| . |
. |
. |
|
Guidelines
for the Integration of Student Projects into ESP Classrooms
|
|
|
Interest in project work
and its integration into second and foreign language (L2) instruction is growing around
the world; the interest stems in part from the work of Fried-Booth (1982, 1986), Legutke
and Thiel (1983), and Haines (1989). The approach is particularly effective in English for
Specific Purposes (ESP) settings because it easily lends itself to: a . authentic
language use, b . a focus on language at the discourse rather than the sentence
level, c . authentic tasks, and d . learner centeredness, all
characteristics of ESP (Robinson, 1991). Most importantly, project work leads to
purposeful language use because it requires personal involvement on the part of the
students: from the onset of a project, students, in consultation with their instructor,
must decide "what they will do and how they will do it, and this includes not only
the content of the project, but also the language requirements" (Fried-Booth,
1986:5). In what follows, we outline fundamental steps for project work and illustrate how
to translate those steps into practice by reporting on one effort to promote project work
in a business English classroom.
|
|
|
Project
work involves multi-skill activities which focus on a theme of
interest rather than specific language tasks (Haines 1989). In
project work, students work together to achieve a common purpose,
a concrete outcome (e.g., a brochure, a written report, a bulletin
board display, a video, an article for a school newspaper, etc.).
Haines identifies four types of projects: information and research
projects, survey projects, production projects, and performance/organizational
projects. What these different types of projects have in common
is their emphasis on student involvement, collaboration, and responsibility.
In this respect, project work is similar to the cooperative learning
and task-oriented activities that are widely endorsed by educators
interested in building communicative competence and purposeful
language learning. It differs from such approaches, however, in
that it typically requires students to work together over several
days or weeks, both inside and outside the classroom, often in
collaboration with speakers of the target language who are not
normally part of the educational process.
|
|
|
Students in tourism, for
example, might decide to generate a formal report comparing modes of transportation; those
in hotel/restaurant management might develop travel itineraries. In both projects,
students might create survey questionnaires; conduct interviews; compile, sort, analyze,
and summarize survey data; and prepare oral presentations or written reports to present
their final product. In the process, they would use the target language in a variety of
ways: they would talk to each other, read about the focal point of their project, write
survey questionnaires, and listen carefully to those whom they interview. As a result, all
of the skills they are trying to master would come into play in a natural way.
|
|
|
Consider, for example, the
production of a travel brochure. To do this task, tourism students would first have to
identify a destination, in their own country or abroad, and then contact tourist agencies
for information about the location, including transportation, accommodations in all price
ranges, museums and other points of interest, and maps of the region. They would then
design their brochure by designating the intended audience, deciding on an appropriate
length for their suggested itinerary, reviewing brochures for comparable sites, selecting
illustrations, etc. Once the drafting had begun, they could exchange material, evaluate
it, and gradually improve it in the light of criteria they establish. Finally, they would
put the brochure into production, and the outcome would be a finished product, an actual
brochure in a promotional style.
|
|
|
In the spring of 1994, the
authors were invited by the Italian Ministry of Education and the United States
Information Service (USIS) to present a series of workshops on the project approach for
English teachers from vocational high schools in Italy. (see Footnote
1 ) The teachers were from all parts of the country and
worked with students in a wide variety of vocational areas: social services and child
care, electronics, catering, agriculture, telecommunications, dental technology, computer
science, tourism, and even stonecutting. They were all ESP teachers, though the
instructional approaches of their schools varied considerably from discipline to
discipline. In general, courses for students in technical fields such as
telecommunications stressed technical reading, while courses in less technical fields such
as tourism favored interpersonal communication. All of the teachers were competent,
enthusiastic, and committed, but most shared the frustrations of teachers everywhere with
schedules, curricula, and textbooks that expose students to content in uninteresting and
non-communicative ways. Most of the teachers were interested in exploring new techniques
for expanding textbook activities to create a more communicative and stimulating learning
environment.
|
|
|
We discovered, by means of
an informal needs assessment, that the majority of ESP students, whether they were in
computer science or child care, needed more experience in listening to and speaking
English. Students of electronics, for example, had little difficulty with technical
reading, in part because they understood the context and were familiar with key underlying
concepts, and also because they recognized cognates. They had a lot of trouble, however,
talking to English speakers about technical material and their technical work.
