ASSISTING THE TRANSITION
FROM SECONDARY TO TERTIARY LEARNING: A CASE STUDY FROM THE MIDDLE EAST
John Barrett and
Esther Daborn
(First published in TESOL Arabia Newsletter, June 2001)
In learning
cultures which are teacher centred there can be a problem with adjustment
to a more student centred approach. Such is often the case with secondary
school students in the Middle East. When they progress to tertiary
level education there can be difficulties. The learning process needs
to shift from being passive to active: from teacher dependence to more learner
independence. This study reports on a programme designed to assist
this transition for Gulf students in a men`s college who were learning general
English to support their studies in a technical training programme.
Coping with change is difficult. When students find they are no longer
being taught in a way they expect, they become disaffected. Resulting student
behaviour in class can be challenging. This creates a classroom atmosphere
for both teacher and student that is far from conducive to learning: one
similar to that described by Gusheng (1995) as a 'mutually uninspiring and
unrewarding' classroom experience.
Wright (1987) suggests that teachers have two major roles in the classroom:
to create the best conditions under which learning can take place, and to
impart knowledge to learners. To achieve these aims, the primary function
of a teacher must be to motivate learners. Skeehan (1989) identifies many
different types of learner, but sees a commonality in the fact that all
are active processors with motivation the root. Motivation
can be broken down into many aspects. The students here appear to
have 'instrumental' motivation to some degree (Gardner & Lambert, 1972),
but Skeehan?s descriptions of 'intrinsic' and 'extrinsic' motivation refer
more accurately because the local prevailing attitude to learning relates
more to personal aims, peer pressure, cultural influences and the age and
maturity of the learners.
Based on this, it seemed appropriate to focus on the intrinsic motivation
or internal drive with the result that students would have some feeling
of making progress. With these two main aims in mind a research programme
was designed to cover one full academic year. It consisted of two groups
of inter-related activities, supporting the aim of creating classroom conditions
under which learning could take place (Wright, 1987).
Introduction to the Programme
To set the tone, the first week of the semester was spent putting into place
some classroom practices that would show the students what was expected
from them and to provide psychological preparation for the next step (Dickinson
& Carver, 1980).
Through a range of minor preparatory tasks: book labeling, nameplate preparation
for desks and lockers etc., students were encouraged to take pride in achieving
a high standard and quality of work. To help them get to know
one another, students were asked to write their personal histories on a
pro forma and attach a photograph. They prepared these for exhibition on
a wall-mounted display board. Next, to confirm expected standards, students
were invited to compile a list of mutually acceptable class rules, then
rank them in order of importance. Eventually, a class list emerged.
The target was twenty rules, one per student. Each student adopted
a rule as his own, and was charged with monitoring and enforcing this rule
throughout the academic year.
These tasks actively involved students in the classroom which, as Ellis
& Sinclair (1989) suggest, can help develop positive behavioural attitudes.
Also, as Wright (1987) points out, learners take pride in achievement.
In this way a good degree of mutual trust was established and there was
a good rapport between student and teacher which would act as a platform
for the implementation of the programme.
The Programme
As mentioned above, the programme had two principal focuses. First,
to address student involvement we targeted student behaviour, and second,
to help them develop some idea of responsibility for their progress, we
worked on some learning strategies.
Student Behaviour
There were two elements involved in fostering co-operative student behaviour:
one of discipline (the Stick), and one with a reward system (the Carrot).
The Stick
We set up an elected committee for student representation in class. The
committee consisted of four representatives elected on a 'one student one
vote' principle. There were regular monthly elections for the posts of committee
member. Importantly, the teacher had no vote or say in whom was elected.
The role of the committee members was to make classroom decisions, arbitrate
and represent student interests. For example, if students were unhappy with
the type of exercise being taught, the committee could inform the teacher
of the feelings of the class and suggest an alternative. The students could
use the committee if they felt that the teacher had handled a student or
class discipline problem inappropriately. Also a student could ask the committee
to act as arbiter in any dispute between himself and another student or,
indeed, between himself and the teacher. Reciprocally, the teacher
could use the committee for advice and guidance, such as helping to make
the final decision on appropriate reprimands or punishments. The teacher
presented guidelines on reprimands, punishments and warnings to the class
for discussion. They were then modified and mutually accepted as fair.
