shanthi nadarajan_undergraduate language teaching the e-portfolio way

8/8/2019 Shanthi Nadarajan_Undergraduate Language Teaching the E-Portfolio Way

1/11

Undergraduate Language Teaching : The E-Portfolio Way

Shanthi Nadarajan (PhD)

University Malaysia Sarawak

[email protected]

Abstract

Providing education to large groups of students at higher learning institutions can be

challenging when students come from various disciplines. The situation becomes complicatedwhen language instructors face difficulties, connecting their areas of expertise to learnerneeds. This paper is an insight into a language proficiency course which attempts to minimizethe instructor and learner variable by using the e-portfolio as teaching tool. The e-portfolio

makes use of a plethora of teaching materials, authentic reading materials and internetresources to support the students learning environment. By connecting the teaching

environment to a virtual learning classroom where students provide feedback, the e-portfoliohas been able to tap into both learner needs and instructional effectiveness. The e-portfolio

experience has paved a way for course coordinators to rethink language learning in terms of apersonalized syllabus and learner centeredness.

Keywords: learning autonomy, authentic material, virtual classroom, teaching resources,

teaching and learning

Introduction

In designing language proficiency courses for university students, language instructorsare often caught between identifying a particular teaching model that a) helps

undergraduates improve their subject knowledge and language skills; and b) identifies

the correct mix of learners who will benefit from it. Having identified, the next stepwould be to tailor the course to meet the needs of the learners and to ensure that the

language presented in the course corresponds as closely as possible to the language that

is actually required by learners in their specific purpose area (Flowerdew, 1993). Placedagainst a larger national education framework, it is important that these learning and

teaching courses be oriented to the principles of continuing education and lifelong

learning. In addition, departments and centers (e.g. language centers) that provide a

service to the university must proceed with flexible teaching and learning programs that

impart not only cognitive skills but also communicative and collaborative competencethat match the needs of different learners. In this matter, the extension of university

activities and increasing student population has made traditional systems andapproaches of teaching on-campus with linear text even more difficult and a different and

cheaper teaching system which enables many more students to obtain similar

instructional opportunities has become necessary. It is also necessary to consider aflexible syllabus that is both adaptable and variable to current needs, (e.g. professional

life) that is related not only to individual learning requirements, but also take into

1
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/11

account the challenges and demands of employer needs and anticipate future trends. This

is increasingly seem as the preferred aim of academic education. This paper is an

attempt by one Malaysian university to address the above issues and create a flexiblesyllabus that uses a particular Second language teaching model, an interactive learning

framework and advances in technology to provide both content area knowledge and

language skills that corresponds closely to differing learner needs. The paper ismade up of two parts. The first part explains the rationale for choosing the teaching

model for teaching subject area knowledge and the second part explains the course

management tool e-portfolio in terms of structure and implementation and implicationfor learning autonomy and integration. In other words it aims to look into the conversion

from a teaching to a learning culture.

Content Based Instruction

Content based Instruction (CBI) as described by Brinton, Snow and Wesche(1989) serve as content driven curriculum where both language and content are taught

concurrently to ensure comprehensible input provided through content material leadsto language acquisition (p.240). Such form of instruction therefore functions as a bridge

between language learning and content learning where instructors often use instructional

materials, (e.g. authentic reading materials), interactive language activities and

reinforcement strategies from both language and academic content areas to developlanguage, content, cognitive and study skills. In University Malaysia Sarawak, the

English forProfessional Purposes course (hereafter EPP) conducted by the language

center is an elective course aimed towards preparing undergraduates for the informationsociety. The course is highly sought after as it promises to prepare students for the

working world. At least twenty five classes with thirty students per class will be taught

concurrently by more than ten to fifteen lecturers per semester. To ensure that teachingand learning does not get compromised due to instructor differences, there is a need to

closely moderate both the teaching and learning environment. To ensure optimum

learning does take place, both features of traditional teaching and online instruction arecarried out. In addition to the two hour weekly classroom contact hours, the learning

process also involves online communication.

