Embedded Files
How many of us have been students in a class where instructions, textbooks, or curriculum did not address our needs? I would not be surprised if every educator had experienced this along their educational journey. #IWishMyTeacherKnew—a powerful social movement pioneered by teacher Kyle Schwartz—captured valuable opportunities for building bridges and promoting open dialogue between the teacher and the learner. However, many educators tread lightly when unveiling the hidden realities and challenges students are facing. During my LTS program, I have focused my designs of curriculum, lesson plans, and materials to highlight students’ voices and prompt their active participation. One reality has always guided my path: Teaching does NOT necessitate Learning. Principled and informed planning of curriculum, content, materials, methodology, and learning outcomes can, nevertheless, direct the teaching and learning process in a productive manner.
The Solar System of Curriculum Design
Curriculum Dimensions: Input, Process, Output- Have You Seen the Solar System?
The term curriculum is a dynamic and comprehensive one; it takes into account several dimensions: the content (input), the process (methodology), and the output (learning outcomes). In this holistic sense, curriculum pays regard to appropriate learning activities and assessments to reach the desired results (Wiggins & McTighe, 2006). In a metaphorical sense, curriculum embodies the solar system—the sun (the curriculum) attracting various planets (i.e., content, learning outcomes, assessment, methodology, material design, sequence). My first attempt to design a poster for my curriculum design manifested a continuous cycle to signify that curriculum design is an ever-evolving, endemic work in progress. It encapsulates various interrelated elements that comprise a systematic whole—what Graves (2000) calls a framework. A designer can approach the constituents of the framework without the need for a sequential or hierarchal approach to what should be approached first. The process is instead multi-faceted, dynamic, and sometimes “messy.” Luckily, Dynamic System Theory and Complexity Theory invite us to interrogate and examine “messiness” or ‘chaos” instead of dismissing them.
In my LT 548 artifact, I began with a specification of the teaching context and the desired learning outputs, following a backward design. In this process, I followed an “ends-means” approach that led to the establishment of a concrete scope and sequence chart for a course titled “English for Life.” The course is designed to develop English language communicative competency (Bachman, 1990) (i.e., organizational and pragmatic) for low-advanced students at the secondary stage. The scope and sequence chart includes competence in areas including linguistic competence, socio-pragmatic competence, genre, and language skills. The organizational abilities developed textual and grammatical competence—what I came to term as the ability to grammar—using lexical, syntactic, and morphological structures accurately, meaningfully, cohesively, and rhetorically (Freeman, 2006). Furthermore, I tried to overcome the inert knowledge problem (Whitehead, 1929), where classroom language learning fails to transfer and/or serve in the social environment. It is what we do with the language, not what we know about it, that manifests learning. My attempt to overcome the knowledge problem included a considerable focus on socio-pragmatic competence, highlighting the characteristics of language production in sensitivity to context (cultural and social) and pragmatic competence, implying and understanding locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary competence. Lastly, the artifact centralizes one main theme, "voices,” in hopes of raising cultural awareness and enacting social justice in the language classroom. The six units follow a sequential order: Literature and Voices of Society, Voices of Fiction, Non-fiction Voices, Rising Voices of Discourse Analysis, Bridging the Gap: Voices of Reality, and My Voice.
Completed of Scope and Sequence .pdfLT 548 Artifact: Scope and Sequence Chart
Pragmatics in the Language Classroom: Silence as a Paralinguistic Feature—When Does Communication Stop?
A considerable number of people claim that language is the only tool for communication. Thus, the absence of language results in the absence of communication. As language educators, we agree that non-verbal communication could be as articulative and expressive as verbal communication. Jaworski (1993) indicates that “the absence of speech does not imply the absence of communication”( p. 46). In support, Dahl and Ludvigsen (2014) valorized the role of gestures in discourse, arguing that they aid the native (NL) and the foreign (FL) listener to engage in another manifestation of speech, resolve message ambiguity, simplify complex structure, facilitate comprehension, recall explicit information, comprehend implied meanings, and reduce distortions.
In an attempt to capture the nuances of communication, I examined the role of silence as a paralinguistic feature in Arabic in my LT 538 artifact, Hearing the Voices of Silence: Silence in Collective Grief. It stands as a lesson plan to teach silence in Arabic language classrooms—an idea that might seem daunting but highly rewarding. The learning outcomes are framed with respect to the IPIC model (Sykes et al., 2020) of designing language learning pragmatics classes. Though devoid of speech, silence functions as speech, requiring our careful attention to interpret its messages and meanings. Learners do not only highlight silence patterns, but they also indulge in analyzing them based on aspects of severity, +/- power, and social distance. This phase prepares learners to articulate their subjective silence choices (long silence, short pause, fillers) and interpret the impact of silence on the interlocutors. Given the contextual affordances and constraints, this activity prepares the learners who are embarking on their study abroad (SA) programs to mitigate and analyze the impact of silence in social interactions. In many communicative contexts, silence plays a double-edged role, representing meanings that range from polite disagreement to collective grief, dominance, consent, remorse, and hesitation. The learners' attitudes towards silence are initially aroused when they attempt to "break the silence" of the teacher by asking multiple questions. Afterwards, the learners participate in an exercise that applies observation, analysis, and extension; authentic materials are used to help learning about silence in collective grief.
Lesson Planning and Materials Development—More Like Soccer!
Have you watched a soccer match before? Lesson planning is much more like soccer. It starts with a goal, followed by a strategy that is supported by certain activities, and is assessed on the playground. In designing a lesson plan, language educators need to pinpoint and articulate their learning outcomes (i.e., learning objectives or goals). Bloom’s Taxonomy provides a conceptual framework, drawing attention to three important categories of the educational process: teaching, learning, and assessment. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) underscored the dynamism of Bloom’s Taxonomy, including action words to describe the continuum of the cognitive process dimension that develops from low-order thinking skills (remember) to high-order thinking skills (create).
In developing Student Learning Outcome Statements (SLOS), educators are advised to use active verbs, specifying the skills and domains of learning: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. These verbs guide educators not only in teaching a lesson but also in devising appropriate assessments. To exemplify, my LT 536 artifact stands as a lesson plan for teaching passive constructions; it is an example of the application of Bloom’s Taxonomy in teaching and assessment. Since the lesson plan used SLOS that aligned with the higher-order thinking skills of analysis of the structure of passive constructions in newspapers, the assessment plan included an expanding activity for designing a newspaper report and generating passive constructions effectively. The assessment plans could entail various production forms, such as posters, research projects, essays, or performances. In fact, this portfolio counts as a form of assessment that targets the “create” phase in Bloom’s Taxonomy to synthesize knowledge in a creative manner—portfolio assessments.
Lesson Plan 3..pdfLT 536 Artifact: Passive Constructions Lesson Plan
Authentic Materials in Language Teaching
Lastly, educators must attempt to bridge the gap between the context and materials to identify—and hopefully question—Thirdness (i.e., the tradition of dichotomies between L1 and L2, native and non-native, self and others). Tomlinson (2010) identified several functional categories of materials: experiential, eliciting, informative, instructional, and exploratory. In materials adaptation and development, educators are encouraged to make wise decisions about how materials can support learning without perpetuating ideologies or “foreignizing” students. Thus, following Maley and Tomlinson (2017), dimensions of authenticity in material development (e.g., text authenticity, task authenticity, curriculum authenticity, context authenticity) are essential to student engagement and familiarization. My LT 536 artifact presents real life materials as a valuable resource for language learning and teaching. The lesson is established on the essence of task-based language teaching (TBLT) (Ellis, 2003) with adaptation to the materials with the aim of humanizing and authenticating the teaching materials. Real newspaper articles are used to present current issues and major incidents from various parts of the world. The plan is designed in hopes of raising cultural awareness and questioning thirdness.
Teaching Pronunciation: The Accent in My Speech
Attempting to teach pronunciation courses could be daunting. Most beliefs are centered around nativeness in speech, though views are recently changing to include the intelligibility and comprehensibility of speech. Celce-Murcia et al. (2010) provide a communicative framework to teach pronunciation based on the principle of communicative language teaching. The framework helps educators approach teaching pronunciation by suggesting five phases, moving from description and analysis to listening discrimination, controlled practice, guided practice, and communicative practice. My LT 539 artifact depicts the application of the five phases in teaching segmental and suprasegmental features of the Arabic language to students in a 300-university-level program. The artifact demonstrates four mini pronunciation lessons capturing the /h/ sound and long vowels in Arabic as segmental features and the assimilation of then/l/ sound—the definite article in Arabic—and phonetic alternation as suprasegmental features.
Integrated Lesson Plan.pdfLT 539 Artifact: Pronunciation Lesson Plan
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed.). Longman.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Goodwin, J. M. (2010). Teaching pronunciation: a course book and reference guide (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Dahl, T. I., & Ludvigsen, S. (2014). How I see what you’re saying: The role of gestures in native and foreign language listening comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12124.x
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses a guide for teachers Kathleen Graves (school for international training). . Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Jaworski, A. (1993). The Power of Silence social and Pragmatic Perspectives. Newburry Park, London and New Delhi: Sage Publication.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590–619. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029
Maley, A., & Tomlinson, B. (2017). Authenticity in materials development for language learning. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Sykes, J. M., Malone, M. M., Forrest, L., & Sağdıç, A. (2020). Affordances of digital simulations to measure communicative success. Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_90-2
Tomlinson, B. (2010). Principles and procedures of materials development. In N. Harwood (Ed.) Materials in ELT: Theory and practice (pp. 81-108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education. New York: Macmillan.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design: A framework for effecting curricular development and assessment (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Image Attributions
Cover Image by Abdelmoughit Lahbabi
The Solar System of Curriculum Design: self-designed illustration via Canva
Newspaper Image by Digital Buggu
Personal Consideration
The cover image showcases the interior of a grand Egyptian temple in Luxor, Egypt. Similar to a well-structured lesson, the picture exhibits a clear and defined foundational framework. The tall columns can be envisioned as the learning outcomes, which are grounded in Bloom's Taxonomy. The hieroglyphics and imprints can be viewed as key concepts in communicative language competency that convey rich information and provoke thought. The overall design reflects a sense of cohesiveness, which is an important trait of lesson design that invites exploration and learning.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse