How can we make our multi-lingual classroom more student-centered?
(An annotated bibliography)
Ann M. Johns, San Diego State University
Email: ajohns@cox.net web address: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~annjohns/
From the colloquium entitled “Still More Enduring Questions in Teaching Writing”
39th TESOL Convention, San Antonio, TX, March 30, 2005

1) Bishop, W. (n.d.) Writing is/and therapy? Raising questions about writing classrooms and writing program administration. Journal of Advanced Composition, 13, (2).
http://jac.gsu.edu/jac/13.2/Articles/13.htm.
In this article, the author (a well-respected L1 composition scholar) argues that we should “be paying attention to issues of affect and providing prospective teachers with a course of study that includes introductions to personality theory, gender studies, psychoanalytic concepts, and basic counseling,” thereby assisting them in understanding that student-centered writing is also therapeutic.

2) Canagarajah, A.S. (2002). Critical academic writing and the multilingual student.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Throughout this volume, the author argues that we need to be very careful about designing the classroom goals, tasks, and assessments for our multilingual students, for they are distinct individuals who come to class with their own ideas about writing, identity, and culture. For example, though some students may desire to accommodate the academic or professional culture, others see a distinct advantage in remaining on the outside.

3) Carel, S. (n.d.) In the world of theory, chaos reigns: Theory to practice and practice to theory. http://www.sedl.org/loteced/communique/n02.html. In this article published in LOTE (Languages Other Than English/ACTFL), the authors discuss cognitive strategies for learning languages (e.g., repetition, resourcing from dictionaries, translation/note-taking, and inferencing). Following Vygotsky (1978), they suggest that classrooms need to be active and creative, for “learning occurs through interacting with others,” and “learning is an active process; learners use sensory input to construct meaning.”

4) Compton, L, C-K Kon, F. Barbieri & S. Brooks. Computers in the ESL writing classroom: An annotated bibliography. http://www.public.iastate.edu/~nkerli/resources/ESL.html
The Internet is replete with articles in which writers argue that ESL students are more comfortable—and collaborative—when they use computers or classroom-based management systems such as WEB CT or Blackboard. This 14-item annotated bibliography provides a good overview for those who are interested in the uses of computers, especially as they encourage a more learner-centered writing curriculum.

5) Cook, J. & Cook, L (1998). How technology enhances the quality of student-centered learning. Quality Progress, 31 (7), 59-63. Though not directed specifically at the ESL writer, this volume provides a useful overview of the generally agreed-upon key elements in a student-centered curriculum, including problem-solving, team skills, learning how to learn, interacting and processing information, and using of technology.

6) The Cooperative Learning Network is a group that shares, supports and advocates for cooperative learning. Includes the TiCLe (Technology in Cooperative Learning) Guide.
http://www.sheridanc.on.ca/coop_lrn.htm/

7) Gentry, E. (n.d.). Creating student-centered, problem-based classrooms.
http://www.aspire.cs.uah.edu/aspire/project_based_classroom.pdf
This twelve-page document by Project Aspire at the University of Alabama (Huntsville) is accompanied by a number of links useful to language arts and ESL/EFL instructors. The author discusses the principles of problem-based learning, problem-based learning activities, uses of technology, and alternative assessments including portfolios, peer review, and team self-evaluations. Though some of the material is written for science teachers, the document is rich and offers suggestions for other teachers, as well.

8) Hong Kong Cooperative Learning Center works with schools and universities throughout Asia. http://www.In.edu.hk/hkclc/.

9) The Journal of Student Centered Learning. http://www.newforums.com/news_jccpage.htm
Published by New Forums Press, this journal includes articles by teachers at all academic levels on topics such as inquiry (or problem-based) learning, creating teams, and student learning outside of the classroom. Includes classroom materials and activities.

10) Leki, I. (2003). A challenge to second language writing professionals: Is writing overrated? In B. Kroll [ed.]. Exploring the dynamics of second language writing. (pp. 315-332). New York: Cambridge University Press.
In this final chapter of Kroll’s collection, Leki challenges our unexamined assumptions about ESL writers and the teaching of writing. She maintains that writing may not be personally fulfilling to many of our students (partially because it’s too hard); it may not be the most effective way for students to learn material from their disciplines, and it may not be central to the disciplines in which our students are enrolled or to their professions. In fact, writing may not be the core of education, as most of us would like to believe.

