TEST YOUR ENGLISH

ONE of the objectives of DBE3 is to improve the quality and relevance of teaching and learning in the classroom. To achieve these objectives, DBE3 has planned and implemented an intensive training programs for teachers. The training is intended to increase the quality of teachers which, in the end, will improve the quality of education.

Training in Classroom Action Research by DBE3

Classroom Action Research is an activity undertaken by teachers to improve their performance and teaching skills in the classroom. They do it by evaluating their teaching approaches and then making improvements. By doing this repeatedly, they should improve their performance and skills.

In order to develop teachers who are able to reflect on their teaching and develop their own performances and skills, DBE3 conducted training in Classroom Action Research from August 11-13, 2009. This training involved teachers of core subjects i.e. Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, English and Bahasa Indonesia. This training was the first training in Classroom Action Research done by DBE3.

There were a number of interesting things about this training. First, DBE3 collaborated with the universities and LPMPs (Teacher Quality Assurance Institutes) in the training which also involved teachers from target schools. Second, the training was focused on the identification of learning problems and how to draft research plans to address these problems.

Third, the training was the first phase of the activity and focused on drafting proposals. The selected proposals will get financial support from DBE3. A second workshop, taking place after the research has started, will focus on data analysis and a third workshop will focus on report writing. The second and third workshops will take place in November 2009 and February 2010.

“The training was effective and applicable. Now I understand what classroom action research is after participating in this training,” said one participant.

Interesting and Useful: BTL 2 Training in Soppeng, South Sulawesi

THE BTL2 training held in Soppeng was implemented in a way that encouraged participants to be active. In this training participants had opportunities to practise after they learned some theory. Megawati, a teacher from MTs Yasrib Lapajung, Soppeng, commented, ”This training is interesting and useful for teachers in Soppeng.” She said that she now understood how to develop learning activities which would encourage students to work in groups actively to solve problems. ”I now realize that text books are not the only source of learning. We can make use of resources in our environment,” she said enthusiastically.

Nilawati, a teacher of SMPN 1 Watansoppeng also said something similar. According to this Science teacher, what was interesting in this training was the group activity which emphasized team work. The atmosphere at the training was very positive and lively. It is hoped that participants will apply their experiences in their classrooms in their schools.

”The participants were very active in this training,” said Arif, a school supervisor for Science in the district of Soppeng. He was sure that, after participating in the training, teachers would be able to support their students better and make them more active in learning.” As a supervisor I will assist my teachers. This will be very useful for them and I believe it can improve the quality of learning in schools, ” he added.

Sumber: http://inovasipendidikan.net/dbe3-8e.html

Article by Trent Lorcher (38,336 pts )
Edited & published by Maryam DiMauro (7,446 pts ) on Jun 8, 2009

For better or worse, standardized tests are here to stay.

Standardized Test Tips: They’re Permanent

Standardized Test Preparation: Prepare Early

Standardized Test Preparation: Teach Preparation

Standardized Test Tips: Listen

Source: http://www.brighthub.com/education/k-12/articles/3409.aspx

Jonathan Snell
j_snell [at] yahoo.com
Toyo Women’s College (Tokyo, Japan)

A common problem for EFL teachers is dealing with a passive class, where students are unresponsive and avoid interaction with the teacher. This is especially true when a teacher seeks interaction in a teacher-class dialog, such as asking questions to the class as a whole, expecting at least one student to respond. This can be a frustrating experience for both parties. Obviously, there will be times when no student can answer a teacher’s question, but often students do not answer even if they understand the question, know the answer, and are able to produce the answer. Furthermore, students can often be very reluctant to give feedback or ask the teacher a question in front of the class. This action research project attempted to explore this problem and sought to create a more interactive teacher-class interchange in one class of Japanese adult English learners.

Action Research Defined

Action research is concerned with trying to improving one specific point in a teacher’s technique in a particular classroom using empirical measurement. Richards, Platt & Platt (1992) have defined it as:

Teacher-initiated classroom research which seeks to increase the teacher’s understanding of classroom teaching and learning and to bring about improvements in classroom practices. Action research typically involves small-scale investigate projects in the teacher’s own classroomŠ

This usually includes having an observer collect data, and together with the teacher develop a plan to bring about the desired change, act on the plan, and then observe the effects of the plan in the classroom.

Class Description

The class observed was a group of twenty-three sophomores majoring in Japanese at a small private Tokyo women’s college. The teacher was an American male with several years teaching experience at Japanese universities. The goal of this required class is to teach the students basic English conversation, reading, listening and writing skills. Their English ability level ranged from upper beginner to intermediate. During the observation period, the students appeared motivated and attentive, and they seemed to be enjoying the class.

Problem Identification

The students, as a class, didn’t respond voluntarily to the instructor’s questions and did not participate in class discussions. Students also never asked the teacher questions outside one-on-one situations. Thus the teacher received little oral feedback. According to the teacher:

Most of the class members sit looking straight ahead using minimal facial expressions, gestures and verbal utterances. What I want is for the students to be more demonstrative and more overtly communicative in their feedback. I want these behaviors: I want the students to ask questions, make comments and to respond with nods and shakes of the head, with sounds of agreement or sounds of understanding. Also, I want them to be both reactive and proactive.

Preliminary Investigation

I observed the teacher’s class in the fourth week of the semester. In the first 45 minutes, the class went through an intermediate level taped dialogue. The students first listened to the tape with their books closed, then again with the books opened. Next, they did a dictation exercise consisting of 25 short sentences based on the dialogue. The teacher then talked about the sociolinguistic and grammar points of the exercise and went on to probe for comprehension:

• T: Any questions? Do you understand everything?
• Ss: Š(no one responds)
• T: Okay, how many people were speaking?
• Ss: Š(no response)
• T: How many people were speaking?
• Ss: Š(no response)
• T: There were two. Two people. Were they friends or strangers?
• Ss: Š(no response)Š

The teacher asked a few other questions which also drew no response or reaction from the students. The students then had to answer some questions about the conversation in their book. Most of the students seemed to have little trouble doing this, and if there were any questions, they readily asked the student sitting next to them.

The second half of the class was devoted to pair work using the phrases and vocabulary from the taped dialogue in role play. The students seemed to enjoy this, and most tried to create their own dialogues. The teacher circulated the room checking on the progress of each pair. The class atmosphere was markedly different from the first half of the class, with chatter and occasional laughter filling the air. The students answered most of the teacher’s questions with alacrity, and some even asked their own questions.

Hypothesis

Because the students seemed to generally understand the teacher’s questions, it was felt that there was something else that kept the students from responding voluntarily in the class-teacher dialogues. Since most Japanese students are taught to listen and not to question a teacher in class, Japanese students have little or no experience in in-class interaction with the teacher, such as questioning or commenting or giving feedback. Students are usually taught to be quiet and respectfully listen to the teacher.

By teaching the students that class interaction with the English teacher is not only acceptable, but normal, useful and beneficial, it was believed that the students would become more interactive with the teacher in teacher-class interaction.

Plan Intervention

Following the hypothesis, two steps were taken to implement a plan:

• First, on the following class, the teacher distributed an explanatory paragraph about “rules” for asking questions in class in English speaking countries. The teacher made an exercise out of it and had students read the paragraph out loud to the class and explained a few difficult words and spent additional time expanding on the text. The “rules” were extrapolated from a culture point in Helgesen & Brown (1994) and were as follows:
  

  Each culture has different “rules” about how students should act in the classroom. In some countries, students are expected to listen and only the teacher should lecture or talk in class. But in English-speaking countries (and in English class), it is good-and important-to answer the teacher’s questions and interrupt with questions of your own. It means that you are interested and paying attention. In English, it is your job to ask questions if you don’t understand. (p. 3)

  The teacher went on to say that if they still felt uncomfortable asking and answering questions, they had to at least nod or shake their head as a response to the teacher’s questions.

