Transcript Slide 1
EBL PASS… In this University, long, long ago, There were three… Julie Catherine Annie Our quest… To engage our students in the nitty-gritty of language learning (grammar and phonetics rules) for themselves, instead of expecting us simply to fill them with knowledge; To help students make the step between being able to fill-in the gap in class to being able to use the rules in written/spoken production. “There has long been concern that traditional curricula, delivered and assessed in traditional ways, promote a surface approach to learning rather that a deep or even strategic one” Entwistle (1995) Our quest led us to the Land Of CEEBL (Manchester’s Centre of Excellence in Enquiry Based Learning) EBL: Learning which: is student-centred; encourages collaborative approach to study; is self-directed; is often guided by a facilitator; involves students doing research; leads to deeper understanding of subject matter; encourages engagement with the subject; develops transferable life skills. http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/ebl/ EBL Learning Cycle: CEEBL Process Product •EBL not yet explicitly applied to grammar or phonetics •EBL in Arts perceived as ill-structured problems, open-ended enquiry •Emphasis on process •Task Based Learning /Problem based learning place emphasis on product – often only 1 right answer! •Focus on problems whose answers known to teacher •Task as carrier for language item •Problem-solving element with controlled knowledge “EBL for EBL” (an End to Boring Language Learning) Language teaching team created stimulus materials (= scenarios = carriers of language item specified) Pairs of first year volunteers given two weeks to research scenario and prepare a presentation for their peers which included creation of an interactive exercise Process facilitated + evaluated by SLT project leaders Had a control group taught in ‘normal’ way (communicative approach) All involved completed same grammar test at end… Similar format for phonetics Approach since adopted as part of phonetics element of oral strand of FREN10210; Different route for grammar: Results of pilot inconclusive; Some reticence amongst some colleagues and students: “We pay fees for quality teaching, which we get, however we wouldn’t if taught by other students” Way forward (idea for PAGeS) came from students themselves Voluntary bolt-on sessions; ‘Older student’ helpers; (Whitman – ‘neer peers’; Goldshmidt – ‘recent survivors’); Using scenarios based on first year grammar programme; Solving the problem through discussion and informal presentation: “but play down the ebl bit, it’s off-putting” An entirely voluntary grammar ‘club’; Small groups of students (Post-A, all three levels) study grammar together; A final and second year pairing ‘facilitate’ a small group of students (mainly first years, but may include second and final year members if enough facilitators); Using a range of scenarios (facilitators also encouraged to take-along supplementary activities); For roughly 1hr a week (starts after reading week, sem 1). Mini potted version of EBL cycle taking place within 1 session We now have 34 scenarios covering all first year grammar points; In the spirit of EBL they carry a ‘meaningful’ problem (a grammar item or items – see Perky Hippopotamus of passion on handout); There is also a set of facilitator’s notes (for their eyes only) SLT organises, trains facilitators, forms groups and is ‘consultant’ but then steps back, responsabilising the students themselves Now in 8th year with 80-130 students taking part each year What’s in it for me? ‘Peer learning’ Ashwin (2003) “This definition assumes that peer learning involves two groups of students, those whose learning is facilitated and those who facilitate…both groups of students should benefit from the interaction in some way”. ‘Peer learning’ Glesner-Fines (2008) “Since the peer has only recently learned […] the material being taught, the peer teacher is more likely to consciously think through the steps of the learning process than one who has greater expertise. Thus, the peer teacher and learner will engage in a cooperative, active process of constructing knowledge” Learning how you and others learn Comunication skills Because had to explain rules to others Extra time on grammar Better understanding of grammar points covered Working methodically and not giving up “It has taught me to work in a group productively and that other people’s knowledge can help me.” Innovative, fun and motivating resources Confronting weaknesses Relaxed, collaborative, small group environment Collation of common evaluation comments (FACILITATOR PAGerS) Good grammar revision Useful facilitation skills training for the CV (employability agenda) Useful organisational skills experience - setting up meetings, negotiation, listening, asking questions, stepping back, encouraging, giving positive feedback, patience… Joy! “This is the only way to put any joy into grammar…to make people aware that they do not have to suffer alone” Comparison of final year language grades for students involved in PAGeS at some point in their degree programme with non-PAGerS (see graphs on handout) Not particularly for those who take part as team members in first year only: 2012 = -1% 2013 = +1% - Entirely voluntary; - No idea how many attend each week, if they ‘invest’, if they are still participating at end of year; - Facilitators do not want to bring in attendance registers; - First year marks do not carry forward (40% pass mark for progression); - Does not mean students are not benefitting in other ways. Facilitation in second year? 2012 = +7% / 2013 = + 4% Facilitation in final year? (2012 = + 2% / 2013 = + 1%) Facilitation in second and final year (2012 = + 5% / 2013 = + 3%) Member + facilitator in first and second year (2012 = + 10%) Taking part in PAGeS at any time (= + 2% for both cohorts) Creating PAGeS – one off extra to see if (= + 8%) students could create scenarios Something is going on in second year at the facilitation level; Students are able to independently construct knowledge, retain it and apply it to other settings = deeper understanding The more PAGeS, the better … Any PAGeS is better than none! Franc, C & Morton, A: Inquiry-Based Learning for Language Learning: The case of Advanced Level French at the University of Manchester (UK) in Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning – Inquiry Based Learning for the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators (Emerald Publishing, 2015) Ashwin, P. (2003). Peer facilitation and how it contributes to the development of a more social view of learning. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 8:1, 5-18. Franc C., Lawton, J. & Morton, A. (2007). EBL for EBL: Enquiry based learning for an end to boring language learning. Case Studies: CEEBL-Supported Projects, 2006 (pp. 47-60). Manchester: CEEBL. Also available on: www.campus.manchester.ac.uk/ceebl/projects/2006/ Entwistle, N. (1992). The impact of teaching and learning outcomes in higher education: A literature review. In Topping, K. (Ed.), Effective Peer Tutoring in Further and Higher Education. Sheffield: Universities and Colleges Staff Development Unit, 1995. Goldschmid, B. & Goldschmid, M. L. (1976). Peer teaching in higher education: A review. Higher Education, 5:1, 9-33. Whitman, N.A. (1988). Peer teaching: To teach is to learn twice. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.