PROJECT WORK DESIGNING ITINERARY Antonia Ivanova Theodora IvanchevaAtanasova

PROJECT WORK: DESIGNING ITINERARY Antonia Ivanova Theodora Ivancheva-Atanasova NBU, Sofia, Bulgaria 18 TH National BETA Conference 16– 17 May 2009 Stara Zagora

What is project-based learning?

“Project-based learning is an approach in which learners investigate a question, solve a problem, plan an event, or develop a product” (Weinstein, 2006, in Beckett & Miller, p. 161).

“What I hear, I forget; what I see, I remember; what I do, I understand” Confucius

“Project-based learning should: • have a process and product orientation • be defined, at least in part, by students, to encourage student ownership in the project • extend over a period of time (rather than a single class session) • encourage the natural integration of skills • make a dual commitment to language and content learning • oblige students to work in groups and on their own • require students to take some responsibility for their own learning through gathering, processing, and reporting of information from target language resources • require teachers and students to assume new roles and responsibilities (Levy, 1997) • result in a tangible final product • conclude with student reflection on both the process and the product. ” (Stoller, 2006, in Beckett & Miller, p. 24)

“Project work is student-centered and driven by the need to create an end-product. However, it is the route to achieving this end-product that makes project work so worthwhile. The route to the end-product bring opportunities for students to develop their confidence and independence and to work together in a real-world environment by collaborating on a task which they have defined for themselves and which has not been externally imposed. ” (Fried-Booth, 2002, p. 6)

Aims in project work:

a. Individual i. To develop confidence in one’s work. ii. To accept responsibilities. iii. To promote personal initiatives. iv. To participate personally and directly in the classroom activities. v. To relate English more to individual students and their life outside the classroom.

b. Social i. To learn to work on one’s own and to share with others. ii. To create personal relationship with the people around them. iii. To become aware of many social aspects. iv. To incorporate knowledge about the local society into the English class.

c. Cultural i. To enrich the students’ personal and cultural background. ii. To show students the contrast between the British culture and their own culture.

d. Curriculum i. To be able to break down barriers between academic disciplines. ii. To get a sense of autonomy in learning. iii. To learn to organise, plan and select. iv. To integrate personal experiences into academic subjects.

e. Language i. To get a balanced language development. ii. To be taught what they really need. iii. To have the opportunity to practise what they learn in the classroom. iv. To learn a fully contextualized language.

What are the benefits of project work?

Advantages: • Project work focuses on content learning rather than on specific language targets. • Project work is student-centered. • Project work is cooperative rather than competitive. • Project work leads to the authentic integration of skills and processing of information from varied sources, mirroring real-life tasks. • Project work culminates in an end product that can be shared with others, giving the project a real purpose. • Project work is potentially motivating, stimulating, empowering and challenging.

Ranked, according to Stoller: • • “authenticity of experience and language intensity of motivation, involvement, engagement, participation, enjoyment, creativity enhanced language skills; repeated opportunities for output modified input, and negotiated meaning; purposeful opportunities for an integrated focus on form and other aspects of language improved abilities to function in a group (including social, cooperative, and collaborative skills) • • increased content knowledge improved confidence, sense of self, self-esteem, attitude toward learning, comfort using language, satisfaction with achievement increased autonomy, independence, self-initiation, and willingness to take responsibility for own learning improved abilities to make decisions, be analytical, think critically, solve problems” (Stoller, 2006, in Beckett & Miller, p. 25)

Short-term projects

Full scale projects

Varieties • Collection projects e. g. creation of an English library • Information projects e. g. article for local newspaper, simulated political debate • Orientation projects e. g. city guide, new student handbook • Social welfare projects e. g. report on local social welfare problem

Stages in a project a. Beginning in the classroom. – – What they want to include in the project What form it will take Who will be responsible for what An idea of the time it will take to produce each part of the project – Any material or resources they might need b. Moving out into the world. c. Returning to the classroom.

Some possible drawbacks to project work

Disadvantages • • • Learners using their own language Some learners doing nothing Groups working at different speeds Lack of enthusiasm in learners Learners fail to see the value in projectwork • A mismatch in expectations between learners and teachers

What is Beckett’s Project Framework? “A tool that addresses the simultaneous learning of language, content, and skills” whose primary purpose “is to show the students the language, content, and skill development which occurs through project work. ” (Beckett, 2005, p. 110) • Graphic Planner The graphic provides a structured frame to a project and allows learners to categorize relevant language, content, and skills for their project. • Project Diary The project diary encourages students to reflect on the language, content, and skills they used during the week on their project. • Benefits 79% of the learners in Beckett’s study noticed that they had learned “language, subject matter content, and skills simultaneously. ” (Beckett, 2005, p. 114).

How it all started?

Students initiated to design a one-day itinerary, or two alternative solutions foreign guests. Their initiation emerged from the fact that they are frequently at a loss whenever they have the task to show somebody around.

Step 1: Warm up: What places of interest can you think of in/around Sofia? (pairs; group discussion) Suggested answers: The Alexander Nevski Cathedral, St Nedelya Church, The National Museum of History, Rilski Monastery, St Sofia Statue, etc.

Step 2: Task: A group of foreigners are visiting your country for a few days. You want to show them around your capital city. In groups decide on a daily itinerary. Students design their itineraries and the whole class votes for the most interesting version or compile a new one.

Step 3: Students are asked to choose one/two places of interest from the itinerary and prepare a 10 minute presentation about it/ them.

Comments and conclusions:

Advantages: • The project appealed to anyone's taste as it was the students’ own idea. • The students expanded their knowledge about the places of interest in their own capital. • Relevant vocabulary on the topic was taught and studied. • The students autonomously prepared presentations. They developed speaking and presentation skills, justifying why they present a specific aspect of a story (even quiet students took the initiative to speak). • The students developed the skill of a good listener. • The students were highly motivated to work. Everybody was involved.

Disadvantages: The students’ presentations raised and partially left some crucial questions unanswered such as: o Is Sofia really named after the St Sofia Church? o What other names had Sofia had before the present one? o Why do we have the statue of Sofia?

References: Beckett, G. H. (2006). Beyond second language acquisition: Secondary school ESL teacher goals and actions for project‐based instruction. In G. H. Beckett & P. C. Miller (Eds. ), Project‐based second and foreign language education: Past, present, and future (pp. 55‐ 70). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc. Beckett, G. H. (2002). Teacher and student evaluations of project‐based instruction. TESL Canada journal, 19(2), 52‐ 66. Beckett, G. H. & Slater, T. (2005). The Project Framework: a tool for language, content, and skills integration. ELT Journal, 59(2), 108‐ 116. Fried‐Booth, D. L. (2002). Project work (2 nd ed. ). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Miller, P. C. (2006). Integrating second language standards into project‐based instruction. In G. H. Beckett & P. C. Stoller, F. (2006). Establishing a theoretical foundation for project‐based learning in second and foreign language contexts. In G. H. Beckett & P. C. Miller (Eds. ), Project‐based second and foreign language education: Past, present, and future (pp. 19‐ 40). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc. Weinstein, G. (2001). Developing adult literacies. In M. Celce‐Murcia (Ed. ), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3 rd ed. ) (pp. 171‐ 186). Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Weinstein, G. (2006). “Learners’ lives as curriculum: ” An integrative project ‐based model for language learning. In G. H. Beckett & P. C. Miller (Eds. ), Project‐based second and foreign language education: Past, present, and future (pp. 159‐ 165). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc.

THANK YOU! Antonia Ivanova – apivanova@nbu. bg Theodora Ivancheva–Atanasova - tivancheva@nbu. bg