|
|
|
Since Italy is a member of
the European Union, and the world's economy is increasingly integrated, the long-term
prospect was that they would also have to communicate informally with native and
non-native speakers about non-technical topics. Students and teachers alike realized that
poring over written manuals and textbook material on such subjects as computer
architecture, circuitry, and the like, would not help students improve their proficiency
in social discourse. Therefore, the immediate priority was to provide meaningful practice
in realistic situations.
|
|
|
Thus, project work had a
strong appeal. Not only does it put students in touch with speakers of the target
language; it also creates a need to communicate, an information gap. Once attention is off
linguistic forms and on the task to be accomplished, students begin to pool their
resources to make themselves understood and to understand their interlocutors. On the
cognitive level, they are required to search and sort their knowledge of the language and
rapidly process input in order to make use of what they know in real time. If topics and
tasks can be identified that require real communication in vocationally appropriate
contexts around relevant subject matter, then the learning process is aligned more closely
with students' long-term communicative needs.
|
|
|
Although recommendations
as to the best way to develop projects in the classroom vary (Fried-Booth, 1986; Haines,
1989; Katz & Chard, 1993; Papandreou, 1994), most are consistent with the eight
fundamental steps described below. Though the focus is upon the collaborative task, the
various steps offer opportunities to build on the students' heightened awareness of the
utility of the language by working directly on language in class. In short, language work
arises naturally from the project itself, "developing cumulatively in response to a
basic objective, namely, the project" (Booth-Fried, 1986:8). Strategically
orchestrated lessons devoted to relevant elements of language capture students' attention
because they have immediate applicability to their project work.
|
|
|
Step I: Define a
theme. In collaboration with students, identify a theme that will amplify the
students' understanding of an aspect of their future work and provide relevant language
practice. In the process, teachers will also build interest and commitment. By pooling
information, ideas, and experiences through discussion, questioning, and negotiation, the
students will achieve consensus on the task ahead.
|
|
|
Step II: Determine
the final outcome. Define the final outcome of the project (e.g., written report,
brochure, debate, video) and its presentation (e.g., collective or individual). Agree on
objectives for both content and language.
|
|
|
Step III: Structure
the project. Collectively determine the steps that the students must take to reach
the final outcome and agree upon a time frame.
|
|
|
Specifically, identify the
information that they will need and the steps they must take to obtain it (e.g., library
research, letters, interviews, faxes). Consider the authentic materials that the students
can consult to enhance the project (e.g., advertisements from English magazines, travel
brochures, menus in English, videos, etc.). Decide on each student's role and put the
students into working groups. If they are not used to working together, they may need help
in adapting to unsupervised collaboration. They may also be a little reluctant to speak
English outside the classroom with strangers. (See Fried-Booth, 1986, and Haines, 1989,
for "bridging activities" and "lead-in activities" which are designed
to develop students' receptiveness to project work.)
|
|
|
Step IV: Identify
language skills and strategies. There are times, during project work, when
students are especially receptive to language skill and strategy practice. Consider
students' skill and strategy needs and integrate lessons into the curriculum that best
prepare students for the language demands associated with Steps V, VI, and VII.
|
|
|
a. Identify the language
skills (e.g., reading, writing, speaking, listening) which students will need to gather
information for their project (Step V). For example: will they have to write letters? If
so, are they familiar with the type of letter that is appropriate for their purposes? Will
they interview native speakers? If so, will they need class sessions devoted to the
language of inquiry and related functions (e.g., how to ask for clarification, or for
repetition)? Should they practice the pronunciation of key words? Will they need help with
intensive listening (i.e., listening to pick out key pieces of information from an
authentic stream of input)? Would roleplays help? Or dictation? Do they need reading
skills practice?
|
|
|
Similarly, identify
strategies for gathering information. If students will secure information from aural
input, show them how to create a grid for systematic data collection to facilitate
retrieval for comparison and analysis.
|
|
|
b. Determine the skills
and strategies that students will need to compile information that may have been gathered
from several sources and/or by several student groups (Step VI). For example, they may
have to read each other's notes, interpret visual materials (e.g., charts and grids), or
listen to and take notes from taped interviews. Plan activities to prepare them for these
tasks.
