Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment

September 4, 2011

Next week I am team-teaching a block week course at the University of Calgary on Global Trends in Language Education. Part of my session has been structured as a public lecture that is open to the public. It is a morning presentation, which may not be ideal for teachers, but nevertheless, if you’re in Calgary you’re invited you to join us for the event.

Here are the details:

Public lecture: Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment*

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Dr. Sarah Eaton

Major shifts in educational evaluation and assessment have been happening since the 1980s. There is an international trend (evidenced by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the International Adult Literacy Skills Survey) towards asset-based or strength-based approaches to evaluating a person’s language competence.

These international frameworks point towards a major paradigm shift in how we value and assess competence. Traditional “deficit-based” models of evaluation are being replaced. Are we ready, as 21st century educators, to translate this policy shift into our teaching practice?

08:30 – Welcome
09:00 – 10:15 – Presentation

University of Calgary
Language Research Centre
Craigie Hall, D-420

This event is free of charge and open to the public.
* This presentation is part of the LANG 599 / 699 block week course.

Global Trends in Language Evaluation and Assessment – invitation

_______________

Share this post: Global Trends in  Language Evaluation and Assessment http://wp.me/pNAh3-Ry

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


New report says learning styles are bogus.

September 4, 2011

School girl on stairsNPR recently published an article entitled, “Think You’re An Auditory Or Visual Learner? Scientists Say It’s Unlikely”. Journalist Patti Neighmond reported on research being conducted by psychologist Dan Willingham at the University of Virginia who reportedly claims that “it’s a mistake to assume students will respond and remember information better depending on how it’s presented”. He goes a step further to say that “teachers should not tailor instruction to different kinds of learners.”

The article quotes another researcher, Doug Rohrer, from the University of South Florida who dismisses the notion of learning styles completely because he has allegedly “not found evidence from a randomized control trial.”

Rohrer’s words indicate that if studies are not “randomized control trials” that they are worthless. While I agree that such studies have their place in research, particularly in medicine and the hard sciences, I would argue that the human learner is comprised of more than neurology or cognition, and that emotions, perceptions and learning abilities can not simply be measured using randomized control trials. Not to mention cultural differences. Anyone who truly believes that culture does not influence learning styles need to investigate the matter on a deeper level.

The article goes on to say that teachers should “mix things up” in the classroom. Well, that I agree with. (Elementary, my dear Watson.) When we teach, we are teaching groups of students, not individual learners.

But to tell me that I as a language teacher should not “tailor instruction to different kinds of learners”, all I can ask is “Really?!” So, when I have had deaf or hard of hearing students in my class, I should not have increased or emphasized visual aids in my class? Or when I had a blind student, that I should not have repeated the information more than once or twice, so that she could be sure to hear it properly?

Really, I just shake my head at fellow scholars who say such things. Honestly, do these same scientists also support eugenics, to ensure that all humans learn in precisely the same way and that the effectiveness of the methods employed can be empirically proven using only randomized control tests?

The article claims that Rohrer advises against using the notion of learning styles, because there is no proof they they actually mean anything.

That made me ask, “Is it really possible that there is no proof that learning styles work?” In less than 30, I found ten studies — just focussed on language learning — that counter Rohrer’s position. While I did not find the “randomized control tests” that he demands as the only acceptable evidence, I did find numerous other studies (including a few control studies, though they were randomized).

If I can find ten studies in less than 30 minutes, relating specifically to language learning, how many studies have been conducted across the disciplines, over the past several decades? Can we really say that learning styles are bogus? What are your thoughts?

Control studies

Eme, E., Lacroix, A., & Almecija, Y. (2010). Oral Narrative Skills in French Adults Who Are Functionally Illiterate: Linguistic Features and Discourse Organization. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(5), 1349-1371.

Tanyeli, N. (2008). The Efficiency of Online English Language Instruction on Students’ Reading Skills. Paper presented at the International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED504676

Research studies (non-control)

Erton, I. (2010). Relations between Personality Traits, Language Learning Styles and Success in Foreign Language Achievement. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 38, 115-126.

Kucuk, M. G.-K., E. ; Tasci, D. (2010). Support Services and Learning Styles Influencing Interaction in Asynchronous Online Discussions. Educational Media International, 47(1), 39-56.

Lincoln, F., & Rademacher, B. (2006). Learning Styles of ESL Students in Community Colleges. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 30(5-6), 485-500.

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2008). Cross-Cultural Differences in the Use of Learning Strategies by Students of Greek as a Second Language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29(4), 310-324.

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Kantaridou, Z. (2009). Plurilingualism, Language Learning Strategy Use and Learning Style Preferences. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(4), 460-474.

Turner, M. (2010). Using Student Co-Regulation to Address L2 Students’ Language and Pedagogical Needs in University Support Classes. Language and Education, 24(3), 251-266.

Wang, L. (2007). Variation in Learning Styles in a Group of Chinese English as a Foreign Language Learners. International Education Journal, 8(2), 408-417. Retrieved from ERIC: http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ834277

Wong, J. K.-K. (2004). Are the Learning Styles of Asian International Students Culturally or Contextually Based? International Education Journal, 4(4), 154-166. Retrieved from ERIC: http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ903817

Zhang, L.-F. (2007). Intellectual Styles and Academic Achievement among Senior Secondary School Students in Rural China. Educational Psychology, 27(5), 675-692.

Scholarly studies (Conceptual and theoretical)

Abraham, R. (1978). The Nature of Cognitive Style and Its Importance to the Foreign Language Teacher.

Jones, S. (1993). Cognitive Learning Styles: Does Awareness Help? A Review of Selected Writings. Language Awareness, 2(4), 195-207.

