1 of 17

A Parallel-Taught Orientation to Academic Writing in a �Study Abroad Program

Paul Freeborn

Eric Gondree

Greg Rouault

Konan University

Hirao School of Management

The 11th Seminar for English Education

Effective Language Teaching: The Never-Ending Challenge

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Kansai University of International Studies

2 of 17

Who we are…

Skills-based, study abroad preparation course �over 3 semesters at Konan University

Special focus on: �academic writing and TOEFL writing skills

Incoming students need rating & sorting

Incoming students need orientation for writing

Incoming students need introduction to TOEFL�
A small group of incoming students can be needy!

3 of 17

Our problem…

a) 1 or 2 writing samples - a poor basis for…

understanding student ability
sorting students into levels
emphasizing critical points of writing program

b) affect involved in streaming learners by “level”

realities in student needs
realities of student perceptions

A ERIC

Many of the statements that were typed in the earlier slides may be good to include as speaker notes, but I cannot see how we can get away from saying/reading what is on the slide if we type in bullets what might actually be intended to be said. So I proposed some changes and abbreviated bullets which can then allow what has been scripted to be said, to be said.

resulting in occasional mis-placement

- Can be commented upon in the spoken part

The parts for II Problem added by Paul to the email need to be taken up here too.

Something about the need for a more positive student working climate should be mentioned (if not here, somewhere), as this is part of our proposal, data/results, and conclusion

Although the students have various “group orientations” to the university and program overall, largely in Japanese… needs to be indicated as to some time they have together, but also to set up the need for some of tis in English as part of students learner/learning identity in a new context as well.

Maybe even a) and b) should be on different slides, or at least introduced by a transition so that not all of this information in on the slide being talked about.

4 of 17

Our old approach…

Limitations of a 1-day orientation program

A new strategy was needed:

More writing samples
More accurate idea of student ability
Emphasis of importance of writing program
Adequate introduction of TOEFL writing
Shared sense of identify as part of SA Program

A ERIC

Ok to “say” this, but again, better to print “bullet points” not sentences on the slides.

Our experience revealed the limitations of sorting students after a 1-day orientation program

Starting bullet #5 with Developed, was out of parallel with the other bullets, so I just dropped it

I am not sure of the significance of the heading on this slide, or what the first point means… If it is referencing the earlier “orientation” then possibly fine. But we are still doing an orientation, so the pre and current editions would need to be delineated well to make this general statement here. Something makes me think that it could be a transition statement between the previous slide and this one, not printed and that this slide elaborates further on the strategy and then the next slide introduces the approach/treatment that we devised before Speaker A goes on to talk about one of those elements of the parallel taught introduction

Depending on the lighting in the room, the light blue font may be difficult to pick up.

Maybe a different word than “adequate”, possibly common, centralized…?

Not sure where they go, but other things here such as the students classroom learning habits and diligence, the group solidarity/positive affect, the introduction to 3 instructors, and possibly others that could be covered here as part of the “strategy” before Speaker A possibly addresses these points as “Targets” in slide #9 for the Approach presented here next by Speaker B… just a thought.

5 of 17

Our new approach…

2 weeks, 6 lessons, 1 class, 3 instructors, 33 students

Parallel-taught:

Day 1: Mini-workshops
Day 2-4: Lead teacher and “focus” class �(writing process, paragraph structure, TOEFL)
Day 5: TOEFL Independent Writing & typing practice
Day 6: Review, feedback, & invite Ss to their class

Students assessed on a variety of activities

B PAUL

Again thinking out loud here, (but also typing and editing – What do you think?) I would “say” this:

Jointly teach the first two weeks of the course, with all students together

And put something much shorter on the slide.

Please use parallel-taught to avoid the misinterpretation from those actually team-teaching (especially with some of the high school focus at this event)

(diagnostic)

Here, after the strategy slide of what we decided, for this “show” type presentation we need to explain in clear detail what we did.

How we focused on 3 things and how we planned and scheduled the parallel teaching over the 2 weeks.

