Literature Gaps and Research Questions in Public
Speaking for EFL Learners
By
Prof. Jonathan Acuña-Solano
School
of English
Faculty of Social Sciences
Universidad Latina de Costa
Rica
Saturday,
February 20, 2016
Post
213
Comprehending
that blended learning methodologies are swapping traditional teaching practices
in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classrooms, the teaching of public
speaking can be improved exponentially with the addition of blended practices.
Traditionally, public speaking has been “taught” and “practiced” in situ, that
is, within the four walls of a classroom, but to empower learners, a different
approach to work and get feedback with the aid of technology and peer feedback
can be more viable for deep learning than simply stepping to the front of a
class and deliver a speech. Who can oppose the idea that blended learning and
teaching cannot account for a different approach to promote public speaking
with a better tint of pronunciation?
Working
on a “hasty” but “emphatic” literature review on peer assessment in blended
learning scenarios aiming at help EFL students improve public speaking and
pronunciation, the scholar scene is –at this point- rather barren than
fruitful. Phillips & Scott (2013) have
divided studies in two main groupings, those that “focus on the linguistic
competence of the speaker” and those concerning “with the characteristics of
effective feedback” ranging from “theoretical considerations of the cognitive
and motivational factors” to peer feedback. However, none of the studies
Phillips & Scott (2013) mention actually deal with blended learning
scenarios where lots of web media is used (e.g. video). Peer feedback where
class partners can rewind presentations to provide mates with suggestions and
positive criticism for improvement is not yet considered in the EFL lookout or
belvedere of possibilities to provide feedback in a more LMS-oriented EFL
teaching environment in higher education.
For
Burkert & Wally (2013), “learners need to be given a say in their language
study in choosing both their learning goals and the methods of teaching and
learning.” Most often what happens is that there is an “imposition” by
instructors on traditional methods mediated by classroom speeches for public
speaking skills and pronunciation grading. EFL learning goals in higher
education can now be grounded on blended learning settings that can also allow
students to set their “learning goals” validated not only by an instructor but
by peers. But, as stated above, none of this is actually mentioned or stated in
recent EFL feedback provision to learners. As quoted by Burkert & Wally (2013),
“according to Holec, the autonomous learner must take ‘resposibility for all
the decision concerning all aspects of his learning’.” But this responsibility
in blended education has not yet been researched to find out what the say
learners have to state is.
Pfandl-Buchegger,
Landsiedler, & Insam (2013) encourage language trainers to “integrate more
pronunciation work into their teaching by heightening their awareness of the
importance of good, clear pronunciation for the learning process as a whole.”
But once again, the encouragement to work on pronunciation through blended
learning scenarios is not accounted in recent studies, either. Though “feedback
checklists can be adapted according to the needs of the learners or the current
stage in the learning process” (Pfandl-Buchegger,
Landsiedler, & Insam, 2013) , are language instructors moving
towards the new trend on blended education to this adaptation, even to include
peers in the feedback provision to classmates? There is no reason why the
monitoring of speech by means of students’ video recordings cannot be done by
peers, too. “As we want our students to develop critical thinking skills and
skills for evaluating language input and new information, peer assessment is
another very form of assessment and giving feedback” (Pfandl-Buchegger,
Landsiedler, & Insam, 2013) that can also be employed in EFL
blended education.
If
scholars and researchers are re-examining feedback in higher education, they
also need to reconsider how it is provided in Blended Education settings.
“Underpinning this re-examination is the important recognition that, if
feedback processes are to enhance learning, we must move beyond a view of
feedback as transmission and acknowledge the active role that students must
play in such processes” (Nicol, Thomson, &
Brelin, 2014) .
And this “active role” also goes beyond the traditional classroom and
instruction that learners are getting; feedback in higher education EFL courses
needs to be seen from the blended learning lenses to potentialize deep learnig
in public speaking and pronunciation.
This literature review of feedback
in language teaching is not yielding results on the current trend of blended
education. Scholarly articles do include feedback research and the provision of
pronunciation and public speaking feedback for students, but none of them
actually deals with feedback in blended classrooms. It is for this reason than
it needs to be considered the following research question to try to yield some
light into this shady spot in EFL education: How can peer assessment in blended learning scenarios benefit language
learners in public speaking and pronunciation acquisition?
What can
be the benefits behind the answering to the research question? To start with,
the benefits for the field of EFL can be divided fourfold mostly pertaining to
learners. By means of replaying the question learner autonomy in virtual
learning environments can be explored and see how language trainees see
themselves in this current way of learning. The search for an explanation can
provide us certainty of teaching practices for young adults in higher education
appertaining to language teaching and learning. Answering the question can give
us an idea of language performers’ provision of meaningful feedback in public
speaking and pronunciation to foster deep learning. Finally, the response to
this inquiry can also give us an idea of how peer coaching in blended education
can be fruitful for pupils and how relevant it can be for teaching
professionals to explore more this area of learning.
When
asked about the challenges to find answers concerning this research question,
no much can be said. Since this is a research project in education, funding
cannot be claimed to be a challenge. This can be done by means of surveys and
in-class observations and analysis of data provided by learners through the
university platform. The same can be stated about data collection; the
population needed for this project is available and should not be labeled as a
challenge for a research project like this one. Since lots of participants are
not necessary, this can be called a case study in education in one’s EFL
classroom. The only true challenge to ponder is the time that will be needed to
design, develop, and analyze the data coming from this project.
References
Burkert, A., & Wally, J. (2013).
Peer Reviewing in a Collaborative Teaching and Learning Environment. In M.
Reitbauer, N. Campbell, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Feedback Matters: Current
Feedback Practices in the EFL Classroom. Frankfurt am Main, DEU: Peter
Lang AG. Retrieved February 6, 2016
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., &
Brelin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer
review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 3(No.
1), pp. 102-122. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026129382013795518
Pfandl-Buchegger, I., Landsiedler,
I., & Insam, M. (2013). Feedback on Pronunciation. In M. Reitbauer, N.
Campbell, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Feedback Matters: Current Feedback
Practices in the EFL Classrrom. Frankfurt am Main,DEU: Peter Lang,AG.
Retrieved February 6, 2016
Phillips, M., & Scott, N.
(2013). Giving Feedback on EFL Learner Presentations. In M. Reitbauer, N.
Campbell, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Feedback Matters: Current Feedback
Practices in the EFL Classroom. Frankfurt am Main: DEU: Peler Lang AG.
Retrieved February 6, 2016
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Post a Comment