• Secondly, the teacher reminded the students of the “rules” at the beginning of each subsequent class and further encouraged them to become more active in the class when the instructor was talking.

Outcome

In the eighth week of the semester, the class was observed again. A lesson similar to the one in the fourth week was presented. At the beginning, the instructor reminded the class of the “rules.” After playing the taped dialogue twice, the teacher began talking about the dialogue, making grammar, usage and sociolinguistic points, interspersed with questions about the passage and the instructor’s explanations. This went on for about twenty minutes and included general comprehension check questions such as ‘do you understand?’ and ‘are you okay?’ as well as specific questions about the dialogue.

Regarding general comprehension questions, most of the students did nod in response and a few answered ‘yes’ to these questions. And it was believed that they did, in fact, understand.

With the specific questions, however, something unexpected happened. When the teacher asked a question, he was usually greeted with poker-faced stares, as before. But when he moved closer, looked specifically at a student, or pair of students, and repeated the question, the students usually tried to answer. In general, I noted, the instructor was paying much more attention to the students, moving closer to them, and looking at specific students and trying to make a better connection with them. Instead of asking questions with the feeling that they really weren’t going to be answered anyway, as before, the teacher made a greater effort to communicate the questions, and acted as if he expected to get responses.

Also, toward the end of the instructor’s talk on the dialogue, two students, without prompting from the teacher, asked questions before the class. Although the questions were not related directly to the dialogue, the fact that the questions were asked before the entire class was considered a breakthrough.

Conclusion

There were some areas where the results of this action research were not as successful as hoped. For instance, the students needed to be prompted with eye contact and a repeated question from the teacher to answer a question, and when they did not understand something, they still did not interrupt the teacher with a question.

And yet some progress was definitely made, especially when the brief span between observations is considered. The students did interact with the teacher by nodding, some did answer the instructor’s questions, and two, on their own initiation, even asked questions before the class. The unanticipated side effect of the teacher becoming more concerned with the interaction was a welcome surprise and contributed to the improvement. There seems to have been some success in instructing and reminding and then expecting the students to become more interactive with the teacher.

Reflection

This action research project forced both the teacher and the observer to remember that ESL teachers in Japan are not just teaching a language, but also a culture, and this includes instructing the sociolinguistics appropriate for the native English speaking classroom. Perhaps more importantly, they had to think about why the cultures are different, in this respect, and how to try and bridge that difference. This lead to questioning the conventional notion that Japanese students simply do not like the native English speaking classroom culture.

An additional reason for interest in the problem addressed here was the belief that this was a common problem in Japan. Teachers, especially native English speaking ones, often become frustrated with a lack of initial success in obtaining an interactive dialogue with the class. This often leads them to mistake a lack of familiarity with a lack of interest, and to teach within the students’ culturally conditioned classroom expectations, instead of introducing the expectations commonly found in classrooms in English speaking counties. While intending to be more accommodating to students, they are failing to give students a useful sociolinguistic skill, which students would likely want and derive benefit. Some may think encouraging the use of this student-teacher interaction common in native English speaking counties is culturally arrogant. But if it is introduced in a sensitive and reasonable manner, it actually contributes to a more fulfilling English class. After all, most students don’t study English just for linguistic competence. They will also want to develop sociolinguistic competence for communicating in different situations in English speaking countries, and this includes the classroom.

Reference

• Helgesen, M. & Brown, S. (1994) Active listening: Building skills for understanding. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
• Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992) Dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics (2nd ed.). Essex: Longman.

Source: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Snell-Interaction.html

What is classroom action research?
Classroom action research begins with a question or questions about classroom experiences, issues, or challenges. It is a reflective process which helps teachers to explore and examine aspects of teaching and learning and to take action to change and improve.

Who is it for?
Any teacher who:

• wants to understand more about teaching and learning
• wants to develop teaching skills and knowledge
• wants to take action to improve student learning

What are the benefits?

• provides a framework for trying out different approaches and ideas
• helps develop reflective practice
• enables teachers to make choices and decisions about their teaching styles
• helps develop confidence
• helps teachers improve student learning

How to do … Classroom action research

1.  Reflect
Consider your current classroom practice. Think about questions you have about teaching, topics you are interested in, problem areas, or aspects of teaching/learning you are unsure about. Make a list. From your list, decide what you would like to research. To help you decide, think about why you want to do it. What are the benefits to you and your learners? When you have decided, write a research question.

2.  Explore
Reflect on your research question. Where can you find information to help you plan your research? It may help you to discuss your question with colleagues. You may need to consult published materials or the Internet for information and ideas. Find out as much as you can about your question topic to help you plan how to do the research.

3.  Plan
Draw up an action research plan which states your question, how and why you are going to carry out the research. Things to think about: how long it will take? What tools will you use in your research? How will you record your research? There are different ways of doing research. It can be as simple as just writing down your own reflections after each lesson or it could include questionnaires, observations, audio recordings and so on.

4.  Research
Carry out your research using your chosen method. Some tools are:

• Peer observation
• Teacher diary
• Learner feedback
• Lesson evaluation
• Recording lessons
• Reflecting on learners’ work
• Surveys

Choose the method which best suits your research question.

5.  Analyze
This stage helps you to make sense of the data you have collected in your research. It is a process of reflecting on, organizing and reviewing your data to help you answer your research question. What have you found out? What insights have you gained from the research? What does your research show you?

6.  Act
Reflect on your results. Look at your teaching practice - what changes will you make?
Take action based on what you found out from your research.

7.  Review
When you have implemented changes, it is important to review. How successful were the changes? Do you need to take any follow-up action? Has your research indicated other areas you could explore? In other words, you begin a new reflective cycle.

How to do …. An action research plan
Once you have written your research question, the next step is to plan how you will organize your research to find the answer or answers to your question.

Why plan?
A good plan will save you time and help to keep you focused. A plan provides a timeframe for organizing your research and helps you to identify any resources you may need. There are different ways of collecting data - the information you collect during your research. Planning will help you to think through the direction of your research, so that you can select the most appropriate tools for collecting and analyzing your data.

Guidelines
Here are some focusing questions to help you develop your plan:

• What is the purpose of my research?
• Why do I want to do the research? How is it going to benefit me? How is it going to benefit my learners? How is it going to benefit the school? How will it help me to make changes?
• How much time will it take?
• How much time do I need? Will I be able to do it in one week? Is it better to do it over a term or even a whole school year?
• Who will be involved?
• Will I ask my colleagues to participate? Which classes will I involve? Will a whole class of students be needed, or should I make selections? Do I need to involve parents?
• What resources do I need?
• Is it easy to access any publications I need to consult? Do I need a computer? Do I need any space apart from my classroom?
• What is the best method for finding answers?
• Will you ask a colleague to observe you? Will you observe other colleagues? Will you conduct questionnaires with your learners? Will I carry out interviews? Will I keep a journal?
• When will the research take place? Before lessons? During lessons? After lessons? All three?
• How will I analyze my data?
• How will I record, sort, organize and understand the data I collect? Will anyone be able to assist me?
• What do I need to find out before collecting data?
• How can you develop your knowledge about your topic area to help you make your research more focused? Can your colleagues provide any insights from their experiences? Are there any books you could read which would provide you with background information?

