The%2043rd%20National%20Conference%20of%20the%20Japan%20Association%20for%20Language%20Education%20and%20Technology%20(LET):

1

• The 43rd National Conference of the Japan
  Association for Language Education and Technology
  (LET)
• Strategies for the Future of Foreign Language
  Education
• Kansai Gaidai Nakamiya Campus
• August 2, 2003

2
1. Classroom-Language Lab Integration Handling
Diversity in Student Abilities and Interests

• Melvin Andrade
• Sophia Junior College
• Hisami Andrade
• Yokohama National University

3
2. Student Diversity

• Ability Differences
• One problem of mixed-ability classes is that
  higher and lower ability learners are expected to
  use the same materials and engage in the same
  tasks at the same pace, often working together in
  pairs and small groups. Furthermore
•  
• Other Learner Differences
• Student diversity extends beyond ability level
  to include other differences such as interests,
  learning styles, and motivation.
• Potential Problems
• Although communicative interaction of students
  of different ability levels is thought to promote
  language acquisition in some cases, it is known
  from experience that there may be negative
  consequences to mixing learners of widely
  different levels anxiety, boredom, frustration,
  loss of motivation, and loss of self-esteem among
  others.

4
3. Classroom-Language Lab Interface Two
Approaches

• There are two basic approaches to integrating the
  language lab and classroom, termed in this study
  parallel and complementary.

Types of LLClassroom Interface
Parallel
Complementary
5
4. Parallel Scheme

• Features and Advantages
• In a parallel scheme, lab activities are
  directly connected to what is taught in the
  classroom, either as a review for reinforcement
  and development or as preview and preparation for
  what will come. Audio, video and other materials
  used in a parallel scheme are most likely part of
  a textbook package. This approach aims at mastery
  of a limited range of content in a step-by-step
  fashion.
• Potential Weak Points
• Potential weak points, however, are that the
  content and activities may lack variety, leading
  the learners to lose interest, and the pace may
  be either too fast or slow for some.
• Application
• Thus, a parallel scheme may work best with
  motivated beginners and lower level
• learners who have had limited experience with
  the language and for whom the language is still
  novel. Moreover, it may be more suitable for
  classes organized by ability level so the pace
  and level of instruction can be adjusted
  accordingly.

6
5. Complementary Scheme

• Features and Advantages
• Lab activities in a complementary scheme are
  only loosely connected, or unconnected, to what
  goes on in the classroom. Materials and
  activities in the lab and classroom cover
  different areas, topics, and skills. A strong
  point of this scheme is that it allows
  considerable flexibility for creating a program
  that can appeal to learners of different ability
  levels and interests. Exposure to wider input
  gives these learners opportunities to reinforce
  previous learning and integrate the new with the
  old.
• Potential Weak Points
• Potential weak points of a complementary scheme
  are that not enough time may be spent on some
  content and activities, and consequently, some
  learners may feel the pace is too fast or the
  treatment superficial.
• Application
• A complementary scheme probably works best with
  intermediate and higher intermediate learners who
  already have a foundation in the language and can
  handle a wider range of material. For a required,
  mixed-ability class at the tertiary level a
  primarily complementary relationship between the
  lab and classroom is an effective way of handling
  student diversity.

7
6. Comparing Parallel and Complementary
LL-Classroom Integration

• Parallel
• Topics are tightly connected
• Syllabi follow the same pace
• LL is mainly preparation for and reinforcement of
  the classroom curriculum
• Narrow range of content
• Good for motivated beginners and lower-level
  learners
• Suitable for classes organized by same ability
  level

• Complementary
• Topics are loosely connected
• Syllabi follow different paces
• LL provides enrichment and expansion of the
  classroom curriculum
• Wide range of content
• Good for intermediate and above learners, and
  less eager learners
• Suitable for mixed-ability classes

8
7. Case Study Learner Characteristics

• Subjects
• The course described in this study is a yearlong
  required course in English speaking and listening
  skills for second-year students at a tertiary
  level institution in Japan.
• Groupings
• Standard enrollment is 250 students randomly
  divided into 5 sections of about 50-60 students
  each, but an enrollment of about 275-300 is not
  uncommon.
• Proficiency
• At the beginning of the first semester, students
  take the listening component of a practice TOEIC
  test. Statistical data over the past five years
  consistently show a near-normal distribution for
  listening ability. Although the majority of
  scores are clustered around the mean (around 52
  points out of 100 points maximum raw score, range
  of about 45-60 points, standard deviation of
  about 8-10 points), the gap between the top and
  bottom quartiles is always conspicuous.