In practice, students initially had difficulty appreciating that, with rights,
come responsibilities. It was difficult for them to accept that there were
consequences arising from their decisions. In time, however, students learned
to exercise their responsibility well, and executed their decision-making
with increasing care and consideration as the academic year progressed.
Interestingly, despite the fact that the committee regularly recommended
harsher penalties than the teacher, committee decisions were readily accepted
by the students as fair.
The Carrot
To balance the `stick' embodied in 'the committee', a 'carrot', by way of
a reward system was set up to show that certain standards were expected.
The classroom needed a good working atmosphere to foster student motivation,
in line with Wright`s suggestions.
The reward system was based on 'points' which students could earn for good
behaviour. These could be traded for time which students could spend doing
language-based activities. The final two 50-minute periods of the week were
reserved for the purpose. Each point earned one minute, so the weekly target
was 100. Points were awarded or withdrawn for a range of good or bad behaviour
negotiated and agreed with the students. Importantly, since the system related
to behaviour and not language performance, wrong answers were never penalised.
A record of the running total was kept on the whiteboard for students to
monitor progress.
Unfortunately, it quite quickly became clear that the reward system shifted
the emphasis in the classroom from one of learning to one of earning points.
It became a game: students manipulated the system by i) deliberately misbehaving
in the knowledge that they had enough time to make up points before the
end of the week, ii) covertly adjusting the running total (upwards!) when
the teacher was out of the room, and iii) bartering with the teacher for
points during teaching. So, after a few weeks, the points system was replaced
by a negotiated settlement of one guaranteed language-based activity period
per week on condition of good classroom behaviour as judged by the teacher.
The modification nonetheless achieved the same aim: the encouragement and
development of co-operative student behaviour, and a classroom atmosphere
in which more learning could take place.
Learning Strategies
There were four strands which aimed to develop study skills and encourage
the students to get a feel for how they were making progress. They centred
on dictionary skills, organisation of work, self-correction, and self-appraisal.
Dictionary skills
Since many students had never used a dictionary before, some time was spent
introducing dictionary work. Students were expected to check spellings and
find meanings of words, as and when they needed them. The aim was to establish
regular use of the skill. Importantly, it was stressed that the teacher
would assist, but only if there was genuine difficulty.
In practice, students at first continued to ask the teacher for answers
rather than consult their dictionaries. Students additionally devised personal
strategies of resistance: persisting with requests to the teacher, asking
other students, or simply giving up. If the student gave up, the teacher
would give further instruction until the student found the answer. Although
this was a difficult period for the teacher, it was clear that if they were
helped, the students would fail to make regular use of the study skill.
As the academic year progressed, students began using their new study skill
more and more, but, inevitably, despite quite a degree of teacher firmness,
there were still a small number of students who remained committed to trying
to get answers from the teacher right up to the end of the academic year.
Organisation of Work
To help them organise their work, students were given additional exercise
books for dedicated purposes: recording vocabulary, grammar, idioms, phrase
of the day, etc. They were given examples of various ways of recording information:
alphabetically, by group, etc. Students were asked to adopt several styles
and maintain records accordingly in the appropriate books. Being unused
to making such choices or having such a level of personal responsibility
for their own work, students at first resisted this task. There was
subsequently a lot of further discussion and explanation in class. Eventually,
the students did accept the responsibility, but regular checks and inspections,
were necessary to remind students of their obligations.
Relatively early on, students began to see some personal benefit from their
work: revision and checking, for example, were simpler and easier than before.
By the end of the academic year, students had volumes of exercise books
with full and easily understood explanations of grammar points, vocabulary,
lists, common idioms and their translations.
Self-correction
To help them look at the product of their work more critically, students
were given a correction guide. It listed examples of common errors and mistakes
together with a code: `sp' = spelling, 'f' = form, 'a' = agreement, 'p'
= punctuation etc. A personal laminated copy of the guide was pasted permanently
to students? desks. The exercises selected for this strand used only pre-taught
phrases, vocabulary and grammar. Importantly, students were never asked
to self-correct on untaught material.
The problem was that once their work had been marked, students expected
to be told where the errors were and what the correct answer was.