11) Nunley, K.F. (2003). The Layered Curriculum. Access this article through http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/suminst/bbi02/webprojects.scc.htm.
Nunley argues that with the variety of students we have in our classes, we need to layer our curricula to include some options. What is curricular layering? Providing assignment options that allow for different interests, cultures, and learning styles, designing hands-on activities for all concept (and language) development, and offering a variety of readings or other methods for students to gain information.

12) Project work: Moss, D. & C. van Duzer (1998). Project-based learning for adult English language learners. http://www.cal.org/caela/digests/ProjBase.htm provides a rationale and structure for completing project work. Assessment measures are also included.
http://www.eslteachersboard.com/s/AuthenticWriting.htm discusses project work designed to assist students in getting a job. http://esl.fis.edu/teachers/support/webp.htm shows how ESL students can collaboratively develop their own web pages.
Success for all is a foundation dedicated to the dissemination of proven reform models for K-12 education. Cooperative learning is a key component. http://www.successforall.net

*********************************************************************
How do we discover whether our approach is working—before it’s too late?
Suggestion: A classroom management team
http://www.isu.edu/ctl/facultydev/webhandbook/smt.htm

Maintained by the Center for Teaching and Learning at Idaho State University, this website provides a 50+ page Handbook for Student Management Teams, developed after Center research indicated that “over 80% of the problems that students expressed about learning or that faculty noted about teaching were related to communication.” The Center promotes this management team approach because, in their view, “the quality of the experience within the teaching and learning community” should be a central concern in our classrooms. Here are the principles upon which the management team concept is based:
• The quality of a class seldom improves as a result of final student evaluations (because the particular group of students has completed the class and gone elsewhere).
• Good two-way communication, between instructor and students, must not be assumed.
• The primary purpose of the team is to improve the quality of teaching (for a particular group of students) and to enhance the quality of the learning environment.
• Getting input from an entire class, while involving a management team, is a good way to set the agenda for improvement,
• When an issue for improvement has been identified, action must follow and the results of these actions should be tracked.
• Compensation for team members must be completely separated from grades and credit.

What is a student management team?
• A group of 3-4 students, plus the faculty member. All students must want to be members; one should be particularly energetic.
• Students have a managerial role and assume partial responsibility for the success of the class.
• Students meet weekly; the faculty member attends meetings every other week.
• Meetings are held in a neutral area, e.g., a coffee shop.
• The instructor provides the initial team task; students continue from there (if they can).
• Students report results of the class surveys (etc) to the class,
• The instructor discusses how changes (in curricula, instruction or assessment) will be made and assessment will be developed.
• Students work with others to improve class atmosphere as well as with the instructor to enhance learning.

What did our management team do? (In a first-year writing class at San Diego State University.)
• Assessment of learning and teaching, especially open-ended questions:
o First survey:
What are you learning about writing in this class (flow, genre, organization, editing, vocabulary, analysis, APA)
What could your instructor do to help you to learn more: (describe APA more, be more specific about what you want, write legibly)
o Second survey:
Things that the instructor has done to help me to complete the project: (extend the due-date, show paper models, provide written and conference feedback, break the assignment into small steps, give extra help.)

Things that I (the student) could do to make this paper better: more time on the project, proofread, re-read my text, ask more questions, understand how to quote.
o Final survey:
Evaluation of tasks and learning
Evaluation of the management team

• How did the team assist the instructor in improving teaching and learning---and the classroom atmosphere? By
o Providing suggestions for organizing and structuring groups.
o Encouraging more organized lectures on difficult topics.
o Discussing with individual students their classroom behaviors.
o Making suggestions for increased scaffolding of assignments, particularly of the readings.

The net result: The instructor was able to follow the set curriculum while still adjusting class assignments and assessments according to agreed-upon steps. The final survey tells us that the team concept and its products made the learning environment more appropriate for the class. The students claimed that their learning and engagement increased…but they had suggestions for improvement, as well.

Home | Professional Activities | Teaching | Consulting & Service | Suggested Reading