|
|
|
c. Identify the skills and
strategies that students will need to present the final project to their peers, other
classes, or the headmaster (Step VII). As they prepare their presentations, they may need
to work on the language (written or spoken) of formal reporting.
|
|
|
Step V: Gather
information. After students design instruments for data collection (e.g.,
questionnaires, surveys, interview questions, grids), have them gather information inside
and outside the classroom, individually, in pairs, or in groups. It is important that
students "regard the tracking down and collecting of resources as an integral part of
their involvement" in the project (Haines 1989:11).
|
|
|
Step VI: Compile and
analyze information. Working in groups or as a whole class, students should
compile information they have gathered, compare their findings, and decide how to organize
them for efficient presentation. During this step, students may proofread each other's
work, cross-reference or verify it, and negotiate with each other for meaning.
|
|
|
Step VII: Present
final product. Students will present the outcome of their project work as a
culminating activity. The manner of presentation will largely depend on the final form of
the product. It may involve the screening of a video; the staging of a debate; the
submission of an article to the school newspaper or a written report to the headmaster; or
the presentation of a brochure to a local tourist agency or hotel.
|
|
|
Step VIII: Evaluate
the project. In this final phase of project work, students and teacher reflect on
(1) the steps taken to accomplish their objectives and (2) the language, communicative
skills, and information they have acquired in the process. They can discuss the value of
their experience and its relationship to future vocational needs. They can also identify
aspects of the project which could be improved and/or enhanced in future attempts at
project work.
|
|
|
To illustrate how these
generic steps can be translated into practice, we outline a project entitled
"Purchasing a Computer," designed by two ESP teachers of business English in
Italy. (See Footnote 2 )
|
|
|
Step 1:
Through discussion and possible negotiation, students agree on a theme for their project.
They will compile and compare information about four computer models in order to recommend
which system their school should purchase.
|
|
|
Step II:
Students decide on the final outcome of their project: subgroups will make presentations
to the class in which they report on the information they have gathered at a computer
trade fair and recommend a purchase. The whole class will then decide which computer to
buy. Together they will write a formal recommendation and submit it to the head
administrator of their school.
|
|
|
Steps III, V, VI,
and VII: The students will engage in the following activities while carrying out
their project:
|
|
|
a. Students will review
authentic advertisements and/or commercials promoting different computer models and brands
that the teacher has collected from trade magazines, journals, computer stores,
television, and radio. While examining the contents of these promotional materials, they
will discover the criteria normally used in comparing computers.
|
|
|
b. Students will survey
school personnel to determine how the new computer will be used. For example, they will
inquire about such criteria as power, memory, portability, warranty, software
compatibility, durability, delivery, maintenance, and cost.
|
|
|
c. Students will meet in
small groups and decide how to obtain information about four computers on the market. For
example, they may review trade magazines, write to companies to secure promotional
material, contact computer outlets by telephone, etc. Then they will gather pertinent
information.
|
|
|
d. Students will summarize
the material they have accumulated on a grid such as the one shown below.
|
|
|
e. Students will review
promotional material about a local computer trade fair and decide which exhibits to visit.
|
|
|
f. Students will visit the
fair to interview salespeople and collect promotional material. They can record
information on a grid like the one above, take photographs and/or tape-record interviews.
|
|
|
g. Students will meet in
their groups and collate all of the information they have obtained. Groups will then meet
in jigsaw fashion (i.e., in new groups made up of a representative from each original
group) and query each other about what they have learned (using the blank grid as a basis
for their questions).
|
|
|
h. Students will return to
their original work groups in order to prepare an oral presentation that summarizes their
findings and concludes with a recommendation for the purchase of a particular system. They
will prepare a visual for this purpose (e.g., a bulletin board display, a poster, an
overhead transparency, etc.). They may do some follow-up writing to support their points
of view, if needed.
|
|
|
i. After listening to all
group recommendations, the class will debate the merits of each computer model and decide
on a class recommendation. A formal recommendation will be written and submitted to the
school administration.
|
|
|
Step IV: In
the process of completing the project, students may need to practice those language skills
and strategies that they determined to be important at different stages of the project.