In terms of approach, the course include both CBI and task based activities (e.g.

problem solving activities) that help provide content area knowledge and increasedlanguage proficiency. Some of activities that help undergraduates improve their language

skills are through joint learning projects carried out in small and larger working

groups, where problems that students themselves have taught up are solved, and throughnew areas of knowledge that are opened up for those taking parts such as knowledge

building community. This enables students from different disciplines to learn from one

another. It also helps instructors understand matters that concern students and also helpthem provide input in terms of language issues. Students are also encouraged to use

networking for the purpose of obtaining discipline specific information and present such

information during class hours. These activities help other students understand differing

perspectives as presented by speakers from different disciplines. There are also

2


3/11

opportunities for extended communications and collaborations outside classroom hours

which are conducted through emails, blogs and virtual classrooms sessions. Students are

required to engage in weekly online asynchronous activities where the best responsesare often highlighted. Extra credit meted where appropriate out at the end of the

semester. There is also opportunities for individual participation in virtual courses of

lectures where learners write on specific topics and fellow students respond. By allowingstudents to reflect and respond at their own time, it has been possible to elicit some of the

more thought provoking dialogues and this has served as impetus for other students to

contribute meaningfully to the class discussion. To encourage students to analyze andthink appropriately, the best answers are often highlighted by the instructor making it

possible for students to note or comment on what is considered thinking out of the box

and how a word can take on new meanings. Thus, the course can be said to have

succeeded in generating a lot of academic dialogues, a feature which could have beenotherwise been lost in a face to face interaction where generally provide brief responses

because of other codes and signals that facilitate communication.

Designing the EPP Course

In designing the course, two models of learning in CBI were considered, namely thetheme based modeland the Sustained CBI. In the former, the language instructor build

the language skills around selected topics or themes e.g. workplace communication andreport writing. As stated by Gianelli (1997), by organizing materials thematically for the

students, instructors get to create a powerful integrated learning environment where

students obtain in-depth understanding of content area knowledge as well as improveand increase their language and vocabulary skills by reusing and expanding them (p.143)

Jacobs defines it as an application of a methodology and language from more than one

discipline in examining a central theme (cited in Gianelli, 1997, p. 143). Meanwhile, theSustained CBI distinguishes itself from theme based models in that students study a

particular discipline for a half or a full semester, progressing through various aspects of a

larger topic through an assignment (e.g. report writing). In EPP, the course begins withstudents reading several articles about the importance of English in workplace

communication and job application. Authentic articles specific to Malaysian

undergraduates needs are discussed to create an awareness of the real context for the

course. Specific groups are targeted to search and select, evaluate and contextuallyapplying specific knowledge in their field that could need language skills and learners

are required transform such knowledge into new knowledge through reports that

discussed both problems and solutions. Only articles by second language writers areselected for basic reading materials because the discourse is easier to manage in terms

of both content and context. The situation is becoming even more apparent especially

when students with different language proficiency levels are involved. Discussionsinvolve students working eyeball to eyeball with their discussion partners where a

specific active intercourse with educated persons1 is created for each case. Those taking

part experience an original and authentic dialogue which includes both non verbal signals

1 Geselligkeit (social intercourse) as explained by Gothe, 1994.

3


4/11

and unconscious behavioral reactions which are a vital part of real world discourse.

These types of academic dialogues have created an awareness of the importance of

language needs, its effect as tool and vehicle for information, its impact on the marketstructure and provide solutions for students to understand the implications of their

employability. These sessions are usually followed by an assignment where students

work on noticing and attending to language gaps and weaknesses in their writings. Toensure that students do not become all too familiar with the learning content and context,

the research topic are changed from semester to semester based on feedback from

students through online classroom discussions. Indirectly, it has also been possible tominimize the possibility of students submitting seniors assignments as theirs and the

course from becoming too predictable. Students are encouraged to write their responses

about selected articles and this enables the instructors to determine the relevance and

currency of the reading materials. For the later part of the semester reporting andbusiness writing skills are addressed. In a way, it is assumed that the later concepts and

information will become reliant on earlier ones and learners can identify a thematic link

as they go through the course. Course outlines of this nature have often been used in

advanced beginner through advanced levels of English theme based learning and isbelieved to provide teaching skills that are appropriate to age level and transferable to

analytical/ critical thinking that undergird discipline specific work (Pally, 2001, p. 281).Sustained CBI also suggests that students learn analytical/ critical thinking skills when

they confront actual academic/ professional task in which skills are modeled, explained

and practiced. Incidentally Pallys (2001) case study involving 13 students from the

Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe in eight classes at two American universities indicatethe effectiveness of the sustained CBI model, where papers by lower proficiency

students who followed the model demonstrated stronger argumentation skills than papers

written by advanced students who had not. Similarly, the EPP course has been able to seta similar tone for its learners in terms of getting them to addressing the core issues in

their report writings.

