2001). English for primary teachers A handbook of activities and (Dörnyei, 2007). Action research has been deined in various ways according
classroom language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  to Gay and Airasian (2000) it is a process in which individual or several teach-
Yin, R.K (2003). Case study research: Design and method. housand Oaks, CA: Sage. ers collect evidence and make decision about their own knowledge, perfor-
Zeichner, K.M. 2002. Teacher-research as professional development for P–12 mance, beliefs and efects in order to understand and improve them (p. 597).
educators in the USA. Educational Action Research 11(2), 301–26. Hopkins (1985) states that action research is “a form of disciplined inquiry”
involving “personal attempt to understand, improve and thus reform practice”
(p.32). Ebbutt (1985) accepts the term as “a systematic study that combines
action and relection to enhance practice” (p.156) and Corey (1953) regards
it as “a process of studying problems scientiically” so as to “evaluate, improve
and steer decision-making and practice” (p. 6). Although action research is
seen as a form of inquiry focusing on teachers’ everyday lives, Kemmis and
McTaggart (1992) articulates that action research requires careful planning,
acting, observing and relecting in a more systematic and more thorough man-
ner than one usually does in his or her everyday life.
he common point of the deinition given above is that action research
aims to improve practice through detecting instructional problems and ixing
them, and it emerges from the learning itself and is designed and carried by
practitioners who are in search of a solution. he aim of all this type of prac-
titioner-based research is to improve practitioners’ practice and transforming
teachers to researchers or explorers about their own teaching (Burns, 1999;
Gay, Mills & Airasian, 2009).

399
400 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 401
action and researchers are recording?

Van Lier (1994) claims that although action research is a small scale study, 6. Use them in class
its intervention in the real world is symbolically important. With the help 7. Interpret the outcomes
of an action research study, practitioners produce information on all aspects 8. Decide on their implications and plan accordingly (p. 17-18).
of their teaching. However, often times, teachers who participate in action
research studies are given certain tasks that are beyond their interests. Action Fox, Martin and Green (2007) argue that researchers need to answer the
research, as Johnson (2012) argues, is an efective tool for professional devel- following pre-research stage questions in order to become more relexive in
opment and growth, and helps teachers improve their vocational competence their own inquiries. Hence, we ind these preliminary questions of utmost
as well as illing the gap between theory and practice. Action research in the importance since, to our knowledge, answers to these questions put the theo-
related literature is seen both as a tool and a research method that empowers retical framework of our research study. Below are the questions we answered
teachers with knowledge, skills and feeling of autonomy (Mills, 2007; Stringer, in the pre-research stage. Nunan (1992) suggests that an action research cycle
2008). Among its many beneits, Hensen (1996) argues that action research that starts with a problem or a puzzle identiication in which a teacher identi-
has many beneits for teachers because ies a problem and follows the systematic procedures given below:
1. it improves critical teaching and thinking, 1. Preliminary investigation: collecting baseline data through observation
2. it improves teachers’ pedagogical repertoire, and recording
3. it promotes learning new things and continuous professional develop- 2. Hypothesis: forming the hypothesis based on the irst two steps
ment, 3. Intervention: teacher’s action to solve the problem
4. and it helps teachers get irst-hand information about their classrooms. 4. Evaluation: evaluating the teaching process whether there is involve-
ment
McNif and Whitehead (2005) ofer an eight-step model of the action 5. Dissemination: sharing the indings and action with other colleagues
research process; 6. Follow-up: investigating alternative ways to solve the same problem (p.
19).
1. review your current practice,
2. identify an aspect that you wish to improve,
Teaching pre-service teachers how to plan, do and present action research
3. imagine a way forward in this,
along with data gathering process plays important role in teacher education.
4. try it out,
Odhiambo (2010) indicates that teacher training departments should involve
5. monitor and relect on what happens,
pre-service teachers in some form of action research so that they gain experi-
6. modify the plan in the light of what has been found, what has hap-
ence and autonomy. Faikhamt and Clarke (2013) state that one of the most
pened, and continue,
important factors that improve pre-service teachers’ action research studies is
7. evaluate the modiied action, and
the support and guidance that is provided by university supervisors whereas
8. continue until you are satisied with that aspect of your work (p. 71).
lack of conidence and practice in carrying out an action research are the main
Similarly, Burns (2010) also ofers an eight-step model of action research; challenges that pre-service teachers undertake during the initial stages.
1. Identify a puzzle area When the related literature about action research in Turkey is reviewed, it
2. Reine your thinking about that puzzle area is seen that there are considerable number action research studies. However,
3. Select a particular topic to focus upon action research studies in Turkish context mainly focus either on ixing spe-
4. Find appropriate classroom procedures to explore it ciic instructional problems or encouraging in-service teachers to do action re-
5. Adapt them to the particular puzzle you want to explore search and improving their research skills rather than focusing on efects of ac-
402 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 403
action and researchers are recording?

tion research in teacher education programs. Devecioğlu and Akdeniz (2007) 1. face diiculties while inding a problem in their microteaching session
taught action research both theoretically and practically in order to improve mainly because they have not been used to such research design or task,
pre-service teachers practitioner-based research skills so that they could detect 2. not easily ind a solution to the problem they previously spotted mainly
instructional problems and ind solutions to these problems while practicing. because they have not been equipped with such self-correction/self-
Çepni, Küçük, and Gökdere (2002) compared teaching practice courses taught improvement schemes,
at Karadeniz Technical University with the ones taught at California State 3. identify their teaching skills and strategies that need to be strengthen
University in terms of action research. hey revealed that there were signii- as well as their strong points in teaching,
cant diferences in terms of encouraging pre-service teachers to carry out ac- 4. ind this overall research experience useful, beneicial and applicable.
tion research or to take part in research activities efectively and suggested that
It is also aimed to ind out that the preservice teachers who participate in
integration of action research studies in these courses would improve efec-
this study will internalize this research scheme and re-apply them continu-
tiveness of pre-service teachers during practice. Aladağ and Gürpınar (2007)
ously in the future. Since this action research scheme and its related task cycle
investigated students’ competence in power point presentations at Computer
will not be familiar to the participants, they might feel diiculties in the initial
Education and Instructional Technologies of Çukurova University. hrough
stages of the application phase. Nevertheless, it is expected that in the mean-
an action research study they revealed that pre-service teachers prepared more
time of experiencing the research procedure, the target group of preservice
efective presentations when they watched and self assessed their presenta-
teachers will beneit from the application and prefer to sustain it as part of
tions. Besides, pre-service teachers also found problematic parts and re-ar-
their teaching and professional development. In order to achieve such a target,
ranged their presentation as well as deining negative factors that inluenced
the research design and its related questions are as follows:
their presentations such as anxiety, time limitation, lack of resources, lack of
experience and technical problems. 1. Which areas are identiied as problematic by preservice teachers in
Kılıç (2006) states that pre-service teachers do not gain suicient compe- terms of their own in-class teaching applications?
tence in practice and observation in classroom. Similar research also revealed 2. What are the positive and negative aspects of carrying out such an ac-
that pre-service teachers have problems in applying content knowledge and tion research from the perspectives of preservice teachers?
vocational knowledge that they gain during their undergraduate education herefore, within this study it is aimed to instruct preservice teachers to
(Yeşilyurt & Karakuş, 2011; Yeşil, 2009; Baskan, 2001). Ataünal (2003) in- apply an action research procedure in their practicum and evaluate the whole
dicates that lifelong learning is an indispensable part of teaching, and thus experience of teaching and research cycle at the end of the academic term.
teachers should always be in the pursuit of improving their knowledge along
with their practice. Traditional in service training is considered as inefective
since it does not always provide suicient time and opportunities for practice Method
( Johnson, 2012). here is a considerable need in research that focus on pre- Harmer (2007: p. 415), while describing the data gathering techniques com-
service teachers’ experience and opinions about practice of theoretical knowl- monly used in action research, articulates that we “might record ourselves (or
edge (Avcı & Bayrak, 2013). have ourselves ilmed) doing particular tasks so that we can assess their ef-
We strongly believe in the necessity for making preservice teachers autono- fectiveness.” In this action research study, we asked twenty-four preservice
mous and life-long relective inquirers who continuously look at their practice, English language teachers to take one of their microteaching sessions previ-
ind problems, and solve them by means of scientiic inquiry. In that sense, by ously recorded and re-view it so as to ind one single problem that they ind
applying this research with them, we believe that we can help them realize that bothering in their teaching. Following that, they would “correct” the problem
such a process is doable. In this study, there exist four assumptions involved. It they identiied the proof of which would be a new recording of their previ-
is hypothesized that the participating preservice teachers will:
404 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 405
action and researchers are recording?

