I see that the interactionist theory is more evidently enacted in the lesson plan. However, there are also small bits of the cognitivist theory woven in.
I would say that by working in pairs or groups, it shows that students are able to learn while interacting with their peers. They are able to even evaluate each other during the process and this sort of feedback could sometimes be more beneficial to the learners as the teacher might at times be unable to give undivided attention to each and every student. Also, students might be less conscious of their pronunciation when it is done with peers rather than the teacher.
According to the cognitivist theory, learners are seen as something like an information processing centre and that learning is focused on the mental minds of the learners. Rules taught to them by the teacher are processed in their minds and then there will be an outcome at the end. In this case, the teacher explicitly teaches them that before a full stop or an exclamation mark, syllables have a fall tone and before a comma or question mark, syllables have a rise tone. This “rule” is processed in the minds of the learners and at the end of it they are able to complete the tasks assigned by the teacher. (Some might argue that this has to do with the behaviorist theory as the teacher merely explicitly teaches the rules and students are expected to form a habit at the end of it.)
Sidetracking a little, here the teacher assigned ‘tasks’ to students as opposed to ‘activities’, where the former is “dynamic, focused on the making and communication of meanings (e.g. project work)” and the latter is “individual, quiet work that is static and limited (e.g. gap-filling exercises)” (Towndrow, 2007). This is essential in the learning process as learners do not end up becoming passive learners.
Strengths:
- In my humble opinion, I thought that the teacher brilliantly activated the schema of the students by showing them a humorous YouTube video on pronunciation as that could arouse their curiosity and make them more interested in the rest of the lesson.
- The use of ICT was another plus point of the lesson plan. By using the IFS gadget with the rest of the class, it helps to involve the whole class even though only a couple of students are actually participating in the task.
Weaknesses:
- One thing that I thought could be better improved was the consistent pair work throughout the lesson. Students could perhaps work in pairs first and later groups instead of just sticking to just one other person. In that way, more people could evaluate each other and that is when the saying “two brains are better than one” comes into play.
- Perhaps the teacher could give examples instead of explicitly teaching the students certain rules in pronunciation (e.g. syllables have a fall tone before a full stop, etc). Students would most probably forget or even mix up these rules if they are taught with understanding them. Hence, giving the students clear examples would help them to better decipher why these rules work this way.
Hi Effie! Thank you for pointing out about the Cognitive theory where the teacher explicitly teaches them that before a full stop or an exclamation mark, syllables have a fall tone and before a comma or question mark, syllables have a rise tone. I didn’t realize that the Cognitive theory comes into play as I thought that it was of a Behaviourist theory where the students will model the teacher pronunciation. However I find that the video is quite irrelevant as the video focuses more on plosives or proper articulation where the main lesson is more on the falling and rising of intonation patterns. Having this kind of video can help to motivate student’s interest and at the same time capture their attention since the video is presented in a humorous way. Thus, the teacher has to be critical in order to ensure that the video is relevant to the topic and it will one way or another evokes student’s curiosity. The use of the IFS is a great ICT tool to ensure that all students participate in the activity and no one student is left out. It feels as though their opinions are appreciated.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the group activity, I also find that the teacher can encourage also group activity and at the same time ensure that when they pair up with their members it have to be a mixed ability. The groupings of the pair work might gives rise to problems where students would prefer to pair up with someone they are familiar with. Students who are of lower ability might be left out and thus faces difficulty in finding a friend to pair up with. Thus, the teacher has to therefore ensure that all students are paired up in such a way where no student is left out and to ensure that each pair is of a mixed ability so that they are able to learn from one another.