Teaching the E-Portfolio Way

To design the EPP course, CBI was considered as one of the few realistic options for

promoting the development of strategic learners within a language learning curriculum.

However, with language teaching becoming increasingly fragmented and unfocused,

where teacher educators and teacher education programs substitute their own individualrationales based on existing pedagogical assumptions and research findings, identifying

subject matter expertise has become an increasingly difficult matter. In addition, the

advent of technology has made it increasingly difficult for instructors to keep on top oflatest in each field. So to create a sound Second Language Acquisition (SLA) basis for

teaching and to remain relevant in terms of learners needs, J.C. Richard (1997) five core

components of SLTE program were selected. (See figure 1). The five componentsinclude a) general teaching ability; b) language proficiency and communication ability; c)

subject matter knowledge; d) pedagogical reasoning; and e) course evaluation. These

components were integrated into the main themes of e-portfolio and will be discussed.

4


5/11

Figure 1: Components of SLTE programs (source: J.C. Richards, 1997, p.206)

General teachingability include the instructors ability to teach meaningfully acrossthe curriculum, organize and manage adult language classrooms, present clear

explanations, assign and monitor students works and provide meaningful input. Toensure all instructors in the various classes in EPP possess such abilities, a coursemanagement tool (in the form of a Compact Disc) called the e-portfolio was given to

each instructor at the beginning of the course. The e-portfolio is literally a powerpoint

feature which has a number of in build features as well as place holders where instructors

add on additional teaching resources as the semester progresses. The overall structure ofthe tool is as indicated in figure 2.

5


6/11

Figure 2: Overall Structure of Course Management Tool

On its own, the e-portfolio is a personalized classroom management tool which begins

with instructors teaching philosophy, course aims and general teaching and learningstrategies as indicated in figure 3. Instructors are encouraged to write out the teaching

philosophy which should be in line with the course aims as indicated in fig.4.

Main Menu

Personal Theoryof Teaching

Subject MatterKnowledge

LanguageProficiency

Pedagogical Reasoning andDecision Making

Teaching

PhilosophyTask basedlanguage

Activities

Grammar

Activities

Video

AudioURL Self

Access Links

ReadingMaterial (Pdf).

Discipline specific

(GeneralReading)

Workplace articles

(discipline

specific)

Current Issues oinESP

Pre-test vs. post test

(across curriculum)

Overall Evaluation

Peer Evaluation

(Course management)

Topic Effectiveness

Learning Effectiveness

Sample students

worksBlog

Virtualclassroom

Previous Semesters

CourseAnalysis/Artifacts

Course material

Evaluation

Criteria

General

Teaching Skills

Topic 1

Topic 2

Topic 3

Topic 4

Topic 5

Topic 6

Topic 7

6


7/11

Content (Menu)

Teaching ResourcesTeaching ResourcesTeaching Resources

Instructor Topics

Teaching Resources Course Material

Peer Summary Assessment

Exit

Evaluation

Reports

Figure 3: Main Menu

EPP 08

Instructor -** Group :

Teaching Philosophy

I like teaching because I enjoy inspiring young minds. I like

to ask questions that challenge and cause them to think and

reflect on issues that concerns.

I understand that the use of technology enhances language

learning. It is a useful tool that helps instruct and inform about

my teaching and students learning performance.

Main Menu Figure 4: Teaching Philosophy

The specific course materials and lecture slides are linked to specific folders that

contain links to existing powerpoint slides (both produced by instructors and taken from

other universities local and foreign), brief video clips specific to each topics, audios forlistening and interacting, jokes, Monday morning activities, notes, handouts, pdf.

documents and URL links to self access language material. In addition, course

assignments, datelines, suggestions and notes are included for the instructors reference.Indirectly, the materials are aimed towards ensuring that all students are exposed to the

same content although they may be taught by different instructors. It also helps new

instructors keep up with existing changes in the field. Indirectly, e-portfolio serves as aone stop centre that provides both language content and subject knowledge and

instructors are only required to rely on their general teaching skills and languageproficiency to carry out the lessons. The e-portfolio has also done away with the textbookas most of the content are self contained and assignments require students to read beyond

what is made available through the text book and classroom lectures. Slides, videos are

incorporated because the students of today are the result of the digital era and tend be

more interested when there is technology and visual involved. Task based activities areused to provide learner engagement and instruction is generally based on what is

7


8/11

presented in the videos which happen to be relevant snippets taken from the internet.