ous microteaching session. he data was collected through a comparison of the fourth to eighth year. he whole group was facilitated and guided during
the microteaching sessions and interviews with the prospective teachers who the action research procedure by two supervising course instructors at the fac-
carried out their own action research. herefore, the aim of this study was to ulty. In order to ensure anonymity, pseudonyms were employed all through the
carry out a research in which preservice teachers carry out an action research data presentation section in the present study.
of relective teaching procedure to identify their own problems in teaching
and explore possible solutions to apply and get over them all. he data sources
which were used to investigate research that aimed to evaluate the whole pro-
Procedure
cess of this action research included: he participants were informed about the research cycle and the related task
1. written action research reports, procedure at the beginning of the term, and constant guidance and support
2. four video recordings for each preservice teacher, and were ofered by the instructors via meetings held every fortnight. he par-
3. an open-ended survey administered to all the participants (n=24) via ticipants were asked to record their classes in the irst place. Later on, they
one-to-one interviews held at the end of the one-term course. reviewed their recordings and identiied their in-class applications that need
to be strengthen or replaced with other applications. hey also focused on
the strong teaching points but the focal aspect was their weak application in
Context that particular recorded teaching experience. After the identiication phase,
he Practicum, which serves as the context of the current study, is a six credit the participants were instructed on how to do multiple source research to ind
compulsory course ofered in the English language teacher education curricu- out possible solutions to the singled-out issue in their teaching. Having com-
lum in Turkey. It is also named as the teaching practice course and given in pleted the data collection procedure on possible solutions, they altered their
the spring semester of senior year in the preservice English teachers’ educa- problematic strategy with an alternative one and video recorded the teaching
tion towards the bachelor’s degree. he prospective teachers taking the course practice again. hey were asked to relect on their altered strategy applied by
are assigned in diferent primary or secondary state schools and required to writing a report of evaluation. At the end of the term, the preservice teachers
teach at least four class hours per week under the supervision of the course were invited to one-to-one meetings with the course instructors to evaluate
instructors at the faculty and with the help of mentoring teachers working as the whole procedure of relective teaching via carrying out action research.
English teachers in those schools. It is required for the preservice teachers that
they participate in a fourteen week of teaching schedule that enable them to
experience actual teaching setting, material application and teacher-student
Data analysis
interaction in English lessons. hrough multiple reading of the written data taken from the action research
reports, the recurring themes and categories were coded. Having coded the
data, meaningful categories were developed out of the repeated items (Cre-
Participants swell, 2004; Gall et.al, 2005). In order to triangulate the indings, the record-
he participant selection included all twenty four preservice English teachers ings of practice teaching were reviewed as well, and three diferent experts
taking the practicum course in four diferent sections. Among the participants, worked on the same procedure independently for veriication. he same meth-
eight were male and sixteen were female. he participants were ranged in age odological pathway was followed for the analysis of data derived from inter-
from 20 to 26 years old with a mean age of 22. he whole group was placed in views held via a survey of open-ended questions on the positive and negative
two diferent schools in groups of at least three. Each group of three prospec- aspects of carrying out action research to identify problematic teaching issues.
tive teachers was guided by one mentor teacher at diferent grade levels from
406 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 407
action and researchers are recording?

Findings Teaching of grammar

he coding and theme analysis of the data gathered from the participants After reviewing the video recordings, the preservice teachers had identiica-
resulted in three interconnected headings of indings. First, there were issues tions on their teaching style in their reports and emphasized that changes in
related with their teaching skills in their classrooms. Secondly, coursebook their grammar teaching styles were required. While describing their grammar
dependent teaching posed a serious problem for them. hirdly, they experi- teaching, they had some identiication; such as, teaching in a grammar-based,
enced problems while teaching in the classroom which should be categorized deductive and traditional manner:
as problems in their classroom management skills (see Fig. 1).
It was so weird to see myself in the video while teaching just as the
teachers I had been criticizing. I realized that whenever I wanted to
clarify a grammar point I tended to give deductive explanations and
turned out to be a traditional teacher whose favorite method was the
grammar translation method. I realized that I had to trust my stu-
dents that they could handle discovery learning and inductive method.
(Sarah)
I saw myself spending excessive teacher talking time on giving deduc-
tive explanations of grammar and feeling satisied as a teacher while
doing that. I realized that I had to talk less and let the learners talk
and produce. It was not me who had to be the center of attention but
the students. I have to admit that I ind it so impressing to explain
rules and regulations to the students just as a mathematics teacher but
this is such a traditional method since I teach English and I have to
Fig. 1. Prospective teachers’ problematic areas
know where to withdraw and let the students be active. ( Jenny)

To be more speciic, the data we analyzed helped us ind answers to our irst Within the cycle of action research procedure, the participants found out
research question which was the areas that would be identiied as problematic some possible solutions to the identiied weak points and spent time to apply
by the preservice teachers in terms of their own in-class teaching applications. these in the classroom. he preservice teachers noted that using drama, induc-
heir problems are given under appropriate headings below. tive teaching strategies, productive tasks of speaking and writing were useful to
them in refraining from traditional methods of grammar teaching.
Teaching skills as a problem area
Teaching of vocabulary
he participants registered a considerable emphasis on evaluating their actual
teaching skills. hey noted that even though they were informed and knowl- he issue of inefective vocabulary teaching proved to generate much concern
edgeable about stages and features of teaching skills, in the actual teaching among the preservice teachers. here was broad agreement that using of the
environment they found themselves diverged from the theoretical ground to a irst language was not theoretically preferred but applied within the classroom
‘less capable’ attitude. hey critically engaged with particularly their methods setting; therefore, the discrepancy between the theoretical preferences and
of teaching grammar, teaching vocabulary, and teaching reading. deeds in practice were highlighted. he preservice teachers were also highly
408 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 409
action and researchers are recording?

critical towards their pronunciation mistakes while teaching vocabulary. hese It was in my reading classes that the students read the text just for the
two main issues of using the mother tongue and pronunciation mistakes were sake of reading. he point was not teaching pronunciation or answer-
the points that had been identiied in data collection procedure of the action ing questions. I realized that both while teaching reading and listen-
research procedure: ing, I had to give the students a purpose to follow the text attentively.
Otherwise, it is so pointless for the students. Since they do not have a
I think that using the irst language was just like a life-saver to me, purpose in mind while reading, they can never know where to focus or
but the problem was that I felt the need of using the mother tongue what to look for within the text. (Dan)
more than necessary. I was prepared in terms of visual materials and
explanations for the set of vocabulary identiied for teaching before the In order to cope with such an issue, the participants suggested various ap-
class, but whenever the students asked me to explain a new word I plications; such as dividing the text into segments of incorrect order and ask-
tended to come up with the irst language equivalence of it. his let the ing the students to reorder the text, asking students to suggest a heading for
students carry on the conversation in the irst language with me from the text they read, illing out a simple table of outline to take notes while read-
that moment on. (Alan) ing, creating info-gap by dividing the text into two parts and asking pairs of
students ask and answer questions on this jig-saw reading text to have an idea
I studied the pronunciation of each and every word I decided to teach on the whole text.
in the class. But, it was so embarrassing to hear that I was mispro-
nouncing the word I was teaching for a couple of times. I need to brush
Coursebook dependency
up my knowledge on reading the phonetic transcriptions of words in
English and take notes to refer during the classes. Sometimes the only A signiicant problematic issue emphasized is ‘coursebook dependent teaching’.
thing that remains in a student’s mind might be the thing you teach he participants wanted to work on this issue as it was found to be ‘problemat-
incorrectly. I would not be beneicial to hear someone to tell me that I ic’ in their eyes. While hypothesizing on the possible reasons, the participants
have to pay special attention to pronunciation, but as I saw that I was noted that they wanted to be on the safe side by following the sequencing and
mispronouncing in the video, honestly speaking, I felt terribly sorry related applications suggested in the coursebook. Nevertheless, the attitude of
and promised not to do it again by studying on it much more. (Meg) coursebook dependent teaching was deined as an ‘inexperienced’ manner and
‘boring classes’ which bear no surprise or excitement for the students:
Code-switching is a favorite strategy of mine while teaching vocabu-
lary. Nevertheless, watching my video, I came to the conclusion that In my irst class, I felt so insecure, and that was why the coursebook
only if I use it scarcely, it might be an efective strategy. Otherwise, was the main actor and decision maker, not me. I was trying to be
learners will tend to use the irst language excessively in the class, lawless but looking inexperienced and replaced by the coursebook.
which is not something I want to experience in my English lessons. here was nothing exciting or provoking enthusiasm on the side of
(Sarah) the students as everything was so regularly driven by the coursebook
itself. I was parroting the coursebook, which I hated the most. Watch-
ing the video, I decided to be a coursebook manipulator while teaching
Teaching of reading
English to tailor my classes in accordance with my students. I think as
he participants observed that during the while-reading stage, they tended to I gain more experience in teaching, I will manage to be the master of
make the students read the text with no purpose at all. Traditionally, the stu- the coursebook and not let it take over my classes in teaching. (Doug)
dents read the texts aloud for a couple of times but this found to be ‘pointless’
by the preservice teachers:
410 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 411
action and researchers are recording?

