Lesson Plan - Used To 1p5u1t

Used To Lesson Plan Chris Khonngam Walden University

USED TO LESSON PLAN

2 Used To Lesson Plan

Lesson planning is the application of learning theory to a defined target learner, providing a “road map” for how a class will be conducted (Purgason, 2014, p. 362). The plan for the lesson “Used To” will consist of the following elements: exposition, objectives, , content, and classroom management. Exposition The foundation of a lesson plan is built upon expository information collected about the target learner and the context of the lesson (Harmer, 2010, p. 158). The exposition section for the lesson “Used To” consists the following areas: target learner, context, diagnostic assessment, and analysis. Target Learner A description of the target learner enables the instructor to consider the students’ age, level, and distinguishing characteristics when selecting materials and methods for the classroom (Harmer, 2010, p. 158). The class for this lesson consists of 15 young adult foreign students attending a private English as a Second Language (ESL) school in Hawaii. Approximately sixty percent of the class is from Asia, primarily Japan and China; and forty percent comes from Europe, most notably Switzerland. While some students may have a terminal goal of ing a standardized exam, such as the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) to meet institutional requirements (Llosa, 2011, pp. 206-7); or the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) as a workplace requirement (Llosa, 2011, pp. 207-8); the immediate goal for the majority of students is to improve their conversational English. Prerequisite knowledge assumed for this lesson includes the ability to form sentences using present simple and past tense and the ability to form basic questions about the past.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

3

Context The course is a combined skills class called “Intermediate Conversational English” that meets daily for 3 hours, 5 days per week. A term consists of 4 consecutive weeks. A unit consists of one week. The school primarily utilizes the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method (Harmer, 2010, p. 50), but also allows for some drills derived from the audio-lingual method (p. 49). The name of the unit is “ when?” The unit instructional goal is to provide students with the skills to introduce themselves by talking about their past. The lesson is the second in a sequence of five lessons, and is called “Used To”. The lesson goal is to form grammatically correct sentences using the verb “used to” and to be able to use it appropriately in conversations. Students will be able to discriminate when to use “used to” as opposed to simple past tense. Diagnostic Assessments Formative assessment will be implemented throughout the lesson to monitor student processing and progress (Bachman & Palmer, 1996; as cited in Llosa, 2011, p. 373). While a form of summative assessment will be conducted at the unit’s conclusion, a standardized exam will be used as a diagnostic tool prior to the first day of class to ensure students meet the minimum proficiency level for the course of Lower Intermediate level; or Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) level B1 (COUNCIL OF EUROPE, 2001). Standardized exams are useful for this purpose because they reliability represent students’ abilities, are relatively free from bias, and are cost effective (Kunnan & Grabowski, 2014, pp. 311-13; Murray & Christison, 2011, pp. 204-5). However, due to the fact that standardized tests consist mainly of indirect measures, calling into question their authenticity when gauging communicative tasks (Murray & Christison, 2012, p. 203), the pre-test will be supplemented

USED TO LESSON PLAN

4

with a face-to-face interview. Those conducting the interview will be asked to rely on their expertise to determine a holistic score (Murray & Christison, 2012, p. 201) and will be trained to maintain inter-rater reliability (p. 204). I have selected the Placement and Evaluation Package for Interchange 2 for the standardized diagnostic assessment (Lesley, Hansen, & Zukowski, 2008). Analysis Because the target students have achieved Intermediate level, the lesson must strive to be challenging and engaging, yet remain comprehensible (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 20). While the pre-test should flag students with glaring deficiencies, extra homework should be made available to students who need to raise prerequisite skills without draining valuable class time. I subscribe Stephen Krashen’s “plus one” input hypothesis that recommends new material just one step beyond students’ current ability (1983; as cited in Celce-Murcia, 2014, p. 8). Because the school promotes the CLT approach, students will expect a higher degree of communicative activities in contrast to audio-lingual drills. Therefore additional communication games and exercises should be used to supplement the course texts. Having a variety of tasks will also uphold student interest (Purgason, 2014, p. 363) and cater to a variety of learning styles (Byrd & Schuemann, 2014, p. 388). The students’ age and maturity should allow for the inclusion of alternative media, such as Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC), and social media (Murray & Christison, 2011, pp. 59-63). Supplementing with authentic materials will enhance student engagement, improve relevancy, and unfold further learning opportunities (Murry & Christison, 2011, p. 56). Finally, because many students have chosen to study in Hawaii due to its many tourist attractions, lessons should include references to local culture in order to pique student interest.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