AS this is part of III Solution from the earlier outline, maybe it can be covered by Speaker A, but for a more even breakdown of time, it might be better to be covered by Speaker B who can then introduce 2 of the elements, to have Speaker A come back to introduce the 3^rd element on TOEFL. And then I will do the “Strong points” in IV (so the end of the Strategy slide should only be setting up what was felt to be needed for the Approach… not stealing any thunder of what happened or we observed together with student feedback on the 3 Qs) and I will do the Conclusion in V [GREG]

6 of 17

Grammar Self-assessment

Introduce basic grammar concepts

Activity: �Study Guide - Grammar in Use (R. Murphy)

Output / Placement Tool: �Study Guide exercises�- coded with certainty of Ss answers

7 of 17

Writing Process

Introduce the concept of “process writing”

Activity: �Demonstrate prewriting strategies�- brainstorming, mind mapping, & freewriting

Model steps of writing process steps

- prewriting, drafting, revision

Output / Placement tool: �Multiple prewriting samples and outline

8 of 17

Paragraph Structure

Introduce organizational principles and formatting rules for formal/academic writing (paragraphs)

Activity: �Provide model paragraph�Worksheet for organizing main / supporting ideas

Output / Placement Tool: �Narrative paragraph (typed) assigned as homework

9 of 17

TOEFL iBT

Quick introduction to TOEFL test writing:

What is the TOEFL iBT?
Integrated vs. Independent writing questions
Time management, # of words�

Activities:�Jigsaw with sample Independent writing answer

Group brainstorming for sample question

Output / Placement Tool: �Topic sentence for iBT Independent writing prompt

10 of 17

Targets

Improved streaming through identification�of student needs in multiple areas of writing

A more positive, integrated social environment within the program

11 of 17

Results and Observations (1)

Q1. Good points…�

Friends (20)
Instructors (9)
Learning

- the way to study

- writing system

- typing

- group discussion, share our opinion

- “brain” map

12 of 17

Results and Observations (2)

Q2. Suggestions for improving…

Check grammar homework
More laughs! ☺
Divide into 3 classes
I have satisfaction this part of the course

13 of 17

Results and Observations (3)

Q3. Three things you learned…

Vocabulary	Freewriting	Brainstorming
Typing	TOEFL writing	Thinking
Grammar	Class rules	Writing skills

14 of 17

Results and Observations (3)

Q3. Three things you learned…

Vocabulary - 4	Freewriting - 9	Brainstorming - 11
Typing - 5	TOEFL skills - 9	“Thinking” - 12
Grammar - 6	Class rules - 9	Writing skills - 16

15 of 17

Strengths

Offered a unique element - “hook”
Created class cohesion and program solidarity
Expanded level check
Expanded needs assessment
More informed streaming decisions
Less stigma
Professional development

16 of 17

Weaknesses

Ss focus on “ability” not “needs”
Positive program-wide identity difficult measure
Alignment vs. transparency
Curriculum innovation needs some allowance
Short term in focus

C GREG

From our perspective, invariably the Ss identify differences in the way the classes were split and streamed

No cloak and dagger

And unfortunately they focus on their perceptions of ability, performance, and language level

rather than learning needs.

ERIC

I like these!

Our qualitative tool, could be followed up by interviews, but as it was not a “study” but rather a pedagogical approach, minute paper than really “interviewing” people fits.

We felt our approach was rather aligned, but it may not be as transparent to the Ss as actual learning time… not just an extended level check

And then any innovation to an existing curriculum (and Paul and Eric had each taught this course previously) involves some concessions in fitting in “new things” or balancing time.

If anyone feels that 2 weeks are “lost” then buy-in for the innovation for Ss, Ts, Program Coordinator can be a problem.

Can assess for short-term language focus, but not academic performance over the long-term as we found out with some “outliers” that initially performed well.

17 of 17

Conclusion

Pedagogically sound
Novelty
Positive affect
Favorable S and T review

Questions…?

Thank you greg@center.konan-u.ac.jp

egondree@center.konan-u.ac.jp

paulfreeborn@yahoo.com

C GREG

We based the orientation on things we wanted to do anyway in the Writing and Grammar course.

So pedagogically it was aligned, just possibly delivered in a more novel way

Which was designed to test our attempt to foster a more positive atmosphere for students.

With the feedback we got after we did it, Paul and Eric did it again with some changes.

We would do it again, again looking at mapping activities across the program curriculum, this is one that is different and given that we are working with such a small group it is actually something they can benefit greatly from to become more cohesive and higher functioning socially once the course is streamed off as are several of the other classes in the program.

And, as mentioned the parallel-teaching had the unplanned benefit for each of us as well.