he participant preservice teachers reported to have adapted the course- tion, group the students by pointing at the members via body language
book in terms of re-sequencing the activities given, feeding the suggested and eye contact, and ensure that all of the students know in which
activities with more supplementary materials taken from other sources and group they are going to be working. (Sam)
replacing some of the activities with alternatives. Upon applying new strate-
gies in the following classes, the prospective teachers indicated that varying While watching my practice teaching, I hated myself saying: ‘do you
materials and activities help them conduct more enjoyable classes and diverge understand?’ My intention was checking clariication but I sounded as
from the ‘cliché applications’ ofered in the coursebooks. if I were humiliating students by constantly repeating that question. I
realized that I had to use a better language to check understanding and
I have decided to replace my question with ‘am I clear?’ Besides, I will
Classroom management
ask students to tell me what they will be doing through question and
he participants also focused on the issues related with classroom manage- answer exchanges before starting the activity. (Kaya)
ment and identiied the problematic points that they needed to be more skill-
ful in time management, grouping learners and giving the instructions. he Preservice teachers’ evaluations on the action research procedure
managerial skills they operated in the classroom were found to be ‘insui-
cient’; therefore, they spent time on developing such skills through action re- Our second research question interrogated the positive and negative aspects
search procedure. of carrying out such an action research for the preservice teachers. Our analy-
ses indicated that as the academic term and related studies of action research
I thought that taking the attendance would take at least ive minutes progressed, the students developed a highly relective perspective on both their
and that was why I allocated that much time in my lesson plan. When performance and the research procedure. It was the interviewers’ perception
I watched my practice teaching to ind out why I my class ended earlier that the participants suggested their evaluations with great awareness and pre-
than planned, I found out that I was too generous while allocating cision. On the positive aspects of the action research procedure, the preservice
time for trivial things like taking attendance. Even though ive min- teachers indicated that such an application increased their:
utes sounded such a short span of time for me before the class, it was • teaching eicacy,
• self-awareness,
obvious that it took only about a minute to ask who was missing in

• self-evaluation skills.
the class. Besides, after facing such a problem of ending the class ifteen
minutes earlier than planned, I decided not to rush during classes, ex-
pand my activities according to students’ pacing and add one or two
contingency plans in case I need them. (Ian) It would not be this much efective to hear my mistakes from an out-
sider. Most probably I would defend myself and act against such an
Before starting a group activity, I asked the students to form groups observation. But, as I observed the mistakes on my own, I could pin-
of three. It took only a minute to see that the whole class was in chaos. point my defects and evaluate myself in a much eicient manner. his
All the students were discussing how to form such groups and I had research procedure enabled me to develop self-awareness on my teach-
hard times in silencing the students and calming them down. While ing skills and provided me with chance to have an overall idea on my
watching the video I realized that I was so busy with preparing the teaching efectiveness. And now, I can say that in my actual teaching
materials of the activity and fell short in grouping students. In my career I will be observing myself just as the way I do in this research
second application I will solve this problem by assigning the members cycle and keep a tract of my actions in the classroom. (Beth)
of groups by myself before starting an activity. I will give the instruc-
412 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 413
action and researchers are recording?

It was hypothesized at the initial stage of this research study that the partici- he research we carried out and the teaching experience were just the
pants would ‘face diiculties while inding a problem in their microteaching things we lacked and in immediate need before graduation. I was in-
session mainly because they had not been used to such research design or task’. decisive on working as an English teacher before taking this course
Nevertheless, depending upon the participants’ identiications, the procedure and now I can tell for sure that I like teaching and I feel the courage to
was: perform this profession. While doing research I named my weak points
• not demanding to carry on, and now I have some plans on how to cope with them all. he best of
• much more beneicial than being observed by others.
all is that whenever I spot a mistake in my teaching I will have the
strategy to sort it out and leave it behind. I ind the whole experience
beneicial and encouraging. (Sam)
he instruction was so simple to perform; prepare a class, record it and
evaluate yourself to improve your teaching. I was not supposed to be On the negative aspects of the action research procedure, the participants
error-free in my teaching, and for that reason I was not scared of hav- emphasized one major problem which was that being videotaped afected both
ing mistakes for the irst time. I could see how I improved as well as my their and the students’ performance especially at the very irst class recorded.
friends. Instead of being judged by another person, I was responsible he preservice teachers reported that they felt under scrutiny when their per-
with the application and evaluation, which game me enough strength formance was recorded by a camera. Besides, they also noted that especially in
to improve myself. ( Jenny) the very irst class, the students’ center of attention was the camera most of the
time. Nevertheless, it was also noted that in the second class that was recorded,
Another hypothesis was that the preservice teachers would ‘not easily ind
there happened to be relaxation on both the teacher’s and the students’ sides.
a solution to the problem they previously spotted mainly because they had not
been equipped with such self-correction/self-improvement schemes’. How- You can see students waving hands right to the camera in my irst
ever, it can be stated that the participants disproved this hypothesis with the class. It was such a fun for the kids in class to be recorded but at the
indication that: same time it was a real intruder for me actually. But it is surprising
to see that children can get adapted to any circumstance so fast. In the
While inding out a solution there are various sources of data you can
second class of recording, it was something usual for them all and they
refer to; such as, your classmates, the forums, blogs on the Internet, your
did not bother to pay much attention to it. I observed that they totally
teachers, sourcebooks, your mentor, and especially you! After identify-
forgot about it when they saw a colorful ball that I brought into the
ing the problem point you have countless ways of solving the issue. You
class to play a language game that day. (Ken)
can try one of them this time and the other solution another time. It
all depends on you. (Ian) herefore, it can be stated that even though video recording the class was a
hindrance at the initial stages, as time passes the class participants and the
he last two hypothesis of this study were that the students would ‘identify
preservice teachers become more tolerant towards it.
their teaching skills and strategies that need to be strengthen as well as their
strong points in teaching’ and ‘ind this overall research experience useful, ben-
eicial and applicable’. Depending upon the participants’ relections and evalu- Conclusion
ations on the research procedure, it can be stated that the participants were
El-Dib’s (2007) action research study with undergraduate-level Egyptian pro-
highly critical and efective in their self-evaluations, and regarded the whole
spective teachers of English found that half of his students were capable of
process as constructive and of use in practical sense.
low-level reflection and reflective thinking did not develop naturally but re-
414 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 415
action and researchers are recording?

quired constant scafolding. Although we believe in the importance and power A growing amount of research studies on prospective teachers in Turkey
of action research in transforming prospective teachers into relective inquir- report that classroom management is the leading problem with which pro-
ers, we aimed to focus on changing our participants’ daily pedagogical prac- spective teachers deal in their practica (Alpan, Özer, Erdamar & Subaşı, 2014;
tices rather than working on how they come to realize or relect upon their Boz, 2008; Saban, Korkmaz & Akbaşlı, 2004; Çakmak, 2008). Findings of this
practices. Seeing that our participants’ recordings and voices show the fact that study support the claim that classroom management is an important problem
each of them has tried to change at least one practical aspect of their teaching for prospective teachers who participated in this study. As such, immediate
through this research study, we believe that our study has beneicial outcomes action should be taken into account to solve the problems associated with
especially from a practical perspective. prospective teachers’ perception and handling of classroom management. It
he overall indings suggest that the process of carrying out action research should be noted that action research, according to Gall, Gall and Borg (2005:
enabled the preservice teachers to be relective upon their own in-class appli- p. 487) has “the purpose of improving local practice rather than producing
cations and highlight the areas of teaching which require strengthening. It is theory or scientiic generalizations.” Similarly, while the indings of our study
observed in the data that the participants found out alternative teaching strat- are important, we value the research technique we used through which practi-
egies and felt more satisied with the related changes applied in their classes. cum teachers seem to have developed themselves more than what practicum
By leaving the control of the study to the preservice teacher, we assumed that teachers (and we as researchers) have so far understood.
the “action” we sought was to happen naturally especially long after our preser- Despite its beneits, action research has serious shortcomings such as the
vice graduate and become in-service teachers. fact that it is not really possible to generalize the results to each education-
Echeverría’s (2010) review of literature has shown that several studies in al environment (Gay & Airasian, 2000) since they are generally, as Van Lier
Latin American countries pointed at “the problems such as the disconnected notes (1994), small scale studies. However, considering the indings that the
entity of the theory and the practice, fragmentation of the teacher education participants found the action research beneicial, it can be stated that a princi-
curriculum, lack of coordination between teacher education institutions and pal area for prospective research emerges from this study. he problems iden-
schools and the separation of the materials and pedagogy” (p.151). Similarly, our tiied and the possible solutions suggested by the participants can lead us to
results can be interpreted in light of these indings in that prospective teachers’ carry out ‘cooperative action research’ approaches (Atkinson, 2003). In order
fourth year courses should serve as a bridge connecting the two ends speciied to empower the personal development facilitated in the research procedure,
above. In such an endeavor, action research studies such as ours can help to mini- the preservice teachers might also be engaged in collaborative action research
mize the negative efects of such structural problems associated with teacher study groups (Tasker, Johnson, & Davis, 2010). herefore, they get the oppor-
education institutions, curricula, and pedagogy. Hence, a speciic course on ac- tunity to share and expand their knowledge base gathered from the research
tion research may be added to the ELT teacher education curricula. experience through collaborative work.
he indings of the present study highlight that action research procedure
enables practitioners to take over the responsibility of the whole teaching and
learning process taking place in the classroom environment. As is stated by
References
Freese (2006), prospective teachers are to be conscientious of their in-class Aldağ, H., & Gürpınar, K. (2007). Üniversite öğrencilerinin sunu becerilerini etkileyen
applications and performance so as not to put the blame on the students or faktörler. Akademik Bilişim: Kütahya.
other parties for the problems concerned. herefore, it can be stated that the Alpan, B.G., Özer, A., Erdamar, K.G., & Subaşı, G. (2014). he development of a stu-
dent teacher concerns scale. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 54, 151-170.
preservice and also in-service development require application and relection
Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your own school. California:
through the research pattern suggested by the constantly looping cycle of ac-
Corwin.
tion research procedure (Harmer, 2002). Ataünal, A. (2003). Niçin ve nasıl bir öğretmen. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Vakfı Yayınları.
416 What happens when preservice English language teachers are in H. Sezgi Saraç, M. Galip Zorba and Arda Arikan 417
action and researchers are recording?