Depending on student needs, lessons like those described below may be planned to provide
students with language practice and support.
|
|
|
- Students will participate in a
teacher-centered question-and-answer activity in which the
teacher asks them about the ads that s/he has collected. [See
(a) above.]
- Students will read a passage that
compares computer models with reference to particular specifications
and optional components They will practice skimming and scanning
for key information in this passage. They will complete a
grid similar to the one above by locating the required information
in the passage [An activity such as this can be completed
between (b)and (c) above.]
- Students will write business letters of
the type required to secure information from manufacturers
about their products.[See (c) above.]
- Students will complete an intensive
listening exercise in which they listen for key information
about computers. [An activity such as this can be completed
between (e) and (f)above.]
- Students will do a roleplay in
pairs in which they impersonate a potential customer and a
salesperson. The grid again provides a basis for the interaction.
[An activity such as this can be completed between (e) and
(f) above.]
- Students will practice question-formation
in pairs to prepare for the jigsaw activity. [See (g) above.]
- Students will rehearse the formal
presentation of a product comparison using a visual aid (e.g.,
a poster they have created to illustrate the features of each
potential purchase). [See (h)above.]
- Students will draft a brief report in an
appropriate register that summarizes their decision and supporting
details.[See (h) and (i) above.]
|
|
|
Step VIII:
In a structured reflection session, the teacher and students will ex-post-facto enumerate
the steps they completed, consider what they have achieved in the process (in terms of
language improvement and acquired content knowledge), discuss the problems they
encountered, and identify areas that they need to pay more attention to in the future.
|
|
|
To maximize the impact of
project work in the ESP classroom, take a few rules of thumb into account.
|
|
|
First of all, always
consider the students' long-term language needs. Though it may be difficult, try to
identify the social and professional contexts that they will have to function in. Think of
projects students can undertake that require them to use the language in a way that
resembles their ultimate use.
|
|
|
Secondly, consider the
linguistic skills that students will have to employ in these contexts. Will they, for
example, have to record telephone messages? If so, projects that require practice in those
skills would be most useful. If, on the other hand, students will have to manage a lot of
fax traffic, the project's subsidiary tasks should involve those types of activity.
|
|
|
Thirdly, consider what is
feasible. One popular project, widely discussed in Italy, involves querying travelers as
they pass through an airport terminal or major train station.
|
|
|
Although
an airport/train station is the ideal place to ask questions and
to find English speakers to answer them, there may be no international
airport or major train station at hand to use for this purpose.
If this is the case, there is no point in insisting that students
interview native speakers of English. At the same time, teachers
should not abandon the idea of a project altogether if ideal circumstances
are not available. Since most professional conversation in English
is probably carried on among nonnative speakers, students will
benefit equally from projects that put them in touch with speakers
of varieties of world English. In addition, there are numerous
sources of material in English that can be obtained at no cost
with a formal letter of request and then sifted, compared, and
summarized. In other words, do not give up simply because a pool
of native speakers or authentic printed material is unavailable
close to home.
|
|
|
Finally, do a lot of
planning. Although the project approach requires student input and decision-making in the
initial phase of project definition, the teacher's understanding of the outcome and the
steps needed to achieve project objectives is crucial. Therefore, before introducing the
project, the teacher should identify topics of possible interest, the educational value of
the outcome, corresponding activities, and the students' material or cognitive needs in
conducting the project. For example, will they need tape recorders or video recorders?
Will they need additional work on language functions they have not yet mastered? Will they
have enough time to complete the task? In short, planning is critical.
|
|
|
Project work is not
appropriate in all ESP settings. There are many schools where curricular demands, the lack
of equipment, scheduling problems, issues of insurance, administrative rigidity, and the
like preclude instructional innovations like project work.
|
|
|
Incorporating project work
into more traditional classrooms requires careful orchestration and planning. Students who
are not used to functioning autonomously, who may even be accustomed to close control and
monitoring, may find it hard to take control of their own activity. Therefore, ease them
into it by planning cooperative, small group work beforehand (see Fried-Booth, 1986 and
Haines, 1989).
