Inquiry Project final report, part two

Rebecca J. Foster

Language Acquisition

One of my favorite things to notice during tests, or in class in general, was how often learners inconspicuously (and perhaps at times unconsciously) used the physical gestures from TPR or the stories to jar their memory of the word. For example, in trying to remember the word "stuck", learners always grabbed their ankles, a gesture which came from the story about Maria getting her foot stuck in a railroad track. Similarly, when a learner was forgetting a word, it usually took just a quick rendition of the gesture to trigger their memory and enable them to produce it.

In general, I was impressed (once again) by the power of linking physical gestures with language. Hands down the most frequent comment in my field notes regarding my teaching was how important the TPR phase was to the TPRS learning process. During the middle part of the year I started to rely less and less on TPR. Meanwhile learners seemed to be retaining less and less. At a certain point, after watching a video of the class, I saw the problem clearly: I was not spending enough time on the TPR phase. As I increased the time and focus I gave to TPR, retention increased. In my field notes, days that went well were usually marked by the words "solid TPR today." Days that dragged and felt frustrating were usually marked with "need to do more TPR tomorrow!"

Watching the videos (and my mistakes in them) also helped me to see clearly the following two basic aspects of TPRS:
1. How the repetitive questions and answers (Q&A) during the storytelling are key to ensuring the massive amounts of comprehensible input necessary for acquisition. As the year progressed, I got better and better at asking hundreds of seemingly obvious questions. Learners, in turn, effortlessly answered my hundreds of obvious questions, but in so doing seemed to increase their overall retention of the words.

One drawback of the TPRS method (or at least the way it is normally taught to teachers) is that it was intended primarily for the foreign language classroom where everyone shares a common language. As such, it relies heavily on quick translations to ensure comprehension. In my more diverse classroom at the Genesis Center, this was obviously impossible. However, I found the normal routes to ensuring comprehension in a multi-lingual environment (i.e., true/false questions, short answers, and occasionally English/non-English dictionaries) certainly adequate, if somewhat more time consuming. While in general I do not believe it is fair to use a language that not everyone speaks, I did use quick translations (to Spanish) when a non-Spanish speaker was having particular trouble with a concept and the quick translation allowed me more time to spend conveying meaning directly to her.

Overall, my favorite aspect of learners' language use was their incorporation of phrases ("don't give up," "I can't believe it," "you saved my life, " etc.) into real life situations. It was remarkable to me that by learning a phrase in the context of a story where the meaning was both clear and memorable, learners were then able to use the same phrases in different but equally appropriate situations over and over again. More remarkable was the sheer glee learners displayed whenever they found an appropriate opportunity to use the phrase. So much so that I started intentionally including more such phrases into my vocabulary lists as the year went on.

One last measure of language acquisition took the form of the long 'chapter stories.' These were 300-500 word stories that included the words from the vocabulary list. While incorporating all of the words often made for a rather contrived story, learners ­at least those with good attendance-- inevitably breezed through the story, answering the questions with ease. Despite the length and complexity of the story, reading the story seemed to them effortless because they had thoroughly acquired all of the words in it. "It's easy," they said almost every time, as if somewhat bewildered by the fact.

Not surprisingly, there was a clear link between regularity of attendance and word acquisition, retention and production. While hardly unique to TPRS, this may be particularly true for the TPRS classroom because both the TPR and the stories require active in-class participation. It is very difficult to "make up" TPRS work. Given the difficult lives of our students, this has both plusses and minuses. TPRS does not require any extra "studying," which most learners have no time to do anyway. It does, however, require that learners come to class regularly, which given the attendance issues in most adult ESOL classrooms suggests that some learners will inevitably fall behind. It was incredibly frustrating to watch well-meaning learners struggle with a set of words they didn't know as well because they had been out the week before taking care of sick children. This is a clear drawback for the TPRS method, though perhaps no more so than for any other teaching under the sun.

Learner Energy/ Response

Learners by and large were very positive about what was happening in their classroom. Within the first week, I heard from one assertive young woman, "I didn't learn anything in my last class. The teacher was nice, but I didn't learn. Now I¹m learning!" Another learner noted that I must have gone to a University to learn how to teach (!).

While learners' energy, as well as my own varied throughout the year, the monthly surveys suggested that storytelling was always among their favorite activities. Learners often commented, usually after a particularly dramatic storytelling session, that it was a "very good class today teacher." Particularly relevant stories, such as the incorrect paycheck story, received comments like, "this is very important!" In general, a good story from my perspective was usually characterized by lots of learner input (shouting out details), laughing, lots of questions and answers, engagement (i.e., smiles, sitting straight up, alert eyes), and a general willingness to participate in or retell the story. All of these for me were signs of memorable comprehensible input.

Those stories that bombed tended to be too complicated (lots of puzzled faces, "I don't understand") or too bizarre (lack of engagement, looking away, skewed up eyes). The stories with learners acting as famous people never worked as well for me as stories in which the learners played themselves (though I¹ve heard this is very learner specific‹apparently sometimes adult learners feel more comfortable playing someone different than themselves). Also, my class tended not to like the few stories in which the main characters weren¹t heroes (or portrayed in any negative way), though this was more true for female characters than for male ones. Some stories seemed to bomb for no apparent reason at all‹ though the same could of course be said of any classroom activity on any given day.

While learners often expressed whether they did or did not like a story, I never once heard a learner asking for a different type of activity altogether. Indeed, despite the lack of explicit grammar instruction (grammar in TPRS is incorporated via changes in the perspective and/or tense of the story), I never once heard the "we want grammar" comment that is so common to adult ESOL classrooms.