Example plans
There are no set formats for designing classroom action research plans. Some teachers like to use calendars to provide a framework for what, how and when they will do the research. Another method is to complete a grid. You can download examples of both research plans below.

How you decide to design your plan will depend on your research aims and purpose as well as on whether you prefer to work with an open, loose plan or something more formally structured. What is important is to know how much time you have available and how you will use that time to conduct your research.

How to do… Research questions

Starting points
Make a list of questions you have about your experiences in the classroom or topics which interest you in teaching and learning. Perhaps there have been lessons where an activity or a task didn’t succeed as well as you had expected. Perhaps you are keen to find ways of engaging your learners in more speaking practice. Perhaps you would like to develop an out-of-class reading programme for your learners.
Select one question or topic and reflect:

• Why are you interested in this topic?
• What do you want to change, improve or develop?
• What do you want to know or understand?
• What are your learners’ needs?
• Write your research question

Tips
√ Don’t ask questions which can be answered with a yes or a no - this will not provide a foundation for research.
√ Consider whether and how researching this question will help you to develop. Don’t waste time exploring things you already know the answer to.
√ Be realistic in terms of time and resources - have you got time to do the research? What resources will you need?
√ Make sure your question is ‘researchable’ - think about how you will find the answer. What tools will you use?
√ How will you know when you have answered your question? How will you measure the results?

Sample questions

• How can I promote a lifelong learning approach in my learners?
• How can I measure learning without formal tests?
• In what ways can I involve parents to help me improve my students’ English language skills?
• How can knowing about learning styles help me to plan my lessons to help all of my students? become better learners
• What can I do to help my students take more responsibility for their learning

Source: http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/transform/teachers/teacher-development-tools/action-research

Iakovos Tsiplakides and Areti Keramida
tsiplakides [ =at= ] hotmail.com
(Ioannina, Greece)

Introduction

It is widely accepted that an important predictor of success in a foreign language is students’ attitude towards it. In ESL/EFL contexts, students who consider the learning of English as a positive and rewarding experience are less likely to suffer from foreign language anxiety. By contrast, they usually have higher levels of motivation, willingness to participate, and high language performance. Students’ attitude towards the foreign language is very often influenced by: a) teacher-student relationships, b) the general classroom atmosphere, and c) the use of authentic teaching materials and activities.

This article is practical in nature. Its aim is to provide English teachers with a set of strategies and practical suggestions in order to help their students develop a positive attitude toward learning English as a foreign language.

Factor 1: Teacher-student Relationships

Teachers can make a valuable contribution to developing a friendly relationship with their students. The following is a checklist with appropriate and effective teacher behavior:

Factor 2: Fostering a Positive Psychological Classroom Atmosphere

It is important to establish a kind of “classroom community”, in which students feel free to communicate using the foreign language. An important thing to bear in mind is that you should create a classroom atmosphere in which language errors are considered a natural part of the process of learning a foreign language (Dornyei (2001: 42). If errors are ridiculed, some students may suffer from communication apprehension, that is, they will be unwilling to communicate using the target language. The following techniques are intended to create a friendly, non-threatening class classroom climate:

Factor 3: Creating an Attractive Physical Classroom Environment

Very often teachers overlook the significance of an attractive and motivating physical environment. However, teachers can make a significant contribution to the physical environment in which teaching and learning takes place. The following is some practical advice.

Factor 4: Supplementing the Teaching Material with Authentic Texts and Tasks

Students often develop negative attitudes towards learning English as a foreign language due to the lack of stimulating, authentic teaching material and tasks. Authentic material is meaningful to students, challenges their cognitive abilities, engages them personally. It also increases interest and intrinsic motivation. If you feel that your English coursebook contains few authentic texts, then you need to provide your students with authentic texts and activities. Authentic material and tasks should be selected based on the following guidelines:

Conclusion

The above parameters, which have a great impact on promoting positive attitudes towards learning English as a foreign language, are essential by themselves. However, they overlap, and fostering of positive attitudes is a complex mixture of all the features described.

English teachers should also note that the principles and techniques described above are general. Teachers need to adapt them according to their students’ needs and the specific teaching context.

Finally, apart from the above principles, it is worth mentioning that fostering positive attitudes towards learning English as a foreign language is a dynamic process. Teachers should be constantly observing their classrooms and their students. In this way, they will be able to identify sources of discontent among students, recognize the reasons why they misbehave, are unwilling to participate, and have low performance.

References

• Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Dörnyei, Z. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Ebata, M. (2008). Motivation Factors in Language Learning. The Internet TESL Journal, 14 (4). http://iteslj.org/Articles/Ebata-MotivationFactors.html
• Frymier, A. (1993). The impact of teacher immediacy on students’ motivation: Is it the same for all students?. Communication Education, 41, 454-464.
• Kyriacou, C. (1997) Effective teaching in schools: theory and practice. Second. Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
• Lightbown, P., and N. Spada. 1999. How Languages are Learned. Second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lee I. (1997) ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: some implications for teaching. System, 25 (4): 465-477.
• Lee, I. (2002). Project work made easy in the English classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review 59, 282-290
• Levin, J., & Nolan, J.F., (1996). Principles of Classroom Management: A Professional Decision-Making Mode. Second edition. USA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008) Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applications. Third edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
• Thompson, T. (1997). Do we need to train teachers how to administer praise? Self-worth theory says we do. Learning and Instruction, 7: 49-63.

Source:   http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Tsiplakides-PositiveAttitudes.html

by Errol Pitts
errolpitts {(at)} hotmail.com
Hanseo University (Seosan, South Korea)

Source: http://iteslj.org/Lessons/Pitts-PastTense/

Using an inductive approach, students will learn one of the most common verb tenses, the past simple. Additionally, students will learn about job searching techniques aimed at helping them to secure employment. Receptive and productive activities are described in detail. Examples of materials are provided. Extensions for learning outside of the classroom are supplied.

Introduction

MTsN Binjai

Adult immigrant and international ESL students have a variety of pragmatic needs. Finding a job is one of these practical and often necessary needs. A job provides financial income to support living and academic expenses such as, housing, food and textbooks. ESL teachers working with settling students can effectively assist them in searching for a job within the provision of English language training. This lesson demonstrates an example of helping Immigrant and International ESL students to find a job while simultaneously teaching one of the most common verb tenses, the past simple verb tense in an inductive manner. Students will work with job searching techniques and the past simple verb tense in receptive and productive activities.

Time Required

• 90 minutes

Objective(s)

• Students will learn about five job searching techniques:
  • using the Internet
  • looking in the newspaper
  • networking, looking in newspapers
  • looking for job opening signs
  • using employment counsellors
• Students will be able to recognize regular verbs in the past simple tense in written form.
• Students will be able to demonstrate the use of regular verbs in the past simple tense through writing.
• Students will be able to use regular verbs in the past simple tense in a communicativeoral activity.

Materials and Equipment

• envelope one per student
• access to the internet
• overhead projector or LCD projector with a computer
• access to a photocopier and printer
• poster paper

Pre-lesson Preparation

1. Choose six or seven regular verbs that are commonly used when searching for a job. For example:
   • talk
   • look
   • help
   • ask
   • phone
   • walk
2. Write a personal letter. This letter should be written from the perspective of an adult immigrant or International ESL student describing his/her job searching experience to a friend or family member. This letter needs to include and briefly describe the five techniques of searching for a job. Also, the verbs you selected in step one need to be used in the personal letter. The letter should be written with student proficiency in mind. See Appendix A for an example.
3. Create a ‘fill in the gap’ worksheet. This worksheet should be similar to the personal letter. The worksheet needs to have students write the selected verbs in the past simple verb tense. See Appendix B for an example.
4. Photocopy the personal letter and the fill in the gap worksheet onto overhead transparencies. Ensure that the font size is bold and large. If there is access to an LCD projector and computer, have the two items saved and accessible via a word processing file instead of using an overhead transparency.
5. Make five small simple job searching technique posters. Find photos or clip art from the internet, print the images and paste them onto the poster paper. Label each poster. Examples of labels are using the internet and looking in the newspaper. Make sure to respect copyright laws for any photos you copy from the internet.
6. Photocopy one personal letter for each student. Put each letter in a standard size envelope.
7. Create a small chart with five columns. Write one job searching technique in each column. Photocopy one chart for every student. See Appendix C for an example.

Procedure

Lead-In

In a large classroom discussion, ask the students questions that make them think about how they have found jobs. For example, “How did you find your job?” Record the specific job searching experiences on the whiteboard (some rephrasing may be necessary) and make sure to use and underline the verbs in the past simple tense. For example, (student name) - looked in the newspaper, (student name) - talked with her friends. If students are having trouble providing examples, give some help by using questions such as, “Did you find your job in the newspaper?” “Did a friend tell you about the job?” You may need to use a personal experience of your own as a first example. Write enough examples to demonstrate all five job searching techniques and try to utilize the selected verbs.

Presentation

1. In a large classroom discussion ask the students questions that assist them in identifying the five job searching techniques. For example, “What are different ways of looking for a job?” If necessary, provide some help by pointing to the examples written on the white/blackboard and point to key words such as ‘friends’ or ‘newspaper’ on the white/blackboard. After the students have identified all five job searching techniques show the ‘job posters’ to the class. Say the names of each of the job searching techniques out loud and have the students repeat. Acknowledge the students who have used each technique. For example, “(student name) - looked in the newspaper”. Ask students, “What is the best way to find a job? Why?” and discuss this briefly. There is no correct answer to this question. The purpose of this question is to make the students think about the positives and negatives with each technique.
2. Draw a long line on the board. Mark an ‘X’ in the middle of it. Write the word ‘past’ on top of the line to the left of the ‘X’. Say ‘past’ out loud and have the students repeat it. Write ‘present’ on top of the ‘X’. Say ‘present’ out loud and have the students repeat it. Write ‘future’ on top of the line to the right of the ‘X’. Say ‘future’ out loud and have the students repeat it.
   
   In a large classroom discussion ask students whose responses are written on the board this question, “When did you ___?” Fill in the blank with “talk with their friends, look in the newspaper, use/search the Internet” etc. Write their responses on the timeline.
3. Explain the concept of past. Ask students, “When did (student name) look in the newspaper?” “In the past, present or future?”, “When did (student name) talk with her friend?” “In the past, present or future?” etc. Repeat until all the student’s examples have been discussed. Ask students, “When did they all look for their jobs?” If necessary, provide help by pointing to the word ‘past’ on the time line. Write ‘past’ on the whiteboard or blackboard.
4. Point to the underlined words and ask the students, “What kind of words are the underlined words?” If necessary, provide examples such as, noun, adjective and verb. If further assistance is still required, give examples of nouns, adjectives and verbs and provide definitions. Write ‘verb’ on the whiteboard or blackboard.
5. Ask students, “What do all the verbs in our examples end with?” If necessary, point to the –ed endings. Write ‘–ed’ on the whiteboard or blackboard.
6. Ask students, “What kind of rule can you make about verbs that happened in the past?” If necessary, point to the words ‘verb’ ‘past’ and the suffix ‘-ed’ written on the board.
7. Write on the board, ‘Use –ed at the end of verbs that happened in the past.’ Be prepared to share some irregular verbs if students ask about them (i.e. deal-dealt, do-did etc.).

Accuracy Activity - 1 (Receptive)

SMPN 2 L Pakam

Announce

“You just received mail from a child/friend/relative living in a different city.” Show students the envelope.

Demonstration

Tell students, “Read the letter and underline any verbs written in the past simple verb tense.” Using the overhead projector, show students the personal letter. Tell students, “I am going to read a few sentences. When you hear a verb in the past simple tense, raise your hand.” Read the first two sentences of the letter and underline verbs in the past simple tense as the students indicate. If necessary, use cues to help the students such as, slow down your speech or look at the students as your read a verb in the past simple tense. When the students raise their hands and indicate the answer, give praise.

Comprehension Check

Ask students, “What are you going to do with the letter?” If necessary, provide help by pointing to the underlined verbs.

Distribute

Pass out the envelopes to the students. Tell the students to start.

Teacher Feedback

Walk around the room and provide immediate correction.

Peer Correction

Tell the students to find a partner and check each other’s work.

Self-correction

Using the overhead projector, show students the answer sheet and tell them to check their answers. Give students time to check their answers.

Questions

Ask the students if they have any questions and answer them.

Accuracy Activity - 2 (Productive)

Announce

Tell students “Complete this ‘fill in the blank’ worksheet”. Show students the worksheet.

Demonstration

Tell students, “You can work with a partner to complete the worksheet. You will need to use the letter (show students the Personal Letter) to complete the worksheet. The answers are on the letter”. Using the projector, show students the fill in the gap worksheet. Read question one out loud and write the correct answer on the blank line. Read question two and ask the students to choose the correct answer. If necessary, provide help by pointing to a few choices. Write the correct answer on the blank line. Provide praise when appropriate.

Comprehension Check

Ask students, “What are you going to do with this ‘fill in the blank’ worksheet?” Show students the worksheet. If necessary, provide help by pointing to the words in the box and the personal letter.

Distribute

Pass out the worksheets to the students and tell them to start.

Correction

Walk around the room and provide immediate correction.

Class Correction

Using the projector show students the worksheet and ask students for their answers. Give praise when appropriate. Give students time to check their answers.

Questions

Ask the students if they have any questions and answer them.

Fluency Activity

Announce

Tell students, “You are going to do a fluency activity. Ask five classmates three questions and write down what job searching technique he/she used on this chart.” (Hold up the fluency chart See Appendix C) Write these three questions on the whiteboard.

• What is your job?
• How did you find your job?
• What job searching technique do you think is the best and why?

Read the questions out loud and have the students repeat.

Demonstration

Using a volunteer student, ask him/her “What is your job?”, “How did you find that job?” (Insert a check mark in the correct column of the fluency chart and show the class) “What do you think is the best way to look for a job and why?” Switch roles with the volunteer student. Respond to the volunteers questions using the past simple verb tense.

Check for Understanding

Ask students, “What are you going to do in this activity?” If necessary, give help by pointing to the questions and hold up the fluency chart.

Distribute

Pass out the fluency chart and tell the students to start.

Teacher Feedback

Walk around the classroom and offer correction only when asked or when communication fails.

Classroom Discussion

Ask these questions, “Who found someone for each of the five techniques?” and “What is the most popular way to find a job?”

Conclusion

Review the past simple verb tense and the five job searching techniques. Using the projector, show students five statements. Each statement needs to include a selected verb written in the past simple tense and a job searching technique. For example,

• He looked in the newspaper.
• He used the Internet.
• She talked with a friend.
• She phoned an employment counsellor.
• She saw a job wanted sign and talked to the store manager.

Ask the class, “Who can come up to the front of the class and underline the verb written in the past simple tense and the job searching technique?” If necessary, complete one example for a demonstration. Provide praise when appropriate.

