Thesis defense. EFL Building communicative competence in EFL students,

1. Luis Emilio Flores Leiva.
Programa Pedagogía para Profesionales
Universidad Alberto Hurtado
June 19th 2013
1

2. Acknowledgement
 Fernando Murillo. Advisor.
2

3. “We are transformative
intellectuals” Giroux.
3

4. My background
 Translator.
 EFL Instructor.
 Language assistant in WI and MN in USA.
 EFL teacher (in process)at a private school.
4

5. 5

6. 6

7. The class 10th graders
17 students
10 boys and 7 girls.
case of Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD)
ages range from 15 to 16
Have taken the solemn test
(prueba solemne) twice.
7

8. Diagnostic test
 Oral Presentations from the previous unit.
 A questionaire.
8

9. From the questionaire
# Question Most repeated answer 2nd most repeated
answer
4 Skill you have most
developed
Listening Reading
5 Skill you need to
develop
Writing Speaking
6 The most difficult
about English
learning
Grammar Fluency
7 Type of evaluation
you prefer
Make videos with role
plays
Oral Presentations
9

10. Research problems
 Need of developing a ‘culturally competent’ speaker in
L2.
 Need for diverse output practice opportunities
encouraging the effective use grammatical and
discursive structures and the contextualized use of
lexical elements.
 Learners making effective use of technological tools to
communicate information enhancing their own
learning.
10

11. Research questions
1. What individual activities can promote and develop
writing skills and give evidence of higher levels of
understanding like critical, creative and analytic
thinking but without neglecting grammatical and
discursive structures and a contextualized use of
lexical elements of the unit?
11

12. Research questions
2. How can a group work produce output that
builds a bridge between giving evidence of the
learners’ contextualized use of lexical elements
of the unit featuring grammatical discursive
structures and contributing to reach
communicative competence?
12

13. Research questions
3. How does the use of ICT by learners, help
them in the developing of skills and
communicative competences in L2?
13

14. Theoretical Framework
 Constructivism
 Cognitivism
Approaches
 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
 Content-based integration (CBI)
 Task -based language Teaching (TBLT)
 Cooperative Language Learning (CLL)
14

15. Pedagogical literature (References)
 Breen, Michael P. and Littlejohn, Andrew (Ed)
(2000) “Classroom Decision-making negotiation and
process syllabuses in practice”. Cambridge Language Teaching
Library.
 Byrne, Donn. (Ed) “English teaching Extracts” (1969)
(p.45-47) Longmans, London.
 Chile. Ministerio de Educación. (2011a): “Programa
de Estudio para Segundo Año Medio”, Unidad de
Currículum y Evaluación: Inglés.
15

16. Pedagogical literature (References)
 Chile. Ministerio de Educación. (2011b): “Bases
curriculares 2012: Idioma extranjero inglés”.
 DeKeyser, Robert M. (Ed) (2007): “Practice in a
Second Language, Perspectives from Applied
Linguistics and Cognitive Psychology”. Cambridge. New York,
NY. Cambridge University press.
16

17. Pedagogical literature (References)
 Echeverria Castillo, Roberto Eduardo, (2009) "The
Role of Pragmatics in Second Language Teaching"
AYMAT Individual Thesis/SMAT IPP Collection. Paper 479.
 Hymes, D. (1974) “Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An
Ethnographic Approach”. The University of
Pennsylvania Press, Inc. Cinnaminson, NJ.
17

18. Pedagogical literature (References)
 Ur, Penny (1996) “A Course in Language Teaching:
Practice and theory”, Cambridge University Press.
 Vygotsky, L. (1962) “Thought and Language”.
Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
 Vygotsky, L. (1978) “Mind in Society: The Development
of Higher Psychological Processes”. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
18

19. The unit
19

20. Why this unit?
 The class has a genuine interest for current events and
specifically, environmental issues.
 Teachers as ‘formative intellectuals’ (Giroux). The unit
gave space for showing well-thought opinions.
 MINEDUC in the Bases curriculares 2012:
“…the topics covered in a unit must be meaningful and
interesting for the students.”
20

21. Unit objectives
At the end of the unit students will be able to:
 Use in context vocabulary related to environment and
green issues in general.
 Write texts in L2 showing higher levels of
understanding like critical, creative and analytic
thinking.
 Display a pragmatic use of the language in both oral
and written forms.
 Use effectively grammatical and discursive structures.
 Use ICT in L2 to enhance their own learning.
21

22. Unit contents
 vocabulary related to the environment
 the use of get with the passive
 collocations with get and take,
 key expressions for interviews,
 future continuous with two purposes: future plans and
as introductions for polite requests and offers,
 sub-skills of reading like: telling the difference
between facts and opinions
 sub-skills such as: organization, linking review,
purpose: so that, in order to, etc.
 pronunciation features shifting word stress.
22

23. How was the unit implemented?
 Brainstorming
 deductive and inductive methods.
 personalized grammar
 Group work
 involving students in meaningful projects.
 Reading comprehension
 Making guesses before reading or watching.
 Listening and watching authetic materials.
23

24. Strategies
 Fill in the blank
 Match words and definitions
 Use cues to make questions
 Read a text and answer questions
 role plays and info gap
 unscramble sentences, etc
24

25. Use of ICT
 great pedagocial tool
 videos with authentic material related to the unit
topic.
 Search for information on the internet
 Visit ESL web pages
25

26. Assessments
 Monitoring every exercise, and checking pronunciation.
 Checking answers on the board when needed.
 Helping with the group / pair work.
 a short ‘for’ / ‘against’ essay in English. (rubric)
 a video in the format of an interview applying the lexical
and grammar structure of the unit. (rubric)
MINEDUC in Programa de estudio Segundo año medio
(2011, p.15) “evaluar de distintas maneras a los alumnos y
dar tareas con múltiples opciones”
26

27. Grades
Assessment Average Highest Lowest
Essay 6,1 6,7 4,6
Video 6,5 7,0 6,0
27

28. What did I find?
About the assignments:
The essay:
Strengths
 developed writing skills
 Increased their use of contextualized lexical.
 critical, creative and analytic products.
 grammatical and discursive structures.
 Included in their portfolio.
Weaknesses
a common problem in the essays:
 Lack of supporting arguments ‘for’or‘against’ the
topic .
28

29. What did I find?
The interview:
Strengths
 collaborative work (CLL)
 Quality, creative and well-produced products.
 Evidence of communicative competences in L2.
 contextualized use of lexical elements of the unit
featuring grammatical discursive structures.
 Weaknesses
 Lower-achievers stayed in their comfort zone.
29

30. Unit improvements
 A student’s self-evaluation
 Using drama in the classroom
 A Newspaper.
30

31. Why did I do all
this?
31

32. Because …
32

33. and…
33

34. Thank you for your attention
34