Applying languaging in learning metalanguage

Transkriptio

1 Applying languaging in learning metalanguage NoFa5 Changing Subjects, Changing Pedagogies: Diversities in School and Education Helsinki Kaisu Rättyä, University of Eastern Finland Pirjo Kulju, University of Tampere Jorma Joutsenlahti, University of Tampere

2 Background: Problems in school pedagogy and in learning metalanguage Tradition in school practises (including schoolbooks) emphasizes linguistic concepts, however: Types of exercises are limited to remembering and understanding factual knowledge in taxonomy table (Krathwohl & Andersen 2002) Examples are limited to prototypical cases which leads to thumb rules and minitheories (Negueruela & Lantolf 2006; Tainio & Marjokorpi 2014) The use of incoherent categories seems to be typical (Rättyä 2013) Students are not used to discuss on grammar (Paukkunen 2011) Nor are they used to languaging (Harjunen & Rautpuro 2015)

3 Negative attitudes and lack of awareness of metaknowledge This problematic tradition of school practice is reflected as a negative attitude towards metalanguage especially in lessadvanced students: they are not able to see the benefits in learning grammatical concepts. (Kulju et al. 2015) Lack of awareness of metaknowledge (cf. conceptual change theory, Chi & Roscoe 2002)

4 Aims of this study to create and discuss a model for teaching and learning metalinguistic concepts to develop exercise prototypes which are based on languaging and which leads to deeper understanding of metalinguistic concepts to develop an internalized understanding of the use of concepts in literacy skills and language awareness

5 Languaging (Joutsenlahti & Kulju 2010; Joutsenlahti & Rättyä 2015) means in this study expressing his/her thinking by own words (natural language) or by drawing (pictorial language) a student constructs meanings of concepts and his/her understanding in languaging prosess an evaluation method for the teacher > The new Core curriculum for basic education 2016 emphasizes languaging (Finnish National Board of Education 2014)

6 Towards a deeper understanding of metalinguistic concepts 1) Basic skill level o Aims in remembering factual and o conceptual knowledge Exercise prototypes: Underline, name 2) More advanced skill levels o Multiple aims: applying, analyzing and evaluating conceptual knowledge, procedural and metacognitive knowledge Languaging Anderson, L. A. & R. Krathwohl (eds.) 2001/2014. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing:.

7 Exercise prototypes Traditional exercise + languaging Produce a sentence according to given model Visualisations + languaging Procedual knowledge Research based learning Underline predicate. Explain how did you find it. Viisuvoittaja: Me olemme kaikki sankareita! (Winner of Eurovision song contest: We are all heroes!) (News headline ) Write a sentence which has PREDICATIVE + SUBJECT + OBJECT. (e.g. Saimmeko me maalin? Did we get a goal?) Describe by using a diagram how the following concepts are devided into different categories noun, verb, adverb, inessive, adjective, partititive etc. Explain how would you proceed if the task is to analyse the parts of speech in a given advertisement? Analyse your text messages and argue how does your text in them differs from standard language in terms of inflection. e.g. kaupungil - kaupungilla (adessive -lla)

8 Conclusion In this presentation we have aimed to model exercise prototypes which would lead to a deeper understanding of metalinguistic concepts. In terms of taxonomy this means that also higher levels, like comprehending, applying and evaluating knowledge, can be achieved. Languaging as a tool gives possibilities not only for a student to express his/her understanding but also to a teacher to evaluate the level of learning. Next step is to collect data and analyse the students answers into presented prototypical exercises.

9 References Anderson, L. A. & R. Krathwohl (eds) 2001/2014. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Essex: Pearson. Chi, M. T.H. & Roscoe, R. D The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In Margarita Limón & Lucia Mason (eds.), Reconsidering Conceptual Change: Issues in Theory and Practice (pp ). Springer Netherlands. Harjunen, E. & Rautpuro, J Kielenkäytön ajattelua ja ajattelun kielentämistä. Äidinkielen ja kirjallisuuden oppimistulokset perusopetuksen päättövaiheessa 2014: keskiössä kielentuntemus ja kirjoittaminen. Kansallinen koulutuksen arviointikeskus 2015:8. Joutsenlahti, J. & Kulju, P Kieliteoreettinen lähestymistapa koulumatematiikan sanallisiin tehtäviin ja niiden kielennettyihin ratkaisuihin. In E. Ropo, H. Silfverberg & T. Soini (eds) Toisensa kohtaavat ainedidaktiikat. Tampere: Tampereen yliopisto. Joutsenlahti, J. & Rättyä, K Kielentämisen käsite ainedidaktisissa tutkimuksissa. In M. Kauppinen, M. Rautiainen & M. Tarnanen (eds) Rajaton tulevaisuus kohti kokonaisvaltaista oppimista. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopisto. Krathwohl, D. R A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 212.

10 Kulju, P., Mäkinen, M. & Räihä, P Peruskoululaisten käsityksiä äidinkielestä ja kirjallisuudesta oppiaineena. In E. Harjunen (ed.) Tekstit puntarissa: ajatuksia äidinkielen ja kirjallisuuden oppimistuloksista päättöarvioinnisssa 2014 ja Helsinki: Kansallinen koulutuksen arviointikeskus, julkaisuja 2015:10, Negueruela, E. & Lantolf, J. P. (2006) Concept-based instruction and the acquisition of L2 Spanish. In R. Salaberry and B. A. Lafford (Eds), The Art of Teaching Spanish : Second Language Acquisition from Research to Praxis (pp ). Washington: Georgetown University Press. Paukkunen, U.-M Lauseiden virrassa. Peruskoulun yhdeksäsluokkalaiset lauseiden tulkitsijoina. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis B Humaniora 97. Oulun yliopisto Rättyä, K. (2013b). Languaging and visualisation method for grammar teaching: A conceptual change theory perspective. English Teaching Practice and Critique 12(3), Tainio, L. & Marjokorpi, J. (2014). Luokanopettajaopiskelijat ja kielioppi. Kieli, koulutus ja yhteiskunta. [ ]. Tainio, L. & Routarinne, S. (2012). Kieliopin ymmärtäminen ja kieliopillinen ajattelu: luokanopettajaopiskelijat lausetta hahmottamassa. In P. Atjonen (ed.) Oppiminen ajassa - kasvatus tulevaisuuteen. Joensuun vuoden 2011 kasvatustieteen päivien parhaat esitelmät artikkeleina (ss ). Jyväskylä: Suomen kasvatustieteellinen seura.