Assessment

Assessment can consist of the personal letter and/or the fill in the gap worksheet. However, in order to use these materials for assessment, students must be told to use a pen to make any mistakes obvious. A checklist can be used in the fluency activity.

Extension/Homework

Ask the students to talk with their family or friends about job searching and report next class. Here are some examples questions that can be assigned.

• What is the most popular technique of job searching? And why?
• What job searching technique is the fastest way to find a job? And why?
• How did you find your job?

Appendix

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

by Steve McCarty

Long English-only version in the Kagawa Junior College Journal, 26, pp. 1-10 (20 March 1998). A shorter, edited, English-Japanese version of this paper appears in Wada, M., Cominos, A., Betts, R., and Y. Ishikawa (Eds.), Team Teaching in the Communicative Classroom. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten (25 January 1998), pp. 170-173.

ABSTRACT

To the extent speaking skills are taught, their degree of improvement needs to be graded, so foreign language teachers need ways to evaluate speaking skills. Dialogues from secondary school English textbooks, adjusted or individualized, provide realistic language material for this speaking quiz activity. Techniques such as jan ken pon among teams of rows ensure fairness with regard to unequal practice time, while heightening students’ interest and responsibility for the outcome. Criteria such as closeness to the model of English taught are clarified to the students. One pair of students at a time performs their dialogue in front of the Assistant Language Teacher (ALT), preferably in a different room. Before performing the dialogue, the two students each hand over a name tag, on which the ALT writes their score when they finish. For the Japanese Teacher of English (JTE) to record these grades helps convince the students that English speaking is a substantial part of the course, and that they therefore need to participate in regular oral activities.

Rationale and Purpose for this Activity

To the extent speaking skills are taught, their degree of improvement needs to be graded. Thus as oral English becomes an essential part of the secondary school curriculum, foreign language teachers implementing the Course of Study will increasingly be looking for ways to evaluate speaking skills.

Individual JTEs and ALTs will need to agree upon precise criteria and procedures for the conduct of periodic speaking evaluations, quizzes or tests. For the JTE to record grades as with any other skill to be tested helps convince the students that English speaking is a substantial part of the course, and that they therefore need to participate in regular oral activities.

This article attempts to answer the need for an approach to the evaluation of English speaking skills at the secondary school level in Japan. It relies upon and benefits from the team teaching partnership, describing the roles of the JTE, ALT and students throughout the activity. Alternatives are presented at each main step in the procedure, allowing the JTE and ALT to choose techniques suitable for their situation and for the level of their students.

The criteria for evaluating speaking skills provide a general theoretical framework that clarifies what constitutes effective English speaking. For grading more objectively, it will be suggested that teachers make a checklist of basic criteria weighted according to their judgement of priorities for each English class.

The procedure is couched in terms of a speaking quiz, but teachers could elect to use it as a speaking activity without grading, or as a trial run toward a future speaking test. Moreover, alternatives are offered which make it possible for a teacher to conduct the activity solo if necessary, or to apply the activity beyond the secondary school level, such as with elementary level college English classes.

Adjustability to any Secondary School Level

Alternative techniques are offered at each main step in the procedure, while the criteria for evaluating English speaking are also up to the JTE and ALT to prioritize, according to the level of each class. It will therefore be seen that this activity can be utilized at any secondary school level where English speaking skills are practiced through dialogues.

Selecting or adjusting dialogues from the textbook is specifically recommended for the subject of English at each year of junior high school. At the high school level, textbook or supplemental dialogues prepared by the teachers could also be useful at the pre-communicative stage, possibly in English I and II. But for Oral Communication A through C, dialogues could be individualized or developed by the students into communicative conversations, what the students really wish to discuss in English.

It would be desirable, with guidance from the teachers, for dialogues to be made more communicative at any level, for example by using the students’ own names in their performance. While the students are practicing, individualizing or composing their dialogues in pairs, the JTE and ALT could circulate around the class to check progress and answer individual questions.

Out-of-Class Preparation

The JTE and ALT need to discuss the alternatives presented in this activity and agree to a step-by-step procedure. They further need to decide which two class periods the in-class procedure will span, toward the end of a trimester or when a speaking quiz is deemed appropriate.

In-Class Time Required

Up to one full class period will be needed for the speaking quiz itself. In addition, perhaps at the end of the previous meeting of the class, an explanation of the procedure and criteria by the JTE will be necessary.

Alternative. The explanation of the procedure and criteria could be in the form of a written handout for greater clarity and to save class time.

Procedure for Conducting the Speaking Quiz

Turning Rows of Students into Teams of Pairs

The students are divided into teams consisting of two rows each, and within the team they form a pair with their neighboring student to practice and perform the dialogues. In case of an odd number of rows, one row could become a team, and pairs could be formed from the front to the back of the row. A classroom with seven rows, for example, would then result in four teams.

Alternative. In this example of seven rows, if one row has no more students than the number of the rest of the rows, the six or fewer students in that row could be seated behind the other six rows to make three teams rather than four. Students may also have to be asked to change their seats to fill in gaps left by absent students.

Practice Time and the Number of Dialogues Needed

If the whole class performed the same dialogue, there would be an unfair difference in practice time, so the number of dialogues prepared needs to be at least as many as the number of teams. All the students practice a certain dialogue for a set time, but only one team actually performs it. They do not know which team will perform the dialogue until the practice time is over and one of the teams is randomly selected.

The length of practice time should be roughly equal for each dialogue, or proportional to the length of the dialogues. This can be flexible, especially when the teachers are still going around the room answering individual questions about pronunciation and so forth. However, to ensure time for students to refine their conversational skills beyond memorization, dialogues with frequent changing of speaking turns are preferable to those with long turns at talk.

The length of practice time allowable could be roughly calculated based on the number of dialogues expected to be used during the class period. The time spent by teams performing dialogues in front of the ALT would also have to be taken into account. Shorter dialogues are again preferable in cutting memorization time and allowing for a more exciting pace.

Number of Times Each Pair Performs

The simplest procedure is for each pair to perform a dialogue once. Particularly when dialogues are individualized by the students, there may not be time to have them perform more than once.

However, when using short dialogues in textbooks or breaking up long dialogues into several short ones, there needs to be something for students to do when they have finished performing one dialogue and much class time still remains. One way to keep the students practicing is to have more dialogues than the number of teams. Depending on random selection, they may perform once or possibly more than once, in which latter case their scores would be averaged or adjusted.

Determining the Order in Which Pairs Perform

When only one team performs a dialogue, there is little difference in practice time among the members, so the order in which pairs perform can arbitrarily be from the front to the back pairs of the team. The question is how to randomly select one team to perform a given dialogue. Here the traditional jan ken pon game of scissors-paper-stone can engage the students and make them feel responsible for the order in which they perform. All the students know how to play this game, and any number can participate. The JTE can conduct it as well as explain it to the ALT if necessary.

At the beginning of the class when teams are first formed, each team is asked to quickly designate a representative. After the practice time for each dialogue is over, all the team representatives do jan ken pon until one team emerges as the loser. This team performs the dialogue, while the others have won more practice time before being evaluated. Toward the end of the class period, if one team is still undefeated at jan ken pon, then their reward would be to practice the last dialogue in the knowledge that they will certainly perform it for a grade.

Alternative. Having the losing team perform the dialogue would seem to accord with the gallows humor of an English speaking test, but the teachers–or students–may elect to have the winning team perform the dialogue if they prefer.

Using Name Tags to Conduct the Quiz in a Separate Room

The first step in the procedure on the day of the quiz is for the JTE to pass out rectangular slips of paper of equal size to all the students. The JTE then asks the students to make their own name tag by writing their name in English, given name then family name, and student number if applicable. Later when the students go to perform their dialogues, they first pass their name tags to the ALT. Then the ALT, who is sitting behind a desk or table, places the two name tags on the writing surface, the left and right hand slips corresponding to where the students they identify are standing. When the students finish performing their dialogue, the ALT thanks them, says good-bye, and writes their grades on their name tags when they leave.

To avoid grading memorization instead of speaking skills, the students could be allowed to bring their dialogues and consult the text if they forget their lines, provided they again face their partner when they speak. The students should be encouraged to practice in a similar manner as well, always facing their partner when in the speaking or listening role.

A separate room has the advantage of privacy and prevents peer pressure on students to perform below their ability. For to do well the students must depart from conventional mispronunciations and not be too embarrassed to change toward the non-Japanese communication style embodied in the dialogue.

To keep students practicing all during the class period and not idle after performing one dialogue, it could be helpful to have students ready to perform more than one dialogue. But if they actually do, they might need a new name tag each time. Then the teachers would have to match name tags and average or adjust the scores of students who performed more than once.

Using Seating Charts to Conduct the Quiz in the Classroom

The JTE and ALT may prefer to conduct the speaking quiz in the classroom, for example because a large class can be tested more quickly. It may also be more convenient in some ways, particularly when the students perform more than one dialogue, because multiple name tags would not be needed.

Instead of individual name tags, one seating chart could serve for each team, usually two adjacent rows forming a number of pairs who practice and perform the dialogues. Since the students would not leave the classroom but simply stand up two at a time, if they performed more than one dialogue the ALT could write any number of scores by their names on the pertinent seating chart.

A regular sheet of blank paper would be passed to each team, with a number or letter at the top identifying the teams in order from the door to the window side or vice versa. The JTE would ask students to write their names in a sort of grid indicating exactly where they sit. Each name would thus be written in a rectangular box on the left or right side, with blank boxes where there are desks but students are absent. If there are an odd number of rows, one row could form a team, writing their names down one row instead of two, forming pairs with the students behind instead of next to them.

The ALT would gather the seating grids when completed by all the teams. Then when a certain team performed a dialogue, their seating chart held upside down would correspond to the exact location of their seats. As each pair finished performing the dialogue, the ALT would write their scores in the boxes containing their names. Although the names and scores would be upside down, it would be easy later to average, adjust or record scores from each box to the gradebook of the JTE.

Visualizing Teachers’ and Students’ Tasks at Each Phase

A decision is needed as to what the rest of the students are instructed to do while one team is performing a dialogue. If the performances are in the classroom, the other students may be expected to continually listen and applaud each performance. Such model behavior, however, may prove unrealistic to expect. On the other hand, if the performing team leaves the classroom, then the remaining students may need some assigned activity to keep busy.

In planning this activity it is important to visualize where the JTE and ALT are during each phase, as well as what task they and the students are engaged in. When the students are practicing or especially individualizing dialogues, both teachers are needed to circulate and help individual students.

To minimize idle time, and to avoid one team performing twice in a row because of losing at jan ken pon, while one team is out of the room performing a dialogue, the other teams could go on to the next dialogue. Since the performances in front of the ALT could take less than half of the practice time for the next dialogue, the ALT could return to the classroom with the team that just performed, and then still be able to circulate and help individual students with pronunciation questions and so forth. But the drawback with this procedure is that the ALT would not be available to help model the next dialogue before the students start practicing. So during this class period it may be preferable to tolerate a certain amount of idle time as a break from the performance pressure of the quiz. Having the students perform a dialogue for a grade only once is simplest but involves the most idle time to plan for.

When there are an Odd Number of Students

Students are paired to perform dialogues, but on the day of the speaking quiz there may be an odd number of students. This can be solved by simply having the JTE perform the dialogue with one student.

Alternative. Particularly if the JTE does not have time to practice with the student, another student could be asked to perform a role twice, with two different partners, perhaps in return for a quiz grade raised about 5%.

Absences on the Day of the Quiz

Absences may be a problem, especially if the quiz carries some weight in the semester grade. In such cases a make-up quiz outside of class time could probably be arranged. If absent students could not be paired, such individuals could perform a dialogue with the JTE, or with a student who previously took the quiz, perhaps giving the latter a small bonus.

Alternative. If the JTE and ALT could not arrange for an out-of-class make-up quiz, it could be done during a following class period. While the JTE is lecturing, the ALT could go out of the classroom with pairs of students who were absent during the speaking quiz. In case of an odd number of such students, a cooperative student who attended the quiz could be asked to perform one of the roles again.

Applications Beyond the Secondary School Level

The seating chart technique described above, not necessarily grids of two rows each, has a variety of applications besides this activity. Foreign teachers needing to learn their students’ names, keep attendance, correct students’ Romanization of their names to the Hepburn spelling, or make any kind of notations about individual students would benefit from keeping a seating chart. College teachers, for example, faced with students grouping themselves in the far corners of the classroom, instead of calling out each name could take attendance according to a seating chart having the students sit as close as possible to the front.

This speaking quiz activity was first developed with first-year high school classes and with first-year junior college classes. Hence it can also be conducted at the college level or adapted to any stage where students practice dialogues.

Criteria for Evaluating Speaking Skills

Fairness in Grading

Many criteria for evaluating English speaking are possible, and there are as many ways to prioritize them. Especially when the parties involved are from different cultures, these criteria cannot be taken for granted as mutually understood and agreed upon. The main purpose for the JTE and ALT to discuss criteria and clarify their priorities to the students is to ensure fairness in grading. Yet in learning what constitutes effective speaking, particularly to native speakers of English, students also gain a clearer picture of where their speaking practice is aimed, and they can better simulate English speaking as an effective form of international communication.

While performing dialogues is pre-communicative, it will be seen that communicative indicators enhance speaking skills while non-communicative factors such as memorization may detract from speaking skills. Therefore it is fair to include communicative criteria in evaluating speaking skills, provided the selected criteria and their relative weight are clarified to the students at some stage before the speaking quiz.

Communicative Realism

Speaking is practiced after listening as a preparation for actual communication in English, and the best speaking is that which simulates realistic communication. Appropriate gestures, a cheerful rather than stilted attitude, and other concomitants of effective communication enhance speaking and therefore provide criteria for its evaluation, insofar as these skills are taught to the students.

At the junior high school level, dialogues can be sought or adapted to be as realistic as possible, sounding natural to the ALT. Whereas in Oral Communication classes at the high school level, teachers could make the speaking quiz actually communicative by helping the students individualize their dialogues in terms of their own information or what they really wish to say to their partner in English.

Avoiding Reliance on Memorization

This activity aims to evaluate the improvement in speaking skills resulting from regular classroom practice. The quality of speaking thus needs to be isolated from variables such as memorization which may take the place of communicative skills. Recitation of a prepared speech is even more vulnerable to this problem, but even in the case of dialogues memorization can overwhelm the communicative variables and be mistaken for skill in English speaking. That is, the words can be uttered without understanding, merely as memorized sounds. Instead of listening to their partners, students can simply wait until the sounds of their partners cease. Excessive reliance on memorization results in a mechanical performance unnatural in speed, rhythm, turn-taking timing and other communicative criteria.

To counteract this tendency, dialogues need to be selected or adjusted to challenge speaking skills such as pronunciation, intonation, accent, stress, listening and turn-taking. If each turn at talk is brief, there can be more turns at talk rather than long passages to memorize. Communicative criteria are valuable for the students to know in general, so the students can be cautioned that signs of reliance on memorization will be evaluated negatively. Some telltale signs are a staccato monotone; speaking memorized chunks too rapidly; cutting in before the partner finishes speaking, or waiting too long after the partner finishes because the student was not listening.