Finally, I received the following comment from a learner's journal (which I have translated from her Spanish): "The different methodologies that the teacher uses are very important because with them, the students show more interest in learning. By acting and telling stories, we use and learn different words and also the stories make class more dynamic and participatory. Also, the students learn to express themselves in front of others."

IMPLICATIONS

In the end, I feel that my efforts to integrate participatory learning with TPRS bore considerable fruit. I found that using learners' lives to develop the stories lent meaning, validation and occasionally inspiration to the TPRS process. By infusing participatory activities with a highly structured method of language acquisition, learners made considerable progress towards their primary goal of learning English. There are, however, two significant drawbacks to integrating the two methods that I think are worth further brainstorming and/or formal investigation.

First, I never managed to bring the participatory process full circle, turning learner issues into concrete social action. I can certainly see how some teachers who are firmly committed to participatory, action-oriented learning would view the TPRS structure as somehow a hindrance to true learner empowerment, ultimately watering down a powerful learning methodology. My own view, however, is that good teaching comes in many forms and that for the right teacher, TPRS can be a powerful tool for fostering strong language acquisition. For adult ESOL learners, not knowing the language is a very serious impediment to success in this country and as such, genuine language acquisition serves the ultimate goal of empowerment. By both integrating and supplementing TPRS with elements from participatory-based learning, I was able to integrate my students' lives and concerns into their learning process. Moving from integration to social action is the obvious next step; one that I think would require significantly more time in the classroom (six hours is not enough!) but is certainly worth investigating more fully.

Second, consistently using learner generated themes to develop the vocabulary, stories and pictures (in other words, all the materials) for TPRS can be incredibly time intensive. I'm not at all sure I would have been able to do this process successfully had I not had a fairly flexible work schedule. I¹m afraid most teachers (my self included) will not always have this kind of luxury. As such, I am very interested to see the soon to be released adult ESOL TPRS materials. As these are designed to cover general themes that are relevant to ESOL learners, it is possible that by using these materials in combination with a variety of more participatory-based activities, one could actually achieve the goal of a "participatory TPRS" classroom without having to reinvent the wheel each year.

Despite these challenges, I feel certain that the potential for linking participatory-based learning and TPRS is significant and worth exploring further. I believe the two methodologies together can and do complement each other, ultimately giving learners the skills and support they need to achieve their goals.

appendices

REBECCA'S ESL CLASS NEWS

December 10, 2002 (Tuesday) __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Class News

Last week students reported the following good news:

Sammy: "Maliys is having a boy!"
Rosa: "I went to New York for 4 days."
Janitza: "I have my drivers¹'license."

Students also reported the following bad news:

Our English Plans

Last week students talked about why they wanted to learn English. For example, Maliys wants to help her children. Paulino wants to learn English for his job. Dominga wants to communicate with her supervisor. Cesar wants to talk to his doctor. Elvira wants to talk to her children's teacher.

Students also wrote what they need to do to learn English. Here are some examples:

Snow Day!

Appendix B

Enrique Goes to Iraq

There is a man. His name is Enrique. He is a reporter for Telemundo. He is in Iraq. He hears an explosion. It is far. It is 2_ miles away. Enrique is not afraid. Then he hears a second explosion. This one is about _ mile away. Enrique is a little bit afraid because the lights go out. He can¹t see. He grabs his flashlight from his pocket. He turns on the flashlight. Now he can see! He runs to the door. The door is locked. Then he runs to the window. He tries to open the window, but it is stuck. The window doesn't move. He tries again. It doesn't move. He tries again. It doesn't move. Enrique doesn't give up. He throws his flashlight through the window. Now the window is broken. Near the window is a palm tree. Enrique goes through the window and climbs down the palm tree. Then he gives his report for Telemundo. He says, "Hello, My name is Enrique. I am reporting from Iraq for Telemundo. There are a lot of explosions. Many people are dying."

Appendix C

"I Can't Believe it!"

Paulino is going to his job in Barrington. He is driving on 195. He is at Exit 7 to Route 114. There is a truck in front of him. The truck has an accident. Paulino stops, but his car hits the truck. His car is on fire, but Paulino is not afraid. He is strong. He pushes open the door. He escapes. His leg hurts and he can¹t see. The ambulance comes. The ambulance takes Paulino to the hospital. The doctor's name is Mercedes. She says, "I'm so sorry Paulino. You have a broken leg and you are blind." Paulino is sad. Rosaly is Paulino's friend from school. She visits him in the hospital. She brings him some yellow flowers. Paulino is happy. He opens his eyes. He can see again. The doctor says, "I can't believe it!"

Appendix D

I'll Find a Better Job!

(Directed by Janitza Hernandez)

Gilma works for a jewelry factory. She gets paid $6.50 an hour. She gets $10 for overtime. She works 60 hours a week. She looks at her paycheck. It is for only $390.00. She says, "It¹s not fair!" She goes to her boss' office. Her boss' name is Faustina. Gilma asks, "Where is my overtime money?" Faustina says, "It's included in your paycheck.² Gilma says, "You're lying! I will find a better job!"

Appendix E, REBECCA'S ESL CLASS NEWS, March 18th, 2003

The following texts represent the seven overhead slides Rebecca shared during her presentation on June 13th.

Participatory TPRS:

Integrating the Participatory Approach with Total Physical Response Storytelling

Participatory Approach:

Total Physical Response Storytelling (TPRS):

Essential Elements of "Participatory TPRS"

Balancing Participatory Approach and TPRS

Key Participatory Issues

Language Acquisition

Learner Response

Quote (translated) from learner's journal: