Methodology Rationale of a Lesson Plan - Essay Example

Methodology rationale of a lesson plan Introduction This paper includes my elaboration of ninety minute teaching lesson where I provide material for students to work on, and complete analysis of it. Also it holds a brief description of my group of students presenting their age, level of English, learning conditions and reasons for choosing this exact topic. Next section contains information about peculiarities of methodology and evaluates the key-features of chosen method. I critically discuss why my choice falls down to CLT methodology and I determine the benefits of this exact way of learning language. This is followed by detailed analysis or the lesson plan and peculiarities of students’ perception of material and attitude to learning, their interests and cooperation during the lesson. Also there will be suggested an action plan for my self-improvement and advance in my future teaching skills. Final point of my paper includes brief conclusion on done work. Context for the lesson Primarily, I want to pay attention that my lesson is designed for young students. They are Libyan and their appropriate age is from 16 to 19. The topic of the lesson is Life Stories. The lesson contain the story about doctor who leave his son burial to save life of unknown boy, precisely listening a rude and angry perturbation of his father. Hence, the story is totally edifying and provides a great example of execution of duty no matter what. Moreover, given text teaches respect and politeness even in stressed situations. These are serious and important moral categories, discussing which will be useful affair for young generation. Their age induces them to think over some eternal notions together with sense of life and people’s behaviour. This is the age of self-identification in the world and understanding of who you are. So topic Life Stories with a big moral purport I consider to be highly appropriate for these learners. It more or less matches with their interests and pretends to be interesting for students. The learners are 10 in number. It is a suitable amount what gives an opportunity to tell your own opinion for everybody, and to discuss the main important points of the topic in pairs and with the full class. Learners study language at their private school for ten years. English is a part of their syllabus so they study General English. Level of knowledge of these Libyan students is intermediate. As there was no verbal part in the exam process for them, they mostly concentrated on the structural form of the language avoiding the meaning and use of them as a result; they are good at writing and reading but weaker at speaking. There are some hurdles for them in the process of using language in the field of communication. They can overcome appeared cumbers only through practice. It is definite fact that these learners need more practice in the sphere of speaking, so the biggest part of the lesson based on improving their communication skills and gives them an excellent opportunity to speak. That is why I choose rather simple text for learners. Almost all the vocabulary is clear and students mostly familiar with the language used in the text. A huge part of attention is paid on the discussion of the topic and main problems of the text but not on the proper understanding of it as it is rather easy. Harmer (2007) provides an important point “If we ask students to express a complex opinion and they do not have the language to do it, the result will be unhappy one for both students and teacher”. So the learners have this language, but they are not always able to exploit it correctly and properly. Therefore, I think over that CLT lesson will be prospective end effective way to achieve success in communication skills. Rationale of choosing methodology Definition of methodology Methodology deals with the set of principles and methods determines the content, forms of organization and lesson constructions, usage of methods, ways and means of language learning in different educational institutions. Brown (2001) mentioned that methodology refers to investigating pedagogical practicing on a general basis. Still, there are explored different methodic c which give accurate guidance how to organize work at the lesson. Among variety of methods I choose Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) methodology for my research. Lantolf (2000) argued that, “Communicative Language Teaching has its Beginnings in 1970s when it was associated with the work of the Council of Europe and followed the development of English language courses specifically aimed at the increasing numbers of Third World students preparing to work in fields such as science and engineering in Britain”. Communicative Language Teaching based on communication between students. Howatt (1984) offers two versions of CLT “strong” and “weak”. Weak version stresses that we should acquire knowledge of language for proper communication, while strong version provides that language is studied through communication. CLT continued to develop during 1980s through various perspectives and becomes widespread through over the world in last 30 years because of its effectiveness and productive results. CLT is assumed the status of orthodoxy in British language teaching circles, receiving a support of leading applied linguists, language specialists, and publishers as well as institutions such as British Council (Richards and Rodgers, 2001). Principles and characteristics of CLT methodology This approach refers to diverse set of principles which based on reflecting communicative view of language and language learning and provide a wide variety of classroom activities. CLT principles due to Richards and Rodgers (2001) based on: learning language through the process of communication; the goal of classroom activities should provide authentic and meaningful communication; fluency is an important dimension of communication; communication involves the integration of different language skills; learning is the process of creative construction and involves trial and error. Richards and Rodgers (2001) identify the most relevant characteristics for communicative methodology. The first one is appropriateness. The basic notion is that the situations and language material should be appropriate to encirclement, roles of the participants, aim of the lesson, and purpose of communication. Thus learners are allowed to use both formal and casual style of speaking depending on the situation. The second characteristic is message focus. Learners need to be able to create and understand messages of real meaning, and even if it is imaginable situation students should provide expected answers perceiving this situation like real one. The third point is psycholinguistic processing. The aim of CLT activities is to engage learners in the use of cognitive and other processes that are important factors in acquiring the knowledge of second language. The next characteristic is risk taking, which means that learners are encouraged to make guesses and learn language from their errors. Through this way of teaching they attain useful skills in different communication techniques. The last but not the least point is free practice. CLT provides usage of “holistic practice” involving the simultaneous practice of variety of sub skills, rather than practicing individual skills for the one period of time. This way of practice seems to be more effective and interesting in communicative methodology. Applying CLT in practice CLT is applied to those who seek a more humanistic approach to teaching, one with the interactive processes of communication received priority (Richards and Rodgers, 2001). It was suggested that the role of teacher as an instructor is rather uncompleted as teacher’s duties include also communicating, classroom managing, overseeing of learning process, and accessing students. Sometimes teacher performs the role of presenter a new material, but class work concentrates mostly on practicing and working in pairs during the class according to Lantolf (2000). CLT provides different ways of work during the lesson. There are such activities as pair work, group work, task-based learning, co-construction, scaffolding, collaboration. All this actions are directed on active work of every learner and active involvement in class work. Moreover, learners have full freedom of choice, independence, and privacy during the lesson. Benefits and disadvantages of CLT The main advantage of CLT is that students have an opportunity to learn language in easy playful atmosphere. CLT always provide some situational tasks which acquire creativeness and fun. That is why during CLT lessons learner can combine study with having nice time, and communicating with each other. Students like this kind of work because they feel easy and relax in the classroom. Still, there are some limitations in CLT. The matter is that studying process is highly serious occupation and it acquires some control and discipline. Students should be motivated in different ways. Hence, such free and informal context sometimes can cause irresponsible attitude to language learning or bustling atmosphere during the lesson. This is a teacher responsibility to avoid such wretched implications. Of course the opportunities which give us this approach are thoughtful and well-productive. Still, the process of learning language should not be limited by this. CLT methodology should be connected with other methodologies for learners to achieve great results. And only a cleverly provided complex of methodologies helps to hit the mark. Suitability of CLT This methodology is suitable for a big number of learners because there are expected a small percentage of tension and stress situation during the lesson. Students study language with pleasure in such a way. It causes desire to study and to improve their language skills, as everyone like to do something with pleasure. This methodology has been represented in Libya and students like this approach to studying language. They realize all benefits which are provided by this methodology and have a strong desire to practice such lessons. Still, they are not completely familiar with the ways of work during the lesson. A lot of group and pair work, using of target language and representing its own thoughts to the whole class seem to be unusual for them and cause some hurdles. All in all, CLT methodology is effective way of teaching language. As language is device by which we communicate and speak with each other. There is no better way to study language than through communication. Exactly this doctrine is laid in CLT methodology. It pays attention to oral, situational conversation, and creative or even improvisation ways of communication, but not to structural, strict and even boring approach of teaching language. Lesson analysis As it is already known that lesson is based on CLT methodology and aimed to develop speaking skills in our case with the help of practicing reading. In our case this two activities consolidates together for better perception of material and understanding of given topic. Harmer (2007) indicates that while students are occupying speaking activities they also must do some other learning affair. It can be listening, reading or speaking. Anyway, it is impossible to fulfill the given task effectively involving just one skill. Only integrating activities with implication of different skills can maximize the effectiveness of students learning opportunities. The lesson begins with presentation in which teacher explains the aims and objectives of the lesson, while students are listening and concentrates on the topic. In lead-in section learners should give the answer to the questions proposed by teacher. Every student is to give constructive feedback. This activity helps to activate their brain computers and inclines them to communicative work during the lesson. Questions are rather easy and directed to their own preferences. That is why it will not provide any hurdles for learners, just involve and prompt them to process of speaking. Next stage of the lesson is named pre-reading section. This activity used for activating the schemata of students, their ‘mental structure’ (Nuttal, 2005). This activation helps learners to assess the text and forms appropriate expectations which they may come across while reading. Hedge (2000) delineates the goals of this section of the lesson as following: “Helps students to anticipate content in drawing up their own lists. This activates their prior knowledge of the topic and any relevant language they might already know”. That is why pre-reading section is indispensable for learners. People in the class need to create their own predictions to the story which they are going to read. Teacher sticks some pictures on the board and provide students with key vocabulary from the text. Students work in pairs trying to guess what is the story about. They present their hypotheses to the audience. This involves students to the text, arouses their interest to the story and improves their communication skills at the same time. Moreover, learners started to get acquainted with the vocabulary which they are going to use both in communication and reading. This gives them certainty and while reading students feel comfortable, because they are familiar with all words and they can understand the content properly (Harmer, 2007). First reading section anticipates to general understanding of the text. Learners see that for the first time and they concentrate on the main issues of the topic and general picture of the story. This presents reading strategy which is called reading for gist or skimming (Harmer, 2007). Learners read the text individually after what they discuss whose suggestions are remained to be the closest to the story. After reading they are to offer a title and continue to work in pairs. At the end of activity students write on the blackboard suggested titles, and teacher provides them with the real name of the story. It leads students to creative thinking and nomination of new ideas. Second reading stage represents scanning reading strategy. Students should read to find some specific information only (Harmer, 2007). For that sake teacher gives the list of questions to the students. Learners should review them and provide the answers. Pair work is suggested for fulfilling this task, so students search for some details from the story. The process of presenting the answers to the audience comes next. Discussion of the moral of the story is rather important for them, as it provides for the educational aim of the lesson. So learners hold discussion of the moral and give the feedback to the class from each group. Post reading section proposes students to make their own end of the story. Imagination, creativeness and writing skills are checked at that time. During the lesson learners complete the tasks in pairs mostly. Pair work is highly effective way to construct the lesson based on CLT methodology. It is really efficient modus to improve your communication skills. It helps to maximize learners talk time and share their thoughts on a particular point (Hedge, 2000). Lesson designed in such a way that pair work outgrowth to the group work and then learners may share their opinions to all class. Students have an opportunity to discuss some points together and know their classmates’ opinion. Learners have to be interested on the topic given. Their level of motivation depends on the personal interests in some way. The text is moral and students should demonstrate high interest to eternal moral categories in their age. Correction of errors is placed at the end of the lesson. During all the activities teacher listens to students attentively and makes notes which contain learners’ mistakes. The lesson is over with the presentation of the errors and students’ questions if some exist. Hedge (2000) offers that it is better to leave errors correction stage at the end of the lesson. The process of interrupting students is not pleasant for them, and may knock down their minds. Moreover, learners better apprehend their mistakes at the end of speaking activity, and try to memorize them without repeating. Evaluation of Microteaching This part of paper includes three sections which based on my evaluation of the lesson. The first part shows my role as a teacher and my skills in cooperation with students in the class during this proper lesson. The second part shows students responding to the lesson. The question of their understanding and concerning is disputed in this section. And, finally, the third part investigates the ways of improving my teaching skills and directed on proper actions to make my further teaching better. 1. The teacher Received feedbacks from my tutor and my peers in general are positive and accretive, so I consider my work is done for purpose, and I obtain some prospective results in proceeding practice of diving some knowledge to students. Although, there is some weak points which are needed to improve. It seems for the feedback that I made good start to the lesson. I did not state the aim and objectives formally, but I did explain what students were going to study in the lesson. That specified an easy atmosphere at the lesson and encouraged students not to be afraid to say something wrong. They knew the topic and understood that it was common theme with a common discussion. Besides there was a good use of visual to activate schema and predict the story. Johnson (2008) concerned that visual aid helped to make perception vivid even contributes to memorability. That is why, given pictures were led to better understanding and activating the student’ schemata. My tutor concerned that I had good monitoring of students while on task. I was watching and listening but not interrupting unless they signal that they want to talk to me. It was absolutely clear that intermitting students was an inadmissible action which had no regard to success. Learners were in the process of sharing their thoughts moreover they did it in English, which is not their native language. That was why I gave them an opportunity to concentrate on that they talk and only at the end I paid attention to how they talk and to their failures. They had just kept studying, so mistakes were a normal practice. I handled the whole group feedback, I asked each group to contribute which was a positive point in my lesson. CLT methodology contributes to speaking, and it was like a kind of rule for me that everyone should speak and provide some thoughts. The first two reading tasks were good for learners. The special attention my tutor paid to the title task as it encouraged students to read for gist, which balances the later detail tasks. I tried to elaborate tasks in such ways which could catch different ways of perception the text and encouraged students to examine text from different angles. According to feedback I had a lovely relaxed manner, tried to keep smiling encourage students. Allen and Valette (1977) noted that tone, volume, clarity and speed of speech were rather important points which teacher should carefully consider at the lesson. “Speaking too softly or unpleasantly loudly are both irritating and unhelpful for students” argued Harmer (2007). So for students’ attention on what I was talking and active participation at the class work I tried to use calm but engaging tone of voice and pleasant, never rude manner. Moreover, I strived to talk in proper, clearly way for learners to understand me quickly and rightly. That was why they had an opportunity to complete all the tasks in a quick manner and for a small period of time. Although I understood that I had points to improve. There were some issues which could be done better and it was not difficult to take them into account. Received feedback concerned that I was giving a little too much time for the tasks. Some students had finished and had nothing to do. I considered this as my defect and I understand that I had to provide some extension activities for situations like this because students might be bored and started to digress. Also while doing the whole group feedback; I need to make sure that I nominate people to answer as well as asking for volunteers. Participation was a little uneven as the same people are always offering all the answers. I tried not to force people to answer the questions, but I should remember that it was a lesson and all participants should work. Moreover, there was some vocabulary in the text that at least one student didnt understand. It led to that I had to pay more attention to vocabulary section and to checking the grasp during the lesson. All in my entire lesson considered as well-planned and with a rather right approach to teaching and working with the learners. Still, there were some weak points which I should take under consideration. 2. The Learners First and foremost I want to mention that my students were very sensible and patient to me. They all provided an active participation and it was pleasant to work with them. I was very pleased by the fact that they were interested in suggested topic. As Edelhoff (1978) mentioned, students’ interest and involvement through the activities was one of the essential criteria of successful work at the lesson. All learners considered being active and although not everyone talked all the time, I suppose they were not bored during our activities. Learners appreciated the tasks and tried to fulfill them with a high quality. They like activating schemata task with pictures, creative assignment with offering a title, and answering the questions for better understanding and detailed fathoming the text. Also writing their own end of the story encouraged them to think over moral categories and on the way out of unpleasant situation. Furthermore, as Carter and Nunan (2001) suggested I give to learners enough time to read, understand and accept all the instructions to the task for their proper implementation with high quality. Sometimes it might be even a little more time then they need, but still I was not flogging them to work in a hurry. One of my misses was that not all the vocabulary was fully understand by the learners. I had to pay more attention to that issue and should explain the meaning of words to provide some extra exercise with vocabulary section. 3. Action Plan Consequential point in my preparing lesson, which is weak and inexperienced, is that students completed all the tasks promptly and because of the slipover of time they seems to be bored sometimes. Hall (2011) designates that teacher are to think over the time which every exercise takes to comply and follow the enough number of activities for not to hurry students but also not to get them bored the same time. I attempt but consider this effort to be improved. That is why for the next time I should carry more and pay more attention to my lesson plan. Moreover, I try to prepare some extra exercises and activities for students who fulfill tasks faster. The problem with vocabulary also should be recollected. As Calderon (2007) mentions, all vocabulary used in the text should be proper for readers and should be processed in pre-reading section. This is carried for favorable understanding of the text and applies to further active discussion. I should regard this point and provide my future lessons with vocabulary section which is planned better. Conclusion In terms of teaching perspectives this lesson has a right to exist. There has been demonstrated cooperation with learners, their interest and engaged participation. The aims of the lesson are achieved and learners approve the quality of the lesson. There are no doubts that some crude moments are appeared and they need to be refined. That is considered to be my defect and encourages me to self-improvement. Reference List Allen, D. and Valette, M., 1977. Classroom techniques: Foreign languages and English as a second language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Bax, S., 2003. The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, Vol 57(3), pp 278-287. Oxford: Oxford University Pres. Brown, J.D., 2001. Using Surveys in Language Programs. UK: Cambridge University Press. Calderon, M., 2007.Teaching Reading to English Language Learners, Grades 6-12: A Framework for Improving Achievement in the content areas. UK: Corwin Press. Carter,R. and Nunan, D., 2001. The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Edelhoff, C. 1978. Theme-oriented English teaching. In. Candlin C. ed. 1981. The communicative teaching of English. Harlow: Longman group limited. Hall, G., 2011. Exploring English Language Teaching: Language in Action. New York: Routledge. Harmer, J., 2007. The practice of English Language Teaching, 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education. Hedge, T. 2000. Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University. Hiep, P., 2007. Communicative Language Teaching: unity within diversity. ELT Journal,Vol 63(3), pp193-201. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Johnson, K., 2008. An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education Limited. Klippel, F., 1984. Keep Talking: communicative fluency activities for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning.Oxford: Oxford University Press. McCormick, K., 1994. The Culture of Reading and the Teaching of English. UK: Manchester University Press. Medwell, J., Wray, D., Coates, E., Minns,H. and Griffiths, V., 2007. Primary English. Teaching English and practice.3rded. Southernhay: Learning matters Ltd. Nuttal, Chr., 2005. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. Australia:Macmillan Education. Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, Th. S., 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’Neill, Sh. and Gish, A., 2008. Teaching English as a second language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Thonis, E., 1970. Teaching reading to non-English speakers. Collier-Macmillan International. Thornbury, S., (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd. Wallace, C. 2001. Reading. In: Carter, R. and Nunan, D., ed. 2001.The Cambridge guide to Teaching English to Speakers of other Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zhang, X. and Head, K., 2010. Dealing with learner reticence in the speaking class. ELT Journal, Vol 64(1), pp 1-9. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More