As a language teacher, the ability to generate a curriculum, create lesson plans that lead to more learning, and associate with the learning objectives and goals of the curriculum are vital aspects of design. I have learned curriculum designing methods, such as backward design (Wiggins et al., 1998), forward design, and central design (Richards, 2013), and executed them in my work. I received many opportunities to develop and implement materials associated with the learning objectives in my lesson plans. Using Bloom's Taxonomy verbs and the ABCD outcomes (Smaldino et al., 2008) are valuable tools I learned this year that have supported me in developing learning objectives and goals. Learning objectives are necessary to design and create lesson plans and materials that work well with activities and appropriately set lesson plans with a textbook or curriculum. While pursuing my Master's in LTS, I received many opportunities to design my ideas, course content, materials, etc. The artifacts below demonstrate my skill in the pillar of Design.
The first artifact that I will showcase is the scope and sequence I created for a course I developed in LT 548: Curriculum and Design. The context for the curriculum was English language learners at a Japanese university studying presentational English skills that could pertain to their future career paths. This course utilized project-based learning (Kokotsaki et al., 2016) to create situations for students to practice giving presentations in English on a topic closely related to their future teaching context. Students would practice presentations for situations such as implementing a new course design, whereas a student in business may do a presentation on marketing a new product. The scope and sequence allowed me to create a plan for the learning goals that students would achieve based on each unit and how the target skills would correlate. An essential step in this design process is creating a needs analysis to determine the learners' career goals and align them with the design of the class (Macalister & Nation, 2019). The needs analysis results allow the teacher to develop a scope and sequence that better represents the course, showing the curriculum's purpose and the learners' objectives in each unit.
While taking LT 539: Pronunciation, I created lesson plans that included all four skills (listening, reading, writing, and speaking), one of which I am using as my second artifact. I created a lesson plan on a suprasegmental feature of English, starting with a reading and writing task that transitioned into a listening and speaking task. Students watch a video about intriguing hotels worldwide and are asked to write about which hotel they would like to stay in. Students then share and ask each other questions about their choices. This activity would lead students to the suprasegmental lesson, where students learn about rising and falling intonation in WH questions and how intonation can change the meaning behind a question. This lesson plan utilizes Celce-Murcia et al. (2010) 5-step communicative framework to create a list of activities that can create opportunities for practice and comprehension. The activities range in the levels of guidance provided to students as they perform intonation tasks with a partner. The lesson was designed to provide scaffolding after each activity and end with a communicative practice task that allows learners to create their own sentences and output.
Centered around 'Food Vocabulary', this lesson plan was created and added to the portfolio in LT 536: Design for Language Learning Systems. The teaching context for this plan is middle-school students in Japan at the novice proficiency level. According to Derwing and Munro (2015), teaching pronunciation even at the beginner level of language proficiency is beneficial for students as they progress in their language-learning journey. At the beginning of the lesson, students are introduced to new vocabulary terms for various foods. They then are asked to categorize the food based on where it is stored: fridge, freezer, or pantry. After practicing the terms with their classmates, students are asked to play a card game utilizing the newly-introduced vocabulary. As we can see in this lesson, I incorporated gamification into the learning process because it can help improve language proficiency by creating engaging activities (Alsawaier, 2018).
While pursuing my degree and developing lesson plans, I also received opportunities to explore what teaching a language other than English could look like. While in LT 538: Pragmatics, classmate Ester Angulo and I created a lesson plan titled 'Creating Dialogue: Giving and Responding to Compliments in Japanese', which focuses on teaching English-speaking intermediate Japanese learners how to give and respond to compliments based on pragmatic situations. We used the IPIC model Sykes et al. (2020) created to develop learning outcomes for this lesson that represent the commonly used language and interactional patterns of the target language community--preparing learners to use their pragmatic knowledge when faced with real-life interactions. Designing this lesson plan was enjoyable because it allowed me to develop materials and ideas with another teaching context in mind that differs from my past experiences.
I encountered multiple challenges that allowed me to learn and improve my design skills throughout my master's program. From designing a curriculum to creating materials and lesson plans, I constantly aimed to enhance these skills. I was given the opportunity to continue learning and improving this pillar of the program and my approach to language teaching. This lesson is something I will carry with me into my future career.
References
Alsawaier, R. S. (2018). The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, _35(1), 56–79.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Goodwin, J. M. (2010). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. In-text: (Celce-Murcia, et. al. 2010)
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2015). Pronunciation fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving schools, 19(3), 267-277.
Macalister, J., & Nation, I. P. (2019). Language curriculum design. Routledge.
Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design. RELC Journal, 44(1), 5–33.
Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., Russell, J. D., & Mims, C. (2008). Instructional technology and media for learning. Pearson.
Sykes, J. M., Malone, M. M., Forrest, L., & Sağdıç, A. (2020). Affordances of digital simulations to measure communicative success. In Springer eBooks (pp. 1–5). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_90-2
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). What is backward design. Understanding by design, pp. 1, 7–19.