I teach a small class at an upper secondary school. The students are attending vocational studies at VG1-level. The school is offering these student to be taught in a small class because they need adapted education.
As a group they are facing some common challenges that entitle them to be taught in a small class: They are not used to producing longer texts in English or to speak solely in English. They also need to enhance their vocabulary and mastery of grammer in order to speak more fluently.
We need to work with various parts of the language in short and varied sessions. It’s not difficult to see when the students are bored or unconcentrated. This means that working with this class probably represents one of the more efficient ways of learning what works in class and what does not, given that we as teachers can generalise our experiences in this way. Of course, teachers do generalise their teaching experience, a phenomenon that in Norwegian pedagogic literature is referred to as “praktisk yrkesteori”. This term was coined by Handal and Lauvås in 1983 and refers to the sum of both the generalised experiences of a teacher and his or her general values (see Lyngsnes and Rismark 2010).
The competence aims that we’ve mainly been focusing on, are these:
Write formal and informal texts with good writing structure and coherence based on themes that interest him/her and which are important for society.
Present and discuss international news topics and current events.
Discuss social and cultural conditions and values from a number of English-speaking countries.
The students have been reading different sorts of texts and producing different sorts of text. All of the texts, both the ones they have read and the ones they have produced, are shorter types of text.
Sometimes they have answered questions to show that they have understood the text. This works fairly well, as they are used to these kinds of tasks. As they have also expressed their impatience concerning longer pieces of texts, both when it comes to what they are supposed to read and what they are supposed to write.
Although the students do their work, I can’t help but wonder if these kinds of tasks will turn out meaningless in the long run. The question arises: Can I tempt them to do some bigger projects after a while?
At other times, the students have produced informal texts, for instance on themes as:
A presentation of your best friend (imagine that someone from abroad would come to stay with you, and you wanted to tell him/her about your friend in advance)
One of your best holiday experiences – what happened?
The students are all able to communicate and tell a short story, but the texts have some basic grammar mistakes. They swap between different verb tenses, and there are other basic grammar mistakes as well.
As they all seem to loathe traditional grammar lessons, and seem to learn nothing from it, I’ve decided to try to practice on very specific tasks related to grammar – particularly on verb tenses – by introducing station teaching. As the students are easily bored, but still need some basic skills work, I hope this might represent a varied way to do it.
Literature:
Anvik, T. C., Burgess, R., Fuhre, P. and Sørhus, T. B. 2009: Tracks 1, Fellesbok, Engelsk for yrkesfag Vg 1. Oslo: Cappelen Damm
Lyngsnes, K. and Rismark, M., 2010: Didaktisk arbeid. 2nd edition, 4th impression. Oslo: Gyldendal
I think you have done a good job in singling out the most important areas of your students language skills to work with. As these kids need adapted education the focus on speaking more fluently must seem more practically useful for them than working with more theoretical subjects. The competence aims you have chosen to work with also mirror this. To write texts concerning their own interests are according to my experience very motivating. I introduced a game in my class that both stronger and weaker pupils have expressed their enjoyment with. In small groups, they take turns constructing sentences writing a story about a given topic. Some of the stories end up with aliens, mafia and war, while some stay focused on the lawyers work ethic. Nonetheless, the pupils are forced to construct language, and as they work in groups, they discuss the language. My experience is from lower secondary, but I still think it might be interesting for vocational students, especially the ones that need adapted education.
Concerning the grammar, I can only agree that it is very difficult to teach bored, unmotivated students. One thing I can think of is to put them in situations where they want to communicate and find they lack the skills and then get immediately to teaching it, a little at a time. How to do this is on the other hand more challenging. I would love to hear some more about your station work and how it went.
Dear Heidi,
thanks for your blog where you share the challenges of working with a small
class of vocational students. I was wondering how many students you have. Is this really
a group rather than a whole class?
My immediate response is to question to what extent you try to select texts according to the
students’ chosen vocation ? (You do not say what the vocation is, or if there is a mixture of students with more than one vocation). You do not say what kind of exam these students are going to face at the end of their English course, and who is going to make this exam. This is a very important factor affecting your choice of teaching materials, activities and plans. In other words, to what extent are you bound by the curriculum goals ?
I think it is widely accepted that the English curriculum for vocational students needs to be reformed so that they are not expected to meet the same academic goals as those students taking the academic option ( «Studiespesialerende»). Unfortunately, since this reform has still not been implemented, it seems that you, and others who teach weaker vocational students, are forced to try to teach vocational students to read and write longer texts, which they are often not interested in doing. My question is, do they have to do this as an exam preparation ?
I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about working with «various parts of the language in short and varied sessions». The ideas you wrote about linked to friendship, holidays and short stories all sound potentially attractive, as does the idea of trying to make any grammar work more creative. I think you are working on the right lines and should continue trying to use a wide variety of different activities while also finding out what motivates the students.
At some stage before or during the coming semester, you could write down, explain and offer your students a range of possible activities, including project work, and get them to choose which ones they want to do. But again, it is unclear which curricular constraints you are working within.
James
I enjoyed reading this post.
The first thing that really hits me is that you listen to your students, you take their opinions into consideration. This is in my opinion a key feature of good teaching, and absolutely neccesary for creating a good learning environment. The signal effect of not only listening to what they have to say, but also changing your plans from their feedback will let them know that you respect them, and this is a good way to start a teacher-pupil relation. Equally important, it shows that you are able to adapt to different situations.
You say that you started to feel the text writing was meaningless. On the contrary, if their starting point is very low why do you have to aim so high as to write a big project? Could a solution be to add 3-4 sentences to their requirement every week? That could create a feeling of progression while still achieving the goals for the period.
I also like that you break up and alternate the methods for teaching grammar. Variation and motivation go hand in hand.