Model of Spoken English Selected

Varieties of English exist, even within countries such as Britain and the U.S. There is not a standard English in the way that there is for Japanese or French. The spoken English of the JTE could be considered one valid model for the students. In any case, a model or models need to be selected and clarified to the students. These could include the English spoken by the ALT and on any software such as cassette tapes utilized in class. But students also have experience of English in previous years of secondary school or earlier. British or Australian ALTs, for example, may need to adjust their expectations if student pronunciation is closer to the American English model to which they have grown accustomed.

In most cases the students would have listened to dialogues before performing them, and their closeness to the model would be a fair indicator of their listening as well as of their speaking. Listening could be called the sincerest form of communication. Thus the model of English heard when the dialogue was introduced would usually provide a valid and unambiguous standard.

Pronunciation

Since pronunciation could easily be mistaken for the whole of speaking, a number of broader criteria have been considered first. For just as memorizing the sounds well could be mistaken for mastery in speaking, pronunciation alone would also be too narrow a criterion. The cooperation with the procedure and the desire to improve in English speaking are not usually considered aspects of communication, yet they tend to result in better speaking. Similarly, the attention and effort to listen to the model presented by the teachers is not an aspect of speaking, yet it is an act of communication meriting recognition or reward.

The more carefully students listen to the dialogues presented by the teachers, the more correctly they are liable to reproduce them. The speaking quiz could thus become a means of rewarding a positive attitude toward communicating in English, one of the objectives of foreign language education in secondary schools.

Once the model of spoken English has been selected, a certain pronunciation can be considered correct. The students have sufficient practice time and are offered the opportunity to ask about the pronunciation of language they find difficult. Then they are expected to enunciate their sentences as in the model they learned.

Every aspect of pronunciation is involved, including loudness overall, accented syllables in words, reductions and other combinations pronounced differently from the words in isolation. Then at the sentence level there are the patterns of stress, pitch, intonation, breath groups and speech rhythm. These patterns carry information beyond the words, and changes thereof carry a special meaning, such as changes in the tone of voice or speech rhythm.

Thus even pronunciation is shown to involve many variables and pitfalls for the learner. A slowing down in speech or falling intonation to recall something may convey an unintended meaning of reluctance to communicate or some such. Transference of Japanese speaking conventions to English can result in interference from L1 to L2 while, again, the English native-speaking listener may receive unintended meanings. However, secondary school students are still learning vocabulary and piecing together the grammar of English, so they cannot be expected to master such subtle features of a foreign language.

Basically, in speaking English the students are changing from syllable-timed to stress-timed rhythm at the sentence level. This can be explained to students as a continuous sort of “jet coaster” intonation that they should listen for and attempt to reproduce. They need to pronounce English smoothly without rendering it into syllables as they do with foreign loanwords in Japanese sentences. That is, they need to pronounce English as they hear it, not as they read it or render it into Japanese. These points are fundamental enough to emphasize to the students and to evaluate as pronunciation criteria.

Loudness

A louder voice has a better chance of being understood, therefore it is generally to be positively evaluated. Whereas a softer voice may mask doubtful areas where the student failed to listen or ascertain the correct pronunciation from a teacher. Since a demure voice is considered properly modest and respectful in Japanese society, this criterion also needs to be clarified to the students for fairness in grading. It could be explained that a louder voice sounds more positive, confident, enthusiastic and cheerful, besides being more easily understood. Thus, short of excessive loudness which becomes noise, loudness is an important communicative criterion of speaking.

Summary of Criteria Issues and Implementation

We have seen that a number of communicative factors affect the quality of speaking, even in a practice situation. The more complete the criteria are, the better the students can understand what constitutes good English speaking, and the fairer they can be graded. Teachers and learners need to keep in mind that the purpose of language is communication, so speaking is accountable to communicative criteria at every stage.

In teaching and evaluating speaking skills, various criteria such as discussed above need to be kept in mind for a balanced perspective. Learning of these criteria from the teachers, the students might aim for them in their regular practice of speaking, while the teachers watch and listen for these qualities whenever the students speak.

The ALT must quickly evaluate two speakers at a time, so it may be more objective to make a checklist of the criteria and their relative weight, as is usually done in judging English speech contests in Japan. Therefore in the next paragraph, summarizing the essential criteria for good English speaking, a percentage will be added to each as an example, totaling 100%. Here again, it is up to the JTE and ALT to agree on the criteria and their priorities, as well as to convey these to the students.

A manageable checklist has to distill the criteria to the bare essentials, yet accurately reflect our standards for evaluating the quality of English speaking attainable by students at a certain level of secondary school. One possible weighting would be as follows: smooth pronunciation and intonation - 40%, loudness - 20%, natural speed and turn-taking timing - 20%, and communicative factors - 20%.

It may be possible for the ALT to listen for more aspects of pronunciation such as accent, but the students may only be able to move closer overall to the the model they have heard. Memorization is required but does not in itself ensure that the speed and timing are natural. Listening underlies most of the criteria, as the quality of speaking tends to reflect the willingness to listen and hence communicate. Communicative factors per se in the performance would include their facing each other, their attitude, gestures and convincing simulation of communication. If dialogues are composed and individualized at the high school level, content could be a factor of communicative realism.

Chronological Summary of the Activity

Various considerations surrounding the evaluation of English speaking skills have been addressed thematically, but it may be clearer to visualize the activity as a whole by chronologically summarizing the procedure. Please refer to the pertinent sections above for a fuller discussion of the decisions involved in each phase summarized here.

First of all, the JTE and ALT study this activity and decide on a step-by-step procedure including criteria suitable for each class level. The procedure and criteria need to be explained to students beforehand, preferably toward the end of the class period

Source: http://www.waoe.org/steve/teamtest.html

David B. Kent
dbkent [at] mail.inha.ac.kr
http://konglish.terrashare.com
Inha University (Incheon. South Korea)

This article describes a method that EFL teachers can employ when conducting oral tests with their students.

Exam Objectives

Primary Objective: To assess the oral skill level of students in a pre-planned communicative context, as well as testing listening comprehension through question/answer based tasks.

Secondary Objective: To allow students to expand their use of language, centered on a theme of their own interest, and engage in oral communication on a familiar topic covered by the class syllabus.

Exam Approach

Students sign up for the exam, in class, one week prior to the testing date. Students should be allowed to select their own partner, and come in pairs to the exam. As a result students will feel more comfortable, and relaxed, during the testing process.

The exam structure is “semi-free”. Students should be informed that chapter headings of the course syllabus provide the topics for the exam, and that they can discuss any one area of relevance to each topic. Typical topics covered by course syllabuses may include the following: around the community, eating, education and school life, friends and family, the global village, health, homes, love and dating, nature, as well as work and lifestyles. As example areas of relevance to school life, the instructor may provide the following suggestions of topic areas: activities and membership of school clubs, participation and impressions of the university festival, and comparison between high school and university life. Students should then be tested for approximately 10 minutes per pair.

Exam Method

Initially, students should engage in a prepared conversation for around 5 minutes. At this point the examination criteria, see below, should be checked by the instructor at relevant points of the students’ conversation. As students had pre-planned their conversations, they should be expected to exhibit a high degree of familiarity with the topic material.

