University of San Francisco

MOTIVATE AS A VERB:
A WORKSHOP TO MOTIVATE EFL STUDENTS AND
TEACHERS

A Field Project Presented to

The Faculty of the School of Education
International and Multicultural Education Department

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Second Language

By
Denise Urdang
2013
i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I- Introduction............................................................................................................. 1

Statement of the Problem............................................................................................. 3

Purpose of the Project...................................................................................................3

Theoretical Framework.................................................................................................4

Significance of the Project............................................................................................6

Definition of Terms.......................................................................................................7

Chapter ll-Review of the Literature........................................................................................ 10

Investigating What Happens in the Classroom...........................................................13

Motivational Strategies...............................................................................................14

The Teachers Role in Promoting Student/Learner Autonomy..................................17

Collaborative/cooperative learning.............................................................................27

Teacher Motivation.................................................................................................... 32

Summary.................................................................................................................... 37

Chapter lll-The Project and Its Development........................................................................ 40

Description of the Project.......................................................................................... 40

Development of the Project....................................................................................... 41

The Project................................................................................................................. 46

ii
Chapter lV - Conclusions and Recommendations...................................................................69

Conclusion...................................................................................................................69

Recommendations.......................................................................................................70

Evaluation Plan...........................................................................................................72

References.................................................................................................................. 79

Appendix....................................................................................................................A-1

Supplemental Material................................................................................................S-1

iii
 1

Chapter I - Introduction

Statement of the Problem

Adult (16-61) learners; immigrants, refugees, and international students at universities

have different language goals. Yet all language learners (LLs) experience in various degrees,

cultural, social, and psychological shifts that both LLS and language teachers might not fully

understand. Language teachers are asking no less from students than the experience of both

stepping out of and maintaining one linguistic community/culture, as well as entering into or

adding another. LLs and their teachers struggle to develop and maintain motivation in the

classroom situation without the awareness of what language learning entails. Gardner (2010)

states that without motivation, all other attributes are nonsignificant(sic). To help solve this

pressing problem, teachers need to be aware of the psychological, cultural, and even political

factors that impact LLSS motivation.

There is a gap in teacher education and continued professional development in terms of

the lack of information on current motivational research in general education and in language

learning in particular. This research includes the effect of teacher motivation on student

motivation as well as the effect of motivational teaching strategies to enhance global motivation

(Bernaus, Wilson, and Gardner, 2008). Motivation is integral to language learning and Gardner

(2010) views motivation as the driving force behind achievement.

Language learning is a unique endeavor. According to Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (as

cited in Mercer, 2011): ...probably no other field of study implicates self concept and self

expression to the degree that language study does (p.3). Traditionally however, research on

motivation in second language acquisition (SLA) has focused on the individual differences of the
 2

learner, specifically on learning styles, learning strategies, language aptitude, and verbal

intelligence Affective traits also contribute to language study achievement, for example;

personality, self-esteem, willingness to communicate, extroversion, introversion, emotions, and

motivation(Brown.2007). Motivation, of both unsuccessful and successful language learners,

has been studied in order to quantify the right formula for academic achievement. According to

Bernaus and Gardner (2008) the majority of motivational research in SLA ...no matter how the

teacher was integrated into the research problem does not even test the teachers (p.388).

The educational system still blames the student for the lack of motivation and treats

motivation as an independent variable. Teachers usual parlance; that students come into the

learning situation motivated or not, speak without an awareness of the dynamism of this variable

and the effect on motivation by the teachers own behaviors. I believe we need a change in the

motivational paradigm, away from blaming the victim, that is, the student, by replacing the

traditional overarching question from: what motivates successful second language learners, to;

how does the language teacher participate in motivating learners in such a complex learning

situation?

Developing the teachers role in structuring an environment to enhance student

motivation in the language classroom supports their achievement and allows us to approach the

problem of motivation more effectively. Motivation is not automatic, and requires teacher

intervention, planning, assessing and evaluation. Dunkin and Biddle, 1974 (as cited in Madrid,

Robinson, Hidalgo, Gomis, Verdejo, Ortega, 1993), and Dornyei, (2001) discuss aspects of the

learning situation that can contribute to activating motivation, such as; learning strategies,

teacher characteristics, the classroom as a social system, goal orientedness (sic), and learner

autonomy. An understanding of the problem of motivating students in a classroom situation

 3

requires language teachers awareness of the immense undercurrent of affective attributes

involved, for both teachers and students. Krashans Five Input Hypothesis (as cited by Du,

2009) includes motivation, attitude, anxiety, and self confidence as affective filters that can

affect students second language learning.

This project will address the problem of the lack of teacher training as to the need for

teacher participation in motivating their students. In the workshop, participants will be (a)

introduced to current SLA motivational research in a user friendly manner, (b) guided in

implementing two research supported motivational learning strategies to inform their lesson

designs, and (c) will explore the role of teacher motivation and its effect on students in the

classroom.

Purpose of the Project

The purpose of this project will be to (a) introduce teachers to current motivational

research focused on language learning, (b) begin to develop awareness as to the teachers

motivation through questionnaires and self -reflection activities, and (c) introduce teachers to

research supported motivating/innovative strategies. The goal of the workshop is to help

teachers motivate students (maybe a first time experience for some), put that motivation into

action, protect it, understand its dynamism, and learn strategies to sustain it.

I chose this project due to the lack of sustained motivation in the English classes that I

have taught. My colleagues and I have often wondered why some students had come to the

United States, made the commitment in terms of money, time, and for some, time away from

work. After a few months, classes are skipped, heads are on the desks, homework is ignored,

and frequent trips to the bathroom are routine. Most of our students came to learn English for
 4

instrumental orientations (Gardner, as cited in Gardner, 2010), career enhancement, academic

success, and to meet the needs of a changing society. Few came because they loved the language

or the process of language learning, however, research supports Gardners (Gardner, 2010)

integrative orientation, wanting to be connected to the target language group, and intrinsic

motivation, learning for the enjoyment, personal satisfaction or interest without focusing on

external rewards, as the stronger motivations. This is in direct opposition to most of my

students motivation. The result is a loss of time, money, and a unique opportunity for language

learning.

My assumption is that lack of motivation be minimized with the teachers intervention

and that a more student centered curriculum in the EFL classroom could lead some to a deeper

orientation of motivation. In order for teachers to make the effort to increase students

motivation, they must maintain their own motivation, interest, and be on the path to becoming

expert EFL teachers with a long term career investment. Attending ongoing professional

development workshops is a way teachers can stay motivated and stay current in research and

innovative strategies.

Theoretical Framework

This project is based on three theoretical areas: (1) learner autonomy supported by an

autonomy supportive motivational teaching style (ASMS), (2) cooperative/collaborative learning

as a motivating strategy, and (3) teacher motivation and its effect on the learning situation.

The first theoretical framework is based on studies that support the teachers use of an

autonomy supportive motivation teaching style (ASMS) (Reeve, 1998). The Self-Determination

Theory (SDT) developed by Ryan and Deci in 1985 (as cited in McCally, 2010) included
 5

research on autonomy, competence, relatedness, and intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, all of

which are strong educational components. Recent studies, (Patall, Dent, Oyer, and Wynn, 2013)

state that teachers who support learner autonomy, increasing options and choices, increase

intrinsic motivation in their students. Self Determination Theory (SDT) will be included in the

workshop material to help participants understand the importance of creating an autonomy

supportive environment with tasks that enhance students autonomy. The participants will

explore their preferred teaching styles with an eye towards developing a more autonomy

supporting teaching style.

The second theoretical framework, collaborative/cooperative learning, is based on

Vygotskys socio-cultural theory and its application to motivation in education. The concepts

included are (a) intentional learning, (b) engagement, (c) engaged participation, (d) learning to

participate, and (e) the situative perspective of learning (Hickey, 2010). An alternative model,

the participation model of cultural development (Lave and Wenger, 1991) also called

communities of practice established by Wenger and Lave (as cited by Wenger, 2006), is included

under the collaborative/cooperative learning theory.

Roger and David Johnsons (2012) contribution to cooperative learning is fundamental.

The difference between working in groups versus structured groups working cooperatively is an

important distinction for educators. This will be explored in my workshop material.

Collaborative/cooperative learning is also supported by the SDT.

Ryoo (2009) and Vrionis (2011) studies contributed to research that challenges the belief

as to the lack of achievement in collaborative learning. Their conclusions resulted in a positive

 6

correlation between the collaborative learning model and quantifiable learning, whether in an

informal setting (Ryoo, 2009), or a formal classroom learning situation (Vrioni, 2011).

The third theoretical framework is based on empirical research that supports the

hypothesis that teacher motivation is related to the use of motivational strategies, which then

positively correlates to student motivation and English achievement. This framework is under-

researched and does not supply much literature. Researchers in this framework have advocated

for more longitudinal, and qualitative research is needed to fill this gap in the literature.

Significance of the Project

This project has four significant benefits for teachers. First, participants will learn to see

students lack of motivation as a temporal and dynamic variable. Second, participants will

understand their role in effecting motivation through research supported motivational strategies.

Third, participants will explore and reflect on their own motivation and its effect on student

motivation. Fourth, participants will explore establishing better relationships with their students

to increase motivation, and lower the affective filter in the learning situation.

This project has significant benefits for students. First, students will have a better attitude

toward the learning situation. Gardners (as cited in Gardner, 2010) Attitude and Motivation

Test Battery (AMTB) investigated attitudes toward the learning situation which included

attitudes toward English, the English teacher, and the English course. Second, students will have

increased motivation which leads to higher English achievement (Bernaus, Wilson, & Gardner,

2008). They will not see themselves labeled as motivated or unmotivated, and will be guided in

developing a more integrative disposition (Dornyei, 1994).

 7

Definition of terms

English as an additional language(EAL) - J. Fishmans (1977) term describing English

as a learned foreign language.

English as a global language(EGL) - An alternative term used in Weger-Guntharps

doctoral thesis (2008).

English as a second language(ESL) - used for learning English in an English speaking

country.

English as a foreign language(EFL) - Traditionally used for learning English in a non-

English speaking country.

Motivational Strategies - Teaching strategies that support students motivation.

Language Level of Motivation - Students attitudes concerning the target language which

is determined by the social environment in which the learning takes place (Dornyei, 1998).

The Learning Situation Level - Motivation in the classroom setting (Dornyei, 1998).

Language-Related Episode (LRE) - Any interactions between language learners where

their second language is integrated, implicitly or explicitly (Swain and Lapkin, as cited in Ryoo,

2009).

Course-specific Motivational Components - Syllabus, teaching materials, teaching

methods, and learning tasks (Dornyei, 1998).

Teacher Specific Motivational Components - Related to teachers behavior, personality

and teaching style (Dornyei, 1998).

 8

Direct Socialization of Student Motivation - Teachers modeling, task presentation, and

feedback (Dornyei, 1998).

Group-Specific Motivational Components - Students group dynamics including goal-

orientedness (sic) ...norm and reward system, group cohesion, and classroom goal

structure/cooperative, competitive or individualistic (Dornyei, 1998, p. 207).

Integrativeness/Intergrative orientation of motivation - Gardner and Lamberts original

term meaning the desire to identify with the target language community. This term has been

revised in subsequent studies by the researchers.

Instrumental orientation of motivation - Students orientation toward learning for the

purpose of achieving external rewards, for example, a good job, higher salary, admissions into

university.

Imagined community - A target language community that is not physically accessible by

the learner but can be perceived through imagination.

Integrative disposition - An openness to and respect for, other cultural groups and ways

of life; psychological and emotional identification(Dornyei, 2003, p. 5).

Perspective-taking - A persons awareness and understanding of anothers point of view,

goals, and affective states.

Intrinsic motivation -Motivation that is activated by joy in the activity itself, in the

challenge of the activity, without any thought of external rewards.

Extrinsic motivation -Motivation based on receiving a reward or achieving a goal, for

example, higher grades, university entrance, or higher salary.

 9

Flow - A term coined by the psychologist Czikszentmihalyi to describe an affective state

while participating in an activity. During this state there is no sense of time or connection to

anything but the activity.

Ulpanim - Classes for immigrants to learn Hebrew in Israel.

 10

Chapter ll-Literature Review

I have organized my review of the literature around three categories: 1) strategies that

promote learner autonomy, 2) collaborative/cooperative learning, and 3) teacher motivation in

EFL.

Category one contains those studies that investigate how student autonomy positively

correlates with the use of motivational strategies in the classroom, category two contains those

studies that show collaborative/cooperative learnings effect on motivation in language learning,

and category three contains studies that investigate the effect of teacher motivation on students

motivation in language learning.

Most seminal research in second language acquisition (SLA) was carried out in a western

context after World War II while the United States was developing programs for immigrants,

refugees, and international students (Darian, 1972). Since then, globalization and technology

have created major shifts in the SLA paradigm. Many of the newer studies have focused on

specific contexts such as Iran, China, Turkey, or Nigeria, and dont always look to the West.

Changing language learning contexts no longer allow for a single Western viewpoint. For

example, the circumstances of LLs studying in their own countries do not correspond with

Gardners (as cited in Gardner, 2010) classic integrative orientation, since the target language

community is not available in its full meaning: contact with native English speakers. Classroom

management and teaching styles differ in all cultures as do attitudes toward authority and

language learning goals. These differences are to be respected and researched in specific

contexts of learning. While I review international literature in different learning contexts, this
 11

project will be oriented toward adult LLs who come to live temporarily in the United States to

learn English.

The role of motivation in educational settings has been a pivotal area in language

acquisition (LA) research. The majority of this research has focused primarily on understanding

which individual cognitive and affective traits supported or undermined student motivation.

Research in applied linguistics, sociology, psychology, and education has led to a multi-faceted

and interdisciplinary approach. This makes sense since according to Brown (2007) and Lambert

(1967) language learning involves particular affective variables which are different from

variables involved in other school subjects. Some of these would include social attitudes,

attitudes towards the target language community, motives, conflicts of cultural values, and

allegiances. Wardhaugh (2010) adds that language learning encompasses social concepts such as

identity, power, class, gender, status, and solidarity. LA is a unique learning experience since it

...involves taking on elements of another culture (Bernaus et al., 2008, p.26), therefore

educational, psychological, and socio-cultural variables should be included in SLA research

In this vein, language teachers are doing no less than educating students to be

functionally bilingual, and often, multilingual. Immigrants, refugees, or students married to

American citizens must become bicultural, a phenomenon termed second culture acquisition

(SCA) or acculturation (Brown, 2007). The term English as a Foreign Language (EFL) will be

used exclusively in this project, regardless of which country the learning takes place, in

acknowledgment of the fact that English might not be the students second language. The use of

the term second language needs to be further investigated and not be automatically applied to

English learning situations. The cultural bias is evident in that Jay Walker (2009) called English

the worlds second language. I might propound the question: what is the worlds first language?
 12

In addition, the term language acquisition (LA) will replace second language acquisition

(SLA) in this field project, except when used in its original theoretical framework, for example,

Gardners socio-educational model. The political, psychological, sociolinguistic, and socio-

cultural aspect of English language learning needs to be addressed in terms of respecting the

learners prior knowledge and complicated identity.

The seminal research on motivation and bilingualism was conducted by Lambert, (as

cited in Gardner, 2010) in which he studied bilingual dominance and the development of

bilingualism among undergraduate students studying French. He identified the most difficult

aspect of bilingualism as the cultural divide; students who dont have an emotional connection or

drive to participate in the target language community have less chance of becoming bilingual.

Lambert also investigated impression formation and defined it as the impression a listener gets

when they hear someone speak a particular language. Research conducted by Lambert,

Hodgson, Gardner and Fillenbaum (as cited in Lambert, 1967), had English speaking Canadians

listen to matched guises of male bilinguals (p.94) speaking French Canadian and English

Canadian. The participants rated the English speaking Canadian guises as better looking, taller,

more intelligent, more dependable, kinder, more ambitious and having more character (p.94)

than the French Canadian speakers. The authors concluded that language is not only a code in

linguistic terms, but also a social code that initiates impressions, brings cultures, communities

and individuals together, as well as creates boundaries between them.

Evolving from Lamberts study, Gardner and Lambert (as cited in Gardner, 2010)

developed the socio-educational model of motivation in SLA. Their research took place in an

already bilingual culture: a French and English speaking Canadian population. The target

language community was physically present and contact was possible. Their research suggested
 13

that the desire to make a connection with the target language community, termed integrative

orientation, was a stronger orientation than instrumental orientation. Instrumental orientation

describes action that is motivated by external rewards, such as a better job, good grades, and

parental expectations. Integrative orientation describes action that is motivated by the LLs

desire to participate in, and communicate with the new target language community. In extreme

cases, LLs want to fully identify into the target language community and leave behind their

native language community. In essence, the language and the community are both the target.

Researchers continue to study and debate the benefit of integrative orientation over

instrumental orientation. Brown (2007), however, succinctly states that language learners tend to

use both, at different times, to achieve their language learning goals. Gardner (2010) has revised

his taxonomy and stated that all types of motivation are valuable, with motivational intensity

being the most important differential.

Investigating What Happens in the Classroom

Much of the research on motivation and foreign language learning has focused entirely

on the learner. In contrast, Dunkin and Biddles model of teaching (as cited in Madrid,

Robinson, , Hidalgo, Gomis, Verdejo, and Ortega, 1993), included process variables: the

classroom teaching defined as both teachers and students classroom behavior. This model cited

two other independent variables on which the outcome of the learning and teaching process were

dependent: (a) presage variables: the teachers characteristics, personality traits, teaching style,

attitudes, and personal qualities, and (b) context variables: the pupils properties.

Decades later, McGoarty (2001) would spotlight the importance of the classroom by

stating: Without such research foci, investigation of L2 motivation becomes an intellectual

 14

enterprise worthwhile in its own terms but removed from the major site of planned L2

acquisition, the classroom (p77). She suggested that in order to better understand LA

motivation, a learning environment that qualifies as effective must be defined more specifically.

Stern (as cited in Madrid, et al., 1993) rearranged some of Dunkin and Biddles categories and

combined the teacher and learners characteristics as presage variables that influence teaching

and learning.

Taken as a whole, the studies in this category are reflected in my project by focusing on

the teacher as an integral component in classroom motivation. This includes the teachers

personality, characteristics, attitudes and personal qualities called the presage variables (Dunkin

and Biddle, as cited in Madrid, et al., 1993). These studies support the projects focus on the

whole classrooms motivational dynamic and not just the individuals students motivation seen

as an independent variable. Supporting the projects theme, McGroarty, (2001) stated that

lacking in current research is a focus on ...motivationally-relevant aspects of L2 instruction

with ...concrete pedagogical alternatives (p.77), as well as ...an adequate theory of L2

instruction (p.78).

Motivational Strategies

In the 1990s, after decades of motivation research focusing on students cognitive traits,

a ...more pragmatic, education-centered approach to motivation research (Dornyei and Csizer,

1998, p.204) was developing. Researchers attempted to fill the gap that existed between

motivation research based on individual differences and research that would include a

pedagogical extension (p.205).

 15

Within this framework Dornyei and Csizer (1998) developed a quantitative study in

which 200 EFL teachers in Hungary, with wide differences in their practicing experience, rated

the perceived importance (p.210) of 51 motivational strategies submitted by the participants

and the frequency with which they used these strategies. Interestingly, the frequency scale and

the importance scale were given to different participants, to minimize the rating of false

frequency if the strategy was rated important. The researchers list of ten macrostrategies was

culled from the 51 strategies, and then weighted for classroom relevance by the participants from

various language programs. By asking these teachers to rate the frequency of use the researchers

were able to reveal the underutilized practices in the classroom.

The ten motivational strategies culminating in this study consisted of 10 macrostrategies

with microstrategies subsumed under each macrostrategy. For example, under the macrostrategy

Task the microstrategies that are listed are: give clear instructions, provide guidance about how

to do the task, and state the purpose and the utility of every task.

An important finding was the lack of any strategies to build a cohesive learner group.

This absence conjectures either a lack of teacher awareness as to the motivational strength of

group level variables, disinterest, or a lack of exposure to motivation research within a

sociocultural theoretical framework. Further explanation was not given. Also underused by

Dornyei and Csizers participants was goal orientedness(sic), or helping students to design their

own study plans, sharing responsibility for organizing the learning process with students in the

class, and permitting students to choose their learning materials (autonomy).

An important weakness in Dornyei and Csizers (1998) study mentioned by Bernaus, et

al. (2008) was that there was no follow up investigation correlating the relationship between the
 16

application of the strategies, motivation, and language achievement. To avoid this pitfall, my

project will include post-workshop surveys and questionnaires for teachers as to the effectiveness

of the implementation of their motivational strategies learned in the workshop, and for EFL

students, post-strategy implementation assessments to be given to students by the participants at

their own schools.

According to Dornyei and Csizer (1998), a weakness cited was that their conclusions

might not be applicable in all settings, due to the fact that their study was conducted in a

European EFL context. In some cultures, these same motivational strategies would have to be

amended. The challenge of cultural appropriateness is always a consideration of different

English language learning contexts since attitudes toward authority and teaching methods are

varied. Regardless of these weaknesses, I think that this was a strong beginning in researching

motivating strategies.

McGroarty (2001) advocates for more research involving groups, social relations, and

interactions that exist in the classroom and their impact on LA motivation. Even though neither

McGroarty nor Dornyei and Csizer (1998) mention cooperative/collaborative learning strategies

specifically, I have taken my cue from the word group and will focus on cooperative and

collaborative learning as a motivational strategy.

My project will incorporate group-specific motivational strategies by promoting group

work for LLs. Specific motivational strategies will be effective in my project because teaching

and use of strategies are perhaps the easiest modification that can be done in a classroom, as well

as the most controllable and the most observable (Julkunen, 2001).

 17

The Teachers Role in Promoting Student/Learner Autonomy

Self Determination Theory (SDT) was developed by Deci and Ryan (as cited in McCally,

2010) and posits an important question for educators: Just how do you create the conditions in

which intrinsic motivation can flourish? And more specifically ...how do you guide that

motivation toward specific outcomesat work, at school...? (p. 21). Creating a learning

situation that promotes autonomy to act and think creatively toward shared goals is extremely

difficult, more difficult than using tests and grades as a reward system. Extrinsic motivation,

activity promoted by a reward system, is usually not sustained over a long period ...there is a

tremendous difference, between training and educating (Balakian, 1962, p. 262).

Deci and Ryans Self Determination Theory is helpful in understanding why promoting

student autonomy in the classroom situation is an integral part of the learning process.

Numerous researchers such as Reeve (1998), and Patall, et al. (2013), have done extensive

research on teacher practices and strategies to develop learner autonomy to increase motivation

in the classroom.

Studies included in this framework (Patall, et al., 2013; Reeve, 1998, 2006, Jang, Reeve

and Deci, 2010, and Dornyei and Csizer, 1998) have concluded that promoting student autonomy

has shown to have many benefits for the students, including: ...interest, enjoyment (intrinsic

motivation), persistence on a task, valuing a task, effort, task performance, subsequent learning,

and perceived competence (Patall, et al., 2013, p.15). Autonomy integrates students into the

process of their own language learning (Patall et al., 2013).

Ushioda (as cited by Dornyei and Csizer, 1998) has concisely stated: autonomous

language learners are by definition motivated learners (p. 217). Dornyei and Csizers (1998)
 18

study included student autonomy as a motivational macro-strategy. In their study, student

autonomy consisted of these micro-strategies: (a) encourage creative and imaginative ideas, (b)

encourage questions, and other contributions from the students, and (c) share as much

responsibility to organize the learning process with your students as possible (p.212).

Patall, et al.s (2013) very strong quantitative study consisted of 278 high school students

and ten teachers, where students reported on teacher practices, the students experience of

autonomy, and the course value. My project does not include course value, therefore I will focus

on the students experience of autonomy and how it relates to teacher practices cited in this

study. An important strength in Patall, et al.s (2013) study was the expansion of the definition

of choice as both allowing students to select among teacher prescribed options and to engage in

ongoing decision making by interacting with coursework in their own way (p. 28). The

researchers made it clear that their operational definition was different from other educational

studies, which only included the choosing of a task as choice.

The researchers used a student background questionnaire and a school experience

questionnaire. The school experience questionnaire used a Likert scale to rate four teacher

practices, a Perceived Self Determination scale, and a course value scale. The study concluded

that perspective-taking, understanding the feelings and perspective of another person, and

providing choice were rated high as autonomy supportive practices. Additionally, students

perceived autonomy experience led to students evaluating their course as having more usefulness

in their lives.

Patall, et al.s (2013) conclusion states that teachers providing choice subsumes other

rated practices and remains a strong independent variable that relates to students autonomy
 19

needs. Included were citations of many studies which concluded that teacher strategies were

supportive of students experience of autonomy, and listed the following teacher strategies to this

end:

listen carefully and assume students perspectives;

structure activities around students interests and personal preferences;

identify the value, usefulness, importance, or relevance of activities;

use non-controlling language;

elicit questions and feedback from students;

encourage students to express negative affect;

provide opportunities for students to work in their own way;

provide opportunities for making choices (p. 15).

These are considered teacher behaviors and in this project I am considering them

strategies and practices as well.

Patall, et al.s (2013) study was strong and inclusive. Many studies were cited to support

its findings. This study will inform my project in that teacher participants will be introduced to

an autonomy supportive motivation teaching style (AMS).

The question of whether or not it was possible to teach pre-service teachers to be more

supportive of student autonomy, regardless of their personality characteristics, was investigated

by Reeve (1998). Reeves two-component experiment tested whether certain personalities would

approach student motivation differently and whether this style was malleable. Could teachers

with a controlling motivational style (CMS) change to an autonomy supportive motivational

style (ASMS) through exposure to literature and a structured how-to training booklet?
 20

He defined an autonomy supporting teacher as one who ...encourages students to pursue

self-determined agendas and then supports students initiatives and intrinsic motivation (p.312).

His experiment included 142 participants, male and female in all levels of education separated

into three groups: a controlling oriented group, an autonomy oriented group, and a control group.

He posed two research questions: 1) do the teachers personality characteristics determine

their motivating style (ASMS or CMS), and 2) can pre-service teachers with a CMS be taught to

use a more autonomy supportive motivational style?

The first research question investigated whether or not an autonomy oriented participant

would approach motivational problems in the classroom by supporting autonomy, and if a

control-oriented participant would use extrinsic rewards to support motivation. A Problems in

Schools questionnaire, posing eight vignettes, asked participants to choose a solution to the

problem posed in each. They were rated on a continuum as highly controlling (HC), moderately

controlling (MC), moderately autonomy supportive (MA), and highly autonomy supportive

(HA). A General causality orientation scale was used to investigate whether personalities with

autonomy oriented characteristics favored the ASMS while control-oriented participants with a

more controlling personality favored a CMS.

The second research question used a modified problems in schools questionnaire and a

post experimental questionnaire asking for reactions to the information in the training booklet.

The modified problems in schools questionnaire posed 12 vignettes with three possible

responses, each one representing a different orientation: autonomy, control, and impersonal, and

a post-experimental questionnaire. The hypothesis posed was that exposure to a structured

training booklet with a how-to section and clear, useful information influences pre-service
 21

teachers with a CMS to revise their style to a more ASMS, as compared to those that werent

given the training booklet with a how -to section.

Using three booklets, each one having information about a different motivational style;

ASMS or CMS and one neutral, the participants wrote essays after reading one of them. His

results suggested that ASMS is a teachable skill. A post experimental questionnaire, one month

later, with three new educational vignettes, showed change in those educators who might prefer a

controlling motivational teaching style (CMS). Elsewhere, Reeve and a colleague (Su and

Reeve, as cited in Patall, et al., 2013) reiterated Patall, et al.s (2013) finding that when teachers

are trained and taught to incorporate practices of an ASMS, they were rated higher by students in

autonomy supportive behavior.

A weakness here is that all classrooms are different and there is no literature alluded to in

terms of the success of a CMS, which in some cases may work better if not perfectly. Another

weakness was a lack of in-class training and observation with a mentor teacher for both students

and teachers.

This study relates to my project in that an ASMS should be taught in teacher training

workshops to both teachers already in the field and pre-service teachers. Giving the participants

practical steps to develop an ASMS with supporting current research citing the benefits for both

students and teachers is an important aspect in any professional development/teacher training

workshop. Participants will answer an online survey before attending the workshop to assess

their teaching style.

Reeve (1998) concluded that teachers can change their CMS to a more ASMS. But

teachers need innovative tools to step out of the rigid curricula with which they are presented.
 22

Innovative strategies can help implement an ASMS and promote student autonomy. A learning

tool that has been positively correlated with student autonomy and motivation is the three-part

European Language Portfolio (ELP), already utilized in Western and Eastern European

countries.

The ELP consists of three categories for students use; the Language Passport to display

the learners proficiency at a particular time, the Language Biography where students plan,

reflect on, and assess the process and progress of their language learning, and the Dossier which

is similar to a personal diary, where the student records their achievements and their language

experiences. The ELP engages students in their own learning through self-assessment and other

reflective activities.

Gonzalezs (2008) pilot project in Spain, involved teachers who took part in a training

course to evaluate the ELP and find ways to incorporate it in the class. The time frame was four

years in two adult language schools in Spain.

Four elements that were shown as important for incorporating the ELP into the classroom

were; ...programme (sic) integration, committed support of teachers and administrators, teacher

and student training, and clarification of status and purpose for the ELP (p.374). In the

Gonzalez pilot project, the aim was to address the four issues, evaluate whether or not the ELP

really helps students in their learning process, evaluate whether the pedagogical and reporting

functions are equally important, and find the best way to introduce the ELP as a pedagogical tool

inside the classroom. The ELP is supports learner autonomy with a wide range of language

learning activities. Not only is it used to record language learning experiences in school
 23

(formal), but it also encourages recording of informal (out of school) experiences with the target

language.

The ELP was categorized into age groups. The adult ELP was not designed for

classroom use specifically, but for adult language learners that might also be taken into a

classroom; therefore, teachers had to develop activities for the adult language classrooms

themselves. They incorporated these aims:

to raise the students awareness about the communicative nature of language

use, thus correcting misconceptions about the importance of grammar and

vocabulary as opposed to skills development;

to encourage self-assessment in each particular skill;

to help learners reflect on their short - and long-term objectives in terms of the

Common European Framework (CEF) levels;

to help them identify their personal ways of learning and the language

learning strategies they used, both inside and outside the classroom;

to enhance the students plurilingual (sic) and intercultural experiences

(p.374).

The first year was dedicated teacher training; learning how to work with the portfolio.

During the second year, the participating teachers were ready to use the portfolio. Half the

teachers used their own students, the other half volunteers. In this study, two types of

questionnaires were collected: teachers and students. Six questions for students resulted in a

very high evaluation of the portfolio.

 24

Overall, the students reported that they felt in control of their learning objectives and took

responsibility for their language experiences in and out of the classroom. Language assumptions

were changed in this study from students dependence on grammar and vocabulary to a stronger

commitment to communicative competence. As reported by the students, the use of the ELP

resulted in the realization that language learning was a lifelong process and increased student

autonomy.

Negative answers went to the reporting function of the portfolio due to its practicality, its

bulky form, impractical as something to bring to a job interview to prove language competence,

and too many repetitive forms to fill out. Teachers responded very positively and were

introduced, some for the first time, to the notion that language learning was an action-oriented

process (p.379). The last two years were spent finding solutions to the weaknesses in the

portfolio.

Gonzalez (2009) draws a parallel between an artists portfolio, which doesnt only

include their best output but represents development over time, and the ELP portfolio which

records language progress over a period of time. The ELP helps students develop goals, make

plans to reach those goals, record and change the process over time, as well as to develop self-

assessment and reflection. It is important to note that Gonzalezs study, which included other

languages as well as English, took place in Europe. One of the students highly ranked

statements was: It is important for every European citizen to learn at least two languages apart

from their own (p.378). This supports the importance of the learning context and the attitudes

toward language learning as being very influential to students motivation.

 25

This relates to my project in that the ELP portfolio increased the students experience of

autonomy. Their language learning was handed over to them. Gonzalez concludes that learner

autonomy was high in all areas, including reflection, decision-making, and action.

In a Turkish case study, Karababa and Suzer (2010) investigated the use of the ELP in the

classroom. Investigated were; the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threads (SWOT) of

the ELP in a particular pilot high school. The teachers were left to unravel the ELP and learn

how to incorporate it into their curricula on their own which they felt wasted a lot of time.

Therefore, much on-going teacher training has to accompany the process of changing any

pedagogical strategy. This supports my project in advocating ongoing professional development

for in-service teachers in order to learn the newest research supported strategies, as well as

assuming the role of mentor and trainer to novice teachers in the future. This aspect of changing

roles in education is one aspect of sustaining teacher motivation and career enhancement and

leads to the development of more expert teachers (Rodriguez and McKay, 2010).

The ELP supports Patall, et al.s (2013) research as a tool for teachers to provide

opportunities for students to work in their own way, and identify the value, usefulness,

importance, or relevance of activities (p.15). Students do not become autonomous learners by

simply being told to work alone. Kohonen (2000) states that teacher intervention is necessary in

order for students to learn skills, learn to become autonomous, and to acquire motivation. The

ELP allows for that opportunity supported by teacher participation.

Kohonen (2000) supports the ELP using can do concrete statements for reflective

purposes, starting with personal questions and followed by language learning process and

questions about language goals:

 26

What are your strengths as a student in school?

How do you see your role as a language learner?

What are your expectations for the language teacher? (p. 3).

What aims do you wish to set for this course?

What is a good group member like in your language class, why?

How might you improve your participation in your groups? (p.4).

These questions are clear and simply put and could be more detailed and complex

depending on the language level.

Kohonens (2000) article, Gonzalezs (2009) pilot study, and Karabara and Suzers

(2010) research resulted in positive effects for LLs using the ELP. Kohonen cited affective

changes in that LLs became very attached to their dossier and/or language diaries.

The Turkish teachers shared reflections on its use and found that it improves teacher and

student autonomy and motivation. But autonomy supportive teaching styles can be difficult for

certain personalities and Karabara and Suzer include that point in their results. Though Reeve

(1998) researched teachers ability to change their motivational teaching style with additional

teacher training, the Turkish study mentions that teachers who could not be part of a reflective

and processing teacher group who were considered non-democratic or non-cooperative (p.

16), were seen as threats. Non-cooperative administrators were also seen as threats to the

implementation of the ELP in Turkey. The Turkish study ended by stating that the ELP

applications ...offer life-long learning opportunities not only for learners but also for

practitioners (Karabara and Suzer, 2010, p.17).

 27

The studies in this framework support my project by illustrating the importance of

student/learner autonomy. Added to the research was the inclusion of teacher intervention to

enhance student autonomy. Students cannot adopt an autonomous learning style without

motivation or the skills to do so. Concurrently, teachers need training to understand the interplay

between motivation and student autonomy. Learning new and innovative strategies to support

student autonomy and motivation so that students are not left to flounder without guidance or

goals will be included in my workshop.

Collaborative/cooperative learning

Socio-cultural (collaborative) and constructivist (cooperative) theories have joined to

create a socio-constructivist theory on learning. Though there is a slight difference between

cooperative and collaborative learning, they can easily overlap. This is not an unfortunate event

since both are conducive to language learning classrooms. A brief differentiation is important to

keep teachers informed but not to lock them into thinking that one is better than the other or that

they cant be flexible with both approaches.

Collaborative learning, from Britain, was developed through English teachers findings

while these instructors were looking for strategies and a methodology to encourage students to

take a more active role in language learning. The methodology put students in teams to

...explore a significant question or a meaningful project (Disney as cited by Palmer, Peters, and

Streetman, 2003).

Cooperative learning was used in America and related to John Deweys philosophy of

the social nature of learning. It is a particular strand of collaborative work where the group, as
 28

well as the individual students in the group, are held accountable for achieving the goal (Palmer,

Peters, and Streetman, 2003).

David and Roger Johnsons (2012) definition of cooperative learning is very specific.

Cooperative learning, in their terms, consists of a group with a group goal and with a reward for

the entire group for the goals achieved. It is not, in its most formal terms, a group of students at

the same table working as independent units and talking to each other. It is a highly structured

endeavor managed by the teacher. The authors state specific conditions to be met for

cooperative learning to take place:

Clearly perceived positive interdependence;

Considerable promotive (face-to-face) interaction;

Clearly perceived individual accountability and responsibility to achieve the

groups goals;

Frequent use of the relevant interpersonal and small-group skills;

Frequent and regular group processing current functioning to improve the

groups future effectiveness (p.2).

The teacher is on the periphery and listens to the students explanations and

comprehension. Small group and whole class processing exist in cooperative learning. After

small group work, the teacher leads the whole class session and shares the results of their (the

teachers) observations. Cognitive and social development are considered products of this type

of learning model.

Collaborative learning is rooted in Vygotskys socio-cultural theories of motivation.

Intentional learning, engagement, engaged participation, and learning to participate as opposed

 29

to learning from participation, are part of the situative perspective and has implications for

motivation in the classroom (Hickey, 1991). Socio-cultural learning is implemented through

interaction, negotiation, and collaboration. An alternative model, the participation model of

cultural development (Lave and Wenger, 1991) also called communities of practice, was

established by Wenger and Lave (as cited by Wenger, 2006).

Oxford (1997) recognized three strands of communication or communicative strands

(p.1) in the language classroom: cooperative, collaborative, and interaction. Oxford stresses their

complementary roles. Cooperative equals a set of techniques to be used in the classroom that

creates interdependence between learners so as to develop cognitive and social traits.

Collaborative learning is a method of constructing knowledge within the social context of the

classroom which leads to creating a new culture; the learning community, and interaction relates

to ...language tasks, willingness to communicate, style differences, and group dynamics (p.1).

In this project collaborative and cooperative learning will be addressed.

A newer concept not fully investigated by empirical research, is to develop a third space

in the classroom. This is the combining of students primary (home, friends, social interactions),

and secondary (school, formal institutions) communicative language experiences to form a third

space. The third space is very applicable to the EFL classroom. Students prior knowledge and

language life experience would be brought into the language learning situation. Joining both

environments to construct the third space would create a rich source for language learning. This

innovative concept would be worth investigating through teacher workshops and action reserach.

As Brown (2007) and Lambert (1967) remarked, the EFL classroom is a totally different learning

climate for students, and I might add, teachers.

 30

Communities of practice have three characteristics: (a) the domain, (b) the community,

and (c) the practice. The domain consists of a shared interest which is easily applied to any

classroom (Wenger, 2006). For the purposes of this project, the domain would consist of

English. The community consists of classmates as well as the teacher, and the practice is to

develop communicative competence. Wenger is clear that shared practice is long and sustained

and not consisting of short term interactions. Language learning, a long and sustained practice,

fits this definition. Swains (as cited in Ryoo, 2009) current research changed the initial concept

of output to collaborative dialogue. As with third space, teachers would have to participate in

teacher development workshops, since cooperative learning transforms the teachers role from a

leadership position to learning facilitator with a more autonomy supportive motivational style

(ASMS). This informs the teacher development segment of my project in that developing an

ASMS needs instruction and guidance especially for teachers who feel more comfortable in the

traditional roles. This type of learning situation level might not be comfortable for all teachers..

If teachers have a CMS and cant shift their perspective they would not be good candidates for

this type of teaching style. A point should be taken that new strategies do not have to be copied

exactly and could be manipulated to fit the teachers personalities.

Studies in non-Western settings resulted in positive results concerning collaborative

learning. Ryoo (2009) investigated how university level English learners co-constructed learning

experiences in small group interactions. The researcher focused on Language-Related Episodes

(LREs) that were embedded in learner interactions. An important factor was the context of the

study, which took place in an after school English discussion club on campus where members

came and went at will and were constantly changing. Gaps were evident in the levels of

proficiency. All participants were voluntary members and there was no homework, teacher, or
 31

classroom climate but the target group was assigned a topic to discuss. Ryoos video-taped

qualitative study showed that the helper/helped roles were negotiated and alternated in the small

groups with no evidence of unidirectional help from the more advanced learner. This allowed for

all students to feel competent and have a interactive role regardless of their communicative level.

The researcher concluded that the informal collaborative process was successful in supporting

learning, as well as supporting an outsider role of the teacher.

Similarly, student communities in EFL language academies are also constantly changing.

Some students come for only two weeks, while others stay six months or more. Ryoos study

also mimicked the problem of the imperfect system of assigning students to a proper level

resulting in variations of proficiency in each class. An important observation about this study

was its success outside of a classroom setting, since this study would probably not be possible in

a Korean classroom where educational constraints are very strong. Therefore, the choice of

another learning context was appropriate and supported collaborative learning while showing the

flexibility of collaborative and interaction strategies.

Weger-Guntharp (2008) researched students studying English as a Global Language

(EGL) in her quantitative study and surveyed English activities preferences which resulted in a

marked preference for talking in pairs and classroom discussions. Though she did not discuss

collaborative learning as a theoretical framework, her research suggests that her participants

preference was working with each other. Her dissertation narrowed the gap in the literature in

terms of classroom research and activity preferences among foreign students living temporarily

in the United States and studying English as a Global Language in an Intensive English Program

(IEP).
 32

Vrionis (2011) study consisted of participants who were taught by alternating

approaches, both lecture and collaborative. Her research studied the effects of the lecture

approach versus the cooperative learning approach. The results concluded that the cooperative

learning style does as well, and in some instances, better than the lecture approach. Higher

achievement students exhibited no difference and Vrionis assumption was that higher achieving

students knew how to achieve very well in the traditional approach. A very important follow up

survey showed that almost all the students in the study preferred collaborative learning with the

goal of achieving communicative competence.

All the studies in this category inform my project in terms of designing collaborative

activities for students. Weger-Guntharps (2008) research in particular was pivotal for my

project due to the pedagogical implications of the student survey showing a preference for

talking in pairs and classroom discussions. In addition, the research is particularly relevant to

my project because the participants were the same population that I am targeting: EFL students

who come to the United States to live temporarily to study English.

Teacher motivation

It has been stated that there exists a clear interaction between teacher enthusiasm and

learner motivation (Day, 2004; Wild, Enzzle, and Hawkins, 1992; Patrick, Hisley and Kemply,

2000; as cited in Dornyei, and Ushioda, 2011). As Czikszentmihalyi (as cited in Bradley, 2010)

contends: The best way to get students to believe that it makes sense to pursue knowledge is to

believe in it oneself (p.72).

Researchers (Dornyei and Ushioda, 2011; Dornyei, 2003; Schaefer, 2010) have noted that

teacher motivation has been very much ignored in empirical LA research, and that there is an
 33

important gap in the literature warranting future investigation. This project will focus on the

intrinsic motivation factors, personality characteristics of EFL teachers, and interaction between

motivating teaching strategies and teacher and student motivation.

Johnson (as cited in Suslu, 2006) listed three theories of teacher motivation: a) equity

theory, b) expectancy theory, and c) job enrichment theory. Equity theory explains that teachers

will be unmotivated due to unfair treatment for their efforts. Expectancy theory explains teacher

motivation as a result of expecting a reward, bonus, or promotion, and job enrichment theory

calls for varied and challenging work which in turn makes teachers more productive (NAEN

report, as cited in Suslu, 2006).

Positive and negative external factors can influence a teachers motivation. Pelletier,

Legault, and Levesque, (2002) report a negative influence on teacher motivation due to their

accountability for their students behavior and achievement level, being compared to other

teachers and their teaching styles and being encouraged to adopt those styles, after school time

demands by the administration, and not being allowed to be autonomous in their own

classrooms.

According to Dornyei (2001), teachers optimal context should include:

the schools general climate and the existing school norms;

the class sizes, the school resources and facilities;

the standard activity structure within the institution;

collegial relations;

the definition of the teachers role by colleagues and authorities;

general expectations regarding student potential;

 34

the schools reward contingencies and feedback system; the schools

leadership and decision-making structure (p. 161).

Yau (2010) and Dornyei agree that extrinsic motivation also includes the possibility of

career advancement. Expanding and enhancing teachers roles increase teacher motivation. To

this effect, both Dornyei (2001) and Rodriguez and McKay (2010) include the importance of

teachers facilitating teacher-training workshops, developing new courses, giving conference

presentations, developing curriculum, teaching higher level courses, mentoring, engaging in

classroom-level experimentation, and becoming involved in activities to increase and enhance

their knowledge and skills. Similar to student motivation, both intrinsic and extrinsic types of

motivation belong in the discussion.

The concept of teacher motivation was an integral part of Bernaus, et al.s (2008) study in

Catalonia, Spain. It was one of the first studies in which I found this variable highlighted. The

researchers added that without this variable--teacher motivation...investigating strategy alone is

useless (p.29). This study gave me the impetus to look for studies highlighting, and even

exclusively focusing on, teacher motivation in EFL.

In this study, the class was the unit of analysis (p.25) because it is where the views of

the teachers and students come together (p.29). This corresponds to the principles referred to in

both Sterns and Dunkin and Biddles studies (as cited in Madrid et al., 1993).

Both the teachers and students rated perceived strategy use--12 innovative and 14

traditional. Teachers additionally completed a 12 point teacher motivation questionnaire amd

students answered the mini-AMTB survey. Correlations were made between the students

perceptions of both types of strategies and English achievement and the teachers perceptions of
 35

strategy use and English achievement. As in Dornyei and Csizers (1998) study, the teachers

were asked to use a Likert scale to rate the frequency of strategy us. There was a positive

correlation between high student perception and achievement; however, the teachers high

perception of a strategy use did not have the same results. Unfortunately the strategy use was not

directly investigated. One conclusion that supports my project is the finding that classes that

scored high on the mini-AMTB had a positive correlation with high teacher motivation, and that

teacher motivation was positively correlated with using motivating teaching strategies.

The Teacher Motivation Questionnaire was limited to only twelve items. Out of the

twelve items, three items ranked the educational authorities and the director which, in my

opinion, confused the findings. I would have preferred two different questionnaires: one for the

teachers personally, and one about the educational authorities and the director. I felt the

questions concerning the teachers ranking the authorities and director wasnt a necessary part of

the questionnaire since the class was the unit of analysis. True to Gardners historical research,

this study included an individual student variable--integrative motivation, but the researchers

conceded that teacher motivation can change the students attitudes towards the learning

situation and motivation.

Tardy and Snyder (2013) interviewed ten teachers who cited the importance of free

choice in teaching materials for the teachers own enthusiasm as well as their students, and

general teacher autonomy in the classroom. Tardy and Snyders participants worked in Turkey

and had a great deal of autonomy as well as the ability to design content-based, integrated skills

courses. The study researched if and when the teachers experienced flow, a term coined by

Csikszentmihalyi (as cited by Tardy and Snyder, 2013). The teachers responses related to the

interaction between themselves and students in the classroom, a perspective that resonates with
 36

Bernaus, et al.s (2008) unit of analysis; the classroom, ...where teacher and student views come

together (p.29), Sterns presage variables; the teachers and learners characteristics that

influence the process variables, and Dunkin and Biddles process variables; teachers and

students classroom behavior in the classroom (as cited in Madrid et al., 1993).

One important consideration out of Tardy and Snyders exploration was the importance

of not just taking the teachers experience of flow as correctly assessing the students experience.

The teachers might be experiencing it and projecting it on the students. Projection of the

teachers experience could result in inexperienced teachers thinking that learning is going on

when in reality it isnt. This is an important point calling for interviews with students as to their

flow experience. Often, teachers can be very perceptive in their evaluation of their class. This

refers to the idea of the necessary structure for cooperative learning. Students talking around a

table in a group might not constitute learning, Therefore assessment, either through discussion or

comprehension questions, is crucial.

Tardy and Snyders study considers the implication of the flow experience in teacher

development programs. The process of reflection, exploration, being able to be articulate about

their work, and to be able to identify peak moments and become more aware of how to create

flow in the classroom, has already become a component of teacher education in Bilkent

University, Ankara, Turkey.

The last study in this category is a masters thesis by Yau (2010) investigating EFL

teachers motivation in New Zealand. The context of this study was important since it was one

that involved a language school, while all other studies contexts were junior high schools, high

schools, or universities. Yaus study highlights the gap in literature concerning EFL teachers
 37

motivation. Yau admitted that her study was inconclusive as to her original hypothesis--to

determine the degree of teacher motivation/de-motivation--but did provide insights into what

was important for teachers to sustain and nurture their motivation. Listed were (a) more

professional development, workshops or training courses, (b) encouragement to pursue higher

education and advanced degrees or ESL training, (c) autonomy at work and related to the

curriculum, (d) professional training that would support them to experiment and create parallel

strategies within the confines of work and the curriculum, (e) awareness of the need for self-

motivation (this included self reflection), developing relationships with students, and (f)

reduction of isolation through collaboration between colleagues in and out of the classroom.

This study pertains to my workshop in that it supports professional development,

workshops, and training courses to motivate teachers. Yaus study supports my project in that

the workshop creates a structure to address his findings through professional development.

Taken as a whole these studies support my projects inclusion of teacher motivation in

order that teachers understand the components that support teacher motivation. With teachers

awareness as to what supports their motivation, approaching school administrators with concrete

suggestions as to the requirements for teacher motivation might result in philosophical and

pedogogical changes in their schools. Teacher motivation has a place in educational research,

and in this project, EFL educational research. Without motivated teachers students will not get

the benefit of long term dedicated expert teachers.

Summary

This literature review supports the premise that student motivation and autonomy,

motivational teaching strategies, and teacher motivation comprise the foundational trilogy of
 38

language learning. The research in this literature review supports my project in that teachers can

be trained to implement strategies to increase student motivation and autonomy. The literature

review presents evidence that motivating strategies increase both teachers, and students

motivation. I propose that motivation training should start with teachers, independent of

students.

Brown (2007) and Bernaus et al (2008) concur that language learning is different from

learning other subjects, since language learning also includes learning a culture, as well as

incorporating the whole students past and present identities, and a possible future one. In order

to expand students orientation to language learning beyond the classroom, particular attitudes

and projections need to take place, and more often this is the job of the teacher. The literature

review encompasses research highlighting what helps develop a motivating language teacher.

Ellis (2008) stated: There is a wealth of literature examining the role of motivation in second

language (L2) learning but remarkably little research that has examined how teachers can foster

motivation in the classroom (p.108).

It has been concluded that there is a clear interaction between teacher enthusiasm and

learner motivation (Day, Wild, Enzzle, and Hawkins; Patrick, Hisley and Kemply (as cited in

Dornyei, and Ushioda, 2011). My project focuses on developing a pilot workshop/mini seminar

using two motivational strategies: cooperative/collaborative learning, and teacher behaviors and

teaching strategies that support learner autonomy. I chose cooperative/collaborative learning due

to the fact that speaking to others involves eye contact, something that in a group format occurs

naturally, rather than looking only at the teacher. Without this eye contact, or relatedness,

language learning remains a mechanical operation.

 39

This project aligns with Gardners statement that without motivation all other attributes

are insignificant. In order for language teachers to motivate their students, and not depend on

students intrinsic motivation, educators would benefit in understanding the uniqueness of

language learning and how teachers behaviors, teaching strategies, autonomy, and beliefs could

impact language learning motivation and learner autonomy.

 40

Chapter III - The Project and Its Development

Description of the Project

This workshop is designed to provide a forum for experienced (two-five years) EFL

teachers of adult (16-61 years old) learners in language academies in the United States. These

specific language learners live here temporarily on student visas. Some of these adult students

will be attending university, others will go back to their countries and career, and still others are

learning as part of lifelong learning goals.

Where most teacher development focuses on pre-service teachers, research has noted the

importance of lifelong professional development for experienced teachers (Zeichner and Noffke,

as cited in Rodriguez and McKay, 2010). Research in professional development for experienced

EFL teachers is scarce. To maintain teacher engagement and motivation throughout a teaching

career requires keeping abreast of, and open to, new research supporting the implementation of

innovative strategies. Professional development for experienced teachers can contribute to

teachers becoming experts in the EFL classroom (Rodriquez and McKay, 2010).

In this workshop, participants will reflect on their own teaching styles and strategies.

Each session will open with a questionnaire which will afford the participants an opportunity to

evaluate different aspects of their beliefs and practices toward language learning teaching.

Participants will be introduced to a brief overview of two language learning motivational

theories; supporting student autonomy as a motivational strategy, and collaborative learning as a

motivational strategy. An awareness of language learning motivation research will support these

motivating teaching strategies. Also included in the workshop will be a session on teacher

motivation in the EFL classroom.

 41

This workshop consists of three Saturday mornings, 9:00 am - 1:00pm, with the first day

beginning at 8:30 am. Each Saturday workshop has three sessions: (a) two hands-on activities,

using research supported motivational strategies that teachers can recreate or adapt as needed, (b)

a unit of theoretical information concerning the motivational strategies learned in the workshop,

and (c) teacher reflections on the workshop activities, including examination of teaching styles

and strategies as well as questions of implementation.

A pre, during, and post-session evaluations or questionnaires will be used for self-

reflection. Participants will be asked to write up an evaluation after each session to be sent via

email to the facilitator. Post-workshop online questionnaires are requested to be submitted a

month after the workshop.

Participants are registered online. A Gmail community email account will be set up for

participants.

Development of the Project

I have been teaching ESL for almost twenty years, during which I have also been a

language learner. Therefore, I have watched the motivation cycles of my students over a period

of time, and also experienced my own cycles of motivation. Firstly, I will discuss my own

experiences of language learning and motivation. I have experienced integrative orientation in

motivation during two different language learning experiences: Hebrew and Spanish.

My first exposure to the Hebrew language was while I was living in New York City, in

the 1970s, during the burgeoning art scene in SOHO. At that time, as a painter, I was meeting

many international artists. The work that was most interesting to me was that of Israeli artists

who had recently arrived to the United States. I loved their work, openness, and culture. I did
 42

not attempt to learn Hebrew, but I was definitely part of a target language community.

Serendipitously, I met an American artist who was going to Israel to do an art project. I went as

her assistant and stayed in Israel for almost ten years.

Hebrew is intimately tied to the religious and cultural identity of Israel. In the late 19th

century it began to be revised as a spoken language, and is now considered the national language

of Israel. Two days after you arrive, natives will ask you why you arent speaking Hebrew. As

Israel is mostly made up of immigrants, they strive for acculturation through language very

aggressively. The government offers, either free, or partially subsidized language programs call

ulpanim. These are taught by native speakers in Hebrew. There were also easy Hebrew

newspapers and special radio newscasts for beginners.

I had never had an interest in learning Hebrew, but now the opportunity to learn a new

language inside the culture was very attractive. At that time innovative teaching approaches

werent used, but the teachers were extremely animated and invested. There wasnt a grading

system nor was there an academic orientation. Even though we did use textbooks, the classes

were never boring. I can say I learned to speak intermediate, non-academic Hebrew, but do not

read, as that was not my focus. Speaking English with other Americans in Israel, as well as with

English speaking Israelis (the majority), was still minimized by living among the target language

population. The majority of speaking and listening was still in Hebrew. As expected, after

returning to the United States, my language skills have diminished. When I returned here, I

wasnt motivated to continue learning in an American classroom setting, which paled alongside

the dynamic experience that I had had.

 43

My next language challenge was Spanish. I began to learn Spanish six years ago while

teaching ESL. Again, I experienced integrative orientation. I enjoyed my South American

students and became very close with some of them. I started studying Spanish in a small

language academy in Berkeley, and I worked extremely hard, though I did not have a non student

target language community. I listened to as much Latin music as possible, and in contrast with

my experience learning Hebrew, I discovered Spanish language literature. Since 2007, I have

only been reading Spanish language literature, but again in contrast with my experience learning

Hebrew, I cannot really function in the language since I never had an opportunity to live with the

target language community. My life in California does not expose me to a Spanish speaking

immigrant population, and of course, I do not want to speak Spanish in my ESL classes. I still

read extensively, and study intermittently. I have an excellent passive vocabulary due to the

literature, but remain tongue tied. I am anticipating some time living in a Spanish speaking

community outside the United States.

In terms of my own motivation, in this case I will speak about Spanish. I see that my

motivation wanes without a target community, until I find another Spanish language novel to

read. Therefore, I would consider that I have created an imagined community (Pavlenko and

Norton, 2007) for myself through the world of books. I have even extended that community

back to 1492 when the Jews were expelled from Spain. This imaginary seed does not remain

unexplored. My father, tall, dark, and handsome has Latin features, though the family that I knew

was from Russia. His last name, Urdang, resembles that of the Prince of Spain who by all

accounts is Basque, with the name Urdangarin. I am now in the process of trying to prove my

Sephardic roots in order to get a passport from Spain through a right to return program. One

cannot get more of an imagined community, and it continues to grow with Spanish language
 44

movies, attempts at listening to the Spanish radio broadcasts, T.V. news, and special language

learning podcasts and programs on YouTube and other sites.

My experience suggests that motivation can, though this can be more difficult, exist

without a physical target community. This situation results in a longer term commitment to

fluency since cycles of contact with the target language community are less available and less

consistent. The language learner has to be aggressively motivated to seek opportunities to be in

contact with the target language, and doesnt necessarily experience any extrinsic or instrumental

rewards. The place of the imagination and the L2 possible or ideal selves contribute greatly to

this type of motivation.

My concern with motivation started with watching my ESL students in San Francisco.

These students, not all young, had taken time out of their studies, work, and family lives to come

to an expensive, intensive language program. It was easy for the short term students, 2 weeks to

1 month; the excitement was maintained with new goals and dreams, friendships, and travel. It

was more problematic to watch the long term students 3 months to 6 months. I would like to talk

about two particular students: a very motivated long term Korean student and his characteristics,

and a less motivated student, also Korean. Both were long term, one still here, and the other

leaving after 6 months.

The first student, I will call him Double S, came to class not being able to speak at all, but

testing very high in reading and grammar. His motivation, high at the beginning, continued to

grow throughout his stay. He took every opportunity to connect to cultural events in San

Francisco, and tried not to socialize with other Korean students, even though he didnt have an

extensive target language community. He came to live with me, in Berkeley, after 8 months of
 45

studying, he moved from level 3 to 5. I became a home-stay mother, which enabled me to

observe him even more. When he came to live with me, I offered to buy rice, asked him what tea

he liked, and tried to make him feel comfortable with some familiar food. He adamantly refused

any food that he would eat in Korea, no tea, no rice, telling me he was American now. He

started to study at a Berkeley English school, connected with volunteer conversation partners

from UC Berkeley, and has connected to a new target language community. He studies every

night, religiously.

The second Korean student, I will call N.J., continuously skipped classes, slept in class,

and never did homework. He was very intelligent and had a very high language aptitude. He

made many presentations in class, and revealed that he had idolized American culture but after

being here, he realized it wasnt so special. He did progress quite a bit but didnt make any

effort nor did he have interest in connecting to the target language community. He left after 6

months and is very happy to be back in his country.

In addition to contributing to my interest in motivation, my observations as a language

teacher and language learning student have led me to believe that English shouldnt necessarily

or automatically be associated with the U.S., and should instead, be considered a foreign

language. The term ESL should be reconsidered as well. English might not be learners second

language. Though immigrants have to use it every day to function in the larger community, in

their private lives they might not speak English. They might consider English as only a means to

survive in their new societal environment. Many English LLs might only use English to function

in the larger, more public English-speaking sphere, for example, in the business community or

their childrens school community. The desire to relate and be part of a target language
 46

community is a very personal decision, sometimes not chosen but dictated by economic, social,

political, or personal.

The Project

This workshop will include activities, discussion and reflection concerning teacher and

student motivation in the language learning classroom, specifically the EFL learning situation.

This workshop is intended for twelve in service EFL teachers with a minimum of two to five

years experience. Experienced teachers have different professional development needs, and

educators who strive for expertise are interested in professional development over the span of

their careers (Zeichner & Noffke, as cited in Rodriguez and McKay, 2010). The question of

long-term career satisfaction and expertise, which in terms of this project includes motivation,

was investigated by Huberman (as cited in Rodriguez and McKay 2010) and outlined three

actions contributing to the above (a) shifting roles, (b) engaging in classroom-level

experimentation, and (c) participating in activities that challenge their skills and knowledge base

(p.4). Wallace (as cited in Rodriguez and McKay, 2010) includes (1) reflection, and (2) the

chance to apply theory and research to practice. This workshop will incorporate (c) participating

in activities that challenge their skills and knowledge base, and Wallaces taxonomy; (1)

reflection, and (2) a chance to apply theory and research to practice (as cited in Rodriguez and

McKay, 2010, p.4).

 47

The following checklist includes the set-up, resources, and materials necessary to create

an environment conducive to the goals of this workshop.

Implementation Checklist:

A smart classroom for facilitator demonstrations,

A room for at least 13 people;

Four round tables with 13 chairs;

Self reflective diary samples;

Questionnaires;

A notebook for participants to engage in self-reflective diaries;

Three laptops;

Large white board and marker;

Nametags;

Activity materials;

Readers

Coffee, tea, water, pastries, cheese, crackers, fruit.

First Saturday begins at 8:30am. Continuing Saturday workshops: 9-1:00pm.

Participants:

In service teachers with two to five years experience in the field. Limit 10

participants.
 48

Goals:

The goals of this workshop series are

to introduce participants to research supported motivational strategies in EFL

teaching,

to share ideas, techniques, and approaches for classroom motivation,

to expand the participants knowledge base to achieve their EFL teaching

goals,

to increase teachers awareness of their own motivation and how it impacts

on their students motivation in the classroom,

to introduce participants to hands on activities as an experiential component

to self reflection as a tool to aid in their understanding, professional growth,

and recording of the EFL classrooms challenges.

Objective:

The objective of this workshop is to increase the in service teachers/participants

knowledge base and contribute to the process of creating expert teachers in the EFL field. This

workshop is intended for in-service EFL teachers in the United States with two to five years

experience and who work with adults (16-61 years old).

Pre Workshop Activities:

Prior to the workshop:

Participants will be referred to the Grasha-Riechmann online teaching style.

survey (see S-1) which will be answered at home and discussed in the first

session.
 49

Participants have picked up the assigned reader at Copy Central.

Suggested reading: Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom by Zoltan

Dornyei (2001).

A MOTIVATING WORKSHOP:

MOTIVATING EFL STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

Objective Strategy Topic Learning/ Assessment

training
activity
1 Exploring the
benefits of Facilitator-led Full group
Teachers will be able to including an Specific Discussion of discussion,
assess their teaching autonomy Autonomy an ASMS reflection
styles. supportive teaching supportive vs. a and
(in groups of three). style. teaching CMS evaluation
Facilitator will group Using the handouts behaviors. of teaching
different teaching styles as an outline,, Question: Do styles.
in groups. groups of three will (see Appendix you want to
have a free form pp.4-5) be an expert Session
Discussion (see discussion to open teacher? evaluation
Appendix pp.1-2). up the topic. (see Appendix (see
(see Appendix p.3) p.6) supplement
pp.8-10)
2 Talk about
something
Wheres Your new,
Teachers will have a Center? Using Google interesting,
Participatory or
strategy to Maps street
approach/ surprising,
challenge Individuals views
that you
preconceptions of Bringing forth prior will introduce students take learned
students from other themselves us to their
knowledge. about your
countries, and increase through hometown if classmates
student relatedness and describing desired, or culture.
social/group cohesion. their home somewhere in Participants
(Small group work). country. their country will expand
. that they like. their
intercultural
knowledge.
 50

Discussion:
3 In small groups; Seating, Facilitator How do
analyze a scenario Guidelines leads you think
Teachers will be that presents a (see Appendix summary/ of that you
introduced to teachers dilemma pp. 16-17) benefits and might
Cooperative and propose ways Teaching drawbacks of implement
Learning(CL) and to help this teacher. guides, CL and CLB CL and
collaborative learning learning CLB in
(CLB) (see Appendix Rules/structure your
pp.7-9) (see Appendix . classroom?
THEORY pp.10-15) Evaluation
(see
Supplement
pp. 36-27)
4a
Teachers will take Prediction Only a few
Participants will be able part in And then?? minutes of
Comprehension
Cooperative teacher
to articulate the main Listening
Learning activity. observation
purpose and advantages (group and Speaking during each
individual students class
of cooperative learning
accountability) session can
and their relationship to Group A Working provide
helpful
students motivation. together insight into
Open-ended stories students'
abilities
and
growth.

4b Listening, Only a few

Teachers will take Speaking. minutes of
Participants will be able part in Making sense Group observation
Collaborative negotiation; during each
to articulate the main
learning activity. of the skills, planning class
purposes and and completing
(group session can
advantages of group activity.
accountability) newspaper Each student provide
collaborative learning Group B helpful
must be
and their relationship to responsible for insight into
students motivation. Jigsaw activity their work in students'
order that the abilities
group reach its and
goal. growth.
.
 51

5
Facilitator led Teachers
What kinds of Benefits of will be able
Teachers summary/
activities can Student to
will be able to discussion on
summarize
support student autonomy
summarize the main learner the main
autonomy? findings
findings of research autonomy
regarding
regarding student
student
(see Appendix
autonomy in a language autonomy
pp.19-24)
learning classroom. in language
learning.
THEORY UNIT

6
Role playing Participants Pairs are Document
Dont worry theyre
Two participants will conduct being your
learning! supported to process
are teachers using their own pair
Autonomy supportive be with
ASMS teaching work autonomous Your
activity
style. discussion and with reflective
Participants will apply facilitator journal
Remaining fill out the
the elements of modeling (see
participants are in appropriate ASMS supplement
structure and ASMS to
pairs form (see behavior(see p. 14)
construct an autonomy
Appendix Evaluation
Appendix
supportive activity. p.4) (see
p.24) Supplement
pp.38-39)

7 Have you ever Learner Adapting a Participant

heard of a language portfolio to fit will be able
autonomy in your teaching to
The English learning portfolio?
the language context. understand
Language Portfolio SHOW ELP How would the basic
VIDEO learning you design a structure of
(ELP) language the ELP and
classroom portfolio? its
Model Discussion follows
(see Appendix Examples of application
THEORY UNIT portfolio pages to their own
pp.25-29)
(see Appendix classrooms
pp. 30-33)
 52

8
Survey: are you Why is it Facilitator led Participants
Teacher will be able
motivated in your
motivation=Teacher important to be summary/ to
autonomy =Student teaching?
summarize
motivation =student a motivated Discuss, on
Constructing the main
autonomy
teacher autonomy teacher teacher advantages
THEORY UNIT of teachers
(see Appendix motivation. motivation
pp.34-36) and
Teacher autonomy
autonomy,
Teacher motivation and their
effect on
Student autonomy
students
Student motivation motivation.
..

9 (Supp.51-57)
Participants
Outlining strategies Talking about will begin
planning your
to plan a
for developing own
Final wrap up: workshop
workshop.
your own Starting your concerning
local their needs
Contextualizing the
workshops. professional and wants
workshop Planning your development in order to
How? group. stay on the
own workshop
path of
What? Student
surveys for becoming
Where? participants an expert
use in their teacher.
Why? own Beginning
classrooms draft will
Who? and action end this
research.
workshop
When?
(see
Supplement Evaluation
pp.40-48) (see
Supplement
pp.57-59)
 53

Day One

First Hello: (8:30-9:00).

Facilitator will introduce him/herself by giving a brief background of key points to be

covered in this workshop: (a) why he/she became an EFL teacher, and his/her beliefs about

language learning, (b) some of his/her teaching challenges over the years, (c) how his/her

teaching has changed over the span of their career, and why, and (c) why he/she decided to offer

this teacher development workshop concerning motivational strategies and teacher motivation.

All around introductions will follow with coffee or tea.

Why are you here? /What do you expect? (9:00-9:30)

Group format: Teachers will informally discuss their reason for coming to the workshop.

Disclosure will be up to each individual. Everything said in the workshop will be held

confidential by participants.

Facilitator will outline the planned topics and evaluation process and introduce the

reflective journal process assigned as ongoing homework.

Facilitator will go over the reader with the participants to familiarize them with the

contents corresponding to the workshop sessions (not a detailed explanation).

Participants will answer preliminary questionnaire. (see Appendix A1)

Developing a self reflective practice: Guideline for workshop evaluation: Guidelines for

reflective diary keeping (see Appendix B1-10).

Self reflective writing will support the participants ability to process the strategies and

theory content in the workshop in a more focused and conscious manner

 54

Facilitator will go over the reader with the participants to familiarize them

with the contents corresponding to the workshop sessions (not a detailed

explanation).

Participants will answer preliminary questionnaire

Developing a self reflective practice: Guideline for workshop evaluation:

Guidelines for reflective diary keeping (see Supplemental material pp.12-20)

Self reflective writing will support the participants ability to process the strategies and theory

content in the workshop in a more focused and conscious manner.

Session 1: (9:30-10:30) Assessing your teaching style

Objective: Teachers will reflect and identify their teaching style. Discussion based on the online

teaching style survey. What are the classroom challenges to incorporating a more autonomy

supportive motivational teaching style? Do you want to incorporate a more autonomy supportive

motivational style into your practice? At the end of this unit teachers will understand the

difference between the different teaching styles

Instruction needed: Facilitator will introduce research that supports student autonomy and the

benefits for teachers and students in adopting an autonomy supportive motivational teaching

style.

Challenge: Teachers might be attached to a more controlling motivational teaching style due to

their teaching contexts. This sessions goal is only to share the information without any coercion
 55

on the facilitators part. Hopefully these teachers will experience a shift, however small after

doing some of the hands on activities.

Activity: The workshop facilitator will provide a summary of the theoretical review on an

autonomy supportive motivational style that supports intrinsic motivation, versus a more

controlling motivational style that supports extrinsic motivation. The facilitator and participants

will review results of the take home survey. Facilitator will pose general questions concerning

motivation. This workshop will not categorically highlight one motivational teaching style as

exclusively better than the other.

The participants will discuss the results of their first online survey, completed online

prior to the workshop. Participants share what style they were assigned in the survey. A group

discussion will follow with a handout of related questions as a discussion guide.

Some examples are (a) why do you think you developed that style, (b) did you choose

that style, and (c) are you happy teaching with that style? (45 minutes)

15 minute break (10:45-11:00)

Session 2: (11-11:45) Traveling through the classroom. Wheres the center of your map?

Objective: To challenge preconceptions and stereotypes of classmates and increase students

relatedness and social/group cohesion.

Instruction needed: Facilitator explains and demonstrates how to use Google maps/street views.

http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/
 56

Challenge: Some countries, for example, Saudi Arabia, does not allow Google maps. There are

only tourist type stock views available. This has to be addressed in the workshop since there are

many Saudi students in EFL programs in this country.

Activity: Participants will be in three groupstwo groups will have three participants, one

group will have four. The participant will count off (1, 2, 3), and all participants with the same

numbers will form a small learning community. Each participant will introduce their home state

or country. Members of the group will share their impressions about each members locale,

things they know, what they think it might look like, or stereotypes about the place or people.

One designated member will write down all the statements. Using Google maps street views, a

participant will take us to their native cities, countries, streets, schools, etc. and share information

with their classmates/colleagues (this according to comfort level). Each participant has 6-8

minutes on the computer. Participants will talk about their locale (45 minutes).

Post activity evaluation: Participants have time to write their thoughts down about the activity

in private. Facilitator has a suggestion box where participants anonymously and privately put

their evaluations, suggestions, and critiques of the activity.

15 minute break (11:45-12:00).

Session 3: (12:00-12:45) Cooperative and Collaborative Learning Theory overview: Rules and

structure of collaborative learning classrooms.

Activity: Facilitator led discussion. After the activity participants will be able to answer:

What are the defining criteria of cooperative learning and how they can be met.

What has research shown regarding the effectiveness of cooperative learning?

 57

How should cooperative learning groups/teams be formed?

How can individual contributions to team projects be assessed and taken into account in grading?

What skills are required to work effectively in groups? How can students be equipped with those

skills and how can teams be prepared to function more effectively?

What forms might student resistance to cooperative learning take and how might the resistance

be minimized or possibly eliminated?

Objective: Participants will be introduced to cooperative learning research in order to support

its implementation in the EFL classroom.

Instruction needed: Facilitator will lead a mini seminar on theory with the appropriate handouts

and discussion.

Challenge: Putting students in groups before they have time to get acquainted as a whole class

might not produce good results. Students might need time to create a class environment for a

few weeks in the beginning of the term before collaborative learning begins. The teacher needs

time to know the students before assigning teams.

Teachers might have to incorporate support from the administration. They might not be

allowed to change the traditional seating arrangement in their schools and might be de-motivated

to even consider the possibility. Schools might be equipped with single person school desks, or

too small classrooms, teachers will have to improvise a variation of the seating and be creative in

the arrangements. Chaos might erupt in the classroom the first few times the system is utilized

causing teachers to give up too fast. Learning a new system demands more preparation and

planning. Do you want to do that at this stage of your career, do you think its worth the effort?
 58

Post activity evaluation.

5 minute break (12:45-12:50)

Post workshop activity (12:50-1:00): Written evaluation of the activity.

Written evaluation of the days activities

Facilitator will handout list with references for further reading on all the topics discussed

during the workshops.

Ongoing Homework:

The participants will also be asked to journal/keep a diary independently at their own

pace during the week between each Saturday workshops. Did you change any of your teaching

behaviors, activities? Did you try something new, if not, why, if so how did it feel? Did your

school know what you were doing, did you tell them?

The Gmail community account is available for interactive discussions, but teachers are

encouraged to write independently about their own teaching context.

 59

Day Two

Check-in: (9-9:30) Participants will discuss their teaching week and their experiences with

incorporating, or not, the workshop strategies and why (30 minutes). (Coffee and Tea)

Room setup: (with restriction of workshop table possibilities) Participants are given four

examples of seating arrangements that are conducive to cooperative learning classrooms. The

participants are split into two groups by the facilitator. Each group decides on a new seating

arrangement that would fit the criteria of cooperative learning, and work in our workshop space.

The choices will be very limited due to the given constraints, but participants can get creative

and use chair seating to inform their choice. Each group explains their rationale as to why they

chose their seating plan. It could be as simple as that they liked it, or they wanted to try

something new, or they could see themselves teaching with that setup.

Session 1: (9:30-10:15) Adding suspense: (4a) Open ended stories, understanding the

newspaper: (4b) Newspaper activity.

Objective: Enhancing social interaction (speaking, and listening) through (4a) cooperative and

(4b) collaborative learning.

Instruction needed: Participants are split into two groups of six. Facilitator hands out copies of

open ended story to cooperative learning group (4a). The newspaper activity goes to the

collaborative learning second group (4b). Teacher walks around the room assesses as she/he

sees it.

Challenge: Some participants might not like a group structure, however small the group may be.

Participants will learn that in cooperative learning all students get a chance to give their ideas
 55

on the facilitators part. Hopefully these teachers will experience a shift, however small after

doing some of the hands on activities.

Activity: The workshop facilitator will provide a summary of the theoretical review on an

autonomy supportive motivational style that supports intrinsic motivation, versus a more

controlling motivational style that supports extrinsic motivation. The facilitator and participants

will review results of the take home survey. Facilitator will pose general questions concerning

motivation. This workshop will not categorically highlight one motivational teaching style as

exclusively better than the other.

The participants will discuss the results of their first online survey, completed online

prior to the workshop. Participants share what style they were assigned in the survey. A group

discussion will follow with a handout of related questions as a discussion guide

Some examples are (a) why do you think you developed that style, (b) did you choose

that style, and (c) are you happy teaching with that style? (45 minutes)

15 minute break (10:45-11:00)

Session 2: (11-11:45) Traveling through the classroom. Wheres the center of your map?

Objective: To challenge preconceptions and stereotypes of classmates and increase students

relatedness and social/group cohesion.

Instruction needed: Facilitator explains and demonstrates how to use Google maps/street views.

http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/
 56

Challenge: Some countries, for example, Saudi Arabia, does not allow Google maps. There are

only tourist type stock views available. This has to be addressed in the workshop since there are

many Saudi students in EFL programs in this country.

Activity: Participants will be in three groupstwo groups will have three participants, one

group will have four. The participant will count off (1, 2, 3), and all participants with the same

numbers will form a small learning community. Each participant will introduce their home state

or country. Members of the group will share their impressions about each members locale,

things they know, what they think it might look like, or stereotypes about the place or people.

One designated member will write down all the statements. Using Google maps street views, a

participant will take us to their native cities, countries, streets, schools, etc. and share information

with their classmates/colleagues (this according to comfort level). Each participant has 6-8

minutes on the computer. Participants will talk about their locale (45 minutes).

Post activity evaluation: Participants have time to write their thoughts down about the activity

in private. Facilitator has a suggestion box where participants anonymously and privately put

their evaluations, suggestions, and critiques of the activity.

15 minute break (11:45-12:00).

Session 3: (12:00-12:45) Cooperative and Collaborative Learning Theory overview: Rules and

structure of collaborative learning classrooms

Activity: Facilitator led discussion. After the activity participants will be able to answer:

What are the defining criteria of cooperative learning and how they can be met.

What has research shown regarding the effectiveness of cooperative learning?

 62

Post activity evaluation

15 minute break (10-15-10:30)

Session 2: Student autonomy theory synopsis (10:30-11:15)

Objective: To introduce the benefits of student autonomy (SA) and strategies that can foster SA.

Instruction needed: Introduction to examples of the language portfolios modules for students

to complete.

Challenge: How to cope with the feeling of loss of power and authority and fears of the students

not reaching established academic benchmarks/goals. Most teacher education programs dont

introduce education students to this concept. Participants will be presented with these questions:

Do you understand the difference between control and structure? Are you an autonomous

teacher? Can you do this in your context? How can you establish a group to work together to

implement this?

Activity: Facilitator led discussion. After the unit teachers will be able to explain and

understand: the three categories of the ASMS instructional behavior to nurture inner motivational

resources.

rely on non-controlling informational language,

acknowledge the students perspective and feelings,

understand the interplay between structure and autonomy supportive

motivational teaching style (several studies as cited by Jang, Reeve, and Deci,

2010).

15 minute break (11:15:11:30)

 63

Session 3: (11:30-12:45). The benefits of student autonomy: students are teachers too.

Objective: Participants will experience an autonomy supportive activity within a class setting.

Instruction needed: Facilitator will model ASMS teaching.

Challenge: Participants will be more autonomous and depend less on the teacher.

Activity: Facilitator will put students into pairs. From our previous theory unit on student

autonomy review the activities that foster (SA). Participants will experience the effects of

having teachers with an ASMS.

Wrap up: (12:45-1:00) Quiet time for reflection. Look at template if you need some structure.

Homework: Please continue to self reflect about your experience in the workshop. This will be

kept personal. Include criticism, positive feelings, what you would like to adapt, if anything and

why. Please keep a record of your weekly teaching experiences at your schools.
 64

Day Three

Check in: (9:00-9:15): Open discussion about teaching week with hot drinks and morning pastry

(15 minutes).

Day three will extend an extra half hour to have to time for post workshop planning,

evaluation, and wrap up. Day three has two theoretical sessions. The wrap up session will

include ideas for participants to develop their own workshop, either as a group, pairs, or small

groups.

Session 1: (9:15-11:00, with 10 minute break) Introducing the English Language Portfolio

theory.

Objective: Introducing the English Language Portfolio (ELP), as a prototype for designing your

own portfolio system.

Instruction needed: VIDEO VIEWING (Choose English language video) The European

Language Portfolio: Introduction to the English Language Portfolio [Video file].

http://vimeo.com/15984590.

Facilitator will also introduce the eportfolio: Manual for eELP European Language

ePortfolio for those who prefer to incorporate online class material. Depending on the student

population and their classroom facilities, the teacher might want to use both hard copy and

electronic versions. This additional portfolio system, Linguafolio, has an excellent website with

a substantial table of contents which is linked below. Some are reproduced in the appendix:

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/contents.
 65

Challenge: There must be adequate training for teachers to understand the portfolio systems

key goals and objectives. Teachers interested in this strategy have to invest a lot of time for

training and should go to the hyperlinked cites to spend time exploring at their own pace, find a

workshop specifically for this, or organize a group and find a facilitator who is specifically

experienced in this system to train the group. Teachers have to decide how they want to

incorporate the portfolios into their classrooms.

Activity: Facilitator shows ELP video (15 minutes). Discussion follows. Facilitator briefly

introduces the eportfolio manual for teachers to explore independently (10 minutes) questions

and discussion follows.

15 minute break (11:00-11:15)

Session 2 (11:15-12:00) Are you a motivated teacher: Teacher autonomy and motivation.

Objective: Teacher autonomy supports teacher motivation supports student autonomy supports

student motivation.

Instruction needed: Participants will bring in the results of their teacher motivation survey.

Challenge: Hopefully the participants in this workshop with two to five years will not yet be

burned out. Sometimes educators have not accepted the concept that teacher motivation is

integral to students achievement, they still believe that it is up to the students. This workshop

will hopefully begin to change that belief.

Activity: Large group discussion concerning motivation and demotivation. What de-motivates

you and why, what motivates you and why.

10 minute break (12:00-12:10)

 66

Session 3: (12:10-1:00)

Objective: Supporting participants to start planning their own workshop

Instruction needed: Templates and articles to guide participants in planning their individually

designed workshop. Participants will be encouraged to work in pairs, but can configure their

own work groups. Supplemental material that gives ideas and feedback about different kinds of

workshop formats is available in the reader.

Challenge: Some participants might not feel that they know what to do and that they wont be

able to accomplish it. Facilitator will suggest to participants that they could try something small

with their own colleagues. As they get feedback and get experience they might consider

broadening their audience to local conferences. Challenge the I cant do it mentality.

Activity: Each pair will get 50 minutes to outline a workshop. The outline should include the

main topic/issue to be addressed, why they want to address it (personal reasons), and what will

be the hoped for results.. How large do they want the workshop to be? Who will be the

participants? They will think of the general design of the workshop and what they want to

include: lecture, mini-seminar, activities, sharing time. At the end of the allotted time, sharing

will take place.

Wrap up: Extra half hour for wrap up (1:00-1:30).

A class discussion and evaluation of the workshop will end the workshop. Facilitator

asks them to complete online evaluation forms.

 67

Recommended viewing and reading

http://www.hayo.nl/autonomybibliography.php#

http://nadabs.tripod.com/motivation/

http://nadasisland.com

http://www.learningpaths.org/introduction/introduction.html

http://members.shaw.ca/mdde615/tchstyles.htm

http://4sbccfaculty.sbcc.edu/lessons/collab_learning/coop_learning/coop_learn_A.htm

Collaborative learning; Retrieved from

http://www.MmUxM/Collaborative_Learning_powerpoint_ppt_presentation/collaborative-

learning

Paul, D. (2012). Motivating low level students. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0M9KvnbqAw

Classroom layout and collaborative learning:

Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/njbotor/classroom-layout-and-collaborative-learning-

10637555

The European Language Portfolio: Introduction to the English Language Portfolio [Video file].

Retrieved from http:// http://vimeo.com/15984590 (Choose English language video)

Bain, K., (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge: MA; London: England, Harvard

University Press.
 68

http://www.languagepowertutoring.com/download/Motivation_in_the_Classroom_VO.pps

http://www.languagepowertutoring.com/bio.html

The English Raven Quick-Guide to Lesson Planning and Keeping Reflective Teaching Notes

Retrieved from http://www.englishraven.com

Quing, X. (2009). Reflective teaching -an effective path for EFL teachers professional

development. Canadian Social Science, 5(2), 35-40.

http://www.slideshare.net/mgdpcastro/cooperative-language-learning-approach-presentation

http://www.iatefl.britishcouncil.org/2012/sites/iatefl/files/session/documents/literature_circles_in

_efl_handout.pdf

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/3.0

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/contents

http//www.innovationinteaching.org

http/www.autonomybibliography.info

http://www. ailarenla.org

http://www.learnerautonomy.org

http:// www.hayo.nl/autonomybibliography.php#
 69

Chapter lV-Conclusions

This project contributes to ongoing professional development for experienced teachers

and focuses on the problem of students and teachers motivation in the language learning

classroom; how they affect students achievement, long term commitment to language learning,

and deep learning. The lack of teacher motivation compounds the problem of student motivation

as well as increasing teacher burn out, dependency on teaching from the text book, and creates a

dearth of expert teachers due to a lack of long term commitment to EFL teaching. EFL learners

need guidance in experiencing motivated learning, autonomous learning, and feeling comfortable

with innovative strategies since some cultures have more traditional and educational constraints

that students and teachers define as real learning/teaching.

Research cited in this project outlined teacher specific components that will contribute to

increasing motivation, and placing it in the center of the learning process. The outlined project, a

workshop for in service EFL teachers, introduces three student centered strategies: cooperative

learning, collaborative learning, and student autonomy. The very nature of collaborative

learning and cooperative learning supports autonomy, but included with these strategies are

teachers behaviors and attitudes towards students as a necessary component for motivation and

student autonomy. The teachers role in the language learning classroom is paramount. There is

much data that concludes that students who become more autonomous are more motivated, and

the literature review supports creating an autonomy supportive motivational teaching style.

Therefore, this project contributes to language teachers understanding their role in

addressing the lack of student motivation in the EFL classroom, and changes the focus from the

individual student to include teaching styles and innovative strategies.

 70

Recommendations

EFL teachers need support from their institution to be autonomous in the classroom, to

use innovative strategies, to create professional support groups with their colleagues, and to be

supported in, and paid for attending ongoing professional development workshops and

conferences. Brown (2007) states that many more affective variables enter into the language

classroom that are different from other subjects. Unfortunately, language teaching is approached

as any other subject taught and learned in the more traditional method, whether in a formal

education setting or a language academy. The lack of awareness as to the complex interaction

between teaching and learning a language in the classroom occurs when teachers lack the

education as to the full spectrum of variables concerned in this endeavor. There exists a gap in

formal teacher education, as well as in motivation in educational research, concerning the

teachers role and their own motivation in creating a motivational environment. Without

administrative support the necessary changes in classrooms, to increase teacher motivation and

motivational teaching strategies, wont be able to flourish. Therefore, I am proposing teacher

development workshops that incorporate this research topic, including sharing of the research

itself as opposed to just teaching activities.

Teachers who would like to change their motivational teaching style to a more autonomy

supportive style would do well to organize colleagues and create a learning group to examine

some of the literature supporting the autonomous learner, student motivation, and the affect of

teacher motivation and teaching style. This could be done within their own framework. The

teachers could incorporate one new strategy in all their classrooms while keeping a self reflective

diary to follow the consequences of the change for themselves and the students. They could then

meet and discuss the results of their action research.

 71

Documentation and reflection are important aspects of implementing any kind of

educational change. The group would be wise to write a report after a few months of

experimenting and submit it to their administration with an arranged meeting date. Teachers can

investigate an opportunity to observe some more progressive language learning programs. This

would give them an opportunity to observe a teacher experienced in some of these strategies, as

well as enlarging their professional contacts.

Collaborative learning, which supports student autonomy and motivation, also changes

the teachers role in the classroom. For this reason a support group might give teachers a place to

exchange information, results, problems, anxiety, and practice.

An alternative method for teacher group support would be to find an educator familiar in

new research and strategies who can be a facilitator. A teacher who works in a more progressive

school might serve this purpose well. Teachers could begin to design their own workshops in

areas that need to be addressed, with each teacher taking turns in acting as facilitator.

Politically, the English language could be divorced from the idea of the United States.

Some students cant get to the learning due to the fact that they have a political or cultural bias

against the United States. Regardless of this attitude, they have to acquire English as a global

language to achieve success in their own countries. Teachers can introduce the concept that the

language can be a means to an end, and it doesnt connote agreement with the United States or

take away their identity. Collaborative work could center on topics that arent based on United

States culture, especially in the beginning, and give the students the chance to make the

language their own. The exchange with students who do like the United States, who bring in
 72

music, movies, and interesting Anglo-topics might soften oppositional students. Too many

United States stereotypes in textbooks work against some students.

If teachers feel burnt out and students are losing their motivation, changing strategies and

infusing the classroom with more spontaneity (listening to the students interests and

suggestions), motivation, inclusion of authentic material, as introduced in this project, might help

in retaining EFL teachers, and increasing student motivation.

Evaluation plan

To assess the effectiveness of the proposed workshop, I have devised the following

evaluation plan:

Questions

Action research is a self-reflective undertaking to improve the teachers own practices,

understanding of practices, and to improve teaching on the situative level. Another name for

action research is that of practitioner research (Zeichner and Noffke, as cited in Oxford, 2011).

In order for action research to be transformative, the teacher researcher has to take a

problem-posing approach instead of just a problem-solving one (Oxford, 2011).

1. How do the teachers characteristics and behaviors in the EFL classroom correlate with

student motivation?

2. What kinds of teaching strategies have a positive correlation to student motivation?

3. How does student autonomy correlate with student motivation?

4. How does teacher motivation correlate with student motivation?

 73

5. How does teacher autonomy in the classroom correlate with teacher motivation?

6. How does teacher autonomy in the classroom correlate with student autonomy?

Participants

This workshop is for in service EFL teachers of adult LLs (16-61) who are investigating

teaching strategies and behaviors that can have an effect on student motivation.

Language learners (EFL) in the classroom will be participants in the action research

study.

Data collection

After the workshop, participants will be encouraged to implement action research in their

classrooms. Action research is a cyclical process of research, action, and reflection, and is not a

single study but a continual reflective process of the research and a repeating of the three

components over a period of time. Teachers should have an element of external monitoring or

feedback, use a multiple data collection method, be clear as to their investment and reasons of

involvement, and consistency between the question and methodology (McMillan,2012).

Permission from parents and the school administration is mandatory. Participants will keep a log

of strategies implemented from the workshop material and continue their reflective journals.

Students will fill out a motivation survey pre and post action research period concerning general

motivation.

Teachers can also adapt the longer English version of the Attitude/Motivation Test

Battery (AMTB) (Gardner, 2010) at http://publish.uwo.ca/%7Egardner/docs/englishamtb.pdf.

Also available in the supplemental material is a Willingness To Communicate (WTC) survey and
 74

a Communication Apprehension survey. Communication assessment can be measured by

recording pairs in communicative tasks.

Please adapt these surveys to your class level as these have advanced level vocabulary.

Some of the survey questions have been intentionally left blank for you to create your own.

Depending on your class level, there is another adaptable General Language Questionnaire

available at http://www.zoltandornyei.co.uk/uploads/english-translation-of-the-hungarian-

questionnaire.pdf

Gardner (2008, 2010) has linked motivation with high achievement level. Therefore,

teachers will assess the students achievement level with a representative sample of students in

the classroom with alternative assessments.. (For further information please refer to

http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/assessing/alternative.htm), pre, and post interviews (speaking

skills), class discussions, and traditional assessment tests. Examples of interview questions are

supplied in the supplemental material but teachers should create their own as they know their

students. Questions should not stop at one answer, and teachers should give prompts to stimulate

more speaking.

Teachers can adapt any type of traditional test form; pre, during, and post research.

Please refer to http://www.slideshare.net/Samcruz5/testing-and-test-construction-evaluation-in-

efl. This website has a multitude of testing ideas. Please refer to the Dornyei & Ushioda, (2011),

chapter 11: Sources and resources, in the reference section for examples of questionnaires.
 75

Data analysis

Questionnaires

Teachers using questionnaires, pre and post strategy implementation, will use ...

descriptive statistical analyses to provide frequencies, means, percentages, ranges, etc. Then the

data, through correlation or factor analysis ... can explore relationships between the variables

(Dornyei and Ushioda, 2011, p.213). Correlation studies can look at motives/motivational

components, such as; ...parental influence and learner commitment; attitudes towards the task

and the teachers; self-confidence and task attitudes (p.219). The authors go on to say that

surveys and questionnaires concerning motivation need to be compared with similar scores from

different samples, and similar scores from other target language learning participants.

Self report questionnaires can measure group cohesiveness (collaborative/cooperative

learning success), and a Likert type questionnaire can measure attitudinal/motivational issues.

Communicative tasks (pair-work) can be recorded.

Qualitative research

Qualitative research should have a place in data collection for LLs. McGroarty(2001)

advocates for more longitudinal, ethnographic, and qualitative studies in language learning

research. Time may not permit such an extensive project; however, aspects of qualitative

research should be part of data collection. Teacher/student interviews, self reporting, and

reflective journaling can be included, as well as student diaries. Peer teacher observation and

interviews will obtain teacher data as to the use of the new strategies.
 76

Validity concerns

Action research conclusions and validity depend on the research design and data

collection methods. According to Anderson, Herr, and Nihlen (as cited in McMillan, 2012),

action research should be based on democratic validity which relates to the researchers concern

with the stakeholders in the study. The stakeholders in this case would be the students, teachers

and the administrators. Therefore the researcher should have students give input on the issue

being researched either through interviews or class discussions. Administrators and the teacher/s

should meet to discuss the research issue and all stakeholders should become part of the process

in offering their perspectives. Outcome validity relates to the effectiveness of the action plan

resulting from the study; in this case the teacher/researcher has to make sure the components of

her study is applicable to the problem and will have some effect if implemented; process validity

relates to credibility and trustworthiness in the qualitative research; in this case, will the process

of the study address the problem being researched; internal validity relates to credibility in

quantitative research and that the research was done in a dependable and competent way;

catalytic validity refers to the action aspect of the research, in this case, changing teaching

strategies, and dialogic validity refers to the dissemination of the findings( McMillan, 2012)

defined as sharing results of the investigation. This could include having a dialogue with

colleagues through a type of public medium, such as websites, professional development

workshops, peer-reviewed journals, or conferences.

To ensure all these five validity concepts, teacher/researchers should have an outside

consultant, a research consultant, who could be a graduate student at the local university to

shadow the project and document things that invalidate some of the findings. Since most

classroom teachers are not experts in designing quantitative or qualitative instruments, as well as
 77

not having the time, this graduate student, who is involved in educational research, could help

devise the instruments to ensure validity. Though action research sounds simple to do, the

validity concerns, social justice concerns, data collection and analysis are not usually what

teachers have been trained to do. Therefore, to protect the validity of this very important step in

educational transformation, it would be wise to have an accomplished research partner to team

up with the teacher/researcher.

1. How to codify behaviors and characteristics of all the participants.

There will be a wide range of variables. The behaviors and results of teacher/researcher

implementing innovative strategies cannot be expected to result in any standard conclusions.

The teacher/researcher will look at the process direction of achievement levels of the students

dependent variable, which indirectly might be achievement scores, since Gardner (2008, 2010)

relates that high achievement is effected by motivation.

2. Impossible to measure the intensity of each teachers changed behavior.

The teacher might think they changed their behaviors and strategies to a considerable

extent but the students might not perceive the change. Peer observation with a Likert type

format to assess the teacher would give objective feedback from the peer observer.

3. Students will write what they think teachers want to hear.

Self reporting has the possibility of threats to validity. To counterbalance this possibility

without eliminating this qualitative source of information, the teacher/researcher will incorporate

different methods of data collection to have a fuller data base.

 78

4. How to incorporate students cultural differences and expectations of education that

will influence their answers.

5. Different variables are in place in different cultures. The teacher cannot influence the

students background and history. Therefore, it would be best to undertake this research after

international students have become a little more acclimated to the new educational system.

6. Action research will not be able to take place without administrative support, i.e.,

changing seating arrangement, changing the curriculum, being a more autonomous teacher.

If the administration does not permit action research in your school, a colleague in

another school or institution might be able to conduct the research, and your role would be as an

observer and recorder. The teacher might then be able to convince their administrators with

documentation and show the validity through dialogic validity, as well as document the other

four types.
 79

References

Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge: MA, London. England:

Harvard University Press.

Balakian, A. (1962). The autonomy of the language teacher. Journal of Educational Sociology,

35(6), 257-262.

Bernaus, M., & Gardner, R. C. (2008). Teacher motivation strategies, student perceptions,

student motivation, and english achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 92(iii),

387-401. 0026-7902/08/387-401.

Bernaus, M., Wilson, A., & Gardner, R. C. (2008). Teachers motivation, classroom strategy

use, students motivation, and second language achievement. Porta Linguarium, 2009,

25-36.

Brown, H. (2007). Personality factors. In Principles of language learning and teaching. (pp.

152-186). New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.

Darian, S. G. (1972). Modern foreign language programs in the early 1940s. In English as a

foreign language, history, development, and methods of teaching (pp. 83-85). Norman:

University of Oklahoma Press.

Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Dornyei, Z., & Csizner, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners: results

of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3), 203- 229.

 80

Dornyei, Z., & Kubanyoiova, M. (in press). Motivating learners, motivating teachers: building

vision in the language classroom.

Dornyei, Z.,& Ushioda, E. (2010). The L2 motivational self. In Z. Dornyei & E.Ushioda

(Eds.),Motivation, language-identity and the L2 Self. (pp. 1-9). Bristol, UK:

Multilingual Matters.

Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teacher motivation. In C. N. Candlin & D. R.Hall (Eds.),

Teaching and researching motivation (pp. 158-191). United Kingdom: Pearson

Education Limited.

Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Sources and resources. In C. N. Candlin & D. R. Hall

(Eds.), Teaching and researching motivation, (pp.261-283). United Kingdom: Pearson

Education Limited.

Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Main types and methods of motivation research. In C.N.

Candlin & D.R. Hall (Eds.), Teaching and researching motivation, (pp. 212-249). United

Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.

Du, X. (2009). The affective filter in second language teaching. Asian Social Science, 5(8), 162-

165. Retrieved from http://www. ccsenet.org/journal.html

Ellis, R. (2009). A reader responds to Guilloteaux and Dornyeis motivating language learners: a

classroom oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student

motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 43(1), 105-109.

 81

Gardner, R.C. (2010). On the definition of motivation and its investigation. In R.C. Gardner

(Ed.), Motivation and second language acquisition: the socio-educational model. (pp.1-

31). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Gardner, R.C. (2010). The attitude motivation test battery. In R.C. Gardner (Ed.), Motivation and

second language acquisition: the socio educational model. (pp. 107-137). New York,

NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Gonzalez, J. A. (2009). Promoting student autonomy through the use of the european language

portfolio. ELT Journal, 64(4). doi:10.1093 /elt /ccno59.

Grasha-Riechmann Teaching Style Survey. Retrieved from http://longleaf.net/teachingstyle.html

Hickey, D. (2012). Sociocultural theories of motivation. The Gale Group

http://www.education.com/partner/articles/galegrp/. Retrieved from

http://www.education.com/print/sociocultural-theories-of-motivation/

Imai, Y. (2010). Emotions in SLA: new insights from collaborative learning for an EFL

classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 278-292.

Jacques, S. R. (2001). Preferences for instructional activities and motivation: a comparison of

student and teacher perspectives. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and

Second Language Acquisition, (pp. 195-213).

Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: it is not

autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588-600. doi:10.1037/a0019682

 82

Johnson, D.W.,& Johnson, R.T. (1991). An overview of cooperative learning. Retrieved from

http://www.co-operation.org/pages/overviewpaper.html

Julkunen, K. (2001). Situation and task-specific motivation in foreign language learning. In Z.

Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition, (pp. 29-43).

Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Karababa, Z. C., & Suzer, S. S. (2010). Practitioners evaluation on the procedural aspects of an

english language portfolio. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 7(3), 13-18.

Kohonen,V. (2000). Student reflection in portfolio assessment: making language learning more

visible. Babylonia: The Swiss Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 1-6.

Retrieved from http://www.babylonia-ti-ch/

Lambert, W. E. (1967). A social psychology of bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2),

91-109.

McMillan, J. H. (2012). Educational research, fundamentals for the consumer (sixth edition),

Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Madrid, D., Robinson, B., Hidalgo, E., Gomis, A., Verdejo, M. J. & Ortega, J. L. (1993). The

teacher as a source of motivation in the EFL classroom. International Conference of

Applied Linguistics, Universidad de Granada, 492-500.

McCally, K. (2010). Self-determined. Rochester Review, 72(6), 19-21. Retrieved from

http://www.rochester.edu/pr/Review/V72N6/pdf/feature_motivation.pdf
 83

Mercer, S. (2011). Introduction. In Towards an understanding of the language learners self

concept,(p.3). ISBN: 976-90-481-9569-5

McGroarty, M. (2001). Situating second language motivation. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt

(Eds.), Motivation and language acquisition, (pp. 69-91). Honolulu, HI: University of

Hawaii Press.

Oxford, R. (1997). Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: three

communicative strands in the language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 81(4),

443-456.

Oxford, R. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. In C.N. Candlin &

D.R. Hall (Eds.), Teaching and researching motivation, (p.234). United Kingdom:

Pearson Education Limited.

Palmer, G., Peters, R., & Streetman, R. (2003). Cooperative learning. Retrieved from http://

projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Patall, E. A., Dent, A. L., Oyer, M., & Wynn, S. R. (2013). Student autonomy and course value:

the unique and cumulative roles of various teacher practices. Motivation and Emotion,

37, 14-32. doi:10.1007/s11031-012-9305-6.

Pavlenko, A., & Norton, B. (2007). Imagined communities, identity, and english language

learning. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (2007) (Eds.), International Handbook of English

Language Teaching, (Part 2), (pp. 669-680). New York, NY: Springer.
 84

Pelletier, L.G., Legault, L., & Levesques, C.S. (2002). Pressure from above and pressure from

below as determinants of teachers motivation and teaching behaviors. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 94(1), 186-196.

Quing, X. (2009).. Reflective teaching-an effective path for EFL teachers / professional

development. Canadian Social Science, 5(2), 35-40

Reeve, J. (1998). Autonomy support as an interpersonal motivating style: is it teachable?

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 312-330.

Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: what autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their

students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), p.231-232/

Reeve, J & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students autonomy during a

learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209-219.

Rodriquez, A., G., & McKay, S. (2010). Professional development for experienced teachers:

working with adult English language learners. CAELA network briefs, 1-10.

Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/caelanetwork/resources/experienced.html.

Ryoo, H., K. (2010). Language related episode (LRE) in learner interactions as an opportunity

for language learning. English Teaching, 64(4), 315-335.

Schaefer, E. (2010). Teacher motivation: the missing link in ESL motivational studies. Journal

of the Ochanomizu University English Society, No.1. (n.p.).

Sapon-Shevin, M., Ayres, B.J., & Duncan, J. (1991). Cooperative learning and inclusion.

Retrieved from http://www.co-operation.org/pages/overviewpaper.html.

 85

Spratt, M., Humphreys, G., & Chan, V. (2002). Autonomy and motivation: which comes first?

Language Teaching Research, 6(3), 245-266. doi:10.1191/13621688021r106oa

Suslu, S. (2006). Motivation of ESL teachers. The internet TESL journal, 12(1). Retrieved from

http://iteslj.org/Articles/Suslu-TeacherMotivation.html.

Tardy, C.M., & Snyder, B. (2004). Thats why I do it: flow and the EFL teacher practices. ELT

Journal, 58(2). 118-128. Retrieved from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org.

Velder, M., & Cohen, E. (1973). Open Ended Stories (pp.114-117). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Globe

Book Co., Inc.

Vrioni, R. (2011). Effects of group learning on the academic performance of university students.

Problems of Education in the 21st. Century, 33, 111-117.

Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An introduction to sociolinguistics (sixth edition). West Sussex, UK:

Wiley-Blackwell.

Walker, J. (2009). On the worlds English mania. Retrieved from

http://www.ted.com/talks/jay_walker_on_the_world_s_english_mania.html

Weger-Guntharp, H.D. (2008). Learner motivations and preferences: realities in the language

classroom (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.

Retrieved from hhtp://www.usfca.edu/ ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of practice; a brief introduction. Retrieved from

http://www. ewenger.com/theory/index.htm
 86

Yau, H. (2010). Language teacher motivation: a study of teachers of English as a second

Language (ESL) in New Zealand language schools. (Unpublished masters thesis). Auckland

University of Technology, Aukland, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.usfca.edu

Workshop references

http://nadabs.tripod.com/motivation/

http://members.shaw.ca/mdde615/tchstyles.htm

http://nadasisland.com

http://4sbccfaculty.sbcc.edu/lessons/collab_learning/coop_learning/coop_learn_A.htm

Link to: http://www. jigsaw.com

Collaborative learning power point presentation [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.MmUxM/Collaborative_Learning_powerpoint_ppt_presentation/collaborative-

learning

Paul, D. (2012. Motivating low level students [Video file]. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0M9KvnbqAw

Classroom layout and collaborative learning:

Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/njbotor/classroom-layout-and-collaborative-learning-

10637555
 87

The European Language Portfolio: Introduction to the English Language Portfolio [Video file].

Retrieved from http://elp.ecml.at/ELP/ELPVideos/tabid/2371/language/en-

GB/Default.aspx (Choose English language video)

The English Raven Quick-Guide to Lesson Planning and Keeping Reflective Teaching Notes

Retrieved from http:// www.englishraven.com

 APPENDIX

Motivate as a Verb: A Motivating Workshop for EFL Students and Teachers

 Ten commandments for motivating

language learners.

1. Set a personal example with your own behavior

2. Create a pleasant, relaxed atmosphere in the classroom

3. Present the tasks properly

4. Develop a good relationship with the learners

5. Increase the learners linguistic self-confidence

6. Make the language classes interesting

7. Promote learner autonomy

8. Personalize the learning process

9. Increase the learners goal-orientedness(sic)

10 .Familiarize learners with the target language culture (Dornyei and Csizer, 1998).
 Ways to create and sustain student motivation

1. Have a good relationship with your students. Know your students, find out their interests

and have individual talk time with them if possible. Find out why they are studying English.

2. Make the classroom a positive learning situation by enlivening it with your class

particular interests.

3. Encourage mistakes and risk taking through light hearted corrections.

4. If age appropriate, investigate, with your students, their learning styles. Make it fun and

non-judgmental.

5. Incorporate topics relevant to students interest. Work outside the textbook.

6. Support learners responsibility to their own progress.

7. Create an environment and teaching style that supports student autonomy. If your student

population is not familiar with that strategy, start slowly. Dont shock your context.

8. Be a motivated teacher. Know yourself and self reflect. Why are YOU there?

Adapted from http://www.getenglishlessons.com/755/workshop-motivation-in-the-classroom

 A1

Why are you here today?

What do you hope to learn or gain from this workshop?

What is your experience with motivation in the classroom?

What have you tried that has really worked well?

Do you know how to:

1. form a cohesive learner group with appropriate group norms?

2. increase the learners goal orientedness (sic)?

3. make the teaching materials relevant for the learners?

4. make learning stimulating?

5. promote cooperation among learners??

6. create learner autonomy? (Dornyei, as cited in Guilloteaux and Dornyei, 2008, p. 59).
 A2

Retrieved from http://www.nadasisland.com/motivation/quest.html

 A3

Research on an autonomy supportive

motivational style of teaching

a. Students who feel autonomous feel that their intention to act comes from within (intrinsic

motivation).

b. Students who feel autonomous feel psychologically free and not externally coerced.

c. Students who feel autonomous feel a sense of choice over their actions.

d. Teachers who support autonomy ask students what they want, what they would like to

contribute to the lesson plan.

e. Teachers who support autonomy give students time to work on a problem in their indivdual

ways, allowing interests to guide their activity.

f. Teachers who support autonomy help students see the value in seemingly uninteresting

activities.

g. Teachers who support autonomy try to create classroom activities to support students

inner resources.

h. Teachers who support autonomy try not to have a teacher centered classroom.

i. Students who perceive themselves as autonomous have more positive functioning

emotionality, creativity, intrinsic motivation, psychological wellbeing, conceptual

understanding, academic achievement, and persistence in school (adapted from studies cited

by Reeve and Jang, 2006, p.210).

 A4

Autonomy supportive instructional behaviors

a. The teacher spends more time carefully listening to the students speech.

b. The teacher more frequently asks how a student wants to approach a problem.

c. The teacher lets the student spend more time working independently and solving things in

their own way.

d. The teacher lets the student talk.

e. The teacher invites the student to sit nearer the learning material in order that the students

may manipulate conversations rather than just watch and listen.

f. The teacher volunteers more explanation as to why a course of action is taken.

g. The teacher frequently gives positive feedback.

h. The teacher encourages the student not to give up.

i. The teacher suggests better ways to approach an activity.

j. The teacher pays attention to the students questions.

 A5

k. The teacher has perspective-taking and understands the students feelings related to the

activity, Reeve and Jang (2006).

These behaviors should lead to the students increased perception of autonomy. If a

behavior does not do this for the student it is not considered autonomy supportive behavior.

Reeve and Jang (2008) investigated which behaviors ended up being autonomy supportive.

All behaviors listed above were highly correlated with students perceived autonomy.

According to Reeve (1998), teachers can change their teaching style, from controlling

to more autonomy supportive, through practice, support, reflective activities, and a detailed

account of what contributes to autonomy supportive teaching behaviors.

Autonomy support does not mean the removal of structure. No structure leads to a

permissive, indulgent or laissez-faire environment (Reeve, 2013).

Why is structure different from control?

Structure means teachers communicate clearly as to what they expect of students to

achieve their academic goals. The teacher offers: plans, goals, standards, expectations,

schedules, rules, directions, challenges, reminders, prompts, models, examples, hints,

suggestions, learning strategies, rewards, and feedback. Control inhibits inner

motivation and demands a closed result (Reeve, 2013, p.231-232).

 A6

Session 1: Activity questions

What does that style afford you?

Where does it hold you back?

Do you believe that style helps you accomplish you and your students goals?

Do you get positive feedback from your students?

Did you ever try a different style, would you like to?

Each group will hear the advantages and disadvantages from the participants experiences.

What does an autonomy supportive motivational teaching style mean? Should you integrate

an autonomy supportive motivational teaching style? Which do you think comes first, or not;

motivation or learner autonomy? What is considered an autonomy supportive teaching style.

Characteristics of expert teachers

A rich and elaborate knowledge base

Ability to integrate and use different kinds of knowledge

Ability to make intuitive judgments based on past experience.

Desire to investigate and solve a wide range of teaching problems

Deeper understanding of students needs and student learning

Awareness of instructional objectives to support teaching

Better understanding and use of language learning strategies

Greater awareness of the learning context

Greater fluidity and automaticity in teaching and greater efficiency and effectiveness in

lesson planning (Richards and Farrel, as cited in Rodriquez and McKay, 2010, pp.3-4).
 A7

Cooporative/ Collaborativelearning

worksheets

FIrst used in America (U.S.A) it is a type of collaborative learning but instead of a total group

assesment, individual students are also accountable for their work. (Palmer, Peters and

Streetman, 2003).

Illustration retrieved from http://waldenmeghan.blogspot.com

Scenario: Mrs. Solomon teaches a 9th grade Careers course. The class consists of a mixture

of ESOL students with limited English proficiency skills, "average" students, and honors

students. There are also several students with special needs including learning disabilities and

attention deficit disorders.

Mrs. Solomon is concerned because there are a high number of students currently failing her

class. She has noted that, while the high achieving students tend to score well on

Multiple/Choice and True/False questions, none of the students do well on application and

scenario-type questions. Frequent absences, along with an apparent lack of motivation among

students are also abundant in Mrs. Solomon's class. In addition, she has noticed a high

number of arguments among the students. In an attempt to better manage her class, she
 A8

assigned seats. She has determined that the seating arrangement has only escalated the

arguments. Mrs. Solomon would like to find a way to overcome the difficulties within her

classroom and also be able to instill these students with the skills necessary to become

productive contributors to the workforce.

She has tried a number of teaching methodologies. Her first attempt was to lecture just as her

teachers had done when she was in school. She found that the students were bored and often

fell asleep. While most students performed average on objective tests, she had no way of

measuring whether the students were grasping the concepts well enough to transfer that

knowledge to real-world applications. Any attempts at class discussions during the lecture

tended to yield little or no response from the students. Students that did show interest were

notably confused. She also found that some of the students were disrespectful to her during

the lectures.

She also decided to try to make her classroom more student-centered by turning to a

computer-based curriculum. She read that students tend to retain more information when a

computer is incorporated into the lessons, so she thought it would be worth a try. She found

an interactive CD to supplement the textbook and allowed students time during each unit to

work from the CD. Although the computer managed to pique the interest of more students

than the lecture did, she found that a large number of students were off task. They would rush

through the assignment, if they did it at all, so that they could play games and/or go on the

internet. She also felt that the use of the computer without any other forms of instruction

prevented students from interacting with one another; thus, the computer-based learning

activities were not promoting the interpersonal skills needed for successful employment.

As a last resort, Mrs. Solomon decided to try group work. Because of the already escalating

tension due to class dynamics, she was reluctant to assign a monumental task on the first try.

Instead, she opted for a basic assignment and allowed the students to pick their own groups.
 A9

She wanted to test their problem-solving and communication skills without interference from

an authority figure, so Mrs. Solomon gave the students their assignment and waited at her

desk for the students to come to her with questions. When she became alarmed at the noise

level in the classroom, she finally decided to walk around the room to observe the groups.

She was disturbed to find a number of students off-task. Several groups did not even attempt

the project, and spent their time initiating conflict with the other groups. As the social

problems among the students escalated, the students' test grades continued to be below

average. The high-achieving students grouped together while the ESOL and special education

students were left together with no leadership in the group.

Mrs. Solomon was devastated because she felt that she had lost control of her classroom.

Feeling frustrated and defeated, she finally decided to seek help from another teacher in her

department that was known for her outstanding teaching abilities. The other teacher

suggested she try_______?

Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/cooperative learning

NOTES
 A10

Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/cooperative-learninng

Cooperative Learning in the Classroom

Pre-Implementation

A. Specify Instructional Objectives

The instructor must explain why she is using cooperative learning, describe its

benefits, and the results typically found from using cooperative learning.

B. Assign Group Roles

Some of the roles that could be assigned or chosen include facilitator,

timekeeper, checker, summarizer, elaborator, research-runner, and wild card.

C. Determine Group Size and Assign Students to Groups

Group size can range from two to four students. These groups can be

homogeneous or heterogeneous. Once the groups are assigned they should not

be changed too often.

D. Arrange Room

It is essential that a group's seats face one another.

E. Assign Tasks

The cooperative learning group's task should be interesting, challenging, and

motivating. It should also be a performance driven and authentic task.

F. Explain Criteria for Success

The instructor should communicate the group-work skill that will be

evaluated. A rubric should be created to evaluate the students' skills.

G. Plan Instructional Materials to Promote Interdependence

The instructional methods and material that an instructor chooses must allow

each individual to contribute to the group's success in a unique and meaningful

way.
 A11

H. Specify Desired Behaviors

An essential part of cooperative learning is to teach students how to work in

groups. This can be achieved by the instructor conducting mini lessons on

how to respect others.

I. Structure Positive Interdependence and Accountability

Group size should be kept small so that each member participates and contributes

uniquely to the group.

II. Post Implementation

A. Provide Closure through Summarization

The instructor should reconvene the entire group of students and summarize

the important points of the lesson/unit.

B. Evaluate Students' Learning

The instructor should use a rubric to grade/evaluate each group's assessment

task.

C. Reflect on What Happened

Instructors should keep a record of what worked and why it worked each time

they undertake a cooperative learning lesson or unit. The instructor should

also adjust their lessons based on the reflection and feedback of the students.

III. Implementation

A. Monitor Behavior

The instructor should circulate throughout the classroom and visit each group.

B. Assist with Needs

The instructor should assist students with their needs by pointing out

additional resources and/or points of view, and also by helping students reflect

on the work that they have completed and their progress.

 A12

C. Intervene, if Needed

The instructor while circulating should intervene if she notices any conflicts.

D. Praise

The instructor should give praise to students so that students know that they

are completing the assignment in a satisfactory manner.

There are three phases of the implementation of cooperative learning. The first

phase is the pre-implementation phase which includes: specifying instructional

objectives, determining group sizes and assigning students to groups, arranging

room, planning instructional materials to promote interdependence, assigning group

roles, assigning tasks, explaining criteria for success, structuring positive

interdependence and accountability, and specifying desired behaviors. The second

phase is implementation which includes: monitoring behavior, intervening if

needed, assisting with needs, and praise. The third phase is post-implementation

which includes: providing closure through summarization, evaluating students'

learning, and reflecting on what happened.

Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/cooperative_learning

http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/index.php?title=Cooperative_Learning
 A13

Illustration Retrieved

from http://www.metagroup.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/wheel.gif

Elements of cooperative learning

Individual Accountability: Each participant/student will be responsible for being able to

work on the paragraphs.

Positive Interdependence: Each group member will need to support team members

in learning

Social Skills/Face to Face Interaction: The students will need to use communication

skills to share ideas and listen for others ideas.

Heterogeneous Grouping: In this workshop the facilitator has chosen two

groupings.
 A14

Evaluation: Participants/students share their finished article.

Trust: The students must feel comfortable with each other in order to work well

together.

Adapted from http://www.users.muohio.edu/shermalw/Sammon621_cl-lessonLWS.doc

Notes
 A15

Try this first

Introduce cooperative learning slowly. Start by allowing students to check their

homework in groups. Groups could then write solutions to the problems on the board,

or write only the work on which they couldnt agree. Teacher could double check the

agreed on answers.

Until the class is used to the components of cooperative learning (CL), start the class

with a short presentation and then move into CL groups or pairs.

Consider starting class work using pairs. This is an opportunity to teach students

group work skills.

Dont use the CL technique in every class. Start with once a week, one class period.

Start with worksheets so groups can set their priorities, goals, and do the assessment

task.

Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning is instruction that involves learning under conditions that meet several

criteria.

What are the defining criteria of cooperative learning and how can they be met?

What has research shown regarding the effectiveness of cooperative learning?

How should cooperative learning groups/teams be formed?

How can individual contributions to team projects be assessed and taken into account in

grading?

What skills are required to work effectively in groups? How can students be equipped

with those skills and how can teams be prepared to function more effectively?

What forms might student resistance to cooperative learning take and how

might the resistance be minimized or possibly eliminated?

Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/cooperative learning

 A16

SEATING ARRANGEMENTS

(cooperative/collaborative)

Retrieved from

http://www.lauracandler.com/strategies/CL/cooperativeseating.jpg

Retrieved from

http://elementaltruths.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/cooperative-0.jpg
 A17

Retrieved from http://sowheniteach.weebly.com/uploads/7/9/2/2/7922181/1308931994.jpg

Retrieved from http:3.bp.blogspot.com

 A18

Cooperative

Learning

Benefits

ESL students

Arguments among students are minimizes

Less disrespect toward teacher

Improves performance for all in learning abilities

Drawbacks

Loss of control

Group work may be resisted

Time requirements

Instructors have to assess students work and progress with nontraditional methods

Vague objective

Avoidance of teaching

Lack of critical thinking activities

Adapted from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/cooperative_learning

 A19

Language learner autonomy basics

In formal contexts autonomous language learners are able to take charge of their own

learning (Holec 1981).

develop a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision making, and independent

action (Little 1991).

can manage the affective dimension of their learning experience to motivational

advantage (Ushioda 1996).

become more autonomous in language learning as they become more autonomous in

language use, and vice versa (Little 1991).

the freedom that learner autonomy implies is-always conditional and constrained:

because we are social beings, our independence is always balanced by dependence-our essential

condition is one of interdependence (Little 1991)

like the acquisition of language, the development of learner autonomy depends on social

interaction (cf. Vygotsky 1978, 1986)

autonomous learners do things for themselves; they may or may not do things on their

own

the teachers indispensable role in the development of language learner autonomy is

governed by three general pedagogical principles (Little 2001, 2007):

Learner involvement we must involve learners fully in planning, monitoring

and evaluating their own learning

Learner reflection we must help learners to reflect continuously on the process

and content of their learning and to engage in regular self-assessment

 A20

Learner autonomy

Some people mistake learner autonomy for self-instruction. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Learner autonomy refers to a students ability to set appropriate learning goals and take charge of his

or her own learning. However, autonomous learners are dependent upon teachers to create and

maintain learning environments that support the development of learner autonomy.

Research has shown that teachers who model reflective practices themselves find it easier to

create the appropriate learning environment to foster learner autonomy. This environment is one that

is positive and motivating, and encourages collaboration and social interaction. It embeds

reflective practices into daily learning activities. Learners accept responsibility for their learning,

review their learning, and evaluate its effectiveness. The more learners begin to think about learning,

the more transparent learning will become to them.

Creating learner autonomy

As teachers we should try to regularly motivate learners to think about why they are learning certain

things, exactly what they are learning, and how they learn most effectively. Learners should develop a

capacity for reflection and recognize strategies that help them succeed.

It is important that both the teacher and the learner use the target language as much as possible

in class, because it is only in using the language that learners can discover their strengths and identify

areas of difficulty. Language learners should be given numerous opportunities to use the target

language in meaningful contexts with their peers. These activities create an environment that will

reinforce each learners goals, celebrate small successes, and gradually build awareness of the

learning process. Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/

 A21

Target language use we must ensure that the target language is the medium as

well as the goal of all learning, including the reflective component

Retrieved from

http://www.caslt.org/pdf/Handout%201B%20Language%20learner%20autonomy%20basics.pdf
 A22

Autonomy Tasks

Language or culture.

Interview native speakers, which takes students out into the real world.

Cooperative learning in pairs or small groups

Problem-based learning situations that require students to use their knowledge to

create solutions for specific situations

Writing in journals and reflecting on what, why, and how they learn

Assembling portfolios that document their learning process over a period of time

Using rubrics that include the learners individual expectations and a self-assessment

component

Peer assessment that allows students to evaluate each other using rubrics and clearly

stated objectives

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/5574

Can you think of any other activities to add to this list?

 A23

Autonomous Learning Activities

Admit and exit slips

An admit slip is a students entry ticket into class. It is filled out before the class begins or during the

first few minutes of class. Students are allowed to exit the classroom when they submit an exit slip to

the teacher. The exit slip is completed during the last few minutes of the class. This enables students

to provide the teacher with feedback about the teaching, a summary of ideas and skills learned, or a

demonstration of their comprehension.

Admit and exit slips are an effective way to informally assess student understanding of new or

old concepts and determine where students need additional clarification or assistance. These slips also

stimulate critical thinking and act as a springboard to link new learning with existing knowledge.

Sample admit slips

1. Write one or more things that you already know about

2. Write one question that you still have about the activity that we did yesterday.

3. Write an explanation of the process you used to solve one problem you did for homework last night.

Sample exit slips

1. One thing I learned today is

2. One thing I am not sure about todays lesson is

3. I can use this knowledge or process again when I

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/linguafolio/5796

After completing your list, take time to share the reasons you gave with others in your group. Adapted

and retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/07/lftraining_m1-a1.pdf/

 A24

My Name

My Partners name

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/06/lf_thinkpairshare.pdf

 A25

Have you ever heard of the language learning portfolio?

Portfolios are a popular and effective way of motivating young learners, providing a fun way to

review language and helping them to reflect on their own objectives, ways of learning and

success.

A brief history of European Language Portfolios

What are Language Portfolios?

Advantages of using them

The problems with Language Portfolios

Using Language Portfolios with young learners

A brief history of European Language Portfolios

Teachers and learners have been working with Language Portfolios since the mid 1990s,

and between 1998 and 2000 various ELP models were piloted in Europe. There has been much

literature written about them and there are lots of interesting examples. In the year 2001, which

was also the European Year of Languages, The Council of Europe launched ELPs throughout

Europe. Many adult and young learner course books now contain features of language portfolios

such as passport activities and learner checklists while many classrooms have learner portfolios

stored on their shelves.

What are Language Portfolios?

They are a collection of individual students work put together in a file or ring binder. They

belong to the student and can be updated as language learning continues by adding to and taking

away pieces of work.

Language Portfolios are made up of three parts:

 A26

1. The Passport

This contains factual information about the language learner. It gives a history of the

learners language learning experiences which in this case refer to learning English.

It may also contain any certificates or qualifications which show the learners level in an

internationally transparent manner. For our young learners this may mean a certificate they

received from a summer camp they attended or a qualification they got from taking an English

exam at school or in any other English language centre. It may also include a ticket to a theatre

production in English, a film they saw or a trip abroad to an English-speaking country. See

Working with passports

2. The Language Biography

This is a personal history of the learners language learning experience. For example it

may include a short narrative about the summer camp which they went on and for which they

have included the certificate in their passport section.

It also includes self-assessment materials, such as the learner checklists and any aims that

learners have for the future. These aims might be passing a specific exam, attending a course and

feeling well prepared for it or being able to speak English to a visitor. See Working with

biographies

3. The Dossier

This is a collection of course work which shows learners level of English. It may include

corrected class or homework, tests and exams or any other piece of work which illustrates where

the learner is at. In this part of an LP, a learner may include voice or video recordings or any part

of project work which they have done.

 A27

Advantages of using them

There are many advantages for teachers and learners:

They enhance learners motivation by providing something personal and tangible which

they can build up and develop over the course.

They help learners to reflect on their own learning and achievement by asking them to

make choices, review, compare and organize their own work.

They enable learners to look for new cultural experiences by opening their eyes to the

possibilities available to them. Part of portfolio work involves show and tell sessions

where learners talk about their experiences and look at other portfolios.

From a teachers point of view, portfolios lead to greater learner autonomy since they

involve self assessment, learner responsibility and parent involvement.

Learners can work in their own time on different sections of the LP.

The problems with Language Portfolios.

First of all with large groups the storage of portfolios can be problematic. Of course,

learners can look after them themselves but this always means there are lots of students

who forget or lose their portfolio. It is better to store them in class and only allow them

home occasionally throughout the year. In this way it means they are readily at hand for

parent interviews and of course class time.

 A28

Secondly, portfolios involve the provision of the folder and the organization of the

contents, which can be quite time consuming. However, once the templates for the three

sections are made and put in an attractive folder and the topic to work on is decided,

learners could work at their own pace and the sessions ran themselves.

Further reading

Peter Lenz & Gunther Schneider: European Language Portfolios.

www.coe.int/portfolio

Council of Europe Standard (C.O.E.): What your language level means.

Malisa Iturain, Teacher British Council YL Centre, Barcelona

Adapted from: http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/portfolios-elt

Please surf the following sites at your leisure:

http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/portfolio_activities.pdf

http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/teacher-development

Retrieved from http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/images/cooplearningebook.gif

 A29

Incorporating the Language Learning

Portfolio

List 3-5 reasons you think having a language learning protfolio would be helpful to different

groups in your school:

LANGUAGE LEARNERS:

TEACHERS

4
 A30

Retrieved from

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/07/lf_learner_log_template.pdf/
 A31

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/06/lf_kwle.pdf/

 A32

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/06/lf_kwl.pdfLearners

 A33

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/modern-languages/lal/documents/Selfassessmentgrid.pdf
 A34

PLEASE take this online teacher motivation and job satisfaction survey. This will part of our

discussion for day three.

Retrieved from

http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/3984/4080143/forms/jobsatis.pdf
A35
A36
 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

MOTIVATE AS A VERB: A WORKSHOP TO MOTIVATE EFL STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

 S1

Retrieved from

http://www.longleaf.net/teachingstyle.html

Teaching Style Survey

(Grasha-Riechmann)

The following is a Grasha-Riechmann teaching style

survey. Respond to each of the items below in terms

of how you teach.

If you teach some courses differently than others,

respond in terms only of one specific course. Fill out

another survey for the course(s) that you teach in a

different style.

Try to answer as honestly and as objectively as you

can.

Resist the temptation to respond as you believe you

should or ought to think or behave, or in terms of

 S2

what you believe is the expected or proper thing to do.

Respond to questions below by using the following rating scale:

1 = strongly disagree | 2 = moderately disagree | 3 = undecided |

4 = moderately agree | 5 = strongly agree

1 = strongly
1. Facts, concepts, and principles are the most important
Response: disagree
things that students should acquire.

2. I set high standards for students in this class... 2 = moderately

Response:

disagree
3. What I say and do models appropriate ways for students
Response:
to think about issues in the content.
3 = undecided

4. My teaching goals and methods address a variety of

Response: 4 = moderately
student learning styles.
agree
5. Students typically work on course projects alone with
Response:
little supervision from me. 5 = strongly agree

6. Sharing my knowledge and expertise with students is

Response:
very important to me.

7. I give students negative feedback when their

Response:
performance is unsatisfactory.

8. Activities in this class encourage students to develop

Response:
their own ideas about content issues.
 S3

9. I spend time consulting with students on how to improve

Response:
their work on individual and/or group projects. 1 = strongly

disagree
10. Activities in this class encourage students to develop
Response:
their own ideas about content issues.
2 = moderately

11. What I have to say about a topic is important for disagree

students to acquire a broader perspective on the issues in Response:

3 = undecided
that area.

12. Students would describe my standards and expectations 4 = moderately

Response:
as somewhat strict and rigid. agree

13. I typically show students how and what to do in order to

5 = strongly agree
Response:
master course content.

14. Small group discussions are employed to help students

Response:
develop their ability to think critically.

15. Students design one of more self-directed learning

Response:
experiences.

16. I want students to leave this course well prepared for

Response:
further work in this area.
1 = strongly
17. It is my responsibility to define what students must learn
Response: disagree
and how they should learn it.

18. Examples from my personal experiences often are used 2 = moderately

Response:
to illustrate points about the material. disagree

19. I guide students work on course projects by asking

3 = undecided
Response:
questions, exploring options, and suggesting alternative
 S4

ways to do things. 4 = moderately

agree
20. Developing the ability of students to think and work
Response:
independently is an important goal.
5 = strongly agree

1 = strongly disagree | 2 = moderately disagree | 3 = undecided |

4 = moderately agree | 5 = strongly agree

1 = strongly
21. Lecturing is a significant part of how I teach each of the
Response: disagree
class sessions.

22. I provide very clear guidelines for how I want tasks 2 = moderately
Response:
completed in this course. disagree

23. I often show students how they can use various

3 = undecided
Response:
principles and concepts.
4 = moderately
24. Course activities encourage students to take initiative
Response: agree
and responsibility for their learning.

25. Students take responsibility for teaching part of the class 5 = strongly
Response:
sessions. agree

26. My expertise is typically used to resolve disagreements

Response:
about content issues.

27. This course has very specific goals and objectives that I
Response:
want to accomplish.

28. Students receive frequent verbal and/or written

Response:
comments on their performance.
 S5

29. I solicit student advice about how and what to teach in

Response:
this course. 1 = strongly

disagree
30. Students set their own pace for completing independent
Response:
and/or group projects.
2 = moderately

31. Students might describe me as a storehouse of disagree

knowledge who dispenses the fact, principles, and Response:

3 = undecided
concepts they need.

32. My expectations for what I want students to do in this 4 = moderately

Response:
class are clearly defined in the syllabus. agree

33. Eventually, many students begin to think like me about

5 = strongly
Response:
course content.
agree

34. Students can make choices among activities in order to

Response:
complete course requirements.

35. My approach to teaching is similar to a manager of a

work group who delegates tasks and responsibilities to Response:

subordinates.

36. There is more material in this course than I have time

Response:
available to cover it.
1 = strongly
37. My standards and expectations help students develop the
Response: disagree
discipline the need to learn.

38. Students might describe me as a coach who works 2 = moderately

closely with someone to correct problems in how they Response: disagree

think and behave.

3 = undecided
 S6

39. I give students a lot of personal support and 4 = moderately

Response:
encouragement to do well in this course. agree

40. I assume the role of a resource person who is available

5 = strongly
Response:
to students whenever they need help.
agree

Copyright 1976, 1987, 1990, 1996 by Anthony F. Grasha and Sheryl Riechmann-Hruska,

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Oh 45221

Click Score Survey and your results will appear below.

The results of your teaching style survey are as follows:

expert formal authority personal model facilitator delegator

Please provide the following information.

Discipline: Level of

Course:

Race:
Academic Rank:

Gender:

If you are filling out this survey more than

 S7

once,because you teach some courses differently than

others, provide the following identifying information:

Please invent a 6-digit number and enter that same

number on each of your multiple surveys. Dont use

empty
the date.

OR

empty
Put your name here:

That will make it possible for me to discuss with you

whether the results seem meaningful.

please click the Exit button:

Exit
 S8

Workshop Reflection

Date of Workshop

What was the highlight of the workshop?

What aspect caused you the most anxiety? shyness?, psychological discomfort?

Was there any aspect that surprised you?

 S9

What were the three most important things you took away from the day?

1.

2.

3.

Which aspects would you include in your own work practice based on your learning

experience?

Did the theory component support your thinking about trying innovative strategies?
 S10

Do you disagree with anything that you heard today, and would like to write about it

privately? Or would you like to share it with the group during our next meeting?

What would you want more/less of in the next workshop: More (M), Less (L)

pair work (M) (L)

brainstorming (M) (L)

input from the facilitator (M) (L)

theory (M) (L)

practicality (M) (L)

participation (M) (L)

 S11

Teacher Language learning Reflection questions:

Discussion

1. How did you learn your second language?

2. In the classroom, what learning activities helped you learn?

3. What helps you now as a lifelong learner?

Adapted from http://visagepda.wikispaces.com, and

http://www.edition.tefl.net/articles/teacher-technique/tefl-workshops-complaints/
 S12

Portfolio as a pedagogical tool for student

autonomy: Teachers Self-assessment

In the spirit of learner self-assessment, please take a few minutes to reflect on what

youve learned about student autonomy in this workshop. Please write a response to the

following questions:

1. How does a portfolio develop reflective and autonomous language learners?

2. Which tools and strategies can you use to create a reflective learning community in

your

classroom?

3. How can you modify your teaching to foster reflective and autonomous learning?

How can reflective teaching and learning impact your teaching and student learning?

Retrieved from http://www.learnc.org

Self Reflection for professional development

Pinpoint a particular moment or

occasion in your teaching or

learning life which made you

stop and think.

Write a letter to an

imaginary colleague describing

this moment or occasion, then

try to explain what it meant to

 S13

you and how it has affected other aspects of your teaching life.

Consider the following: How did this moment or occasion subsequently change what

you

did in the classroom? Why did it have these effects? In what ways has your thinking about

this moment or occasion changed over time?

Alternatively: Brainstorm a time line of critical moments in your teacher learning

including texts, people, events, trips and intercultural experiences that were

particularly significant to you as an educator.

Use these to write a memoir, first deciding who you want to read it.

Will your readers be valued colleagues? Past students? Then, which moments will

you write about?

With your readers and critical moments in mind, either write chronologically, or

according to the most salient topics in your time line (e.g., critical people and critical

texts).

As you write, try to explain what these critical moments meant to you and how they

have

affected other aspects of your teaching life.

Having written your memoir on teacher learning, what insights have you gained about

your teaching, about yourself? What have you learned through the writing and

rewriting process (Burton, Quirke, Richmann, and Peyton, 2010, p.166)?

 S14

Guidelines for completing the Reflective

Journal

Studies have shown that reflection upon ones learning is key to a full learning experience.

For this reason, you will be required to keep reflective journals as part of your professional

development.

Workshop Reflection to be completed after attendance of each one day of workshop

How long will it take?

As a rough guide, each journal entry should take approximately 20-30 minutes. You may

take more or less time depending upon your time constraints and the amount of detailed

information you wish to include. Feel free to add comments but the minimum requirements

are included in the template. I suggest you check out the exemplars first for ideas on how to

complete them.

What should I write?

Dont worry about how you write. Spelling, punctuation, grammar etc are of no concern

whatsoever to the program. We are trying to access experience and thoughts.

Dont be afraid to use different modalities: writing, drawing while sharing of thoughts,

feelings and responses.

Dont worry if you discover your answers overlap or if you feel one question has

already been answered in response to another. Try to write something, no matter how brief

your response may be to each question. If you find that you have nothing to comment on in

certain sections note so, may be this is telling you something important about your practice?
 S15

1. You can fill them out through the website listed at the end of the template electronically

(with Word or you can use the online survey), or print off and complete them by hand.

You are not limited to space provided in the template, each section expands to accommodate

different amounts of information.

When do I submit them?

Workshop reflections need to be submitted to the project facilitator at the next workshop,

along with a quick demonstration of your achievements. You may also choose to email them

to the workshop facilitator (denise@yahoo.com).

Confidentiality

All information completed in journals is confidential. It is used only to evaluate the

implementation of the PDSP program. There is no requirement to identify yourself

personally if you choose not to. You may also prefer to edit your journal entry before

submission; this is fine as long as all required fields are completed.

The reflections on the practice lessons will be retained by the project facilitator along with

examples of materials created. If you have any questions or concerns about your Reflective

Journal please dont hesitate to discuss with your workshop Facilitator.

Adapted from http://visagepda.wikispaces.com, and

http://www.edition.tefl.net/articles/teacher-technique/tefl-workshops-complaints/
 S16

TEMPLATE FOR PERSONAL OR REFLECTIVE JOURNALS

SUMMARY OF WHAT WAS DONE (DONT DESCRIBE EVERYTHING, BE SELECTIVE)

 S17

NEW LEARNING

What did I learn that was new to me?

What insights did this new knowledge give to me?

Did it help me see something in a new light?

Did it help me understand something that I didnt understand before?

 S18

How do I think this might be useful (in practice, in my studies, in my life)?

PERSONAL REACTION

How did I feel about what was done? (Did it affect me emotionally and if so how?)

What did I like or enjoy and why?

What did I dislike and why?

 S19

What did I find easy to do or understand and why?

What did I find difficult or challenging to do or understand and why?

ACTION TO BE TAKEN

Is there any action that I will take as a result of what was done?

Do I need to plug gaps in my knowledge?

 S20

Do I need to investigate or research further?

Retrieved from http://www.dds.qmul.ac.uk/documents/39157.dot

 S21

Retrieved from

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4647675302445433&pid=1.7&w=270&h=181&c=7&rs=1

Teacher Reflection Activity

o How did you learn your second language?

o In the classroom, what learning activities helped you learn?

o What helps you now as a lifelong learner?

o Once you have finished this activity we will have a short discussion.

Retrieved from

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/06/lftraining_m3_a1.pdf

Encouraging learners reflection

There are many ways to encourage students to reflect on their own unique way of

learning such as those listed below. Take a few minutes to discuss or think about other

techniques you have used and with what degree of success.

 S22

Teachers should frequently encourage learners to think about what they already know when

entering a new phase in their language learning.

Learners can be involved in evaluating their own work (self-assessment) or other learners

work (peer assessment).

The teacher can ask learners to make a list of activities they like and find helpful in learning.

Students can design their own activities to be used as class activities or outside of class for

language practice.

After self-assessments or teacher-administered assessments and performance tasks, learners

should write down areas for improvement, vocabulary they need, and other goals to advance

their language skills.

Small goals enable learners to achieve and feel good about their successes. Understanding

that these small steps are necessary to learn a new language helps students plan more

realistically for future learning.

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/

A self-check activity for students

As you work toward developing a reflective learning environment, you can periodically

or regularly ask learners to answer the following questions. You may want to

consider asking students to answer orally at times and in writing at other times.

What am I learning?

Why am I learning it?

How am I learning it?

 S23

How successful is my learning?

How can I demonstrate my learning?

What am I going to do next? It is also common practice that administrators evaluating school

programs ask similar questions of learners in a class that they are observing. If students

cannot articulate their ideas in response to these questions, it is a clear signal they will not

internalize the learning.

Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2010/06/lftraining_m3_a2.pdf

 S24

Examples of Different Cooperative Groupings

Name of

Group What is it? Works best Benefits Drawback

Retrieved from http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/index.php?title=Cooperative_Learning

2 students with

one problem Increased

Content that
share their ideas engageme
requires Fewer
or questions. nt time
Pair-share discussion, perspectives
Each person Helps
reflection, or and solutions
speaks, listens, those who
explanation.
& gives are shy

feedback.

Each member of

the small group

researches one Students

part of the Content with gain

Some students
question /content four or five teaching
Jigsaw feel pressured
for a certain parts to and
by a time limit
amount of time. research. research

The members of skills

the group come

back together.
 S25

Each member

teaches his/her

part to the rest of

the group.

Students

may
The class is split
change
into half. Each Some students
their
side discusses Debates or may speak less
Split-class discussion opinion or
/debates their discussions with such a
develop a
knowledge large group.
different
/beliefs, etc.
perspectiv

e.

Easy to
Receive a
leave out or
variety of
Predicting team up
Class is split into feedback
what will against a
groups of 3. The Group
Random groups of 3 happen, shy student
groups discuss members
responding to or one who
the topic. are
a situation. has a
accountabl
different
e
opinion.

Ability/Interest/Friendship Students are Creating Students It is

Group divided into plays/skits or can work unrealistic

 S26

groups based on an activity in at a pace to find a

some quality that which students that best completely

they all have in must work suits them homogeneo

common. together Students us group

outside of are rarely Weaker or

class. bored and unpopular

often students

motivated. may be

excluded.

Students are There are

formed into Exploring many

Minorities
groups where geography, opportunit
may
Diversity Groups they come from history, and ies to gain
become
a wide variety of diverse different
alienated.
backgrounds, lifestyles. perspectiv

interests, etc. es.

Older Older

Older students students- there students

Students are
teaching is less may be a
divided into
younger pressure to bad
Multi-aged groups groups in which
students (i.e. compete with influence;
there are a
science peers Older
mixture of ages
experiments). Younger students

students- feel may not

 S27

important that know how

an older to work

person is with a

spending time younger

with them. child or an

"at risk"

student.

Students

whose

parents are

inactive in
Students
the school
get the
Students prepare may be
A major opportunit
and lead a alienated
project in y to
discussion of from those
which students authentica
Peer-led Conferences material with whose
set up stations lly teach
parents, parents
for several Students
instructors, participate
intelligences. learn self-
students, etc. Some
confidenc
students
e.
may not be

involved in

interactions

.
 S28

Five Tips for Building Strong Collaborative Learning

Teachers share successful tactics for helping kids learn from each other with examples

from math and English classes.

BY EDUTOPIA STAFF

Credit: Zachary Fink

1. Consider Classroom Geography

Many classrooms are arranged specifically to enable the flow of ideas across a shared

workspace. In math classes, students work in groups of four, so desks are arranged in clusters

of two sets of two desks facing each other. In this arrangement, engaged groups of students

are easy to spot, says math teacher Betsy Thomas. "Their faces are directed towards each

other or each other's work, making sure people are staying together and sharing questions and

explanations." In the best groups, she says, you'll see a student actually get up out of her seat

and walk around to help another student figure out where he might be going wrong.

English seminars are set up around large, oval Harkness tables, where students can all face

each other. Because eye contact is key to fruitful discussions, English teacher Julie Anderson

always makes sure her students can see each other at the start of class and will reposition
 S29

those who can't. In rooms without a Harkness table, she has her students sit in a circle. The

tighter the circle, the better, she adds. If the students spread out too much, it can diffuse

energy.

"The Harkness table works because all the kids can see each other and nobody is privileged,

including the teacher," Anderson explains. "We are learners like everyone else." In a recent

discussion, students talked about the differences between honor, fame, reputation, and

respect, which prompted a conversation about how the pursuit of fame and honor today

compares to that in ancient Greece. It was a conversation that gave Anderson food for

thought, too. "I found myself wondering for days afterwards what exactly fame and honor

meant in these respective cultures," she says.

2. Focus on Process, Not Right Answers

In math classes at College Prep, teachers have a clever way of shifting the emphasis away

from right or wrong answers. Students are given problem sets with coded values (PDF). Each

student is assigned a unique set of numeric values for a set of variables (e.g., for one student,

a=12, b=8, c=15, d=3, and for another, a=5, b=12, c=2, and d=7). The students plug these

values into the problems, each student ending up with a different set of correct answers. As a

result, when the students review the problem sets together, they must focus on how they

arrived at their final answers rather than on the answers themselves.

Similarly, in the school's English seminars, there can be more than one right answer when

analyzing and interpreting text: students are encouraged to share differing perspectives.

During a freshman discussion about The Odyssey (PDF), for instance, the class was asked

who might be a modern-day equivalent of Odysseus. One student half-jokingly suggested

 S30

Tim Tebow, the oft-maligned football player, noting how the displays of resourcefulness by

the two were similar. Another student suggested Michael Phelps, the Olympic swimmer,

citing the mistakes he'd made in the past, and a third compared Odysseus's journey to that of

Felix Baumgartner, the skydiver who recently broke the sound barrier, as both journeys had

their uncertainties and struggles. "It really comes back to textual evidence," says Maya, a

junior at College Prep. "People can have completely different answers, but as long as they

support it with a good analysis, then their answer is completely acceptable and sometimes

even brilliant."

3. Build In Accountability to Each Other

A sense of shared responsibility among students for their collective success is essential to

many classroom practices at College Prep. For instance, in Thomas's Math II class, students

take group tests (PDF) at the end of some units. Though the students work in groups and

consult on answers, each student completes a copy of the test. However, only one test from

each group is randomly selected for grading to ensure students are grasping the material and

are all on the same page. "We intentionally make the problems on the group test much harder

than we do on the individual tests," says Thomas. "But because they're free to work together,

they generally prevail on the questions."

At the end of every unit, Thomas also gives each group a collaboration grade

(PDF) indicating how well the group worked together over the course of the unit. Each group

is graded as one, so everyone within a group gets the same mark. These collaboration grades

count for 10 percent of students' overall grade for each unit.

Anderson uses discussion tracker sheets (PDF) in her English seminars to capture the flow of

the conversation (PDF) and how often each student speaks. These maps provide a clear

record for students to see how much each is contributing during class and who may need

some extra encouragement to enter into the flow of the discussion.

 S31

4. Let Students Teach Each Other

Both the math and English teachers have honed techniques to encourage peer-to-peer

teaching among their students. Again, Thomas and her math colleagues intentionally make

the group classwork problems harder, pushing students to first seek help from their

groupmates before appealing to the teacher. If students begin problem solving by explaining

elements of the problem to each other, chances are those exchanges will trigger others until

they find the solution. And if not, they will at least have enjoyed a healthy dose of

collaborative critical thinking.

In English, the seminars are composed of both juniors and seniors to help the younger

students learn how to be receptive, active participants in discussions. "Juniors learn from the

seniors how to act in the seminar and that gets passed on year after year," explains Anderson.

She also assigns pairs of students to lead class occasionally, another way of helping them

learn by teaching. "When I'm put in a position of actually having to lead the discussion, I

have to come up with more things to say," says Maddy, a junior. "That way, I learn more than

I would have otherwise."

Online discussions provide another forum for students to collaborate and share ideas, and

Anderson often uses these online conversations to shape the next day's class discussion. For

example, in a recent online discussion about Plato's Allegory of the Cave on the class's

website -- which was built using the free Google Sites tool -- students were required to write

three questions (PDF): a discussion question, a question based on a specific point in the text,

and a question based on a personal perspective. The next night, Anderson selected five of

their questions as starters (PDF) for which they wrote 400-word responses. To further stoke
 S32

the collaboration, students were also required to address the thoughts of the two students

above them in the thread, a tactic Anderson uses to encourage more peer-to-peer learning.

5. Encourage Students to Be In Tune with Each Other

For students to feel comfortable asking each other for help, it's important for them to learn

how to be sensitive to each other. In math, each group is thoughtfully selected to provide a

mix of skill levels and personality types and Thomas gives concrete feedback on the group's

interactions. She will encourage more vocal students to take a step back, making room for

more reticent ones to pose their own questions and see that their participation actually

benefits the whole group. Overall, everyone begins to understand how a successful,

productive group functions.

In her English classes, Anderson employs a number of methods to help students stay in tune

with each other. She is intentional about modeling examples of positive and engaged

listeners. She insists that everyone sit up straight, make eye contact, and not raise their hands

while someone else is speaking, helping the entire class understand the messages body

language can convey.

Anderson also starts every class with a few moments of quiet to help students recalibrate their

mindset and focus. She frequently asks students to indicate their energy and stress levels.

This not only helps Anderson structure the class -- on a "low energy" day, she might have

students pair up for individual readings -- but it also helps students better understand and be

sensitive to one another's emotional states of mind.

Before embarking on the actual discussion, Anderson sometimes assigns roles to three

students to help facilitate discourse. The scribe takes notes for the entire class, which allows

the rest of the students to focus on the discussion; the discussion mapper uses a table diagram
 S33

to track who is talking and how often, providing students with a visual representation of their

contributions; and the moderator makes sure the discussion goes smoothly, either by slowing

things down if the discussion is moving too quickly or by creating space in the conversation

for quieter students to contribute.

Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/stw-collaborative-learning-tips

This article originally published on 12/5/2012

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4534429886971942&pid=1.7&w=268&h=185&c=7&rs=1

Notes
 S34

Post-Training
Summary Evaluation

1. What are the three most important things [or topics] you learned during this training?

2. Was an appropriate amount of material covered during this week? If not, was too
much material covered or too little?
 S35

3. To what extent do you expect this meeting will make a difference in the way you do
your job?

1 2 3 4 5

No Tremendous

Difference Difference

Comments:
 S36

Daily Evaluation Form

Name of training: ______________________Date: __________

1. What did you enjoy most about today?

2. What did you learn during today's sessions that you anticipate using in your work?

3. Was there anything you did not understand during today's sessions? Please provide specific
examples.
 S37

4. What is the most valuable thing you learned today (knowledge or skills)?

5. What other specific comments do you have?

Thank you.

Retrieved from http://www.go2itech.org/HTML/TT06/toolkit/evaluation/forms.html

 S38

OVERALL EVALUATION OF PRESENTATION

4. Please take a moment to answer the following questions. Your comments are an important
contribution as we design learning experiences to meet your professional needs.

What will you do differently in your practice/service setting as a result of this training?

What do you feel were the strengths of this presentation?

What do you feel were the weaknesses of this presentation?

How can we improve this presentation?

What additional training-development education do you require?

 S39

5. Please rate the following statements using a 1 through 5 scale where:

1 = Disagree Strongly 5 = Agree Strongly

____ The difficulty level was about right.

____ I can apply the information in my practice/service setting.

____ The presentation met my professional educational needs.

____The trainer actively involved me in the learning process.

____ As a result of this training, I feel more confident in my capacity to

develop training materials.

 S40

Personal Report of Communication Apprehension

Directions: This instrument is composed of 24 statements concerning feelings about

communicating with others.

Please indicate the degree to which each statement applies to you by marking whether you:

Strongly Disagree = 1; Disagree = 2; are Neutral = 3; Agree = 4; Strongly Agree = 5

_____ 1. I dont like speaking in groups.

_____ 2. Generally, I am comfortable speaking in groups.

_____ 3. I am tense and nervous speaking in groups.

______4. I like to speak in groups.

_____ 5. Speaking with new people makes me tense and nervous.

_____ 6. I am calm and relaxed speaking with new people.

____ _7.

_____ 8.

_____ 9.

_____10.

_____11.

_____ 12. I am very relaxed when answering questions in class.

_____13. When speaking with new students, I feel very nervous.

_____14. I have no fear of speaking up in conversations.

_____15. I am very tense and nervous in conversations.

_____16. I am very calm and relaxed in conversations.

_____17. When peaking with new students, I feel very relaxed.

_____18. Im afraid to speak up in conversations.

 S41

_____19. I have no fear of giving a presentation.

_____20. Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid while giving a presentation

_____21. I feel relaxed while giving a presentation.

_____22. My thoughts become confused when I am giving a presentation.

_____23.

_____24. While giving a presentation, I get so nervous I forget facts I really know.

SCORING:

Group discussion: 18 - (scores for items 2, 4, & 6) + (scores for items 1, 3, & 5)

Meetings: 18 - (scores for items 8, 9, & 12) + (scores for items 7, 10, & 11)

Interpersonal: 18 - (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores for items 13, 15, & 18)

Public Speaking: 18 - (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores for items 20, 22, &24)

Adapted from

http://www.natcom.org/uploadedFiles/Teaching_and_Learning/Assessment_Resources/PDF-

Assessing_Motivation_to_Communicate_2ndEd.pdf
 S42

Willingness to Communicate (WTC)

Directions: Below are 20 situations in which a person might choose to communicate or not to

communicate. You have completely free choice in this type of situation. How many times (1-

100) would you would choose to communicate in each type of situation? Indicate in the space at

the left of the item what percent of the time you would choose to communicate.

(0 = Never to 100 = Always)

_____ 1. Talk with a service station attendant.

_____ 2. Talk with a physician.

_____ 3. Present a talk to a group of strangers.

_____ 4. Talk with an acquaintance while standing in line.

_____ 5. Talk with a salesperson in a store.

_____ 6. Talk in a large meeting of friends.

_____ 7. Talk with a police officer.

_____ 8. Talk in a small group of strangers.

_____ 9. Talk with a friend while standing in line.

_____10. Talk with a waiter/waitress in a restaurant.

_____11. Talk in a large meeting of acquaintances.

_____12. Talk with a stranger while standing in line.

_____13. Talk with a secretary.

_____14. Present a talk to a group of friends.

_____15. Talk in a small group of acquaintances.

_____16. Talk with a garbage collector.

_____17. Talk in a large meeting of strangers.

 S43

_____18. Talk with a spouse (or girl/boyfriend).

_____19. Talk in a small group of friends.

_____20. Present a talk to a group of acquaintances.

Scoring:

Context-type sub-scores--

Group Discussion: Add scores for items 8, 15, & 19; then divide by 3.

Meetings: Add scores for items 6, 11, 17; then divide by 3.

Interpersonal: Add scores for items 4, 9, 12; then divide by 3.

Public Speaking: Add scores for items 3, 14, 20; then divide by 3.

Receiver-type sub-scores--

Stranger: Add scores for items 3, 8, 12, 17; then divide by 4.

Acquaintance: Add scores for items 4, 11, 15, 20; then divide by 4.

Adapted from

http://www.natcom.org/uploadedFiles/Teaching_and_Learning/Assessment_Resources/PDF-

Assessing_Motivation_to_Communicate_2ndEd.pdf
 S44

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

GENERAL INFORMATION:

First Name:

Age:

City and country:

Official language(s) of your country:

Your native language:

Other languages you speak:

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS:

1. What is your country famous for?

2. What do you like about living in your city?

3. What do you not like about living in your city?

4. Describe your family.

 S45

5. Describe a good friend. Tell about his/her personality and physical

appearance. Why is he/she your friend?

6. What do you usually do with your friends? When do you usually meet them? Where do

you usually go? How do you usually go places with them (by car, by bicycle, by bus, on

foot)?

7. How many days a week do you go to school? How many hours do you spend at school

every day?

8. How long is your summer vacation? How many holidays do you have during the school

year? What are they?

9. What are the subjects that you are studying at school this year?

10. What subjects do you like the most? Why?

11. What subject do you dislike the most? Why?

12. What do you usually carry in your school bag?

 S46

13. What is in fashion for girls this season?

14. What is in fashion for boys this season?

15. What is your very favorite movie?

16. What is your very favorite book?

17. Who are your favorite musicians?

18. What is your favorite food?

19. Do you like American food?

20. What is your opinion of America?

21. If an American student came to your city, where would you take him/her?

22. Look into your future and complete this phrase: Ten years from now...

Retrieved from http://nclrc.org/teaching_materials/flteen_interviews/templates.htm

 S47

STUDENT MOTIVATION SURVEY

I am learning English for pleasure and enjoyment:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I want to learn English very much:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I know the best ways for me to study and learn English:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I am learning English to get more money, a better job, to make my parents happy, to finish

university:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I feel nervous when I speak English outside of class:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

My goals in this class are:

I dont know (100%) ___:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: I know (100%)

I like English:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I like to communicate in English:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

 S48

I am nervous in class:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I am learning English because I want to talk to native English speakers:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I like to be perfect/excellent in everything I do:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

My level of motivation to learn English is:

VERY HIGH____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: VERY LOW

My interest in other languages is:

VERY HIGH____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: VERY LOW

My feelings about my English teacher are

VERY HIGH____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: VERY LOW

I think that I will get a good grade in English because I worked hard:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

I think that I will get a good grade in English because it is easy for me to learn languages:

DEFINITELY NO____:_____:_____:_____:____:_____:_____: DEFINATELY YES

 S49

Websites for planning workshops:

http://enhancinged.wgbh.org/formats/person/wkshp_agenda.html

http://edition.tefl.net/articles/teacher-techniqye/tefl-workshops-complaints/

http:// enhancinged.wgbh.org/formats/person/wkshop_schedule.html

http:// enhancinged.wgbh.org/formats/person/wkshpplanning.html

http://www.asme.org/groups/educational-resources/asme-teacher-workshop-guide/workshop-
checklist

http://enhancinged.wgbh.org/formats/person/workshops.html

http://www.usingenglish.com/articles/setting-up-workshops-for-teachers.html

http://www.ehow.com/print/how_6506708_ develop-teacher-workshops.html
 S50

TEFL.net : TEFL Articles : Teacher Technique : Common complaints about TEFL workshops

Common complaints about TEFL workshops

and how to respond to them. As the number of workshops about teaching English I have
attended and given is well over a hundred, Ive heard and made a fair number of complaints over
the years and tried to respond to those grumbles when planning the occasional workshops I give
now. Below are some [...]

Written by Alex Case for TEFL.net

and how to respond to them.

As the number of workshops about teaching English I have attended and given is well over a
hundred, Ive heard and made a fair number of complaints over the years and tried to respond to
those grumbles when planning the occasional workshops I give now. Below are some
suggestions on how you can take the same approach to your own involvement in CPD:

1. Too much pairwork

This is an example of the largest group of complaints I have come across- that the workshop is
too much like an EFL lesson. This general complaint could be because teachers are bored with
things they do in the classroom all the time, or it could be because they think it is a sign of
someone not putting enough thought into their workshop plan. In the case of too much pairwork,
the person leading the workshop has probably instinctively used it as usual without necessarily
thinking about its purpose- which in an English class is to expand the amount of speaking for
each person, something that is irrelevant in a workshop. Good reasons for having pairwork in a
workshop are to give people the time they need to think about something before you give your
ideas, to give people who need warming up or are bored or unmotivated a break and change of
interaction (only likely to be necessary if it is their second or third workshop that day), or to
introduce pairwork to teachers who dont use it in class. Bad reasons include doing it
automatically, and just filling time. As in a carefully designed TEFL class, thinking about (and
maybe writing down) the reasons why you have each pairwork stage and whether it is
replaceable with something more novel or less time wasting should make sure that you avoid this
complaint. You could also explain those reasons to the workshop participants and tell them how
much time is worthwhile spending on that pairwork stage for those reasons. Otherwise it is best
to find a way that is less time consuming and maybe newer to the participants, such as all of
them taking the Student A role and you taking the Student B role, or one of them shouting out a
question for anyone at all attending the workshop to answer. The same criteria work for
justifying and avoiding mingle activities and taking part in songs, games etc that you are
demonstrating.

2. Too much brainstorming

Again, the fact that TEFL teachers do this all the time in their classes and all the time in their
workshops isnt a good sign, or at least could be taken negatively. The actual negative effects
could be that the workshop leader seems lazy or with no ideas of their own and that some people
 S51

come out of a long brainstorming stage having learnt nothing new. One way of avoiding these
negative impressions is to have a huge list of your own ideas ready to add a few to what
everyone else has contributed while or after brainstorming. In fact, to save time you could just
take one or two ideas from others before giving your own ideas. The problem with these
approaches is that they can make any brainstorming seem like a bit of a sham, so another
approach is to brainstorm as usual but tell them that you will give out a photocopy at the end of
the session with your own ideas on the subject.

3. Too little input from the presenter

The complaint above is an example of this. Unlike some of your students, the people attending
your workshop should be able to take every idea you give them and think about them and use
them every day. Because of this and the fact that they might rarely get the chance to go to
workshops and so have a long time to think about a few ideas (like students who are in that
position with English- maybe those who use English at work and come for a 2 week intensive
course) they need and want lots of input rather than lots of time to think about their own ideas.
The exceptions are people who have had a lot of workshops that day or recently, workshops
where you know that specific people attending will have a lot to contribute (and so the workshop
leader is more like a chair in a meeting than a presenter) and internal workshops that are as much
about sharing ideas (maybe to improve the school) as they are about giving new ideas. As the
more demanding people attending your workshop will leave asking themselves What did the
workshop leader tell me that I didnt know?, look at the first draft of your workshop plan with
this in mind. You might also want to prepare for every possible question and give plenty of time
for Q and A, making sure you answer the questions yourself rather than usually bouncing them
back to the other participants.

4. Too much eliciting

This could be an example of the point above, or another example of just because its good in the
TEFL classroom doesnt mean, as people might need to speak to aid memory but they arent
there for actual speaking practice. Too much eliciting- like concept checking, instruction
checking or too much praise- can also seem patronizing to some people. It might also be less
suitable for a large workshop where people dont know each other and cant necessarily hear
people in other parts of the room speak than it would be in a small internal workshop. Even
knowing all these things, it can be difficult to stop what becomes an almost instinctive use of
elicitation for TEFL teachers. To get round this, put an effort into putting other ways of getting
people involved into your workshop plan, e.g. matching, ranking, and agreeing and disagreeing
with statements.

5. Too theoretical
The solution here is to make sure people who attend go away with something they can use in
their classes the next day, or at least in the near future once they have had a think about the ideas.
Ways of doing this include giving them photocopiable worksheets, lists of practical ideas such as
classroom games, or at least a few suggestions for what kind of practical classroom activities
your research findings could lead to if they turn out to be backed up by future research.

6. Not suitable for my classes

Ways of avoiding this complaint include making sure the workshop description makes it very
 S52

clear what kind of classes its ideas are suitable for so that only the right kind of people attend,
telling them what kinds of classes each idea in it could be used for so they dont miss out on
ideas they could actually use, finding out as much as possible about the people who will attend or
have attended so that you can adapt the workshop to their needs (maybe writing this flexibility
into your workshop plan), and making sure the ideas or variations on them are useable with a
wide range of classes (either different ideas for different classes or ideas that are useable with
many different kinds). Factors that make classes different to maybe take into account include
level, how mixed the levels in each class are, class size, amount of technology available, room to
move around, seating arrangements, ages, culture, syllabus constraints, discipline, needs and
motivation.

7. Not for me
As well as being suitable for a different kind of class, the ideas in a workshop could be most
suitable for a different kind of teacher, for example one at a different point in their career, with a
different kind of teaching style, with a different teaching philosophy, or with different ideas
about SLA. Again, try to make it as generally applicable for the people who could come to it as
possible, and then make the limits of that range clear so that people can make an informed choice
whether to attend or not. You can simplify this by writing down a perfect teacher for that
workshop, the least suitable person for that workshop, and then deciding what a good dividing
line between the two would be.

8. No new ideas/ lots of things I had heard before

This could be a case of misjudging the experience and background of the people who were going
to attend, or of not giving enough information to put such people off- or in the worst case just of
having no original ideas to share! Not having your own idea of how to change the world of TEFL
is not, however, a reason to stop giving workshops. Ways of passing on ideas most people wont
have heard but that are not your own include borrowing them from a brand new book or edition
of a magazine (obviously acknowledging the source), doing the same with something so old or
obscure that it has been forgotten, and adapting ideas from your hobbies or another field you
know well.

9. Good ideas in theory but impractical

Mention as many possible examples of them working in practice (or if they are new ideas,
something similar working in practice or these ideas working in different contexts) as possible,
mention your own practical classroom experience and impatience with airy fairy ideas to show
that you dont accept any old nonsense, make sure each idea and section of the workshop
includes practical ideas rather than just tacking a few ideas onto the final part of the workshop,
and/or start the workshop with practical applications and work backwards to the theory.

10. Didnt have much impact on my teaching

This could be similar to the point above, or could be the opposite- I tried all the practical ideas
out, but because there was nothing radical behind them my classes went basically the same as
before. If the latter could be the case, try to make sure all the ideas tie together and have a
fundamental concept behind them, either by starting with a radical and/ or new theory and seeing
what practical ideas it could lead to, or by organising the ideas you want to include into ones that
share common ideas and trying to find a theory or theories that justifies them and ties them
 S53

together, rejecting any ideas that dont tie in. You could also write this factor down on your
workshop plan you make sure you have thought about it, e.g. People attending this workshop
should lead to their classes being more/ less. This will be achieved by

11. It was just a set of unconnected ideas

Whilst a workshop on my favourite activities avoids all possible complaints about being
impracticable, randomness does make the ideas difficult to remember and doesnt help people
come up with their own similar ideas. The tips for this are the same as Didnt make much
impact on my teaching above.

12. Couldnt understand the workshop leader

This could be a case of language level (many outside workshops have a mix of native and non-
native English speakers attending), use of jargon (what training people have had changes what
kind of TEFL jargon they are familiar with- some English teachers dont even know the word
TEFL, for example), having complicated ideas, ideas that are only easily understandable if you
have certain knowledge or a certain kind of brain (e.g. research based on statistics), or just be
because of the workshop leader being unclear. Just as with an observed or other important
lesson, you can write down as much of what you are going to say as possible and simplify it- and
then throw that script away so that you dont actually recite it and so lose all spontaneity. One
good way of simplifying both language and ideas is to see if you can translate it into another
language, or at least understand a translation of it.

13. It didnt answer the questions I had about the topic

For example, From the workshop title I expected to find out how to boost my students listening
skills in a way that would improve their exam scores, but instead it was all a bit vague and
mainly about listening when taking part in conversations. This example suggests one solution,
which is to make the title and any accompanying description of the workshop clear, informative
and unambiguous. You can make sure that the information tells them what questions will be
answered by writing the description that way, e.g. This workshop will attempt to answer the
questions Another technique is to start the workshop by asking the people who attend to write
down what questions they have about the topic, and then get them to see which have been
answered and which they would like to ask in the final Q and A stage near the end.

14. Too much taking part

I am one example of someone who is happy to act the fool in front of a class of kids, or even
when Im leading a workshop, but do not want to be picked out of the audience in a workshop or
take part in action songs anymore than I would want to when I go to the theatre. From what I
have heard other people say, I am not the only one who feels that way. Other reasons people
might not be happy taking part is that they think it is wasting time, that being given a written
description of it is more useful for the future than whatever you can remember from doing it, or
that they learn better or quicker in other ways. If you really think demonstration is necessary to
explain something properly or make it memorable, possibilities are to give them a less active or
embarrassing way of doing it (e.g. sitting down, mouthing silently, choral drilling, shadow
reading, doing the actions in a smaller way such as just with your hands on your lap),
demonstrating with one obviously keen person or friend you have cued to do it, or showing a
 S54

video or puppet show demonstrating it.

15. Treated like children

This is mainly due to the point above, but could also be because of excess eliciting, concept and
instruction checking, or talking with classroom level language to a group of high level or native
level English speakers. Try to avoid all of these- actually, I tend to try and avoid them in my
classes too! One way of testing your workshop plan for this point, which works well for many of
the points above as well, is to think How would I change this if it was one of my (childrens)
classes? If the answer is not at all, you might want to think about changing it at least a little to
make it more suited to its purpose.

Written by Alex Case for TEFL.net

September 2008 | Filed under Teacher Technique
Alex Case is Teflnet Reviews Editor. His personal blog is TEFLtastic.

TEFL.net 1998-2013
 S55

TEFL.net : TEFL Articles : Materials : Easy ways to write a TEFL workshop and/ or TEFL
article

Easy ways to write a TEFL workshop and/ or

TEFL article
Sometimes it can be difficult to decide where to start

Written by Alex Case for TEFL.net

There is no end to the possible things you could write about or speak about if you have the whole
world of teaching and language learning to choose from, but sometimes it can be difficult to
decide where to start.

1. Problem and solutions

Think of one problem you had, then give the solution you used, others you tried, and any others
you can think of. Discuss what other situation those solutions can be used in and/ or what you
learnt from the whole problem solving process.

2. Ways of practising/ games for

Make a list of ways of practising one particular grammar point, function, situation, type of exam
question, etc, plus maybe the general principles you used to come up with those ideas or other
things the ideas can be used for. This is perhaps the easiest way to start writing, as the initial
ideas can come from a Google search or trawl of books in the teachers room.

3. Games using
Make a list of ways of using one or more particular classroom props (OHP etc), particular toys
(beach ball etc), or materials the students are given or are available in the self-access centre
(graded readers etc), along with ideas on what language points you could cover in those ways. If
you got some or all of the ideas from elsewhere, letting others know the sources can also be
useful.

4. Good ideas from

Pass on some highlights from a particular workshop or training course you attended, website
youve found, teachers book you are using, TEFL magazine you have read, one particular TEFL
author or other TEFL celebrity, one teachers forum etc.

5. Ideas from the world of

Give ideas on how do adapt activities from outside TEFL, such as drama (e.g. warmers), therapy
(e.g. speaking exercises), or art (vocabulary learning).

6. Sources for/ ways of finding out more about

Talk about how teachers can find out more about particular kinds of teaching, alternative
teaching methodologies, their students areas of business etc. without too much boredom, time or
 S56

expense, starting with how you did so.

7. Alternative ways of
Doing a textbook listening, introducing a grammar points, using a particular textbook etc.

8. Teaching classes
Describe how to tackle a particular kind of class, e.g. large classes, mixed level classes, classes
that dont get on, very low or high level, particular age ranges, or mixed pre-experience and post-
experience business classes.

9. Teaching students
Concentrate on one particular kind of student, e.g. the very old, very young, deaf, blind, students
with particular first languages, students who cant read the Roman script etc.

10. What I learnt from teaching

Extreme teaching situations you have been in, and what you learnt from that that has been useful
in your other classes, e.g. teaching a blind student, teaching outdoors, teaching babies

11. What I learnt from

The experience of working in a store, time management training, learning a sport etc and how it
is relevant to language teaching and learning.

12. (Teaching) English is like

One or a connected string of metaphors for teaching or learning a language being like playing a
sport, walking dogs, hunting etc, with ways you can convert that into practical classroom
practices

13. A reaction to another workshop or article

Talk about your disagreement with, extensions of, variations of etc an idea you came across
elsewhere, plus maybe a general theory of how people should approach similar ideas and new
ideas in general.

14. Variations on
Take one well known thing and see how many ways you can come up with of changing the
number of people, use of technology etc, e.g. variations on Find someone who, card games,
board games, or PPP.

15. Training your students to

Use a vocabulary notebook, make foreign friends, read a newspaper on their own, stop
translating etc.

Written by Alex Case for TEFL.net

March 2008 | Filed under Materials
Alex Case is Teflnet Reviews Editor. His personal blog is TEFLtastic.
 S57

Sample Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire

SAMPLE WORKSHOP EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Workshop Name: ____________________________________

Training Location: ____________________________________
Participant Name (optional): ___________________________
Date: _______________
Job Title: __________________________________________
Years in present position? <1 1-3 3-5 5+

INSTRUCTIONS
Please circle your response to the items. Rate aspects of the workshop on a 1 to 5
scale:

1 = "Strongly disagree," or the lowest, most negative impression

3 = "Neither agree nor disagree," or an adequate impression
5 = "strongly agree," or the highest, most positive impression

Choose N/A if the item is not appropriate or not applicable to this workshop. Your
feedback is sincerely appreciated. Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORKSHOP CONTENT (Circle your response to each item.)
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
N/A=Not applicable

1. I was well informed about the objectives 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

of this workshop.

2. This workshop lived up to my expectations. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

3. The content is relevant to my job. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

WORKSHOP DESIGN (Circle your response to each item.)

4. The workshop objectives were clear to me. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

5. The workshop activities stimulated my learning. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

 S58

Sample Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire

6. The activities in this workshop gave me sufficient 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

practice and feedback.

7. The difficulty level of this workshop was 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

appropriate.

8. The pace of this workshop was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR (FACILITATOR) (Circle your response to each item.)

9. The instructor was well prepared. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

10. The instructor was helpful. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

WORKSHOP RESULTS (Circle your response to each item.)

11. I accomplished the objectives of this workshop. 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

12. I will be able to use what I learned in this 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

workshop.

SELF-PACED DELIVERY (Circle your response to each item.)

13. The workshop was a good way for me to 1 2 3 4 5 N/A

learn this content.

14. How would you improve this workshop? (Check all that apply.)

___Provide better information before the workshop.

___Clarify the workshop objectives.
___Reduce the content covered in the workshop.
___Increase the content covered in the workshop.
___Update the content covered in the workshop.
___Improve the instructional methods.
___Make workshop activities more stimulating.
___Improve workshop organization.
___Make the workshop less difficult.
___Make the workshop more difficult.
 S59

Sample Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire

How would you improve this workshop (contd)

___Slow down the pace of the workshop.

___Speed up the pace of the workshop.
___Allot more time for the workshop.
___Shorten the time for the workshop.
___Improve the tests used in the workshop.
___Add more video to the workshop.

15. What other improvements would you recommend in this workshop?

16. What is least valuable about this workshop?

17. What is most valuable about this workshop?

Are you interested in receiving other educational materials/workshops from [your

organization or partner name here] or e-mail updates about this project?

Yes No

If so, please write your name, address, e-mail, phone number, and the subject(s) and
grade level(s) you work with most.
 S60

http://www.serviceleader.org/sites/default/files/file/7%20Workshop%20Questionnaire.pdf