9
(No Transcript)
10
9. Course Format

• Groupings Classes meet twice a week for 90
  minutes each, and each of these sessions is
  divided into two 45-minute periods. While one
  section of students (50-60) is in the language
  lab, another section is divided into two groups
  (25-30 in each) that meet in classrooms adjacent
  to the lab. After 45 minutes, the students in the
  lab and the classrooms exchange places.
• Sequence One day a week, lab activities precede
  classroom activities, and on the other day
  classroom activities precede lab activities,
  serving sometimes as preview and sometimes as
  review for certain shared activities.
• Teachers One native Japanese speaking language
  lab teacher and two native English speaking
  classroom teachers teach the course. The students
  have the same lab teacher for both semesters, but
  the classroom teachers for the first and second
  semesters exchange groups.

60 students in LL
30 students in classroom
30 students in classroom
45 min.
45 min.
11
10. Distribution of Content Between LL and
Classroom

• Course Content

LL-only content
Shared content
Classroom-only content
12
11. Language Lab Activities Whole Group

• Format To accommodate different learning
  styles, this 45-minute period includes both
  teacher-fronted whole-group activities and
  independent self-paced practice. Whole group
  activities give particular attention to listening
  for main ideas, listening for details, drawing
  inferences, and other related listening skills.
• Presentation Lessons begin with short
  teacher-provided explanations and presentations
• using visuals on overhead monitors to activate
  and build background knowledge, and to
• introduce essential points of grammar and
  vocabulary. This introduction, which is usually
  given in English and amplified in Japanese if
  necessary, is followed by pre-listening,
  while-listening, and post-listening tasks,
  including frequent quizzes.
• Materials Listening and video passages cover
  various types of formal and informal discourse
  such as social conversations, telephoning,
  interviews, documentaries, and lectures. The
  materials consist of excerpts from a number of
  ELT textbooks as well as from TV and movies on a
  wide variety of topics at different levels of
  difficulty.
• Levels Easier and more difficult materials are
  distributed throughout the syllabus and are not
  strictly graded. Thus, every week students
  encounter materials that are both confidence
  building and challenging.

13
12. Language Lab Activities Independent

• During the independent self-paced practice phase
  of the lab session, students have several options
  depending on their needs and interests
• 1. They can work on pattern drills to improve
  pronunciation, intonation, grammatical
  accuracy, and fluency.
• 2. They can listen again to that day's or a
  previous day's audio or video passage.
• 3. They can listen to supplementary materials
  previously obtained from the teacher.
• Outside of class hours, the lab is available for
  independent study as well. Students can come to
  the lab to (1) review previous lessons, (2)
  prepare make-up assignments for classes they have
  missed, or (3) practice with other materials for
  self-enrichment.

14
13. Classroom Activities

• First day
• Controlled, guided, and freer tasks using the
  textbook.
• Whole class, pair work, and small group
  activities reading aloud with expression,
  question and answer exchanges, role-plays,
  problem- solving, discussions, and
  summarizing.
• Numerous topics, both concrete and abstract, are
  covered art, career choices, children, crime,
  daily life, employment, environmental issues,
  health, human relations at work, marriage,
  romance, and retirement, etc.
• Vocabulary and short written exercises.

• Second day
• Designated students, about one-third of the
  group, deliver short prepared speeches based on
  topics introduced during the first day.
• Afterward, pattern drills that have been or will
  be used in the lab are practiced in whole group
  and pair work formats.
• Students then use these patterns in original
  sentences and role-plays, which often develop
  into free-form conversations between the teacher
  and students.

15
14. Outcomes Grades-Test Correlations

• At the end of the term, students receive one
  grade for the course, based on the average of the
  classroom (50 points) and lab (50 points) scores.
  
• The distribution of grades (A, A, B, C, X)
  during a typical year is close to a normal curve,
  with the majority of learners receiving As and
  Bs.
• The Pearson correlation (N 230, p lt .05)
  between the TOEIC raw scores (max. 100) at the
  beginning of the course and the final grades
  (max. 100) for a typical year is moderately low
  (around .52). It is a better predictor of the lab
  (listening) score (around .62), but not a good
  predictor of the classroom (speaking) score
  (around .23).
• For the top quartile, the TOEIC-lab correlation
  is stronger (around .51) than for the bottom
  quartile (around .35). The correlation between
  the lab and classroom scores for all students is
  positive but low (around .35) however, it is
  stronger for the top quartile (around .42) than
  the bottom quartile (around .15).
• One interpretation of this data is that high
  TOEIC scorers tend to have high grades, but low
  TOEIC scorers will not necessary have low grades.

16
15. Feedback and Conclusion

• At the end of each semester, students provide
  feedback through anonymous question-naires
  covering topics such as pace, difficulty,
  activities, and materials. There is also a
  section for open-ended comments.
• The results over the years have been consistently
  positive, lending support to the approach
  advocated here. Some features of the
  lab-classroom interface contributing to its
  success are
• 1. a variety of meaningful materials and tasks
  of different levels
  that are distributed between lab and classroom,
• 2. pattern drills shared between lab and
  classroom but handled differently,
• 3. exposure to different teaching styles through
  team teaching, and
• 4. at least one bilingual teacher or advisor to
  handle communication problems with limited
  English speaking students.

17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)