Avcı, D. E., & Bayrak, E. B. (2013). Investigating teacher candidates’ opinions re- Gall, J.P., Gall, M.D., & Borg, W.R. (2005). Applying educational research: A practical
lated to scenario- based learning: An action research. Elementary Education Online, guide. Boston: Pearson.
12(2), 528‐549. Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and
Baskan, G. A. (2001). Öğretmenlik mesleği ve öğretmen yetiştirmede yeniden applications 6th Edtion. USA: Pearson.
yapılanma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 16-25. Gay, L. R., Milles. G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for
Boz, Y. (2008). Turkish student teachers’ concerns about teaching. European Journal of analysis and applications 9th Edition. USA: Pearson.
Teacher Education, 31(4), 367-377. Harmer, J. (2002). he practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. UK: Cam- ------------. (2007). he practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Harlow: Long-
bridge University Press. man.
------------ (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for prac- Henson, K. T. (1996). Teachers as researchers. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery & E. Guyton
titioners. New York: Routledge. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (2nd ed., pp. 53-64). New York:
Corey, S. M. (1953) Action research to improve school practice. New York: Teachers Col- Macmillan.
lege, Columbia University. Hopkins, D. (1985). A teacher’s guide to classroom research. UK: Open University Press.
Creswell, J. (2004). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantita- Johnson, A. P. (2012). Eylem araştırması el kitabı. (Trans. Yıldız Uzuner & Meltem
tive and qualitative research (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Özten Anay). Ankara: Anı.
Çakmak, M. (2008). Concerns about teaching process: Student teachers’ perspective. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1992). he action research planner. Geelong: Deakin
Educational Research Quarterly, 31(3), 57-77. University Press.
Çepni, S., Küçük, M., & Gökdere, M. (2002). Hizmet öncesi öğretmen eğitimi Kılıç, A. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik becerilerini uygulama ve gözleme
programlarındaki araştırmalara yönelik derslerin incelenmesi. Fen ve Matematik düzeyleri. Manas Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(16), 155-168.
Eğitimi Sempozyumu, ODTÜ, Ankara, 1234-1240. McNif, J., & Whitehead, J. (2005). Action research for teachers. USA: David Fulton
Devecioğlu, Y. & Akdeniz, A.R. (2007). Hizmet öncesi öğretmen eğitiminde aksi- Publishers.
yon araştırma yaklaşımının uygulanması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi ve Mills, G. E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher-researcher. New Jersey: Pear-
Azerbaycan Devlet Pedagoji Üniversitesi Uluslararası Öğretmen Yetiştirme Politikaları son.
ve Sorunları Sempozyumu, 12-14 Mayıs, Bakü, Azerbaycan. Nunan, D. (1992). Research method in language learning. UK: Cambridge University
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Qualitative, quantitative and Press.
mixed methodologies. UK: Oxford University Press. Odhiambo, E. (2010). Classroom research: A tool for preparing pre-service teachers to
Ebbutt, D. (1985). Educational action research: Some general concerns and speciic become relective practitioners. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 4, 1-15.
quibbles. In R. Burgess (ed.) Issues in educational research: Qualitative methods (pp. Saban, A., Korkmaz, İ., & Akbaşlı, S. (2004). Öğretmen adaylarının mesleki kaygıları.
152-174-64). Lewes: Falmer. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 17, 198-208.
Echeverría, P. (2010). El papel de la docencia universitaria en la formacióninicial de Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education. New Jersey: Pearson.
profesores. Calidad en la Educación, 32, 149-168. Tasker, T., Johnson, K., & Davis, T. (2010). A sociocultural analysis of teacher talk
El-Dib, M. A. B. (2007). Levels of reflection in action research: An overview and an in inquiry-based professional development. Language Teaching Research, 14(2),
assessment tool. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 24–35. 129–140.
Faikhamta, C., & Clarke, A. (2010).hai pre-service science teachers engaging action Van Lier, L. (1994). Action research. Unpublished manuscript. Monterey Institute of
research during their ifth year internship. Asia-Paciic Journal of Education, 33(1), International Studies.  
1-16. Yeşil, R. (2009). Sosyal bilgiler aday öğretmenlerinin sınıf içi öğretim yeterlikleri
Fox, M., Martin, P., & Green, G. (2007). Doing practitioner research. London: Sage. (Kırşehir Örneği). Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 23-48.
Freese, A.R. (2006) Reframing one’s teaching: Discovering our teacher selves through Yeşilyurt, E., & Karakuş, M. (2011). he problems teachers encountered during the
relection ad inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 100-119. candidacy process. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(1), 261-
293.
 Researching the researchers: A case study
29 of perceptions and reflections of teacher-
researchers in a higher education context
in Turkey
Wayne Trotman

Introduction
Borg (2013: 1) comments that for most teachers research is ‘a foreign con-
cept, or at least an unfeasible one.’ More optimistically, he adds that although
teacher-research remains a minority activity in the ield of language teaching,
‘...it has the potential to be a powerful transformative force in the professional
development of language teachers’, (Borg, 2013: 6). Bearing this in mind, this
study employs empirical data in order to outline research on language teacher-
researchers in Turkey. Along with reasons for choice of projects carried out by
Turkish university level teachers of English there, it looks also at issues faced
throughout the research period and how they were dealt with. he inal ques-
tion concerns the perceived beneits of their research.
his was in a sense, therefore, a partial replication study of Borg (2013,
chapter ive), in which I sought to compare where possible my own ind-
ings with his concerning teacher engagement in research. Borg’s much larger
study – one I would recommend all research supervisors read - presents ind-
ings from an empirical investigation involving 1,700 practitioners worldwide.
Critics of a qualitative research study such as my own into a relatively small
corpus of researchers might query the sample size and degree of generaliz-
ability of conclusions drawn; Yates (2003: 224), for example, comments on
the ‘potential over-reading’ of individual stories. In contrast, Dörnyei (2007:
39) explains that the detailed exploration of a few cases may be particu-
larly appropriate when working in areas where few empirical accounts exist.
Whatever the case, it is hoped that the indings in this study when compared
with those of Borg (2013) will have resonance with teacher-researchers and
their supervisors.

419
420 Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections Wayne Trotman 421
of teacher researchers in a higher education context in Turkey

Background Methodology
During the summer of 2013 I invited nine experienced colleagues in Izmir
Katip Çelebi University (IKCU) a state university in Turkey to a meeting to Research questions
discuss the degrees of interest in and possibilities of setting up and carrying he aim of the the study was to analyse interviewee responses to the following:
out teacher-research projects, i.e investigating aspects of their own classrooms.
What were researchers’ definitions of teacher-research and why did they decide to
his was with a view to hosting an ELT research conference and writing up
engage in this?
their studies for publication. I outlined how support would be available from
How did they feel about being a researcher?
myself and a colleague at a nearby university who was also experienced in What topics did researchers investigate and why?
supervising research studies. At a follow-up meeting the nine teachers were What issues did they face in their research; how did they deal with them?
informed that there was a possibility of them both presenting at an interna- What were the benefits of their research and for whom?
tional IATEFL Research SIG supported conference in 2014 and having their
subsequent papers published. Meetings over the summer of 2013 continued at
which proposals were discussed and reined. Data collection and analysis
Apart from the irst question for which a short questionnaire was used to gain
Participants and context data, all others were investigated by individual semi-structured interviews that
At the start of the 2013-2014 academic year ive of the original nine partici- were transcribed and analyzed. A few minutes before the interviews partici-
pants began their projects, while three newly appointed teachers also joined pants were provided with the questions in order to prepare their responses.
the group and began theirs. In a sense the eight participants (from a then Also used for data gathering was my on-going log to track researcher progress
possible total of 34 teachers in the School of Foreign Languages) formed a and locate diiculties teachers faced. After arranging a schedule for weekly
convenience sample; dealing with a larger igure was not felt to be possible. tutorials, some were recorded and transcribed. Prior to my analysis, partici-
Several other teachers were currently engaged in Master’s studies, albeit in pants were asked to carry out ‘member checks’ in order to verify the accuracy
areas other than ELT such as English literature and teaching Turkish as a sec- of extracts taken from the eventual transcript.
ond language. All studies referred to in this chapter took place with colleagues,
students and classes in preparatory year language courses. All were carried out Research deinitions
on a voluntary basis and with the permission of the university authorities who
I asked teachers to provide their own deinition of ‘teacher-research’, all of
were keen to host an initial teacher-research conference. Following their pre-
which appear in Box One. I then asked them to compare their own deinition
sentations at the Gediz / IATEFL ReSIG conference in Izmir in the summer
irstly with each other’s and then with that of Borg (2010) which I feel encap-
of 2014, participants also presented their work to colleagues at the start of the
sulates the essence of what teacher-research consists of. Apart from generating
2014-2015 academic year.
data for my own study, in a follow-up group discussion this also acted as an
awareness-raising task that enabled teachers to clarify parameters and direc-
tions to be taken in their own research.
422 Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections Wayne Trotman 423
of teacher researchers in a higher education context in Turkey

Box One: Researcher deinitions of ‘Research’ Borg (2010: 395) deines teacher-research as ‘..systematic inquiry, qualita-
tive and / or quantative, conducted by teachers in their own professional contexts,
1 ‘Teacher-research is systematic research used by teacher-researchers in a teac-
hing environment to gain a deep understanding of their own teaching and individually or collaboratively (with other teachers and / or external collaborators,
their students’ learning. In this research, teachers search for useful ways to and which aims to enhance teachers’ understandings of some aspect of their work, is
improve their teaching practice by gaining new perspectives and ideas from made public, has the potential to contribute to better quality teaching and learning
diferent sources.’ in individual classrooms and which may also inform institutional improvement and
2. ‘Teacher-research is is systematic research used by teacher-researchers in a teac- educational policy more broadly.’
hing environment to gain a deep understanding of their own teachin and their Comparison of deinitions with that of Borg (ibid), which contains eight
students’ learning. In this research, teachers search for useful ways to improve features, reveals how although three (numbers 1, 3 and 4) indicate that it
their teaching practice by gaining new perspectives and idea from diferent should be systematic, none make any reference to it being qualitative and /
sources.’ or quantitative. Two (5 and 6) indicate that it should take place in their own
3. ‘ As an indispensable element of teacher and curriculum development, teacher- professional contexts, while number 1 refers to ‘a teaching environment’ and
research plays a crucial role in teaching. It supports researchers in raising number 2 refers to ‘their teaching experience’. Although no direct mention is
awareness of the eficiency of the teaching process, as well as aiding teachers made concerning research being an individual or collaborative afair, numbers
in discovering their strengths and weaknesses with the help of solid data on a 6 and 8 refer only to ‘a teacher’, which leads me to conclude that in perhaps all
specific part of teaching; it keeps teaching alive.’ eight cases teachers view research as solely individual projects. All eight dei-
4. ‘ Teacher-research is a term that is used to describe the systematic afairs of lan- nitions include a reference, directly or indirectly, to research being both about
guage teachers who seek new ways or methods to improve students’ language enhancing a teacher’s understanding of their work and having the potential
learning, as well as their own professional development. to contribute to better quality teaching and learning, with some referring to
5. ‘Teacher-research is usually small scale studies conducted by teachers upon a either problem-solving or answering questions. None, however, appear to feel
challenge they face or out of curiosity, with the purposes of answering questions that teacher-research should be made public or may be able to inform broader
on how to enable learning more efectively, finding ways to overcome chal- educational policy. It is also of interest that numbers 5 and 8 feel teacher-
lenges related to the teaching / learning context, and providing insight on the research is something done on a small scale.
teaching profession.’
6. ‘Teacher-research is a process in which a teacher tries to shed light on some
problems she experiences or faces in her classes. To start the process the teacher
Researcher vignettes
has to feel the need for a change or improvement in her class practices. he pro- Departures
cess goes on with systematic thinking over the problem.
7. ‘Teacher-research is an important aspect of development, not only for educators Perhaps in the case of many (if not most) research groups, for varying reasons
and teacher-researchers themselves but also for their colleagues, in that it pro- participant fall-out tends to occur. Soon after providing their deinitions of
vides valuable information about the teachers, their teaching styles and their research two participants asked to withdraw. he irst was S, whose research
students’ attitudes and learning styles. Besides this, it provides a means for focus had been ‘How to Use Translation in ELT Writing Classes. S felt he
teachers to figure out why certain things are or are not happening.’ should prioritise and complete his doctoral studies concerning translation.
8. ‘Teacher-research is small scale research which a teacher does to find answers to he second withdrawal was D, whose focus was ‘Improving Students’ Critical
his questions about his teaching / lesson, or to find solutions to his problems in hinking Skills’, an extension of her second MA, who also chose to prioritise
class. It may improve a teacher’s teaching method. thesis completion. D continued with work on the initial focus, although this
became curriculum design rather than teacher-research. She later gave an in-
424 Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections Wayne Trotman 425
of teacher researchers in a higher education context in Turkey

house presentation of her on-going study. Towards the end of her study, N, ‘I like doing research..but I didn’t have a chance so I thought this was a good
who was researching the impact of poetry on English language learning, asked chance’
to withdraw on the grounds that it clashed with MA studies which were also ‘....I thought I needed to improve something about myself and my teaching.. and
drawing to a completion. It is interesting to note that all three withdrawals I’ve always wanted to be a better teacher..I want my lessons to be more beneicail to
were due to realisations, two early on, and one much later, that Master’s and my students’
Doctoral studies already begun did not easily transfer to teacher-research. Re- I had just completed my MA and I was familiar with the process of conducting
searcher vignettes of the ive remaining participants appear below, followed by research. Since teacher-research involves evaluating the ongoing process of teaching
extracts from transcripts of interviews with each which illustrate responses - as well as engaging in research, which meant practice plus theory, the idea of being
in no particular order - to the same questions. involved in teacher-research really aroused my interest.
Of those completing their research, Vildan completed her BA in ELT at
METU. She was in her irst year at IKCU, following ten years’ full-time teach- “How do you feel about being a teacher-researcher?”
ing at state universities in Turkey: seven at Uludağ University and before that
three at Trakya University. She was assistant director of the Testing Depart- ‘I’m a bit afraid..because I don’t know anything about it..but if I can get time..and
ment at IKÇU and mother of a four year-old son. hroughout the study she coaching..I think I can do it.. I am sure it will help in my classes’
taught eighteen lessons per week. Çiler graduated from Uludağ University ‘I’m excited to be involved in research..as I am in my early years of teaching I
ELT department in 2010 and was in her third year of teaching, her irst year at have so many things to learn’
IKCU. hroughout the study she taught twenty lessons per week. Sevil was in ‘In fact it feels academic.. I mean professional..we are academicians and we need
her eighteenth year of ELT and was Director of Testing at IKCU. Currently in to do research...so it’s a good thing..you improve yourself..it’s what we should do..
her second year there, she had previously worked in Uludağ university where instead of preparing tests (laughter)’
she had completed her Master’s which involved research into Teacher Peer ‘Being a teacher-researcher required me to put a lot of efort in allocating time for
Observation. She was married with a ive-year old son. hroughout the study my research by giving up some of my leisure activities. However, doing something
she taught twenty lessons per week. Kevser was in her eighth year of language for my personal and professional development gave me such a pleasure that it was
teaching. Having spent the irst eight in two private high schools, she was at really worth it’
the time of the study in her second full year at IKCU. Kevser had sixteen les- Combining analyses of responses to the above two questions it is clear
sons a week plus responsibility for Faculty English Testing. She had previously that although they expressed a wish to do so, unsurprisingly, working in ear-
completed the CELTA. Ezgi completed her BA in ELT at Marmara Univer- lier contexts in which there was no encouragement or possibility of carrying
sity and MA in Educational Administration in 2013. She was in her sixth year out research had previously prevented most of the group from such studies.
of teaching and this was her irst year at IKCU. She had previously worked at Comments relect Borg (2013: 18) who notes how non-collaborative school
Doğuş University and Celal Bayar University. hroughout the study she had cultures tend to act as a barrier to teacher-research. Two participants relect
duties in the Testing Department and taught twenty lessons per week. Borg’s inding that the top two reasons for doing research are to ind better
ways of teaching and because it is good for their professional development.
Borg (2013: 107). It is also interesting to note that apart from fear, the largely
“Why did you decide to engage in teacher-research?”
positive feelings of optimism, excitement, felt professional needs, pride, plea-
‘I’ve always wanted to do something like this but never had the chance or time to do sure and self-worth are all features in researchers’ responses.
it..and also I don’t know how to do it..I always had lots of things to do and the ad-
ministration never encouraged us to research..so I didn’t try..I never had a colleague
who was doing research..
426 Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections Wayne Trotman 427
of teacher researchers in a higher education context in Turkey