5 Objectives

Kitty Purgason (2014) lists writing objectives as the first step in lesson planning (p. 365). The second step is mapping objectives to instructional materials. A third important step, according to instructional design theory, is to map assessment to objectives (Gentry, 1994). The objectives section for the lesson “Used To” consists of the following sections: learning objectives, materials, and assessment. Learning Objectives In a ground-up approach, the skills and knowledge targeted for any particular lesson are derived from a needs analysis (Norris, 2011, p. 581) or needs assessment (Graves, 2014, p. 54; Weddel, 1997). In lieu of this time-consuming process, institutions may deduce learning tasks from established proficiency standards and/or government directives (Kunnan & Grabowski, 2014, p 307). This lesson plan abides by lesson goals and objectives defined in the institutional syllabi, corresponding with CEFR and standards set by the Commission on English Language Program Accreditation (CEA). At the program level, goals are general statements that describe what students will have achieved at the end of the course, derived from the needs assessment (Graves, 2014, p. 58). The goals for the combined skills course “Intermediate Conversational English” are for students to be able to communicate at the CEFR level B1: to understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters; to cope with situations likely to arise while traveling where the target language is spoken; and to produce simple text and speech on familiar topics, including past events, hopes, and ambitions, and offer explanations and opinions (COUNCIL OF EUROPE, 2001). An instructional course comprises 14 weekly units. The instructional goal for the unit “ When?” is to provide students with the skills necessary to introduce themselves by

USED TO LESSON PLAN

6

talking about their past. The presented lesson is the second in a sequence of five lessons. The goal of the lesson “Used To” is to form grammatically correct sentences using the verb “used to” and to be able to use it appropriately in conversations, including being able to discriminate when to use “used to” as opposed to simple past tense. Goals are divided into sub-goals, or objectives (Graves, 2014, p. 58). According to Robert Mager (1962), the forefather of Criterion Referenced Instruction (CRI), objectives should be clear, observable, and measurable. This corresponds well with Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT), a product of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) that employs “tangible” learning outcomes (Norris, 2011, p. 578). One popular method of writing objectives comes from the Instructional Development Institute in 1971, called the ABCD method. State the Audience who will benefit from the lesson, the Behavior to be performed, the Conditions or how the learner will perform the behavior, and the Degree or measurement of student success. Because the behavior must be observable it is usually stated in the form of an action verb (J. D. Brown, 1995; as cited in Graves, 2014, p. 59). To ensure clearly defined objectives, key verbs are selected from those corresponding to Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956) . As an integrated lesson following the CLT method, five activities are planned that loosely correspond to the four phase approach outlined by John Norris for TBLT: task input, task work, task performance, and task follow-up (2011, pp. 584-5). The following five activities are identified along with their corresponding learning objectives: 1. Warm up: childhood picture. Objective: Using a picture prompt, students (Ss) repeat and apply the verb “used to” in place of past simple tense to describe a habitual action.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

7

2. Grammar focus: form of “used to” Ss apply rules for using the verb “used to” in written sentences with complete accuracy. 3. Conversation and pronunciation practice: interview. Ss working in pairs recall and repeat a diacorporating “used to” with accurate pronunciation \yustʌ\. 4. Performance: celebrities then and now. Ss working in groups apply the verb “used to” to a sentence describing a celebrity, combine and assemble a dialog, and perform the dialog using correct pronunciation. 5. Transfer: Truth or lie game. Ss formulate a sentence with the verb “used to” complying with provided criteria, and appraise the truthfulness of other Ss statements. Materials Selection According to Purgason (2014) the second step in lesson planning is to select the materials that can best accomplish the stated learning objectives (p. 365). Published textbooks have several economic advantages over the development of original instructional materials, despite their flaws of being overly restrictive (Harmer, 2007, p. 153) and imperfect (Byrd & Schuemann, 2014, p.380). In order to maximize textbook adaptability, I have employed Jeremy Harmer’s (2007) matrix for selecting coursebooks that stresses inclusion of supplementary materials (p. 154). As an integrated lesson, content that is both “linguistic” (grammar-focused) and “thematic” (meaning-focused) are required. My experience has informed me the majority of publishers that attempt all-encoming textbooks utilizing an “eclectic” blend of methodologies (Harmer, 2007, p. 51) fall short of their goal. Therefore, I have selected two main texts for the course. For my thematic textbook, I choose Interchange 2 (Richards, Hull, & Proctor, 2005). It is an integrated skills text, including reading, writing, speaking, listening, pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and collaborative activities; all organized around a common theme. The set includes

USED TO LESSON PLAN

8

a comprehensive teacher’s edition with learning objectives, teaching notes and tips, and a question bank. Supplementary materials include an audio CD, teacher’s resource CD, games, photocopiable activity sheets, and a comprehensive Web site with additional worksheets. For my linguistic textbook, I select Betty Azar’s classic Fundamentals of English Grammar (Azar, 2003). This series of books is renowned for having clear grammar rules and explanations- often with illustrations, and lots of drills and gap-fill exercises. able resources on the teacher Web site include the excellent activity book Fun With Grammar, expansion activities, song lessons, PowerPoint slides, and a seemingly endless supply of teacher-created worksheets. Employing the CLT method necessitates having a large resource of collaborative activities, which also improves lesson variety (Purgason, 2013 p. 365) and stimulates interest. For this lesson I have selected the very functional photocopiable exercises in Jill Hadfield’s Intermediate Communication Games (2000). As identified in the exposition, the target learner’s aptitude accommodates the inclusion of CALL. According to Robert Blake (2011), students using CALL are more engaged (p. 30) and may perform better (p. 21). Considering that Norris (2011) advocates the use of authentic materials in TBLT (p. 583) and Blake (2011) considers social media to be an integral communications medium in today’s society (p. 25), I have opted to incorporate a clip from the popular Web site You Tube in this lesson: Hottest celebrities: before & after! (thrillerman1, 2009) because it is relevant to my students, interesting, and provides great context for discussions using the verb “used to”. Assessment Authors Kunan and Grabowski (2013) state that “without assessment, teaching would be incomplete” (p. 304). The purpose of classroom assessment, which tends to be formative, is to