Secondly, after students have completed their paired conversation, the instructor should ask several questions of each student. The points of evaluation for each student can then be further completed or re-evaluated as necessary. At this phase of the test the instructors approach should be based upon the selected topic of the student pair. For example, if students elect to discuss a topic such as their hometown then the instructors line of questioning may revolve around asking the students to persuade the instructor that it is a good place for a few days holiday. This phase of testing should be planned to take around 5 minutes.

Exam Critique

Overall, students should be able to complete a pre-planned conversation of the appropriate length for the test conditions. Instructors may find that some pairs of Korean students will read all of their pre-planned conversation, even though the evaluation is not a reading test. As a disincentive for doing this, the instructor may inform students that 50% of their exam score will be deducted if they read their prepared conversations. As appropriate, instructor’s may allow students to bring notes, or memory cards, along with them to the test.

Further, familiarity with the topic material selected by students should allow them to adequately respond to the questions asked by the instructor in the second phase of testing. Even those students who never speak in class should be able to interact, to a higher or lesser degree, with the instructor at an appropriate level for the line of questioning.

The downside to this kind of testing in large class environments where an instructor has more than 200 students, and up to 300 students to test, is that both students and instructors feel rushed especially with only 10 minutes per exam. Therefore, times should not be indicated on the exam sign-up sheet, only number order should be provided. In this way, students know they can take as long as they need, as the next pair will enter only after they complete the exam. This approach will see students generally keep to the set 5 minutes for their prepared conversation, some going over and some going under. The instructor can the control the line of questioning, to see the pair finish up on schedule.

Exam Evaluation Criteria

TOTAL:

Comments:

Examination Criteria Explained

Evaluation should be conducted when students engage in their prepared conversations. Revision of the instructor’s evaluation can be conducted, if necessary, during the question/answer phase of the exam. For each point of evaluation, students are graded on a Likert-type scale (1 being poor, through to 5 being excellent). The comments section of the exam evaluation sheet can be used to record points of feedback for each student. For example, problematic points of pronunciation, or grammar mistakes continuously employed by the student throughout the duration of the test.

Fluency of Speech: This point of evaluation should be based upon the smoothness of speech, not speed, and take into account the normal use of hesitancy in conversation. If students cease their conversation to giggle, or if they have memorized their conversation and can not continue by relying upon their inherent communication skills then this should reflect in a lower rating. Students who speak efficiently, and without awkwardness, should in turn be granted a higher rating.

Grammar Use: It is unrealistic to expect that any Korean EFL student will come to an exam and speak without any grammar problems; emphasis should therefore be placed on being able to understand the students communicative intent even if grammar errors are present in sentence structures. However, continual use of the same grammar errors by a student, such as the use of simple past for all past tense terms, should reflect in a lower rating. Alternatively, those students who are able to recognize that they had made a grammar error, and correct it during conversation, should be provided a higher rating.

Listening Comprehension: This phase of evaluation is initially tested during the prepared conversation section of the exam. As some students will not understand what their partners are saying. In some cases, Korean students will remain silent and wait for their partner to repeat their statement, and this should reflect in a lower rating. At other times a student may ask for clarification, or ask their partner to repeat what they had said, and this should reflect in a higher rating. Further more, this section of evaluation should be applied in the question/answer tasks of the exam. Some students may not understand the instructor’s question, even after rewording, whereas other students will understand the same question immediately.

Pronunciation: As native English speakers possess a high degree of tolerance to ambiguity accent is not considered a viable point of exam evaluation, except where it hinders communicative understanding in the case of radically influencing pronunciation. In situations where continual mispronunciation occurs, or understanding is lost due to incorrect pronunciation of terminology, students should be given a lower rating. Alternatively, if students correct their mispronunciation, or recognize their mispronunciation and attempt to correct it throughout the exam, then this should reflect in a higher rating.

Vocabulary Appropriateness and Complexity: Depending on the student choice of topic, certain terms or vocabulary items can be selected from the course materials and incorporated within student conversational presentations. If students use higher level vocabulary, and select terms taught from the textbook then they should receive a higher rating. If students employ very simple vocabulary terms for a complex topic, such as health, then this should reflect in a lower rating.

References

• Brown, H. Douglas. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 3rd Ed. USA: Prentice Hall, Inc.
• Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B., and Wheeler, R. (1996). A Training Course for TEFL. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Source: http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Kent-Testing.html

By Kenneth Beare

Today we are living in a “Global Village”. As the Internet explosively grows, ever more people are becoming aware of this “Global Village” on a personal level. People correspond with others from around the globe on a regular basis, products are bought and sold with increasing ease from all over the word and “real time” coverage of major news events is taken for granted. English plays a central role in this “globalization” and it has become the de facto language of choice for communication between the various peoples of the Earth.

Many People Speak English!

Here are some important statistics:

• English Next 2006
• How Many People Learn English Globally?
• How large is the English learning market worldwide?

Many English speakers do not speak English as their first language. In fact, they often use English as a lingua franca in order to communicate with other people who also speak English as a foreign language. At this point students often wonder what kind of English they are learning. Are they learning English as it spoken in Britain? Or, are they learning English as it is spoken in the United States, or Australia? One of the most important questions is left out. Do all students really need to learn English as it is spoken in any one country? Would it not be better to strive towards a global English? Let me put this into perspective. If a business person from China wants to close a deal with a business person from Germany, what difference does it make if they speak either US or UK English? In this situation, it does not matter whether they are familiar with UK or US idiomatic usage.

Communication enabled by the Internet is even less tied to standard forms of English as communication in English is exchanged between partners in both English speaking and non English speaking countries. I feel that two important ramifications of this trend are as follows:

1. Teachers need to evaluate just how important learning “standard” and/or idiomatic usage is for their students.
2. Native speakers need to become more tolerant and perceptive when communicating with non-native speakers of English.

Teachers need to carefully take into consideration the needs of their students when deciding on a syllabus. They need to ask themselves questions such as: Do my students need to read about US or UK cultural traditions? Does this serve their objectives for learning English? Should idiomatic usage be included in my lesson plan? What are my students going to do with their English? And, with whom are my students going to be communicating in English?

Help Deciding on a Syllabus

• Principled Eclecticism - The art of picking and choosing your approach based on a student needs analysis. Includes an analysis of two example classes.
• How to Choose a Course book - Finding the right coursebook is one of the most important tasks a teacher needs to undertake.

A more difficult problem is that of raising the awareness of native speakers. Native speakers tend to feel that if a person speaks their language they automatically understand the native speaker’s culture and expectations. This is often known as “linguistic imperialism” and can have very negative effects on meaningful communication between two speakers of English who come from different cultural backgrounds. I think that the Internet is currently doing quite a bit to help sensitize native speakers to this problem.

As teachers, we can help by reviewing our teaching policies. Obviously, if we are teaching students English as a second language in order for them to integrate into an English speaking culture specific types of English and idiomatic usage should be taught. However, these teaching objectives should not be taken for granted.

Teaching Techniques

• Guide to Teaching English for Non - Professionals
• Basic Lesson Plan Format
• Basic English Curriculum for Teaching

Teaching Specifics

• Teaching Grammar in an ESL / EFL Setting
• Improve Vocabulary Skills
• Conversation Tips

Related Articles

• Setting ESL Class Objectives - ESL Teaching Objectives Meeting Students Lea…
• Better Business English: A Proposal
• ESL / EFL Back to School Special for Teachers of English as a Second Langua…
• Kenneth Beare - Guide
• Telephone English - How to Telephone in English for Business English ESL EF…

Source of this article is http://esl.about.com/od/englishforbusinesswork/a/global.htm