|
|
|
Similarly, many teachers
encounter resistance from school administrators when they challenge the status quo with
the project approach. Traditional schools that are governed by strict curricular
guidelines and systematic testing are frequently not the most receptive environments for
project work. Some administrators, for example, may complain that the elaborate activities
associated with project work do not prepare students for required exams. Yet, if the
underlying objective of an ESP program is to build the students' ability to use the
language fluently in novel situations, project work will carry them a lot closer to
meeting that objective than more conventional work on grammar, vocabulary, and
pronunciation.
|
|
|
Project work can only be
effective when teachers relax control of their students temporarily and assume the role of
guide or facilitator. The teacher can play an important role by diligently overseeing the
multiple steps of project work, establishing guidelines, helping students make decisions,
and providing instruction in the language when it is needed. Giving students freedom to
immerse themselves in the project can lead to motivated and independent learners, but it
requires a certain flexibility on the part of the instructor if students are to benefit
maximally.
|
|
|
Though
project work may not be the easiest instructional approach to
implement, the potential payoffs are many. At the very least,
with the project approach, ESP teachers can break with routine
by spending a week or more doing something besides grammar drills
and technical reading. It is likely that the benefits of project
work will also include improved student motivation, students'
enhanced awareness of their language needs, integrated skills
practice, and, conceivably, a more stimulating and satisfying
learning and teaching experience for students and teacher alike.
|
|
|
Ken Sheppard directs a three-year study of content-ESL
programs at the Center for Applied Linguistics in Washington, D.C. He has conducted
seminars for teachers in Eastern Europe, held a Fulbright lectureship in Morocco, and
taught second language acquisition in Spain.
Fredricka L. Stoller is an assistant professor in the
ESL/applied linguistics programs at Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona. She
is also director of the Program in Intensive English at the same university. |
|
|
Return |
|
|
- Fried-Booth, D. L. 1982. Project work with advanced classes. ELT
Journal 36, 2, pp. 98-103.
- -----1986. Project work. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Haines, S. 1989. Projects for the EFL classroom: Resource material
for teachers. Walton-on-Thames Surrey, U K: Nelson.
- Katz, L. G., and S. C. Chard. 1993. Engaging children's minds: The
project approach. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
- Legutke, M. and W. Thiel. 1983. Airport: Ein project fur der
Englischunterricht in klasse 6. Hessisches Institut fur Bildungsplanung und
Schulentwicklung (HIBS), Abt. IE, Bodenstedstrasse 7, D 6200 Wiesbaden.
- Papandreou, A. P. 1994. An application of the projects approach to
EFL. English Teaching Forum, 32, 3, 41-2 .
- Robinson, P. 1991. ESP today: A practitioner's guide. New York:
Prentice Hall.
- Selinker, L. 1979. On the use of informants in discourse analysis
and "Language for Specialized Purposes." International Review of Applied
Linguistics in Language Teaching, 17, 3, pp. 189-215.
- Tebeaux, E. 1985. Redesigning professional writing courses to meet
the communication needs of writers in business and industry. College Composition and
Communication, 36, 4, pp. 419-28.
- Warwick, B. 1992. Business Correspondence by Fax: An investigation
into frequency of use, discourse structure and linguistic features. Unpublished MSc.
thesis, University of Aston, U.K.
- Williams, M. 1988. Language taught for meetings and language used
in meetings: Is there anything in common? Applied Linguistics, 9, 1, pp. 45-58.
- Wilson, M. 1987. Writing for business. Walton-on-Thames Surrey,
UK: Nelson.
|
|
Footnote 1
The author would like to thank all of the teachers who
participated in the Spring 1994 Italian seminars on project work in Reggio Emilia, Italy,
as well as the representatives from the Italian Ministry of Education (Dr. Maria
Mencuccini and Professor Tonino Sensi ) and USIS (Dr. Dee Parker). Without the teachers
and their fine and inspiring work, this article would not have been possible.
Footnote 2
The teachers were Catherina Pazienza from Ancona and Gian Carlo
Tore form Lodi. Several other ESP projects are described in the Proposte di Moduli
Didattici Inglese: Progetto'92 compiled by the Italian Ministry of Public Instruction
(Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, Direzione Generale Istruzione Professionale) under
the direction of Maria Mencuccini, Tonino Sensi, Lucilla Lopriore, Ubaldo Nencioni,
Caterina Capra and USIS academic specialists Ann Johns and Kay Westerfield.
Back to Article
|
. |
. |