USED TO LESSON PLAN

9

provide immediate while measuring student progress (Bachman & Palmer, 1996; cited in Llosa, 2011, p. 373). This is in contrast to summative assessments used to measure students’ terminal skills for ability purposes. Since summative exams generally occur at the conclusion of a unit, none is provided for this lesson segment. However, results of the formative assessments may be recorded for future use in a general summative assessment. According to established instructional design theory, assessments must be measurable and correspond to stated lesson objectives (Gentry, 1994). In addition, Katz emphasizes the direct link between practice methods and assessment methods (2014, p. 328). Assessment can be formal and detached, as is typically the case with achievement exams (Harmer, 2010, p. 166); or informal and integrated (Katz, 2014, p. 320) as is often the case with ongoing . Following the CLT approach, this lesson incorporates large amounts of provided by both peers and the teacher. The following section describes and rationalizes assessment tools and methods for each of the five identified lesson activities. 1. Warm up: childhood picture. Activity: students (Ss) compose and recite a sentence about a childhood picture of the instructor using the verb “used to.” Assessment: formative using the IRF (Initiation-Response-) method. Rationale: the task is productive (Katz, 2014, p. 328) eliciting a limited constructed response (Katz, 2014, p. 328; Murray, 2011, p. 190). The focus is on meaning using an authentic example (Norris, 2011, p. 583). The purpose of assessment is to check understanding by providing immediate . Evaluation criteria are provided on a checklist: use of the verb “used to” for past tense for habitual actions. The teacher (T) provides corrective for non-habitual action (e.g. “used to take pictures”). Negative expressions are not encouraged but allowed, and incorrect use of “didn’t used to” are not corrected at this time.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

10

2. Grammar focus: form of “used to” Activity: Ss study the grammar rules for “used to” using example sentences in the textbook Fundamentals of English Grammar section 2-11 Expressing Past Habit: Used To, page 52, then complete gap-fill exercises #25 page. 52-53. Rules include application to habitual past actions, negative form with “didn’t use to”, and as an extension lesson, choosing the appropriate infinitive to describe people (“be” vs. “have”). Assessment: formative using gap-fill exercises featuring self-correction, peer-, and teacher . Rationale: the task is productive, eliciting a closed-choice constructed response. The focus on is form using manipulated examples (Norris, 2011, p. 583). Ss employ selfcorrection using the textbook as a guide, and may work in pairs to check each other’s’ work. T monitors the assessment and provides additional guidance where necessary. 3. Conversation and pronunciation practice: interview. Activity: Ss listen to a recording of an interview with two people discussing their past, then work in pairs to fill gaps in a transcript of the recording and finally practice speaking the dialog using correct pronunciation of “used to.” The recording is taken from “Listening: life as an immigrant” in Interchange 2 (3rd Ed.) page 3. Assessment: formative using gap-fill exercises, utilizing self-correction and peer. Rationale: the task is integrative, employing receptive skills for listening and productive skills for speaking. The receptive skills are processed internally, thus cannot be measured directly (Katz, 2014, p. 327). Therefore, a closed constructed-response gap-fill activity (employing the writing mode) measures understanding. Self-correction is provided through reviewing the audio and peer- is available during pair work. Pronunciation of “used to” is assessed through peer- and T monitoring during the dialog practice. The criterion for pronunciation is ing to apply reduced speech.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

11

4. Performance: celebrities then and now. Activity: Ss watch a video, Hottest celebrities: before & after! showcasing images of famous celebrities as children compared to how they look today and individually write three sentences describing one celebrity with the verb “used to” or “didn’t use to.” Then, in groups of 3-4, Ss construct a dialog using at least one sentence from each student discussing celebrities and finally perform for the class. Assessment: formative using peer during the exercise and T after the exercise in the form of a scored rubric (Katz, 2014, p. 326). Rationale: this is a performance-based integrative task replicating authentic conditions (Norris, 2011, p. 584). Ss will be provided with the rubric used to score the performance using direct measures. Both an individual and group grades will be provided. The purpose of assessment is to provide student , however scores may be recorded for use in an overall summative assessment of the unit. 5. Transfer: Truth or lie game. Activity: in groups of 3-4, each S forms a statement with “used to” or “didn’t use to” from a picture prompt representing a past habit and a random card indicating verity: “TRUTH” or “LIE.” Group vote as to the verity of the statement, with points awarded if they correctly guess “TRUTH” or “LIE.” Play then es to the next S and continues until all picture cards are used. Assessment: formative ongoing peer assessment. Rationale: this follow-up task (Norris, 2011, p. 584) is an integrative performance task focusing on both form and meaning. The prompts and criteria force each S to self-monitor language prior to producing their sentence. Ss provide through negotiating meaning (Norris, 2011, p. 581), by correctly identifying the verity of a sentence as “TRUTH” or “LIE” or, as is more often the case, by misunderstanding or correcting misapplication of the criteria by Ss. For example, S may be prompted to “LIE” but constructs an incorrect sentence, which is revealed during the group vote. T may optionally deduct ‘points’ for incorrect sentences or

