Conversational prosody or tone of voice (e.g. intonation, pauses, speech rate etc.) plays an essential role in our daily communication. Research studies in various contexts have shown that prosody can function as an interactional device for the management of our social interaction (Hellermann, 2003, Wennerstrom, 2001, Wells and Macfarlane, 1998, Couper-Kuhlen, 1996). However, not much research focus has been given to the pedagogical implications of conversational prosody in classroom teaching and learning. Informed by Community of Practice theory (Lave and Wenger, 1991) and Academic Task and Social Participation Structure (Erickson, 1982), which place participation at the core of the learning development, the current research employs an exploratory case study to examine the function of speech prosody during the co-construction of classroom talk-in-interaction in and between different classroom activities (e.g. whole class instruction, group discussion, group presentation, etc.). Audio–video data of classroom lessons were collected over a two-month period. Transcribing conventions described by Atkinson and Heritage (1984) were adopted to note the prosodic features in the recordings. Prosodic features such as pauses, volume, intonation, and speech rate were set as the main criteria for analysing the classroom talk. Analysis of the transcripts showed that speech prosody can function as a coordination tool for language learners to organise their social participation roles in collaborative learning activities (e.g. forming alignment, managing turn-taking, signalling repair sequences, etc.). The research also showed that prosody can function as a pedagogical tool for language teachers to manage classroom interactional ground (e.g. provide scaffolding, align academic task structure and social participation structure, frame classroom environment, etc.). Moreover, the research showed that prosodic analysis can be an effective tool in unfolding the pedagogical importance of classroom interaction (e.g. IRE/F sequences) in classroom teaching and learning.

Providing feedback on students’ written tasks is a common aspect in today’s classrooms. Feedback affects students’ written language learning by either enhancing it or hindering it, depending on what, how and when it is given. The purpose of this degree project is to research how teachers perceive students’ writing process, how they give feedback on students’ written tasks in a primary EFL classroom, and the reasons behind their chosen strategies. Semi-structured interviews with two English teachers teaching years 4-6 were used as a method for this study. To support and analyse the data from the interviews, this project contains an overview of the fields of written language learning, formative assessment, effective formative feedback and writing as a process using literature and previous research. The literature and research show that teaching writing in a foreign language should focus on enhancing students’ interest in writing by supporting their curiosity and willingness to become writers. This can be done by focusing on content of a text instead of grammar or spelling, as this does not support young learners in their writing process. Teachers therefore need to provide feedback on aspects such as content, coherence and structure and give students information on how they can proceed in and improve a task. That is when the feedback will have the most positive effect on students’ learning. Further, the process-based approach of writing is argued to be beneficial for students’ learning as it encourages students to take an active part in their writing process. The major conclusions of this study are that the two teachers prefer to give informal and oral selective feedback on students’ writing tasks during the task. They give feedback once or twice on a task and often in the middle, to scaffold a progression. However, this is not in alignment with process-based writing. The study also shows that the two teachers are not aware of the theories underpinning writing as a process. Instead, they are well trained in ways of formative assessment and scaffolding language learning, but not the process-based approach of writing.

No description available.

This thesis aims to explore whether some Swedish teachers and students feel that they are helped by ICT tools in their classrooms or not. It is vital for this thesis to find out whether or not teachers experience that their students are positively stimulated by the use of ICT when learning English. Ascertaining whether teachers find that ICT tools make it easier for them to teach or not is also of particular interest. Students’ answers to questions regarding the perceived benefits of technology and what they think about their teachers’ technology usage are also important. In order to accomplish this aim, four teachers were interviewed about their opinions on this matter and one English class per teacher, totaling 70 students, answered questionnaires regarding their opinions on the matter. The results reveal that teachers believe that while ICT offers some great tools to create variation in the classroom and that it might increase student motivation, opinions on whether or not technology also helps students to produce better results differ. The students’ results on the other hand clearly show that most students believe that they learn better when using computers, they would like to use computers more during class, and they prefer to write using a computer rather than pen and paper. Overall, the students have a more positive attitude to ICT tools than the teachers.

<p>Within the last few hundred years, English has gone from being a rather small peripheral language to what it is today – a world language, spoken by millions of people worldwide. The best-known dialects to Swedish learners of English are British English (RP, Received Pronunciation) and American English (GA, General American). Traditionally, British English has been the variety taught in Swedish schools, but due to the recent and growing influence of American English, more and more pupils are using the American dialect. The purpose of this essay is to determine which of these dialects is more common among students in one Swedish school. I have also investigated if the teachers’ English pronunciation and their opinions of the different dialects, as well as the students’ own, have an impact on what variety the students choose to use.</p><p>The results of the study show that although all students mixed both dialects, American features were predominant. A small number of students spoke mainly British English. A majority of the students claimed to be influenced more by the media than by their teachers. When it comes to the students’ opinions of the two dialects it appeared that the students who used more features from one dialect proved to be more positive towards that dialect. Many students found British English to be snobbish. It was also seen as slightly more classy and beautiful than GA. American English was generally considered cool but cocky. It was not considered as intelligent-sounding as RP, but instead more friendly and reliable.</p>

Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-02T20:25:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 3484.pdf: 912595 bytes, checksum: 6c13c263e2e220fad3b93472e9ed3c6c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-02-28 / When learning a foreign language, more specifically English, it is common that students report that speaking is the most difficult skill to be developed. This difficulty may be related to the lack of a critical view about identity and culture and, hence, students may not value their culture and language. Some students may consider the foreign language superior (RAJAGOPALAN, 2003) and, therefore, may not take risks during oral practice in classroom, which might influence the development of oral competence. It is possible to notice the need of a critical literacy on foreign language, whose objective is to empower students to reflect about their identity and analyze their learning process in a critical way. Based on critical applied linguistics (PENNYCOOK, 2006), this research has the objective to verify how critical literacy may help learners develop a critical view about their culture and language and to analyze if reflections about identity might help students in the development of their oral competence of English as a foreign language (EFL). To answer the following research questions What is the initial perception of students about their culture and about foreign culture? ; Does critical literacy foster awareness about their language and culture? ; and How can the process of (re)construction of identity influence the perception of orality in EFL? , a qualitative (ERICKSON, 1984) interpretativist research (HOLMES, 1992; MOITA LOPES, 1994) was carried out. Data was collected and recorded through individual interviews and focus groups during the first semester of 2010. Analyses were developed through data triangulation (VIANA, 2007) based on theories about identity (BHABHA, 2003; RAJAGOPALAN, 2003; HALL, 2006), EFL learning (ALMEIDA FILHO, 2002) and critical literacy (BARTON, 1994). The results show that critical literacy was important to empower students and to improve the development of oral competence. / Ao aprender uma língua estrangeira (LE), especificamente a língua inglesa, é comum que os alunos relatem que a oralidade é a habilidade mais difícil de ser desenvolvida. Essa dificuldade poderia estar relacionada com a ausência de uma visão crítica sobre sua identidade e cultura e, com isso, os alunos poderiam não valorizar sua cultura e língua. Alguns alunos podem possuir uma visão de superioridade da LE (RAJAGOPALAN, 2003) e, dessa forma, podem não assumir tantos riscos durante as atividades em sala de aula, o que pode dificultar o desenvolvimento da oralidade. Percebe-se a necessidade do letramento crítico de LE, cujo objetivo é o empoderamento dos alunos para refletir sobre a própria identidade e analisar de maneira crítica seu aprendizado. Inserida na lingüística aplicada crítica (PENNYCOOK, 2006), esta pesquisa tem como objetivo verificar de que maneira o letramento crítico pode auxiliar os aprendizes no desenvolvimento de uma visão crítica sobre sua cultura e sua língua e analisar se reflexões sobre sua identidade podem auxiliar os alunos no desenvolvimento da oralidade em LE. Na tentativa de buscar respostas para as seguintes perguntas Qual é a percepção inicial dos alunos sobre a cultura alvo e sobre sua cultura? ; O letramento crítico promove conscientização sobre sua língua e cultura?; e Em que medida reflexões sobre (re)construção da identidade influenciam a percepção sobre a oralidade em LE (inglês)? foi conduzida uma pesquisa qualitativa (ERICKSON, 1984) de natureza interpretativista (HOLMES, 1992; MOITA LOPES, 1994). Os dados foram coletados por meio de entrevistas individuais e de grupo focal gravadas em áudio durante o primeiro semestre de 2010. A análise foi feita por meio da triangulação dos dados (VIANA, 2007) e com base em teorias sobre identidade (BHABHA, 2003; RAJAGOPALAN, 2003; HALL, 2006), ensino-aprendizagem de LE (ALMEIDA FILHO, 2002) e letramento crítico (BARTON, 1994). Os resultados mostram que o letramento crítico foi importante para o empoderamento dos alunos e auxiliou o desenvolvimento da competência oral.

Within the last few hundred years, English has gone from being a rather small peripheral language to what it is today – a world language, spoken by millions of people worldwide. The best-known dialects to Swedish learners of English are British English (RP, Received Pronunciation) and American English (GA, General American). Traditionally, British English has been the variety taught in Swedish schools, but due to the recent and growing influence of American English, more and more pupils are using the American dialect. The purpose of this essay is to determine which of these dialects is more common among students in one Swedish school. I have also investigated if the teachers’ English pronunciation and their opinions of the different dialects, as well as the students’ own, have an impact on what variety the students choose to use. The results of the study show that although all students mixed both dialects, American features were predominant. A small number of students spoke mainly British English. A majority of the students claimed to be influenced more by the media than by their teachers. When it comes to the students’ opinions of the two dialects it appeared that the students who used more features from one dialect proved to be more positive towards that dialect. Many students found British English to be snobbish. It was also seen as slightly more classy and beautiful than GA. American English was generally considered cool but cocky. It was not considered as intelligent-sounding as RP, but instead more friendly and reliable.