They could not see why they should do what they considered to be 'teacher`s'
work. Much further discussion took place before students accepted the marking
system. Here, the element of trust played a large part, the teacher relying
fairly heavily on the trust and rapport previously nurtured in class.
Once students were comfortable with the initial marking procedure (several
weeks on), the experiment moved to the next stage: the teacher stopped indicating
each error and only indicated that certain types of error had occurred on
particular lines in the student`s work. Again, once that procedure was established
(several weeks on still), we moved to the final stage which was to indicate
to the student only the total number of errors in his work, but importantly
not the types. Students now had to find, identify and correct their own
errors.
In time, students regularly managed this. Indeed, there were further benefits:
they saw this as a 'fun' game, and they themselves extended its use to spoken
work. So students often self-corrected during verbal exchanges with
the teacher, and indeed, listened attentively to individual students during
spoken discourse and offered advice on correction. Students appeared
to gain confidence in their use of written and spoken English, learned to
consider their work carefully, and appeared quite happy to find and correct
their own (and others') mistakes.
Monitoring Progress
This strand aimed to help students acquire a reliable means by which they
might accurately measure their own language learning progress. The hope
was that students would derive some satisfaction from their perceived progress,
in line with Wright`s concept of self-appraisal.
At the start of each week goals were set: students were told what was to
be learned by the end of that week, and there would be a test. The same
procedure for testing was used throughout the academic year: tests always
consisted of ten dictated questions. At first, the test only had single
words from the week`s vocabulary list. Later, more complex phrases and sentences
were used.
Before each test students had ten minutes to revise. After each test students
were given a further ten minutes to check their answers by referring to
their exercise books, course books and dictionaries. The marking was done
using the correction guide. The test could be re-done, re-submitted and
re-marked until the student was finally happy with his mark. All marks at
every stage of the process were recorded in a file. An important stage
in the fostering of self-appraisal was the procedure for issuing marks:
each student in turn was invited to estimate his mark. His actual mark was
then written on the whiteboard against his name for comparison. When all
marks were up, the students calculated the class average, worked out numbers
of passes and fails, and decided on the acceptability, or otherwise, of
individual and class results.
The marks were recorded in a file which students were encouraged to access
regularly so they could chart their performance over time. Students scoring
consistently well could observe their improvement, while those not doing
well were alerted to the need to improve. In practice, students regularly
accessed the file containing the records of their marks and seemed to take
a great deal of satisfaction from noting how they had improved over a period
of time. Indeed, students even checked that the teacher had been recording
their marks correctly.
Conclusion
It is clear from this programme that the classroom procedures went some
considerable way to assisting the student transition from secondary to tertiary
study, and helped them cope with differences in teaching and learning styles.
The programme demonstrably raised interest in class, increasing student
(and teacher) motivation, and ameliorating student behaviour in the classroom.
The most successful elements of the programme were the committee, self-correction
and, especially, monitoring progress. This shows the students
enjoy a challenge and competing among themselves. This kind of motivation
shows both the kind of internal drive described by Gusheng (1995), where
students operate within their own social culture, as well as a mix of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation as defined by Skeehan (1989).
Change, however, is not an event, but a process. The transitional programme
took time and strong determination to see through. Its success owes a great
deal to class discussion and negotiation to establish mutual respect and
a good rapport between student and teacher. It is not just a
matter of providing skills tuition for students, but more of fostering in
students a sense of involvement in and responsibility for their own learning.
The study shows that the students appear to have both the capacity and the
willingness to change and to be positively receptive to innovations in teaching
and learning, even at a relatively late stage in their learning development.
References
Dickinson, L. and Carver, D. 1980. Learning How To Learn - Steps
Towards Self-Direction In Foreign Language Learning In Schools. ELT Journal
35/1: 1-7
Ellis, G. and Sinclair. B. 1989. Learning To Learn English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Gardner, R. C. and Lambert. W. E. 1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second
Language Learning. Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Gusheng, Z. 1995. Motivation In College English Teaching And Learning. IATEFL
Newsletter, 126/2. 1995.
Littlewood, W. 1981 The Communicative Teaching of English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Skeehan, P. 1989. Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. London:
Edward Arnold/Hodder & Stoughton.
Wright, T. 1987. Roles Of Teachers And Learners. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.