USED TO LESSON PLAN

12

mispronunciation of “used to.” The ‘points’ awarded are arbitrary, but may lead to a motivational reward, such as candy. The purpose of assessment for this activity is not to measure performance per se, but to provide authentic peer during negotiation and empower Ss to self-correct and notice gaps in their own understanding in an authentic communicative context. Although tolerance for error would appear to be greater in the fluency-oriented CLT approach (Brinton, 2014, p. 344), remains a key element of every instructional method. Despite the contention that error correction can lead to increased student anxiety (LarsenFreeman, 2011, p. 531) and may interrupt the flow of conversation (Bartram & Walt, 1991; as cited in Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 599), the fact is students want to be corrected (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 598, 605). From a behaviorist perspective, corrective (CF) prevents the formation of “bad habits” (Ur, 1996; as cited in Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 598). From a cognitive perspective, CF empowers students to “notice gaps” in their understanding and modify their output, an element of negotiating meaning (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p 596). From a sociocultural standpoint, CF provides scaffolding necessary for learners to expand their development (Norris, 2011, p. 584). Implementations of differ between “accuracy” and “fluency” work (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 599). During “accuracy” work, is more immediate and explicit (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 593). During “fluency” work, tends to be more implicit (such as asking for clarification) and delayed. In addition, oral lends itself to being immediate and implicit, as in recasts (Brinton, 2014, p. 344), while written is more likely to be delayed and explicit (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 599). In addition, instructors need to be wary of overcorrecting students (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p. 598), and thus should employ selective

USED TO LESSON PLAN

13

correction (p. 599) in alignment with the formality of speech or social (Lai, 2010, p. 167). The for written grammar tends to be more strict and formal than for spoken grammar (Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p 532). Also, English exchanged between non-native speakers (NNS) facilitating as a lingua franca may contain “ungrammatical but unproblematic” errors (Seidlhofer, 2001; as cited in Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 535), which are likely to occur during group activities. IRF pattern in oral As identified by researchers Sinclair and Coulthard in their 1975 article, Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils (as cited in Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 182), the Initiation-Response- (IRF) sequence is one of the most common patterns of oral in the SLA classroom. Its use may be traced back to parent-child interaction (Seedhouse 1997; as cited in Waring, 2008, p. 578). Despite criticisms that the IRF technique is too teacher-focused (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 182) and constraining (Broady, 2002, p. 64), these shortcomings may be mitigated by modifying the pattern to allow for unexpected “contingencies” in conversation (Lee, 2007; as cited in Waring, 2008, p. 579) and opportunities for elaboration (Hall & Walsh, 2002, as cited in Brinton, 2014, p. 346; Broady, 2002, p. 64). in the lesson “Used To” This section will outline for each activity in the lesson “Used To” for both oral and written modes and describe appropriate rubrics for measuring learner competence. 1. Warm up: childhood picture. Using the IRF technique, immediate and explicit oral is provided as each S speaks a sentence incorporating the verb “used to.” However, as this is a warm-up activity focusing on meaning rather than form, the pattern may be modified to

USED TO LESSON PLAN

14

allow for more “instructional conversation” (Hall, 2001; as cited in Brinton, 2014, p. 346) to help learners to “notice new language features”, in particular the use of the bare infinitives “have” and “be.” 2. Grammar focus: form of “used to.” Appropriate to written accuracy work, is explicit and delayed in the form of student self-assessment using the textbook key as a rubric. Ongoing peer-provided oral may occur during pair work. In addition, T should actively monitor Ss’ work and provide targeted, immediate, and explicit oral and written CF for egregious written errors that could derail S understanding or if disagreements are observed during pair work. 3. Conversation and pronunciation practice: interview. Students self-correct the listening portion through repeated listening and checking of their completed transcripts. Some oral may be provided by peers during pair work before and during recitation of the dialog. As this is a listening and speaking accuracy task, CF should be explicit. Because peers may hesitate to provide direct CF, it is vital that the T actively monitor the activity and act as a “mediator” to facilitate scaffolding (Sheen & Ellis, 2011, p 597). For the pronunciation task, T may reduce tensions by making peer-assessment into a game. As the activity progresses, T may opt to encourage accomplished Ss to expand on the rehearsed dialog by adding new information, thus expanding the focus from form to meaning. 4. Performance: celebrities then and now. As this is a complex integrated and collaborative activity, it is important for T to confirm S understanding of the steps and criteria. This can be facilitated with the presentation of a formal rubric or checklist that identifies the steps and requirements for the task. While the first part of the task, writing a sentence, is not formally assessed, T should actively monitor Ss’ work and provide direct, informal to

USED TO LESSON PLAN

15

Ss who may be struggling or off-track. During the second step, peers provide as they negotiate production of a combined dialog during group work. Again, it is very important for T to act as “mediator” during this phase to provide expert guidance, scaffolding, and facilitate negotiation. During the third phase, production of the group dialog, T oral must be limited to facilitating the task, as CF may interrupt the performance and hamper fluency. Formative CF is therefore explicit and delayed in the form of a graded rubric provided after the activity. However, ongoing verbal encouragement is advised as a motivational tool. 5. Transfer: Truth or lie game. This conversation game to apply knowledge and confirm understanding is also collaborative and complex. Since this activity is not formally assessed, no rubric is needed. However, it may improve execution if T writes the steps and rules on the whiteboard. Modeling the activity with a select group of Ss is strongly recommended. Informal oral CF is provided by peers during the activity, focusing on meaning. If S fails to provide an accurate statement based on the prompted criteria, peers earn points for noticing the error. The complexity of the activity invites misunderstandings by design, providing numerous opportunities for Ss to practice negotiating meaning. However, as these misunderstandings may lead to confusion and even arguments, it is important for T to actively monitor the game and provide explicit oral to clarify understanding and assist scaffolding. In addition, T should provide encouragement to maintain a fun atmosphere and inspire Ss to elaborate and expand on their statements by temporarily intervening in conversations using follow-up questions as a prompt. However, T must avoid becoming the focus of conversation and should bow out as soon as possible.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

16 Content

The content of the lesson “Used To” consists of an analysis of how the lesson fits into the overall curricular plan, meets course goals, and integrates into the unit. The presentation of content is organized in a standardized format (Murray & Christison, 2011, pp. 26-7) that illustrates the lesson context and describes specific steps for each activity. Curriculum plan According to Graves (2014, p 53), an effective course plan is derived from three elements: identifying instructional methodology, examining the educational context, and assessing learner needs. The instructional methodology embraced by the school is primarily Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). The school utilizes notional-functional syllabi as established by the Council of Europe (Robinson, 2011, p. 297), and the primary text, Interchange 2 (Richards, Hull, & Proctor, 2005) provides objectives that correlate with CEFR. The educational context is postsecondary learners attending a private language school in Hawaii (Murray, 2011, p. 150). Student needs have not been directly assessed, as the curriculum is designed to meet CEFR standards. While students may have individual goals of ing the TEOFL or TOEIC exams, the general goal is to improve conversational English. One special consideration is the potential for students to be both distracted and/or motivated by their environment being a world famous tourist destination. Curricular goals According to the Interchange 2 CEFR Correlation (Richards, Hull, & Proctor, 2005), the lesson “Used To” corresponds to the following CEFR level descriptors [the learner can…]: generally follow the main points of extended discussion around him/her, provided speech is clearly articulated and in standard dialect (B1); ask and answer questions about pastimes and past

USED TO LESSON PLAN

17

activities (A2); participate in short conversations in routine contexts on topics of interest (A2); describe plans and arrangements, habits an routines, past activities and personal experiences (A2); write very short, basic descriptions of events, past activities and personal experiences (A2). Considering the lesson “Used To” is the second lesson in the unit “ when?” which is the first of a 16-week course “Intermediate Conversational English,” the identified behaviors provide the foundational skills required to curricular goals. The unit instructional goal is to provide students with the skills to introduce themselves by talking about their past. The goals for the combined skills course “Intermediate Conversational English” are for students to be able to communicate at level B1 of the CEFR. Content integration The first lesson in the unit “ when?” reviews prerequisite skills such as asking questions about the past and talking about the past using simple past tense. The second lesson introduces the form “used to.” The succeeding lessons perfect the form, expand context, and provide opportunities for practice. This unit provides scaffolding that “links topics” (Harmer, 2010, p. 162) to future lessons, such as: describing change, sharing holidays, comparing time periods, describing abilities and skills, talking about landmarks, and speculating about past and future events. In addition, each chapter in the primary text Interchange 2 contains common “threads” (Harmer, 2010, p. 162) running throughout, including: conversation, grammar focus, listening, speaking, vocabulary, pronunciation, reading, and projects. Finally, in concert with CLT, the final lesson in each unit consists of a project-based summative assessment, advanced conversation games, and a social activity integrating the lesson with Hawaiian culture.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

18

Content A Lesson: “ when?” Day 2: “Used To” (80 minutes). B. Level/Subject: Lower-Intermediate (CEFR B1)/Conversational English C. Student body: 15 students: 10 Japanese, 5 European D. Book: Interchange 2 (3rd ed.) by Richards, Hull, & Proctor. Fundamentals of English Grammar (3rd ed.) by B. Azar. E. Seating: Movable chairs and tables. F. Equipment: Whiteboard & markers, CD-player, Computer with Internet access, video projector & screen. G. Instructional materials: Childhood picture of instructor, Interchange 2 (3rd ed) classroom audio CD, “Life as an immigrant” transcript/gap-fill handout, “Celebrities then and now” assessment rubric, “Truth or lie” game cards (5 sets), game prizes (optional). H. Lesson Goal: To teach students how to form grammatically correct sentences using the verb “used to” and to be able to use it appropriately in conversations. Students will be able to discriminate when to use “used to” as opposed to simple past tense. I. Instructional objectives: 1. Using a picture prompt, students (Ss) repeat and apply the verb “used to” in place of past simple tense to describe a habitual action. 2. Ss apply rules for using the verb “used to” in written sentences with complete accuracy. 3. Ss working in pairs recall and repeat a diacorporating “used to” with accurate pronunciation \yustʌ\. 4. Ss working in groups apply the verb “used to” to a sentence describing a celebrity, combine and assemble a dialog, and perform the dialog using correct pronunciation. 5. Ss formulate a sentence with the verb “used to” complying with provided criteria, and appraise the truthfulness of other Ss statements. J. Rationale: Ss will describe habits and routines, past activities, and personal experiences (CEFR A2).

USED TO LESSON PLAN

19

K. Approach or philosophy: Following the CLT method, students learn meaning through authentic, comprehensible input and producing authentic, comprehensible output. Students perfect form through contextual sentence manipulation, repetition, and application. L. Procedure 1. Warm up: childhood picture. (10 minutes).  Hold up a childhood picture of the instructor, and/or it around.  Ss write 3 words (adjectives) describing the person in the picture.  T monitors Ss and offers suggestions.  T writes on the board and says: “I used to have big ears.” (or another appropriate sentence).  T reveals the subject of the picture. Be humorous.  T writes form on whiteboard: “You used to _______”  T using IRF format, questions each S: “What did I use to look like?” o Encourage Ss to use one of the words they wrote to save time. o Use recasting to correct mistakes. o Expand and respond to interesting or funny statements. o Use follow-up questions with advanced students. o Maintain a quick pace. o If S can’t answer, allow them to but go back to them later. o Write common infinitives on the whiteboard, such as “have” and “be.” o Allow negative statements but don’t correct misuse of “didn’t used to” o Correct for non-habitual actions.  T reviews by summarizing habits that are still true today using “still am/do”. 2. Grammar focus: form of “used to” (15 minutes).  Ss read Fundamentals of English Grammar section 2-11 Expressing Past Habit: Used To, page 52, a-f.  T lectures form rules: o a-c) Past situation or habitual actions. Reinforce using examples from the Warm Up Activity or the textbook page 52. Non example: “Yesterday I went surfing”. “I used to go surfing.” Not a habit, happened just one time. o d) Question form (use not used). o e-f) Negative form (didn’t use to not didn’t used to) o T note: since most NS (NAE) incorrectly say “used to” it is acceptable.  (if needed) T uses IRF to complete error correction Exercise 24 #1-7 page 52.  Ss complete gap-fill Exercise 25 #1-6 pp. 52-3.  Ss self-correct Exercise 25 using the key. (Optionally, in pairs).  T answers Ss questions and provides guidance.  Extension: T notes use of “be” for most adjectives, however for personal attributes, say “have.” Example: “I used to have big ears.”  Homework (optional): Exercise 26 #1-7 page 53.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

20

3. Conversation and pronunciation practice: interview (15 minutes).  Warm up: T asks “What is an immigrant?” Use IRF format to extend discussion (if needed). Refer to Interchange 2 #4 page 3.  Ss form pairs.  Play Interchange 2 class audio CD #1 Track #3 “Life as an immigrant.”  Pronunciation: T asks “How did they say used to? In NAE we reduce our speech and say \yustʌ\” Write phonetic pattern on whiteboard.  Ss practice repeating \yustʌ\  T plays audio again, Ss listen for \yustʌ\  T hands out “Life as an immigrant” transcript/gap-fill exercise.  T plays audio again. Ss fill gaps in handout. Play audio once more to correct errors (if needed).  In pairs, Ss practice the dialog. o T instructs Ss to listen for reduced speech \yustʌ\ o T monitors Ss for using reduced speech o Ss change roles and repeat dialog. o Extension (if needed): Ss fill gaps in dialog with original words, and speak new dialog. 4. Performance: celebrities then and now (20 minutes).  Warm up: T comments on celebrities that change their looks. Example: “ Michael Jackson, he used to have a cute nose, and then he changed.”  Show the You Tube video: Hottest celebrities: before & after!  T encourages brief but loose reactions to the video. Use IRF if needed.  Ss form groups of 3-4.  T instructs Ss to each select one celebrity and write 3 “used to” sentences. o Can be positive or negative. o T offers help if they don’t know the name of the celebrity. o Each group member must choose a different celebrity.  Repeat the video. T monitors Ss writing sentences.  T hands out “Celebrities then and now” assessment rubric. o Groups will write and speak a combined dialog. o Each S contributes at least one sentence. o Ss are assessed both individually and as a group. o Dialog should be logical and sound natural. Explain “gossip” if necessary. o Assessment criteria:  Accuracy of grammar.  Appropriateness of context.  Pronunciation of \yustʌ\ o T monitors Ss, offers suggestions and mediates group interaction.  Groups should practice their dialog. It must be memorized, not read. (Separate the class if needed).  T collects rubrics, sentences, and completed dialogs.

USED TO LESSON PLAN 

21

Ss perform dialogs for the class. o T should encourage applause and class interaction. For example, react with faux shock to how celebrities have changed. o Note: T does not provide CF during the performance.

5. Transfer: Truth or lie game (20 minutes).  Ss remain in groups or form new groups of 3-4.  Arrange chairs of each group surrounding a table.  T announces “Truth or lie” game. Note: game pieces consist of two stacks of cards, 1 stack of 20 pictures depicting past habits, and 1 stack of four cards reading either “TRUTH” or “LIE.” Both stacks lie face-down on the table.  T reviews steps. If needed, write on the whiteboard. Alternatively, provide written instructions. 1. S picks a card from the pictures stack. 2. S picks a card from the “TRUTH or LIE” stack. 3. S makes a statement about themselves and the picture. 4. If S card says “TRUTH” S must tell the truth. 5. If S card says “LIE” S must tell a lie. 6. Group votes if S statement is “TRUTH” or “LIE.” 7. S reveals card. Each correct guess gets one point. 8. If S made a mistake, S loses one point. 9. Discard picture. Replace and mix the “TRUTH or LIE” cards. 10. Play es to the next S.  T models game play with one of the groups or with other teachers.  Ss play game until all picture cards are exhausted. o T monitors Ss carefully for correct game play. o T monitors for correct reduced speech. o T maintains fun atmosphere by making playful comments. o T enforces validity of S “TRUTH” or “LIE” statements, and encourages Ss to assess peers by asking follow-up questions. o Note: mistakes will be made. That is part of the fun! o T facilitates negotiation of meaning. o Optionally, provide a prize for S with the most points. o Game can be extended by reshuffling the picture cards or shortened depending on time constraints. 5. Closing (time permitting).  T uses IRF format to question each group or each S about something interesting they found out during the game.  T asks about any mistakes or misunderstandings that occurred.  T assigns homework.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

22 Classroom Management

Effective classroom management involves considering how the instructor will cope with a variety of variables (Harmer, 2010, p. 34). These include managing classroom interaction (Brinton, 2014, p. 343) and dealing with challenging students (Beare, 2012). Classroom interaction is managed by “restructuring” activities into individual work, pair work, and group work (Murray & Cristison, 2011, p. 45). Examples of student challenges include waning motivation and accomplishing tasks at a different pace. Classroom management for the lesson “Used To” The lesson “Used To” varies activities and pacing to sustain student engagement (Murray & Cristison, 2011, p. 41), incorporating a myriad of strategies for student interaction. The following section describes rationale for student grouping for each activity, predicts potential student challenges, and provides suggestions for successful implementation of each activity. 1. Warm up: childhood picture. One-centered activities bolster student confidence (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 46) and allow students to work at their own pace (Harmer, 2010, p. 43). Using the IRF technique, Ss individually produce a sentence and share it with the class. As a warm-up activity, students are engaged by the childhood picture of the instructor, creating a “social event” around how the instructor once looked (Brinton, 2014, p. 350). During the IRF activity, students may have difficultly thinking of an original sentence. That is why the T first instructs Ss to write three adjectives describing the picture before the target language “used to” is introduced. By writing the sentence first, remedial students are not pressured to improvise a sentence. During the IRF sequence, if a student can’t produce a sentence, T should allow them to “” with the caveat of returning to them at a later time.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

23

2. Grammar focus: form of “used to.” Individual work is employed to develop student confidence in the new language; however, pairwork may be implemented for corrective . If Ss appear disengaged, T may add urgency by randomly calling on Ss for answers using IRF. T should monitor the activity for struggling students, and employ pair-teaching by teaming them with a stronger partner (Harmer, 2024, p. 177). If Ss finish the activity early, a supplemental homework exercise is provided for them to complete. 3. Conversation and pronunciation practice: interview. This activity begins as an individual exercise which then expands into a dyad, which provides a “low-risk” environment for Ss to acclimate to later group work (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 46). If students have difficulty listening to the audio recording, it may be necessary for T to preview vocabulary using the transcript (Harmer, 2010, p. 183). If students appear unengaged or are resorting to using their L1, T may have to reassign partners. The activity may be extended for students who finish early by having Ss replace missing dialog with original phrases and repeating the exercise. 4. Performance: celebrities then and now. Through the use of an authentic and relevant video, Ss attention is refocused. Complexity and interactivity are scaffolded by first having students write individual sentences then combining them into a group dialog. Groups are utilized to increase opportunities for practice and to improve the quality of output (Murray & Christison, 2010, p. 47). Instructions are clarified and expectations are communicated by distributing the assessment rubric, which is written using clear and simple language (Harmer, 2010, p. 37). At this point in the lesson, the environment is becoming less teacher-focused and more studentfocused by gradually relinquishing control to the students (Murray & Christison, 2011, p. 44). This frees up the T to monitor group interaction, provide encouragement, and remediate struggling students. Disengaged students should be motivated by the pressure of performing for