Students have also written in calling for more video clips to be integrated into each topic.

Language Proficiency and Communication Skills

With language being both tool and vehicle for instruction in EPP, language

proficiency is seen as a necessary prerequisite for all instructors. Since all EPP

instructors are selected from an existing pool of language instructors, the issue oflanguage proficiency is not seen as an issue. However, general communicative ability and

subject matter knowledge still serve as factors especially with new instructors, who

may be unfamiliar with the overall theme of the course and would be learning as they

teach. To overcome the gaps, attention is paid to text selection in terms of matchinglearners needs with instructors expertise. This is to ensure that the language teacher is

able to impart relevant knowledge to learners. The use of discipline specific texts that

differ from language instructors subject area knowledge, can result in learners viewing

language instructors as less competent and therefore treat the subject as less importantcompared to their content courses (Creese, 2001) and this can have implications for

overall teaching and learning in terms of attendance and performance. To ensure thatinstructors posses a threshold level of proficiency in the subject matter, the e-portfolio

is equipped with the various teaching resources, course content, reading materials,

assignment task and powerpoint slides that could be used for each lesson. In addition,

additional teaching resources such as up to date data in terms of topics and techniques areincluded. Additional language resources in terms of downloadable syntax and grammar

activities that can be downloaded and self access material are also included to ensure that

instructors remain on top of matters. These features include notes, videos andpowerpoint slides from foreign institutions taken from the WWW and from peers.

Subject matter knowledge refer to information which instructors need to know about

what they teach rather than what they should be teaching and this constitutes informationwhich would not be shared with students and non instructors. Ideas as to what issues are

essential for interviewing, statistics on undergraduate unemployment levels, applications

procedures, accurate and appropriate language are included. This however does not meanthat the instructor is now a subject matter expert. Rather, the concern is still on accurate

and appropriate language use and usage. So to ensure that instructors do not get

confused or carried away with teaching the content rather than language, linguistic issues

(focus on grammar and vocabulary) happen to be integral aspects of teaching andlearning in each topic.

Course Evaluation and Decision Making

As most professional instructors of English undergo pedagogical training inlanguage teaching and academic training in linguistics and applied linguistics, language

instructors must be seen as having have certain priorities or decisions on the nature of

language that are crucial for language development and evaluation. In this matter,

instructors are encouraged to identify factors that effect learners performance and

8


9/11

development, and document selected assignments in specific slides in the e-portfolio.

So, at the end of each topic, instructors are required to document their best practices,

weaknesses or gaps in topic from time to time. Such information is used as artifacts forunderstanding the learning that has taken place and will help with future planning. In

addition, instructors are encouraged to add comments on students level of language

accuracy and appropriacy, intonation and stress, communication and presentation skillsand confidence management. This helps instructors to later come up with more effective

measures for helping learners overcome their weakness in subsequent courses.

Pedagogical reasoning and decision making at various stages happen to be central to thenature of teaching and is best clarified with an example from the actual lesson. So, a

number of questions are posed to the individual instructors at the beginning of the course

in terms of opinions on the effectiveness and limitations of the course. Instructors are

required to compile specific examples of common errors made by students as evidencefor gaps in students learning. In thinking through these questions and artifacts, skillful

instructors have been able to create a mental plan for subsequent planning of the course

and related courses and also inform others of their best practices. Indirectly, the e-

portfolio has also generated a culture of sharing where instructors have begun to willinglyshare their methods and teaching aids thus cutting out on a lot of reduplications.

In terms of direct course evaluation, three forms of evaluation are held for this course.

The first is in terms measuring overall language learning that has taken place on the part

of the learner. To assess the learning taking place, a pre-test and post test design is used

at the beginning and end of the course. This is in addition to the universitys finalassessment that takes place at the end of the year. Second, the course runs a mid term

evaluation for select groups to determine the effectiveness of the course. This helps

inform on instructional effectiveness. This helps ensure that there is no mismatchbetween course objectives, instructional style and learner needs. Indirectly, the mid term

evaluation also provides the course coordinator an idea of the effectiveness of the

program and how well students are relating to it. Finally, instructors and learnersevaluate the course and this helps inform the university and course coordinator about the

overall relevance of the course in terms of meeting the course aims and objectives.

Conclusion

Overall, it cannot be said that the e-portfolio has helped addressed all the gaps andweaknesses in theory and application. Changes have to be made from time to time and

that should be seen as the gear that keeps the course relevant. There is the need to

monitor the content that is being used systematically to make sure that the informationprovided is accurate, appropriate and up to date. It is equally important to ensure that

there is an existing information seeking culture in learners and learners remain focused.

Being language instructors, it would not be fair to expect instructors to keep up with therapid changes in another discipline and by providing the content to instructors through

the e-portfolio, the course has been able to help bridge the difference between language

and content area expertise. It is often believed that language instructors feel inadequate

since they do not have ownership over the content of the course. However, to provide a

9


10/11

focus, the responsibility for learning is shifted to the learner where students generate the

content. This has made it possible for language teachers to concentrate on the language

elements (e.g. grammar, vocabulary, cohesiveness and coherence). The instructors arealso responsible for the level of engagement, motivation and for ensuring that the course

remains relevant in the eyes of the learner. In this matter, the e-portfolio has succeeded

as students continue to comment that the course has made a connection between whatthey have learned at the university and their real world. Finally, the e-portfolios

usefulness in the course can be attributed to the fact that it is based on a number of well

planned approaches and techniques that have been proved in SLA and its penchant foracademic language. The pre-test and post test evaluations have shown good progress in

the language level of students from specific disciplines indicating that language learning

has taken place. It is on the onus of the coordinators and instructors to come up with more

effective assessment criteria that can provide more information on the actual learning thathas taken palace. Generally, academic competence is seen as being able to dramatically

impede or accelerate L2 learners performance and progress within the school system

(Kinsella, 1997) and as Adamson (1993), indicated, it may not be cost beneficial to wait

for students to acquire basic language proficiency before they learn to develop academicsurvival skills. So, presently in addressing the changing needs of learners, it is

inescapable for each institution to address the need of its varying student population. So,it setting the pace for personalized teaching and learning tool, the e-portfolio seems to

have struck gold.

Acknowledgement

The e-portfolio and students responses were presented at the National Students

Development and Educational Conference (Nasdec 08) at Universiti TeknologiMalaysia on 22 October, 2008.

10


11/11

References:

Brinton, D.M., Snow, M. A., and Wesche, M.B. (1989). Content Based Second

Language Instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Creese, A. (2002). The discursive construction of power in teacher partnerships:Language and subject specialists in mainstream schools. Tesol Quarterly. 36,4,

597- 616.

Flowerdew, J. (1993). A educational, or process, approach to the teaching of professional

genres. ELT Journal47, 305- 16.

Evans, T. & Nation, D. (2000). Changing University Teaching: Reflections on Creating

Educational Technologies. Kogan Page.

Gianelli, M.C. (1997). Thematic units: Creating an environment for learning. The

Content Based Classroom: Perspective on Integrating Language and Content. InM.A. Snow & D.M. Brinton. The Content Based Classroom: Perspectives onIntegrating Language and Content. Longman.

Krashen, S. (1981).Principles And Practice In Second Language Acquisition. Oxford :

Pergamon.

Pally, M. (2001). Skills development in sustained content based curricula: Case

Studies in Analytical/ Critical Thinking and Academic Writing.Language and

Education. 15.4: 279- 305.

Richards, J.C. (1997). Preparing language instructors for tomorrows languageclassrooms in Language Classrooms of Tomorrow: Issues and Responses.Anthology Series 38. Seamco RELC:295-129.

Shanthi Nadarajan is a lecturer at the language center in Universiti Malaysia Sarawak.

As a visiting Fulbright Scholar from 2004 to 2007, she was at the University of Arizona,

United States. She majored in second language acquisition and learning. Her published

works focus on second language vocabulary acquisition and cross-linguistics studies.

11

shanthi nadarajan_undergraduate language teaching the e-portfolio way

Documents