“What research topic are you investigating and why?” ‘As this is my irst venture into research I’m having problems inding reading
material, and always wondering about the next step. As I’m teaching several classes,
‘My topic is how to engage my students in more communicative pairwork activities..
getting data is not an issue as long as I do it outside teaching time..asking students
because I’m having problems with this in my classes..my students are not interested
to complete a short survey’
in pairwork and they don’t want to talk during pairwork activities..that’s why I
‘Time..and in fact I couldn’t start it..if I can start during the ive week break..it’s
decided to work on this topic’
not a very diicult subject.. I think I can ind enough literature about it...I hope I’ll
‘Developing a Student-Centred approach in my classroom. I’m curious as to how
have time to analyse..in fact I can’t do anything’
teachers could overcome the problem of planning a student-centred lesson and actu-
‘To be honest I should spare more time to think about what I should do..lack of
ally carrying it out. I recently watched an experienced teacher having diiculty in activities..I’m having diiculty in implementing my ideas in my lessons.. I need
doing this’ more experience.a lot of reading..attending seminars’
‘L1..I prefer using the L1..Turkish in my classrooms in fact..and I really wonder ‘he main problem I face is the collection of data because I prefer to work with
if I’m doing the right thing or not and how my students feel about it...do they want teachers by observing their classes and their use of pronunciation..I had to record the
it or..if theywant it..when and how much’ lessons besides taking personal notes and then transcribe all the data’
‘I’m trying to ind ways to make my classroom more learner centred..to make Issues researchers faced in the middle of their studies are clear from the
them more actively involved in the learning process..teachers in Turkey are mak- above responses. hey are illustrated in comments concerning inding the
ing a big mistake...the foreign students can all speak better than Turkish students.. time and energy to combine research with a heavy teaching load, carrying out
we do not create an environment for our students to produce the language they’ve research while still getting used to working in a new institution, locating rel-
learned...I’m going to do that’ evant research literature, assessing an appropriate means of data collection and
‘I focused on error-correction in pronunciation that broadened my horizon as I inding the initial impetus to begin writing up the study. Scheduled weekly
got to learn the error-correction techniques to be used in this’ individual tutorials went a long way towards relieving some of the strain felt
In terms of a research orientation, three are a combination of evaluating by members of our research group; such meetings I am sure prevented further
and surveying. hese concern pedagogically enquiry into the efectiveness of participant fall-out.
or reactions to new approaches and examining views and attitudes then using
the inding as the basis for practical action (Borg, 2013: 109). All ive relect “What do you think will be the beneits of your study?”
Borg’s key inding which describes teacher-research carried out on the whole
as ‘..predominantly private, relective, pedagogical, evaluative, informal and in- I’ll try to ind solutions..and practise the new things I’ve learnt in my class.. students
ternal’, which contrasts with formal scientiic research carried out by research- beneit from seeing a teacher doing research...it’s very helpful for colleagues..maybe
ers seeking to improve their academic status, Borg (2010: 123-4). they also experience the same problems..even if not.when you share your indings
they begin to think about it...without being aware of it you start to do it better..you
can share it with other universities.they start to respect you.. and see that you try to
“What issues, e.g problems or obstacles are you facing? How are you solving update yourself ’
them / planning to solve them?” ‘I’ve beneited early on in my own teaching by trying to talk less, getting students
‘I can’t ind time..here I have too many classes.. I have to do work related to the to communicate more, and stopping and observing the lesson from my students’ per-
Testing oice.also this is my irst year and I’m trying to get used to the system..and spective..my colleagues could also beneit from my feedback, I think’
I have a four year-old son who has just started kindergarten. In the mid-year break ‘I’ll answer my questions..if I should use L1 or not..next year’s students may
I’ll have time for research reading..and will write the introduction’ beneit if I change my teaching style..in our school it’s a problem for colleagues..how
much L1 should they use’
428 Researching the researchers: A case study of perceptions and relections Wayne Trotman 429
of teacher researchers in a higher education context in Turkey

..it’s something I’ll learn from..irstly colleagues..then students..I’ve learnt a lot.. cerning Testing, while two were also married with a young child. Supervisors
irst of all students wanted to do more listening..this surprised me..also all of the of research confronted with teachers who claim they cannot ind time to carry
students wrote that they don’t want me to use Turkish’ out studies might like to point them to the relevant chapters in this book. It is
Looking at my research, I‘ve became more conscious of myself as a teacher and dis- also interesting to note that while two participants had previously completed
covered diferent techniques I could make use of in my own classes. ..teacher-research their Master’s, the other three – perhaps as a result of conidence and self-
helps the teachers develop themselves not only as researchers on a speciic topic, but esteem boosted by their success in research outlined here – are about to begin
also as teachers to become more efective in their teaching processes. their own. I wish all ive well, and look forward to working with them again
For the interested reader, Borg (2013: 15) provides an extensive list of po- on their research one day soon.
tential beneits of teacher-research, several of which are illustrated in the above
extracts. Examples therein include allowing teachers to become ‘more relec-
tive, critical, and analytical about their teaching behaviours in the classroom’,
References:
(Atay, 2006), and ‘boosting a teacher’s sense of status’, (Davies, Hamilton & Atay, D. (2006). Teachers’ professional development: Partnerships in research. TESL-
James, 2007). In relation to Borg (2013) extracts above also relect his inding EJ, 10 (2), 14
that the four main ways that research had an impact were in terms of learning Borg, S. (2013). Teacher-research in Language Teaching: a critical analysis. Cambridge:
new teaching techniques, sharing ideas with colleagues, improved teaching,
Cambridge University Press.
and greater awareness of teaching and students.
Davies, P., Hamilton, M., & James, K. (2007). Practitioners leading research. London:
NRDC.
Implications
An institutional climate that encourages teacher-research is vital if such stud-
ies are to be carried out; permission and support should be sought by the
supervisor and researchers involved. Organised support in the form of weekly
tutorials is also a clear requirement in order to locate and deal with ongoing
issues and any diiculties arising, plus, where possible, outside help from a
fellow research supervisor. An ultimately achievable goal, in the form of a con-
ference to present at or the possibility of publication would certainly motivate
would-be teacher researhers.

Endings
As a inal comment, vignettes reveal how teachers ranging from three to eigh-
teen years of experience carried out research into their own classrooms. It
should not be interpreted as patronising for me to point out that all ive were
female; anyone who perceives research as a male oriented / male dominated
ield might like to remember this. Also noticeable is that apart from heavy
teaching loads, four teachers also held busy positions of responsibility con-
 431

Teacher-researchers in Action
Edited by Kenan Dikilitaş, Richard Smith and Wayne Trotman

Teacher-research Workshop with teachers from Gediz University

Tutorial sharing meeting with teachers from both Gediz University (on the left) and
İzmir Katip Çelebi University (on the right)
 INDEX