USED TO LESSON PLAN

24

the class. Use of L1 must be discouraged, as the instructional goal is for students to practice negotiation in the L2. This can be accomplished by reminding Ss to use English (Harmer, 2010, p. 179) and using the assessment rubric to demonstrate consequences of using L1 on their grade. Groups who complete their dialog early may be encouraged to improve or expand their compositions. 5. Transfer: Truth or lie game. Student interaction has gradually built from individual, to pair work, to group work, building S trust and elevating S attitudes (Murray & Christison, 2010, p. 47). A collaborative game is employed to maximize opportunities for practice and increase S autonomy (Brinton, 2014, p. 350). The role of the T has shifted from lecturer to manager, monitoring the activity to provide encouragement and occasional assistance. Because this is a complex activity, it important for the T to communicate the steps using clear and simple language. It may be helpful to write the steps on the whiteboard or provide a handout. T must also model the activity before having Ss proceed. The activity is designed to create intentional confusion that will force Ss to practice negotiating meaning, therefore the T should monitor group interaction to clarify misunderstandings and smooth over arguments. It is important for the T to maintain a fun and relaxed atmosphere by reminding Ss that this is not a graded exercise, that there is no single “correct” answer, and by occasionally “dropping in” on group discussions. Lack of engagement is not anticipated to be a problem due to the nature of friendly “competition.” Because gameplay is fairly complex, T may choose to reassign groups to avoid pairing remedial Ss. If groups finish early, the game cards can be reshuffled and played again.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

25 Summary

“Used To” is a self-contained lesson plan for ESL students studying at level B1 of CEFR. It meets the instructional goals of the overall course and has clearly written lesson objectives. While following the CLT approach by focusing on meaning and employing comprehensible input and output, grammar and listening exercises also focus on form and utilize behaviorist gapfill exercises and repetition. Lesson content is integrated and task-based; practicing reading, writing, listening, and speaking. The lesson content is varied, including both authentic materials and contrived materials for sentence manipulation. Lesson materials are presented in a relatable context, including personal photos, authentic dialog, and a YouTube video of familiar celebrities. Assessment is formative, and criteria closely match the stated objectives and the practice environment. varies according to the instructional context, and includes formal explicit T for “accuracy” work and informal selective correction for “fluency” work. Selfassessment is utilized for individual work, while peer- is employed during pair and group work. The terminal performance is assessed using a written rubric in order to avoid interrupting group presentations. Finally, a conversational game is employed to provide opportunities for students to practice the target language in context, and to simulate an environment where students are required to negotiate meaning. Since language is unsuccessful unless it is understood, negotiating meaning is the most important skill in SLA. This lesson provides amble opportunities for students to practice, experiment, perfect, and reinforce understanding of the target language.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

26 References

Azar, B. S. (2003). Fundamentals of English Grammar (3rd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.

Beare, K. (2012). Classroom management. Retrieved from http://esl.about.com/od/esleflteachingtechnique/a/classroom_management.htm

Blake, R. J. (2011). Current trends in online language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 19–35.

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay, 19, 56. Brinton, D. (2014). Tools and techniques of effective second/foreign language teaching. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (340-361). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning. Broady, E. (2002). Changes, challenges and complexity: recent debates in English language teaching. Language Learning Journal, 26(1), 62-67. Byrd, P. & Schuemann, C. (2014).English as a second/foreign language textbooks: how to choose them - how to use them. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (380-393). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

27

Celce-Murcia, M. (2014). An overview of language teaching methods and approaches. In CelceMurcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2-14). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning. COUNCIL OF EUROPE. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Retrieved from: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_en.pdf Ellis, R. (2014) Principles of instructed second language learning. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (31-45). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning. Gentry, C.G. (1994). Introduction to instructional development. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Graves, K. (2014). Syllabus and Curriculum Design for Second Language Teaching. In CelceMurcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (46-62). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.

Hadfield, J. (2000). Intermediate communication games. Pearson P T R.

Harmer, J. (2010). How to teach English. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Longman. Katz, A. (2014). Assessment in second language classrooms. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (320-337). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning. Kunnan, J. K. & Grabowski, K. (2014). Large-scale second language assessment. In CelceMurcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (304-319). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

28

Lai, J. (2010). Interpersonal functions of EFL teachers’ evaluative discourse. International Education Studies, 3(2), 167–173. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Teaching and testing grammar. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 518–535). Chichester, W. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Lesley, T., Hansen, C. & Zukowski, J. (2008). Placement and evaluation package, Interchange third edition/ages second edition. Cambridge University Press. Llosa, L. (2011). Standards-based classroom assessments of English proficiency: A review of the issues, current developments, and future directions for research. Language Testing, 28(3), 367–382. Mager, R. (1962). Preparing instructional objectives. Palo Alto, California: Fearon Press. Murray, D. E., & Christison, M. (2011). What English language teachers need to know, Volume II: Facilitating learning. New York, NY: Routledge. Norris, J. M. (2011). Task-based teaching and testing. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 578–592). Chichester, W. Sussex: WileyBlackwell. Purgason, K. B. (2014). Lesson planning in second/foreign language teaching. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (362-379). Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning. Richards, J. C., Hull, J., & Proctor, S. (2005). Interchange 2 (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

USED TO LESSON PLAN

29

Robinson, P. (2011). Syllabus design. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 294–306). Chichester, W. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, Volume II (pp. 593– 607). New York, NY: Routledge.

thrillerman1. (2009, January 4). Hottest celebrities: before & after! Part 1 of 2. Retrieved from: http://youtu.be/nVXpaUUF9hA

Waring, H. Z. (2009). Moving out of IRF (Initiation‐Response‐): A Single Case Analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796-824. Waring, H. Z. (2008). Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, , and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 577-594. Weddel, K. S. (1997). Needs assessment for adult ESL learners. In ESL Resources. Center for Adult English Language Acquisition. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digests/Needas.html