_____________

Share this article: New report says learning styles are bogus. http://wp.me/pNAh3-Rm

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Developing the Intercultural Dimension in Language Teaching: A Practical Introduction for Teachers

August 16, 2011

Developing Intercultural Dimension in Language TeachingIn this 42-page guide, available free from the Council of Europe authors Michael Byram, Bella Gribkova and Hugh Starkey offer practical insights for classroom language teachers. The topics covered in this resource include answers to questions such as:

  • What is the intercultural dimension of language teaching?
  • What knowledge, skills, attitudes and values are involved in intercultural competence?
  • Do I need to be a native speaker?
  • How can I promote the intercultural dimension if I have to follow a set curriculum and teach grammar?
  • How do I deal with learners’ stereotypes and prejudices?
  • How do I overcome my own stereotypes and misconceptions?
  • How do I assess intercultural competence?

This is a brilliant piece of work that includes extracts from the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and an extensive bibliography.

Get yours here: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/guide_dimintercult_en.pdf

_____________

Share this post: Developing the Intercultural Dimension in Language Teaching: A Practical Introduction for Teachers http://wp.me/pNAh3-QK

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Common tech abbreviations used in language teaching and literacy

July 15, 2011

Is your mind boggled about all the abbreviations and acronyms you find when it comes to talking about technology and language learning? Here are a few of the more common ones, spelled out:

app – application: a program often used on a mobile device such as a cell phone or a tablet.

b-learning – blended learning (methodology that combines f2f and e-learning)

BLE – blended learning environment

BLL – blended language learning

CALI – Computer-assisted language instruction (this term was later replaced with CALL)

CALL – computer-assisted language learning

CAI – Computer-assisted instruction

CLIL – Content and Language Integrated Learning

CMC – computer-mediated communication

CVRE – collaborative virtual reality environment

e-learning – electronic learning

f2f – face-to-face (i.e. traditional classroom instruction)

m-learning – mobile learning (e.g. learning with mobile phones, iPads, etc.)

MALL – mobile-assisted language learning

MOO –  multi-user object-oriented technology

MMO or MMOG – massively-multiplayer online game

PDA – personal digital assistant

SCA – synchronous cyber-assessment

TELL – Technology-enhanced language learning

TTS – text-to-speech

VOIP – Voice-over Internet Protocol

VR – virtual reality

WELL – Web Enhanced Language Learning

Have I missed any? If so, leave me a comment and we’ll keep adding to the list.

___________________

Share this post: Common tech abbreviations used in language teaching and literacy http://wp.me/pNAh3-OC

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Job Opportunity: Summer Research Assistant – Specialist in Second Languages

June 2, 2011

June 15, 2011 – Update – This position has been filled. Thanks for the many responses and queries!

_________

I have a project on the go that examines questions around second language education, L2 acquisition and language learning and pedagogy. I’m looking for a part-time research assistant / associate to collaborate on this project over the summer months. Here’s what I’m looking for:

Research Assistant / Associate (Term position)

Summary statement

The Research Assistant / Associate is responsible for assisting the Principal Investigator (PI) in the collection, formatting, analysis and reporting of information on topics relating to second and other language acquisition, language pedagogy and related topics.

Major Responsibilities

  • Plans, organizes and coordinates his or her own schedule to ensure that deliverables are met by due dates.
  • Liaises with the PI for the collection, formatting, analysis and reporting of information.
  • Conducts a literature review using primarily online academic, government and other databases.
  • Data entry of bibliographic information using Endnote.
  • Maintains electronic and hard copy data files and reports.
  • Maintains up-to-date documentation of work completed.
  • Produces written materials for research reports.
  • Proofreads and edits documents generated by the PI.
Meets with the PI on a regular basis to review the work in progress.
  • Deliver work completed on a weekly basis. These deliverables will generally consist of research articles, government reports, applied research articles and professional materials that can contribute to the research report.

Education

Post-secondary degree. Candidates who are currently enrolled in a Master’s or PhD program will be given preference.

A background in second language learning or second language education is highly desirable.

Experience and Skills

  • Experience working with electronic research databases.
  • Previous research experience (e.g. conducting a literature review) is desirable.
  • High levels of personal motivation, self-management and detail-orientation. The incumbent will have the ability to take responsibility to meet deadlines and make progress with minimal supervision.
  • Strong spoken and written communication skills.
  • Rigorous research methods.

Other qualifications

  • You have access to academic research databases through the library of an accredited institution.
  • Strong existing technology skills with MS Word (or Pages), Endnote and general Internet and electronic communications.
  • You are comfortable navigating the Internet to conduct research.
  • You are able to meet face-to-face in the Calgary area on a regular basis or via Skype if you are not located in the Calgary area.
  • You have access to your own computer and the Internet.
  • Must be legally entitled to work in Canada and have a valid Social Insurance Number.

Position Details

Start date: Monday, June 13, 2011
End date: Friday, August 5, 2011

Hours: Generally flexible hours – 5 to 15 hours per week, with a minimum of 5 hours per week.

Wage: $25 / hour, to a maximum of 80 hours ($2000) during the term of the project. Wages are subject to the usual CPP and EI deductions.

Work site: You will work from your own home, on campus or anywhere the work can be completed.

To apply send a brief resume and cover letter via e-mail to:

Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton
Eaton International Consulting Inc.
sarahelaineeaton (at) gmail.com

Applications are accepted until a suitable candidate is found.

Download a copy of this document for easy printing from:

View this document on Scribd

______________

Share this post: Job Opportunity: Summer Research Assistant – Specialist in Second Languages http://wp.me/pNAh3-HR