A Assessment iv, 4, 99, 100, 102, 123, 124, 125,

126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133,
Accuracy 50, 129, 228, 230, 231, 260, 411 134, 135, 136, 138, 149, 151, 152,
Action research iv, vi, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 163, 199, 200, 203, 205, 208, 209,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 25, 30, 37, 39, 40, 212, 306, 307, 333, 352, 354, 406
41, 42, 45, 78, 84, 119, 138, 151, 156, Autonomy v, vi, 4, 5, 125, 135, 138, 149, 176,
164, 166, 168, 169, 175, 176, 215, 179, 180, 181, 182, 185, 186, 187,
222, 225, 226, 227, 229, 231, 233, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194,
234, 235, 343, 377, 378, 379, 380, 195, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220,
381, 382, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 223, 311, 313, 321, 323, 324, 325,
391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 397, 398, 327, 332, 333, 334, 352, 390, 391, 422
400, 401, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407 Aware v, 32, 33, 55, 56, 57, 64, 74, 75, 84,
Activity 14, 33, 34, 42, 68, 73, 83, 96, 99, 99, 133, 135, 137, 138, 149, 161, 183,
102, 103, 156, 161, 171, 172, 173, 194, 197, 208, 210, 215, 218, 221,
174, 192, 194, 211, 232, 256, 294, 223, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230,
295, 307, 312, 327, 353, 360, 365, 231, 232, 233, 234, 237, 240, 244,
370, 371, 372, 384, 400, 401, 409 247, 250, 253, 261, 262, 263, 270,
Afective 88, 90, 91, 101, 109, 110, 111, 118, 273, 278, 303, 314, 317, 318, 319,
155, 184, 217, 218, 220, 325 320, 321, 362, 367, 386, 417
Anxiety iv, 4, 14, 61, 65, 88, 90, 91, 97, 99,
100, 101, 102, 109, 110, 111, 115, C
118, 119, 120, 126, 130, 133, 134,
153, 158, 159, 160, 162, 164, 217, Clariication 42, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 171, 217,
339, 356, 374, 392 219, 228, 233, 255, 258, 260, 262, 401
Approach 11, 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 30, 34, 38, Classroom iv, v, vi, 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14,
45, 54, 62, 63, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29,
73, 74, 75, 79, 80, 166, 173, 179, 180, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42,
253, 260, 270, 271, 273, 305, 306, 43, 44, 51, 53, 55, 57, 58, 62, 64, 66,
307, 328, 352, 357, 375, 377, 416 67, 71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81,
Appropriate 26, 35, 56, 97, 138, 139, 149, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 94, 97, 99, 100, 101,
153, 226, 228, 229, 231, 233, 234, 102, 103, 104, 107, 109, 111, 112,
293, 294, 326, 360, 361, 366, 372, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 128, 135,
375, 386, 390, 396, 409, 417 136, 138, 141, 142, 149, 153, 154,
AR 9, 352, 353, 354 157, 159, 160, 162, 163, 164, 165,
166, 167, 168, 169, 172, 179, 180,

433
434 INDEX INDEX 435

181, 183, 186, 188, 194, 195, 197, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 230, 231, 233, 234, 256, 264, 281, Group work v, 4, 36, 136, 153, 154, 155, 156,
198, 199, 201, 205, 209, 210, 212, 286, 323, 333, 334, 355, 360, 365, 371 303, 309, 322, 324, 327, 328, 330, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163,
215, 223, 225, 226, 230, 232, 234, 332, 333, 348, 353, 354, 360, 374, 164, 190, 191, 306, 310, 311, 312,
254, 257, 259, 261, 264, 268, 269, D 385, 391, 392, 393, 394, 398, 399, 313, 320, 321, 382
270, 271, 272, 273, 285, 287, 288, 402, 403, 405, 417, 418
292, 294, 295, 303, 305, 306, 307, Deductive 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, Explicit 36, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, I
308, 310, 327, 337, 338, 339, 340, 217, 386, 397 61, 68, 73, 76, 132, 255, 258, 268,
341, 343, 347, 349, 354, 355, 359, Dependence 56, 190, 191, 195, 313, 316 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 287, 288, Inductive 66, 67, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 169,
360, 361, 362, 363, 365, 367, 370, Development iv, vi, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 289, 290, 292, 294, 295, 297, 299, 202, 207, 217, 386, 397
375, 376, 377, 379, 380, 382, 384, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 25, 28, 30, 32, 300, 303, 304 Integration 5, 32, 37, 276, 291, 324, 327,
386, 388, 390, 392, 396, 397, 400, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, Exploratory vi, 3, 13, 16, 24, 26, 30, 31, 32, 392
401, 404, 405, 407, 416, 418 45, 61, 63, 65, 75, 76, 82, 85, 93, 98, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42, 44, 74, 84, Intensive 275
Clause 69 114, 118, 119, 125, 132, 134, 135, 127, 134, 135, 230, 231, 343, 347, Interaction 11, 13, 16, 36, 41, 56, 62, 68, 69,
Cognitive 36, 72, 98, 101, 109, 110, 111, 132, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 142, 149, 355, 361, 362, 375 70, 73, 74, 75, 79, 138, 153, 154, 185,
184, 193, 194, 195, 199, 217, 218, 150, 152, 167, 175, 176, 179, 215, Extensive 14, 23, 36, 38, 199, 279, 281, 287, 192, 193, 217, 253, 256, 260, 261,
219, 220, 260, 304, 322, 325, 329, 216, 218, 222, 262, 264, 285, 288, 288, 290, 291, 303, 418 263, 277, 312, 394
331, 359 305, 322, 323, 325, 327, 331, 332, External 2, 10, 14, 29, 79, 80, 348, 349, 350, Interactive 192, 226, 263, 353, 356
Collaboration 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 333, 334, 357, 359, 360, 361, 362, 351, 352, 363, 413 Interdependence 186, 188, 193
33, 138, 167, 168, 175, 176, 182, 183, 363, 364, 370, 374, 375, 376, 377, Internal 2, 79, 80, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352,
193, 260, 306, 312, 317, 319, 330, 378, 379, 381, 382, 387, 388, 390, F 353, 416
331, 333, 387 393, 404, 405, 407, 409, 412, 415, Internet 102, 192, 194, 221, 226, 231, 232,
Collaboratively 3, 9, 12, 15, 186, 188, 378, 419, 422 Feedback iv, 1, 3, 37, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 323, 365, 366, 402
380, 413 Developmental 63, 65, 132, 377 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 63, 64, 65, 69, 70, Interview 73, 102, 103, 150, 181, 258, 274,
Communication 21, 28, 50, 102, 108, 116, Diary 218, 219, 220, 221, 328, 331 73, 74, 75, 84, 87, 89, 98, 104, 113, 278, 280, 339, 353, 379, 380, 381,
121, 122, 136, 156, 164, 168, 209, Dick Allwright iv, vii, 2, 3, 16, 19 126, 131, 133, 138, 141, 142, 150, 386, 387
223, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 180, 219, 254, 255, 256, 258, 260, Intrinsic 85, 189
232, 233, 234, 235, 253, 254, 260, E 264, 290, 295, 299, 300, 301, 305,
261, 262, 263, 268, 276, 277, 306, 328, 355, 380, 417 K
Elicitation 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 59, 255, Fluency 54, 129, 130, 131, 132, 154, 158,
360, 363, 385 258, 260, 262 Dikilitaş, Kenan i, ii, iv, vii, 3, 6, 16, 37, 65,
Communicative 50, 61, 78, 87, 153, 154, 159, 160, 162, 260, 288
EP 31, 34, 40, 41, 42 119, 360, 421, 422
174, 179, 189, 194, 207, 216, 226, Error v, 4, 35, 50, 51, 52, 56, 57, 58, 228, 253,
227, 229, 231, 232, 234, 235, 253, G
254, 255, 256, 257, 259, 260, 261, L
260, 268, 289, 324, 382, 385, 416 262, 263, 402, 416 Game 220, 232, 233, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327,
Controlled 24, 68, 69, 70 Error correction 4, 51, 58, 254, 256, 257, 328, 330, 331, 332, 335, 402, 403 Learner autonomy v, vi, 4, 5, 125, 138, 149,
Cooperation 97, 133, 155, 260, 306 259, 260, 261, 262, 263 Glossary 93 179, 180, 181, 182, 186, 188, 190,
Critical 4, 14, 17, 38, 41, 42, 43, 63, 123, 125, Evaluation 4, 11, 63, 65, 124, 126, 127, 131, Grammar 34, 54, 58, 61, 62, 63, 66, 67, 68, 191, 193, 194, 195, 216, 217, 218,
126, 132, 135, 149, 152, 165, 166, 132, 133, 136, 138, 163, 195, 199, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 90, 91, 94, 219, 223, 311, 313, 321, 323, 324,
167, 171, 176, 177, 179, 183, 186, 203, 205, 208, 212, 218, 219, 221, 95, 98, 101, 109, 132, 143, 144, 160, 325, 327, 332, 334
187, 217, 253, 257, 264, 273, 274, 280, 292, 295, 296, 297, 298, 348, 192, 197, 198, 202, 206, 207, 219, Learner-centered 123, 198, 199, 312
305, 306, 322, 324, 327, 357, 363, 382, 388, 391, 395, 401, 402 222, 227, 258, 267, 269, 275, 281, Learning-centered v, 4, 197, 198, 199, 200,
375, 390, 398, 402, 413, 418, 419 Experience 3, 10, 14, 15, 19, 22, 26, 40, 61, 283, 284, 288, 303, 342, 343, 369, 202, 205, 210, 212
Critical incident 171, 177, 357 64, 65, 81, 125, 133, 137, 151, 157, 396, 397 Lingua franca 4, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229,
Cultural 5, 16, 101, 109, 152, 226, 276, 277, 158, 163, 166, 168, 172, 174, 175, Grammatical 49, 50, 51, 71, 170, 228, 230, 234, 235
278, 279, 280, 283, 284, 285 180, 188, 193, 203, 204, 207, 211, 231, 235, 255, 268, 269, 296, 297, 337 Listening 22, 26, 30, 87, 88, 93, 94, 95, 97,
Culture v, 41, 123, 257, 275, 276, 277, 278, 98, 127, 137, 192, 206, 208, 209, 218,
436 INDEX INDEX 437

221, 222, 230, 231, 232, 233, 258, Peer observation iv, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 74, 75, 261, 273, 303, 332, 351, 380, 382, Teacher-research iv, vi, 2, 3, 5, 6, 19, 20, 34,
261, 279, 282, 283, 284, 286, 288, 76, 414 389, 404, 406 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 61, 75,
290, 291, 303, 399, 418 Potential 5, 118, 125, 155, 200, 328, 333, Relective 37, 40, 41, 42, 45, 63, 68, 74, 75, 78, 135, 193, 273, 359, 360, 361, 362,
362, 363, 372, 409, 413, 418 76, 120, 135, 166, 167, 170, 175, 176, 363, 364, 367, 370, 371, 372, 374,
M Practice v, vi, 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 20, 179, 180, 363, 375, 377, 379, 387, 375, 388, 409, 411, 412, 413, 415,
24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 392, 394, 395, 401, 404, 407, 416, 418 416, 418, 419, 421, 422
Metacognitive 138, 149, 182, 184, 185, 186, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 50, 51, 54, 56, Responsibility 4, 25, 67, 125, 155, 156, 162, Team-teaching v, 4, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169,
187, 193, 194, 217, 219, 289, 329, 331 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 164, 169, 179, 182, 184, 185, 186, 172, 174, 175, 177, 178
Method 3, 23, 24, 49, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 74, 75, 76, 84, 88, 94, 95, 97, 119, 127, 187, 190, 191, 193, 197, 200, 217, Technique 52, 75, 255, 361, 405
59, 62, 75, 123, 156, 165, 169, 175, 128, 134, 135, 136, 137, 151, 154, 223, 227, 307, 315, 318, 325, 363, Technology vii, 10, 17, 37, 103, 136, 138,
202, 218, 264, 271, 279, 289, 322, 155, 158, 159, 160, 161, 164, 165, 373, 404, 414, 418 151, 192, 194, 195, 213, 333, 334, 368
327, 351, 353, 360, 379, 382, 388, 166, 167, 170, 174, 175, 176, 189, Smith, Richard i, ii, viii, 1, 2, 6, 16, 421, 422 TR 2
390, 393, 397, 407, 412 206, 207, 210, 213, 217, 221, 222, Traditional 72, 123, 179, 181, 197, 207, 226,
Mistake 49, 50, 51, 52, 55, 56, 255, 320, 403, 226, 229, 232, 235, 254, 255, 256, S 228, 230, 270, 302, 307, 310, 334,
416 260, 264, 268, 275, 280, 285, 302, 364, 371, 392, 397
Mother tongue vi, 155, 229, 337, 338, 340, 318, 319, 322, 328, 343, 347, 354, Sentence 27, 31, 68, 69, 70, 71, 92, 94, 171,
342, 343, 385, 398 355, 356, 361, 362, 363, 369, 370, 290, 292, 295, 296, 297, 299 U
Motivation iv, 2, 4, 5, 23, 36, 49, 57, 58, 77, 375, 376, 378, 379, 381, 382, 384, Social 10, 11, 12, 16, 21, 22, 28, 33, 36, 82,
78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 88, 99, 385, 386, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 85, 101, 109, 110, 132, 155, 192, 194, Understanding iv, 3, 9, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22,
133, 155, 156, 162, 163, 164, 182, 394, 395, 397, 400, 401, 404, 405, 208, 217, 222, 264, 285, 312, 325, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 39,
183, 188, 189, 197, 205, 211, 212, 406, 407, 412, 415 329, 331, 332, 333, 343, 356, 357, 378 42, 44, 55, 63, 80, 93, 94, 96, 125, 128,
215, 226, 229, 233, 254, 264, 273, Pronunciation v, 4, 52, 58, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, Speaking iv, 4, 50, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 134, 135, 137, 143, 144, 180, 189,
282, 283, 284, 286, 300, 324, 341, 97, 101, 105, 109, 120, 121, 202, 227, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 206, 211, 219, 222, 227, 233, 261,
348, 351, 355, 356, 357, 359, 360, 228, 231, 232, 235, 253, 254, 256, 103, 105, 106, 109, 110, 111, 113, 273, 280, 283, 289, 296, 297, 322,
361, 364, 365, 367, 370, 372, 373, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 127, 323, 326, 330, 331, 340, 341, 342,
374, 375, 382, 385 264, 265, 398, 399, 416, 417 131, 132, 137, 153, 158, 159, 160, 347, 356, 357, 359, 361, 362, 363,
161, 162, 164, 168, 176, 192, 205, 365, 371, 378, 381, 385, 401, 412, 413
O Q 206, 207, 210, 218, 219, 220, 232,
258, 264, 275, 282, 284, 286, 288, V
Observation iv, 26, 35, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, Questionnaire 33, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 96, 101, 290, 291, 308, 311, 340, 363, 384,
67, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 125, 172, 103, 109, 110, 111, 112, 114, 115, 385, 397, 398 Video vi, 5, 65, 70, 71, 131, 323, 324, 325,
255, 256, 257, 259, 305, 354, 377, 118, 120, 121, 157, 180, 181, 190, Speaking anxiety iv, 99, 101, 109, 110, 111, 327, 328, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334,
380, 381, 382, 391, 392, 401, 414, 422 271, 277, 278, 307, 308, 309, 327, 115, 120, 158, 159, 160, 162 353, 354, 394, 395, 397, 398, 399,
Online 76, 138, 194, 195, 265, 279, 328, 353, 328, 329, 339, 352, 372, 386, 387, 411 Strategy 2, 3, 6, 17, 38, 140, 146, 148, 151, 400, 403
406, 407 152, 187, 195, 215, 216, 217, 218, Vocabulary v, 4, 5, 26, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95,
R 220, 221, 223, 255, 256, 260, 262, 96, 97, 101, 109, 143, 144, 146, 192,
P 288, 325, 334, 349, 395, 398, 403, 422 202, 221, 222, 267, 268, 269, 270,
Reader 290, 291, 294, 295, 299, 418, 422 Sustained 2, 6, 11, 37, 156 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 281, 282,
Pair work 102, 154, 155, 158, 162, 163, 164, Recast 51, 53, 54, 55, 59, 255, 256, 258, 259, 283, 284, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290,
311, 312, 313 260 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297,
Pedagogical 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 152, 179, 197, T
Relection iv, 1, 4, 33, 39, 40, 43, 55, 63, 64, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304,
201, 225, 226, 227, 228, 257, 261, 71, 72, 74, 75, 77, 83, 98, 124, 125, Task 11, 62, 75, 85, 97, 103, 127, 149, 155, 323, 326, 327, 329, 330, 331, 332,
263, 390, 404, 416 127, 130, 131, 132, 134, 135, 166, 171, 194, 233, 234, 280, 304, 307, 342, 369, 374, 385, 396, 397, 398
Pedagogy v, 37, 39, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 167, 169, 170, 173, 174, 177, 178, 308, 324, 328, 343, 348, 349, 350, Vocabulary instruction 4, 267, 268, 273,
230, 231, 233, 234, 235, 273, 274, 179, 186, 187, 209, 210, 217, 226, 351, 353, 393, 395, 402, 411 288, 289
380, 404
438 INDEX

W
Trotman, Wayne i, ii, vi, viii, 5, 6, 409, 421,
422
Word 19, 21, 27, 29, 41, 58, 91, 93, 96, 120,
121, 171, 194, 201, 221, 253, 255,
268, 269, 270, 272, 273, 274, 287,
288, 289, 291, 292, 293, 296, 297,
299, 300, 301, 302, 331, 337, 342,
372, 383, 398
Writing v, 2, 4, 6, 17, 26, 43, 50, 74, 80, 84,
87, 93, 94, 96, 125, 133, 137, 138,
139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 146,
147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 167,
169, 171, 199, 219, 258, 275, 280,
282, 283, 284, 286, 288, 290, 291,
303, 306, 308, 311, 323, 324, 327,
328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 335, 339,
354, 359, 366, 368, 395, 397, 410,
413, 417